Page 9 of 11 [ 160 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: Feb 06, 2005
Posts: 15689
Location: Eating over the sink.

06 Mar 2012, 9:44 am

I think almost anyone understands that (well, libertarians would disagree for their own reasons) but the arguments really are over what's the most optimal ratio. Clearly you need a safety net for the impovrished, also marhall's said it before and I agree that while the safety net is in place its best not to have such a hard line for the safety net that people just above the net are forced to fall in; hence it should be more of a gradient.

The hardest part of it all though is matching human desires with what's realistic or sustainable, and it seems like this is the biggest headache that many socialist countries get into and how their lifestyles end up centered on borrowing. Quite sadly we've taken major note that the US, supposedly having a stronger capitalism to socialism ratio, has also really gone off the rail almost to the same extent as they have. Clearly we've had *huge* flubs and a lot of them have come in the form of stimulus bills, government doing its usually awful job as venture capitalist, and we also have another problem that's quite sad - we can't even talk about the results of programs because, anywhere that race comes into play you end up with a third-rail topic where you don't dare to fix the problem but rather you just throw as much money as you can down the hole (like for instance inner-city schools; the parents aren't there for the kid, the other kids are essentially forced into something close to a study hall education, they'd be much, much, much better off if there were high quality subsidized boarding schools complete with dress code to get bright kids with potential out of that mess, not to mention charter schools for the parents who want to help their kids but, if you try saying that we have BIG race-mongers who'll come out on behalf of the teachers unions and demagogue such things to bits given the chance). We also have a social security system that's underfunded, solutions to fix that for at least another century are often floated and simultaneously shot down for whatever reason (they exist - why they don't go anywhere is beyond me), and then you have our military spending which - the combination of being the strongest free society and having naval control means we're in a position to help keep the world stable, its much better us at that helm than someone like China, but the challenge is figuring out how to subsidize it or even figuring out how to work something out where the countries who want us there essentially help us, at least partially, subsidize the costs.



noname_ever
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Dec 25, 2011
Posts: 500
Location: Indiana

06 Mar 2012, 10:54 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

That story, I'm pretty sure, is made up. But, regardless, depending on the mindset of the people in the class, they could realize that they'd all benefit from studying and thus gain more of an incentive to play their small part to make sure the GPA remains high - you know, like how athletic teams work (I'll admit there's some selection bias in that motivated people join teams, but I'd say there's a similar selection bias in economics students).

I doubt there is similar selection bias between econ students and sports teams. Unless it's an upper level class, you have no idea of the skill set and interests of those in your class. Your classmates are just as likely to be dimwitted lazy freshman communications majors as anyone else. If you had a underachiever on a sports team, you can remove them from the team. You can't remove underperforming classmates. Therefore, some will have to work much harder than others are capable or willing to contribute if the overall team goal is to excel. Most people aren't that altrustic and are willing to go down in flames as long as the "teammates" weighting you down perish as well.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: Feb 06, 2005
Posts: 15689
Location: Eating over the sink.

06 Mar 2012, 11:18 am

noname_ever wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:

That story, I'm pretty sure, is made up. But, regardless, depending on the mindset of the people in the class, they could realize that they'd all benefit from studying and thus gain more of an incentive to play their small part to make sure the GPA remains high - you know, like how athletic teams work (I'll admit there's some selection bias in that motivated people join teams, but I'd say there's a similar selection bias in economics students).

I doubt there is similar selection bias between econ students and sports teams. Unless it's an upper level class, you have no idea of the skill set and interests of those in your class. Your classmates are just as likely to be dimwitted lazy freshman communications majors as anyone else. If you had a underachiever on a sports team, you can remove them from the team. You can't remove underperforming classmates. Therefore, some will have to work much harder than others are capable or willing to contribute if the overall team goal is to excel. Most people aren't that altrustic and are willing to go down in flames as long as the "teammates" weighting you down perish as well.

I think it would be much more likely in the Georgetown scenario, if they had any hope or possibility of doing so, is that the A students would simply drop out and try to reschedule the class in a few quarters; mainly that I used to be one and I know that the people who are going all out for their A's have a lot of self-worth wrapped up in them. I somehow doubt many of them were the ones opting for grading by socialism.



Longshanks
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Feb 02, 2012
Posts: 558
Location: At an undisclosed airbase at Shangri-la

06 Mar 2012, 1:58 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
Longshanks wrote:
Well, I think it's time for an experienced tax professional who votes after looking at history and the numbers instead of voting with his heart.


This is a great start - flaunting professional certifications that, in all likelihood, you'll give people no means to verify and which are, regardless, really are not that relevant to your argument.

Really? Like you've got any at all.

Quote:
To begin with, realistically, capitalism and socialisim are the same in the sense that both are forms of economic feudalism. Where they differ is as follows:


Wait a minute, since you're talking about how you actually vote why the hell are you contrasting socialism and capitalism? Most parties (at least most parties that anyone ever votes for) in the US aren't socialist. Do you honestly sit down and think "I could voter for the Workers of the World Party or I could vote for one of the other parties" each election?

Fine. If you want to nit-pick - I vote logically - not with my heart or emotions like you do.

Most of the democrats in office have professed socialism. I cite their own liberal press supporters



Quote:
(1) In capitalism, the enterprenuers become the rich kings and lords. In socialism, it's the public officials who become the rich kings and lords.

(2) In capitalisim, society is productive and improvements in the quality of life do come, but not all at once. Socialism is the opposite because there is no incentive to invent or create because any extra wealth one may receive from their extra effort gets shared by the rest.

(3) All of the worlds great socialist countries have one thing in common: They all have failed. Russia, all of the countries of the old Eastern Block, Britain, France, Italy, and let's not forget Greece. And oh yes, there's China. Now China is converting from socialism to fascisim, which is socialism with property ownership - which is still a form of economic feudilism. Ultimately, it too will fail.


Strictly speaking, the central planners in the Soviet Union did use incentives and performance targets. While they were generally not as good as market-based incentives, they were effective enough to influence some factories to produce an enormous amount of industrial output, sufficient to have very negative environmental consequences (if you want, I can dig up a Microeconomics textbook that mentions environmental degradation via centrally decided performance targets as one of the failures of Centrally Planned economies).

That still does not explain why the Soviet Union failed economically or why socialism is better. Rather, you're just proving one of my points.

Quote:
Of course, let us not forget the Georgetown economics professor who was on the news last year for failing his whole class. He gave his students a choice: be graded by capitalism or socialism. The class chose socialism - which meant that the grades would be averaged together and everyone would get the same grade. The first exam resulted in every one getting a C. The second resulted in a D. The third resulted in an F. The students got upset and demanded to know why they were flunked. After a long discussion, it turned out that the "A" and "B" students quit studying for the exams. They were sick and tired of puting in the extra work to pull the weights of those who wouldn't work as hard. Thus the lesson: Socialism was designed by lazy people for lazy people. Society becomes stunted. But in capitalism, there is more hard work and risk taking because there is incentive to make a profit - and thus society advances.


That story, I'm pretty sure, is made up. But, regardless, depending on the mindset of the people in the class, they could realize that they'd all benefit from studying and thus gain more of an incentive to play their small part to make sure the GPA remains high - you know, like how athletic teams work (I'll admit there's some selection bias in that motivated people join teams, but I'd say there's a similar selection bias in economics students).

It's on the internet - google it.

Quote:
Now, of course, there will be failures to communicate, because some people you just can't reach.


If I were a socialist (and most democratic socialists aren't advocates of Soviet-style central planning - they're either market socialists or advocates of decentralized participatory planning) I would find your arguments utterly unconvincing.


True, most "democratic socialists" are facists, which is socialism with property ownership.

Longshanks


_________________
Supporter of the Brian Terry Foundation @ www.honorbrianterry.com . Special Agent Brian Terry (1970-2010) was murdered as a direct result of Operation Fast & Furious - which Barry O won't discuss - wonder why?


snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2011
Posts: 2328

29 Apr 2012, 3:37 pm

The coroner, Michael Cormier, is now dead and is suspected to have been poisoned.

Possible arsenic poisoning probed in death of coroner's official

8O


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2011
Posts: 2328

08 May 2012, 9:18 am

NOW A WITNESS TO BREITBART'S DEATH VANISHES

8O


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jan 20, 2011
Posts: 3200

08 May 2012, 5:22 pm

It's probably related to the birth certificate. Or Area 51.

Quote:
Filmmaker Steve Bannon, appointed executive chairman of the Breitbart News Network after Breitbart’s death, has insisted to WND that the media mogul died of natural causes and to suggest anything else is irresponsible.

“Breitbart had an enlarged heart,” Bannon told WND. “He had been hospitalized for the problem last year and told to lose weight that he did not lose.”

Bannon, formerly a Breitbart News Network board member, told WND that for months prior to his death, Breitbart had been working overtime to finalize a refinancing of his news agency.

“He died of natural causes,” Bannon said. “The family wants the matter put to rest, and WND is beginning to irritate me suspecting foul play.”



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 12, 2010
Posts: 20601
Location: Spokane Valley, Washington

08 May 2012, 5:24 pm

simon_says wrote:
It's probably related to the birth certificate. Or Area 51.

Quote:
Filmmaker Steve Bannon, appointed executive chairman of the Breitbart News Network after Breitbart’s death, has insisted to WND that the media mogul died of natural causes and to suggest anything else is irresponsible.

“Breitbart had an enlarged heart,” Bannon told WND. “He had been hospitalized for the problem last year and told to lose weight that he did not lose.”

Bannon, formerly a Breitbart News Network board member, told WND that for months prior to his death, Breitbart had been working overtime to finalize a refinancing of his news agency.

“He died of natural causes,” Bannon said. “The family wants the matter put to rest, and WND is beginning to irritate me suspecting foul play.”


Maybe, or maybe Breitbart was just a fat bastard.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2011
Posts: 2328

08 May 2012, 6:19 pm

That man is trying to save his and possible his family's lives.

8O


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


Last edited by snapcap on 08 May 2012, 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jan 17, 2008
Posts: 5572

08 May 2012, 6:23 pm

I am quite sure he was about to announce that Apollo 11 found aliens on the moon and that's why NASA had to hire Kubrick to make a fake landing with special effects.


_________________
.


techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: Feb 06, 2005
Posts: 15689
Location: Eating over the sink.

08 May 2012, 8:39 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
I am quite sure he was about to announce that Apollo 11 found aliens on the moon and that's why NASA had to hire Kubrick to make a fake landing with special effects.

Sure it wasn't a Russian superbarracks or a Dr. Evil fortress? That would have been way cooler.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 12, 2010
Posts: 20601
Location: Spokane Valley, Washington

08 May 2012, 9:35 pm

snapcap wrote:
That man is trying to save his and possible his family's lives.

8O


In this case, I somehow doubt there isn't a second gunman on the grassy knoll.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jul 21, 2007
Posts: 7657

09 May 2012, 2:22 am

Vexcalibur wrote:
I am quite sure he was about to announce that Apollo 11 found aliens on the moon and that's why NASA had to hire Kubrick to make a fake landing with special effects.

...a false landing on the grassy knoll, which Obama btw knew all about (and in fact managed from building 7, which has been reconstructed in a secret bunker in area 51). Oh, and something about the Illuminati.



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2011
Posts: 2328

09 May 2012, 8:00 am

This is why I workout, so the weak heart excuse isn't a viable explanation in the case I'm shot with a chemical that induces a heart attack.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSEnurBApdM[/youtube]

8O


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 12, 2010
Posts: 20601
Location: Spokane Valley, Washington

09 May 2012, 10:41 am

snapcap wrote:
This is why I workout, so the weak heart excuse isn't a viable explanation in the case I'm shot with a chemical that induces a heart attack.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSEnurBApdM[/youtube]

8O


Then again, if Obama had ordered Beitbart's death, you have to ask, why not Rush Limbaugh, Roger Ales (spelling) or Rupert Murdock first? :twisted:
But seriously, just because the CIA can kill someone by inducing a heart attack hardly means that every presidential critic who dies from one had been targeted for death.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Page 9 of 11 [ 160 posts ] Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Jump to: