|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On November 14 2020 07:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 07:01 Mohdoo wrote: The government needs to be specifically targeting thanksgiving. They need to be yelling from towers "PLEASE JUST SKIP THANKSGIVING THIS YEAR" Yeah about that...The goverment is holding a mass welcome dinner for the new house members + Show Spoiler +
Pelosi continues to be a embarrassing Karen
|
Politicians lead by example. Or so I heard once.
Let's hold an effing banquet for the new aristocrats. We are better than the brutes and won't be affected by the substance of alcohol as much as they are. Social distancing won't be a problem. And if so, we just switch the ventilation on high. Or buy some more ventilators with taxpayer money. Sometimes it's hard to believe what's happening.
Do they really think this is fine to do in the current situation. Even if it were safe, it doesn't quite send the right message in my opinion. The easy an important information is to stay distanced, at home is possible and avoid indoor gatherings.
|
On November 14 2020 07:26 Artisreal wrote: Politicians lead by example. Or so I heard once.
Let's hold an effing banquet for the new aristocrats. We are better than the brutes and won't be affected by the substance of alcohol as much as they are. Social distancing won't be a problem. And if so, we just switch the ventilation on high. Or buy some more ventilators with taxpayer money. Sometimes it's hard to believe what's happening.
Do they really think this is fine to do in the current situation. Even if it were safe, it doesn't quite send the right message in my opinion. The easy an important information is to stay distanced, at home is possible and avoid indoor gatherings. Even without covid, this whole stupid banquet just shouldn't happen. They don't need these ridiculous prince's ball sorta bullshit. This entire culture of extravagance needs to get tossed in the dumpster
|
idk i think banquets serve a purpose. i would be more inclined to go after ways they make elicit money and then promote this sort of perk instead.
i won’t defend the timing amid the pandemic though. it’s nice to treat your ‘employees’ sometimes.
oh i’m sorry i didn’t realize this was the higher content required thread. i don’t have enough to contribute to this though :o
|
United States10393 Posts
On November 14 2020 07:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 07:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:01 Mohdoo wrote: The government needs to be specifically targeting thanksgiving. They need to be yelling from towers "PLEASE JUST SKIP THANKSGIVING THIS YEAR" Yeah about that...The goverment is holding a mass welcome dinner for the new house members + Show Spoiler + Pelosi continues to be a embarrassing Karen reason #51023 for why politicians are the worst crop of people in america. screw the rules, im in congress.
|
On November 14 2020 07:47 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 07:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:01 Mohdoo wrote: The government needs to be specifically targeting thanksgiving. They need to be yelling from towers "PLEASE JUST SKIP THANKSGIVING THIS YEAR" Yeah about that...The goverment is holding a mass welcome dinner for the new house members + Show Spoiler + Pelosi continues to be a embarrassing Karen reason #51023 for why politicians are the worst crop of people in america. screw the rules, im in congress.
Yet, everyone here wants to give them more power, much more, including over their health (plus you know, you saw someone like Trump can get elected, why would you want to give DC more power over you...). Meanwhile in China....
https://hongkongfp.com/2020/11/12/death-sentence-for-hong-kong-democracy-ngos-activists-govts-react-as-democrats-unseated-from-legislature/?fbclid=IwAR1aDPS1EiqzuypNoMgvJaoILTyXnaAQ3lm_GqjX6IG_uPyz39FhvMMkb4w
With COVID and the unprecedented restrictions on our liberties in the West it appears no where is safe in the world from the ratcheting up of authoritarianism.
This is also fucked up: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54890229 (Denmark culled millions of their minks merely over a concern about C-mutation - this isn't the freaking bubonic plague killing 25-50% of your population)
For the record they killed 17 million. Fuck Governments.
|
The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case.
|
Northern Ireland26763 Posts
On November 14 2020 07:55 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 07:47 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 14 2020 07:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:01 Mohdoo wrote: The government needs to be specifically targeting thanksgiving. They need to be yelling from towers "PLEASE JUST SKIP THANKSGIVING THIS YEAR" Yeah about that...The goverment is holding a mass welcome dinner for the new house members + Show Spoiler + Pelosi continues to be a embarrassing Karen reason #51023 for why politicians are the worst crop of people in america. screw the rules, im in congress. Yet, everyone here wants to give them more power, much more, including over their health (plus you know, you saw someone like Trump can get elected, why would you want to give DC more power over you...). Meanwhile in China.... https://hongkongfp.com/2020/11/12/death-sentence-for-hong-kong-democracy-ngos-activists-govts-react-as-democrats-unseated-from-legislature/?fbclid=IwAR1aDPS1EiqzuypNoMgvJaoILTyXnaAQ3lm_GqjX6IG_uPyz39FhvMMkb4wWith COVID and the unprecedented restrictions on our liberties in the West it appears no where is safe in the world from the ratcheting up of authoritarianism. This is also fucked up: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54890229 (Denmark culled millions of their minks merely over a concern about C-mutation - this isn't the freaking bubonic plague killing 25-50% of your population) For the record they killed 17 million. Fuck Governments. Fuck minks, the bastards. Scuttling around, spreading Covid. Probably Communists too
|
United States43969 Posts
The mink Denmark killed were on a mink farm, I don’t think they were ever going to die of old age. It’s a pretty weird thing to be outraged over.
|
On November 14 2020 07:55 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 07:47 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 14 2020 07:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On November 14 2020 07:01 Mohdoo wrote: The government needs to be specifically targeting thanksgiving. They need to be yelling from towers "PLEASE JUST SKIP THANKSGIVING THIS YEAR" Yeah about that...The goverment is holding a mass welcome dinner for the new house members + Show Spoiler + Pelosi continues to be a embarrassing Karen reason #51023 for why politicians are the worst crop of people in america. screw the rules, im in congress. Yet, everyone here wants to give them more power, much more, including over their health (plus you know, you saw someone like Trump can get elected, why would you want to give DC more power over you...). Meanwhile in China.... https://hongkongfp.com/2020/11/12/death-sentence-for-hong-kong-democracy-ngos-activists-govts-react-as-democrats-unseated-from-legislature/?fbclid=IwAR1aDPS1EiqzuypNoMgvJaoILTyXnaAQ3lm_GqjX6IG_uPyz39FhvMMkb4wWith COVID and the unprecedented restrictions on our liberties in the West it appears no where is safe in the world from the ratcheting up of authoritarianism. This is also fucked up: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54890229 (Denmark culled millions of their minks merely over a concern about C-mutation - this isn't the freaking bubonic plague killing 25-50% of your population) For the record they killed 17 million. Fuck Governments. Is it really surprising that you would say fuck the precautionary principle, go private profits of an obsolete industry? Not really.
The Covid they found in mink was mutated and people working there got infected. The mutation was in the structure that most (I think most) vaccines in development target. So pretty big deal if the mutation were to actually reduce the vaccine's effectiveness. Source
|
On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case.
The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work.
Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc.
There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me).
PS: I find it funny how everyone ignores the shit China does and just pounces on the minks. Good look.
|
Northern Ireland26763 Posts
On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case. The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work. Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc. There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me). It may not be a logic you subscribe to, to say there’s no logic behind it is another thing entirely.
|
United States43969 Posts
On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case. The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work. Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc. There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me). Your rate of pay within a society doesn’t represent your productivity in a vacuum. Losing 60% of that number doesn’t mean losing 60% of your intrinsic worth. The number is a product of the system in which taxes are taken out. Without the taxes the number would be different. My number is surprisingly high but I wouldn’t claim that I was worth that in a vacuum. It is only in this narrow time period of stability, centralized military spending, arbitrary labor restrictions, and spreadsheets that I come into my own.
Viewing your payrate as your value in a vacuum is naive beyond belief. Only a child could believe such an absurdity. The government isn’t taking 60% of the mushrooms I forage or the firewood I collect, it’s taking 60% of a number of imaginary paper that is completely divorced from any rational measure of labour or productivity.
|
United States43969 Posts
On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote: PS: I find it funny how everyone ignores the shit China does and just pounces on the minks. Good look. Wegandi, if you don’t want people to respond to the stupidest part of your post then I recommend that before you hit post you read what you wrote and take that part out. Complaining that we took issue with your ridiculous comment about mink is missing the point somewhat.
|
Northern Ireland26763 Posts
On November 14 2020 08:24 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote:On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case. The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work. Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc. There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me). Your rate of pay within a society doesn’t represent your productivity in a vacuum. Losing 60% of that number doesn’t mean losing 60% of your intrinsic worth. The number is a product of the system in which taxes are taken out. Without the taxes the number would be different. My number is surprisingly high but I wouldn’t claim that I was worth that in a vacuum. It is only in this narrow time period of stability, centralized military spending, arbitrary labor restrictions, and spreadsheets that I come into my own. Viewing your payrate as your value in a vacuum is naive beyond belief. Only a child could believe such an absurdity. Kwark while I find you a valuable contributor to society and my general browsing existence I do agree with your assessment you aren’t worth what you’re remunerated with. Coincidentally I feel somewhat undervalued in that metric so what you say we split the difference?
|
In what is either peak "I voted for the leopards eating people's faces, but they weren't supposed to eat MY face ", or peak grifting for a new book, Charles Koch is now saying that his partisanship was a mistake and he wants his final acts to be ones to bridge the partisanship divide.
(There a LOT of issues here. He's still funding GOP at 10x democrats, he makes blatantly false statements about how he didn't really support the tea party and more, refuses to say if he voted for Trump, etc.).
Mediaite writeup of WSJ interview - I don't have a wsj subscription.
The multi-billionaire, known for funding conservative causes, opened up to the Wall Street Journal about his politics ahead of the release of his book Believe in People: Bottom-Up Solutions for a Top-Down World. After decades of controversial work pushing partisan causes in America, Koch claimed his new aspiration is to “Unite a diversity of people behind a common goal.”
When Koch was asked by the Journal if he would be voting for Joe Biden or President Donald Trump, he called the inquiry a “divisive question” — refusing to answer.
“However I answer, that’s going to upset a bunch of people,” he said. “That’s why there’s a secret ballot.”
In 2020, the Kochs’ political spending still remains partisan: Koch Industries donated $2.8 million to Republican candidates in the campaign cycle, compared to the $221,000 spent on Democratic candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
In his new book, however, the billionaire called his partisan ways a mistake, and in comments to the Journal he minimized his support for the tea party during Barack Obama’s administration.
“Boy, did we screw up!” he reportedly wrote in the book. “What a mess!”
“We did not create the tea party. We shared their concern about unsustainable government spending, and we supported some tea-party groups on that issue,” Koch told the Journal. “But it seems to me the tea party was largely unsuccessful long-term, given that we’re coming off a Republican administration with the largest government spending in history.” Koch is now attempting to work with Democrats and liberals on social issues including immigration and criminal justice reform. He has partnered with organizations including the LeBron James Family Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, and some Democratic state legislative campaigns.
“I congratulate Joe Biden and Kamala Harris on their victory,” Koch told the Journal. “I look forward to finding ways to work with them to break down the barriers holding people back, whether in the economy, criminal justice, immigration, the Covid-19 pandemic, or anywhere else. At the same time, I hope we all use this post-election period to find a better way forward. Because of partisanship, we’ve come to expect too much of politics and too little of ourselves and one another.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/charles-koch-says-his-partisanship-was-a-mistake-11605286893 https://www.mediaite.com/print/boy-did-we-screw-up-conservative-megadonor-charles-koch-confesses-his-partisanship-made-a-mess-of-the-nation/
|
On November 14 2020 08:24 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote:On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case. The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work. Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc. There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me). Your rate of pay within a society doesn’t represent your productivity in a vacuum. Losing 60% of that number doesn’t mean losing 60% of your intrinsic worth. The number is a product of the system in which taxes are taken out. Without the taxes the number would be different. My number is surprisingly high but I wouldn’t claim that I was worth that in a vacuum. It is only in this narrow time period of stability, centralized military spending, arbitrary labor restrictions, and spreadsheets that I come into my own. Viewing your payrate as your value in a vacuum is naive beyond belief. Only a child could believe such an absurdity. The government isn’t taking 60% of the mushrooms I forage or the firewood I collect, it’s taking 60% of a number of imaginary paper that is completely divorced from any rational measure of labour or productivity.
Who is talking about productivity and intrinsic worth (something that doesn't exist by the way - didn't you have to take economics with accounting? Jevons, Walras, Menger, you know, subjective theory of value)? Your 2nd paragraph is a huge strawman and is really a non-sequitur to my point. View it in time then - you work an 8 hour day and they take 60% of that time (your pay). Really, I am just using any arbitrary #. Tax and liberty are antithetical. It's why there was no income tax in the US until 1913 and the Government mostly funded itself through use-fee's and tariffs (all things considered - considerably less authoritarian than property and income taxes).
|
Northern Ireland26763 Posts
Fuck off Charles, breathtaking levels of hubris.
|
United States43969 Posts
On November 14 2020 08:31 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2020 08:24 KwarK wrote:On November 14 2020 08:17 Wegandi wrote:On November 14 2020 08:01 WarSame wrote: The good news (for Canada) is that we have an extremely promising opportunity to get tons of really highly skilled immigrants. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Though I agree with you Wegandi, I fear governments getting too much power. I think in general you should be fairly libertarian(left or right) but during emergencies(wars, pandemics, droughts) you should be willing to become more centralized and authoritarian for pragmatic reasons. The issue is that it's hard to unroll the authoritarianism. I would love to see a President come in and work on lowering their powers, devolving them back to Congress, remove the power from EOs, etc.
I can buy in with you on the centralization of power and the personal liberty part of libertarianism. I just can't buy the raw market approach libertarians seem to believe must happen. Voucher schools could be very useful, but libertarians seem to be so against things like UBI for principle reasons when that just shouldn't be the case. The problem with UBI just like with Georgism is in practice - they're meant to get rid of the welfare bureaucracy and reduce overall welfare spending (and in the case of Georgism significantly reduce taxation burden), but that never happens. What happens is it just adds to the existing structure and piles on more redistribution and disincentive for productive work. Plus how can you disentangle the idea of a centralized powerful State and then give it enormous economic power? The USSR would have been no less authoritarian if it kept the Gosplan, but had high marks for civil liberties. They kind of go together in practice, never mind the logical and moral implications where our liberties originate from - from self-propriety/ownership. From there you get Lockean homesteading, contracts, notion of what is just or unjust concerning trade and property, etc. There's no logic to the folks who are for civil rights, but want centralized State authority over your entire sphere of life (and yes, economics is that - it is our time, our labor, our dreams and bodily action). You say I can't trade because I don't have a permit - that's an imposition on my body, or you take 60% of my income (basically 60% of my time and thus of my working life that has been stolen from me). Your rate of pay within a society doesn’t represent your productivity in a vacuum. Losing 60% of that number doesn’t mean losing 60% of your intrinsic worth. The number is a product of the system in which taxes are taken out. Without the taxes the number would be different. My number is surprisingly high but I wouldn’t claim that I was worth that in a vacuum. It is only in this narrow time period of stability, centralized military spending, arbitrary labor restrictions, and spreadsheets that I come into my own. Viewing your payrate as your value in a vacuum is naive beyond belief. Only a child could believe such an absurdity. Kwark while I find you a valuable contributor to society and my general browsing existence I do agree with your assessment you aren’t worth what you’re remunerated with. Coincidentally I feel somewhat undervalued in that metric so what you say we split the difference? Undervalued relative to what? What number on an app on a phone made by children representing a quantity of paper that is in turn representing an idea created by a central bank do you feel best quantities the value you bring into the world? Now consider a coffee bean harvester in Africa who gets a far, far lower number than you due to factors that neither you nor him really understand. What is the correct value of you and him? And denominated in what? How many bushels of grain should you each get?
The whole system is so far beyond any rational quantification that any attempt to do so quickly devolves into the absurd. And that’s the point I’m making here, that saying 60% of a made up number is too high is nonsensical because the 60% is produced of the same incomprehensible and unjustifiable system as the number it is applied to.
|
Charles is wrong. Instead of focusing on the unicorn (how is AOC and Pete Sessions supposed to "unite"?) he should have focused on local control and independence movements. The US is very sectarian and it's going to get worse as everyone is a Nationalist these days only looking to hold total power in DC and lord it over everyone. Federalism is dead. It needs a revival.
|
|
|
|
|
|