|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Yeah, a lot of Booker's policy proposals fall in that square for me. He seems to generally identify the right problem (which puts him ahead of most of the competition) but then proposes the wrong (market-based, usually) solution. Any solution that involves funneling more cash into the gaping maw of the finance industry, probably not great. Where does the maw of the finance industry come into play? They are stored and managed by the U.S. treasury for 18 years. The only way Wall Street is even remotely involved is that you can use some of it in your IRA or retirement account. Forcing everyone who wanted to save into a retirement fund to invest everything into a Vanguard Target Date Fund and leave it there for 18 years would be the single greatest value-enhancement in economic history.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Yes? A 19 to 20 year old couple would have access to their money for medical bills. housing, and schooling. What are you getting at?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Forcing everyone who wanted to save into a retirement fund to invest everything into a Vanguard Target Date Fund and leave it there for 18 years would be the single greatest value-enhancement in economic history. For the people collecting the mutual-fund fees, sure
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:For the people collecting the mutual-fund fees, sure Good for everyone invested in them. Go look up Vangaurd. They are a non-profit investment firm and have the cheapest products available. You pay ~ 3 cents for every $10,000 you invest in and admiral fund from Vanguard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:21
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yes? The problem with all three things is inelastic demand. People will pay whatever it costs to not die, not live on the street, and to have a chance at a good career. Name a country that solved healthcare by saying "here's some free money if you can't afford care now it's your own fault". Zero. Name a country that solved healthcare by creating some public system that used monopsony power to control costs and guarantee care as a basic human right, that's every country with good healthcare outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:The problem with all three things is inelastic demand. I mean... yeah. If you do absolutely nothing to address any other problems, then this plan won't do anything to fix them. Breaking the generational cycle of poverty would be a massive change in American society, race relations, women's autonomy, and the political relationship of citizens and institutions. Implementing Single-Payer does nothing to stop this from being done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:You pay ~ 3 cents for every $10,000 you invest in and admiral fund from Vanguard. Yes it's a great option assuming I'm not a market mover who drives up prices as I buy and drives them down as I sell, which the US government investing on behalf of 330 million people would be. Unless the US government used its resulting controlling stake in every company in the country to appoint every board of directors and run them all as public companies  then this plan would ownLeon Trotsky 2012 posted:I mean... yeah. If you do absolutely nothing to address any other problems, then this plan won't do anything to fix them. Right that is what I am saying, this doesn't solve generational poverty unless you actually fix the systems that suck capital out of poor people already, if you did that this would be a good addition, but if you don't it's not that great on its own. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yes it's a great option assuming I'm not a market mover who drives up prices as I buy and drives them down as I sell, which the US government investing on behalf of 330 million people would be. The Expense ratio (fees) for a fund are fixed. They don't go up because they are worth more. And the U.S. government wouldn't be controlling everything. People would decide how much they want to contribute to retirement/savings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yes it's a great option assuming I'm not a market mover who drives up prices as I buy and drives them down as I sell, which the US government investing on behalf of 330 million people would be. Okay. I agree with you mostly, but just looking at it in different ways. I was looking at it as a bedrock of what poverty levels we accept as a baseline for every human being in America. There is this spot where you can fall no further,.Bookers plan is very smartly designed and it should be the new baseline for the American dream. But on it's own it won't change the WHOLE SYSTEM of interconnected businesses and agencies. When combined with other programs, it could effectively save people who fall through the cracks of a welfare state by having poor/addict/irresponsible/crazy/whatever parents. The social impact would be huge, but kind of muted by the idea of a full array of other social programs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:35
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The Expense ratio (fees) for a fund are fixed. They don't go up because they are worth more. Forcing everyone in the country to invest in the stock market is not a retirement plan and wouldn't get the same returns that you as an individual expect, because a retirement plan of that size would be the market. Market prices would be essentially determined by the buying and selling that this Vanguard megafund does meaning you would just get out the same money you put in, less fees. Dividends would of course be insignificant because the P/E ratios of every stock on the exchange just exploded when you dumped $40,000 x 330 million Americans = $13.2 trillion into equities E: The massive one-time run-up when you start dumping in all this money would be great for everyone who currently owns stock (the top 1% own nearly all of it) of course, which is why they're always pushing for this VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:38
|
|
|
This just sounds like when Bush wanted to turn Social Security into a 401K for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
I think the main thing with Booker's plan is that it is "your" money and not a bad person's welfare. Being universal gives it buy in. And even if it doesn't solve every problem with poverty in America, it would be a pretty amazing thing that in America - a country where your blood determined your life trajectory from the day you were born - could have a society where, no matter how bad with money your parents were or how impoverished your neighborhood is, you have some control over your life. You can choose to go to college, get a house, not be ruined by a medical bill, or save your money and figure out what to do with it later. There is a floor on the level of poverty we allow in America. That is the combination of "Well-crafted public policy program that is easy to administer" and "inspirational American Dream marketing sale connected to the program" that the Dems really need.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I think the main thing with Booker's plan is that it is "your" money and not a bad person's welfare. Being universal gives it buy in. you left off the "doesn't actually work due to failing to address any of the actual problems" in your description of its benefits. weird.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I think the main thing with Booker's plan is that it is "your" money and not a bad person's welfare. Being universal gives it buy in. Nope it's means-tested to ensure it punishes the poor for working: above $25,000 in household income for a 4-person family every dollar you make costs each kid 8 cents (16 cents for the household) every year. For each dollar above $25,000 you earn every year, each kid loses $1.80 off their final balance or a loss of $3.60 for the whole household   And it's actually worse than that if it doesn't ramp but has hard cliffs like in the table, then you really do lose money by working more in some situations If you have two parents making only $10/hr you're at 175% of the poverty line and each child gets only $23,948 which is hardly a solution for generational poverty VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I think the main thing with Booker's plan is that it is "your" money and not a bad person's welfare. Being universal gives it buy in. I'm not sure if you can really call something universal if it only applies to a non-trivial extent to the very poor (and the amount shrinks very quickly the instant a family goes from being "extremely poor" to just "kinda poor"). Can this money be used to pay for rent or healthcare? Because if it's specifically limited to homes, education, and retirement, that's really bad. Most poor people are not going to be getting houses, and there are problems with affording education beyond just the tuition (though paying for tuition obviously helps). Stuff like single-payer, free public housing, and free higher education all seem to address these problems better (but I guess they don't give a huge windfall to the wealthy due to a ton of money suddenly flowing into the stock market). edit: Like, this would obviously be better than nothing, but it's absolutely not "smart" in any sense (given there are far better ways to solve the problem of people being unable to afford necessities) Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Even in the insane world where BookerBucks passes into law, it just lasts one mid-term cycle before the Republicans roar back into power vowing to destroy this welfare program that selectively favours poor minorities.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:06
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Even in the insane world where BookerBucks passes into law, it just lasts one mid-term cycle before the Republicans roar back into power vowing to destroy this welfare program that selectively favours poor minorities. Seriously, the Republican voter base of FYGM suburbanites gets an insignificant amount of money from this plan gently caress yeah they'd vote to cut the poo poo out of it
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
That Booker plan is stupid af. What would happen is that even if, by some miracle, it all works out without being sabotaged at some point is that exactly eighteen years after it goes into effect a huge amount of money would be dumped into the target sectors, which obviously would lead to everyone in those sectors jacking up prices, and in doing so loving over everybody who was born too soon to get the benefits from said program. Imagine if you're a twenty-year-old struggling to pay yourself through college and all of a sudden a buncha eighteen-year-olds flush with cash cause your university to significantly raise the tuition fees? Motherfuck, the GOP would have a field day turning those people against the Booker plan and the Dems in general, because they could say that you're getting screwed because of it and it'd be true. It's exactly the same kind of bullshit policy that bad dems always push that lets the GOP go all divide and conquer on the electorate. It's literally setting yourself up for a massive defeat down the line and for no goddamn reason other than to make a buncha lanyards feel smart about themselves. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 11:04
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Can this money be used to pay for rent or healthcare? Because if it's specifically limited to homes, education, and retirement, that's really bad. Most poor people are not going to be getting houses, and there are problems with affording education beyond just the tuition (though paying for tuition obviously helps). Booker's answer to "what can this money be spent on" is generally "we don't know, but generally wealth building activities. We'll have 20 years to figure it out."
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 12:10
|
|
|
Well that sure as gently caress is going to sell the plan to the voters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
On a recent ep of The Weeds Matty Yglesias really lays out why this plan sucks. Off the top of my head some of the reasons were: - complicated means testing scheme with steep cliffs which will necessarily mean more paperwork and parental income verification for the beneficiaries - You can spend this money on the down payment of a house without an explanation of who is giving out all of these mortgages to people 18-25 years old with low incomes and little to no credit history - No one will get a dime of benefits until 18 years after the legislation is passed, which means all it takes is one period of unified republican administration and congress to wipe it out, and there will be no constituency who will be voting in droves to protect a hypothetical future entitlement (which is the same thing that happened to a similar program in the UK) - There is nothing to prevent colleges from simply raising tuition to capture the extra money that they’d be otherwise leaving on the table And one other thing I thought of - assuming it passes and doesn’t get dismantled in the nearly 2-decade phase in period, does it have a provision to increase the base payment with time to account for inflation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
SousaphoneColossus posted:On a recent ep of The Weeds Matty Yglesias really lays out why this plan sucks. Off the top of my head some of the reasons were: Hahah, goddam It's kindof amazing how these huge workshopped plans can be thrown together and do so little to actually address problems
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Hahah, goddam Consider that it is designed to address problems other than those you are worried about, such as 'How can we make the financial sector vastly more profitable and transfer money to the top 1%?'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
Booker will not be President ever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
SousaphoneColossus posted:
Imagine if Social Security hadn't started paying out until 1975 when the first young people from the 30s retired. We probably would have lost the 1936 elections and joined the other side in wwii
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
I'd like to hear how that plan is going to stop parents from abusing their 18 year old child's formation years
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 16:18
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Sadly thats not a disqualifying defect for the Democrats in the year 2020. It might even be a positive for her. This isn't the hot takes thread, kiddo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Also, with the amount of cost inflation in higher education, it isn't really that impressive. Basically, it is taking the EITC from Kamala and basically locking it up for 18 years (and yeah having it being thrown into a downpayment isn't going to end well). Also you could I dunno...just increase pell grants rather than some "wonkish" solution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
Here's a solution to everything: Pre-reagan tax brackets adjusted for inflation. Then do all the fun leftist stuff that makes society sane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
Admittedly, raising brackets isn't as necessary as just closing all the loopholes they have popped up (carried interest) and just start taxing all income the same way (more brackets wouldn't hurt). Also, the US probably could get buy with MMT if it wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HootHootBerns/status/1055821466741207041
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Here's a solution to everything: Unfortunately, this will be the response to sane propositions like yours in 2018 America: MAGA idiot: oh, u mean the fun leftist stuff that got us 12 years of republican Presidents beginning in 1980? THAT fun leftist stuff? gently caress off socialist
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
Those MAGA kids probably have college paid by their parents and are still on their parents' health insurance. They don't give a poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 17:52
|
|
|
Someone pointed it out and now I can't stop noticing it. Everyone with a Rose emoji or anarchist flag in their twitter profile name has an anime avatar.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:Unfortunately, this will be the response to sane propositions like yours in 2018 America: You'll never convince the chuds. The only way out is convincing non chuds to support and vote. Only way to do that is to show you actually give a poo poo about their needs. Also no I'm talking about leftist stuff LBJ and FDR couldn't get through in their time. UHC, UBI, free pre k free uni. Fix poo poo for real.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Someone pointed it out and now I can't stop noticing it. I have not even remotely noticed this trend. Just in the visible comments of that tweet there are 5 rose emojis with non-anime avatars (and zero with anime avatars). Also do you still think the Booker plan is "very smart" after the various issues people have mentioned?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I have not even remotely noticed this trend. Just in the visible comments of that tweet there are 5 rose emojis with non-anime avatars (and zero with anime avatars). asking LT2012 if he still thinks a thing he posted previously is an express route to him finding somewhere else to be in a hurry, for reasons that include his expressed opinions on whether or not it is possible to count to six million.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Also do you still think the Booker plan is "very smart" after the various issues people have mentioned? Haha, it's LT2012, even if he's factually wrong because he misread an article he will double down for 20 pages of bad faith arguments and fishmeching
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I have not even remotely noticed this trend. Just in the visible comments of that tweet there are 5 rose emojis with non-anime avatars (and zero with anime avatars). Is... is your AV from an anime? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Is... is your AV from an anime? Did you know on this forum, people can buy other people avatars? Also stop trying to lay the weakest burn ever on rose Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 16:48
|
|
