US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1338

And this is what you people don't understand. A bigger minimum wage at the cost of shareholder value cannot and will not happen. A bigger minimum wage will come with an increase in cost and a reduction in labor, the people earning that bigger minimum wage will have less hours and less jobs, and the consumers will have to pay more

On October 08 2014 22:42 Velr wrote:
The political Spectrum in the US just seems very "extreme".

You have diehard libertarians, diehard leftist, diehard conservatives and christians + the biggest medianetworks that jump all over exactly these extreme figureheads... If you add in the 2 Party System that has to gather all these into just Republicans and Democrats you end up with something that looks just "absurd".

Most other countries have (several) fringe parties that normally don't get all that much of the vote while the politics are dominated by parties that don't act openly "extreme" (in General ).

On October 08 2014 15:24 Liquid`Drone wrote:


Norway is still a fundamentally capitalistic society.. Heavily regulated sure (and it will have to be more heavily regulated in the future for us to maintain our egalitarianism), and we're certainly guilty of some degree of third world exploitation to maintain our consumerist habits.. But I still think it's pretty much the best society humanity has managed to create through the entirety of human history.. From my perspective, in Norway we've gotten to the point where we don't need more economic growth (an opinion I have little political support for even here ), and I disagree with the notion that GDP is a great metric for societal success but I still just have to ask..

What's the alternative? I'm not talking about the alternative to largely unregulated capitalism - because I think the alternative is heavily regulated capitalism. But what's the alternative to heavily regulated capitalism? I mean, I like the idea of a fully automated zero-growth society where everyone's basic needs are provided for and where all energy can be spent on education and culture, but we're pretty far from being there, and I feel like we need to discuss what's viable, not what my pipe dream for the future is..

Further, I've seen you criticize the idea of a radical free will in the past. And I agree with you, I think the notion that everyone is responsible for their own success is just.. not grounded in reality, and this to me is a significant part of why I favor redistribution policies so much, because I feel that the poor are not responsible for who they are, their character, their desires, or even their moral dispositions. But then I also have to extend that courtesy to the wealthy. I can't hold a billionaire morally responsible for wanting to be a billionaire, from my perspective that disposition has been installed in him through factors outside his own control. The morality of individuals is to me irrelevant, attempting to actually find some common ground we can progress from is what matters imo..

On October 08 2014 15:24 Liquid`Drone wrote:


Norway is still a fundamentally capitalistic society.. Heavily regulated sure (and it will have to be more heavily regulated in the future for us to maintain our egalitarianism), and we're certainly guilty of some degree of third world exploitation to maintain our consumerist habits.. But I still think it's pretty much the best society humanity has managed to create through the entirety of human history.. From my perspective, in Norway we've gotten to the point where we don't need more economic growth (an opinion I have little political support for even here ), and I disagree with the notion that GDP is a great metric for societal success but I still just have to ask..

What's the alternative? I'm not talking about the alternative to largely unregulated capitalism - because I think the alternative is heavily regulated capitalism. But what's the alternative to heavily regulated capitalism? I mean, I like the idea of a fully automated zero-growth society where everyone's basic needs are provided for and where all energy can be spent on education and culture, but we're pretty far from being there, and I feel like we need to discuss what's viable, not what my pipe dream for the future is..

Further, I've seen you criticize the idea of a radical free will in the past. And I agree with you, I think the notion that everyone is responsible for their own success is just.. not grounded in reality, and this to me is a significant part of why I favor redistribution policies so much, because I feel that the poor are not responsible for who they are, their character, their desires, or even their moral dispositions. But then I also have to extend that courtesy to the wealthy. I can't hold a billionaire morally responsible for wanting to be a billionaire, from my perspective that disposition has been installed in him through factors outside his own control. The morality of individuals is to me irrelevant, attempting to actually find some common ground we can progress from is what matters imo..

I think the notion that everyone is responsible for their own success is just.. not grounded in reality, and this to me is a significant part of why I favor redistribution policies so much, because I feel that the poor are not responsible for who they are, their character, their desires, or even their moral dispositions

On October 08 2014 22:42 Velr wrote:
The political Spectrum in the US just seems very "extreme".

You have diehard libertarians, diehard leftist, diehard conservatives and christians + the biggest medianetworks in the world that jump all over everything these extreme figureheads spit out... If you add in a 2 Party System that has to gather all these into just Republicans and Democrats you end up with something that looks just "absurd".

Most other countries have (several) fringe parties that normally don't get all that much of the vote while the politics are dominated by parties that don't act openly "extreme" (in General ). But I highly doubt we have less "crazies" than the US, you just don't hear about/from them as often.




Pls give me ONE real live example where this actually happened.
This is the standard Response to the Minimum wage argument and it has just no base in reality (assuming your not going way overboard with the Minimum wage, obviously ).
If this was the case, countries with higher wages than their neighbours would crash and burn due to being outcompeted, yet this is not happening.
But I guess Scandinavia, Switzerland and every other Country with decent wages are just some sort of "magical wonderlands" where your reasoning doesn't apply because "Magic".

On October 08 2014 22:46 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

I feel like the parties will keep getting farther and farther away from each other until one of them ends up splitting in two. Most people in the middle don't tend that much to either extreme, and the party or party fragment that swallows their pride and capitalizes on this first will make significant gains.

On October 08 2014 23:24 Millitron wrote:

Basically all US manufacturing jobs have gone overseas. Your iPhones are made in Taiwan, your sneakers are made in Indonesia, the cotton for most of your clothes comes from India. These things are all because the US has wage standards higher than those countries, and so the companies responsible shipped those jobs to where it was cheaper.

Now, places like McDonald's can't really ship frycook jobs overseas, but they can further automate their systems to cut the number of cooks needed.


As long as the media prioritizes conflict over truth, the parties will always be extreme. Every interview on CNN or Fox where one side says something insane is free advertising for the insane people.

On October 08 2014 23:50 Velr wrote:


See... Thats the main Problem.

You could create an Iphone from scratch in the US for the same price you have now (because they are ridiculously overpriced atm anyway ). BUT that would create smaller winnings for the shareholders. At the same time you would have way more People that are able to actually buy that Iphone.
The Problem is not that its impossible to have manufacturing Job in Country XYZ due to wages, the problem is that you earn even more when exploiting 2nd and 3d world labourers which have to work under conditions that would be downright illegal in the US (or other 1st world countries).
There is also a pretty simple solution to this - tariffs and customs. Make manufacturers either follow the same restrictions/laws (work savety, enviromental, even holydays...) that they would have to follow in the US or let them pay customs/tariffs.

On October 08 2014 18:25 Introvert wrote:


While of course I agree that environment matters (who denies it?) I think undue weight is placed upon it.

For instance,you gave the example of your brother- he's far wealthier than you, because he cared more about money or a certain lifestyle, what have you. Presumably you had the same parent/s... you said you were very similar in many ways, including intelligence.

So how can you say that



(emphasis added)


Is that not a factor, even a little bit? Certainly it must have some basis in the world. The story you told seems to show that!

On October 08 2014 23:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:


I never chose my character, desires, or moral disposition. To the degree where I did choose them through reflecting upon issues, even my ability to reflect, and the ideas and experiences I have had leading to my reflections were not chosen by me. And mostly every difference in personality between me and my brother can be witnessed from a very, very young age - he was always more responsible, I was always more aloof and playful. These differences are actually very commonly observable among siblings, where the older sibling is the more responsible one (and also typically the one who gets the highest education/salary and the most prestigious jobs), and this is very natural because even in homes where responsibility is emphasized in the first child, the second one observes that this role is already occupied within the family-unit and then chooses another role because that is how he or she gets the attention he or she typically craves. My firm opinion is that our personalities are created by factors entirely outside our control (because our mental faculties are also outside our control) and thus I feel it is wrong to blame anyone for anything.

On October 08 2014 23:50 Velr wrote:


See... Thats the main Problem.

You could create an Iphone from scratch in the US for the same price you have now (because they are ridiculously overpriced atm anyway ). BUT that would create smaller winnings for the shareholders. At the same time you would have way more People that are able to actually buy that Iphone.
The Problem is not that its impossible to have manufacturing Job in Country XYZ due to wages, the problem is that you earn even more when exploiting 2nd and 3d world labourers which have to work under conditions that would be downright illegal in the US (or other 1st world countries).
There is also a pretty simple solution to this - tariffs and customs. Make manufacturers either follow the same restrictions/laws (work savety, enviromental, even holydays...) that they would have to follow in the US or let them pay customs/tariffs.

On October 09 2014 01:20 Introvert wrote:


Ok doing this on this phone is too hard.


If this is the view you espouse, I must wonder two things: why I should listen and consider what you say (since I am predisposed to a viewpoint anyway, which must be as valid as yours) and why I should believe that anyone else (in government) could possibly control or plan increasingly complex programs or institutions for everyone else.

On October 08 2014 23:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:


I never chose my character, desires, or moral disposition. To the degree where I did choose them through reflecting upon issues, even my ability to reflect, and the ideas and experiences I have had leading to my reflections were not chosen by me. And mostly every difference in personality between me and my brother can be witnessed from a very, very young age - he was always more responsible, I was always more aloof and playful. These differences are actually very commonly observable among siblings, where the older sibling is the more responsible one (and also typically the one who gets the highest education/salary and the most prestigious jobs), and this is very natural because even in homes where responsibility is emphasized in the first child, the second one observes that this role is already occupied within the family-unit and then chooses another role because that is how he or she gets the attention he or she typically craves. My firm opinion is that our personalities are created by factors entirely outside our control (because our mental faculties are also outside our control) and thus I feel it is wrong to blame anyone for anything.

On October 09 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:

Because we're not magical unicorns but physical beings with limited information that are bound to physical laws? Also there is no reason to believe that every predisposed viewpoint is equally valid. Also he's not advocating that "the government runs everything". Redistribution like Norway does, does not mean huge government intervention. Quite the contrary. Countries like Germany and France are way more involved in the economy and have less generous welfare systems than the Scandinavian nations.

On October 09 2014 01:15 aksfjh wrote:
While the working conditions are awful in the 3rd world countries compared to 1st world countries, the relative conditions to their surroundings and quality of life have improved significantly as well. Enacting tariffs and trade restrictions does nothing but hurt both sides, just like what happened with sugar tariffs in South America and the Caribbean. Those countries would continue to be rife with poverty, and maybe we would see a resurgence of American manufacturing and trade, or maybe we'd just import everything from Germany and Japan instead.

It's not like lowering US wages would help either, since all that would happen is a creation of another subclass of people. You can't live off of 40 hours a week on minimum wage already and that's what a lot of working adults are being paid, so lowering the wage floor just makes people poorer.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding though and the complaint is that we pay people in manufacturing jobs too much (because they're unionized? idk). The same thing occurs though, where you just create more working poor, which cannot buy the products they make (or others like them in different sectors).

Also, if you seriously believe they'll just automate the process, you need to rethink that. As of now, you usually only have 1-3 cashiers, 1-3 cooks, and a manager (and maybe an asst) at a fast food joint. You can't just turn every store into a vending machine, so you'll still have 1 cashier, 1 cook, and a manager at minimum to be there "just in case." Are they going to dump everybody for peak hours as well? Not likely. The most likely scenario, instead of automating, is that of "flex scheduling," where people are put in some sort of "on-call" list instead of set hours. Maximize the utility of the workers you have. Overall hours would be cut for most, but with a ~20% pay raise for many of those workers (proposed minimum wage hike), they could break (almost) even or even better than before.

On October 09 2014 01:20 Introvert wrote:


Ok doing this on this phone is too hard.


If this is the view you espouse, I must wonder two things: why I should listen and consider what you say (since I am predisposed to a viewpoint anyway, which must be as valid as yours) and why I should believe that anyone else (in government) could possibly control or plan increasingly complex programs or institutions for everyone else. How such masterminds, with their own enviromental influences, could even make a "right" decision- whatever that means in this context. When you speak of trends among, say, firstborns (something I am familiar with) it seems to be just that- a trend, not a rule. Anything else gets you into murky water, despite the relative simplicity of the idea.