Total posts: 1,971
-->
@WyIted
I try to learn something new wherever possible. For example, I learned that one of Hamas’ realized objectives was to interfere with or foil the Abraham Accords.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Indeed. As was the ceasefire in effect prior to October 7, 2023.
Created:
-->
@Yassine
@WyIted
Here’s a good video from Al Jazeera detailing how Hamas has met many of its objectives:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
So... Might makes right?
Dramatic much? More like “subject to federal approval” means exactly what it says. That fact means there is no violation of state sovereignty here, unless the courts find that the DOT is disapproving the measure for improper reasons, as I have already acknowledged.
The point is not that this is a big deal nationally, it's just as obvious to a violation of stated right wing principals as it gets. If you was a right winger see nothing wrong with this, that's fine. I am just not interested in hearing you argue states rights ever.
So, not a big deal, but big enough to trigger melodrama and binary thinking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It is “subject to federal approval.” Therefor, the federal government can also disapprove without it constituting overreach. To be fair, I will say that there is probably a bigger legal burden to uphold with disapproval than simple approval. That will be for the courts to decide. If it is hypocrisy as you claim, I don’t think this is a (mole)hill that limited government conservatives wish to die on. Trump is pursuing smaller government in just about every other respect for this to register.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Israel is an interesting combination of two, often opposing directives: that human life has value and “Never again.”
Created:
-->
@WyIted
"See that pile of rubble? See that modern developed country? The pile of rubble won"
Since the 1940s, two state solutions have been offered. Every time, the Palestinian Arabs have refused them; the Arab League even boycotted meetings over the first offer of a two state solution. When Israel finally says, “That’s it. No more offers of a two state solution!” Hamas responds, “Well then, we will bake your babies and take hostages until you offer a two state solution!”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
the toll program is subject to federal approval because there have been a number of projects on various roads in lower Manhatten that have received federal subsidies.
As you know and acknowledge the above to be true, I’m not sure how you can argue this is a case of federal overreach.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I am not really a Nazi… Also, I dont support Trump.
I see. So in other words, not much has changed with you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
One day, you announce you have become a Nazi, the next day you support Trump… in other words, not much has changed with you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
Currently we share in the wealth of that production. We are an essential part of it.What about when we're not?
We all can only speculate. What I will say is that when technology replaces a certain skillset, the need for other skillsets is also created. Such as when automobiles took over horses and carriages, the need for car and engine designers and manufacturers and mechanics arose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
Who owns and operates the means of production then? Private individuals? Forever?
I’m not sure what you’re asking here. In contrast to what? Private individuals own the means of production currently.
There is no reason to be against a minimum wage.
Never said I was.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
If a minimum wage is not forcing employers to take a pay cut, there is no point. Increasing prices needs to be discouraged/punished. You get this right? The point of a minimum wage is to pull wealth back into the lower classes.
This is why the working class cannot minimum wage itself into prosperity. Price controls lead to inadequate supply. Minimum wage jobs are not the stuff careers are made of and are meant to be entry level and for youths. The middle class depends upon industrialization, education, unionization, and most importantly, societal sources of wealth creation, which would be access to resources and intellectual property.
This recourse also ends in economic collapse. If nobody is paying anyone, nobody is buying anything.
Henry Ford achieved legendary success by creating a product his own workers could afford. More recently, Walmart has used a similar model.
I believe Marx’s goal was to have machines doing the grunt work, having society share in the fruits of machine labor, and freeing people to pursue more fulfilling goals such as the arts.
As machines do more and more work previously done by paid human labor, the subject of “universal basic income” rears its head. There was a candidate for president in 2020 who made this the center of his platform.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
I posted some of my thoughts in post 66. When I have seen business owners asked about minimum wage increases, they usually have responded with a variation of these three things:
- “Depending on the size of the increase, I might have to raise prices a bit.”
-“I might need to increase my use of automation and reduce my staffing.”
-“I already pay higher than the minimum, so I expect the effects to be negligible.”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
We should have sufficiently advanced technology in 2032 to deflect it if it appears to be coming too close for comfort.
Created:
Posted in:
Here’s an interesting timeline on the poverty rate:
“Poverty rate trends
1950s: The poverty rate was around 22%
1964: The poverty rate was 19%
1973: The poverty rate was 11.1%, a low point
1983, 1993, 2011: The poverty rate rose to nearly 15% three times
2019: The poverty rate was 10.5%, an all-time low
2020: The poverty rate rose to 11.5% due to the pandemic
2021: The poverty rate declined to 7.8% due to federal programs like unemployment insurance and stimulus payments
2022: The poverty rate rose to 12.4% as many of those programs expired
2023: The poverty rate rose to 12.9%
Factors affecting poverty
The poverty rate has been affected by economic growth, recessions, and government programs. The cost of living and inflation have also contributed to poverty.”
One of the things I find interesting is that the poverty rate was actually quite high in the 1950’s, and that is when the US had the corner of the market on manufacturing after the rest of the industrialized world had been ravaged by WWII.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
cost of living prices are ridiculously high in every state with high wage prices. The dollar buys less stuff.
It can get pretty complicated. It depends upon what the competitive wages are when the minimum wage is increased. If they are low, then the effects are more noticeable. Most states pay higher than the federal minimum, so the federal minimum wage is largely a moot point. The states that pay the federal minimum have lower costs of living, yes, so the minimum wage vs cost of living varies widely across the country. So many kids are learning to monetize online content that they are finding more creative ways to earn than we had.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Ah, no. My post #127 was not asking you, Shila, for a response. For example, this is me NOT asking you for a response. I predict you will respond anyway. Prove my prediction wrong if you can.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Ah well, there is a distinction between “want to be true” and “predict to be true.”
My prediction came true here as well— not that it is a difficult prediction— that’s the entire point:
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
“*Awaits the inevitable, unsolicited, low value response from compulsive spammer*”
Note the fulfillment of my prediction in post 128 (the very next post, in fact)
Yes, it's all about you LOL
Hmm… I don’t get how your attempted slight fits this scenario…
Created:
-->
@Shila
I wager that Harikrish might have said the same thing…
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
The religion forum would certainly not be the same without her… and that would not be a bad thing!
*Awaits the inevitable, unsolicited, low value response from compulsive spammer*
Created:
-->
@WyIted
Publix is one
Publix is excellent— happy and efficient employees with stock in a private company. Costco is similarly well run but a public company.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Every worker can have a vote on the board. So simple, just buy the stock and risk some investment.
Yes, but it is one vote per share rather than per shareholder. The workers would need to decide how to vote as a group (like a union) to make an impact.
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.
This thinking exemplifies the caricaturish view of Musk’s wealth that I just described. You see Musk as a wealth taker rather than a wealth creator. You don’t seem to understand what Musk’s net worth means, either. Do you know how his net worth can change by billions of dollars in a very short period of time? Note that I did not say “increase by billions.” It surely seems like you have no idea.
Whether you agree with my proposal or not,
I do not. I doubt any economist in the free world would, assuming he could understand exactly what you’re proposing.
there is surely a problem here.
The concentration of wealth? Sure, but you are barking up the wrong tree here. I can give you better “trees” if you like.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Firstly, I am not proposing any government intervention in the enterprises of a business. That difference aside, I think it's important to note that I wouldn't trust the US government with this system, let alone the Chinese government. That isn't saying very much, though, because I don't trust the US government to do the things that the US government already does.
Hmm. Now it sounds as though you are advocating for a benevolent dictatorship. That is arguably the best form of government— as long as the benevolent dictator stays in power.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I realize that a semantic distinction is causing us some problems here. If the government holding the value of a company's stocks while not actually directly controlling said company is government ownership of that company, then there isn't a difference. What I just described, however, is not the same thing as central planning, and I think that that's an important point.
It sounds as though your idea has the most in common, real world speaking, with China. No expert on China here, but it has companies which are run by non governmental employees, but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) always has the right and authority to intervene in various enterprises as it sees fit.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
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?
Instead, the reverse is true— Musk and his ilk are wealth/value creators. They bring value via creativity and innovation. For sure, there are CEO’s out there who are not worth their millions in salary (not that Musk receives a cash salary) and are pretty much guilty of corporate mismanagement or even malfeasance. But then there are CEOs who are worth every penny they get, and this is a concept that is foreign to many. There are CEOs whose success has become the success of countless investors, but they haven’t managed to create utopia, so they must stink.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
“Hmm… and if people like Musk don’t wish to be government employees?”
Then instead of doing something that they are incredibly good at and therefore likely earning a very good salary they can get a job that they are bad at and earn a much smaller salary.
“Where does the investment capital come from?”
Taxpayers.
^^^ How is your prescription distinct from government ownership of what are now private entities?
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
"Only government employed professional investors would make investments.""We would still have people like Musk making investments."These statements aren't contradictory if people like Musk were government employees.
Hmm… and if people like Musk don’t wish to be government employees?
Where does the investment capital come from?
And again:
Would you be able to outline exactly what it is you are prescribing? I need more than “Musk can keep doing what he’s doing. He will just be accumulating wealth at a more humane and reasonable rate.” (Not an exact quote)
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
We would still have people like Elon Musk making investments and independently deciding how companies are run.
You continue to make contradictory prescriptions:
“Only the government would make investments.”
“We would still have people like Musk making investments.”
Would you be able to outline exactly what it is you are prescribing? I need more than “Musk can keep doing what he’s doing. He will just be accumulating wealth at a more humane and reasonable rate.” (Not an exact quote)
Created:
“Elon Musk Is Overpaid
Or so says a Delaware judge.“
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I'm not going to attempt to deny that hundreds of billions of dollars is a far greater incentive than hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even so, we don't offer people billions to be professors and yet they still are. (I choose "professor" specifically because it is a position that doesn't pay any ludicrous amount of money yet requires a lot of background knowledge. Once again, people still become professors.) No, being a professor doesn't require you to risk your own money, but in my proposed economy, nor would investing.
Professors are not paid commission. Professional investors are. If professional investors are paid only a base salary, they won’t be putting in any extra hours away from family they otherwise would (which is good) and achieving the better results those efforts would enable. What’s worse, there wouldn’t be many good investments at all under your system. So, you would get mediocre investors dealing in mediocre investments.
Oh, would you say it doesn't negatively affect us in any way? Sure. We can go with that. Tesla stock tanking does not negatively affect the rest of us. This supports your argument how?
You made a claim about the stock market, and I asked you about your claim to see if you have any idea what you are talking about. Your non-answer actually is an answer to that.
I am not suggesting any such thing. Nothing would be confiscated, because no one would be privately investing in the first place. This system in no way relies on taking money from the already rich as you would suggest. Elon Musk could keep the hundreds of billions he already has, he just wouldn't be making hundreds of billions anymore. I also do not believe that the government should take ownership of his companies. He would retain full control over said companies, but the government would have control over the massive funds for those companies. My concept is effectively to leave as many parts of the economy intact as possible while reducing everyone to a reasonable fixed salary and using the excess money that they would have been making to improve government services while lowering taxes at the same time.
The bolded involves contradictory claims. It’s as if you are saying, “No, the government is not taking ownership of your lemonade stand, you just can’t continue to profit from it, and only the government can by shares of its stock.” Your idea lacks coherence and understanding of how businesses are owned and financed.
Created:
-->
@Shila
The guy is just a student.
Noted. I am being gentle : )
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
This is where I earn the ire of the libertarians:
Theft is the unlawful seizure of money and property. Our republic has deemed this seizure as lawful within certain limits. So, taxation is not theft. We have duly elected representatives in government who lobby on our behalf to set these limits and to decide how the tax revenue is spent. Without taxation, a nation would become unsustainable even in the short term.
Now, I’m not a huge fan of income tax, but our government was able to amend the Constitution to allow such a tax. Income tax is hardly unique to the USA, but I have heard from more than one economist that a progressive consumption tax (a higher percentage of tax as the product gets more expensive) would be the ideal.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I believe that people should be employed to make good investments, and the resulting large quantities of wealth should be controlled by the government and used for public interest.
There are already people— fund managers— privately employed to do that. Would you prefer that only government could employ fund managers?
People get into investing chiefly to accumulate and control wealth. If you take away that control from investors, they are then disincentivized to put as much money, time, and effort into investing.
If his net worth stopped going up because his investments were tanking, that would indirectly have a negative impact on the rest of us as well.
How do you believe, say, Tesla stock tanking negatively affects the rest of us?
What I would really like to see is people like him being reduced to the fixed salaries that the rest of us live on while the money from these investments goes to the good of the public.
You think that a person’s stock shares should be confiscated past a certain point? Musk is not even a stock investor per se. He is an entrepreneur and innovator and hence a creator of wealth. His investments are mainly in companies which he has created and led. Do you think the government should take over ownership of his companies?
Realize that Musk wouldn’t even have attained such wealth in the first place under the confiscatory system you suggest. Your system only has large amounts of wealth to confiscate because it was accumulated up until now under a totally different system. Your system will not accumulate much wealth going forward from the time it is implemented. The government’s share will then get smaller and smaller over time. This is a huge flaw in your suggestion.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Is Elon Musk doing more work in one minute than everyone in an average American household combined does in 4.5 years?
No.
It is neither an insightful question nor answer if we leave it there. As with many such wealth stats, that site is substituting changes in net worth over time as income from wages/salary. Some years, that number is negative. Turns out that Musk does not take a salary. This “income” figure is derived mainly from:
Unrealized gains: the present value of one’s investments if they were to liquidate completely. If that figure decreases, it is called an unrealized loss.
Capital gains: the profit from selling an investment for more than one bought it for (ie a realized gain).
Passive income: this is income other than from salary/wages, such as rental income and dividends.
Knowing the above, do you think that we would somehow make higher salaries if Musk and the like’s net worth remained static (no “income”)?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@whiteflame
I’m just speculating here, and time will tell, of course, but perhaps Trump is coming out swinging against historic allies for two possible objectives:
1. Nations hostile to the US will see is and think, “If this is how he treats his allies, what might he do to us?!” Not that they would ever admit it.
2. Allies will think, “I think we might be more on our own with this guy in charge of the US. Perhaps we DO need to allot more towards our military strength.”
And, of course, the never out of fashion TDS reason:
3. He’s just a fvcking idiot!
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think so. I’m not sure what the actual criteria for tight regulation vs. loose regulation is on this.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Interestingly enough, over-the-air broadcasts are held to more stringent standards of classification than cable broadcasts. As “60 Minutes” is classified as a news program by FCC standards, it then must adhere to the standards of a news program.
“Fox News is not accredited as a news program!”:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You are unknown on this site.
Whether true or not, it is irrelevant to the case regarding your spamming. In fact, irrelevancy is a telltale sign of spam.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Yes, that's what a conclusion derived from premises and logic is called
Now that you mention it, perhaps you could structure your arguments in a rigorous, syllogistic format:
P1 + P2 = C
For more complex arguments:
P1a + P2a = C1
C1 + P2b = C2
And so on as needed. This way, your arguments are more organized and can be more easily examined and critiqued by others.
I don't get into too many debates because I don't care to commit to the time it takes to craft a 10k character response with limited internet service. So glad I was able to clear your genuine inquiry up.
Well, what you could do is write debate arguments in a computer notepad or wp as able. They wouldn’t have to be constructed in one sitting, and no internet required. When you have finished writing a round, simply copy/paste to the online debate when able.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
There’s no exact number for spam. It just means a whole lot of posts anywhere and everywhere, which you have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No, you came here for an argument.
Ah, that must be why you have so many debates under your belt— you love the art of debate and make superior arguments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
When do you think you’ll achieve 6000 posts? By noon tomorrow?
Created: