Total posts: 28,020
-->
@badger
Isn't this the same guy who wants to hire cheap Indian labour instead of paying Americans? H-1B? What wealth is he creating for Americans then?
You are thinking about Vivek. Musk told him to fuck off if he wanted to make India first.
Created:
-->
@badger
Well you could win the debate with a simple paragraph explaining the exact limit of human innovation. You can even ask your buddies to chirp in like that Jubilee format. Feel free man.
Created:
-->
@badger
Feel like debating that? You take the con position?
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
a good excuse to drain our resources for their luxuries.
Already addressed this. Resources are enhanced through innovation, that is: our finite material resources only have a value to "drain" ONLY when innovation is applied. And you do not dispute that innovation is an inexhaustible resource if properly rewarded and justifiably permitted.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Unless you're concerned that people like him will stop working out of spite under the new system at the cost of being able to pay for their basic needs, I see no reason to believe that they would "disappear".
If everyone did the bare minimum, society would crawl to a standstill. Imagine every societal function running at or below the efficiency of government services. There's no logical reason to advocate for a system that punishes overproducers.
Again, you do not dispute that around 2% of GDP would disappear if Musk produced the bare minimum to survive.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
The problem here is that 1.61% of our GDP is being used just to make sure Musk (not billionaires in general, Musk is sucking up this much wealth on his own) is being "properly rewarded" with needless luxury after needless luxury.
Why would you care if Musk receives 1.61% of GDP if he created > 1.61% GDP in value for millions of Americans?
You never did dispute the fact he created more value to the consumers than the money he received for compensation in trade.
If Musk were to disappear, so would that 2% of GDP value he created.
Whether you agree with my proposal or not, there is surely a problem here.
Absolutely there is a problem. Marxist education has brainwashed people into thinking it's justifiable to destroy 2% GDP so that one person can't get 1.61% compensation trading his created value for dollars. That's a massive problem that needs to be fixed if society is to continue evolving and advancing.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
Also they voted against the Laken Riley act, a position only 20% of the population supported...
Also opposed protecting women's sports from biological men, another wildly unpopular position...
TBH, I don't know ANY issue the Democrats are on the popular side of ATM. Even Abortion. Most people want the States to enshrine protections into law that the Feds cannot touch. Democrats want to have the ability to overrule those State protections with judicial activism on the federal level. Their TDS was so blinding they didn't recognize that State protections for abortions was something they should have gotten behind. Should have been a very easy win.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
Also, Malcolm X warned about the takeover of the Black Caucus by the establishment cartel.
That's why the deep state had him murdered. He was going to expose the hypocrisy back then that we clearly see today.
"You just can't belong to that Party without analyzing it. I say again, I'm not anti-Democrat, I'm not anti-Republican, I'm not anti-anything. I'm just questioning their sincerity, and some of the strategy that they've been using on our people by promising them promises that they don't intend to keep."
“The White liberal is the worst enemy to America and the worst enemy to the Black man. Let me first explain what I mean by this White liberal. In America there’s no such thing as Democrats and Republicans anymore. That’s antiquated. In America you have liberals and conservatives. This is what the American political structure boils down to among Whites. The only people who are still living in the past and thinks in terms of “I’m a Democrat” or “I’m a Republican” is the American Negro. He’s the one who runs around bragging about party affiliation and he’s the one who sticks to the Democrat or sticks to the Republican, but White people in America are divided into two groups, liberals and Republicans…or rather, liberals and conservatives. And when you find White people vote in the political picture, they’re not divided in terms of Democrats and Republicans, they’re divided consistently as conservatives and as liberal. The Democrats who are conservative vote with Republicans who are conservative. Democrats who are liberals vote with Republicans who are liberals. You find this in Washington, DC. Now the White liberals aren’t White people who are for independence, who are liberal, who are moral, who are ethical in their thinking, they are just a faction of White people who are jockeying for power the same as the White conservatives are a faction of White people who are jockeying for power. Now they are fighting each other for booty, for power, for prestige and the one who is the football in the game is the Negro. Twenty million Black people in this country are a political football, a political pawn an economic football, an economic pawn, a social football, a social pawn...”
― Malcolm X
― Malcolm X
Created:
-->
@WyIted
I think it's actually pathetic. We literally have uncovered 100 billion in government fraud and wasteful spending and they are mad just because "orange man bad"
Trump has weaponized TDS to force the left to champion positions that only 20% of the population support, like corruption, waste, fraud, housing undocumented criminals, and publicly funded health services for undocumented invaders. Also transgender services for career criminals currently in prison so that males can rape females. They want the Kennedy center to have grooming sessions with children paid with public funds.
Double'R's response is to just double down on more Orangemanbad.
The Democrat party is self destroying itself with TDS. Popularity is tanking fast. Membership is declining. Leadership is absent. State media is in decline. Cultural centers are torn down.
All because of TDS. They lost the plot, and now everything else.
Stick a fork in it.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
They may pretend to with some pet issues like abortion
They would oppose unregulated abortion for sure. Only state approved facilities.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
The left is tanking hard in polls as they scramble to preserve the 4th branch of government. It's clear just how deep the waste, fraud, and abuse goes among those unelected contracted alphabet agencies and exactly who was benefiting the most from it.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
Polls show the left is very weak on 1st amendment rights.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Doge.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
Created:
-->
@cristo71
There's also the logical fallacy that wealth creation is a linear function. And for most people, this is true. You punch in. Push a button x amount of times. You get y salary.
Investment is never a linear function. So comparing the wealth an investor creates to a person pushing a button for x amount of seconds will always seem like a "social injustice"
So when one frames it as "earning 1 dollar for every second", the OP is purposefully being dishonest about the wealth creation. They are not comparable at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I'll have whatever the Congress is feeding you.
Created:
-->
@cristo71
Taxpayers.^^^ How is your prescription distinct from government ownership of what are now private entities?
Bingo.
Created:
-->
@cristo71
If Musk’s net worth were to get cut in half or double, I wouldn’t be losing any sleep over it either way. It is funny how so many people assume that Musk is merely a hoarder of wealth in a zero-sum game, as if he keeps shelves full of custom-made, million dollar bills in his own personal vault— maybe even with his own face on them?
Most of that comes from the logical mistake that because resources on the planet are finite, then wealth creation MUST be a zero sum game.
In reality, it's human innovations that has always defined the exact value of the finite resources. That upper limit of innovation approaches infinity.
A hundred years ago, people were throwing away Uranium as a natural deadly poison. Today, we can power entire cities with just a few Kg of it. 100 years from now, we could maybe power the entire planet on the same amount.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
RFK wants to hold billionaires accountable.
Congress doesn't want to do that.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
And the value of finite material resources relies solely on innovation, which is a limitless resource.
Example, an acre of farm 100 years ago produced x amount of food. today it produces 100x amount of food. 100 years from now, it could be 1000x
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
innovation is never a limited resource. Ever.
Created:
-->
@cristo71
I believe economic policies should be more focused on providing opportunities for upward mobility and support for those struggling, rather than trying to equalize wealth by rewarding non-producers and punishing producers. There's no reason why we can't allow both individual success and collective well-being to coexist.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Yes, and removing the incentives for the wealth generation that benefits an entire society of consumers can have devastating consequences for those who are in the middle of the bell curve, and much less consequence for those living at the extremes who can, as they say, just take their ball and go home.
It's the middle of that bell curve that suffers when you try to flatten it. Or as you put it "a significant negative impact"
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
This means that if you earned a dollar every second..
This is a linear function. Can you use a realistic function and calculate wealth generation with an exponential function?
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Well I would hope mathematicians wouldn't be saying arbitrarily "this number is too large" without proof
For a non-mathematician, the concept of wealth generation being an exponential function is like speaking a foreign language.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I'm trying to pay people enough for them to still be productive while not giving one single person 1.61% of the US GDP.
You must be familiar with a normal distribution curve.
How would you flatten that curve? Mandatory eugenics so people have the same ability and same ambition and same autism and other disorders that put people like Musk at the extreme ends? Or worse, eliminate the extremes through genocide like Cambodia did with their Marxist killing fields pogram?
That would be the end of civilized society as we know it. And likely be the end of our evolution as a species (which will start us down the road to natural extinction)
Wealth equality enthusiasts really have not thought this out to the horrid conclusion.
As a math enthusiast, you should not see large numbers and think "I can't imagine such a large number"
That is what math is for, to explain why those large numbers exist, despite what you feel.
Created:
-->
@badger
Same, I think your "Hurr Durr, man makes stuff, man gets money for stuff, man evil" is a retarded and hypocritical tree to die on.
Created:
-->
@badger
Being cocksure about knowing what a smarter person is worth must have some payoff for you.
I bet you laughed your ass off when Piggy was killed in the book/film Lord of the Flies. Primal jealousy is my guess.
Created:
-->
@badger
No, I am not foolish enough to think I could Monday morning quarterback what people do in the moment to achieve greatness. I know my limits.
Created:
-->
@badger
I get it, you think he is overpaid, I think he is underpaid.
Created:
-->
@badger
What about my answer did you not like?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
What if a judge says "nah, you can't spend your money on the internet, because that would make the internet companies rich"
How about groceries? How about anything?
I bet you would tell the government power judge to fuck off. It's your money, you should own it.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
The judge knows nothing. It was an abuse of power that the investors had to work around.
Created:
-->
@badger
It's not rubbish. There's a real reason why the workers collectively refuse to commit to a 30 year loan to buy out their employers.
To your question, I already demonstrated that Musk is underpaid due to the fact people willingly traded less money for his goods and services than what it was worth to them.
Created:
-->
@badger
Personally, I like Bernie's idea. Give workers a seat at the board.
Workers can already do that. They just need to go get a loan and buy out the people that employ them. Then they can be rich too.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Well, I too would probably insist that rich people stop being so greedy.
Doesn't greedy mean hoarding money? The Investors wanted to spend the money, and the government judge said "nah, you can't give away your money"
Created:
-->
@badger
How would you replace Musk?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
The government judge didn't steal from the stockholders, he just refused to allow them to spend money.
Created:
-->
@cristo71
And the stockholders scrambled to get Musk paid the following year in a way the Judge could not stop.
So sick of people in power like that government judge refusing to allow others the choice of what to spend their money on.
Employees can and will never be investors of their own work, because by definition, that would make them self-employed, which would mean they could pay themselves whatever they wanted to. Somebody has to be responsible for the risks.
Created:
-->
@badger
His own party pulled the support out from under him to promote Hillary in the 2016 primaries.
Bernie would have had to make way more promises about taking care of the little people. The elites didn't want to go with that. At the time, I thought Bernie would have been a much better alternative to Trump, and might actually tear down some of the system. And now Bernie is a millionaire and mostly quiet since 2016.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
but we don't have to give them quite so much bread that could be given to the other geese.
Then you want to willingly limit the production of productive geese by destroying incentives, effectively destroying wealth for all of society. That's luddite at best and masochistic at worst.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Once again, there is a substitute for Musk.
No, there really isn't. You can't take 10 people with 140 IQ and compare the value they create to one person with 170 IQ. It simply doesn't happen and we have centuries of evidence to prove it. A 140 IQ professor can help 200 people, a person that creates AI and launches satellites to reach billions of people creates exponential value.
Musk is severely underpaid if you did the math. It's an exponential function, not linear.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
but the government would have control over the massive funds for those companies.
So economic fascism. Government control over private property. We have a record of history to show exactly why that system fails.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I care about maximizing the well-being of as many people as possible, and I would hope that you do too. As for the people buying those products, what part of my proposal would stop them from buying the same products at the same prices?
Because there's no substitute for Musk, and removing the incentive to create wealth for millions of people with a product they pay Musk less than it's worth would impoverish millions with the removal of the product Musk created. Killing geese that lay gold eggs makes everyone poorer.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
No wonder you guys think Trump is a great choice for president.
Selective edits didn't help Jan6, or Kamala.
womp womp
Created:
-->
@Double_R
to the world's premier superpower.
Lol, we aren't. 100 years ago, China was like a flea on our ass. America has let every other nation catch up since we decided to outsource innovation to the government.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
That premise of outsourcing investors assumes there is no long tail on a normal distribution curve, where Musk lies at the far tail. You can't replace Musk with multiple inferior investors and expect the same product value.
Even if he takes the money the people willingly gave him and spends it on all on Jets, not only did he make the millions of people wealthier by trading a more valuable product than the money they gave him, but he also helped the jet manufacturers.
That's a double win for everyone, so you should encourage more of what Musk is doing. And also objectively realize that Musk is undercompensated for the wealth he created due to the fact people gave him less money than the product was worth.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
employing investors?
Those are opposite concepts. Employers are investors, employees outsource their risks (investments) to their employer.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Does that mean that he should have that money? No.
You are basically telling millions of people what they should trade their money for. Ethically, that's highly immoral. Every single person purchased the goods and services for what they felt was a bargain or else they would not willingly trade. Every single person would be that much poorer without the goods or services worth more than the money traded. You are advocating for the decrease in the standard of living for millions of people by saying Musk should not accept their money and provide a better value in exchange.
That's also immoral.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
As a general rule, people do not willingly trade money unless they feel the service or good was worth as much or more.
This implies value of the services/goods created through the risk taking and management of Musk is actually higher than the money he currently has. There is only one way to select the best risk taker, and that is for them to produce value. Salaries are for people who take zero risks creating value, and therefore, cannot be compared to Musk.
Created: