|
Heaps of Sheeps posted:One our of most recent presidential candidates even Hey, that's the official candidate of TGRS you're talking about. We only poo poo on the racist misogynist Jew here.
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
SulphagneSocialist posted:Bertrand Russell you say? Counterpoint: the idle rich are goddamned sociopaths.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Drones. But if you have DocWagon Platinum, a team of mercenaries will drop in from your skylight and do it. You make a 90% top marginal tax rate for incomes over $2M. Paying executives more than that then becomes infeasible. That’s something with historical precedent and solves inequality issues as time goes on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Kind of ironic isn't that the reason they couldn't sustain themselves is that the US economically crushed them. "Well, the reason that failed is because outside forces mercilessly crushed it" isn't really an answer, because there's plenty of outside forces that'll happily attack any attempt to set up an alternate system that ends racism forever. Personally, I agree with Coates' idea that racial reconciliation is likely impossible on any timeframe worth talking about. The fact that people are bringing up "well, people in the 11th century didn't think our modern systems would be possible" as a response to that just shows how bad the problem is - sure, maybe future people will finally manage to end racism five hundred years from now, but that's so removed from the modern context that it's barely worth discussing. Even if we did have a ready-to-go guaranteed-to-work solution to racism, it'd still take at least a couple generations to implement. It's an extremely uncomfortable truth, though, because I'm white. Sure, I'm Jewish too, but I'm never going to have a cop pull me over because of the color of my skin. I'm not really impacted in the same way KM, Coates, or other PoC are. I can only dimly grasp the enormous pile of current and future human misery - I'm talking about when I say that racism will be with us for another couple hundred years or more. At the same time, I can only dimly grasp the amount of privilege for both myself and my descendants that's inherent in that claim. I think the real reason white liberals are so determined to have hope that racism will end any day now is that it provides them an outlet for the guilt they feel about the racist society they benefit from - having faith that racism will end someday allows them to feel like there will eventually be an escape from that guilt, and in the meantime they can deflect it by convincing themselves they're working toward the end of racism. Saying that there is no end, that there is no hope, drives a stake in that escape-valve and drives home the fact that miserable, oppressive system that benefits us at others' expense is going to continue onward and there isn't really anything we can do about it. White people really want to be told that they can make the problems go away if they just try hard enough and then they won't be complicit anymore. Meanwhile, people of color have it so much worse - they don't have the luxury of deluding themselves with false hope, because the truth is staring them in the face every day. Under the vegetable posted:Hey, that's the official candidate of TGRS you're talking about. We only poo poo on the racist misogynist Jew here. Whatever weird vendetta you have against KM, TGRS, and the other PoC who post there, can you not do that here?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
SulphagneSocialist posted:Like Russell points out, there were (and still are) entire sedentary classes of the population who live off their wealth, never working a day, and they are not disconnected from society. In fact, we venerate them and put them in charge of it, for some bizarre reason. I suppose you're right in that wealthy people don't seem to have a stake in society's success though. SulphagneSocialist posted:Edit: unemployed people are miserable because society is built in such a way to degrade you and classify you as unworthy if you are not employed. Unemployment is treated like a moral disease instead of an economic phenomenon. We could have and should have gotten rid of that stigma a long time ago. In the old days, working debased you: nobility would never deign to work, that was for peasants. Democrazy posted:Yeah, it's a hard and seemingly intractable problem. Without enough work to go around, the next few decades could be truly awful. However, without a shortage of labor, we as a society are allowed to explore necessary yet less profitable forms of employment for people thought impossible before, plus work shorter hours without suffering a loss of quality of life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Someone's job has to be to do the horrible things while someone else's job is to relax in luxury. It is literally impossible for the same person to do both tasks in their day to day life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
There is no way to distribute important but annoying tasks amongst a society to ensure that it isn't an unfair burden only a lowly few have to labor under. This is why jurors are all bums.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:You make a 90% top marginal tax rate for incomes over $2M. Paying executives more than that then becomes infeasible. That’s something with historical precedent and solves inequality issues as time goes on. You need to also tax wealth though to really put a dent in inequality. Wealth inequality is dramatically worse than income inequality, and also more important/relevant when discussing inequality as a general concept. Taking income (unless you literally tax 100% or something) can only slow the rate at which the rich become richer (and it won't do much for the hyper-rich if you're only talking about labor income).
