2020 US Presidential Election

[Christiaan]

Trump and Reagan's Favorite Economic Theory Debunked: Millionaires' Tax Cut Doesn't Help

There has been criticism for some time, but now it has also been scientifically established: tax cuts for the highest incomes cause more inequality and do not contribute to the prosperity of lower incomes and middle incomes, researchers say in a study of the richest countries.

This can be seen as a line through the so-called "trickle-down economics", the theory behind the economic policy of, among others, US presidents Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. According to that theory, money that the rich do not have to pay in tax via expenditure ultimately ends up with the lower incomes.

Researchers David Hope (London School of Economics) and Julian Limberg (King's College London) argue that tax cuts for the very rich over the past 50 years have helped only the very rich and have not led to more jobs or economic growth. "Policymakers should not worry that raising taxes on the rich to cover the financial costs of the pandemic will hurt their economies," said Hope. The study authors examined the effects of taxes on income, capital and assets in eighteen member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Tax increase

The finding is good news for British Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak, among others, who may want to increase taxes on capital to bring the budget deficit down somewhat. Such a tax increase will be disproportionately due to the richest Britons. The findings also suggest that plans for a one-off 5 percent wealth tax on the 8 million richest Britons will not cause irreparable damage to the UK economy. Hope and Limberg's conclusions provide arguments against reasoning that is especially common in the US. Republicans, in particular, often argue that policies that help the richest are ultimately good for the rest of the economy.

Link to Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant:

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-ac...tingverlaging-miljonairs-helpt-niet~bfaf6732/

 

[FGG]

To address the poverty issue, Republicans have generally regarded job creation as a form of social policy. That's why Republicans are known for saying "get a job." Ronald Reagan once said that "the best social program is a job." I think we can all agree that having a decent job far outweighs living on benefits. Certain jobs, which generally pay minimum wage, are not meant as careers. Having a decent job is not impossible, all one has to do is study STEM or similar field (accounting, nursing, etc.), and it only takes four years to change one's life around. Now, I understand people with tinnitus have concentration issues (as I do). I have no choice but to work extra hours to make up lost time.

I appreciate you giving these issues thought but do you think there are enough STEM jobs for everyone? Also, if the "menial" jobs are not given a living wage, who would be able to do those jobs?

What about people who literally don't have the intellect to do the jobs you mentioned? Or people with severe learning disabilities? Do you opt for public assistance in those cases?

This is something Yang talked about a lot too with his push for a universal basic income: with automation many blue collar jobs are not even outsourced, they are just gone to machines. Eventually, with automation, there literally won't be enough jobs for people and all of those people can't just become nurses or engineers.

The conservative economic system you describe would have worked in the 50s, where people had lots of relatives that weren't struggling themselves that could help and there were plenty of good paying jobs everywhere but that's not the reality in the modern world.

 

[GlennS]

It truly amazes me that conservatives would get on a high horse about cancel culture. Economic freedom is like the #1 thing that describes conservatives. I'm pretty sure not buying art from someone I no longer like is like economic freedom 101.

I don't like how this discussion is headed. In order to get away from polarization you first have to ACKNOWLEDGE it, and that means both sides, right AND left.

While I think the right is the more dangerous right now, I also can see how corrosive the left is, mainly through, YES, cancel-culture and its attempt to heavy-handedly socially engineer through media and education.

For instance, the left has pathologized and literally demonized masculinity and wants to feminize men.





It also wants to masculinize women.

The left comes at its issues at present as if there is only ONE acceptable stance and if you don't share it, you are considered inhuman and should be banished into the wilderness.

The only way to have a functional society is to be able to coexist with those you disagree with. If that turns out to be impossible, the country WILL split into two or more ideologically-based countries, not that we don't already have that situation in many respects.

 

[FGG]

I don't like how this discussion is headed. In order to get away from polarization you first have to ACKNOWLEDGE it, and that means both sides, right AND left.

While I think the right is the more dangerous right now, I also can see how corrosive the left is, mainly through, YES, cancel-culture and its attempt to heavy-handedly socially engineer through media and education.

For instance, the left has pathologized and literally demonized masculinity and wants to feminize men.

It also wants to masculinize women.

The left comes at its issues at present as if there is only ONE acceptable stance and if you don't share it, you are considered inhuman and should be banished into the wilderness.

The only way to have a functional society is to be able to coexist with those you disagree with. If that turns out to be impossible, the country WILL split into two or more ideologically-based countries, not that we don't already have that situation in many respects.

The last video was Jonathon from Queer Eye. It was just a celebrity endorsement.

How is including a famous gay man (who is using his real life mannerisms) in an ad demonizing masculinity?

 

[Lilah]

I appreciate you giving these issues thought but do you think there are enough STEM jobs for everyone? Also, if the "menial" jobs are not given a living wage, who would be able to do those jobs?

There is a higher demand for certain jobs over other jobs. I understand there is always a high demand for STEM, related, and medical-related jobs. There are some "menial" jobs that pay well, like plumber and repairman. However, if it is a low-paid dead-end job, it is not a career. Wages for menial jobs would increase if they is not such a huge supply of workers. The market corrects itself. Also, by increasing the wages, the employer passes the cost to the customer, or cuts costs (i.e., jobs) to meet pay for increased expenses. I do believe wages need to keep up with inflation, however I am not sure if every job should pay a living wage as some jobs are not intended as careers. We have to balance out how many jobs are cut as a result of increased wages.

What about people who literally don't have the intellect to do the jobs you mentioned? Or people with severe learning disabilities? Do you opt for public assistance in those cases?

Many STEM related jobs do not require high intelligence but do require hard work and probably more hours of study than most humanities majors. You imply that people who study humanities, and related topics, have less intellect. Personally, I believe many people can do STEM-related jobs, however if they are unable to, they can study other fields. People with severe learning disabilities, that is typically identified/diagnosed in early childhood, should get public assistance.

 

[FGG]

There is a higher demand for certain jobs over other jobs. I understand there is always a high demand for STEM, related, and medical-related jobs. There are some "menial" jobs that pay well, like plumber and repairman. However, if it is a low-paid dead-end job, it is not a career. Wages for menial jobs would increase if they is not such a huge supply of workers. The market corrects itself. Also, by increasing the wages, the employer passes the cost to the customer, or cuts costs (i.e., jobs) to meet pay for increased expenses. I do believe wages need to keep up with inflation, however I am not sure if every job should pay a living wage as some jobs are not intended as careers. We have to balance out how many jobs are cut as a result of increased wages.

Many STEM related jobs do not require high intelligence but do require hard work and probably more hours of study than most humanities majors. You imply that people who study humanities, and related topics, have less intellect. Personally, I believe many people can do STEM-related jobs, however if they are unable to, they can study other fields. People with severe learning disabilities, that is typically identified/diagnosed in early childhood, should get public assistance.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I am talking about people with learning disabilities who can't learn this stuff. They exist.

This wasn't some sort of deeper commentary on humanities vs STEM. This is about people who just can't do it.

I have a friend who is published in a philosophy journal but can't pass even the basic math class (even getting a GED took years). He has a severe math related learning disability but is highly intelligent.

He is in his early 60s now and lives in complete poverty (he has so much dental pain he can't address to). What should he do? He has no living family left. I can no longer work so I can't help him. What should he do until he can get social security? He has only ever been able to get low paying jobs in his life.

 

[GlennS]

How is including a famous gay man (who is using his real life mannerisms) in an ad demonizing masculinity?

How is having him cross-dress and sashay relevant to selling a food service?

Given that this ad plays like 1,000 times a day on CNN, and is even being placed during NFL football, it's social engineering:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/opinion/GQ-men-masculinity.html

And really, the ad industry are the closest to propagandists (think Don Draper and Mad Men). They understand human psychology and how to manipulate. The first place to see where culture is being steered is to look at ads.

And the left are keen deconstructors of media, often seeing phantoms, so it doesn't make sense for them to gaslight those who are picking up on their own messaging.

 

[Lane]

why do liberals believe that the common man is "dumb"?

@Lilah -- Though I don't consider myself a liberal (more like a libertarian), I do believe that anybody who believes in ludicrous, unfounded conspiracy theories would more than qualify for being labeled dumb, or stupid, or gullible, or easy manipulated, etc. And it always seems to be right leaning Republicans who believe this kind of rubbish.

This can go back to the conspiracy theories surrounding Vince Foster who worked in the Clinton white house. Numerous independent investigations concluded he committed suicide, but the conspiracy theorists kept insisting the Clintons had him killed. Those theories still abound today. A more recent version of that would be the conspiracy theories surrounding Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was killed, and whose parents have sued various news organizations to stop the slander. -- Fox News Settles With Seth Rich's Parents For False ... - NPR

Then there's the whole notion of the Sandy Hook killings being a hoax, and Obama being a Muslim and born in Africa, and COVID-19 being a hoax, and the Democratic party being a den of pedophiles, etc. And then there's one of Trump's favorites, that Joe Scarborough killed a woman in his office--even though he wasn't near there at the time, and an autopsy concluded she died of natural causes. The politics of personal destruction have been alive and well during the Trump presidency, and he set the tone the whole way.

There's other fallacies that could be mentioned, but when I see how people glom on to these kinds of mostly easily disprovable ideas (including that climate change is a hoax), I have to admit, I can hardly keep from considering them stupid. I know it's probably not politically correct to say something like that on this thread, where some seem to believe blame for dysfunctional political discourse should be shared equally, but I just don't agree.

As for those tens of millions of people who believe the election was rife with fraud, or believe what Trump and his cult-like followers have to say about literally anything? Well, I think you can pretty well guess what I think about their level of intelligence, or ability to discern whether or not somebody is pulling the wool over their eyes.

 

[Zugzug]

Many STEM related jobs do not require high intelligence but do require hard work and probably more hours of study than most humanities majors. You imply that people who study humanities, and related topics, have less intellect. Personally, I believe many people can do STEM-related jobs, however if they are unable to, they can study other fields. People with severe learning disabilities, that is typically identified/diagnosed in early childhood, should get public assistance.

I used to teach STEM, particularly low, college level. Trust me, not everyone can do STEM. And I don't say that from any sort of elite ground, as I am dumber than a monkey at many things. Actually, I'm not even that bright at a lot of STEM subfields.

Also, I find it peculiar that you are making a strong argument for STEM and education, while saying California doesn't represent America and that liberals look down on the common man. Those same liberals think people with "menial jobs" should be getting paid more.

Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out, as I appreciate the discussion. I just don't understand why you hate California so much.

 

[FGG]

How is having him cross-dress and sashay relevant to selling a food service?

Given that this ad plays like 1,000 times a day on CNN, and is even being placed during NFL football, it's social engineering:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/opinion/GQ-men-masculinity.html

And really, the ad industry are the closest to propagandists (think Don Draper and Mad Men). They understand human psychology and how to manipulate. The first place to see where culture is being steered is to look at ads.

And the left are keen deconstructors of media, often seeing phantoms, so it doesn't make sense for them to gaslight those who are picking up on their own messaging.

That's what Jonathon does. He cross dresses and sashays. They didn't have him do anything. He's acting like himself.

Edit: because i mean to add the question along these lines, does the existence and popularity of RuPaul threaten masculinity?

 

[Lilah]

Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out, as I appreciate the discussion. I just don't understand why you hate California so much.

I don't hate California; I think it is one of the most beautiful states and San Diego is one of the nicest places I've visited. What I don't understand is why people are leaving California in droves due to high taxes, high rent, etc. for cheaper tax-friendly states, when at the same time they want increases in minimum wages and socialist policies (which all require higher taxes). They essentially vote for higher taxes and then leave the state, and so they don't practice what they preach (and silently admitting socialism doesn't work). Seems both illogical and hypocritical to me.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...owth-rate-at-record-low-as-more-people-leave/

He is in his early 60s now and lives in complete poverty (he has so much dental pain he can't address to). What should he do? He has no living family left. I can no longer work so I can't help him. What should he do until he can get social security? He has only ever been able to get low paying jobs in his life.

Unfortunately, he does not have much options. I assume he qualifies for benefits. I know a handful of poor people at church who qualify for subsidized housing and other benefits, however they cannot afford to go brunch after church and we sometimes help with that. However, they appear to have their basic needs met and one has said she doesn't have any debt. On dental work, the best thing he can do is call multiple places and see if a dentist can fix his teeth. Pulling out the bad teeth will at least fix the pain. I had a bad flareup some time ago and was uninsured, fortunately I found a rheumatologist who didn't charge office visit fees and only charged the minimum amount for blood tests to cover her costs.

 

[FGG]

I don't hate California; I think it is one of the most beautiful states and San Diego is one of the nicest places I've visited. What I don't understand is why people are leaving California in droves due to high taxes, high rent, etc. for cheaper tax-friendly states, when at the same time they want increases in minimum wages and socialist policies (which all require higher taxes). They essentially vote for higher taxes and then leave the state, and so they don't practice what they preach (and silently admitting socialism doesn't work). Seems both illogical and hypocritical to me.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...owth-rate-at-record-low-as-more-people-leave/

Unfortunately, he does not have much options. I assume he qualifies for benefits. I know a handful of poor people at church who qualify for subsidized housing and other benefits, however they cannot afford to go brunch after church and we sometimes help with that. However, they appear to have their basic needs met and one has said she doesn't have any debt. On dental work, the best thing he can do is call multiple places and see if a dentist can fix his teeth. Pulling out the bad teeth will at least fix the pain. I had a bad flareup some time ago and was uninsured, fortunately I found a rheumatologist who didn't charge office visit fees and only charged the minimum amount for blood tests to cover her costs.

He works full time at a coffee shop but is still on food stamps and can't afford housing, let alone getting even salvage dental care. He was literally sleeping in his car for a month until he found a second job living with a severely disabled man (as just someone paid to be there at night when the nurse is gone in case of an emergency). He gets almost no sleep in this job because the man is so lonely (and my friend is compassionate and great company) but the job pays in free housing so he can get a roof and a daily shower, but that's all the bootstrapping he can muster.

His worries are more urgent than "after church brunch" (not that you were exactly saying that but it came off slightly insensitive to me even if that wasn't your intention) and I sometimes wonder if the difference between the left and the right is that people on the right don't know people like him.

 

[TeeOh]

I don't hate California; I think it is one of the most beautiful states and San Diego is one of the nicest places I've visited. What I don't understand is why people are leaving California in droves due to high taxes, high rent, etc. for cheaper tax-friendly states, when at the same time they want increases in minimum wages and socialist policies (which all require higher taxes). They essentially vote for higher taxes and then leave the state, and so they don't practice what they preach (and silently admitting socialism doesn't work). Seems both illogical and hypocritical to me.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...owth-rate-at-record-low-as-more-people-leave/

Unfortunately, he does not have much options. I assume he qualifies for benefits. I know a handful of poor people at church who qualify for subsidized housing and other benefits, however they cannot afford to go brunch after church and we sometimes help with that. However, they appear to have their basic needs met and one has said she doesn't have any debt. On dental work, the best thing he can do is call multiple places and see if a dentist can fix his teeth. Pulling out the bad teeth will at least fix the pain. I had a bad flareup some time ago and was uninsured, fortunately I found a rheumatologist who didn't charge office visit fees and only charged the minimum amount for blood tests to cover her costs.

California socialist? Is their tech industry nationalised? If I recall correctly, one of their biggest money makers is still very much privatised over there. You can still be a capitalist market economy with a slight increase in minimum wage or a basic welfare program for the poor and disabled. Countries with the far right in power even have these "socialist" policies.

Norway has more public ownership (almost half of the oil industry is nationalised). How much public ownership does California have on its tech industry in comparison? Oh and Norway is also the most developed country in the world in terms of human development index. If California is socialist than Norway is a communist dictatorship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDI

 

[FGG]

Would this be stimulating enough for you, @just1morething ?

https://politics.theonion.com/trump-seeks-to-stimulate-economy-by-sending-rare-autogr-1842415662

I almost tagged Justin from Hough Ear Institute by accident in the mobile drop down menu btw. That would have been pretty amusing.

 

[TeeOh]

I used to teach STEM, particularly low, college level. Trust me, not everyone can do STEM. And I don't say that from any sort of elite ground, as I am dumber than a monkey at many things. Actually, I'm not even that bright at a lot of STEM subfields.

Also, I find it peculiar that you are making a strong argument for STEM and education, while saying California doesn't represent America and that liberals look down on the common man. Those same liberals think people with "menial jobs" should be getting paid more.

Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out, as I appreciate the discussion. I just don't understand why you hate California so much.

You are not wrong either about not everyone being able to do STEM. To back you up, there's a reason why they need immigrants to fill up the demand. Just take a look at this:

Then you have folks who are against immigration so their solution is let's make it easier for people to get into a STEM career.

So one of the proposals to make it work is to make university free for everyone. Nope, sorry that's socialism.

Ok then let's have a livable minimum wage so students can feed themselves while studying. Nope, also socialism.

I give up.

 

[Lilah]

I sometimes wonder if the difference between the left and the right is that people on the right don't know people like him.

I don't know anyone like your friend. I do know multiple people who live on benefits but they appear to have enough until the next check arrives. To me, they seem comfortable given their circumstances.

 

[FGG]

I don't know anyone like your friend. I do know multiple people who live on benefits but they appear to have enough until the next check arrives. To me, they seem comfortable given their circumstances.

I think this probably at least partially explains our different positions on this.

 

[just1morething]

Would this be stimulating enough for you, @just1morething ?

I would sooner have the talking Trump doll. I already have a nice pic of him from my small donation pre-election. I posted it on this thread. I wonder if Trump was serious about sending out that many pics of himself? I kind of doubt it. Noise is killing me today.

 

[Born To Slay]

I think this probably at least partially explains our different positions on this.

In high school, I had a friend in similar conditions. Every time I'd go over to her house to hang out, I always brought way too much food for me to eat because her house never had food. She'd regularly complain about being hungry and they lived in a shitty rental. Her parents couldn't get decent medical care despite multiple chronic health issues. This is how the working poor live in America. This isn't only case either, I could go on. And I don't even live in a poor area.

 

[Lucifer]

https://www.thecollegefix.com/cornell-vaccine-mandate-only-applies-to-white-students/

This is really fucked up. If they are forcing white people to get the mandatory vaccine then they should be making it mandatory to people of colour too.

 

[FGG]

https://www.thecollegefix.com/cornell-vaccine-mandate-only-applies-to-white-students/

This is really fucked up. If they are forcing white people to get the mandatory vaccine then they should be making it mandatory to people of colour too.

Looks like Cornell's actual statement was edited to misrepresent them to make a right wing political point:

Cornell Didn't Racially Segregate Flu Vaccine Mandate

 

[Zugzug]

https://www.thecollegefix.com/cornell-vaccine-mandate-only-applies-to-white-students/

This is really fucked up. If they are forcing white people to get the mandatory vaccine then they should be making it mandatory to people of colour too.

It actually gives a weird message about vaccination. It's telling people of color that they are supposed to be scared of vaccines. Very strange -- I think it should simply be strongly suggested for everyone. The people with weird medical problems can sort it out with their doctors.

I mean, the core idea of the policy, which is that brown and black bodies have historically been mistreated is true. But it seems like an odd place to apply this.

 

[FGG]

It actually gives a weird message about vaccination. It's telling people of color that they are supposed to be scared of vaccines. Very strange -- I think it should simply be strongly suggested for everyone. The people with weird medical problems can sort it out with their doctors.

I mean, the core idea of the policy, which is that brown and black bodies have historically been mistreated is true. But it seems like an odd place to apply this.

They did say that, though (not to be scared despite history). The original message was edited for propaganda reasons:

Cornell Didn't Racially Segregate Flu Vaccine Mandate

 

[just1morething]

As for those tens of millions of people who believe the election was rife with fraud, or believe what Trump and his cult-like followers have to say about literally anything? Well, I think you can pretty well guess what I think about their level of intelligence, or ability to discern whether or not somebody is pulling the wool over their eyes.

 

[Lucifer]

They did say that, though (not to be scared despite history). The original message was edited for propaganda reasons:

Cornell Didn't Racially Segregate Flu Vaccine Mandate

Still a poor reasoning though. They probably stated that reason to save them from the backlash. Forcing to make the vaccine mandatory to one race and not the other due to things that happened in the past to them is not right. You either make the vaccine mandatory or voluntary for everyone without picking and choosing which race to make it mandatory with.

 

[Zugzug]

They did say that, though (not to be scared despite history). The original message was edited for propaganda reasons:

Cornell Didn't Racially Segregate Flu Vaccine Mandate

You're right. The original message is pretty different, thankfully.

 

[FGG]

Still a poor reasoning though. They probably stated that reason to save them from the backlash. Forcing to make the vaccine mandatory to one race and not the other due to things that happened in the past to them is not right. You either make the vaccine mandatory or voluntary for everyone without picking and choosing which race to make it mandatory with.

You didn't read my link, did you?

The unedited Cornell statement makes it clear there is no race based mandate.

It was deceptively edited to make it *look* like it said that but it didn't.

 

[FGG]

You're right. The original message is pretty different, thankfully.

It's so frustrating because right wing social media just forwards this kind of propaganda without fact checking.

The group that screams "fake news", just constantly churns it out.

And it's not like they don't know what they are doing. The unedited Cornell statement is only a few lines longer so it was a very deliberate decision to be deceptive.

 

[Lucifer]

You didn't read my link, did you?

The unedited Cornell statement makes it clear there is no race based mandate.

It was deceptively edited to make it *look* like it said that but it didn't.

I don't think they will force people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. If they make it mandatory there would be so much backlash. What happens if you had vaccines in the past that have affected you. Are they still going to force those people to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

By the way I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I have taken a few vaccines in the past. Since this COVID-19 vaccine is brand new and it's not just one type of COVID-19 vaccine we need to look out for others too. I may take it in a few years time and want to make sure there are no major side effects.

 

[Lucifer]

It's so frustrating because right wing social media just forwards this kind of propaganda without fact checking.

The group that screams "fake news", just constantly churns it out.

And it's not like they don't know what they are doing. The unedited Cornell statement is only a few lines longer so it was a very deliberate decision to be deceptive.

It was bad for that article to mislead people thinking that they were making it mandatory for one race and not the other.

I think the way it was worded could have been better. If they didn't mention about people of colour being used as a science experiment then right wing media would not have manipulated the article much.

I could see why right wing media would edit that part out cause they would know that some black people don't want to get the COVID-19 vaccine due to them being used as a science experiment in the past and they would be able to get a free pass but whereas white people have no excuse to complain cause apparently people are saying their privilege.