Total posts: 232
-->
@zedvictor4
We sell federal bonds to local investors looking to make a profit when the bonds mature. We can also sell those bonds to international investors. No martians needed, but if they have legal currency bonds are available to anyone with the ability to buy them.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't speak for most nations, but most us debt is owed to the us taxpayer.
Most private debt is owed to private investors or banks. So in essence we are indebted to ourselves, and i believe i get my money back with interest in the form of quality education, infrastructure, healthcare. We just need to make sure there is accountability (aka beuracracy) to follow that money.
Created:
Hmm lets see, if someone lives for years with diabetes and heart failure, but then gets a bad flu which leads to pneumonia... what do they normally put on the cause of death???
Do you think covid is the first disease to affect people with chronic conditions? Do yall even know what the normal procedure is before you claim some conspiracy craziness?!?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Blue states are responsible for 73% of the national debt. Without the fed (as in other states) to bail them out, Cali, Washington, and Hawaii would collapse economically.
Actually blue states send more money to the fed than they get back. Red states take more from the fed and are the ones responsible for the fed debt.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
@zedvictor4
Please explain how debt is bad if every successful private business of any scale is loaded with debt?
Apple has cash on hand more than most nations... still hasnt paid of its debt.
Low interest debt is often very much worth a high return investment such as infastructure or investing in your people with healthcare and education. Your worship of the free market (even only focusing on the successful ones) betrays your fear of debt.
And your economics is so 101. You do realize 101 is just an introductory course?
Maybe thats why blue states are so successful.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Usa is not liberitarian. No 1st world nation is liberitarian.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Hospitals get bonus funds to cover the sudden surge in expenses. Something they absolutely need. You definitely should be skepitcal of how it is being spent/claimed, but thats not what your doing. Your applying blame just for the act of receiving and then assuming they are squandering, and then assigning blame based on your assumption. Marvelous process.
The hospital gets the money. Not the doctor. Appointments are mostly for private practice, not hopsitals. and no, the icu bed dont ever require an appointment. Thats just ridiculous. Your twisting doctor office with icu hospital and your argument simply sounds nice but makes zero sense.
Some doctors and nurses are getting HAZARD pay, at the discretion of the facility since unlike some counties, the us people prefer to just dub you a hero and pat themselves on the back. And again, it is almost always an hourly or salary bonus, no patient farming incentives for med staff. That's ridiculous. Most hospital workers are not obsessed with the budget, that includes the doctors.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Hospital administrators think about money. Doctors and nurses are mostly salary and have an oath to uphold patient wellbeing. Most arent saints, but your putting off some grim nonsense. How do you live in this world where everything is out to get you?
And if the capitalism incentive is so inherently evil, does that mean you are full on socialism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
"swamped by admissions and running low on icu beds"certainly you would agree not every covid patient needs to be in an icu right?last a heard the survival rate of those put on a ventilator is pretty darn low but they aren't giving the death numbers like they did in the beginning, don't you find that strange?
Considering the increasing numbers are new and hospitals are warning they are REACHING CAPACITY and not OVER capacity no i do not find it strange. It is not a heart attack, it doesnt kill in an hour. And it isnt even that deadly. Its death ability is a DoS attack on our system, overwhelming our capacity. None of this is suprising to anyone who understands what they are looking at. So again. No.
And omg i am tired of seeing this:
Its something else suddenly overwhelming our hospital system
Ok, what is filling our icu beds then?
Youd hear about it in the news. A natural disaster. A bombing. A chain car crash.... all over the state??? In several states???? REALLY???!!!
or is there another pandemic spreading and your theory is that they are not giving us enough health guidelines and restrictions? even back in march when we had no tests, it was obvious the sudden surge in icu beds with respiratory symptoms during a respiratory pandemic WAS THAT SAME RESPIRATORY ILLNESS.
But it is June. We have tests. The reason it wasnt mentioned is the same reason they didnt specify the cases were homosapiens. Its obvious to anyone who cares to look. Why dont yall apply the same critical eye to your own zanny theories once in a while? Do some legitimate research beyond your favorite sites.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
sure, why not, we let obesity, tobacco and other preventable things run rampant and they kill far more people every year.
What kind of comparison is that? None of those are contagious. You won't get obesity by going to a rally with obese people there!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
@bmdrocks21
"Hospitalizations of patients with the novel coronavirus in Texas reached an all-time high Monday after breaking records for nearly every day the previous two weeks."
"As Utah tops 200 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, doctors warn that hospitals are approaching capacity"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
So the hospitals being swamped by admissions and running low on icu beds is also because asymptomatic people are being tested?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
"Good points, but it's important to understand that the British promised the Arabs the land as well. I'd be angry if I fought a war for land I wouldn't even get."
What war were the palestinians fighting? As far as i am aware they were part of the ottomans who lost the war. British didnt take over until the war ended. And yes, the Brits hold the majority of the blame in this situation and the situation as a whole.
Im glad to see someone with a nuanced view, usually im fighting off both sides who consider me simultaneously a zionist and an antisemite.... lol.
But I don't think it'd be correct to say that 20 years ago Israel was the good guys. Even so far back as the foundation of Israel, you had Israelis building mini-ethnostates by kicking non-Jews from their homes. Take the 1948 Partition Plan. Israel had a vastly disproportionate share of land compared to its population, and yet accepted the deal graciously. Even respected Israeli leaders like Ben-Gurion were talking about "abolishing partition and spreading to the whole of Palestine." Look at all the war crimes Israel committed in the Independence war and how few people were punished for them. Look at how quickly Israel jumped into war against the Arabs in 1967 and look at how they lied about Egyptians planning to attack first even when the military generals knew that Egypt wasn't ready for a fight. Seems like they committed war crimes there too. Look at Israel's questionable '82 Lebanon invasion, and how they potentially killed people themselves but also allowed the Phalangists to murder people in the streets. Look at what Israel did in Operation Protective Edge in 2014.
I dont know the details of every operation, especially the more recent ones, but i am open to info, however i did read more on the earlier struggle. I am not saying they were innocent 20 years ago, im saying they were under legitamete threat from suicide bombings in contrast to Hamas's ineffective rockets of today. I was explaining why israel has become so hostile and jaded to palestinians. 100 years of constant violence did that to both sides, however Israel was far less hostile and violent at the beginning. They did not kick out any arabs until war started, and 1) they did not start the war, 2) they were under attack by the local arabs for decades prior to the war including an entire decade of nonretaliation. Once war starts, of course attrocities happened, but the lead up to the war is mostly on the shoulders of the palestinians imo. So yeah, they got alittle aggressive during the war, nothing unexpected.
Too.my knowledge israel did not jump into wars with anyone, but responded. The exact lebanon event im unsure of, but is this following persistant bombardment from golan heights into Israel? Thats not an unprovoked attack, that's a response, and fully justified. Unless im mixing things up. I know i left some events out but it was too many points at once, lets settle these first.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Once again, the distribution of cases is different in the nation. Your likelyhood of knowing someone with covid is different in new york than it is in alabama... but fear not, that is changing fast.
If you dont trust the testing numbers, look at increasing hospitalizations. There is no twisting those numbers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@triangle.128k
A two state solution shouldn't have ever happened in the first place. In 1947 at the time of the partition, the Israeli Jews were a small minority in the land. It was overwhelmingly Arab. The Arab League wanted to establish a state that would guarantee the rights of Jews in Palestine to citizenship, religious freedom, and local autonomy in areas where they are dominant. However, Zionism has always been about establishing a state in an already inhabited country - inherently leading to the disenfranchisement of the native Palestinian citizens once they got western support. Israel is clearly in the wrong here, if two state peace is not possible then Israel needs to go.
The british took that land from the ottomans. It was never self governed. The british promised the land to both the arabs and the Jews, who badly needed a place to live, and were also promising an egalitarian society of freedom and respect for Palestinians. The early Zionists were openly secular and very left wing. I would like to see a reference to palestinians offering freedom to jews, for they never showed up to any talks, and were the first to initiate violence.
The jews moved into empty lands and built cities, or bought homes voluntarily from willing palestinians. They literally put up with a decade of violence without retaliation from 1920 to 1930, and even then it was a breakaway group that was declared terrorist by the official settler bodies. Israel as is was established because of Palestinian xenophobia and violence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Current activities in the territories, sterilizing black people, demolishing Palestinian buildings in East Jerusalem, acting as a big homie to Trump, spreading online propaganda, suffocating Gaza... New shit comes out all the time. I'm an Israeli, but it's really hard to be patriotic about a regime like this.
