******Official politics thread ******

[Caldwin]

Originally Posted by rebeccablack [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

do u guys think that in a post-trump world the gop will pivot back to focusing on fiscal responsibility / free trade / forward thinking pragmatism or are we stuck in this culture war nightmare reality forever?

Since when in recent history has the GOP focused on fiscal responsibility? They may that about it. But, they spend nearly as much as the Democrats.

[Caldwin]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Plato did have an ideology, one of Meritocracy. It's one of the foundational ideas of Western ideology. In that sense maybe it is black and white. Meritocracy is an ideology that philosopher kings would do the best on top, then lower down rungs everyone has their place. Including slaves at the bottom who are better governed by other rather than themselves.

IDK where the grey is though. You either believe society should be organized according to merit or not.

My understanding of meritocracy is one's rise or fall is based on effort and abilities. There is no class system in meritocracy, because classes are a construct of segregating people by social and economic status, often set by birth rights. In a class system, there is little movement between the classes, especially moving up in class. In a meritocracy (and free market for that matter) one can go up and down the economic ladder several times in a life.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The biggest threat to US hegemony is itself. It's co-option by corporations and its subservience to undisciplined private interest with no vision beyond enriching themselves. Oligarchy in short (which Aristotle identified as an unstable system).

Nearly all that we have in modern society is from those who want to enrich themselves. Without that, there is little incentive to invent new products, services or ideas. The issue then becomes what will they do to achieve what they want. Will they cheat, steal and scam there way through until they have no customers left, or will they do the responsible thing and increase their customer base.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It creates unprofitable military adventurism, predatory capitalism, kleptocracy, and undermines popular support for our country and global support for its position as a leader.

Yep, the old "industrial military complex". This, I agree with you.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Google is giving away the mechanisms you are talking to China ATM...why? Because the US Government serves Google more than Google serves the US Government. And that is a problem.

I despise Google, which is why I use the DuckDuckGo search engine. Unfortunately, Youtube is owned by google and is the only video service like it that my blue ray player has on it. I might look at other options for my PC though.

[Caldwin]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's not that complicated why libertarianism doesn't work:

Labor costs are too low.

Educational, Health, Housing, and Food expenses are too high.

Much of the increase in cost is due to inflation caused by the devaluing of the currency due to "printing" more currency because government can't stop its outrageous spending spree. Wages can never keep up with inflation. Wilson created the Federal Reserve and took us off the gold standard. But, the dollar was still tied to gold until Nixon came along and severed the connection completely. That's when inflation really took off. Ever since then, if the government needs more money, they just "print" more of it. It's a hidden tax on all of us. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In a pure market system on a timeline ends and implosion. There are no customers after awhile. Just masses of angry half-starved people.

I completely disagree with this. A free market system with little government interference will always survive in the end.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If libertarian goverment was great -- we would have never left it.

We didn't leave it, the government stole it from us, starting with Wilson.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Most of the advancements we are proud of in this country had nothing to do with libertarianism and everything to do with centralized forces organizing group efforts..

I disagree. Most advancements were done with individuals (or group of individuals) with great ideas, or just accidently discovering something... penicillin anyone? Even with corporations, it all comes down to individuals with ideas. Whether the ideas are viable or not will be sorted out by the free market.

You don't get that with the government. They produce mandates, whether viable or not. Most often, what comes out of governments are failures. Look at the cars from the eastern block back in communist Europe. Those were government planned cars. They were death traps, and polluted like nothing we ever saw in the US.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The pyramids would never be built by a libertarian system, the telecom systems and the internet would not either.

The pyramids were built with slave labor. Do you really want that now?

While the internet structure was built by the government, it was the free market that made it the way it is now, well, that is until big tech (i.e. Google, Facebook, Twiiter) get there way and push the upcoming newbies (gab, BitCute, Patreon, etc.) out of the way using big government as there means of doing so.

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Cooperation works better than competition on a macro level.

I disagree completely

[JurisDictum]

Originally Posted by Caldwin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nearly all that we have in modern society is from those who want to enrich themselves. Without that, there is little incentive to invent new products, services or ideas. The issue then becomes what will they do to achieve what they want. Will they cheat, steal and scam there way through until they have no customers left, or will they do the responsible thing and increase their customer base.

There are so many people capable of doing more of the jobs that need to be done (which is shrinking) that they don't pay well under a unregulated supply/demand system. If you understood the concept of a historical timeline you would understand why this is not the case at first but becomes the case later.

There are much more people capable of something like office administration then there once was. Meanwhile skilled labor is not in high enough demand to provide the kind of wages needed for there to be people that can afford consumers. Things like automation and software "kill jobs" are killing more by the day.


Many of our great accomplishments and inventions have zero to do with "people trying to enrich themselves." A lot comes from the military and workers on salary. In general, its really hard to reduce someone down to "trying to enrich themselves" that isn't simply an investor.

Was Einstien trying to enrich himself? How about Newton? Even Zuckerberg will push back against this idea -- in his case you might be right -- but nonetheless, it makes zero sense to act like big accomplishments and societal projects were all because people want to be rich.

Most the time these people are trying to not focus on that. Doctors complain they can't focus on medicine etc...

You might disagree about cooperation being somehow less important for something like the internet or space travel than competition -- but I don't see what evidence you can possibly produce of this. It certainly isn't a boom to things like medical science or software development.

[Thorondor]

On wall street most is caused by stock buybacks that are mostly doled out to the executive board via bonuses; essentially stealing from shareholders and lesser employees

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by Caldwin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

While I don't like big monopolistic corporations, I also don't like redistribution of wealth. All that does is make everyone equally poor, like Venezuela. I have no problem with someone being rich, as long as they are not a Scrooge or a Mr. Potter (from "It's A Wonderful Life").

The ones who call for redistribution of wealth generally view wealth as a zero sum resource. That's not true in a free market economy. Using John Stossel's pie analogy, in a zero sum economy there is one pie where if someone gets more, someone else gets less, therefore the idea of the rich "stealing" from the poor. In a free market economy, wealth is being generated, therefore creating more pies. If someone gets more pie (i.e. richer), it doesn't mean someone else gets less (i.e. poorer). In fact, the rich can get richer AND the poor can also get richer.

Now, when it comes to government, when they get richer, it DOES mean others get poorer. Because, the government produces nothing and don't make wealth. They only take wealth.

the "pie" is a visual tool to demonstrate percentage of the total amount owned by each class. it is not a literal pie.

[America]

i need a monthly slice of blueberry cream thats why im on that #yang

[Patriam1066]

UBI, ending Medicaid and Medicare (only free healthcare is mandatory OBGYN care for pregnant moms so we avoid teratogenic burdens + care til age 2/3 years old) is preferable to our current system. Buy your own care, no more disability, which I think we all can agree is widely abused by people who are able bodied enough to work at a desk. “I’m disabled.”

You can’t answer a phone? You can’t be a clerk? How disabled are you you gypsy

Anyway, Yang’s answer makes more sense IF we end Medicare and Medicaid to pay for it and instead fund it that way as opposed to his VAT. Also, if we’re going socialized medicine, German model with all our states as laboratories for their own individual insurance companies. Texas, Cali, NY, Ohio.... someone will do something that works and then we can do that nationally. Only problem is doctors and nurses make nothing in Germany and that would be catastrophic here since every redneck and minority is obese / diabetic. Houston has to be the insulin capital of the world

[JurisDictum]

https://www.germanjobs.com/2016/09/2...xpect-to-earn/

If you choose to work in a hospital, you are usually promoted according to your years of professional experience, and your salary rises accordingly. With higher responsibility comes a better salary. Chief physicians are at the top level of their career and earn the most – with an average of around €278,000 per year. As well as their work with patients, they lead a hospital department and supervise employees. Next in line are the senior physicians – they also have leading roles within the hospital and earn more than colleagues without this title. Depending on your professional experience and the type of hospital you work in, this is normally around €115,000 annually. As a fully trained doctor without a leading position, on average you are likely to earn €85,000 per year – again, this may rise with your experience.

This is a little lower, but Germans don't have to pay for their education, insurance, or healthcare expenses like they do here and America. Germany is a relatively fat and heavy smoking country (lots of beer with french fries and gravy) -- so its not like comparing us to the Swedish or something.

Yesterday I hear of some Neurosurgeon only making like $150K/year here after expenses. That kind of sucks for one of the most skilled professions there are.

High doctor pay is on the decline in America thanks to hospitals and insurance companies. Not mention the absurd serf-making loan programs that pass for education funding here. Not that we spend any less on the universities despite the huge amount we charge for things like professional and graduate school.

[Thorondor]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

no more disability, which I think we all can agree is widely abused by people who are able bodied enough to work at a desk. “I’m disabled.”

You can’t answer a phone? You can’t be a clerk? How disabled are you you gypsy

Anyway, Yang’s answer makes more sense IF we end Medicare and Medicaid to pay for it and instead fund it that way as opposed to his VAT. Also, if we’re going socialized medicine, German model with all our states as laboratories for their own individual insurance companies. Texas, Cali, NY, Ohio.... someone will do something that works and then we can do that nationally. Only problem is doctors and nurses make nothing in Germany and that would be catastrophic here since every redneck and minority is obese / diabetic. Houston has to be the insulin capital of the world

Disability is what the "non-binary, pan-amorous" circus freaks embrace in order to opt out and suckle at the teet of a "system of oppression" they have no problem criticizing while massively exploiting it.

Essentially, they are embracing their role of oppressing the working class poor by burdening the working class poor with the costs of doing nothing while on the take. The same could be said of the walmart people, with their round walmart faces; there is often some overlap, obviously.

Stalin (and any good socialist, for that matter) started his "clean-up" pogroms, by exterminating these ones first. Socialism cant work with do-nothings swithering around around in their own filth, indiscriminately fucking each other while supported by the public coffers.