I would "like" this if it weren't for the McCain part.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Ugh, great. One of the only ways I see the Dow crashing 56% from it's high is if Bernie is elected. And if Bernie is elected, I'm sure "Dumb bet debt" will be #2 behind Student Loan Debt in the line of getting "forgiven" and having those that were responsible enough to not make dumb bets pay for those that did make dumb bets.
So @dadika13 just give me your PayPal now, so I can send my "fair share" of what Strum will owe you now, and just get this over with.
Dammit Bernie back in the news again
56% is not impossible, but certainly not likely. But, waiting 5 years to see how bad it gets? Okay!
It dropped 1000 points in one day. Allegedly, due to this coronavirus... I dunno.
I shouldn't have watched "Inside Job" narrated by that commie/pinko Matt Damon.
Kind of obnoxious that I had to take all of those calculus classes then. I should’ve just told my professors that economics and math just don’t really go together.
Well... I just see lots of "economists" who offer what amount to arguments for or against other economic arguments based on some interpretation of numbers and conditions. I should have said that economists APPLY MATH differently! Better?
I’m confused by what you mean tbh. Pretty much all economics is based on calculus of some variety. Economists “prove” their arguments the same way that physicists do. They have to back it up with math. Sometimes that math is based on bad data and sometimes it’s misapplied, just like any other science. But economics is firmly rooted in math, and most of the applications are pretty straight forward in my experience.
Sometimes that math is based on bad data and sometimes it’s misapplied, just like any other science. Seems like "bad" data is subjective and "misapplied" is subjective... which is why it's never exact.
I know that math is absolutely involved with determining economics. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
Gotcha. Subjective and objective both really. We have subjective interpretations of what is good vs bad data, but there is also objectively good/bad data in the sense that the data either accurately represents objective reality or it doesn’t. As far as misapplication goes, economists are no more immune to bias than anyone else. They want their hypotheses to be correct. Some will fudge the models or data to make it work.
When Bernie’s MFA plan was analyzed by the major economic think tanks, their results almost perfectly tracked with their political associations. The conservative think tanks said it would cost more per capita, the largely neutral ones said it would cost about the same and more progressive think tanks said it would save money. They’re using different data and models.
Exactly! That's why I was saying that Economics seems almost philosophical... in a way. It's biased. They use their preferred variables, factors and interpretations (models) to create what are economic ideas. It's not as simple as 2+2=4 (Calculus usually isn't, I kn ow). If it were, I don't think there would be so much conflict about what works and what doesn't, or what will work and what won't.
Philosophy plays a part for sure. There are certain schools of though that have huge influneces on anyone trying to study or do research in economics. The hard truth is that we disagree so much because nobody can account for every possible variable. Market behavior ultimately comes down to human decision making which is impossibly complex. So we simplify and then argue about who’s model is the best.
Thank you. Something else to argue about, but NEVER prove one way or the other! Just what we need!
You’d probably like game theory. Everything is simpler when there’s one set of rules and we can predict a clear outcome based on every possible combination of decisions
I'm not really bothered by the various economic philosophies. I like variety!
Dow closed down over 3.5% and 1,031 points! I did not see that coming. Gone are the gains of the last year in a day.
I'm a little late to the argument here, but do we really have posters trying to argue that the US is a socialist country or just that certain government programs are similar to socialism?
Seeing as half of the people here think that any form of public spending is socialism, and the other half don’t seem to know that democratic socialism is a completely different political philosophy, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for a productive conversation about socialism on this board.
But at least Marx got referenced so maybe we’re at least getting warmer?...
Do you just say shit to say it and don’t care if you’re not accurate?
The Dow was at 26,091 a year ago. It closed at 27,960 today. It’s still up nearly 2,000 points since this point last year.
Anyone who doesn't understand the market and thinks this hurts Trump.
Market falling on Chinese export problems resulting from Coronavirus works in Trumps favor as the way to fix this is more domestic production.
Year to date. I'm not blaming Trump. I'm sure it will bounce right back... or not. This virus thing isn't going anywhere soon.
ETA: I wasn't referring to "everyone" losing it all, either. But, 3.5-4% loss in a day is shaking-up a few people's portfolios.
Last edited:
I tried to show examples of how the 10 Planks of Communism are in place, even codified in our laws and practices.
I think that Cold War propaganda machine worked like a charm.
Socialism constitutes massive cogs in the gears of the USA. I think it's kinda funny how people are petrified of something that they've been actively been participating in their entire lives.
...then count me in as ready to abolish the US dept. of education, bureau of land management, department of labor, federal reserve, council on foreign relations, and the United Nations.
...with Social Security, Medicare and welfare coming soon.
Great, I'll count you in for that. I've been railing against the Fed for 13 years now. It ain't going anywhere. It took me 13 years to realize it. Those others aren't going anywhere, either. In fact, there will just be more and more departments of so-and-so.
They are here to stay as well. Unless the USA loses its status as the world's reserve currency... then, maybe, but very doubtful.
Those are embedded now. Sorry.
There's a difference between being a socialist country and having some programs that are similar to socialism. That's like saying I'm just like Michael Jordan because I play basketball.
We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.
-Bernie Sanders
Just kidding, that's FDR. Bernie isn't some radical that we've never seen before. He's FDR 2.0
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.
-Bernie Sanders
Just kidding, that's FDR. Bernie isn't some radical that we've never seen before. He's FDR 2.0
It's "like saying that?" In a very vague way. It would be more like saying, I play basketball for the Bulls, and even played for UNC.
Did you see those "some programs?" I showed, literally, the 10 Planks of Communism put into practice, by law, in America. Did you read them individually? Those in that particular post aren't even all of the programs. The programs require a foundation in a social structure to even hope to function. A lot of it came about during the Great Depression and WWII eras. But, regardless, it's getting more and more centralized. Now, there has been a recent push-back by the old time States Rights minds. But, none of them are mailing their SS checks back, or stepping-out of all the programs that they've been actively, willingly participating in their entire lives.
Indeed, he is. But, it's not time for it here, yet. Things have to get a lot worse, I think, before someone like him can get elected.
But some of those interpretations under the individual pillars just weren't even accurate.
Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Americans do these with actions such as the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management (Zoning laws are the first step to government property ownership)
Zoning laws and taxes = the abolition of private property? No. Marx wasn't talking about owning a house when he referred to private property. He was talking about the ownership of Capital, and its relationship to the exploitative relationship between those who own Capital, (capitalists, bourgeois) and wage laborers (proletariat). This is the cornerstone of his critique of Capitalism. Basically he viewed any ownership of capital as a form of rent seeking behavior. Property taxes are not the same as the abolition of private property.
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Americans know this as misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".
We don't have a heavily progressive tax system. We have almost exactly the opposite. We have a tax system written by the wealthy for the wealthy. There are literally sections of the US tax code that were written by corporate attorneys. That's supposed to be Communism? I think Marx would disagree.
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Americans call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.
Estate taxes and the various other forms of taxation that affect a very small minority of cases of inheritance, certainly don't abolish the rights of inheritance. Marx believed in a reset button. Everyone starts from the same point, because there is no generational accumulation of wealth. That is not how American society works.
Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Americans call it the Federal Reserve which is a privately-owned credit/debt system allowed by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) another privately-owned corporation. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking.
Marx argued against private creditors. He believed that private loans were the same type of rent seeking behavior as owning private property. Instead of land, the Capital that you would own would be the funds you can lend to whoever wants the credit. But then you argued that all (or most) credit issued in the US is controlled by a private corporation. So how is that communism?
Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
Americans call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.
Okay now we're getting somewhere. Transportation is the best example so far. It's also one of the best arguments for any kind of public program. Roads are the perfect example of a public good that should be subsidized. You could also easily argue that almost any form of modern communication can easily, and legally be monitored by the state via the Patriot Act, therefore the State has a more than firm enough grip on the means of communication.
Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Americans call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture… Thus read "controlled or subsidized" rather than "owned"… This is easily seen in these as well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.
This is a hard libertarian interpretation of how federal agencies work. The department of agriculture subsidizing farms is completely different than what Marx means by "instruments of production owned by the state." He's literally talking about the State owning farms instead of citizens owning them, because a private citizen owning it is merely rent seeking and profiting from the undeserved ownership of that land.
---
Private ownership of Capital is a cornerstone of the American economy, and that won't change if Bernie is elected.
Bernie also cannot singlehandedly implement any of the policy proposals in his platform. Presumably we would just see him signing much more moderate versions of his proposals, which can actually be passed through Congress.
You're not going to win me over with a FDR comparison. I think he's one of the worst presidents of the 20th century.
cc: @dadika13
Yes, it is DEFINITELY an "interpretation", no doubt about that!
I wasn't offering those "interpretations" to suggest that Sanders is a Castro Commie. I was simply showing that there are an abundance of programs and functions in our government and everyday lives, that we take for granted, that ARE "Socialism". It's not Communism, no! What I was trying to show is that Americans think they fear "Communism"... but, I think it's more residual fear propagated by generations of post-WWII/Cold War fear of the USSR. I don't think the USSR was a pure example of Communism. They, and Red China, seemed to be more like dictatorships, to me.
Bernie doesn't play golf... there's about 300 million that can go to something!
It will be interesting to see who Bernie picks as VP if he gets the nomination. With his age and recent health issues, that's going to be an important pick because he will be attacked relentlessly on that.
Similar threads