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Someone's job has to be to do the horrible things while someone else's job is to relax in luxury. It is literally impossible for the same person to do both tasks in their day to day life. Trabisnikof posted:There is no way to distribute important but annoying tasks amongst a society to ensure that it isn't an unfair burden only a lowly few have to labor under. This is why jurors are all bums.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So we're gonna be conscripting people to wipe elderly dementia patients' asses then? i assumed the bit about selecting jurors was obvious sarcasm . Most of the "poo poo jobs" people are talking about are just grotesquely underpaid to the point that only desperate people will do them. Remove the desperation and, oh no,you'd have to increase wages significantly. Probably get a better quality of work if we paid personal care aides fifty grand a year. gently caress it, pay jurors as much as we pay lawyers and maybe we'd get a better quality of juror too. And if you ask where the money comes from, as was proposed above, wealth tax. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Oct 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:i assumed the bit about selecting jurors was obvious sarcasm . Or instead of defining one job as the poo poo job and another job as the rewarding job, we can integrate the two. More doctors/nurses and fewer patients with those people providing a wider range of medical/hospital services is one way to do it without having to force people to do it for the money. If school janitor is one of those jobs where we can't find enough people who find it fulfilling, but people still want to teach, having teachers help clean certainly makes sense if everyone is being fulfilled and rewarded appropriately. It actually is a fairly common social occurrence for people to split up less desirable work amongst themselves so that everyone gets to share in the rewards and no one is overly burdened by the costs. But so many people are ingrained into a classist/capitalist framework where labor is all about win-lose and communal or social goods have to be ignored over personal benefit. That and the other common classist belief that "those people" would just be layabouts if we didn't hold their life on the line over work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Its been said that the racism of people renders legislative change ineffective, so what are the logistics of individually Like, the proportion of actively malevolent racists is...less than a majority? Set up patient intake for Nazi rallies, while they're away from their usual routines?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Ideally no one would need to pay any attention to government because it would only act as a neutral or positive influence in our lives. That is the sci-fi utopia, and we don't have that largely in part because of complicit behavior with racism, classism and the desire of some to impose their cultural will onto others. This is as old as society itself, all these problems have been with us. But we have come a long way and we are nearing a moment that we can fix these things, and injustice and uplift us all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
we already conscript people to wipe butts and clean toilets with the threat of poverty, homelessness and starvation lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:we already conscript people to wipe butts and clean toilets with the threat of poverty, homelessness and starvation lol guys, help calibanibal is starting to make sense
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
Tarezax posted:guys, help Over the months, you wonder, did he Change? Did I Change? Its the ultimate gas light, nothing is real.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:You make a 90% top marginal tax rate for incomes over $2M. Paying executives more than that then becomes infeasible. That’s something with historical precedent and solves inequality issues as time goes on. You try passing that into law in a country where 95% of the population (to be generous) is either not aware of the concept of marginal taxation or does not understand it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
mdemone posted:You try passing that into law in a country where 95% of the population (to be generous) is either not aware of the concept of marginal taxation or does not understand it. I mean that's basically true for every single topic in every single law. The issue is that the social contract has collapsed and people can't trust things they can't understand since they can't trust their supposed advocates anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I mean that's basically true for every single topic in every single law. We're taxing the richest of the rich. Explain no further.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I mean that's basically true for every single topic in every single law. I agree, but it's especially catastrophic for that issue, since it directly impacts what a government can do for its people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:We're taxing the richest of the rich. Explain no further. Why should I believe you when someone else is telling me you're actually coming to kill my babies?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Why should I believe you when someone else is telling me you're actually coming to kill my babies? Who are you gunna believe, uniformed paper wizards or Alex Jones and men in pepe t-shirts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Who are you gunna believe, uniformed paper wizards or Alex Jones and men in pepe t-shirts? well I know which one I see more on facebook 
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Its been said that the racism of people renders legislative change ineffective, so what are the logistics of individually The target population is maybe 200 million people or so. Have fun with that. The people enthusiastically marching at the Nazi rallies are only the tip of the iceberg; for every jackbooted thug waving a swastika in one hand and a Confederate flag in the other, there's a hundred bystanders who walk past it on the street and don't really see a problem with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:But the literal coup was by hardline members of the Soviet government, soooo... i'm referring to the yeltsin coup in 1993
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I'll also never forget the time that the Russians gracefully accepted the Czechs decision to adopt liberalizing reforms in the late sixties. The Soviets really showed their true colors then. eastern bloc uprisings have nothing to do with nationalities policy within the ussr. you know, that thing hungary and czechoslovakia weren't part of
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/918962076466532353
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:i assumed the bit about selecting jurors was obvious sarcasm . Keep in mind that this discussion is in the context of a world where people are not required to work in order to maintain a decent standard of living, often discussed as including free education, free public transit, free childcare etc. So now every personal care assistant has an extra 50k a year to spend on luxuries, which will allow them to live a markedly different lifestyle than those that do not labor. (BTW, this strongly implies that your comment about wealth tax makes no sense, since apparently the government is setting all wages and salaries in this world.) Doctors and nurses would presumably command even higher salaries because of their more difficult training and higher expertise. As automation continues to shrink the size of the necessary labor force, this will tip the see-saw in the other direction, with those selected by the bureaucracy as suitable for labor being upper class citizens, over the drudges who are not selected. (And do you think racism might just play a factor in those decisions?) Also, let's face it, those who are being given the bare minimum lifestyle are probably going to hate it, having to live in government apartments next to alcoholics and domestic abusers, eating whatever foods the government contracting officer deems meet the minimal nutritional requirements, being leered at on busses where people leave trash and poo poo on the floor because they have no stake in ownership of the commons and their passes can't be revoked. You're looking for some magical point on the salary slider where enough people are willing to do a poo poo job that need is met, but not paying them so much that you create two tiers of citizens with notable lifestyle differences between those selected by the bureaucracy as suitable for labor and those not. And I'm not convinced that a central government is going to be able to reliably hit that sweet spot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:"Well, the reason that failed is because outside forces mercilessly crushed it" isn't really an answer, because there's plenty of outside forces that'll happily attack any attempt to set up an alternate system that ends racism forever. In the case of the Soviets, they took on a battle that in all likelihood they were never going to win. That said that battle was based on an imbalance that isn't set in stone and neither is the battle against racism. It may look grim, but at the same time there are cracks forming even in the structures of power that hold the US together. As far as the arms race question, military spending was a fact in there somewhere but from the Soviet perspective, they knew that the West had a technical edge and while they were mass producing tanks...they also knew they were going to lose tons of them if they the fought the west on equal terms. A big part of it is simply the Soviets did some impressive things with the spending they had but they could only go so far without the massive capital/infrastructure edge the West had and they had to make the difference up with numbers. Also, the Soviets had no reason to trust the US (and largely vice-versa although I think our paranoia was less justified). Also, another thing about the Russian state historically, it usually an equal opportunity oppressor and will happily merciful putdown ethnic Russians as well. You have remember Muscovy grew largely by absorbing if not conquering its other neighborhoods and that the Russian state has always been about Moscow versus the provinces. St.Petersburg was essentially an artificial creation of the Muscovite state. The language of the Moscow is Russian, so the language of the Empire, but even then standardization was always forced on speaking "proper" Russian one would hear in Moscow (yes there is a parallel to Rome). That said, ironically enough the empire that Moscow created also still binds the rest of Russia, not only from fear of being oppressed by the Moscow but that it is better to choose the devil you know that the pissed off foreigners across the border that hate the Muscovite state for making GBS threads on them. Also, due to the fact, most of Russian infrastructure is focused around the city makes it pretty much impossible to ignore. R. Guyovich posted:eastern bloc uprisings have nothing to do with nationalities policy within the ussr. you know, that thing hungary and czechoslovakia weren't part of I think Soviet nationalities policy would have worked a lot better without the idea of a monolithic vanguard party to be honest. Of course, the revolution/civil war wouldn't have worked without one either. It is a bit of a catch 22. As far as 1956/1968...I think both sides did pretty terrible things during the Cold War largely for geopolitical purposes. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Oct 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/what-america-would-be-like-without-blacks/ For the thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:CNAs and EMT-Bs make very little money because a license can be acquired in one or two semesters, or a few months of full time study. The barrier to entry is fairly low, and people tend to burn out fast due to the awful nature of a lot of the job. It is easy for companies to hold wages down, because there are plenty of people willing and able to acquire the requisite skills and licenses for $13 an hour. Of course what I say doesn't make sense if you glom a lot of extra poo poo onto it! Most of what you're saying either demonstrates unfamiliarity with the job landscape or is just weird in the context of a UBI discussion. Why are there government food inspectors making sure nobody buys too-fancy food and low quality government housing when everyone has a UBI? The whole point of the UBI is to abolish and phase out those sorts of structures and replace them with a more market based system. Average salary for a personal care aide is approximately 20k. It's actually extremely difficult to keep those jobs filled, at least in my area, salaries are very low and retail work pays better with a lower barrier to entry; why go through a background check and certifications etc, plus have to clean poop, when you can work at Target and make more per hour? If everyone received a 20k universal basic income, I actually think you'd see more people taking that kind of work, mostly because it's a lot easier to deal with a stressful job when you're netting out twice the salary, and doubling your annual income is a really big deal! Plus, a lot of other jobs that wouldn't be economically justifiable (i.e., retail, manufacturing) would get automated out, so the remaining jobs would be things like personal care for which demand is more inelastic & absolute). If you want to talk about redesigning the overall system, sure, we can do that, but that's expanding way beyond the scope of the initial UBI proposal I was making. For what it's worth doctors *should* be paid a lot less; so should lawyers; conversely though yes tuition should be free for candidates who merit a chance to do the work. The real offense, currently, to my mind is all the jobs that DO take professional training and expertise but that are immensely underpaid because they are traditionally seen as "women's work," traditionally government funded, or both. The high school and elementary school teacher is perhaps the best example; a master's in english is no more difficult to get than a law degree, but we don't pay high school english teachers like we do lawyers, even though the teacher's job is more important, societally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I think Soviet nationalities policy would have worked a lot better without the idea of a monolithic vanguard party to be honest. Of course, the revolution/civil war wouldn't have worked without one either. It is a bit of a catch 22. the policy got hosed up real bad by wwii. preservation of the whole union was the priority but after the war i'd argue the cpsu was largely successful in maintaining national autonomy. it wasn't just russians in the party, after all
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:eastern bloc uprisings have nothing to do with nationalities policy within the ussr. you know, that thing hungary and czechoslovakia weren't part of Oh yeah you're right. That makes it better. Totally undermines my point and supports yours too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:the policy got hosed up real bad by wwii. preservation of the whole union was the priority but after the war i'd argue the cpsu was largely successful in maintaining national autonomy. it wasn't just russians in the party, after all Well the issue is of course, that while Soviet cultural and linguistic autonomy did exist, it also was conducted along largely the same political lines. The problem with this is obviously that autonomy only exists in a pretty narrow channel and can only be existed in a controlled manner. That said, the entire authoritarian nature of the Soviet Union wasn't an accident and was a growth of A: the Russian Empire was also deeply authoritarian, B: the Bolsheviks were "hardened in a baptism of fire" by the Civil War and C: that the Soviet Union was often largely on the defensive and at least some of that paranoia was justified. Anyway, there wasn't just Russians but nevertheless, it was mostly Europeans at the union. Of course, the counter-argument is that at least at the Republic level, there were usually non-Russian nationalities in charge (although there was usually a Russian deputy somewhere in there doing the heavy lifting). Part of this was simply a near vertical difference in educational levels between the European and non-European parts of the Russian Empire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
The USSR made racism illegal and told us that it had been eliminated, and therefore it was. Bing bong so simple.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Oh yeah you're right. That makes it better. Totally undermines my point and supports yours too. if your response to anything remotely positive about internal policy of the ussr is "prague spring!!!!!!" you might be a moron
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
remember the black guy who got an arrest warrant out for him for being beaten by neonazis scum? turns out the warrant was issued cause the police claim he was attacking people. meanwhile, the very same police have failed to bring most of the nazis who beat deandre harris to any semblance of justice... http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/black-man-attacked-charlottesville-rally-charged-171013065312451.html guess they were too busy trying to cook up reasons to throw a black man who was violently assaulted and beaten in jail
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
also apparently this is a thing https://twitter.com/womensmarch/status/918988148922880000 the women's march organizers have been having to defend themselves on twitter the last couple of days because their event is bernie adjacent and that set a lot of very disturbed people off
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So walk me through this. People work half as much, but still get paid the same. You've effectively doubled salaries and personnel expenses at a stroke. Who is picking up the tab, employers? The government? Uh you know we have this right now, right? Like full-time work legislation is not gumdrops and fairyland magic playtime, it is how things work now. You didn't think the 40 hour full-time week was something the market just decided is the most efficient, did you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The target population is maybe 200 million people or so. Have fun with that. The people enthusiastically marching at the Nazi rallies are only the tip of the iceberg; for every jackbooted thug waving a swastika in one hand and a Confederate flag in the other, there's a hundred bystanders who walk past it on the street and don't really see a problem with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:59
|
|