|
LeeMajors posted:Unless you are literally the Monopoly guy or the Duggars, they actively work against your interests. It's cool how you know people's "interests" better than they do.
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:03 |
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Begin the day with a pro-Bush post Wrong album, you're obviously a fake.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:It's cool how you know people's "interests" better than they do. Yeah you're right how could we forget, some people just want someone who will stop the godless sodomites and abortionists.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Bobby Jindal first ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q26LCfLtTBA Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 17:40 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:It's cool how you know people's "interests" better than they do. I'm not sure if you know this, but the average American voter is a stupid, easily scared animal. The Federalist Party based their entire system of beliefs around this idea. Most things liberals fight for--universal health care, a higher minimum wage, higher taxes on the rich--are objectively better for people and the economy than what conservatives fight for. It's not a matter of opinion. Just because someone votes for a Tea Party candidate because he promises to stop the godless queers and sexhavers does not mean that they have voted in their best interests. Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Bobby Jindal first ad So he's choosing this as a hill to die on. Wonderful. I await the loving coronary the Louisiana business community will have when he attempts to pull the poo poo Arkansas and Indiana tried. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 17:43 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:I'm not sure if you know this, but the average American voter is a stupid, easily scared animal. The Federalist Party based their entire system of beliefs around this idea. I don't think you know what the term "objectively" means.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:I don't think you know what the term "objectively" means. Just replace "objectively" with "arguably" and his point is solid. Libertarian, laissez-faire-esque policies either don't benefit most workers.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:I don't think you know what the term "objectively" means. How about you stop making snippy little comments and actually engage with his arguments?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:It's cool how you know people's "interests" better than they do. Some things like healthcare or minimum wage are everyone's self-interest though. If I make above minimum wage and my neighbor only makes minimum, it hurts me that he doesn't make more--if he makes more he'll spend more and the economy will improve. A similar situation with healthcare; if my neighbor doesn't have coverage and gets sick, his decreased productivity is a drain on the economy and hurts me. Welcome to capitalism, where nobody is an island.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:I don't think you know what the term "objectively" means. In the context of "uninfluenced by emotions or beliefs", yes, I do. Those things help more people than tax cuts for the rich (or tarring and feathering gays and sexhavers). This is supported by actual data.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:If I make above minimum wage and my neighbor only makes minimum, it hurts me that he doesn't make more--if he makes more he'll spend more and the economy will improve. What if you employ him.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
$1000/hr minimum wage 98% tax on incomes above $1m There, "objectively" better for everyone. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Then you still have an obligation to treat him well, as a fellow human being.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:98% tax on incomes above $1m Considering that in the 1950s the top tax bracket paid 90% and the world didn't end, I'm not sure why you think this is a strawman.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Considering that in the 1950s the top tax bracket paid 90% and the world didn't end, I'm not sure why you think this is a strawman.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Considering that in the 1950s the top tax bracket paid 90% and the world didn't end, I'm not sure why you think this is a strawman. The bracket was 90%, but that isn't what they paid (for various reasons like it being a progressive tax, the top bracket being set comparatively high compared to today's top bracket, and deductions existing.) "Piketty-Saez 2007 posted:For people whose income ranked between the top 1 percent and top 0.5 percent, the effective tax rate for individual, corporate, payroll and estate was 34.0 percent in 1960, 36.1 percent in 1970, 37.6 percent in 1980, 31.5 percent in 1990, 35.7 percent in 2000 and 31.3 percent in 2004. It's definitely gone down over time but the idea that people, even the richest, were ever giving up 90% of their income is inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Kalman posted:The bracket was 90%, but that isn't what they paid (for various reasons like it being a progressive tax, the top bracket being set comparatively high compared to today's top bracket, and deductions existing.) Yes this is how progressive tax rates work. It does not change that the top bracket was very high and the very rich pay comparatively less today.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Some things like healthcare or minimum wage are everyone's self-interest though. If I make above minimum wage and my neighbor only makes minimum, it hurts me that he doesn't make more--if he makes more he'll spend more and the economy will improve. A similar situation with healthcare; if my neighbor doesn't have coverage and gets sick, his decreased productivity is a drain on the economy and hurts me. If your neighbor makes more due to a minimum wage increase, their increased spending will lead to inflation which hurts you. You could only be helped if the world produced more from the increase, which is hardly certain. The healthcare part is true to a limited extent, but you're assuming that your own healthcare can only be helped. For example, I have UK friends with the same medical issue I do who are on the NHS. They like the system, but it leads to worse outcomes than my own health insurance. Alter Ego posted:In the context of "uninfluenced by emotions or beliefs", yes, I do. Those things help more people than tax cuts for the rich (or tarring and feathering gays and sexhavers). This is supported by actual data. Congrats on being uninfluenced by those plebe's ideas, beep boop  Without emotions or beliefs there is no utility function to optimize. Diogenes lived in a barrel.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Life isn't a "utility function," it's coexistence with fellow human beings who you're supposed to care about and want to help.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Then you still have an obligation to treat him well, as a fellow human being. An "objective" argument stripped bare of "emotions" or "beliefs".
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Life isn't a "utility function," it's coexistence with fellow human beings who you're supposed to care about and want to help. Excuse me I know a book that conclusively shows that actively loving over people is helping them. It also has trains in it!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
On the plus side, it's nice that sociopaths out themselves so easily.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:Congrats on being uninfluenced by those plebe's ideas, beep boop You'll forgive me if I don't take the word of a guy who apparently is arguing the virtues of politicians who campaign by telling their constituents "Elect me and I'll gently caress over the people who have it worse than you!"
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If your neighbor makes more due to a minimum wage increase, their increased spending will lead to inflation which hurts you. You could only be helped if the world produced more from the increase, which is hardly certain. Minimum wages have a much greater effect on the people receiving it than the economy at large. And even so, their spending is my income and vice versa, so my neighbor having more money to buy stuff with stimulates the economy and lets money that was otherwise sitting in someone's bank account get spent, so it does in fact lead to more things getting produced. Minimum wage is not a very significant driver of inflation. If you're rich you can still afford good healthcare, which is out of reach of most voting people. America's health insurance is among (or actually?) the worst in the developed world, so obviously voting to keep it the same is voting against your own interests.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:You'll forgive me if I don't take the word of a guy who apparently is arguing the virtues of politicians who campaign by telling their constituents "Elect me and I'll gently caress over the people who have it worse than you!" What utility or interest, completely unfettered by emotion or belief, are you trying to improve? Lemming posted:Minimum wages have a much greater effect on the people receiving it than the economy at large. And even so, their spending is my income and vice versa, so my neighbor having more money to buy stuff with stimulates the economy and lets money that was otherwise sitting in someone's bank account get spent, so it does in fact lead to more things getting produced. Minimum wage is not a very significant driver of inflation. Again, hardly objectively correct: http://www.voxeu.org/article/spending-income-and-debt-responses-minimum-wage-hikes Rich by what metric?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If your neighbor makes more due to a minimum wage increase, their increased spending will lead to inflation which hurts you. You could only be helped if the world produced more from the increase, which is hardly certain. The NHS objectively leads to better outcomes than our current insurance system, largely due to the large number of uninsured, underinsured, and denied patients in our current system. Where the NHS struggles is due to chronic underfunding, in contrast to the US private healthcare system's waste. Also the U.S. has its own NHS counterpart, the VA, which, despite criticism, still manages to deliver consistently better care at a lower cost than its private counterparts. Inflation is not correlated with increased spending in an economy. It occurs when money is created faster than the economy grows. If the economy grows because more people are able to pay for goods and services due to an increased minimum wage, inflation will not necessarily occur. You should learn how inflation works.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Real Name Grover posted:Hey guys, shut up Is he still pretending to live in Pennsylvania? It looks like I might have to go to Des Moines or Omaha for work this summer. It'll only be a week or so, but how can I get into a campaign event, preferably for one of the crazies? Do I have to sign up for their mailing list and give an Iowa zip code? I really don't want to get constant diabetes ads.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yes this is how progressive tax rates work. It does not change that the top bracket was very high and the very rich pay comparatively less today. Except that the numbers say that the vast majority of the very rich don't pay much different in terms of effective rate now compared to then - only the very top few (the top 0.5% and really only the top 0.1%) do, and a lot of them aren't making their money from ordinary income anyway these days. The "top income tax rate used to be 90%!" is a red herring that ignores huge changes in compensation structures and economic distribution, or worse, assumes that those changes are due to (rather than in spite of) the tax bracket changes.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:The NHS objectively leads to better outcomes than our current insurance system, largely due to the large number of uninsured, underinsured, and denied patients in our current system. Where the NHS struggles is due to chronic underfunding, in contrast to the US private healthcare system's waste. Also the U.S. has its own NHS counterpart, the VA, which, despite criticism, still manages to deliver consistently better care at a lower cost than its private counterparts. That doesn't respond to what I said. Why are you using an Austrian definition of inflation?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
LeeMajors posted:I'm amazed that supposed Thinking Persons in the 21st Century still support the GOP. Maybe he just hates gays or wants to restrict access to abortions. See, there are plenty of reasons one would vote republican!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What utility or interest, completely unfettered by emotion or belief, are you trying to improve? You didn't read that thing you linked at all quote:It has been argued recently that a minimum-wage hike can have a significant stimulative impact on the economy. We believe that there might be some truth to this assertion, as there is clear evidence that the minimum wage increases the income of adult minimum-wage households, who in turn tend to have high marginal propensities to spend. Your claim about minimum wage was very specific. You said "If your neighbor makes more due to a minimum wage increase, their increased spending will lead to inflation which hurts you." which is in no way supported by what you linked. And it doesn't matter what the metric is for rich. Average health care outcomes in the USA are garbage and the amount we spend is astronomical. For the average person, it's greatly in their interest to move to a proven system that works, and all the Republicans want to do is repeal Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What utility or interest, completely unfettered by emotion or belief, are you trying to improve? I want people of differing worldviews and belief systems to actually be able to live together instead of clamoring for legal discrimination or prison for those worldviews or belief systems with which I disagree. Many Republicans/Conservatives do not extend this courtesy to me, which is the fundamental issue with your false equivalence concern trolling bullshit. I'm arguing for policies that they don't like which at most will result in them paying a bit more in taxes, if that. They're arguing for legal discrimination at best or at worst imprisonment for me.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Bobby Jindal first ad *looks around empty church, nodding in approval*
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What utility or interest, completely unfettered by emotion or belief, are you trying to improve? Your own cited study shows that consumer spending would increase, it would just be matched by increased consumer debt. Did you even read its conclusion? quote:For these reasons we should be somewhat suspicious of claims that the minimum wage will significantly boost the economy. Nevertheless, our results, as well as the results of other many other papers (a small recent list includes Parker et al 2010, Adams et al 2009, Browning and Crossley 2009, Krueger and Perri 2008), provides compelling evidence that putting money into the hands of consumers, especially low-income consumers, leads to predictable increases in spending. It also literally doesn't even mention the word inflation once. So you may need other evidence to back your claim that the minimum wage would cause inflation.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What utility or interest, completely unfettered by emotion or belief, are you trying to improve? Did you read your own link? quote:It has been argued recently that a minimum-wage hike can have a significant stimulative impact on the economy. We believe that there might be some truth to this assertion, as there is clear evidence that the minimum wage increases the income of adult minimum-wage households, who in turn tend to have high marginal propensities to spend. It says nothing about inflation. The fact that most arguments against minimum wage center around "but inflation!!!!" (objectively untrue) and "well what about the wage I worked so hard to get!!!" (crab mentality) makes it clear to me that there really aren't many arguments against minimum wage that stand scrutiny. e: beaten loving twice 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Lemming posted:You didn't read that thing you linked at all If the minimum wage workers spend more and the economy isn't significantly boosted, it's impossible for you, the unaffected worker, to not be harmed economically from that inflation unless you don't spend money on any of the same things as them. Does rich mean Monopoly guy in this case, as the op said?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If the minimum wage workers spend more and the economy isn't significantly boosted, This is bullshit that doesn't happen, you disingenuous sociopath.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
The paper said they were skeptical a minimum wage increase would significantly boost the economy. In that case, the increased spending demand of minwage workers must be balanced out somewhere else through higher prices. It's basic economics.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:If the minimum wage workers spend more and the economy isn't significantly boosted, it's impossible for you, the unaffected worker, to not be harmed economically from that inflation unless you don't spend money on any of the same things as them. Again, did you even read the article that you linked? How exactly would "the unaffected worker" be harmed economically from the inflation that you have yet to show actually happens?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:03 |
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:That doesn't respond to what I said. You specifically said: Series DD Funding posted:The healthcare part is true to a limited extent, but you're assuming that your own healthcare can only be helped. For example, I have UK friends with the same medical issue I do who are on the NHS. They like the system, but it leads to worse outcomes than my own health insurance. That is what I am responding to with my sources, which are relevant to the discussion, unlike your own. As for the definition of inflation, that is my understanding of the general consensus definition, taught to me long ago in undergrad economics. Is there another definition you would prefer? And does an increase in minimum wage cause inflation under that definition?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:42
|
|