|
Speaking of, this seems like an unusually ambitious plan to tackle the racial wealth gap, courtesy of Cory Booker. 
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Speaking of, this seems like an unusually ambitious plan to tackle the racial wealth gap, courtesy of Cory Booker. making sovereign citizen nutjob ideas a reality one step at a time
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Cool, accounting for inflation then by the time a child born two years from now turns 18 they can afford almost an entire semester of college, or 1/200th of an illness. Thanks, Cory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:Cool, accounting for inflation then by the time a child born two years from now turns 18 they can afford almost an entire semester of college, or 1/200th of an illness. Thanks, Cory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:That already is accounting for inflation, average in-state tuition in the US for public universities was 9,410 per year in 2016, and Booker also supports medicare for all, so I'm not sure what point you're making here. It seems like an extremely wonky solution to the problem, and making the future even more reliant on strong economic growth seems a bit questionable. You're exposing everyone to interest rate risk and convoluting the plan for no real gain. If the goal is to give people money, why not just give people money? Treasury can snap billions of dollars into existence to buy bombs to drop on foreigners, they can snap money into existence for the people just as easily without all of these vulnerable to manipulation intermediary steps. VVVV That too. It feels like a dodge on a bunch of underlying problems. Oh, America is a capitalist hellscape where access to wealth is the primary determining factor of health and success? What if we gave you a one time influx of money? You know, to navigate the immutable capitalist hellscape Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Oct 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
I would say that the primarily problem with the plan is that it assumes we should still have universities you have to pay for rather than treating them like elementary or high school education where everyone can go at will. Likewise, it assumes that healthcare is something you still have to pay for at point of use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:That already is accounting for inflation, average in-state tuition in the US for public universities was 9,410 per year in 2016, and Booker also supports medicare for all, so I'm not sure what point you're making here. What was it in 1998?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
haven't you people learned anything from Vox Media sweetheart and Budget Wonk Paul Ryan? if there's that many numbers on a graphic, it -must- be both sensible and reasonable. the alternative is admitting that you're being taken for a ride by someone who's saying "yeah, prices won't keep increasing at their current rate, because of, uh. elves."
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:But do you think John Kerry, the guy who got swiftboated by an opponent who got a cushy stateside job from his daddy, could have beaten Trump? Or could Al Gore, the man who was parodied as a robot throughout his run, have beaten Trump? Yes, I think either of them would have beaten Trump, although not as decisively as either Bill or Barack. I do agree with the differences you mentioned before between Bill/Barack and Al/John. I don't think Hillary really fits entirely into either basket, but yes she's closer to the Al Gore / John Kerry boring mold that we vote for just because we're supposed to vote for Democrats. I also think George W. Bush was, while very dumb, a good campaigner. Probably better than Trump. It grosses me out that charisma matters as much as it does, but, uh, it does. So who is the most charismatic of the current prospects? I guess that's also Bernie at this point. Jesus I wish he were 10 years younger.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:It seems like an extremely wonky solution to the problem, and making the future even more reliant on strong economic growth seems a bit questionable. You're exposing everyone to interest rate risk and convoluting the plan for no real gain. If the goal is to give people money, why not just give people money? Treasury can snap billions of dollars into existence to buy bombs to drop on foreigners, they can snap money into existence for the people just as easily without all of these vulnerable to manipulation intermediary steps. No all we need is for nothing to go wrong in the markets for almost 20 years and assuming only the most modest inflation you'll have maybe 15-20% of a shot at competition in the Real Economy before you take out loan servitude like everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
That Cory Booker plan looks very much like the kind of thing a democrat who doesn't "get it" would propose. A one time wealth transfer of up to 40k if you spent the first 18 years dirt poor and going through the worst public schools that gave you no preparation whatsoever for university. It's like someone took a 2008 democrat and tried to find the minimum amount of leftward movement to satisfy those angry goons, but miscalculated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Speaking of, this seems like an unusually ambitious plan to tackle the racial wealth gap, courtesy of Cory Booker. How does he plan to pay for all this? What's his budget plan?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:How does he plan to pay for all this? What's his budget plan? Is this a serious question or are you being ironic?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:How does he plan to pay for all this? What's his budget plan? Just cut the EITC and the CTC, should pay for this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:haven't you people learned anything from Vox Media sweetheart and Budget Wonk Paul Ryan? i'm just going to leave this here and try not to vomit
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:That plan looks very much like the kind of thing a democrat who doesn't "get it" would propose. A one time wealth transfer of up to 40k if you spent the first 18 years dirt poor and going through the worst public schools that gave you no preparation whatsoever for university. It's like someone took a 2008 democrat and tried to find the minimum amount of leftward movement to satisfy those angry goons, but miscalculated. Is the concept itself sound if the figures were increased? I am not sure a "market solution" is the right one here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:Is this a serious question or are you being ironic? that is 110% a joke and that it's not instantly apparent as such in this forum is at least half of it
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:Is this a serious question or are you being ironic? It's a serious question. I'm assuming cancelling the Trump tax cuts is a start but how does the rest of the math work out?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:that is 110% a joke and that it's not instantly apparent as such in this forum is at least half of it Bright Wanderer posted:It's a serious question. I'm assuming cancelling the Trump tax cuts is a start but how does the rest of the math work out? *sad trombone noises*
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:How does he plan to pay for all this? What's his budget plan? pretty simple, we're going to cut taxes on wall street and pfizer, and give some of the resulting windfall to the children. you may respond that's not how numbers work, but i put it to you that that means you, freshly registered person, do not understand how America works
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:*sad trombone noises* congratulations on becoming a mod. this is your first gimmick forums persona. try not to enjoy it too much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:pretty simple, we're going to cut taxes on wall street and pfizer, and give some of the resulting windfall to the children. Why would you cut taxes on wall street and pfizer? I don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:congratulations on becoming a mod. this is your first gimmick forums persona. try not to enjoy it too much. I am sincerely laughing a bunch right now, you made my day better. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
It was an honest question, did I say something wrong? The Booker plan looks like a good start but I don't know a lot about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:It was an honest question, did I say something wrong? The Booker plan looks like a good start but I don't know a lot about it. No it's just that "but how will you pay for it???" is a bit of a meme. I don't think I am in a position to explain the economics of it but the short answer is that the idea that the US Government has to pay for things like a household budget is a bit silly and we could comfortably just print money (or more responsibly, cut the military budget and raise taxes on the rich) to pay for it, and that it's not even a particularly ambitious program relative to the resources we have available.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:No it's just that "but how will you pay for it???" is a bit of a meme. If you print a lot of money won't that just drive inflation up? Maybe that's a good thing for folks with lots of debt anyway but food prices going up would be pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
the honest answer, from a democrat who actually felt like doing something good for the poor and wasn't a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of goldman sachs, would be "we're gonna turn rich people upside down and shake them once or twice. with the resulting couple billion dollars, we could pay for this through 2050 no issue." corey booker is a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of goldman sachs. his answer will be "we're going to cut taxes on wall street. that will pay for it. do not ask me how."
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:It seems like an extremely wonky solution to the problem, and making the future even more reliant on strong economic growth seems a bit questionable. You're exposing everyone to interest rate risk and convoluting the plan for no real gain. If the goal is to give people money, why not just give people money? Treasury can snap billions of dollars into existence to buy bombs to drop on foreigners, they can snap money into existence for the people just as easily without all of these vulnerable to manipulation intermediary steps. I think the answer to most of this is that the program is designed "defensively" to give it the veneer of universality and "wealth-building", to make it seem like you're not just giving a bunch of black kids 40k-50k as soon as they turn 18. Obviously stuff like "government invests in a low-risk fund" is silly and could easily get waved away (probably would?) in actual implementation and transformed into "government accumulates a sum in a ledger for you and then you have access to it when you turn 18". It's a really roundabout way to deal with the wealth gap, yeah, and I'm not sure how "you're 18, now here's 40k. Either spend it on your college tuition or buy a house or leave the money in a fund for a few more years" works in practice. Frightening Knight posted:I would say that the primarily problem with the plan is that it assumes we should still have universities you have to pay for rather than treating them like elementary or high school education where everyone can go at will. quote:Likewise, it assumes that healthcare is something you still have to pay for at point of use.  Bright Wanderer posted:How does he plan to pay for all this? What's his budget plan? (But he says "capital gains and estate tax").
