Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • unofan
    replied
    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    It's not theft. It's a "Protection Fee".
    It's the admission price for living in a civilization.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecct
    replied
    Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
    And yet STILL, you want everything privatized, and think taxation is theft. Hilarious.
    It's not theft. It's a "Protection Fee".

    Leave a comment:


  • FadeToBlack&Gold
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    Pretty obvious why you picked them, though I would say the inequality is even worse today, given the record number of people on food stamps and at/below the poverty line.
    And yet STILL, you want everything privatized, and think taxation is theft. Hilarious.

    Leave a comment:


  • FlagDUDE08
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    My guess is 1893, 1929, and 2006. I leave it as an exercise for the reader why I picked those three dates.
    Pretty obvious why you picked them, though I would say the inequality is even worse today, given the record number of people on food stamps and at/below the poverty line.

    Leave a comment:


  • 5mn_Major
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    My guess is 1893, 1929, and 2006. I leave it as an exercise for the reader why I picked those three dates.
    Mostly well done by the board. It appears that there is likely a high point around the turn of the century, 1929 and actually today. Graph one says the 'today' high point was in 2007, but I expect its 2016 (not shown on these graphs).

    http://inequality.org/wealth-inequality/

    If you consider that the US as a percent of world wealth probably maxed between WWI (prior Europe) and 1980 (after emerging markets), then that would make 1929 the worst wealth disparity post antiquity in the history.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecct
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    My guess is 1893, 1929, and 2006. I leave it as an exercise for the reader why I picked those three dates.
    I'm having a panic attack that I can't come up with the answer. I feel so depressed.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    My guess is 1893, 1929, and 2006. I leave it as an exercise for the reader why I picked those three dates.
    2006? I would have said closer to 2007 or 2008.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
    I'm actually curious, since 1850, when was wealth equality the absolute worst? Not sure how to define that, but I'm guessing it was the Gilded Age. Wiki estimates the top 1% had 51% of the property though the top 10% had 75% of the wealth (which is no different than today apparently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth..._United_States)
    My guess is 1893, 1929, and 2006. I leave it as an exercise for the reader why I picked those three dates.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    Go back to 1900
    Morgan
    Carnegie
    Rockefeller
    Rothschild
    Rhodes?
    Krupp??

    Not much has changed except the names.
    I would go with the top five:
    Vanderbilt, Ford, Carnegie, Morgan, and Rockefeller. I'm guessing those five had as much as the bottom 50% at one time.

    ETA: http://www.businessinsider.com/riche...s-ever-2011-4#

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...orical_figures

    Interesting.

    I'm actually curious, since 1850, when was wealth equality the absolute worst? Not sure how to define that, but I'm guessing it was the Gilded Age. Wiki estimates the top 1% had 51% of the property though the top 10% had 75% of the wealth (which is no different than today apparently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth..._United_States)

    Leave a comment:


  • joecct
    replied
    Originally posted by 5mn_Major View Post
    Scoobs headline of the day:

    8 people have as much wealth as half the world

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...port/96545438/
    Go back to 1900
    Morgan
    Carnegie
    Rockefeller
    Rothschild
    Rhodes?
    Krupp??

    Not much has changed except the names.

    Leave a comment:


  • 5mn_Major
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Scoobs headline of the day:

    8 people have as much wealth as half the world

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...port/96545438/

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by unofan View Post
    I doubt it. We still don't have universal health care, mandatory paid parental leave, or even mandatory paid sick leave. And you think we'll be shamed into a UBI?
    I agree that corporate control of media has so far ensured that only plute policies are permitted to be discussed in front of the vast majority of citizens. But that's changing and the change is being driven by, of all people, the far right. Extremely stupid wingnut rightwing ideas are now part of the national discourse. Some of these, like the anti-immigration hysteria of a few years ago, run directly counter the interests of the plutes.

    We can learn a lot from the Morlocks when it comes to reaching people. This is a fantastic guide to how to effectively fight for a sincerely leftist agenda, and it is overtly inspired by the Tea Party boobocracy. I hope every Democrat in the country reads it and acts on it.

    "The people united can never be defeated" is bullsh-t. We have been defeated going on 60 years as the rest of the world surpassed us first in rights then in quality of life. You can't just fight hard to win, you have to fight smart, especially when confronted by the soft fascism of the monetization of politics in America. Scoob seems to think that only its replacement by the hard fascism growing on the right can shock Americans into reclaiming our country. I don't believe that is so. People will vote their interests, but until we can criminalize the bribery that makes our government the personal property of the 1%, we need to overwhelm the political class with the dire threat of unemployment if they do not follow our will.
    Last edited by Kepler; 01-12-2017, 03:50 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
    um, I thought the law required emergency rooms to provide treatment to everyone who needs it? That sounds like universal health care, and while we might complain that it is "substandard," I'd bet 75% of the world's population would be delighted to have it. Health care and health insurance are two very different things, and it sounds like you are confusing the two.

    We already have one in disguised form, do we not? I thought anyone who couldn't afford food qualified for SNAP, anyone who couldn't afford health insurance had Medicaid, etc. Isn't the more important question not whether we have it, but how to make it work better than what we have now? I'd very much prefer that, out of a fixed budget, substantially more value be delivered to recipients by improving delivery services and reducing administrative overhead. Analogous to school systems these days having more administrators than teachers; what sense does that make?
    sigh

    Leave a comment:


  • FreshFish
    replied
    Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

    Originally posted by unofun View Post
    We still don't have universal health care
    um, I thought the law required emergency rooms to provide treatment to everyone who needs it? That sounds like universal health care, and while we might complain that it is "substandard," I'd bet 75% of the world's population would be delighted to have it. Health care and health insurance are two very different things, and it sounds like you are confusing the two.

    Originally posted by unofun View Post
    And you think we'll be shamed into a UBI?
    We already have one in disguised form, do we not? I thought anyone who couldn't afford food qualified for SNAP, anyone who couldn't afford health insurance had Medicaid, etc. Isn't the more important question not whether we have it, but how to make it work better than what we have now? I'd very much prefer that, out of a fixed budget, substantially more value be delivered to recipients by improving delivery services and reducing administrative overhead. Analogous to school systems these days having more administrators than teachers; what sense does that make?

    Leave a comment:


  • unofan
    replied
    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    Interesting. While the profile of this grows, and the experiments return results and build a best practices toolkit, it's going to get harder for the knucks to keep this idea out of the US media.
    I doubt it. We still don't have universal health care, mandatory paid parental leave, or even mandatory paid sick leave. And you think we'll be shamed into a UBI?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X