Total posts: 471
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Those cheap Chinese goods do wonders for Americans, if some workers are mentally burdened as you suggest, then that's pretty bad, but the benefits definitely outweigh the drawbacks. The fact that poor Americans can afford an I-Phone is a beautiful thing, I would never want to give that up. The fact that some people lose from these trade deals is bad, but the rest of the country shouldn't suffer to save this minority.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Fauci has(probably) come to a niche minority position, academics, like all people, can be misguided, this doesn't mean we should throw out the baby with the bath water.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It doesn't matter what fauci thinks, here is why.
Say I want policy A to get passed. I analyze 100 studies on this policy.
say fauci's research thinks it is good, 20 studies have inconclusive results, and the rest are against it. If Fauci is vocally against it, it doesn't matter. I care about the opinion of the whole of the data.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
If we examined the totality of the evidence and that is what it suggests, then sure. But I highly doubt that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
So what, I don't want any academic with a narrow field of knowledge making command decisions involving hundreds of non-feild related variables.
Research from academics provides us with our facts to form our opinions though, if the facts side with one side over another, then I want my politician to side with the facts of the matter. I find it really hard to believe all of the academics have got it wrong, but Trump has found this great truth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I was referring more to academics and their research, not teachers. Look at polls of economists or research published on trade, populism, and immigration, they aren't in alignment with Donald Trump at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
So you gonna support a racist and a rapist? Nice
I can say these same things about Trump. I wouldn't, but if Biden is a rascist and a rapist then so is Trump.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
You think Trump is more competent than Biden? Biden has slipped up before, but Trump has said some horrid and ant-intellectual things. Biden's positions are generally backed by the academic community, at least more so than Trump's.
Created:
Posted in:
I will be supporting Biden over Trump, what do you think?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
Furthermore, did any of the many other big cities experience this? Or is this a freak exception?
I misread this. I don't think it was an exception seeing how the overall attitude is incredibly negative amongst economists, and I think there is a reason for that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
Furthermore, did any of the many other big cities experience this? Or is this a freak exception?
It was in San Diego.
"Significant negative effect" relative to past numbers. This assumes there is no initial problem which has its own consequences.
I'm confused here, of course we will compare it to past numbers to see the state of the city before and after the policy. What is the "initial problem" in this instance?
How would the situation unfold if no rent controls are implemented? in your opinion.
We would have a more labourers employed and working according to my source.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
Housing inefficiency are all the housing problems these experts found with rent control.
okay.
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?
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. So low wage workers might just be better off without rent control.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
What i meant to say is that with rent control you do have housing inefficiency.
What is housing inefficiency? I looked online and found nothing.
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.
Well rent control does keep people in particular parts of a city because rent control disincentivises moving. But when it comes to the workforce, it had negative effects, a 40.9% increase in unemployment, but only a >1 % in the employed doesn't look good. I know my source doesn't look specifically at low wage and low skill labourers, but I think I can assume that some of that 40.9% is comprised of low skill low wage labour.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
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.
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.
Also, despite a very very small increase in the number of employed people, this is most likely because of an increase in population.
Also, it was 30,000 per year, so it was actually 330,000 lost apartments lost as a result of rent control.
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.
I don’t think the government passes rent control expecting it to cause housing shortages(15% reduction in rental housing) and increase unemployment, but that is what the end result is, and the end result is really all that matters to me.
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?"
Well the source I sent stated that green belt, open space, and urban growth boundary regulations were playing a significant role in the increasing price of housing, so maybe roll those back. Also, just to make things clear, kickback regulation means shrink the amount regulation, at least in some ways.
In short, I can only agree with the consensus of economists, “Rent control creates many more problems than it solves.”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
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.
Okay, it appears that rent controls have a negative impact on investment in housing. This is because investing becomes less viable and lucrative, leading to reduction in housing quality, supply, and price. 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.
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.
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? If the problem can be remedied for a brief moment, but the aftermath worsens the situation then I see little utility in rent controls.
Do you think the free market could have adjusted to that problem? Do you suggest better alternatives?
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.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
1. Would a different rent control policy provide better results?
Sure, different policies in different circumstances can yield completely different results. The purpose of this forum was looking at rent controls generally.
2. Demonstrating that current policy was not successful in its goal doesnt mean no policy would have better results.
Well, I agree the policy may have worked had it been changed.
The current outcomes could be unsatisfactory but still better than if we did nothing.
Maybe, but in one of my sources it said removing rent control could actually lower prices. Another one of my other sources said it hurt the quality and quantity of housing. I would assume they were talking generally about rent control, so in other circumstances it could have an opposite impact, but my point still stands.
Also, I accidentally messed up the question they were asked, it was not specific to New York and San Francisco. Here is the question they were asked.
Local ordinances that limit rent increases for some rental housing units, such as in New York and San Francisco, have had a positive impact over the past three decades on the amount and quality of broadly affordable rental housing in cities that have used them.
81% disagreed(95% if we adjust for how confident they were). So they don't think there was any positive impact on quality or affordability of housing.
Created:
Posted in:
That was a great discussion, loved every minute of it! Both sides did a great job!
Created:
Posted in:
I didn't expect gaethje to win, but I don't think his take down defence will be enough to Khabib. I still think Tony would fair better against Nurmagomedov as a result of his ability to keep the fight standing. However, Gaethje out worked Tony yesterday, and was the better man overall, so he deserves the next shot at the title.
Created:
Posted in:
Simps are 100% valuable to society. I don't want women to be attacked online purely for being women, and simps are a good way to make my wish a reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
Howdy, first want to address this point.
That is a little disingenuous.Why do you incessantly use the words ‘urban planners’ in the context of looking for research papers? I’m growing increasingly weary of repeating myself without you modifying your stance in light of what I just said. I repeatedly stated that urban planning is a multi-disciplined field of study, and therefore, the people working there will come from many different fields, and so will their research papers.
I showed you the first page of results on “rent control” from scholarly sources, and all of them were economists with one guy who also had a background in law. So unless these urban planners are working under the title of “economist,” then this critique holds little water in my eyes.
And I do not need to use urban planners to argue my point, which is why I looked and noted the fact that economists, and only economists were present on the first page of google scholar. You offered urban planners, so yes a lot of my effort was put into urban planners because that was what you proposed, but I have not acted as if your points don’t exist.
And I am not being disingenuous, I haven’t pretended to know less than I do, I purely admitted that I know little, which is true. I am very uncomfortable as a layman to dip my toes into fields I know literally nothing about(this is why I like studies a lot, but that’s besides the point).
you just carry on chanting the ’more-research-papers-equates-to better’ mantra.
What I’m trying to communicate is that I will trust something over nothing, your critiques on economists and the ways they come to their conclusions is only valid if these faults make their research obsolete. You said,
Note that I’m not suggesting economists are useless but just that their position on certain issues should be taken with a gain of salt.
So I should find some value from economists , just I should be skeptical, got it.
Let me break down what I’m seeing.
- Economists’ opinions should be treated with a good deal of skepticism.
- Economists publish basically all of the research.
- So me using economists to form my opinion was merely as a result of them being the only ones researching this topic, not me treating them as great sources of info.
Also
- You propose another source of info, using urban planners as one example, but not the only one.
- They don’t offer me anything, all of the first page of scholarly sources is written purely by economists.
As for your points about the ability of economists to come to a good conclusion…
We always go to this but I am weary to move into this, purely because I lack the ability to truly locate methodological failures(because I’m uneducated). I hope my weariness is understandable. I guess I’ll get going on this with new research to inform my opinion.
The problem comes if we mistake the supply and demand graphs for the real world of uncertainty, speculation, purposeful behavior, and change. It just doesn’t doesn’t take into account a change in people’s behaviour, and because of that, it makes knowing whether the change occurred due to a change in price or because of a change in behaviour impossible.
I did some research and it doesn’t appear like this is a fair critique
This is not unique to economics, this is also true for urban designers and architects.
Predicting changes in human behaviour is so incredibly difficult.
Utility is the quality in commodities that makes individuals want to buy them, and the fact that individuals want to buy commodities shows that they have utility.
But this is a hotly contested issue. Your objections practically line up word for word with notable economists. This is not a blindly accepted truth clearly. It is a real debate going on.
For example: the urban goal here is to maximise the building of new houses (for the rental sector). According to the supply and demand model, increasing the profit margins of landlords will increase the potential of them to build new houses, and therefore, increase the supply of housing as a whole. And so the policy (based on the simplistic supply and demand model) is to deregulate the rental market. It roughly assumes that, because landlords are making more money, this will automatically result in them building more houses, and that some ideal equilibrium will be reached at some point.This is a foolishly over-simplistic assumption. We haven’t begun to understand the behaviours and incentives of landlords and tenants, much less the specific urban environment ( much less where will the equilibrium be). But anyway, the goal and policy outcome was set.
This is only true if we believe supplyside memes. The idea that supporting supply increases leads to a lowering of demand which lowers prices, but this is again hotly contested, it is by no means a well accepted idea, this proposal would be heavily reliant on other factors, and keynesians would most definitely oppose this if provided greater context. I also greatly doubt that modern economists would look to supply side as a means to solve everything.
I apologize for making you feel as though your points have been ignored, but I still am having trouble seeing what you're saying, it may just be because this conversation is out of my league, but still, I am having trouble. If you're not arguing utility, as you admitted, and you’re merely arguing that economists are poor sources of info, but they are the only people writing about this(as I proved). So I feel like you’re moving your finger without pulling the trigger. As I have said before, even if I grant you everything, I don’t know if I could change my position because your points aren’t leading me anywhere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
Yes. To propose the idea that, maybe, economists are not the best people to inform policy makers what housing policy should be like, is hardly a utilitarian conclusion. I never suggested otherwise. I merely pointed out that your initial post used economists as the only reference point to gauge the question of whether rent controls were useful or not, and that this was insufficient. I don’t need ‘studies, reports, papers, meta analyses’ to do that.
The problem is, if it is correct that economists are practically the only people to research this, then no, it wouldn’t really be a notable problem for me to purely use economists to establish my position. Whether economists are a good source of info or not, if they are practically the only people to offer anything then I am merely working with the evidence presented to me.
I have repeatedly stated that this is a problem of this-and-that, and not either-this-or-that. You need a multi-field system of analysis— which includes urban planners along with a certain group of economists (including other fields too), and certainly not just economists (or even just urban planners, even tho the term ‘urban planners’, by definition, includes many different fields of study).
But I’m not seeing this and that, I’m just seeing “this.” I looked up “Rent Control” into google scholar, this is the first page of results.
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.9.1.99 Written by Richard Arnott, an economist.
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/259959?journalCode=jpe Edgar O. Olsen is an economist.
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/000282803769206188 Edward L. Glaeser and Erzo F. P. Luttmer are both economists.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8145/76ca5ce2c2c851aca62c7ee4a10973e5d2cf.pdf Richard Arnott is an economist.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00420987520080561?casa_token=oV0eBHudXwwAAAAA%3ARvBQaovm6jNHzPiUQjsY3Q-MukqMnkM5CJjcH5vhEfYW5TzlFVsRPuOQZHOP_TyQ8gd2866jKJXC& Mark Frankena is an economist.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/brklr54&div=32&id=&page= Richard Epstein is sort of fuzzy, but he studied law and economics in university, so not still an economist in my eyes.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1468-0297.00571?casa_token=yjgdUPlYVVoAAAAA%3AnPer2BMwsHZt80Ym3qPejQG5cONccEJpmwM1Rvcv_WFOkVuV6kp3jghvcMWq4yHA_y3V1f9VL2g0qA Patrick Emmerson is an economist, and si is Kaushik Basu.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119002005028 Both Jakob Roland Munch, and Michael Svarer are economists.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166046200000338 Richard Arnott is an economist.
