Jump to content
WillFranklin

The Most Liberal Thread Ever

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, bludog said:

 

Blaming the victims is the start of a race to the bottom.  Contempt like that;   Accusing poorly educated people of  wasting their money on gadgetry and imaginary gold-plated hub caps, only leads down a road which denies them everything except the basics that make life possible.   Maybe not even that.

 

Closing the wealth gap to levels found in the US in the 1960s and 70s not only puts more money in people's pockets for saving or discretionary spending, but allows the demand side (labor) to keep the supply side (goods and services) healthy and running.  Allowing the wealth gap to continue widening kills the goose that laid the golden egg and except for luxury items, has the overall effect of shutting down industry.  The less money people have, the less they can buy.

 

If there is a measure of truth in what you say, then why not, like Germany,  provide free education, for all capable students up to and through university level ...  An example of a race to the top.

 

 

This is undeniably true.  Only a percentage max out on their credit trying to live beyond their means.

 

I am fine with free college but you are not going to pay for it with $20 Minimum Wage because it would drive costs up across the board.  $200K professors would become $400K professors.  The average household credit card debt is over $16K so "only a percentage"  seems naive at best.  Raising minimum wage does not put that many people in a better situation.  If the west coast is any indication, it is more likely to make them homeless because it drives up housing costs first. 

 

In the end however it does not change what I stated.  It is very bad for the environment.  That people think increased consumption doesn't come with increased pollution/carbon output is naive at best.  Your defense in increased consumption completely ignores both that and that increased consumption does not create wealth for the purchaser.  It only creates more wealth for the elite.  An iphone costs like $10 to manufacture.  It is the $300 in software licensing that prices it so high.  Higher rents favor the landlords not the tenants.  More car sales favors Wall Street who will see their stocks rise, not the purchaser who sees their investment's value fall as soon as they drive it off the lot.  The only way to close the wealth gap is to force people into wealth creating investments, and that will not be done by creating more digits on a paycheck. Those are illusions of wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WillFranklin said:

 

Lots of people that are poor and middle class are very frugal with their money. They spend it on a mortgage, or rent, a car, food, and clothes. A stronger Consumer Protection Agency would be a good thing to accompany closing the wealth gap though.

 

Don't see how that logically follows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Craig234 said:

 

Well, it is just facts that poor people spend basically every penny and then some, and that private credit card debt has skyrocketed for the reason he said.

 

The consumer protection agency just fights crime and fraud, it doesn't otherwise help on inequality.

 

I understand. I am saying in addition to closing the wealth gap a stronger Consumer Protection Agency would be helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kacper said:

 

I am fine with free college but you are not going to pay for it with $20 Minimum Wage because it would drive costs up across the board.  $200K professors would become $400K professors.  The average household credit card debt is over $16K so "only a percentage"  seems naive at best.  Raising minimum wage does not put that many people in a better situation.  If the west coast is any indication, it is more likely to make them homeless because it drives up housing costs first. 

 

In the end however it does not change what I stated.  It is very bad for the environment.  That people think increased consumption doesn't come with increased pollution/carbon output is naive at best.  Your defense in increased consumption completely ignores both that and that increased consumption does not create wealth for the purchaser.  It only creates more wealth for the elite.  An iphone costs like $10 to manufacture.  It is the $300 in software licensing that prices it so high.  Higher rents favor the landlords not the tenants.  More car sales favors Wall Street who will see their stocks rise, not the purchaser who sees their investment's value fall as soon as they drive it off the lot.  The only way to close the wealth gap is to force people into wealth creating investments, and that will not be done by creating more digits on a paycheck. Those are illusions of wealth.

 

I'm with you that the minimum wage isn't the way to fund it, but your comment about across the board and $200K to $400K is nonsense.


On your concern about the environment, it's a reasonable point to raise the concern, but we need to deal with that by regulating what's sold, not by having most people not be able to afford to buy things.

 

That is a real issue on a global scale, as countries like China and India have the poor get wealthier - the planet doesn't have the resources for them to use resources the way the US does.

 

Trying to keep people from affording things will create tyranny from plutocracy - when a few have all the money, they have all the political power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kacper said:

I am fine with free college but you are not going to pay for it with $20 Minimum Wage because it would drive costs up across the board.  $200K professors would become $400K professors

 

I am in favor a $20 min wage.  I did not suggest the $20 min wage should pay for free college.  It couldn't.  Bernie Sanders plan to fund the program takes the best approach:---  Place a 0.5% tax on stock transactions, a 0.5% fee on derivatives and a 0.1% charge on bonds.  These sources of funds would rack up $300 billion each year.  Which is more than enough for the college-for-everyone program. (Those willing and able).

 

8 hours ago, Kacper said:

The average household credit card debt is over $16K so "only a percentage" 

 

I'll say it again, and it's a fact:  There is a significant percentage of the middle class and poor that are hardworking and frugal.

 

8 hours ago, Kacper said:

seems naive at best.

 

I don't like your attitude.

 

8 hours ago, Kacper said:

Raising minimum wage does not put that many people in a better situation.  If the west coast is any indication, it is more likely to make them homeless because it drives up housing costs first. 

 

High minimum wages have little to do with homelessness on the West Coast.  The reasons housing costs are rising on the West Coast are diverse and complicated.  There is an affordable housing crisis.  Below are a few of the reasons:

 

-  Population density and height-restrictive building codes in many cities preclude new housing.  For instance San Francisco has the second densest population after NYC.

-  Continuous influx of people.

-  Urban redevelopment has displaced many.

 

8 hours ago, Kacper said:

In the end however it does not change what I stated.  It is very bad for the environment.  That people think increased consumption doesn't come with increased pollution/carbon output is naive at best.  Your defense in increased consumption completely ignores both that and that increased consumption does not create wealth for the purchaser.  It only creates more wealth for the elite.  An iphone costs like $10 to manufacture.  It is the $300 in software licensing that prices it so high.  Higher rents favor the landlords not the tenants.  More car sales favors Wall Street who will see their stocks rise, not the purchaser who sees their investment's value fall as soon as they drive it off the lot.  The only way to close the wealth gap is to force people into wealth creating investments, and that will not be done by creating more digits on a paycheck. Those are illusions of wealth.

 

Few people want to tackle the very sensitive subject of population control.  In the end politicians would be in charge and Eugenics would rear its ugly head, as happened in Nazi Germany where they bred for cosmetic appeal.

 

The existence of people causes pollution and burning of fossil fuels.  The continuing development of technology and industrial output creates more pollution and releases CO2/methane into the atmosphere.  Most people want nice things.  Gadgets that didn't exist 50 years ago, like personal computers, have become near-necessities now. 

 

The more population increases, the more mining, drilling and industrial production needs to be done to satisfy people's wants and needs.  In a capitalist system supply will try to keep up with demand.

 

There are many fixes. 

-  Population control -  The stumbling block is HOW

-  Reorganization of cities around public transportation instead of privately owned vehicles.  Even providing bicycle paths.

-  Switching from burning fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, where possible with present technology.

-  Please come up with some others.

 

But there is one fix that is unacceptable to me and that is degrading the quality of people's lives so that they are living more like animals.  For a better world, all people SHOULD be living a comfortable, prosperous life that gives them security.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we should raise minimum wage. I think it should be done in steps like it always has been done. I am not sure what the amount should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bludog said:

-  Population control -  The stumbling block is HOW

 


Hartmann made a point today that when women are empowered to equal rights, the population growth tends to go to zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Craig234 said:


Hartmann made a point today that when women are empowered to equal rights, the population growth tends to go to zero.

 

Abortion on demand! Equal pay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Craig234 said:

Hartmann made a point today that when women are empowered to equal rights, the population growth tends to go to zero.

 

It would be the perfect solution.  So far, most of the world has not made this kind of progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bludog said:

 

It would be the perfect solution.  So far, most of the world has not made this kind of progress.

 

In fact, much of the world is very backwards. And even in America, it is pretty bad for women compared to their potential.

 

Women are still expected to be home bearing children and keeping house in the south by people like Roy Moore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bludog said:

 

I am in favor a $20 min wage.  I did not suggest the $20 min wage should pay for free college.  It couldn't.  Bernie Sanders plan to fund the program takes the best approach:---  Place a 0.5% tax on stock transactions, a 0.5% fee on derivatives and a 0.1% charge on bonds.  These sources of funds would rack up $300 billion each year.  Which is more than enough for the college-for-everyone program. (Those willing and able).

 

 

I'll say it again, and it's a fact:  There is a significant percentage of the middle class and poor that are hardworking and frugal.

 

 

I don't like your attitude.

 

 

High minimum wages have little to do with homelessness on the West Coast.  The reasons housing costs are rising on the West Coast are diverse and complicated.  There is an affordable housing crisis.  Below are a few of the reasons:

 

-  Population density and height-restrictive building codes in many cities preclude new housing.  For instance San Francisco has the second densest population after NYC.

-  Continuous influx of people.

-  Urban redevelopment has displaced many.

 

 

Few people want to tackle the very sensitive subject of population control.  In the end politicians would be in charge and Eugenics would rear its ugly head, as happened in Nazi Germany where they bred for cosmetic appeal.

 

The existence of people causes pollution and burning of fossil fuels.  The continuing development of technology and industrial output creates more pollution and releases CO2/methane into the atmosphere.  Most people want nice things.  Gadgets that didn't exist 50 years ago, like personal computers, have become near-necessities now. 

 

The more population increases, the more mining, drilling and industrial production needs to be done to satisfy people's wants and needs.  In a capitalist system supply will try to keep up with demand.

 

There are many fixes. 

-  Population control -  The stumbling block is HOW

-  Reorganization of cities around public transportation instead of privately owned vehicles.  Even providing bicycle paths.

-  Switching from burning fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, where possible with present technology.

-  Please come up with some others.

 

But there is one fix that is unacceptable to me and that is degrading the quality of people's lives so that they are living more like animals.  For a better world, all people SHOULD be living a comfortable, prosperous life that gives them security.

 

 

1.  The number of people in the middle class who are not is reflected in the high median credit card debt and it is more than just a "percentage" as you previously indicated.

 

2.   I don't care how free college gets paid for.  Pay for it by eliminating the earned income tax credit for all I care.

 

3.  I don't care what you think about my attitude.  You strike me as someone who would be all for "the environment" without actually supporting anything that would adversely affect you personally.  We are responsible for too much of the world's pollution as is and the last thing we need to do is add to that with more pointless consumerism. 

 

4.  The disproportionate high wages drive the influx of people to the west coast and the disproportionate high wages create more money chasing after the same goods which leads to housing inflation which leads to homelessness.

 

5.  People all around the world can live "comfortable, prosperous" lives on less money than Americans make and certainly less than $20/hour.  The government, however, in the US needs to drive wages up to continue to monetize the debt which drives the purchasing power of the US dollar down since fiat currency is debt backed and not gold backed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kacper said:

 

Pay for it by eliminating the earned income tax credit for all I care.

 

 

 

That is not liberal :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Kacper said:

2.   I don't care how free college gets paid for.  Pay for it by eliminating the earned income tax credit for all I care.

 

5.  People all around the world can live "comfortable, prosperous" lives on less money than Americans make and certainly less than $20/hour.  The government, however, in the US needs to drive wages up to continue to monetize the debt which drives the purchasing power of the US dollar down since fiat currency is debt backed and not gold backed. 

 

#2: This hurts the poor disproportionately

#5: They do, but their prices are also much lower. And environmental protections are probably less too.  When you look at their lives in detail, their standard of living is much lower than that of US middle class families doing well. Part of that is a trade-off, because they get single payer health insurance. Part of that is that they make do with less.

 

It's probably hard to compare to other countries because of different standards.

However, if you compare to the most similar country, i.e. Canada, that supports your assertion. Canadians live well on somewhat less money that Americans. The difference is almost entirely due to higher taxes for social programs notably single payer medicare for all.

 

But the higher taxes are progressive. CEOs take home much less in Canada than in the US. Even someone with a salary of $50K/year pays about 50% in total taxes in Quebec, the highest taxed province. That includes both federal and provincial income taxes, but doesn't include the total 15% fed+prov sales taxes. I really doubt Americans would submit to that level of taxation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kacper said:

I don't care what you think about my attitude.  You strike me as someone who would be all for "the environment" without actually supporting anything that would adversely affect you personally.  We are responsible for too much of the world's pollution as is and the last thing we need to do is add to that with more pointless consumerism

 

How wrong you are. My income is Middle Class.   I have led a modest life and always made choices which left a minimal impact on the environment.  For 30 years, in lieu of owning a car I either walked, bicycled or took public transportation.   I never buy anything on time but wait until I can pay in full.

 

Do you live in a glass house?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kacper said:

I don't care how free college gets paid for. 

 

Don't care?  A strange argument, better left unsaid.  "Don't care" sounds like "secretly against".   Which is the same attitude as Conservative politicians wishing to dumb-down the public.

 

15 hours ago, Kacper said:

Pay for it by eliminating the earned income tax credit for all I care.

 

The latest in a constant drumbeat against the poor.

 

15 hours ago, Kacper said:

The disproportionate high wages drive the influx of people to the west coast and the disproportionate high wages create more money chasing after the same goods which leads to housing inflation which leads to homelessness.

 

Actually, more people are departing California than coming in.  Washington State and Oregon are experiencing an influx.  The reasons are varied and complicated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WillFranklin said:

 

That is not liberal :-(

 One can be progressive without being a statist democrat.  If everyone gets a free college degree, we shouldn't need to have much in the way of welfare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kacper said:

 One can be progressive without being a statist democrat.  If everyone gets a free college degree, we shouldn't need to have much in the way of welfare

 

That is hardly a good argument for ending the Earned Income Tax Credit. It also benefits the disabled who work part time, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WillFranklin said:

 

That is hardly a good argument for ending the Earned Income Tax Credit. It also benefits the disabled who work part time, for example.

 

There doesn't need to be a good argument for eliminating the EITC.  More people will benefit from a free university education than enjoy that now.  Like I said, I don't care where the money comes from, the democrats who scream about government subsidizing worker wages at Walmart seem to not realize that it is through the EITC.  Do away with it and Walmart will have to pay more competitive wages to attract workers.  EITC is also the source of much of the fraudulent tax returns having been filed in recent years.  The IRS was paying out the money based on what the returns represented without actually processing them.  By the time they found out the thing was fraud, often the money was wired away and the perpetrators vanished without a trace.  It is one of the reasons they delayed sending out checks in 2017 for 2016 returns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kacper said:

 

There doesn't need to be a good argument for eliminating the EITC.  More people will benefit from a free university education than enjoy that now.  Like I said, I don't care where the money comes from, the democrats who scream about government subsidizing worker wages at Walmart seem to not realize that it is through the EITC.  Do away with it and Walmart will have to pay more competitive wages to attract workers.  EITC is also the source of much of the fraudulent tax returns having been filed in recent years.  The IRS was paying out the money based on what the returns represented without actually processing them.  By the time they found out the thing was fraud, often the money was wired away and the perpetrators vanished without a trace.  It is one of the reasons they delayed sending out checks in 2017 for 2016 returns.

 

I am not saying the EITC should be allowed to be mishandled. The anecdotes you mentioned are examples of where the law was not followed properly. They are not, however, good arguments for ending the EITC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

 

I am not saying the EITC should be allowed to be mishandled. The anecdotes you mentioned are examples of where the law was not followed properly. They are not, however, good arguments for ending the EITC.

As I said, I don't care where the money comes from.  Eliminate the EITC and give the handicapped a bigger check if that is your concern.  Pay for free college by taking a couple aircraft carriers to the auction block.  We need to stop catering to the lowest among us at the expense of the more efficient use of our public funds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Kacper said:

As I said, I don't care where the money comes from.  Eliminate the EITC and give the handicapped a bigger check if that is your concern.  Pay for free college by taking a couple aircraft carriers to the auction block.  We need to stop catering to the lowest among us at the expense of the more efficient use of our public funds. 

 

I do not think we should end the EITC under any circumstances. I do think we should increase the Social Security Disability checks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WillFranklin said:

 

I do not think we should end the EITC under any circumstances. I do think we should increase the Social Security Disability checks.

 

Then we disagree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WillFranklin said:

 

You should become a Liberal.

 

You should leave the DNC.  That you prioritize bigger checks for drug addicts over investing money in creating educational opportunities for people reflects that parties mindset that people must be kept tied to the federal government for their survival. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×