U.S. Politics - Page 550 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5491  
Old 12-07-12, 18:28
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
Do you think if we reduced Sam's taxes he would give his employees raises?
Nope.

Do you think if Wal-Mart was not the low price leader people would still shop there? If Wal-Mart went away tomorrow how long until that void would be filled?

Again, consumers don't, en masse, go out and buy the most expensive **** they can buy.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009

Last edited by Scott SoCal; 12-07-12 at 18:39.
Reply With Quote
  #5492  
Old 12-07-12, 20:06
Vino attacks everyone's Avatar
Vino attacks everyone Vino attacks everyone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,219
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn_Wilson View Post
Take it easy on him Scott.....HE LIVES in a place that takes the summer OFF from production and sits around on the government tits. Socialist I say....anti-capitalist......
Ouch lol. There is no socialist alternative to the capitalist economy model. Personally i have a huge respect for it, but I do not keep myself blind for its weaknesses.

Many of us have become almost libertarian socialists, a bit like Noam Chomsky (ofcourse without his masocistic foregin policy). It retains the free market elements of responsibility, competition, and incentive. However allows for greater cooperation than the flawed state Capitalist system some are stuck with now.
__________________
"I know how to ride my bike" - Nibali

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9LBsWCNE9I

Vuelta 06 - the greatest gt in history!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24TQdI7csHs
Reply With Quote
  #5493  
Old 12-07-12, 20:44
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,943
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Nope.

Do you think if Wal-Mart was not the low price leader people would still shop there? If Wal-Mart went away tomorrow how long until that void would be filled?

Again, consumers don't, en masse, go out and buy the most expensive **** they can buy.
I don't shop there now.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Gods don't kill people, people with Gods kill people.
Reply With Quote
  #5494  
Old 12-07-12, 21:53
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
I don't shop there now.
Neither do I. I don't fly Southwest either.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5495  
Old 12-07-12, 22:30
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
You mus-understand. How is it possible to lower income tax rates and at the same time increase revenue to the treasury? When that happens, as it has in the past, then the rates were too high to maximize revenues. You are hung up on social equality at the expense of revenue. It's that simple.



If the safety net will pick anybody up then this will be the result far too many times.



Ok fine. Balanced how? Tear the top down or lift the bottom up?



That's nice and all, but if there's demand for the local artisan then the local artisan will find a way to satisfy it, unless he's prevented from doing so.



We can agree on this. Yet most 'solutions' from the left begin with a lack of funding as their premise. Sometimes funding's the issue, sometimes it's not but it's always the left's answer.



So the question is, what's the States responsibility here? Nobody wants to withdraw from those truly in need. So what's to be done for the rest?



It's a by product of how progressive we now are here. Does anyone think prop 30 would have passed if it had raised taxes on everybody? Hell no. This was liberal class warfare/divide and conquer at it absolute finest. It's extremely short term thinking but then that what the left offers these days.



You can think this if you like. We have had this discussion before. We have problems with cost and access in the US. It could have been fixed. We never even tried.
Though this is entirely a human construct to regulate social relations, no?

The point is whether such a construct, as normative, is beneficial, or even fortuitous.

On thinking about what "I like," it's experience that has been most instructive. Though I don't live in Cali so who knows?
Reply With Quote
  #5496  
Old 12-07-12, 23:52
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

So, if your household hourly wage and benefit is less than $30.00 an hour, what's your incentive not to get on the dole?



Before the source is dismissed out of hand... it is either accurate or inaccurate. The grater point is this; why is it so important to reach this far with welfare if not to create a class of dependency and perpetual voting block? What other reason is there?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ty_665160.html
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5497  
Old 12-08-12, 08:10
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
So, if your household hourly wage and benefit is less than $30.00 an hour, what's your incentive not to get on the dole?



Before the source is dismissed out of hand... it is either accurate or inaccurate. The grater point is this; why is it so important to reach this far with welfare if not to create a class of dependency and perpetual voting block? What other reason is there?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ty_665160.html
The better inquiry is simply, again if this source is true, why is welfare able to surpass "low salaried" jobs?

As per $168 dollars per day, given what I make, perhaps I should just pack it up as they say, head back and live off yous guys!
Reply With Quote
  #5498  
Old 12-08-12, 15:00
aphronesis aphronesis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Nope.

Do you think if Wal-Mart was not the low price leader people would still shop there? If Wal-Mart went away tomorrow how long until that void would be filled?

Again, consumers don't, en masse, go out and buy the most expensive **** they can buy.
So, on the one hand, workers don't have a gun to their heads forcing them to work in the retail sweat shop that is Wal-Mart, and yet, on the other unemployment under Obam is still at near record highs (because we don't count the govts. cooked figures that don't allow for partially unemployed and those already off relief) with no end of that in sight. And part of the reason that they don't have to work in Wal-Mart is that if they'd made proper choices and paid attention in school, they'd have better options. Except you agree that quality of schools is at an all time low so maybe even if they were paying attention there was nothing to pay attention to? Although if I understand your argument correctly, it's only that schools are inefficient, but all the potential material is good to go. And yet, by your accounting small business owners are demoralized and feel persecuted and the grand old American dream of opportunity is severely withered because the economy has not been grown lately. But people don't have to work at Wal-Mart because they have other options.

Do I have all that correct? Would those other options include engaged political dissent or just taking some other crap dehumanized job that caters to human subsistence at a level well below mediocre?
Reply With Quote
  #5499  
Old 12-08-12, 15:48
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aphronesis View Post
So, on the one hand, workers don't have a gun to their heads forcing them to work in the retail sweat shop that is Wal-Mart, and yet, on the other unemployment under Obam is still at near record highs (because we don't count the govts. cooked figures that don't allow for partially unemployed and those already off relief) with no end of that in sight. And part of the reason that they don't have to work in Wal-Mart is that if they'd made proper choices and paid attention in school, they'd have better options. Except you agree that quality of schools is at an all time low so maybe even if they were paying attention there was nothing to pay attention to? Although if I understand your argument correctly, it's only that schools are inefficient, but all the potential material is good to go. And yet, by your accounting small business owners are demoralized and feel persecuted and the grand old American dream of opportunity is severely withered because the economy has not been grown lately. But people don't have to work at Wal-Mart because they have other options.

Do I have all that correct? Would those other options include engaged political dissent or just taking some other crap dehumanized job that caters to human subsistence at a level well below mediocre?
Quote:
So, on the one hand, workers don't have a gun to their heads forcing them to work in the retail sweat shop that is Wal-Mart, and yet, on the other unemployment under Obam is still at near record highs (because we don't count the govts. cooked figures that don't allow for partially unemployed and those already off relief) with no end of that in sight.
No one is forcing anyone to work anywhere, much less wal mart. Workers there know what they are getting when they start there. Clearly, wal mart workers feel they are better of working than sitting at home, which they certainly could do.

Quote:
And part of the reason that they don't have to work in Wal-Mart is that if they'd made proper choices and paid attention in school, they'd have better options.
Yes, generally, although there are certainly well paid career positions there.

Quote:
Except you agree that quality of schools is at an all time low so maybe even if they were paying attention there was nothing to pay attention to?
Lots of non-monetary reasons for schools finished products. Lots of policy issues there and problems lie with motivation of students and involvement of their parents particularly with the inner city.

Quote:
Although if I understand your argument correctly, it's only that schools are inefficient, but all the potential material is good to go
You mis understand.

Quote:
And yet, by your accounting small business owners are demoralized
By and large, yes. But they'll adapt because they don't have a choice.

Quote:
Would those other options include engaged political dissent or just taking some other crap dehumanized job that caters to human subsistence at a level well below mediocre?
Mediocre compared to what? The demonized "rich?"

I'm guessing that employees that don't particularly care for what they do or feel trapped consider their jobs dehumanizing. Just look at you average local government worker.

So, again, should we as a 'society' underwrite everybody at some level? $100 an hour, or is that too low?
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5500  
Old 12-08-12, 16:44
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post

I'm guessing that employees that don't particularly care for what they do or feel trapped consider their jobs dehumanizing. Just look at you average local government worker.

So, again, should we as a 'society' underwrite everybody at some level? $100 an hour, or is that too low?
It's an issue of exploitation. Since ideas can't be controlled, nor primary and secondary resources that the market determines, well then it's labor that can be taken advantage of. No?

$100 per diem isn't the question, rather it's what does it cost to live with basic dignity? Even better, what factors determine that cost?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.