David P. Sims seems to be an economist, but I can’t find definitive evidence.
This is the first page of results, so probably the best studies(although I don’t know if high citation counts would make it a great study).
The term ‘urban planner’ is a somewhat loose term that includes individuals with an education background specifically in the field of urban planning to individuals with a background in a variety of other fields. What makes them ‘urban planners’ is the vast field they are studying and influencing. So research papers won’t necessarily come with the tag ‘urban planners’, etc....Additionally, a large number of urban planners work for government groups and associations that don’t publish via the classic peer-review journal system, but through internal papers that report directly to government.
But I don’t have access to these opinions, so I can’t know if urban planners have a strong opinion, how they reach their conclusions, or what hard statistics they are working with. Urban planners and their work are wonderful and add value to society, but if I can’t see their work, I’m left to purely hypothesize about their opinions, and how they reach them.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Still, it doesn't mean that humanity polluting the air is not a massive problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
My main question here is what utility does your opinion serve. I ultimately want studies, reports, papers, meta analyses... this is the way I am to change my opinion. If economists aren’t the right people to look to for answers about rent control, and I should look to urban planners, I need something from urban planners on rent control, if I could see a decent number of studies from urban planners that support rent control, then I would immediately make changes to my stance on the issue. I have heard a lot of reasons why economists aren’t valid, but your alternatives are worse because they haven’t offered anything of their own.
Is it not true that urban planners have offered practically nothing on the issue? Is it not correct that I should value economists more because they have offered a significant amount of research(sadly no meta-analyses though)? All I know is that economists are the only group of academics that research the issue to my knowledge, so, even if I Concede all of the topics brought up, I still couldn’t, and wouldn’t say that urban planners will be the people to construct my opinion on rent control.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
I sadly have to keep this one brief, I might touch on the other stuff you said in a later time.
don’t think the term ‘massive concern of an economist’ is supported by the link you just provided. If anything, the link supports my position that, because economists are traditionally focussed on a relatively small subset of metrics, a few have recently shown interest in expanding their field of determinants to include the currently in vogue idea of ‘happiness’.
I mean, it examined 101 published studies, and sure it appears the bulk of the examined data came from research done from the 1970s to the 2010s. But, in comparison, I found a study done on urban planning and happiness which appears to have gotten its data from about the same time period(honestly it actually looks like the data is younger in the urban planning study). The research economists do on happiness appears to be quite abundant honestly.
I’m not sure what difficulty has to do with disagreement here. Why would a difficult field lead to more disagreement within that given field?
Difficulty will stem from the complexity and abundance of the ‘moving parts’ of a field of study. Coming to conclusions will inevitably be more difficult and more time consuming if a field is more difficult because there will have to be more data on more variables to come to a conclusion. This inevitably increases the chance for disagreement.
I ’m not sure what the over-simplicity of mathematical models in economics has to do with the amount of research ‘done on it.
I wasn’t referring to mathematical models in economics. I was talking about economics and mathematics separately, looking at differences in the quantity of research published and the complexity of economics.
Your claim that an economist ‘will never support a policy if it has a net negative on society as a whole’ is just not true and makes the false assumption that all economists are unbiased, uninfluenced characters, who work for companies and groups with no objectives to protect the interest of their shareholders and affiliates, and that those objectives will never run contrary to objectives serving the good of society as a whole. That is just false.
I would be a fool to claim that all economists are unbiased agents, but whatever corruption exists is present all throughout the social sciences(including urban planning). I wrote that from the perspective of an unbiased economist, not with the assumption that all economists are unbiased, I will of course admit that economists can have perverse incentives, but this is by no means exclusive to economics, and most economists are indeed honest actors.
I read their comments. Almost every comment points to the supply and demand theory, in one way or other, and it was the basis on which they made their decision. I did not see a ‘wide variety of reasons for their decisions’. They all used slightly different language to denote the supply and demand theory. I also did not observe the ‘wonderful beauty of economics’.If variety denotes beauty, it cannot be viewed as beautiful. If accuracy and high predictability value denote beauty, it would also not be beautiful.
I think we are seeing different things here.
But anyway, what is wrong with supply and demand? It seems that it is remarkably accurate and has been remarkably accurate at predicting prices, despite noted and rare exceptions existing. We generally want goods and services to be affordable for the common man, and it appears that looking at supply and demand is a decent way of doing so. It seems as if you’re under the impression that this is the only thing economists use.
Also, it again appears that the urban planning side offers little input on the issue of rent control, so it appears that your argument is "economists fail to come to conclusions properly, so let's side with urban planners," even though urban planners do little research on the topic. .
Finally, in my opinion, I think that even if I am to agree with you fully on all of your compelling and thought provoking points, I would still argue that economists are the people to go to purely because of the frightening lack of research on rent control from urban planners. I think it is fair to say that it is only fair to form an opinion based on what the totality of the evidence suggests, and I have only found one study on rent control which had a co-author with a degree in urban planning(he also had a degree in economics). So, urban planners could change my mind, but I would a little more
Created:
Posted in:
A woman should feel free to pursue whatever she wants, placing a stigma on women as catholic priests feels unnecessary and borderline sexist. Ultimately, I want people to make their own choices as to how they wish to live their lives, stopping women from becoming priests hinders this wish of mine from becoming a reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
You’ve perfectly exemplified why I think economists are ill suited to advising us on the issue. I agree that economists are well equipped to deal with topics related to production, consumption and the transfer of money, that said, the service of providing a place to live for a population of a city or country in exchange of a regular fee, cannot be adequately analysed by merely using those metrics. There are so many more important factors that need to be considered.When considering something multi-dimensional like the service of renting property, one ought to also be concerned with the wellbeing of people that use that service, and the larger urban environment as a whole.In the greater scheme of things, urban planning is a technical and political endeavour that plans and designs environments and spaces (including water supply, communication and transportation infrastructure, etc....). Their primary concern is public welfare—and so they must consider a wide array of issues including sustainability, existing and potential pollution, transport including potential congestion, crime, land values, economic development, social equity, zoning codes, and other legislation, etc.....not discounting other more political endeavours and goals.The simplistic and often fallacious theory of supply and demand along with an analysis of ‘production, consumption and the transfer of money’ are simply insufficient variables to help us answer the question whether rental controls are beneficial to the society as a whole.
A massive concern of an economist is also public welfare, an economist will never support a policy if it is a net negative on society as a whole.
including sustainability, existing and potential pollution, transport including potential congestion, crime, land values, economic development, social equity, zoning codes,
I saw you point to sustainability, but again, economists do care about sustainability. They always want resources to be available and abundant(which explains why they support a carbon tax)
You also pointed to social equity, but economists want to make sure some measures are put in place to make people more equal. For instance, people like George J. Borjas are for immigration, but only if re-distributive policies are put into place to help everyone benefit from immigration. But, if these policies aren’t in place(which they aren’t today in his mind), then he is very skeptical of immigration. This is an example of an economist who doesn’t want the gains to be so lopsided, he deeply cares about equality, as do practically all economists.
You pointed to crime, and again, economists care about crime, they actually study crime extensively(even if gathering info and coming to conclusions is very difficult for them). An economist will not act as if their proposals will not impact crime, many economists like John Lott(not really a fan of him) look deeply into both crime and economics.
You point to transportation(I’m assuming you're referring to public transportation), but economists care about public transport as well. They care about the impacts of public transportation on society, and notice how they observe factors like health, biodiversity, water quality, and even things like noise.
Economists, like urban planners, look deeply into practically all policies and the totality of their impacts.
You’ve shown us they can be over simplistic. Your first link demonstrated to us how they use the theory of supply and demand to explain trends in the rental market. Additionally, and as I alluded to above, they can afford to be ‘simplistic and facile’ specifically because their metrics are minimally concerned or adapted to consider the public welfare as a whole. Economics is not a difficult field. It is a field that studies a very complex system with insufficiently complex tools to make any good predictions.
My first link does not show that, it merely shows that economists are against rent control, not the way they came to their conclusions. Actually you can see the notes of the economists and the reason they voted one way or another. You will see a wide variety of reasons for their decisions which highlights the wonderful beauty of economics, and the brilliance of the people who study economics.
Also, if “economics is not a difficult field” then why is there so much disagreement amongst economists. Economists have the same facts and can come to completely different conclusions. In fields that are more objective like math, there is more(albeit very little) agreement. There are very little established truths in economics unlike many other fields, if they used very simple tools to come to their conclusions then you would anticipate more homogeneity. If economics is simple why is there so much research done on it, and why is there so much less research done on urban planning if it’s so much more complicated?
I know I've thrown a good amount of links at you, but my young age and my lacklustre understanding of economics and urban planning basically force me to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
I should have maybe asked you this before, but why would the field of economics be an area of expertise with regards to city demographics and planning?
When we look at the renting of property we are ultimately looking at production, consumption, and the transfer of money, I assume you would agree to this. In continuation, a rent control would directly impact all three of these these things. Furthermore, this is what economists look at for a living, this would suggest that an economist is the best person to look to when searching for an answer to whether rent controls work or not.
The problem with economics is that they use the simplistic world of economics to understand the complex of world of human behaviour and society.
I don't really think this is true, economists can’t afford to be simplistic and facile. Moreover, the reason why it may appear that economists might struggle to “understand the complex world of human behaviour and society” is merely because the world of economics is so difficult. It is ultimately impossibly difficult for an economist to isolate for a specific variable perfectly(like rent control). So, some of their work may seem overly simple and blunt, but I tend to think otherwise for the reasons above.
Urban design and planning has been around much longer than economists have.
I don't really think that this matters, being around longer doesn't mean they are more equipped to answer the question of whether rent control works or not.
Also, you pointing to urban planners as a valid authority would suggest that they agree with rent controls, are there any surveys of urban planners on rent control? This point about urban planners would require some evidence to suggest that urban planners support rent control, I looked online and all I found was individual urban planners that either supported or hated rent controls, not a broad survey(which would be required IMO).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Marko
You must know that I rely a lot on the opinion of economists because I am not formally educated in economics. Personally I do not feel like I have the authority or ability to contest the opinion of people who dedicate years of their lives to understanding the complex world of economics. I ultimately have trust in their ability to find truth, even if economists can be wrong, they are far better than my own theories or ideas. If I am to form an opinion about an economic policy, I will only trust established economists who know their stuff, even if their models are flimsy(which I am still unsure of) as you suggested they are the best source of info we have. You point the problems of trusting economists, but what is the alternative? Whilst I acknowledge my approach may seem a little primitive and narrow-minded, it is ultimately the best one in my eyes, because all other approaches seem to be much worse than my own.
Also, I'm sure that under some specific circumstances a rent control policy could work, but I really don’t think any economist would disagree with that.
In short, whilst your grievances may be valid, I am still not confident enough to disagree with the economists’ consensus on rent controls.
Created:
Posted in:
Bernie has pushed for rent controls, what are your thoughts?
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.
Moreover, several studies are against rent controls...
I want to see what others have to say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
It does seem like a lot of them are run this way. I would highly doubt that this applies to all of them however.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Oh, I thought you were implying that China was right wing because you appeared to condemn the Chinese governments response to the virus. Also, I would agree that left wing nations like America, Canada, Norway, and Denmark are better than right wing ones. I am on the right because I want to see countries that are left wing move a hair to the right.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Well, it's well written, the music in background creates an interesting atmosphere and mood.
Anyhow, it appears that you took shots at the Chinese and Iranian governments. I would agree that Iran is in some rough shape, but not so much China. Whilst it isn't free, it has made some stupendous progress. Even if the it is fairly unequal and the rich gather a lot of wealth, the average person is living a much better life than ever before. If you are to argue the wealth has only flown to the top, you see here that the median urban Chinese citizen is living about as well as a Bulgarian currently.
As it relates to the corona virus, ""a world health organization expert urged the world to copy China's response to COVID-19."" I understand that China has taken serious action against those who don't obey the Chinese government's recommendations, but the WHO doesn't seem to think it's too bad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Okay, I guess that's a fine position to have, thought you were a little more extreme on this issue. I don't think there is a strong disagreement then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Destiny has never stated that incest was an affirmative good, he said that it is morally neutral and shouldn't be made illegal, I presumed you wanted incest to be illegal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Also if someone already has a mental disability, they can pass that to their children genetically, so should we ban those people from reproducing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Be careful though, he has openly advocated for incest and bestiality.
I actually agree with him on these issues. They should be legal.
The conservatives you mentioned are journalists not debaters, they are pretty different as journalists dont know logical fallacies,etc
I fail to see why a journalist wouldn't be able to locate logical fallacies like debaters can. Plus, journalists should be able to back up their positions when challenged on them, just like any other person. So, journalists are equally formidable opponents when compared to debaters in my opinion.
his opponents dont know basic debating etiquette, thats why he invited THEM on his show
I don't think he tries to find people lacking debate technique or conduct to debate him. Moreover, he has never run away from a debate challenge to my knowledge, he appears to seek debate from anyone and everyone, whether they're uneducated people or academic scholars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrUUBNgoroM-an example of when he takes on a debater, go to 34:00
Good clip.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Nick Fuentes isn't someone I think of as a good debater.
I would agree with that.
Destiny is a troll to people who can't debate.
Wouldn't you agree that he has held his own against good competition like John Lott and Vaush?
he would get destroyed by Ben Shapiro
I'm unsure who would come ahead personally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
His two debates with no bs were funny asf
I agree.
Created:
Posted in:
Steven Bonnel is a rational and intelligent liberal. Despite me disagreeing with him on a few issues, I think he's a good source if you want to hear arguments against social conservatism. He has (in my opinion) beaten conservatives like Nick Fuentes, Lauren Southern, James Allsup, and Andy Waraski.
Personally he's shifted me to left on social policy and a bit to the right on economic policy.
What do you guys think of him? : )
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
I mean it has worked fine in some instances. Worker owned companies which have gotten off the ground outperform non worker owned companies(Source). But these companies "are almost impossible to get off the ground."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
If a worker wants to own part of a company, they can. They just have to buy stock in whatever company they want.
That's true, but in most companies workers own an insignificant portion of the companies stock. People who are pro worker owned companies want more employee stock ownership plans for example.
Created:
Posted in:
I've recently been captivated by this topic so I want to create a forum thread on it. However, I'm just a laymen so we must look to studies from people who know their stuff. One conclusion I came to was that worker owned companies are more profitable and more stable.
Here is a good source.
On the contrary, I have also come to the conclusion that worker owned companies are horribly difficult to get off the ground.
Here's another good source. (Use the word search function for the best experience, it's too long.)
On the whole I'm anti worker owned companies. I'm not an economist, nor do I have a great or decent understanding of economics. But I want to create a discussion on the topic anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Well notes aren't meant to be grammatically correct, and he didn't right the same thing four times, it appears that he repeated himself once with the phrase, "I want nothing." I have had situations where I repeat myself while writing, it doesn't indicate stupidity at all.If he needs to write essentially the same thing more than 4 times then he is stupid.
Here is a better view of the notes.
If this isn't stupidity then you have such a low bar for it.
LoL.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
How is utilizing notes stupid? I agree that this isn't "4D chess", but this appears to be an odd call out.
Created: