Total posts: 1,890
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
We would still have people like Elon Musk making investments and independently deciding how companies are run.
You continue to make contradictory prescriptions:
“Only the government would make investments.”
“We would still have people like Musk making investments.”
Would you be able to outline exactly what it is you are prescribing? I need more than “Musk can keep doing what he’s doing. He will just be accumulating wealth at a more humane and reasonable rate.” (Not an exact quote)
Created:
“Elon Musk Is Overpaid
Or so says a Delaware judge.“
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I'm not going to attempt to deny that hundreds of billions of dollars is a far greater incentive than hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even so, we don't offer people billions to be professors and yet they still are. (I choose "professor" specifically because it is a position that doesn't pay any ludicrous amount of money yet requires a lot of background knowledge. Once again, people still become professors.) No, being a professor doesn't require you to risk your own money, but in my proposed economy, nor would investing.
Professors are not paid commission. Professional investors are. If professional investors are paid only a base salary, they won’t be putting in any extra hours away from family they otherwise would (which is good) and achieving the better results those efforts would enable. What’s worse, there wouldn’t be many good investments at all under your system. So, you would get mediocre investors dealing in mediocre investments.
Oh, would you say it doesn't negatively affect us in any way? Sure. We can go with that. Tesla stock tanking does not negatively affect the rest of us. This supports your argument how?
You made a claim about the stock market, and I asked you about your claim to see if you have any idea what you are talking about. Your non-answer actually is an answer to that.
I am not suggesting any such thing. Nothing would be confiscated, because no one would be privately investing in the first place. This system in no way relies on taking money from the already rich as you would suggest. Elon Musk could keep the hundreds of billions he already has, he just wouldn't be making hundreds of billions anymore. I also do not believe that the government should take ownership of his companies. He would retain full control over said companies, but the government would have control over the massive funds for those companies. My concept is effectively to leave as many parts of the economy intact as possible while reducing everyone to a reasonable fixed salary and using the excess money that they would have been making to improve government services while lowering taxes at the same time.
The bolded involves contradictory claims. It’s as if you are saying, “No, the government is not taking ownership of your lemonade stand, you just can’t continue to profit from it, and only the government can by shares of its stock.” Your idea lacks coherence and understanding of how businesses are owned and financed.
Created:
-->
@Shila
The guy is just a student.
Noted. I am being gentle : )
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
This is where I earn the ire of the libertarians:
Theft is the unlawful seizure of money and property. Our republic has deemed this seizure as lawful within certain limits. So, taxation is not theft. We have duly elected representatives in government who lobby on our behalf to set these limits and to decide how the tax revenue is spent. Without taxation, a nation would become unsustainable even in the short term.
Now, I’m not a huge fan of income tax, but our government was able to amend the Constitution to allow such a tax. Income tax is hardly unique to the USA, but I have heard from more than one economist that a progressive consumption tax (a higher percentage of tax as the product gets more expensive) would be the ideal.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I believe that people should be employed to make good investments, and the resulting large quantities of wealth should be controlled by the government and used for public interest.
There are already people— fund managers— privately employed to do that. Would you prefer that only government could employ fund managers?
People get into investing chiefly to accumulate and control wealth. If you take away that control from investors, they are then disincentivized to put as much money, time, and effort into investing.
If his net worth stopped going up because his investments were tanking, that would indirectly have a negative impact on the rest of us as well.
How do you believe, say, Tesla stock tanking negatively affects the rest of us?
What I would really like to see is people like him being reduced to the fixed salaries that the rest of us live on while the money from these investments goes to the good of the public.
You think that a person’s stock shares should be confiscated past a certain point? Musk is not even a stock investor per se. He is an entrepreneur and innovator and hence a creator of wealth. His investments are mainly in companies which he has created and led. Do you think the government should take over ownership of his companies?
Realize that Musk wouldn’t even have attained such wealth in the first place under the confiscatory system you suggest. Your system only has large amounts of wealth to confiscate because it was accumulated up until now under a totally different system. Your system will not accumulate much wealth going forward from the time it is implemented. The government’s share will then get smaller and smaller over time. This is a huge flaw in your suggestion.
Created:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Is Elon Musk doing more work in one minute than everyone in an average American household combined does in 4.5 years?
No.
It is neither an insightful question nor answer if we leave it there. As with many such wealth stats, that site is substituting changes in net worth over time as income from wages/salary. Some years, that number is negative. Turns out that Musk does not take a salary. This “income” figure is derived mainly from:
Unrealized gains: the present value of one’s investments if they were to liquidate completely. If that figure decreases, it is called an unrealized loss.
Capital gains: the profit from selling an investment for more than one bought it for (ie a realized gain).
Passive income: this is income other than from salary/wages, such as rental income and dividends.
Knowing the above, do you think that we would somehow make higher salaries if Musk and the like’s net worth remained static (no “income”)?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@whiteflame
I’m just speculating here, and time will tell, of course, but perhaps Trump is coming out swinging against historic allies for two possible objectives:
1. Nations hostile to the US will see is and think, “If this is how he treats his allies, what might he do to us?!” Not that they would ever admit it.
2. Allies will think, “I think we might be more on our own with this guy in charge of the US. Perhaps we DO need to allot more towards our military strength.”
And, of course, the never out of fashion TDS reason:
3. He’s just a fvcking idiot!
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think so. I’m not sure what the actual criteria for tight regulation vs. loose regulation is on this.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Interestingly enough, over-the-air broadcasts are held to more stringent standards of classification than cable broadcasts. As “60 Minutes” is classified as a news program by FCC standards, it then must adhere to the standards of a news program.
“Fox News is not accredited as a news program!”:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You are unknown on this site.
Whether true or not, it is irrelevant to the case regarding your spamming. In fact, irrelevancy is a telltale sign of spam.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Yes, that's what a conclusion derived from premises and logic is called
Now that you mention it, perhaps you could structure your arguments in a rigorous, syllogistic format:
P1 + P2 = C
For more complex arguments:
P1a + P2a = C1
C1 + P2b = C2
And so on as needed. This way, your arguments are more organized and can be more easily examined and critiqued by others.
I don't get into too many debates because I don't care to commit to the time it takes to craft a 10k character response with limited internet service. So glad I was able to clear your genuine inquiry up.
Well, what you could do is write debate arguments in a computer notepad or wp as able. They wouldn’t have to be constructed in one sitting, and no internet required. When you have finished writing a round, simply copy/paste to the online debate when able.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
There’s no exact number for spam. It just means a whole lot of posts anywhere and everywhere, which you have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No, you came here for an argument.
Ah, that must be why you have so many debates under your belt— you love the art of debate and make superior arguments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
When do you think you’ll achieve 6000 posts? By noon tomorrow?
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
My post 128:
“I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t even agree with the premise of the question…”
… your questions are based on nonsense premises…
Called it! You could have saved both of us time and trouble by just saying that upfront, but that obviously isn’t your style.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You are well on your way to the top! But remember this:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Probably something called a computer. Don’t look now, but you’re coming up on 5800 posts!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Spam is spam, regardless of the count.
<— FYI post totals are counted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The context before and after the debate performance was night and day different. Up until that point the DNC was not in any position to stand up against Joe Biden the way you are claiming they should have. And in fact they rightly refrained from stepping in afterwards allowing Biden the space to make his own decision as he was entitled to do.
So, we disagree on that.
Predicted response: “Well, it is absurd and stupid to disagree with the very lucid point I just made.”
Yes Joe Biden is old. Everyone knew that. What ended his campaign was the image of him standing on that debate stage fumbling his words spectacularly. That was the point he was no longer viable, any action taken before that moment would have been premature, especially for an organization whose literal job it is to support the Democratic candidate.
Ah, right. Similarly, the “emperor with no clothes” was doing juuust fine until a little child pointed out the situation openly so that the it could no longer be ignored.
Predicted response: “What a silly comparison to make. The two situations could not be more different.”
You said you "blame the DNC" in the context of why Americans voted for the moron. My interpretation is exactly what those words mean. If you meant something different then by all means enlighten me.
To quote you back to yourself: “Turns out it becomes very easy to make a message sound stupid when you inject your own stupidity into it. Who knew?”
This particular line of discussion started with a question I posed (and which you “reinterpreted”) in post 128 which you should have left as rhetorical as I had suggested. You don’t wish to discuss political strategy, remember? You and I could see a black sedan and disagree on what color it is, so I don’t see the point in “enlightening you” any further on this.
So is swatting aside your epithets.
I’m not sure what you expect with your stubborn, strawman reinterpretations of what I am saying. Yet you insist on posting to me unsolicited anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You also shouldn’t base your self worth on how many posts you can rack up on this website.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Aw, you shouldn’t base your self worth on what you can glean from online profiles.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Simple: I don’t expect people here to know me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
but I think Haley stood a very real chance... If not for the indictments.
Haley was always well behind. I have no reason to believe that the indictments changed the outcome of the primaries. I think they appealed more to people who were not very politically engaged to begin with.
From the fact that it was my comments you were criticizing as a "defeatest mentality" and then said "this reminds me of a teacher who...". If you weren't talking about my comments then I don't know what "This" in that sentence was talking about.
Yes, you have a defeatist mentality which absolves the DNC of any responsibility to lead. Not YOU engaging voters more effectively but the DNC.
You asked why Biden was picked…
No, I didn’t ask that.
An unprecedented response to an unprecedentedly terrible performance. It never ceases to amaze me how right wingers always seem to forget what happened before the action they criticize as if everything happens in a vacuum.
Ah, there’s the gaslighting. I was wondering when you were going to resort to that, Mr. Anton.
Me: “They should have done [A] before it was too late.”
You: “To do [A] would have been unprecedented.”
Me: “That IS what they ended up doing!”
You: “And it was unprecedented just as I claimed.”
But to pretend it's the DNC's job to hold Americans hands and tell them who to vote for is ridiculous.
Not what I said. Your routine and predictable strawmanning and gaslighting is tedious.
It's there job to make the case, but the case couldn't have been any clearer.
Indeed, the case was clear: “Trump is an existential threat. He is, quite simply, unfit for the office. Instead, vote for me, Kamala Harris, despite the possibility that I may be the worst major candidate for president any y’all ever seen!”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Your profile is full of unknowns.
To you, yes. Not to me.
Created:
Posted in:
Hmm… it appears that Trump exists no matter what the subject at hand may be. Anyway:
Does the past exist?
It used to.
Does the future exist?
It will.
Do abstractions exist?
Yes, in the abstract.
Do thoughts exist?
If they don’t, then I’m not as smart as I thought.
If something will never be observed, does it exist?
That depends… we talking “Russell’s teapot,” or dark matter, or?
If you have heard that something has been observed, but never observe it yourself, does it exist?
That also depends… we talking Bigfoot, or relativistic time dilation, or?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The opposite turned out to be true, that's not where we started. Recall that prior to the indictments and assassination attempts there were viable challengers to Trump, but the party coalesced around him after those events.
No, I don’t recall that. The only viable challenger turned out to be Hayley, but she dropped out, ceding the nomination to Trump prior to the events you mention.
I'm not the teacher, it's not my job to teach my classmates, especially given that there are over 300 million of them.Again, and as I've made clear repeatedly to GP, I am entirely uninterested in arguing political strategy or effectiveness. I care about real, actual issues. If all you've got is "you're wrong because Trump voters said so" I couldn't care less what you have to say.
Where did you get the idea I was talking about you? I have been talking about the DNC and how I blame the DNC. And I’m not talking about teaching per se; I am using good/bad teaching as a metaphor for good/bad leadership. I get it: you blame the DNC for nothing. That fact does not come as a shock to me.
You seem to have forgotten that he won.
No, but you seem to have forgotten that you said this:
“congratulations on your home team winning the prize, since that is clearly all you care about.”
And how did Biden’s win in 2020 work out in 2024 for the Democratic Party?
A political party standing in the way of their own incumbent President's reelection campaign would have been unprecedented
Geesh, man. What do you think happened right after the Trump/Biden debate??
Anyhoo, to sum up: I blame the DNC whereas you blame the American people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
For any republican candidate yes.
Huh? Obviously the opposite was true in the Republican primaries. That’s the problem— if one sees Trump’s success in the primaries as problematic.
The election I think proved that the democrats would have likely lost no matter what.
There's nothing the democrats can do with that. If you show people the worst of who you are and they are willing to set it all aside and assume you're actually terrific... The outcome is pretty much set.
That’s a very defeatist mentality. Instead of blaming the leadership, blame the followers? That is worse than defeatism. This reminds me of a mediocre math teacher who chastised her students for poor test scores. That she was perhaps teaching ineffectively never entered her mind.
Biden was picked by the voters in 2020 because every poll showed that he was the best candidate to beat Trump,
Yes, I know. Biden was supposedly the most electable the DNC had. That’s the problem!
In 2024 Biden made the fatal mistake of trying to run again.
And the DNC allowed this charade to occur and continue until it became unsustainable and unwinnable. Again, that’s the problem!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
It is a Chuck Norris joke. Such as “When Chuck Norris slices onions, the onions cry.”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Nice. I thought it might be a number of H20 molecules thing, but I had no idea whatsoever how many. Answers #3, 6, and 7 also seem legit in the context of “when is water wet?” The OP would be better phrased “When does H20 behave as water?”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Trump should have been fairly easy to beat in 2024, though not as easy to beat as in 2020. Why was the DNC unable to generate better candidates than Biden/Harris?
I ask this rhetorically if you are equally confounded and are asking yourself the same thing, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t even agree with the premise of the question…
Created:
Posted in:
When Chuck Norris jumps into a lake, he doesn’t get wet; the lake gets Chuck Norris.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Perhaps, but I have read that his intent is to get Mexico to take more responsibility for their borders and cartels.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Looks like another example of Trump’s predilection for brinkmanship.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Too much binary thinking— “either you’re for DEI or you’re a dirty white supremacist!”— and not nearly enough exposure to the nuanced takes of intellectuals such as John McWhorter, Coleman Hughes, Glenn Loury, and Thomas Sowell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
That is why concepts such as “optics” and LCD exist in politics. The advent of radio changed politics, and TV changed it even more. Social media has changed it yet even more.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Ha! My college roommate loved Cinderella. At least, I think it was Cinderella?
Created:
Posted in:
Here is an interview with a former Blackhawk pilot. In addition to what I have pointed out, she adds that the helicopter should ideally have had one more crewmember aboard for collision avoidance purposes. It appears that 3 is the minimum crew, so the flight was technically in compliance there. As for the training status of the flight, it appears that the purpose of the flight was to learn how to navigate DC’s busy airspace! Damn, that is aggravating and tragically ironic:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
After 4 years of Trump culminating in the pandemic, the American people said, “We deserve better!” and elected Biden. After 4 years of Biden, the American people said, “We deserve better!” and reelected Trump.
Created: