It's not my generation's fault. It's your generation's (parents) fault.

bballman posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

I would like to see us focus a bit more on seeing other countries treat their own with fairness.  Granted that might not work with N. Korea.  However, Mexico....

Hard to get our government to treat its own citizens with fairness (I know fairness is a relative term) nevermind getting other governments to make changes.  Seriously doubt we're going to convince any other government to force their companies to raise wages significantly...

And there is no doubt some regulation is necessary.  We all want clean air and water.  The US has gone overboard...  

And lastly (for now), raising taxes and creating government jobs will never help the country grow.  We need to spur private economic growth.  

Our economy is really messed up right now from years and years of politics of division.  Thousands of good paying, wealth building jobs go unfilled while debt ridden college graduates with unmarketable degrees serve coffee.  We talk about corporate taxes and "loopholes" and have forgotten the definition of a true loophole.  Our policies have encourage and forced companies to locate outside our boarders while the middle class goes on welfare and we wonder what happened to our jobs.  We race to the bottom. 

Fix the business climate in the country.  Stop demonizing business.  Encourage them to invest here.  And get the next generation trained up to take those jobs that will be created.  The American Dream is not dead.  It's just been in hibernation. 

Golfman25 posted:

jacjacatk posted:

bballman posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

But, sometimes people take good things too far. See labor unions for example.

Yep...

Remind me again why labor unions = bad and capital unions (corporations) = good, inherently?

Labor unions are about risk avoidance.  Capital unions are about risk taking.  Show me a labor union who would agree to fluctuate income with profits - up in good times, down in bad time.  It just doesn't happen.  Risk takers get compensated for that risk. 

In a typical mature (large) business, capital ownership is about owning a share of the profits of the business, including from the labor of that business' employees, while ceding day-to-day involvement in the decision making process to representatives of ownership.  It is not about creating a business in any real sense of risk-taking job creation. Labor unions in the same environment exist to give the workers in that mature business the same collective voice that the owners have in negotiating for their share of the profits from that business.

There are any number of examples of unions taking ownership shares/profit sharing in businesses. Feel free to Google.

2019Lefty21 posted:

And it's less than 100 days til opening day of college baseball!!

MUCH less, 38 days to son's opening day.

cabbagedad posted:

2019Lefty21 posted:

And it's less than 100 days til opening day of college baseball!!

MUCH less, 38 days to son's opening day.

If I'm counting correctly, I think it's 62 until my son's. Probably explains why I'm arguing about economics...

Golfman25 posted:

Our economy is really messed up right now from years and years of politics of division.  ...

....  The American Dream is not dead.  It's just been in hibernation. 

Yes, and exactly.  If we, as a society, stopped blindly following our side of the isle (both sides) and started just thinking common sense right and wrong for each issue, we'd be headed toward a much better place.  If most of our fellow citizens would put in anything close to the degree of thought that has been demonstrated by those in this thread, we'd be headed toward a much better place.   Sorry, 37 1/2 days to opening day.

bballman posted:

Matt13 posted:

bballman posted:

And lastly (for now), raising taxes and creating government jobs will never help the country grow.  We need to spur private economic growth.  

Except it is the only thing that has in the last century.

That's debatable. VERY debatable. 

Not really.

cabbagedad posted:

Golfman25 posted:

Our economy is really messed up right now from years and years of politics of division.  ...

....  The American Dream is not dead.  It's just been in hibernation. 

Yes, and exactly.  If we, as a society, stopped blindly following our side of the isle (both sides) and started just thinking common sense right and wrong for each issue, we'd be headed toward a much better place.  If most of our fellow citizens would put in anything close to the degree of thought that has been demonstrated by those in this thread, we'd be headed toward a much better place.   Sorry, 37 1/2 days to opening day.

I think the term "drop the mike" is appropriate here.  Almost reads good enough to frame and hang on my office wall - maybe with some big surf or a waterfall in the background - no joke.  I will add that common sense right and wrong on "each issue" will oftentimes not be apparent at the big picture level, at which point you need to begin discussing the topic at the next level of issues.  Something like the Federal government's role in primary education - that topic seems to have lots of really good and really bad aspects once you get into the details (which I haven't, so I don't have any strong opinions and why I used it for my example).  I do wish the general population was better informed so they could form opinions on at least a small basket of facts, but lots of topics will simply be too "complicated" for the common man on the street to secure a firm grasp on all the facts.  As such, we need quality folks in government.  Quality folks would be a great start and then maybe let the political parties politely tip the scales when they get into office instead of arbitrarily tilting them.  The scene from Holy Grail comes to mind (Tim - please chime in) when the "witch" is put on the scales with the duck - and the duck ends up heavier (therefore the witch must be made of wood and can float - she is summarily burned at the stake).  

Let's not sell the investigators short.  She also turned a guy into a newt.

Golfman25 posted:

jacjacatk posted:

bballman posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

But, sometimes people take good things too far. See labor unions for example.

Yep...

Remind me again why labor unions = bad and capital unions (corporations) = good, inherently?

Labor unions are about risk avoidance.  Capital unions are about risk taking.  Show me a labor union who would agree to fluctuate income with profits - up in good times, down in bad time.  It just doesn't happen.  Risk takers get compensated for that risk. 

It shouldn't. Labor should have a certain value regardless of profits. Rarely do corporations increase wages based on increases in profit. Nor do they voluntarily pay more for raw goods or real estate based on profits. They may raise wages slightly in good times, but not in league with profit increases. Labor, therefore, is valued gauged on how cheaply it can be obtained by corporations in coordination with what that labor can demand based on the market. The only question is whether the cost of labor is negotiated in individual units or by unions which bring a far stronger bargaining position to the table.  

This is true, HOG.  I am no socialist, but there is a fundamental need for labor to have some sort of mechanism for asserting itself.  When labor gets greedy though... businesses shut down and everybody hurts.   Add in low income workers both foreign and abroad and the common American laborer is really in a world of hurt.

Teaching Elder posted:

This is true, HOG.  I am no socialist, but there is a fundamental need for labor to have some sort of mechanism for asserting itself.  When labor gets greedy though... businesses shut down and everybody hurts.   Add in low income workers both foreign and abroad and the common American laborer is really in a world of hurt.

How about when ownership gets greedy?

The end game of the path of constant maximizing of marginal profit without a healthy dose of socialism is neo-feudalism.

Socialism leads to Neo- feudalism.  Think about it.

Teaching Elder posted:

Socialism leads to Neo- feudalism.  Think about it.

It hurts to think about it.  Please expand.  I can only assume you are referring to socialism gone bad.  Remember, we are discussing economics so the idea a pure socialism is an argument whether or not it actually works in practice.  

If the thread beings to slow during the day, I suggest we move into some more focused ideas such as socialized medicine.  That should get us a few more pages.  I will admit that the frequency of cautionary MRI's and TJS in the US might decline if healthcare was socialized.

cabbagedad posted:

Golfman25 posted:

Our economy is really messed up right now from years and years of politics of division.  ...

....  The American Dream is not dead.  It's just been in hibernation. 

Yes, and exactly.  If we, as a society, stopped blindly following our side of the isle (both sides) and started just thinking common sense right and wrong for each issue, we'd be headed toward a much better place.  If most of our fellow citizens would put in anything close to the degree of thought that has been demonstrated by those in this thread, we'd be headed toward a much better place.   Sorry, 37 1/2 days to opening day.

I really didn't care for Trump or Clinton. I didn't vote for either. I was very critical of both during the campaign.

I use Facebook mostly for political discussions with friends, It's not the typical reinforcement from people who think like yourself environment. It's a very good cross section of the political spectrum. I've never chosen friends by their political beliefs. However, when you jump into a discussion originated by another person you become exposed to your friend's Facebook friends who you may not know and they don't know you. It was a very interesting experience.

I found most people believe if you're not for person A you're for person B. In back to back posts I was either a commie liberal or a Nazi fascist. I disproved the validity of a lot of posts. I was on to the fake news thing before it was news.

Heres what I discovered during and post election. Many people would prefer to hear what they would like to believe is true rather than the truth. Until we get past this level of partisanship this country is in trouble. Unfortunately this level of partisanship exists in Washington. Politicians don't represent the people anymore. Number one, they are interested in staying in power over the truth. Two, they are mostly interested in the special interests who provide the money to get them reelected.

Congress (House and Senate) is in session on the average 140 days per year. They spend half their day on the phone and at meetings fundraising. This means they really only work 70 days per year. How much money do they make in their fundraising? They average 18K per day. These people are part time employees. Send them home. Make them get real jobs. They're out of touch with reality. 

When you hear a Washington politician say something that comes across as being out of touch with reality either, 1) He is out of touch with reality, or 2) He knows it isn't true. But it's what he needs others to believe to get reelected.

We can't go to Washington and burn the place down. I guess enough people feel electing Trump is the equivilant. So we need to throw every one of these bums out. Why doesn't it happen? Congress has a 9% approval rating. Yet 88% get reeelected. Voters think the process sucks, the politicians suck, but their guy is ok so they reelected him. No folks, It's your guy too. He sucks. He has to go along with everyone else.

jacjacatk posted:

Golfman25 posted:

jacjacatk posted:

bballman posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

But, sometimes people take good things too far. See labor unions for example.

Yep...

Remind me again why labor unions = bad and capital unions (corporations) = good, inherently?

Labor unions are about risk avoidance.  Capital unions are about risk taking.  Show me a labor union who would agree to fluctuate income with profits - up in good times, down in bad time.  It just doesn't happen.  Risk takers get compensated for that risk. 

In a typical mature (large) business, capital ownership is about owning a share of the profits of the business, including from the labor of that business' employees, while ceding day-to-day involvement in the decision making process to representatives of ownership.  It is not about creating a business in any real sense of risk-taking job creation. Labor unions in the same environment exist to give the workers in that mature business the same collective voice that the owners have in negotiating for their share of the profits from that business.

There are any number of examples of unions taking ownership shares/profit sharing in businesses. Feel free to Google.

I wasn't just talking about profit sharing.  That's a one way street - only applicable if there are profits.  But what happens when there aren't profits.  Does labor take it's cut?  Very rarely and only when forced against a wall. 

roothog66 posted:

Golfman25 posted:

jacjacatk posted:

bballman posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

But, sometimes people take good things too far. See labor unions for example.

Yep...

Remind me again why labor unions = bad and capital unions (corporations) = good, inherently?

Labor unions are about risk avoidance.  Capital unions are about risk taking.  Show me a labor union who would agree to fluctuate income with profits - up in good times, down in bad time.  It just doesn't happen.  Risk takers get compensated for that risk. 

It shouldn't. Labor should have a certain value regardless of profits. Rarely do corporations increase wages based on increases in profit. Nor do they voluntarily pay more for raw goods or real estate based on profits. They may raise wages slightly in good times, but not in league with profit increases. Labor, therefore, is valued gauged on how cheaply it can be obtained by corporations in coordination with what that labor can demand based on the market. The only question is whether the cost of labor is negotiated in individual units or by unions which bring a far stronger bargaining position to the table.  

Sorry, but these days of ultra price competitiveness all wage increases must be justified by increasing efficiency and thus profits.  Otherwise, it won't be long until there is no business.  The idea that someone should just get an x% increase for showing up is from days gone by.  It's too easy for global competitors to take the work.   

I wasn't just talking about profit sharing.  That's a one way street - only applicable if there are profits.  But what happens when there aren't profits.  Does labor take it's cut?  Very rarely and only when forced against a wall. 

LOL. You have heard of layoffs, right?  If not, set your time machine to 2009 and be amazed.

I am having tires put on the truck right now, and only have access to the phone.  I will try to flesh things out later, but also have relatives in town.

But, socialism is collectivist in nature.  Not to the same extent as communism, but collectivist none- the- less.  Collectivism means we all become, as Hayek said, surfs to the central planners.  

Socialism also seems to breakdown into communism very quickly, as ambitious men are always waiting in the wings to seize power.  Socialism has that power nicely aggragated at the central governmental level.

U.S. politics show evidence of this the more that we cede authority, money and rights over to the central government.  Ambitious people are hungry to seize the reigns of that power, and utilize it both to punish those who disagree as well as to enrich themselves and their friends.

If your theory  about socialism breaking down into communism very quickly was true, western Europe would be communist by now.

It's serfs, not surfs, BTW.

Thanks.  You're correct on the spelling of serf.

Check out the great majority of Asia and Eastern Europe for a counter examples of the progression of socialism.  

By the way, the EU is breaking up.  Seems many are tired of being serfs to Amsterdam.

Pardon.  Belgium. 

The EU difficulties have more to do with nationalism and the systemic deficiencies of the way the Euro works than with anyone being tired of socialism.

I know European Socialism is the US political boogeyman, but is the US better off with or without

Public Schools
Social Security
Medicare

Unless you're willing to ax those right off the bat, you're already acceding to living in a socialist democracy, and then we're just discussing how much socialism you're interested in, and the economic arguments for/against differing levels.

Also, we already have socialized medicine in this country (and did before the ACA), we just do it in the most ass-backwards way humanly possible. Sort of how we do a lot of things, lest we fall into the trap of admitting that we're actually socialist to begin with.

The only way for the U.S. to be considered socialist is to stretch socialism out on a Procrustean bed.  There are dozens upon dozens of versions of socialism.  But switching things around so to encompass capitalistic ideals does not make the capitalistic nations socialist.

Socialism grew out of a reaction to capitalism, but many socialist countries have retreated back to semi-capitalism.  

Among other things, EU countries are tired of being run by centralized bureaucracy. 

Our backwards socialized medicine system has had the folks who got it right flocking to our country for care.

Teaching Elder posted:

Thanks.  You're correct on the spelling of serf.

Check out the great majority of Asia and Eastern Europe for a counter examples of the progression of socialism.  

By the way, the EU is breaking up.  Seems many are tired of being serfs to Amsterdam.

Even if the EU was breaking up that would be irrelevant.  Norway, Sweden, Finland etc are not going to change their system of govt any time soon. It works for them. 

http://www.patientsbeyondborde...ism-statistics-facts

https://cronkite.asu.edu/buffe...da/prescription.html

Yeah, flocking here.

Virtually every country socializes the cost of some/many things, and the US is no exception. That we can't discuss that honestly is just more of an indication that "socialism" is just a word we use to dismiss the economic arguments in which we're unwilling to engage.

jacjacatk posted:

http://www.patientsbeyondborde...ism-statistics-facts

https://cronkite.asu.edu/buffe...da/prescription.html

Yeah, flocking here.

Virtually every country socializes the cost of some/many things, and the US is no exception. That we can't discuss that honestly is just more of an indication that "socialism" is just a word we use to dismiss the economic arguments in which we're unwilling to engage.

If it is indeed socialism them how is calling it socialism a dismissal?

Socialism may be working in Scandanavia, however, I am sure that you will agree that exceptions don't probe rules.

Also, we already have socialized medicine in this country (and did before the ACA), we just do it in the most ass-backwards way humanly possible.

Very true.  Medicare cannot even adopt the VA model when it comes to negotiating drug prices.  When was the last time the VA was held up as having a great program?  Instead, they talk about allowing imported prescription drugs from Canada as a way to lower costs.  Talk about a weak effort.

Teaching Elder posted:

jacjacatk posted:

http://www.patientsbeyondborde...ism-statistics-facts

https://cronkite.asu.edu/buffe...da/prescription.html

Yeah, flocking here.

Virtually every country socializes the cost of some/many things, and the US is no exception. That we can't discuss that honestly is just more of an indication that "socialism" is just a word we use to dismiss the economic arguments in which we're unwilling to engage.

If it is indeed socialism them how is calling it socialism a dismissal?

 

Socialism may be working in Scandanavia, however, I am sure that you will agree that exceptions don't probe rules.

Using the word socialism to dismiss out of hand anything you don't like while actively taking advantage of the socialist aspects of your society from which you benefit or with which you agree is disingenuous.  I have no problem calling public schools socialist, but people who decry the ACA as "socialism" are either being intentionally disingenuous or obtuse, or they're "the common clay of the new West".

Certain aspects of socialism have crept their way into the United States - and it's not a good thing...

Socialism works in countries like Finland and Denmark because they have a population smaller than the population of metro Atlanta. Apply that to a population of over 320 million and it doesn't work out too well. There are also more billionaires living in these Scandinavian countries per capita than anywhere else. Part of that is because there is no "death tax", so they can pass their wealth on to family with no penalties. 

We're talking about apples and oranges. The other problem is those countries have opened their borders like good hearted, idealistic socialists and the nightmare is invading them. It's not a pretty picture anymore. 

Interesting...

https://www.facebook.com/delta...640/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

Ironic that you linked that from Facebook.

Every young generation is idealistic and unsatisfied with their (initial) position in life, the millennials aren't unique in that and blaming social media or technology for making millennials "different" than prior generations is just the crutch for the millennials' parents to place blame for the "ills" of millennials on something other than their own parenting skills or the millennials own failings.

Every generation decries those that preceded it and follow it for whatever reasons will make them feel better about their own shortcomings.

The people I know who moved from countries that started with social democracy are Republicans. In their countries social democracy turned into totalitarianism.

One friend is from Denmark. It's supposed to be where people are the happiest. They must get happy over mediocrity. He came to the US so he could choose his college and his major. What good is free if it's not what you want? His parents left Denmark when his father retired due to taxes. Even taxes on the middle class are 50%.

And that 50% is just federal tax. I looked it up a little while back and sales tax is in the 26% range. There are other taxes as well. They total in the 90% range. But you get free healthcare and free education...  what a sham. 

Whether there are trophies or not, kids are smart enough to figure out who the best teams are.  The idea is to be on the team that finishes in first. 

ClevelandDad posted:

Whether there are trophies or not, kids are smart enough to figure out who the best teams are.  The idea is to be on the team that finishes in first. 

5000 likes

bballman posted:

And that 50% is just federal tax. I looked it up a little while back and sales tax is in the 26% range. There are other taxes as well. They total in the 90% range. But you get free healthcare and free education...  what a sham. 

There is a large percentage of the US population that would have very positive attitudes towards Denmark's society.  It is not necessarily what the US "stands" for (exceptionalism, greedy cut-throat capitalism, add your own), but for the average guy, it is a wonderful system.  It has been around for some time and had managed not to implode or collapse due to mass laziness.  If you want to talk about why that model is not what you, as an individual want or perhaps thinks the US should adopt, please feel free to fill up the board.  But to dismiss the model as a sham - as though some guy behind the curtain is getting rich off all the poor Danish folks - falls flat.

Any idea how much wealth that gentleman accumulated in Denmark before he left the country versus what amount of money it took to replace the benefits he forfeited upon departure?  Probably not some guy making minimum wage (or the Danish equivalent), but some guy with a slug of money who figured he would be better off making the jump.

Go44dad posted:

ClevelandDad posted:

Whether there are trophies or not, kids are smart enough to figure out who the best teams are.  The idea is to be on the team that finishes in first. 

5000 likes

What does that mean?  Are we back to baseball or is there some metaphor that I am missing.  Finishing first in baseball I sort of get (my son's team finished first in state USSSA AA one year - does that count?  Didn't think so).

I think a large portion of the American population has no concept of what it would be like to give 70-90% of their money to the government. Once they got their first paycheck, they'd be shell shocked. Then they'd figure "why should I even work and give all my money away, when I can not work and still get all the free stuff". It's a flawed model. 

In other news, just got an invite to beta test the upcoming version of GameChanger on Android! It's about time!

bballman posted:

I think a large portion of the American population has no concept of what it would be like to give 70-90% of their money to the government. Once they got their first paycheck, they'd be shell shocked. Then they'd figure "why should I even work and give all my money away, when I can not work and still get all the free stuff". It's a flawed model. 

And yet, in the countries where there's a substantial tax-fueled social welfare system, most people don't choose not to work.

So, are Americans just inherently lazy in your opinion? Or is it more that they just can't stand seeing someone "less" than them getting "more" than they should? Or some other explanation?

Given the ever-decreasing amount of labor needed to fulfill the needs of most humans, we're inevitably headed towards a time where there won't be enough actual work to do to keep everyone busy if we don't re-evaluate what it means to work for a living. We'll either end up with a very socialist universal income based society, or an incredibly stratified haves/have-nots society.  And given the numbers of people involved, the latter is likely to be even more brutal than it is today in the places where that sort of stratification exists.