|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Please post more as the left continues to shrink to the smallest it's ever been world wide and marxists cause massive economic crisises in country after country. Actually the left is more powerful than it's been in decades, capitalism has been in crisis since 2008 and destroyed the planet, and the ruling class are panicking and can't maintain control. You're not fooling anyone dude.
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:You don't care about small business, entrepeneurship, or the middle class. You only care about the lower class. These are some of the main reasons Trump won. I'm heartened that nobody really gives a gently caress what you guys think, and people like you will never influence actual policy because a lot of people in this forum are more to the left than 95% of most americans and even the majority of the Democratic party. Before this discussion can really go further, what do you consider the middle class (in terms of individual income)? Because roughly half the country makes below $30,000/year. I find that many people who talk about the middle class are referring to income levels that only represent the top 1/4 or 1/3 of Americans. ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Fine, what if that means a 10% unemployment rate? "What if increasing minimum wage caused 10 million people to die from cancer? What then?" (Unless you can show that this relationship between increased minimum wage and a significant increase in unemployment exists, you're not actually making a point. I'm pretty sure studies have been doing that show there isn't much of a relationship between past increases in the minimum wage and unemployment.) Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 02:46 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Actually the left is more powerful than it's been in decades, capitalism has been in crisis since 2008 and destroyed the planet, and the ruling class are panicking and can't maintain control. You're not fooling anyone dude. Haha ok pal.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Before this discussion can really go further, what do you consider the middle class (in terms of individual income)? 40-80 k is middle class. 80-160k is upper middle class. But it depends on the location and family size. Most small business owners don't make more than 200k.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:40-80 k is middle class. Okay, see, this is a pretty strange standard*. Only 15% of the US makes 75k or more per year. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I don't think those people are a priority. I feel pretty confident saying that no one who makes above 50k should be given priority when it comes to economic policy, with the possible exception of people who live in very high cost of living areas like NYC or California or something. Only about 30% of the country makes above 50k; there are many, many people who are in far more dire straits. *It's reasonable only if you define "middle class" by how easily a person can afford to live (rather than where they fall relative to other Americans), but if that's the case there's no reason to give the middle class priority in terms of our economic policy. edit: Also, you really can't consider $15/hr a fringe position only advocated by the wacky leftists on these forums. There are many mainstream Democrats advocating for it, and Sanders received a very significant portion of the vote during the primary, showing that social democratic policy in general is no longer remotely fringe. ISeeCuckedPeople posted:While money will make things a little better it is only part of what needs to be done to help the poor in the country. Stuff like education, etc won't fix things. All the jobs that pay poorly will still need to be worked, even if literally every single American has a graduate degree in engineering or whatever. The general structure of the job market isn't going to significantly change, and demand for unskilled jobs will remain roughly the same. Improved access to education is helpful towards making the country more of a meritocracy, but it will do almost nothing to address poverty rates. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:00 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Okay, see, this is a pretty strange standard*. Only 15% of the US makes 75k or more per year. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I don't think those people are a priority. 20% of the US Population live in New York or California... http://www.businessinsider.com/middle-class-in-every-us-state-2015-4 The 40-80k is not far off. 80-160k being upper middle class is not off either. Considering these numbers are from 2015.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:20% of the US Population live in New York or California... Those are household incomes, not individual incomes. edit: The reason I asked in the first place is that many Americans with above average incomes have a heavily distorted idea of what constitutes middle class and believe that something around 50-60k a year falls around the midpoint, when in reality it's about half of that.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Heh, first time I've said this but read more marx if you think manager salary was remotely relevant. your rebuttal to "profit is the difference between what the workers have created and what the workers are owed" was "well how would you pay the owners then" either you forgot what profit means, or you forgot that owners pay themselves a salary. there is not another way to solve this math problem.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Haha ok pal. You seem to take a lot of pride in being out of touch. How's complete denial about reality working out for you in terms of convincing people to take your political opinions seriously? 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:You seem to take a lot of pride in being out of touch. How's complete denial about reality working out for you in terms of convincing people to take your political opinions seriously? What does this have to do with the left being more powerful than it ever has been?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Haha ok pal. Income: Spent it all on booze and payday loans. Henry Offenses: Shitposting. Using "cuck" in his forum name. Punishment: Death by guillotine.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
When people ask why the democrats are a waste, I'm going to point them to this thread (also the hillary toxx thread)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:your rebuttal to "profit is the difference between what the workers have created and what the workers are owed" was "well how would you pay the owners then" The implication of that, consistent with marx, is that owners deserve nothing. Labeling the money differently (salary) doesn't change that. Ownership and management are not productive according to LTV.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:The implication of that, consistent with marx, is that owners deserve nothing. Labeling the money differently (salary) doesn't change that. Ownership and management are not productive according to LTV. You are being purposefully obtuse. If owners do work, they could just as well do this work without being owners. Most big owners hire other people to do the work for them, including the work of deciding where to invest their money for the best profits. There are entire firms with tens of thousands of employees dedicated to just this.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:You are being purposefully obtuse. If owners do work, they could just as well do this work without being owners. Most big owners hire other people to do the work for them, including the work of deciding where to invest their money for the best profits. There are entire firms with tens of thousands of employees dedicated to just this. You're the one who defined profit in a way that eliminated the possibility of contribution from the owner and therefore categorically denied that capital allocation (and management) is work (which is marx). If you're backing down from that it's a good thing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:You're the one who defined profit in a way that eliminated the possibility of contribution from the owner and therefore categorically denied that capital allocation (and management) is work (which is marx). If you're backing down from that it's a good thing. This is the definition of profit that capitalists themselves use you ignoramus
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:This is the definition of profit that capitalists themselves use you ignoramus Haha no the definition capitalist use doesn't include the implication that workers are "owed" all of the profit.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Haha no the definition capitalist use doesn't include the implication that workers are "owed" all of the profit. You use this definition yourself when arguing that owners deserve to be paid because they are also workers Bob le Moche fucked around with this message at 04:20 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Haha no the definition capitalist use doesn't include the implication that workers are "owed" all of the profit. does the manager do any work yes or no
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:When people ask why the democrats are a waste, I'm going to point them to this thread (also the hillary toxx thread)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
People aren't paid poo poo wages because their work is unnecessary. Minimum wage labor actually tends to be very critical work, that no one wants to do. The reason for the low wages is the lack of power on the part of people compelled to work them. They are powerless, and so are coerced into accepting bullshit wages. An increase in the minimum wage won't actually affect employment, because toilets still have to be scrubbed, and they're not going to scrub themselves. So where does the extra money from? Answer - from people with higher incomes, who must see both a real decrease, because the price of goods increase, and a nominal decrease, as all businesses collectively have less excess money to encourage high earners to stick around. This redistribution is 100% of the reason minimum wage is opposed so vehemently, from people like troika, because the suffering of everyday people is less important to him than his marginal comforts. rudatron fucked around with this message at 10:11 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:I love these marxist analyzations. Please post more as the left continues to shrink to the smallest it's ever been world wide and marxists cause massive economic crisises in country after country. you could only be forgiven in thinking the left is "shrinking" if you limit your window to the united states and certain parts of western europe and even then it's demonstrably false
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Oh my god the irony. What about the Walton family though
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
rudatron posted:There's isn't a single study that's managed to prove an increase in the minimum wage creates an unemployment crisis. Its bullshit fear-mongering. The people who have done these studies commonly caution against generalizing the findings about small increases of the minimum wage to larger ones. Nobody thinks the minimum wage can be raised endlessly without affecting employment, we just don't know where the inflection point where the wage gains are overwhelmed by unemployment losses is. But we all agree it must exist. The other wrinkle is that the good studies that eliminate (most) confounding variables are based on cross border comparisons where the state or municipality on one side of a border raises the minimum wage creating a differential. A national $15 minimum makes it impossible to do the studies that could prove a $15 minimum doesn't cause significant unemployment. There are non-capitalist-bootlicker reasons to be cautious here.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 07:22
|
|
|
How convenient. Every time your predictions are proven wrong you can just move the goalposts and say "all those things I said could totally happen next time you never know, therefore never do anything." The God of the Gaps theory for free market fundamentalist religion.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:The people who have done these studies commonly caution against generalizing the findings about small increases of the minimum wage to larger ones. Nobody thinks the minimum wage can be raised endlessly without affecting employment, we just don't know where the inflection point where the wage gains are overwhelmed by unemployment losses is. But we all agree it must exist. Given that there's basically never "just loving double it right this moment" proposals we kind of have time to spot "okay this isn't actually helping anymore." Caution is something we're perfectly happy with, what we're being asked of here is beyond caution.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
it's always surprising that we have to let the minimum wage keep falling or the economy will fall apart. i'm sure the rich, who are making more than ever year upon year could manage to share some of the money they stole from workers, but apparently that will destroy the economy?  imo, trump is the perfect exemplar of why the owner class needs to be divested of all wealth. what has trump produced of value in his life? nothing. is he talented? no. does he have any virtue at all? unlikely. so then why is he richer than most americans (and also now president)? capitalism does not produce meritous individuals and results, it is just a new name for aristocracy. trump is a new aristocrat, a member of the owner class. that's why he's able to fail over and over again and still remain wealthy, and have access to other members of the owner class. 
Condiv fucked around with this message at 09:12 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Condiv posted:companies that shouldn't exist and shouldn't continue to stay in business aren't what i'd call market efficiency. uber has no business plan that leads to profitability, and loses half a billion quarterly easily, yet it's unbelievably highly valued. that looks like the market being extremely inefficient and shoveling resources into a burning moneypit. Uber does have a path to profitability, but it has to first reach two goals: a) destroy all significant competitors (i.e. taxicab companies) so that it has a de facto monopoly and b) weaken or outright eliminate regulations so that it can operate at ever-lower cost. For a number of investors, their involvement with Uber is at least partly an investment towards one or both of those goals. If Uber itself succeeds at accomplishing them but then goes under anyways, that's an acceptable outcome as long as it enables those investors to recoup their money through other, more sensible investments in the now-destabilized rideshare/taxicab industries.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 10:05
|
|
|
If individual income got taxed the way businesses do, off the top after rent, expenses, etc, it would actually be a progressive tax. I think there is a very important difference between ownership and management. One has value, the other does not. I think management is probably significantly overpaid in this country, but it does add value. I think actually enforcing antitrust law and taking a hard line would do a lot to help small businesses, taking a harsh view of vertical monopolies in particular as well as horizontal ones.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:The people who have done these studies commonly caution against generalizing the findings about small increases of the minimum wage to larger ones. Nobody thinks the minimum wage can be raised endlessly without affecting employment, we just don't know where the inflection point where the wage gains are overwhelmed by unemployment losses is. But we all agree it must exist. it's a good thing t hat most plans I've seen call for a decade-long transition to $15 then
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
Capitalism is a good system you guys, it just can't possibly ever pay workers enough money to survive with dignity or it will completely fall apart and poo poo itself.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
The funniest thing is how, i'm reading an economics textbook, and they will talk about a bunch of factors that contribute to a country's economy- land, labor, law, and then you'll see "entrepreneurship" thrown in there.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:you could only be forgiven in thinking the left is "shrinking" if you limit your window to the united states and certain parts of western europe and even then it's demonstrably false South America pal. Bolivarianism, probably the only major leftist movement left in the world has failed and is being shattered before your very eyes. Not without causing major crises either.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
Socialist governance is thriving in Ecuador, Bolivia, etc. In Brazil, the people are rising up against the recent right-wing coup and just had one of the largest general strikes ever. The venezuelan people have consistently elected socialist governments since 1999 and you are fooling yourself if you think a US-backed takeover by private interests will bring anything other than more misery and oppression under a pinochet-style puppet. Meanwhile the capitalist US is literally falling apart under a Caligula president Bob le Moche fucked around with this message at 14:21 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Socialist governance is thriving in Ecuador, Bolivia, etc. In Brazil, the people are rising up against the recent right-wing coup and just had one of the largest general strikes ever. The venezuelan people have consistently elected socialist governments since 1999 and you are fooling yourself if you think a US-backed takeover by private interests will bring anything other than more misery and oppression under a pinochet-style puppet. Lol No. Lenin barely won reelection, and probably rigged the vote. The left wing party in Ecuador is the weakest it has ever been. Bolivia's left wing party has been rocked by scandal after scandal. Evo Morales lost a bid to change the constitution to allow him to be reelected heavily. His autonomy charter attempt also failed back in 2015. It is very likely that things are not going to go well for them in 2019. Left wing in Brazil is completely lost, they have very little power and chances for reelection. The left-wing part of the party has been demolished by scandal after scandal. The left wing in Argentina lost it's presidential elections and lost control of congress. The left wing in Peru lost as well. The left-wing in Venezuela is literally a dictatorship causing a national crisis with children dying in the streets of hunger and killing their own protestors. The left in South America is being demolished. You are loving mental if you think otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
Sure if you get all your info from the cato institute. Do you also believe climate change is a hoax? Your method of arguing in favor of capitalism being sustainable appears to be plugging your ears, closing your eyes, and shouting "America is already great". I'm sorry but history is moving on, with or without you, "ISeeCuckedPeople".
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
It's crazy that people are still arguing capitalism is good while refugees are fleeing northward to escape one of its exemplars
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
Condiv posted:It's crazy that people are still arguing capitalism is good while refugees are fleeing northward to escape one of its exemplars Also the fact that global warming exists and we aren't doing anything about it is a pretty good reason that capitalism is awful.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Sure if you get all your info from the cato institute. What a loving misnomer. You don't even try to argue with the facts haha. Come to the Latin Americans can't have nice things or Venezuela thread. I'm sure they'll love what you are saying. Also lol @ people blaming capitalism in and of itself for racism. That's fun.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Cnidaria posted:Also the fact that global warming exists and we aren't doing anything about it is a pretty good reason that capitalism is awful. too true
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 15:14
|
|