US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1999

On May 23 2015 10:22 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


Sooooo reporting you to KwarK

Also, why get a truck in the first place if you don't need one?

On May 23 2015 03:12 Falling wrote:

Ah- I should have specified- I was using Canadian examples, specifically in BC where there is no real union in any grocery store anymore and provincial parks are handled entirely through private contracts. (Yes, technically Superstore has a union, but it is the weakest I have heard of and of the worst sort- all the negatives (territorial ism preventing cleanup on aisle four) and none of the benefits- permanent part-time work to avoid paying benefits, minimum wage and paltry 10 cent raises.) The result is knocking the jobs out of sufficiently good living wage into 'high school jobs.'

The point being how does one determine what is a real job vs a high school job when jobs can slide from one to the other with little connection to how many high school students actually exist to take said jobs.

The world’s third-richest man weighed in on the national debate over rising levels of income disparity in the United States yesterday, saying that while the gaps between the country’s haves and have nots are definitely increasing, it is not the fault of those at the top. Nor will it be solved by traditional methods, like improving education or hiking the minimum wage. His solution: a pragmatic, direct way of helping incomes rise for the working poor across America by increasing access to the Earned Income Tax Credit.

“No conspiracy lies behind this depressing fact: The poor are most definitely not poor because the rich are rich,” Buffett, who’s net worth we clock in at $71.3 billion, wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece published late yesterday. “Nor are the rich undeserving. Most of them have contributed brilliant innovations or managerial expertise to America’s well-being. We all live far better because of Henry Ford, Steve Jobs, Sam Walton and the like. Instead, this widening gap is an inevitable consequence of an advanced market-based economy.”

That’s not to say the gap isn’t growing. Citing data from The Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans, he said that the total net worth of those on the list in 1982, the first year the list was compiled, was $93 billion. In 2014, that number was $2.3 trillion, up 2,400%. At the same time, median household income in the United States rose only about 180%, he said.

Improving education, won’t work fast enough, or go far enough, he said. And fighting to raise the minimum wage—currently in vogue among many on the left—won’t bridge the gap either, he says, and may actually backfire by hurting employment. “The better answer,” he said, is an expansion of the earned income tax credit, a federal tax credit targeted at working class Americans which gives them a credit starting with the first dollar they earn and rises until it hits a ceiling, then phases out from there.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, more than 27 million taxpayers got the ETIC in 2013 and in the 2012 tax year, the average EITC was $2,982 for a family with children.

“There is no disincentive effect: A gain in wages always produces a gain in overall income,” writes Buffett. “The process is simple: You file a tax return, and the government sends you a check. In essence, the EITC rewards work and provides an incentive for workers to improve their skills. Equally important, it does not distort market forces, thereby maximizing employment. “

That distortion is the main criticism of opponents of raising the minimum wage. Arbitrarily increasing the amount employers are required to pay workers, as cities like Seattle, and most recently Los Angeles have done, is a disincentive to hiring or retaining workers, especially those at the lower end of the economic latter who most need a job.

“I may wish to have all jobs pay at least $15 an hour,” writes Buffett. “But that minimum would almost certainly reduce employment in a major way, crushing many workers possessing only basic skills. Smaller increases, though obviously welcome, will still leave many hardworking Americans mired in poverty.”

It’s an argument that probably won’t sit well with many on the left accustomed to blaming employers and the rich for the pain of the poor, but, like most things Buffett says and does, it isn’t aimed at being popular. It’s aimed at actually getting something done.

On May 23 2015 11:28 puerk wrote:

Canada is not really relevant as it is a dictatorship: https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/600182550938660864

On May 23 2015 12:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


IQ is normalized with mean 100 and standard deviation 10-15ish so... Not quite that low

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's trade agenda suffered a setback Friday evening during a series of last-minute maneuvers in the Senate. While the upper chamber eventually passed a bill that would help Obama streamline a trade pact with 11 Pacific nations, the final product threw a wrench into the president's plans.

The Senate approved a bill to "fast-track" trade agreements negotiated by the president. The agreement will prevent Congress from amending or filibustering Obama's controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. The TPP deal would have a hard time surviving without fast-track authority.

But a key crackdown on human trafficking survived the legislative jujitsu. The White House considers the provision a deal-breaker, as it would force one of the nations involved in the TPP talks -- Malaysia -- out of the agreement. An immigration-related amendment authored by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) never got a vote, making it far more difficult for Obama to win over skeptical tea party Republicans in the House.

The slavery provision's survival means that the House will either need to amend the bill and send it back to the Senate, which would cause a delay and complicate the House debate, or pass a bill and go to conference with the Senate, also causing a delay. It also potentially could be fixed in separate legislation otherwise moving through Congress.

But time is not on the side of advocates of the trade agenda, as summer recess is approaching, followed by a heated presidential campaign season. "It leaves a substantial problem that no one's sure how will be addressed," said one senator. If fast-track is ultimately approved, 60 days would need to pass before the TPP could be voted on.

On May 23 2015 11:28 puerk wrote:

Canada is not really relevant as it is a dictatorship: https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/600182550938660864

On May 23 2015 11:53 screamingpalm wrote:


Pretty much exactly what I was saying earlier in the thread lol.

Source

On May 24 2015 04:23 killa_robot wrote:


So, the rich are getting richer, and the poor and getting poorer, but it's not the fault of the rich? And a rich guy is saying it? Talk about a surprise.

Where is the government supposed to get the extra money for these refunds, and what about people who are on welfare? All this does is offset more costs away from employers and onto taxpayers.

On May 24 2015 04:26 Wolfstan wrote:


Just go with a flat 10% rate on all income over 18k. Keep the printing presses running for 2% inflation.

On May 24 2015 04:23 killa_robot wrote:

So, the rich are getting richer, and the poor and getting poorer, but it's not the fault of the rich? And a rich guy is saying it? Talk about a surprise.

Where is the government supposed to get the extra money for these refunds, and what about people who are on welfare? All this does is offset more costs away from employers and onto taxpayers. It doesn't even do anything to prevent the gap from increasing, given it does nothing to help the middle class.

On May 24 2015 04:52 Gorsameth wrote:
Its easy to say minimum wage wont close the gap between rich and poor when that is not even the point of it.

On May 24 2015 05:03 puerk wrote:
Where does this fixation on opportunity come from?

On May 24 2015 05:08 screamingpalm wrote:
I also don't care to become rich. I don't have the ambition or drive, and am happy to live off the grid and see others achieve what they want to do. A strong safety net and perhaps access to health care is about all I could ask for. I don't feel I deserve more than that- nor do I care enough to want it.