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:If you print a lot of money won't that just drive inflation up? Maybe that's a good thing for folks with lots of debt anyway but food prices going up would be pretty bad. we've printed literal trillions of dollars since 2008. it was how we bailed out the banks. curiously the inflationpocalypse has failed to occur
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:I suspect that this is going to be a large part of Booker's higher-ed accessibility plan. At current tuition costs (which, yeah, will go up faster than inflation, so this can't be the only part of it), this is roughly equivalent to free college for students at/near the federal poverty line, so this serves as a Hillary-style means-tested plan on that end. Then, it has the added bonus of giving a bunch of extra wealth for poor kids to spend on housing (or whatever) if they choose to not go to college. I misread on healthcare, my bad. The problem with means-testing college is that all the middle class suburbanites will spite vote against it. Means-testing makes programs weaker in terms of public support.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:No it's just that "but how will you pay for it???" is a bit of a meme. NO. NO IT WASN'T AN HONEST QUESTION YOU FOOL Bright Wanderer posted:If you print a lot of money won't that just drive inflation up? Maybe that's a good thing for folks with lots of debt anyway but food prices going up OH FOR gently caress'S SAKE HERE WE GO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X58m6rdoz7A why does every migf rereg sound the same
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:I mean, considering that the GOP base was much more enthusiastic for Trump than Bush, I feel like Trump is a better GOP nominee for their purposes. 2000 presidential election: 50.45m votes for Bush 2016 presidential election: 62ish m votes for Trump but there were a third more eligible voters in 2016 You might be right about the base, but Trump got less proportional turnout overall. (although I guess I could see an argument that the extra nonvoting eligibles skew extremely heavily Democratic) that said I think I should probably end this derail about Hypothetical Al Gore 2016 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:we've printed literal trillions of dollars since 2008. it was how we bailed out the banks. Aren't they unwinding that right now anyway? Rates are going back up. Would you need a cooperative Fed to go along with the massive money printing? They don't seem too cooperative at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
lemme give you a hint on this one LK the price of food is inordinately privileged in the CPI relative to other fixed expenses like housing and healthcare and hosed with due to a combination of subsidies (which are their own thread) and trade agreements (which are being shredded as we speak, which is why food is about to get more expensive regardless of social welfare)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Yes, I think either of them would have beaten Trump, although not as decisively as either Bill or Barack. I do agree with the differences you mentioned before between Bill/Barack and Al/John. I don't think Hillary really fits entirely into either basket, but yes she's closer to the Al Gore / John Kerry boring mold that we vote for just because we're supposed to vote for Democrats. I also think George W. Bush was, while very dumb, a good campaigner. Probably better than Trump. I think we have very different views of candidates and what makes a winner, but thats fine. And I wouldnt really describe Bernie as charismatic, I would say he has extreme authenticity. I might go have a beer with Bernie to hear him talk about wealth inequality, but I wouldn't necessarily want to watch a game or whatever with him. He's a frazzled old dude with some endearing mannerisms sure, but more importantly he's been on the same rant his entire life so I have no doubts that he will do his best to do the things he says. No other candidate really gives me the same confidence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:lemme give you a hint on this one LK the price of food is inordinately privileged in the CPI relative to other fixed expenses like housing and healthcare and hosed with due to a combination of subsidies (which are their own thread) and trade agreements (which are being shredded as we speak, which is why food is about to get more expensive regardless of social welfare) What's the hint? I'm sorry I don't understand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:NO. NO IT WASN'T AN HONEST QUESTION YOU FOOL He seems sincere!  Willie Tomg posted:lemme give you a hint on this one LK the price of food is inordinately privileged in the CPI relative to other fixed expenses like housing and healthcare and hosed with due to a combination of subsidies (which are their own thread) and trade agreements (which are being shredded as we speak, which is why food is about to get more expensive regardless of social welfare) I'm not sure I follow the implication here for inflation and the CPI. I understand that you're saying that the CPI (which iirc is a measure of inflation) is weighted disproportionately by food prices which are artificially modified by subsidies and trade agreements, but the result of this is...? (I may be dumb. )
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
Bright Wanderer posted:Aren't they unwinding that right now anyway? Rates are going back up. Would you need a cooperative Fed to go along with the massive money printing? They don't seem too cooperative at the moment. brings a tear to my eye to see a set of goalposts thundering across the plains like that. y'know, pioneers used to ride these babies for miles. you wanna skip to the end of this game already, friend? the bit in the middle where you try to flesh out a character naive enough for "isn't printing money... inflation?" and also savvy enough for "quantitative easing requires a cooperative Fed to coordinate the direct injections of cash into the pockets of rich people" is only entertaining to the worst sort of pedant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:The problem with means-testing college is that all the middle class suburbanites will spite vote against it. Means-testing makes programs weaker in terms of public support. Yeah, "ambitious program to close the racial wealth gap that survives racist attacks" coupled with "means tested way to pay for college education" that somehow survives because "look, this is universal, middle class kids get ~7k out of this (compared to 45k for poor kids)" is a uh... tough balancing act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
Frightening Knight posted:He seems sincere! The explicit inflation measure is likely to overstate actual inflation? If I'm reading correctly?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:40
|
|