|
Fulchrum posted:The use of available resources to benefeit the populous is an inextricable part of a socialist system Mmmm, no, under a socialist system, there's actually quite a bit of discretion over whether or not to use those available resources. quote:and the system will not ignore those resources and their ingerent value because of magic. You really, really don't know the first thing about socialism. You should stop talking about it until you educate yourself.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:40 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:as you claim socialism would magically make them do. No one said this, though? The problem is you're blaming "socialism" for the fall of oil ruining Venezuela's main funding method. It's strange that you don't see how the same capitalist machinations that run the entire world's economies are also the same ones ruining Venezuela  Anyway, throw the "venezuela bad ergo socialism bad" argument on the pile of "ways capitalism brainwashes easy marks" I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:the populous 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The use of available resources to benefeit the populous is an inextricable part of a socialist system, and the system will not ignore those resources and their ingerent value because of magic. Fulchrum I'm curious, do you support AOC?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
The "poopulace"
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/costareports/status/1081666053955112961 this won't end well for him. also i feel like this will make the market implode hard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SloppyPSYOP/status/1081677827844513794
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
Akumu posted:What do you mean by "matter"? In either case, if you make a different amount of income than estimated, you owe a different amount of income tax. What is special about that amount changing linearly with income? Let’s say your salary is $80,000 and you expect to get a bonus, and you don’t know exactly how much you’ll get, but it won’t be $70,000+. It’s pretty easy to calculate withholding each month because you know roughly what portion of your income will be taxed at various rates and no portion will be above 24%. Now let’s say you have the same scenario, but literally every penny of additional income is taxed slightly more than the last. It’s much more easy to plan and predict your tax liability in the first scenario. Ogmius815 fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Mmmm, no, under a socialist system, there's actually quite a bit of discretion over whether or not to use those available resources. So you are, in fact, just retreating into them magically avoiding using a resource because otherwise your argument doesn't work. white sauce posted:No one said this, though? No, im not. Your strawman is. I'm ignoring Venezuelas present and Maduro completely and focusing on how things worked under Chavez. When things were good for the Venezuelan people and socialism worked for them, because they were pumping out oil to sell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
the vast majority of venezuela's economy was still private under chavez.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
heyitsamanda posted:Haha Joe Manchin looks like he’s even adopting Trump’s “goldface” makeup there It's called goldfishing
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So you are, in fact, just retreating into them magically avoiding using a resource because otherwise your argument doesn't work. "It's very socialist to make an entire economy reliant on one single resource, which had it's prices on the international market plummet", says really smart market-loving man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AdamParkhomenko/status/1081696072580374528
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
I feel like the Pentagon chief of staff resigning is kinda huge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:It's called goldfishing That shot of Trump like 30 pages back where you could clearly see the end of his face makeup just before his ears has been giving me shudders ever since 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
white sauce posted:"It's very socialist to make an entire economy reliant on one single resource, which had it's prices on the international market plummet", says really smart market-loving man. building your economy around its most abundant useful resource is what any country, capitalist or socialist, will do, jackass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/costareports/status/1081666053955112961 So Democrats could use this for universal healthcare, too, right? Ogmius815 posted:Let’s say your salary is $80,000 and you expect to get a bonus, and you don’t know exactly how much you’ll get, but it won’t be $70,000+. It’s pretty easy to calculate withholding each month because you know roughly what portion of your income will be taxed at various rates and no portion will be above 24%. Not really. If you're uncertain about your income, your uncertainty about your tax liability is going to be about the same either way. Let's say you don't know much it will be, but maybe somewhere between $5K and $15K. With brackets you already know the total liability on your first $80K. Let's say you're not being bumped into a new bracket, and the bonus will be taxed at 24%. Then your total liability will be your total liability on the $80K + something between 0.24*$5K and 0.24*$15K. You'll probably go with something closer to the $15K withholding to avoid paying a lump sum. Divide that by your # of paychecks to get a withholding value. With a smooth liability curve Your total income will be somewhere between $85K and $100K. Pop those into the liability function, and use a liability closer to the $100K value. Divide into your paychecks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:20
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:building your economy around its most abundant useful resource is what any country, capitalist or socialist, will do, jackass. Yet that's not the crux of your argument. The crux of your argument is that a socialist economy will exploit any resource available, without any consideration for whether or not doing so would be environmentally disastrous. It is for this reason that it is a very bad argument.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Let’s say your salary is $80,000 and you expect to get a bonus, and you don’t know exactly how much you’ll get, but it won’t be $70,000+. It’s pretty easy to calculate withholding each month because you know roughly what portion of your income will be taxed at various rates and no portion will be above 24%. I'm not sure this works out, because your effective tax rate (unless all your income is in the lowest bracket), and also total liability, is still changing with income. If your goal is to have an equal monthly withholding that adds up to your tax liability, you will still be thrown off by that unknown end-of-year bonus. Your calculation is still (fixed base income liability + variable bonus liability) / 12, nothing in that is particularly affected by the curve those two are calculated from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:building your economy around its most abundant useful resource My god you're so close to getting it it's frustrating as hell Fulchrum do you believe that taxing the wealthy will make the wealthy take their money somewhere else?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
yeah, I fuckin' despise Maduro and am not exactly an unalloyed Chavez fan, but ascribing Venezuela's woes to "socialism!  " is missing several points
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:28
|
|
You, uh...you need to do some basic reading about Venezuela, duder. Chavismo is hardly synonymous with socialism, and even then it's difficult to argue that he ran the system as originally intended.
|
Telsa Cola posted:I feel like the Pentagon chief of staff resigning is kinda huge. Dismantle American empire and all, but just randomly hollowing out the bureaucracy seems like some Pandora's box poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
To add, I also think it would be a feature to have a formula that has a built-in asymptote of 100% taxation at infinity dollars, rather than having to fight over adding new brackets for the mega, ultra, and ultra-mega wealthy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yet that's not the crux of your argument. The crux of your argument is that a socialist economy will exploit any resource available, without any consideration for whether or not doing so would be environmentally disastrous. It is for this reason that it is a very bad argument. So your argument just comes down to a socialist country magically being morally superior. Venezuela did exactly what you are saying that a socialist country would never do. So, because you know that counterargument invalidates your baseless assertion, your only real response is to go no true scotsman again. If it is within their best interest to exploit something at the expense of another, a population will do that action just as readily as an individual would. You could realise that the problem of the tragedy of the commons is not something that magically gets cured when you introduce socialism, but you refuse to admit that. white sauce posted:My god you're so close to getting it it's frustrating as hell No, I think that taxing and regulating the wealthy within a capitalist system would be the only sensible way to deal with wealth accumulation. Glad you're admitting I am right here. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:yeah, I fuckin' despise Maduro and am not exactly an unalloyed Chavez fan, but ascribing Venezuela's woes to "socialism! Exactly. It's very, very possible to acknowledge that Venezuela's system is a shitshow, and that Chavez was and Maduro is corrupt as hell, while at the same time acknowledging that none of this is due to "socialism."
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So your argument just comes down to a socialist country magically being morally superior. No one here has said either of these things. Stop blathering out nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Glad you're admitting I am right here. Like I said, no different than arguing with a chud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:yeah, I fuckin' despise Maduro and am not exactly an unalloyed Chavez fan, but ascribing Venezuela's woes to "socialism! what's even richer is that he's claiming that we should NOT get rid of the current system of global hegemony, because of what happened with oil in Venezuela. It's absurd. Then he claims victory in the most annoyingly condescending way possible. I'm glad I got to see Fulchrum white sauce fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
"Actually, Venezuela sucks" - socialists "A HA! NO TRUE SCOTSMAN!" - capitalists
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Exactly. It's very, very possible to acknowledge that Venezuela's system is a shitshow, and that Chavez was and Maduro is corrupt as hell, while at the same time acknowledging that none of this is due to "socialism." The only people mentioning Venezuela's problems are your strawmen. I'm talking about the perfectly functional and burgeoning system that Venezuela enjoyed because of socialism, and because of its redistribution of oil profits to the people. Majorian posted:No one here has said either of these things. Stop blathering out nonsense. Yes, you did. Your argument is that a socialist country would never use a resource to benefeit its people if there was an environmental impact. Which is completely full of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
Akumu posted:To add, I also think it would be a feature to have a formula that has a built-in asymptote of 100% taxation at infinity dollars, rather than having to fight over adding new brackets for the mega, ultra, and ultra-mega wealthy. Income tax doesn’t even matter to the ultra mega wealthy because if they like they can have no income for the year or take much of their “income” in a form that will be taxed as long-term capital gains. So complicating the ordinary income tax code to deal with the ultra-wealthy isn’t very meaningful absent other major reforms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yes, you did. Your argument is that a socialist country would never use a resource to benefeit its people if there was an environmental impact. Which is completely full of poo poo. He never said any of that... why do you argue in such bad faith?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1081698144193335296?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
white sauce posted:He never said any of that... why do you argue in such bad faith? Majorian posted:The crux of your argument is that a socialist economy will exploit any resource available, without any consideration for whether or not doing so would be environmentally disastrous. It is for this reason that it is a very bad argument. Is it that you can't read, or don't read? And I do like the hypocrisy of someone who accused me continuously of bringing up Venezuelas present economy, despite my very pointedly ignoring it, claiming I'm arguing in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Dismantle American empire and all, but just randomly hollowing out the bureaucracy seems like some Pandora's box poo poo. Yeah, dismantling is good but I think thats some that needs to be orderly because just having random gaps in our national security network seems like a disaster ready to happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
Everything is so loving dumb
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Is it that you can't read, or don't read? The negation of always is not never. Ogmius815 posted:Income tax doesn’t even matter to the ultra mega wealthy because if they like they can have no income for the year or take much of their “income” in a form that will be taxed as long-term capital gains. So complicating the ordinary income tax code to deal with the ultra-wealthy isn’t very meaningful absent other major reforms. Perhaps, perhaps. I think this points out the difference in our thinking, though. You think a single non-linear function is more complicated, whereas I think a handful of different constant levels and breakpoints is more complicated. Akumu fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Jan 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Why the gently caress is Trump saying the shutdown may last for years? The only thing that keeps people working is the likelihood a budget will get soon passed and they'll get backpay. If they think it will last for years, they'll just quit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Lycus posted:Why the gently caress is Trump saying the shutdown may last for years? The only thing that keeps people working is the likelihood a budget will get soon passed and they'll get backpay. If they think it will last for years, they'll just quit. because he is toddlar brained rear end in a top hat who doesn't care about anyone or anything outside his dumb loving wall. he probably deep down understands if he is hosed either way and the shutdown is his tantrum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:40 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yes, you did. Your argument is that a socialist country would never use a resource to benefeit its people if there was an environmental impact. I never argued that, you loon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 01:43
|
|