Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

Well, since your 20 % ceiling only hold water if you discount all data that doesn't fit it*, assume that the top marginal rate of the personnal income tax is a great indicator of the overall tax policy of the government**, and that Americans are genetically different from Northern Europeans***, I'm going to keep considering it bogus.

As for the 100%, it wasn't mean literally at first (Yes, I know I sound like a GOP lawmaker), but as an exemple because it looked like you were confusing % of GDP and gross revenue. I'm still not sure if you were confused or merely confusing.

Now, I know you meant one cannot capture 100% of output, and I'm not contesting that. But as a matter of fact, GDP is defined as "the market value of all officially recognized final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time." (That's from wiki) Black markets and tax evasion are, by definition, not part of GDP stricto-sensu.


*Like the fact that government revenue are on a steady raise since 1945 if you include local and state government. I'm pretty sure cops don't take 5% of GDP in speeding tickets.

**Hint: Right now the top marginal tax rate went up by four percentage point, but government revenue aren't going to change by much because the other rates didn't change. And I don't think corporate tax rate went up by four percentage point either.

*** If it's a cultural thing, you can change it, although it does take time. However I wouldn't expect it to stay constrant for 80 years.

[Helgoland]

QED.

Hell no.

1) QED is only used in context where a conclusion is reached from a set of axioms, not when it is based on empirical data. Your implied claim to mathematical accuracy is bogus, to say the least.

2) As you are making a claim in the field of science, you need to provide data to claim to be right [1]. You provide none.

3) Even if data had been provided, a certain amount of rigor is needed to reach a conclusion. Yours is more of a qualitative argument [2].



[1] Or maybe not, looking at neo-liberals.
[2] A euphemism coined by my father, who originally used it to call the arguments usually used by libertarians complete bullshit.

[SalmonGod]

There are a lot of empty houses, true, but how many of those houses were made this year?

They're only remnants in relation to the number game.  In terms of real stuff, it's still current prosperity.

Actually, most of them need repairs. Mold has infected large numbers of vacant houses. When homes aren't heated and air doesn't circulate, that happens. About $5000 per a house to treat this. Old prosperity deteriorates rapidly, especially unused.

In my opinion, that's why people shouldn't have been kicked out in the first place.  They were forced to leave their homes for what?  So those homes can sit empty and rot, and banks can fluff the value of their assets on paper?

So now, keeping in mind that the numbers game is already rigged and unnatural, it does need changes, and changes will happen in a decade or two. Possibly huge changes. Possibly what we least should desire! Criticize, by all means.The only part truly wrong with your present critique is a lack of an explanation how a new system works better, how a select few elites wouldn't easily subvert it as usual, and how the transition could be made smoothly without the butchery and famines the last time capitalism was radically overhauled.

I have a few things I can say here.  They're somewhat vague in the sense that they don't involve hard numbers or concrete action plans.  But this is because I don't think the problems with capitalism that we're discussing here can be reformed away.  Basic principles have to change and a lot of it has to take place at a cultural level.

I'm not going to get into it here, though, because I don't want to take over the thread with radical theorizing.  It's stuff I've already repeated a bunch of times all over the forum anyway.

what's the justification for homeless children, who are completely blameless for their situation?

I'd hope that there aren't too many of those. Foster care is hardly a blessing, but it's better than the street, right?

There's plenty.

[Scoops Novel]

Not yet! One thing i would like to know before you decide to end it or not, is how much of this sorry list the population as a whole picked up, with any cases based on personal experience to be flagged as such and if not statistically backed.

[GlyphGryph]

what's the justification for homeless children, who are completely blameless for their situation?

I'd hope that there aren't too many of those. Foster care is hardly a blessing, but it's better than the street, right?

Not... not so much, honestly. Foster care is a... bit of a tossup. It's sort of incredibly underfunded and undermanned to achieve reliable results, and there's a distinct shortage of people willing to care for foster children, meaning many case workers will often end up placing children with families that are... less than optimal.

I suppose you could say that foster care is sometimes better than living on the street, but I'd hesitate to give it better than even odds.

[SalmonGod]

Plenty of foster parents take on children with intent to exploit them one way or another, even today.

[FearfulJesuit]

Just out of curiosity: since a lot of people, myself included, feel this thread has outlived its usefulness, would it be a good idea if I started a replacement American Politics thread that can carry us over to, oh, 2015 when the primaries begin?

[RedKing]

Probably a good idea. American politics needs a place to call its own, otherwise it'll overwhelm the progressive thread, and then from there it'll spread to the happy, sad and WTF threads. Well, at least the sad and WTF threads.

We must follow a careful strategy of containment to keep American politics isolated. Maybe send in some weapons inspectors periodically or something.

[FearfulJesuit]

Beh, I'm gonna run out of internet here soon (we're moving house). If someone else (you, Redking, maybe, or Aqizzar) wants to set up an alternative thread, all power to you.

[Owlbread]

It's a pity this thread didn't hit the 1000 page mark before we pronounced it past-its-sell-by-date.

[Helgoland]

How hard is it to program a spambot?

[Aqizzar]

Well, it did clear ten thousand posts.  That certainly is something.  I'll agree though, this thread has officially gotten too long in the tooth for its own good and is now circling nothing of substance.

I'll be locking it in a little while.  I'm just bidding a fond farewell to my fucking eyesore of a politics thread, it gave its all.  Catch you on the flip side, 2012.

[Helgoland]

So, Bundestagswahlen 2013 thread?

[mainiac]

It's too young to die!

[RedKing]

It's too young to die!

Hey, it outlived Mitt Romney's campaign. xD