Making sense of the current political climate

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
kj6723
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 345
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 774
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Dutasteride .5mg daily, minoxidil 5% 1-2x daily, nizoral 1% whenever

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by kj6723 » 6 months ago

So Ocasio-Cortez wants to provide a stipend to those “unwilling” to work...? :wtf:

User avatar
koolaidshade
Hair Loss Rookie
Hair Loss Rookie
Posts: 247
Joined: 11 months ago
Reputation: 346
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: semen retention, real social dynamics, 12 rules for life

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by koolaidshade » 6 months ago

pjhair wrote:
6 months ago
It was going to be 45% of my salary at the time of retirement paid out for the rest of life. That in addition to 401 k and social security would have been a nice retirement package. They actually had a pension calculator according to which I was going to get around 65 k a year in pension alone. 65k was above 45% of my then salary but it perhaps took into account the 3% yearly income increment that we received in our company.

I had to quit the job to pursue grad school though. :worried:
Damn, what state do you live in? How old are you, and what did you do for undergrad/grad school? I've never made more than six figures, though im getting close to it, but my job is kinda chill and i can go on vacation whenever i feel like it

CaptainForehead
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 306
Joined: 10 months ago
Reputation: 563
Norwood: NW7
Regimen: Avoid mirrors and other reflective surfaces

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by CaptainForehead » 6 months ago

pjhair wrote:
6 months ago
It was going to be 45% of my salary at the time of retirement paid out for the rest of life. That in addition to 401 k and social security would have been a nice retirement package. They actually had a pension calculator according to which I was going to get around 65 k a year in pension alone. 65k was above 45% of my then salary but it perhaps took into account the 3% yearly income increment that we received in our company.

I had to quit the job to pursue grad school though. :worried:
That is a sweet pension plan! :thumbup:
How do they compute the retirement age? Or more precisely, how long do you have to be working in order to be eligible for the pension?
This was a public sector company?

User avatar
rclark
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1143
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: Finasteride 1 mg daily, Progesterone 2% (22mg daily), Minoxidil 15% hair growth only).
Using 1.5 mm needle on all bald/balding areas weekly.

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by rclark » 6 months ago

kj6723 wrote:
6 months ago
So Ocasio-Cortez wants to provide a stipend to those “unwilling” to work...? :wtf:
Her tax rate is insane. I like her because she is a lesbian.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 606
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1221
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by JLBB » 6 months ago

rclark wrote:
6 months ago
Her tax rate is insane. I like her because she is a lesbian.
Her 70% tax rate on those with incomes over 10 million is fine, I fully support it. Gives more room to lower taxes on the middle class and 99% of the population, not that she plans to do that though however. All it will mean is that billionaires become more dependent on stock options and stocks, which incentive maximising profit of their business rather than pursuing ideological political causes to virtue signal as they do now. Telling that you a Democrat Hillary voter don't support this tax rate but somehow are against Trump. Because your political views lack any substance whatsoever, you literally just parrot CNN and NBC talking points. Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.

Also she isn't lesbian, so you're wrong on both fronts.

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 992
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2632
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Rudiger » 6 months ago

JeanLucBB wrote:
6 months ago
Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.
Was there a poll on this?

Not that I'd find it hard to believe that Republicans would support it any more than Dems, just I find it hard to believe that anyone would support it at all.

Hahaha, this shows how popular she is even among her fellow Dems:

https://theintercept.com/2019/02/09/oca ... ting-2020/
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1347
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1854

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by blackg » 6 months ago

We should all pay more taxes to support the less fortunate.
As long as they are citizens of the country in question and not ungrateful gate crashers hoping to milk the system.

Build that wall!
She packed my bags last night

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 992
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2632
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Rudiger » 6 months ago

JeanLucBB wrote:
6 months ago
Her 70% tax rate on those with incomes over 10 million is fine, I fully support it. Gives more room to lower taxes on the middle class and 99% of the population, not that she plans to do that though however. All it will mean is that billionaires become more dependent on stock options and stocks, which incentive maximising profit of their business rather than pursuing ideological political causes to virtue signal as they do now. Telling that you a Democrat Hillary voter don't support this tax rate but somehow are against Trump. Because your political views lack any substance whatsoever, you literally just parrot CNN and NBC talking points. Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.

Also she isn't lesbian, so you're wrong on both fronts.
This perfectly expresses how this will play out.

From 7:13


I didn't really think about how the actual trickling down would affect every tax bracket.

But really, you think everyone from $10m+ isn't just going to move everything elsewhere? That's the obvious major concern, even when people thought Trump would 180 on his promises that was what the wealthy were threatening to do (and it turned out, for no good reason).

Added in 1 hour 25 minutes 5 seconds:
Ughhh. Sometimes things are so cringy and hypocritical about the left that it triggers me beyond laughter (though it's usually laughter) and I think I must repress it, because I half watched the SOTU during the week, and I remember this moment, and being beyond disgusted (I temporarily shut my laptop lid, took a deep breath, and opened it again) I had still sort of forgotten about it until seeing this video just now.

From 1:17


To put this in to context, all of the white dresses sat there stone faced when Trump talked about more disabled people working, the lowest minority unemployment rate ever, Kamala Harris shook her head in disgust when the mention of catching 1,500 traffickers of forced female prostitutes came up. Orange man bad, illegals have a right to work and traffic in our country.

But when this statistic of women actually filling up the majority of new jobs last year comes up?

As the video displays in text about consulting their groupthink (and I noticed this at the time) AOC gets in huddle mode and turns around "gals, he's talking about us? Not the disabled minorities or the slave whores, us wahmen, so what do we do? He's literally Hitler, but we're being celebrated by Hitler, it's such a dilemma!"

Of course their narcissism overrides their hatred of someone they literally view as a Nazi and they give in, and celebrate. Think about this for a second, if you were in front of an evil genocidal maniac who threatens the fabric of civilisation as we know it (in your mind) and he threw you a bone, and you had the option of continuing your courageous stance of showing no emotion or acknowledgement of what he deems are his successes, would you be so grateful? Would you not think "if such an awful person is celebrating me, then something is wrong".

You can see Omar Ilhan (I'll give you a guess which one that is, well ok, 2 guesses tops) reacting with joy and glee, the woman who insisted her election was a representation of the rejection of everything Donald Trump's stands for. She's also called for "mercy" on Americans charged with fleeing to Syria to fight for ISIS, and just recently called for defunding Homeland Security, gee I wonder why? Also kind of odd that for the party where skin colour and differences are invisible, the only 2 Muslims chicks out of 230 Dems just happen to sit right beside each other. No tribalism going on whatsoever there.

Trump then mentions another cheap pop (though I don't blame him) about more women in the workforce than ever before, and again some reluctance, AOC is laughing and gestures a bit like "oh jeeze, do we have to break character again?!" but they give in of course. Even if Hitler is pulling their strings, validation is validation.

I'd also love to see the twisted media narrative had Trump said "don't sit" to a group of congresswomen in any other context than being in the middle of celebrating them.

But finally, and this was beautifully orchestrated, even if unintentional, he's got them to stand up reluctantly, twice, by vaguely mentioning women, as that's their gender and they are fickle and respond to it. But they weren't totally convinced, some started to stand up, some probably weren't going to but felt they had to show unity.

So how reluctant would they be, if Trump was to single out and celebrate specifically the amount of women in Congress? Not the single moms scrubbing floors, not those offered job opportunities thought previously unthinkable, and definitely not the disabled or the hood rats, but the women sitting in expensive white dresses with their 6 figure salary.

Reluctant? The camera doesn't even have time to show their reaction, their asses are all immediately off their seats without a second thought. It's the most disgusting back patting you'll ever come across.

The reason it's so, so bad- they sat stone faced shaking their head at every point Trump brought up, so at least if they were being disgusted at something like 1,500 traffickers being caught, they could justify it with "I didn't see that on CNN, I'm sure politifact and Snopes are disproving it right now".

At least that would be an argument, a ridiculous one, but still. However, the minute he starts celebrating women, it doesn't matter if it's bullshit statistics, it doesn't matter if Hitler is celebrating them, this isn't about the disabled or minorities or trafficked women, it's about us. And we need to celebrate that.

Something out there crosses lines and is much bigger than racism and poverty and discrimination, and that thing is love, for yourselves, you narcissistic fickle fucking morons.

Bonus point: Cortez with the worst air five in history at 3:21. And I know, she may have been somehow throwing an "air five" in the direction of more women across from her, but wouldn't that be even more retarded?
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

User avatar
rclark
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1143
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: Finasteride 1 mg daily, Progesterone 2% (22mg daily), Minoxidil 15% hair growth only).
Using 1.5 mm needle on all bald/balding areas weekly.

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by rclark » 6 months ago

JeanLucBB wrote:
6 months ago
Her 70% tax rate on those with incomes over 10 million is fine, I fully support it. Gives more room to lower taxes on the middle class and 99% of the population, not that she plans to do that though however. All it will mean is that billionaires become more dependent on stock options and stocks, which incentive maximising profit of their business rather than pursuing ideological political causes to virtue signal as they do now. Telling that you a Democrat Hillary voter don't support this tax rate but somehow are against Trump. Because your political views lack any substance whatsoever, you literally just parrot CNN and NBC talking points. Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.

Also she isn't lesbian, so you're wrong on both fronts.
There are no Republicans in current political positions that support taxing super wealthy.

I actually do support wealthy people paying more taxes.

In fact Republican Paul Ryan wanted to privatize Social Security, which is a small amount of funding that is
given to people who retire after sixty two to seventy.
Last edited by rclark 6 months ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1461
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3630
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

JeanLucBB wrote:
6 months ago
Her 70% tax rate on those with incomes over 10 million is fine, I fully support it. Gives more room to lower taxes on the middle class and 99% of the population, not that she plans to do that though however. All it will mean is that billionaires become more dependent on stock options and stocks, which incentive maximising profit of their business rather than pursuing ideological political causes to virtue signal as they do now. Telling that you a Democrat Hillary voter don't support this tax rate but somehow are against Trump. Because your political views lack any substance whatsoever, you literally just parrot CNN and NBC talking points. Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.

Also she isn't lesbian, so you're wrong on both fronts.
I took the lesbian comment as simply being an example of rclark attempting humor.

Added in 7 minutes 38 seconds:
blackg wrote:
6 months ago
We should all pay more taxes to support the less fortunate.
As long as they are citizens of the country in question and not ungrateful gate crashers hoping to milk the system.

Build that wall!
Taxes need not just be paid to "support the less fortunate", but to support civilization. Great civilizations have working infrastructure (for example), and the infrastructure in the USA is in steep decline. The roads have more and more potholes, and are more and more prone to traffic jams. The airports are embarrassing, and it's routine for people to wait an hour or more to cross customs.

When America was at its peak power, during the post-war era, taxes were at 70% or higher. The country was the envy of the world in infrastructure, it was also placing men on the moon and expanding science and art in every directions. Nowadays? Science, art, technology, and infrastructure progress more slowly, so that rich people can spend more money on useless consumer goods. At this rate, China will have better science than the USA within ten years. It already has better infrastructure.

I have visited the very wealthy consumer neighbourhood near Trump's home in Florida, in west palm beach. Do you know where the tax cuts go? It goes into things like $2,000 sweaters and $4,000 shoes. It's wasted. Most of those people are severely overweight. It would be better to have that money invested into growing civilization.

Added in 6 minutes 52 seconds:
JeanLucBB wrote:
6 months ago
Her 70% tax rate on those with incomes over 10 million is fine, I fully support it. Gives more room to lower taxes on the middle class and 99% of the population, not that she plans to do that though however. All it will mean is that billionaires become more dependent on stock options and stocks, which incentive maximising profit of their business rather than pursuing ideological political causes to virtue signal as they do now. Telling that you a Democrat Hillary voter don't support this tax rate but somehow are against Trump. Because your political views lack any substance whatsoever, you literally just parrot CNN and NBC talking points. Even half of Republicans support this giant tax on the ultra-rich.

Also she isn't lesbian, so you're wrong on both fronts.
The views of the centrist democrats are fairly consistent, in my opinion.

They don't represent the top 1%, they represent the top 10% who have delusions of joining the top 1%. Upper-middle class white liberals: lawyers, doctors, managers, academics, those sorts of people.

I read a good analysis of centrist democrats a while back: They would be perfectly fine with 1% of the population controlling 99% of the wealth, as long as that 1% was 51% women, 10% Black, 10% Hispanic, 10% gay or lesbian, 4% Asian, 1 to 2% trans-sexual, etc.

Cory Booker, a centrist democrat who is running for President, apparently wants to provide a $50,000 allowance to a large segment of young people, top help level playing the field. On paper it sounds good, it sounds like a great idea to promote equality. In practice, it's not going to do shit in the long-term. A few years of inflation on post-secondary education, real estate, and health insurance will more than make up for it. Further, that $50,000 gift might actually increase the inflation rate, particularly on post-secondary education. The priority should be to lower costs.

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 992
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2632
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Rudiger » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
I have visited the very wealthy consumer neighbourhood near Trump's home in Florida, in west palm beach. Do you know where the tax cuts go? It goes into things like $2,000 sweaters and $4,000 shoes. It's wasted.
Yeah and then the money just disappears?
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1461
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3630
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

Rudiger wrote:
6 months ago
Yeah and then the money just disappears?
No, it gets transferred. Purchases of consumer goods, in this current economic climate, counts as a transfer to China. China then uses a lot of that money not to buy more toys, but to build infrastructure. They are building better highways, better schools, better laboratories, et cetera.

Are you familiar with the broken window fallacy?

The broken window fallacy is a thought experiment from 19th century economics. The idea is that randomly breaking windows might be helpful for the economy, as people will then need to spend money on repairing their windows. But it's not really true (in most cases). Really, that money would be spent regardless, so it's better if it's spent on investments that actually increase utility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_o ... ken_window

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 992
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2632
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Rudiger » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
No, it gets transferred. Purchases of consumer goods, in this current economic climate, counts as a transfer to China. China then uses a lot of that money not to buy more toys, but to build infrastructure. They are building better highways, better schools, better laboratories, et cetera.

Are you familiar with the broken window fallacy?

The broken window fallacy is a thought experiment from 19th century economics. The idea is that randomly breaking windows might be helpful for the economy, as people will then need to spend money on repairing their windows. But it's not really true (in most cases). Really, that money would be spent regardless, so it's better if it's spent on investments that actually increase utility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_o ... ken_window
China can't even build apartment blocks and houses that stand for more than 5 years, never mind this supposed "infrastructure" that was supposed to be in place over a decade ago (and will still be talked about in another decade).

The Chinese government are currently anxiously awaiting the eventual fate and collapse of Venezuela because of some loans they dished out, the fall of Maduro is being described as somewhat catastrophic for the Chinese. A world super power with such a threatening infrastructure is so reliant on some third world country that they threw some pesos at a few years ago?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by how the literal purchase of sweaters etc. ends up as profit towards the Chinese (unless you mean the replacement of such goods requires the manufacturing from Chinese sweatshops, which don't normally produce $2,000 items of clothing) but I'd much prefer that explanation over the broken window fallacy (which is absolute nonsense if you think it through, and relies on a constant repetitive "window breaking" without the chain ever being broken by a progressive purchase) but regardless, if China are taking in funds from your consumer goods, it's being spent on ripping off middle class or poorer Chinese people, not on their infrastructure.
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1461
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3630
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

Rudiger wrote:
6 months ago
China can't even build apartment blocks and houses that stand for more than 5 years, never mind this supposed "infrastructure" that was supposed to be in place over a decade ago (and will still be talked about in another decade).

The Chinese government are currently anxiously awaiting the eventual fate and collapse of Venezuela because of some loans they dished out, the fall of Maduro is being described as somewhat catastrophic for the Chinese. A world super power with such a threatening infrastructure is so reliant on some third world country that they threw some pesos at a few years ago?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by how the literal purchase of sweaters etc. ends up as profit towards the Chinese (unless you mean the replacement of such goods requires the manufacturing from Chinese sweatshops, which don't normally produce $2,000 items of clothing) but I'd much prefer that explanation over the broken window fallacy (which is absolute nonsense if you think it through, and relies on a constant repetitive "window breaking" without the chain ever being broken by a progressive purchase) but regardless, if China are taking in funds from your consumer goods, it's being spent on ripping off middle class or poorer Chinese people, not on their infrastructure.
No, China is gradually building a very impressive base of infrastructure. Not just roads but also airports, trains, universities, laboratories, and hospitals.

It is true that there are examples off buildings falling, but that happens. They're growing pains, all countries have a few infrastructure disasters. Do you know how long Massachusetts took to build the big dig? But in the big picture they are doing quite well. Their rate of growth has been high for several decades. This is a google image link for the Shanghai skyline:
Image
It looks like a few of the buildings are still standing.

The Venezuela argument is hypothetical. We'll see how much damage they suffer from those events.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1730
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3765
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Making sense of the current political climate

Post by Admin » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
China then uses a lot of that money not to buy more toys, but to build infrastructure.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjian ... tion_camps

Like those?

But at least they have a great economy, nice roads, and cool-looking fururistic skyscrapers, freedom is overrated, plus it makes people unequal to the point that some of them think that they need to buy 4000€ sweaters while others can't even afford the latest God of War game and to eat sushi every other day.

And you now what would fix that? Re-education camps to make them understand that this money could be put to better use if they just accepted that we could steal it from them.

Captalism and freedom are immoral bruh, obviously we'll get eaten by China if we don't become as authoritarian as them as fast as possible.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest