Yes, by all means, let's take more money from hardworking people who the market has organically picked as geniuses at efficiently meeting human wants, who already spend much of their life as slaves to help the poor, and give it to the government. What can go possibly wrong?
Sounds like a great reallocation to me!

Or perhaps we should give even more to the lowest IQ and least mentally organized members of society (who already get an unaffordable $2.7 trillion every year), who on average have utterly failed at working hard, at saving money, and at efficiently meeting the wants of their fellow humans? That sounds like a great plan too, and really fair.

Where do people come up with this stuff? How does anyone sane with the slightest clue how the world works, how economies work, how wealth creation works, buy into the fruit loop vision of economics that all current Democrats are pushing? How did fruit loops, most of them who've never even run a business, take charge of the economic discussion in the West?

Great post.

In Scotland we now have free university education. It's like robbing the poor to pay the rich!!!
It hasn't actually helped the "poor" the government claim it was aimed at. It's acted as a subsidy for middle class parents, who would have paid for their kids education anyway.
I think the stats suggest that graduates earn 10x more than non graduates, and retire 10 years earlier. I think they should finance their own kids education. Maybe downgrade their Range Rovers, forgo their spa breaks, and work a few years more. It's not like they wouldn't still have a higher standard of living than the average non grad.

This is a very good post imo.

I did not mean to quote this post. The new Tapatalk app is being buggy. I mean to quote Former DJ's post.

There's so much wrong with that post I don't know where to start. Revolution doesn't happen in the modern world. Even poor people are so wealthy that there's no driver for it. Comparing people living on $5 a day in real terms, working 12 hours/day 6 days a week (when the Marxist revolutions happened) to now with our cushy easy lives is just absurd. Starving overworked people, not lazy fat people with ass implants, Netflix and plenty of cigarettes.

Moreoever, he has this completely backwards:
The view that prompts revolution is that the current system is unfair - the one that Bernie Sanders if putting forward - not the view that it's your fault if you're poor.

FDR didn't save the country. The Western countries that didn't do these programs pulled out of the Great Depression just fine. Australia being one of many examples:
The US would have taken the same trajectory without FDR.

Canada was also hit harder than the US and didn't do a version of the "New Deal" in name only until 1935 and had no significant new government spending until 1942 with the war. It both pulled out of the depression and had no revolutions.

It is unethical to have a society protect the "super rich" while millions go without, especially youth that have their potential diminished through no fault of their own. It would be dealt with if not for the police state.

ToothSayer and other bigoted boot-lickers of billionairs will fight tooth and nail to protect them, throwing up claims like the laziness of poors (a racist dog whistle) and the dire economic necessity of the virtuous super-rich job creators (a fallacy) because they are broken humans.

His horrible posts here highlight why he is banned from the politics sub-forum.

Regardless of opinions on this, the OP you responded to was full of blatant factual errors and an invalid premise in the title (that this results in the poor earning less) and another in the first paragraph (that an economy is zero sum).

So you think there would be open revolution except the police are keeping you down and enforcing those pesky things called property rights? You sound like a Bolshevik, whose philosophies led to hundreds of millions of lives ruined.

They're not claims. They're hard data. The poorest households work 0.42 full time hours per household, in a country where jobs are plentiful. The richest work 1.97 full time hours per household. That's a fact. You have no response to these hard facts, so you throw out terms like "bigoted", "bootlickers", "racist". It's all you have because you lose on the facts; facts are the antithesis of your radical fact-free agenda.
What happened in China when people of your ilk and moral philosophy revolted and killed and jailed all the "bourgeois rightists", using exactly your claims as justification (that the rich were parasites rather than highly effective organizers of capital with huge externalities)? We know what happened because we ran the experiment. 70 million people died of starvation and the country spent two generations in poverty and fear. We have hard data on what happens when your moral philosophy is put into action. It's not pretty. It's hard to allocate capital well. Few can do it well and those that can are incredibly valuable with enormous externalities. You want to kill them or take all their stuff because they're better at life than you. It's pure sick demented envy turned into a political philosophy. We've seen the destruction that's wrought when it gains power.
My posts here are excellent and filled with extensive data, facts and reasoning. Yours are filled with pure assertion, hate and derision.

You and your toxic views and attitude (and fact free bigoted posting) show why the entire politics forum was shut down and exiled from the site.

Max Cut

It is a fact that the top 1% pay nearly 40% of the taxes. More than their fair share. More than the bottom 90%.

Not a claim. A fact.

Don't you ever forget it. Unstuckpolitics posters will never be able to actually tell you those facts.

As almost always, you have the facts wrong and are just freestyling bullshit. But anyway, you were banned from the old politics sub-forum. Then after TPTB melted down about a year ago and closed it for a night or two and reopened it with new moderation, more tolerant of **** posting not dissimilar to yours, where almost no one has been banned, you stand almost unique as a banned poster. And you lasted like a week.

I don't think it's fair that some artists on Spotify have billions of streams, while local indie artists have none. They should be shared out, when someone clicks to listen to Drake they should have to listen to local artists first.

And successful producers shouldn't be allowed work with billionaire stream artists. It promotes inequality and is unethical.

I think the OP has been given that opinion already and my post didn't rely on any of that.

Wrong. But we should look at how much they actually pay as a percentage of wealth.

You know you're effectively making your arguments when hard-left bolshevik revolution types drop in to smear you in a mini rage.

Max Cut, the old politics forum is dead bro. That's why you have this in your location:



If you have anything other than invective and assertions relevant to this thread, by all means provide them, but your kind of posting is no longer welcome on this site (hence why the old politics forums was shut down). More broadly, the hard left worldwide is shooting itself in the foot with this kind of nasty, fact free, hardened fundamentalist character smearing, where the only goal is to personally attack rather than discuss and find truth:
Normal people are seeing this for what it is now. The claims have become too shrill and too reaching and too absurd. It's not working any more. That won't stop you of course (fundamentalist fevers like yours have to burn themselves out - see Nazi Germany or Communist Russia) but come back and read your comments again in a few years.

triggered. must have hit a sensitive spot.

hold on for the next instantiation of the poli sub and maybe you're brand of hate and fantasy crafting will be tolerated. who knows.

There is no content in anything you've posted in this entire thread. No data. No facts. No arguments - just a few bare assertions contrary to the very clear facts. Plus personal attacks. You've convinced absolutely no one of your points and probably alienated some people and made them think that there's nothing but empty rhetoric in the "hate the rich" spew you do.

Meanwhile I'm getting PMs from left wingers asking me for more information and saying that there are ideas in here they've never encountered and find persuasive. Which is the very reason you want to shut me down by calling me a bigot, racist, and so on. Desperately screaming names is all you have as there are zero facts or data for the position you're advancing.

I'm telling you it's not working any more. Normal people are getting wise to your tactics because they're so overused and overreached. The entire world is moving right because of people like you, with shock election results in multiple countries. I shouldn't tap the glass I guess.

I gave a succinct opinion. For some reason you flew into a tirade over it and I have no interest in playing chess with a pigeon. GG man, you totally won.


PMs from left wingers asking me for more information
PMs from left wingers asking me for more information
PMs from left wingers asking me for more information
PMs from left wingers asking me for more information
PMs from left wingers asking me for more information
PMs from left wingers asking me for more information

csb

Max,

Would you say the % of children who have had their potential undeservedly diminished has gone up, down, or stayed the same throughout human history? How about the last 100 years?

I'd say, for example, murder rates are down. But I still think, as a society, we should strive to lower them more.

Amazing avoidance of a simple question. Are you afraid of answering his question?
You came in and tried an intense personal attack (against the rules of this site), and offered an "opinion" that was pure thoughtless assertion of your own prejudices. You presented no facts or evidence, no arguments.
Pointing out the gaping flaws in your opinion isn't a "tirade".
You did play. You got mated in a few moves. Now you're sarcastically asserting you didn't play? Have some honor, man.

Unlike you I like talking to people with whom I disagree. It is a valuable experience as I learn from it as I can never fully know the truth, morally or practically. This thread had good opinions on both sides until you decided to come along, and, like a pigeon, poo all over the posters and opinions in it. Because you think you know better. But can't back it up with facts or evidence. Or answer simple questions honestly...

I think everyone in this forum would agree that we should lower the murder rate of children as much as possible.

You didn't really answer my question but it seems that your first post ITT implies one of two things:

A. The quality of life for the poor has stayed the same or gotten worse in recent history

or

B. The quality of life for the poor has improved, but at a slower rate than is possible and there is a better way forward

If A, I'd love to see your justification. If B, I'd be interested to hear what you would instead and why it would be superior to the current system

ye, gg gg wp

B. Redistribute some of the excessive wealth from the "super rich". Perhaps tax generally based more on wealth than just income, providing for more opportunity to accumulate significant but not excessive wealth. For one, among many reasons, it would help lower the number of impoverished children thereby raising the total EV of the citizenry. I am not going to get into a full blown political discussion in this forum, but that's the gist of it.


[edit: Just a note that I did not specifically say the murder rate of children in my previous example and I don't know your reason for adding it.]

How would you define excessive wealth?