Yeah, isreal has done some screwed up shit, particularly Netanyahu's administration. But Israel has done some very exceptional things as well in pursuit of peace, particularly in previous administrations. Israel has been getting more extreme and hateful as of late, however they have been living with hate their entire lives. It's totally one sided now, but only a decade or 2 ago they had to deal with randomly exploding at the market or on a bus.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Yes, i work in healthcare and have seen many people die from it. We have 2.5mil cases in usa. There are 330m people. Thats less than 1%, and they are not spread evenly. Obviously centers of international commerce and tourism got hit hard and first, but its clearly spreading fast.
If you want to verify its existence, its very easy. Go volunteer at a hospital, im sure they will be happy to use your help.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Do you not support israel, or just its current activities in the territories?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@triangle.128k
@Username
This is a complex issue and my middleground view tends to piss both sides off. If either of you wants to continue, ill be happy to oblige.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I have no idea about the consequence free life, i was simply repeating franklins words back to him while pointing out that his points are completely irrelevant to my economic argument.
Yes the broader blue red divide is far more complicated than state by state, but the economic policy is not. The party in charge of the capital has outsized influence on the policy direction of the state, thus red districts in a blue state often have higher taxes and more regulations than red districts in red states... and these policies prove benefitial to the economy.
Thus modern american left wing economic policies are superior.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Wtf does abortion and consequence free lifestyles have to do with culture?
If we are comparing culture, we are talking about art, music, philosophy, the exchange of ideas and expressions.... your just talking about having traditional values. Sure red states are more conservative, thats the definition sherlock. That has nothing to do with culture.
You just dont like blue state culture, which is your opinion, and not something i care about. And i maintain democrat superiority on economic policy.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Of the blue powerhouses, cali and new york are the 2 biggest in the nation. Why havent their restrictive regulations and high taxes not scared off every millionaire and entrepreneur?
Im not saying democrats dont have corruption, im saying their economic policies are superior.
Every human institution of considerable size has greedy people within it. Considering how cozy the right is with the oil lobby, the military industrial complex, and corporate interests will you agree both parties are equally corrupt?
Im examining policy; once we agree on what to do, we can work on properly doing it and getting rid of the corruption. But whats the point of arguing about how to get there when we dont even know where we are going?
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
So your claiming that left wing policies are all about pumping up gdp? Like minimum wage laws and commerical regulations? I love how the right flips their position on a dime.
I dont agree that blue states somehow have worse culture and you have provided no argument to defend that random claim. Regardless, it is irrelevant to the point. Successful economies and thriving cultures often to hand in hand.
Created:
-->
@OntologicalSpider
A programmer is omnipotent, but not omniscent or omnipresent.
He can review the code after the fact, but cannot monitor every part simultaneously.
And he may know everything that happens in the code, but that doesn't translate into perfect intelligence and decision making.
Omnipotent is but 1 quality of god. Without omniscience and omnipresence, it is not the same god.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Certainly, the successful capitalism leads to increased inequality, which is why policies such as increasing wages are being pushed in those very same areas.
Created:
-->
@Mharman
You say debt is a bad thing, but the right tends to praise the free market and every successful complany from apple to Pepsi is loaded in debt.
Its called an investment, and if you can take a low interest loan to invest in your people or economy thats a successful strategy.
California is massive but most states are the size of European nations. They got enough sIze to make a working formula work. These are not reasons, they are excuses.
Despite high taxes, most wealthy person wants to live in new york or cali... kinda throws a monkey wrench in the whole "taxes will scare away the rich" claim.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
@Dr.Franklin
As much as the live shows, museums, thriving arts scenes, and 5 star dining of cities are cultural negatives, this is a discussion of economic policy and effectiveness. Hence why i specified Economic powerhouse, which yes, depends largely on money. Having a strong economy doesnt mean weak culture, as you clearly have no defense for economic "pro business" right wing policies, would you care to conceed the point so we can compare cultural and soul achievements.
also all states are mostly rural, and alot more suburbs than cities. Theres plenty of small town culture if that is your way. California is major agriculture producer and that has nothing to do with cities, but it does have alot to do with economic policy. And cost of living = how much people are willing to pay to live there = how much they want to live there. It can turn into a problem, but it is problem of too much success. Nothing to be ashamed of.
So regarding economic policy, all agreement left wins?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
@sadolite
You are either a slave with a master and no rights the ultimate oppression or it's every man for himself only the strong survive the ultimate freedom, answer to no one.This actually agrees with my interpretation of the wings.At the extreme end of left-wing what happens is that all are tamed and suppressed such that noone can harm anyone, except the leaders who can harm all.At the extreme end of right-wing all are free to prey on each other but without fail, there is a guaranteed endgame of the rich ruthlessly ruling over the poor and social outcasts generation after generation until eventually the impoverished and abused combine to riot and overthrow the elite.
Except i showed how the right wing is for a police/military state that enforces social restrictions and the status qup... while blm and defund the police showed that the left does not accept masters that can harm all.
The left wants change, the right wants more of the same. Progress vs stability and tradition. Both can be good or bad.
@rational madman.
Your unfortunate result on the right is based on economics and policy outcomes, while your unfortunate result on the left is on politics and assumptions of foul play. Clearly you acknowledge where policy superiority lies. Perhaps if the left wasnt in a costly war over policy and reality it could focus on purging its internal demons.
Created:
-->
@Trent0405
Well yeah. Both the left and right "agendas" are just generalizations with lots of individual disagreements within. Youll never agree with it 100% just like its unlikely youll agree with anyone 100%.
But overall. The left package is clearly better based on results.
Created:
That which is good for existing businesses or wealthy is not necessarily good for the economy or society at large.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Its not deceptive. Defund and reform mean very different things. The confusion is entirely yours for believing they are the same thing.
Reform implies changing department policies, does not affect resources. May actually require more resources to implement changes. Defund seeks to move resources for enforcement and put it into investment. Poverty creates crime. Decreasing the effects of poverty should reduce crime, while also enabling people instead of imprisoning them. Sounds more benefitial for the rest of society too.
Reform has nothing to do with defund. The only confusion is in conflating the 2. Maybe you think they are talking about reform because you are reading articles on reform.... 🤔
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Note the glaring word "opinion" in the url. Within the article you see the quote: "*I’ve* been advocating the abolition of the police for years." There isnt even a suggestion of this opinion being anyones but his own.
You presume that what 1 person believes is a mainstream opinion with zero evidence. I see this alot. It is incredibly falacious thinking.
A recent "last week tonight" episode where john Oliver touches on alot of the issues, including the defund issue.
I also remember years ago when police had several encouters with mental people, including a deadly encounter with a tazzed schitzo on a roof who fell and died, police were quoted saying "we arent trained for this, we dont want to respond to these issues, this isnt our job."
Once you take the politics and angry semantics out of this, defund the police is something that should be logical and bipartisan. Their law enforcement efforts should he properly funded, but the staff and funding to respond to wellness checks and mental situations should be handled by psychiatrists and social workers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Im sorry, but your claims about defund police are the opposite of everything ive heard. Where did you get that information?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Certainly the budget and physical size of the government isnt changing in that example, but the fact that the people can demand the change, and the government complies without excessive resistance... especially a change to enforcement, is a massive reduction in the size of the government's power.
Just because your definition of government curiously does not include the police... which are clearly part of the government. Does not mean it isnt part of the definition of others. However you do confirm my claim that the right mostly get up in arms over big gov in commerce (bureaucrats) but dont mind regulating people and social life ("police are not the government"). When i think big gov tyranny, it isnt an army of beaurocrats that first comes to mind, its hyper vigilant police and martial law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
There were plenty of dresses for trump, the arguments were that those dresses were not a "high crime or misdemeanor." Getting a blowjob, successful or not, is neither high crime, nor misdemeaner. Trump's accusations were far more serious. Clinton's impeachment was a political joke. You cant twist logic to fit convenience. Thats called hypocrisy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Defunding is not about different training programs, but shifting some of the resources to non police departments that would respond to non police issues, like mental health crisis, or wellness checks.
But i was listing various small gov examples, they were not linked to each other. Defund a gov agency, especially an entirely agency accused of over enforcement, is objectively a pro small gov policy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Right wing safety: prohibition, war on drugs, moral safety such as gay marriage/trans restrictions. Theocracies, police states. The left tends to police commerce, whereas the right tends to police people.
Left wing small gov: anarchy, defund the police. Small Gov is a dying strategy world wide since over 100 years ago. Not too many examples.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Left and right can both be big or small, and can both claim to defend freedoms or safety. The difference is that the left promotes new ideas and radical change, while the right promotes traditional, stability, and the status quo.
Of course these are overall, and international generalities. Individuals or individual policies can be exceptions, however most will follow this definition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
He clearly said not just trump, meaning also clinton, where the Republicans voted to impeach along party lines. Are you so obsessed with partisanship and political one liners it is blinding you?
Trump may have been impeached along party lines, but he was also aquitted along party lines, in a court that was made entirely of politicians. From dems to repubs, their choices were dictated by politics, not justice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You have proven that our military represents our flag.
You have not proven that the flag represents our military.
Our military defends the ideals of our nation.
The ideal of our nation are not the military.
Why do you think fascist dictators are the ones that tend to have military parades and not democratic societies?
The military has little to do with internal politics. He is protesting internal politics. Internal politics, like police, and courts, are also a major part of the flag. This is a distraction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
But it wasn't the long term, my source looked at the first 4 months of the policies implementation. So even right after implementation, it had significant negative impacts on the labour force.
"Significant negative effect" relative to past numbers. This assumes there is no initial problem which has its own consequences. How would the situation unfold if no rent controls are implemented? in your opinion.
Furthermore, did any of the many other big cities experience this? Or is this a freak exception?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
What is housing inefficiency?
Housing inefficiency are all the housing problems these experts found with rent control.
But when it comes to the workforce, it had negative effects
In the long term yes, but rent controls were put in place to deal with the immediate housing shortage for low wage workers. If, without rent control, these workers get priced farther and farther from the heart of the city that needs them, what would happen to the economy of the city?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
You accused me of being a fascist. I poked holes in that. Now you say that you didn't say that. You clearly said that my mentality is fascist. If your way of thinking is fascist, you then identify yourself as a fascist.
I didn't say i didn't call you a fascist, i defined fascist, or at least its defining characteristic. Hypernationalism. which i bolded several times. There was no walk back. Your extreme patriotism and loyalism is fascism. Love thy nation does not mean you have to think your nation is perfect and beyond improvement.
I never stated he himself should be ostracized from the league. I never said he doesn't deserve a job in the NFL. I simply think it is disrespectful
You didn't simply *judge his actions* as "disrespectful."
You *judged his person* as "a f--king coward" and "a bitch." All within the first post.
And nobody mentioned the league.
It's intended purpose in 1931 according to Mark Clague “Professional sports needed to define themselves as patriotic in order to be seen as as part of the war on the home front and center for morale rather than as an expendable entertainment which is how they were initially,”Smithsonian states the anthem was "The music was a hit in America. A patriotic song, "Adams and Liberty" (later changed to "Jefferson and Liberty"), adopted the tune, which was also used for a song celebrating the naval war against Barbary pirates, early in the 19th century: "When the warrior returns, from the battle afar, To the home and the country he nobly defended...." And who had written that? Francis Scott Key."The National Anthem is for respecting the soldiers who have died for our battle of freedom. If you have issues, you can protest these issues in an environment that does not directly relate to the death of soldiers who fought for our freedom.
I dont know who that guy is, but neither sports or the anthem were invented in 1931. The fact that a song that was inspired by the anthem (and not the anthem itself) was used in celebration of a single naval battle against some pirates is completely irrelevant. Its a song of how proud we are of the perseverance of our *rebellion* against authority, in the name of freedom.
These are some LOOSE connections my friend.
"O’er the ramparts we watch’d were so gallantly streaming?And the rocket’s red glare, the bombs bursting in air,Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there,"This verse in the anthem has nothing to do with the expression of injustice. It is a way to honor the military who have fought hard for our country in the first place. Hadn't they fought for our freedom, we would be under a Nazi rule where we would have no freedom of expression, and Colin Kapernick would be dead. Without the military protecting us, allowing us to protest, we would not have these rights.These lines I represents show the long hours and the bombings. This is an element of the military, which Colin Kapernick still kneeled for, a sign of disrespect
These lines represent the military of an enemy nation, our own previous nation that refused to listen to our pleas and demanded we swear allegiance to them without question. No.
You are completely twisting the meaning of that verse. The injustice already happened. This verse immortalizes our survival of our oppressor's wrath, and eventual triumph.
So you want to disrespect the soldiers who helped you fight to speak freely? Disrespect Trump all you want but you really want to disrespect our fallen troops who died so you can talk about the issue in our societySo you have no respect for the soldiers. Good to know
What im trying to explain to you is that neither i nor Kaepernick disrespected any soldier. The anthem has nothing to do with the military. Indeed one can say that by trying to falsely use their sacrifice as a way to score a debate point, the only one disrespecting soldiers here is you.
Created:
Posted in:
But it is actually harming the workforce from the research I’ve found. In SanDiego rent controls resulted in an increase of unemployed people by 40.9% in just 4 months(Page 666). So rent controls are contributing to the problem, not solving it.
What i meant to say is that with rent control you do have housing inefficiency.
But without rent controls you lose a fundamental part of a city's workforce and the whole thing will lead to instability and possibly economic collapse.
I'll take some inefficiency over instability any day.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
This lack of investment resulted in 30,000 lost apartments in New York every year over 11 years in New york as a result of rent controls according to William Tucker.
Yes, but the referenced rent regulations are decades old (as the negative effects are slower to kick in). In the meantime, the city has maintained a necessary low wage workforce it requires for functionality.
Without the workforce these cities may collapse and lose far more jobs, housing, and population. Im pretty sure at least our two examples are growing quite well and the 30k lost is a drop in the bucket for what was gained thanks to the availability of local and relatively cheap labor.
This is just me spitballing, but if rent controls lower quality and affordability in the long term, then wouldn’t the problem still be present and worsened ultimately?
I was considering an infinitely cumulative cost would certainly undermine any benefit no matter how small it costs, but these effects are not permanent. Even if someone leaves and their friend commits fraud, it will ultimately end when the person dies. The apartment resets to market rate, but then increases are again limited. Renters can't pass on their apartments. The aftermath seems to be far better than the consequences of inaction.
I am unsure, it seems like government regulation that restricts housing supply is a big factor in increasing housing prices, but federal housing programs have also found success. A pure laissez faire solution will most likely be unsuccessful. Maybe kickback regulation but still maintain some government intervention.
The government isnt restricting supply, it is inadvertently disincentiving more building through a complex chain of events. It's a stretch to consider that intentional. Some localities are providing tax subsidies to encourage building, that is one way to counter balance the negative. Is that what you meant by "kickback regulations?"
Another solution would be to increase transportation speed so they can live farther away but not increase commute times. Something like maglev trains, but that's not really a repeatable solution.
In conclusion
I think inaction would have been disaster and rent control was most certainly better than no action.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
Im sure the experts explained how rent controls negatively impacted availability and prices. Having you summarize those explanations would be helpful for the clarity of my response.
Assuming im seeing the same expert opinions, over the *long term*, rent controls do hurt prices, availability, and quality of housing. I will conceed that. However, i will argue that they were put in place to resolve a short term problem that required a solution. The consequences of ignoring that problem were far higher than the consequences of rent controls.
A city requires low wage workers. This includes the heart of downtown, financial districts, and wealthy areas which require cooks, janitors, delivery, taxi, maintenance, etc. There is only so many hours in a day and if travel to and from work becomes to great, it becomes prohibitive. For the city to continue to function, a solution was required. Could there be better solutions? Perhaps. But the continuing thriving of cities like NYC and LA suggest the increased costs were not too great.
Do you think the free market could have adjusted to that problem? Do you suggest better alternatives?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
I am against rent controls, and so are economists. 81% of economists say that rent controls failed to provide cheap and high quality housing in New York and San Francisco, while only 2 percent of economists said otherwise.
I think the problem here is an issue of all or nothing fallacy. Sure i will agree that rent control policy was unable to keep up with housing costs... but the questions remain:
1. Would a different rent control policy provide better results?
2. Demonstrating that current policy was not successful in its goal doesnt mean no policy would have better results. The current outcomes could be unsatisfactory but still better than if we did nothing.
Rather than proving that current policy failed to reach a certain goal, you should try to prove that no policy would achieve that goal better. And i will argue it will not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
That's it? I can add scientists and artists to the list, but that still leaves the vast majority of humanity unemployed. How exactly will capitalism survive without customers? How will the people survive without income?
The solution is to let the machines do all the endless, tireless, perfect labor. Skyrocket our GDP. And use the newfound wealth to distribute yang's universal income, or ditch the now (in the future) meaningless concept of money altogether.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
What jobs do you think are safe? I can name 2.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
So this is what my country says that communism could work. Communism could work if the humans are nice and the machines are nice, however, little corruption would make the system go dead.
Are you trolling? I made no reference to nice people or nice machines.
1. Not nice machines is an apocalypse scenario that has nothing to do with what economic system you choose. Lol.
2. Whether people are nice has nothing to do with it. Corruption is currently destroying capitalism, so what? They are human systems. They are flawed, but thats why we keep improving them. Do you think capitalism can function in a world without income? What will you do? Universal Basic income? Well that's practically communism! At that point what's the point of money? Once you eliminate money, you have communism.
Im not endorsing this today, I'm saying it's inevitable in the not that distant future. That or the dystopian alternative. Relevant thoughts?
Created: