2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[mike1498]

I don't even know why the right is so infatuated with a big middle class. It's like they want to be the soviet union or something. Like I've said before, I would rather provide everyone an equal opportunity for upper level education and let them decide their path. Then we aren't paying more for all these manufacturing plants that the majority of people don't want to work in. I'm not saying we shouldn't have any, but I don't see the need to create tariffs so we can be totally reliant on ourselves. Plus it costs more. It's not like unemployment was even an issue pre coronavirus. There's literally no logic.

Manufacturing is considered "unskilled labor". That doesn't mean these people are stupid obviously, but it means the average joe can do these jobs. I would think people would want a more educated workforce with higher salary potential. It creates more diversity between the economic classes. Otherwise like I said, you are essentially supporting the rise of USSR

Is the rights version of the american dream working in a manufacturing plant? Something tells me a lot of people who push this have way better jobs.

[discostu]

Originally Posted by mike1498

I don't even know why the right is so infatuated with a big middle class. It's like they want to be the soviet union or something. Like I've said before, I would rather provide everyone an equal opportunity for upper level education and let them decide their path. Then we aren't paying more for all these manufacturing plants that the majority of people don't want to work in. I'm not saying we shouldn't have any, but I don't see the need to create tariffs so we can be totally reliant on ourselves. Plus it costs more. It's not like unemployment was even an issue pre coronavirus. There's literally no logic.

Manufacturing is considered "unskilled labor". That doesn't mean these people are stupid obviously, but it means the average joe can do these jobs. I would think people would want a more educated workforce with higher salary potential. It creates more diversity between the economic classes. Otherwise like I said, you are essentially supporting the rise of USSR

What type of jobs are you expecting with this "higher salary" potential?

Truly curious.

I take a far more pessimistic approach to future jobs, salaries, etc. where a post graduate degree (let alone a college degree) will be required.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by discostu

What type of jobs are you expecting with this "higher salary" potential?

Truly curious.

I take a far more pessimistic approach to future jobs, salaries, etc. where a post graduate degree (let alone a college degree) will be required.

Well if people like it or not, manufacturing jobs are dying regardless if China owns it because of increased technology. It's the reason why I think long term the American economy is in a better situation than China. I think in a lot of areas we are ahead of China and we should continue to encourage STEM fields specifically.

I guess the counter is that not everyone has the capacity to be in STEM which is a valid argument. My response is that people are still more likely to have a higher salary as a receptionist then working in a manufacturing plant. If this wasn't all true why did pre corona had such low unemployment? It's not that manufacturing is making a comeback.

[trixstar]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

1. Trump puts the American people first with a huge, favorable trade deal
2. The Trump administration is the only one on earth to impose sanctions against China for the Xinjiang issue

But American liberals? "Disgusted". The truth, though, is that they couldn't care less about Xinjiang or the people there. Just another chance to take a shot at Trump and hope that people don't actually read the articles.

The way you talk to people doesn’t really even deserve my response but A) I didn’t recall the New York Times article about the topic so I had to google it. B) the New York Times is fake news remember?!? Now he’s admitted it so I guess it really wasn’t fake news. The “trade deal” is an absolute joke and farmers are still being paid welfare due to the mess we’re in. I don’t think we should be doing any type of deals with a country that has people in what are basically concentration camps.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50511063

[coltsnsox07]

Thank goodness their finally renaming the Eskimo Pie, that'll fix everything.
Still not as bad as what they called Brazil nuts in Georgia when I was growing up...

[Clark]

Originally Posted by discostu

Here's my hot take.

Globalism didn't destroy the middle class. Shareholders destroyed the middle class.

They are one in the same. Pursuing globalization in order to maximize shareholder investments. Moving capital to low wage/ low regulatory countries at the expense of your own citizens (consumers). I believe that we need to look at ways to balance the wage gap. I don't have the answer but it needs to be discussed.

There is growing minority that believe the entire system needs to be torn down and have wealth equally distributed regardless of ability or opportunity.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

China has not destroyed the middle class. The upper class's wages have been increasing at a lot greater rates than the middle class. Thats a different debate and that debate is if you think Jeff Bezos needs to share more of his worth with his workers. It doesn't have to do with China. Manufacturing is not the reason why Jeff Bezos salary is increasing at higher rates then the middle class salaries were in comparison to 50 years ago.

I understand. I oversimplified the argument. In my opinion, China is one vehicle for Bezos excessive wealth.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Well if people like it or not, manufacturing jobs are dying regardless if China owns it because of increased technology. It's the reason why I think long term the American economy is in a better situation than China. I think in a lot of areas we are ahead of China and we should continue to encourage STEM fields specifically.

I guess the counter is that not everyone has the capacity to be in STEM which is a valid argument. My response is that people are still more likely to have a higher salary as a receptionist then working in a manufacturing plant. If this wasn't all true why did pre corona had such low unemployment? It's not that manufacturing is making a comeback.

It depends how you define manufacturing. BTW, STEM is systemically racist according to our friends on the left.

https://www.shutdownstem.com/

[mike1498]

Also does anyone question why so many of these communist countries GDP is mainly manufacturing? Does anyone question this? I don't think it's coincidental at all. The easiest way for a country to dictate and control the income distribution is by creating one big middle class. Like you see with China right now, they are creating tariffs back to protect their manufacturing. When you create a country mainly on manufacturing there will be endless government intervention because once you aren't competitive anymore, you don't have an economy. There isn't anything proprietary or anything skillful about manufacturing so you're pretty much screwed if you completely change your economy to mirror manufacturing and can't compete. The only way this could work is if people are willing a lot more government intervention and throw american values out of the window. Personally I'm not for that.

You know why the industrial revolution was so successful? It was cause we had basically 0 labor laws. It's easy to compete when you pay your workers 10 cents an hour and work them 16 hour days. I know it's a crazy concept but when we increase labor laws we decrease our competitiveness. As you can tell over the years we have increased our labor laws which has pushed companies away. I would honestly have more respect for people that supported this massive manufacturing push to come out and say they wan't a country that has no labor laws and is heavily controlled by its government. At least you would be consistent with your argument.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

I understand. I oversimplified the argument. In my opinion, China is one vehicle for Bezos excessive wealth.

Just so I can understand, how is China a vehicle for his wealth? China doesn't choose the wage increase for American Amazon employees. Bezos does. If we are looking solely on wage increases in america, china does not have a factor on how much Bezos gives to his workers.

EDIT: I get what you mean. You were dropping the wage disparity part and just saying it's cheaper to make stuff over there. You have to understand that certain parts of Amazon's business plan isn't as achievable in China. Hence why you see Amazon as one of the biggest employers in America. This is just comparative advantage and based on our countries values we allocate our resources differently than China. It's not a bad thing as long as it's sustainable.

[ssilva872]

Originally Posted by DegaBama

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.esp...3fplatform=amp

Wow.

This is so messed up...

I can't say I'm surprised though smh.

Hopefully the idiot(s) are found and banned for life.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Just so I can understand, how is China a vehicle for his wealth? China doesn't choose the wage increase for American Amazon employees. Bezos does. If we are looking solely on wage increases in america, china does not have a factor on how much Bezos gives to his workers.

EDIT: I get what you mean. You were dropping the wage disparity part and just saying it's cheaper to make stuff over there. You have to understand that certain parts of Amazon's business plan isn't as achievable in China. Hence why you see Amazon as one of the biggest employers in America. This is just comparative advantage and based on our countries views we allocate our resources differently than China. It's not a bad thing as long as it's sustainable.

Yes. Consumers are attracted to the convenience of the Amazon business model. However, the site is full of Chinese sellers/manufacturers that ours have difficulty competing with. Our manufacturers are forced to close or move capital to other low cost jurisdictions. Lost jobs equals lower wealth and people have no other choice but to buy the cheap Chinese stuff. It is a vicious circle as we race to the bottom.

That is where I believe as much as a business focused person Trump is, has said hold on, we are committing suicide.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

Yes. Consumers are attracted to the convenience of the Amazon business model. However, the site is full of Chinese sellers/manufacturers that ours have difficulty competing with. Our manufacturers are forced to close or move capital to other low cost jurisdictions. Lost jobs equals lower wealth and people have no other choice but to buy the cheap Chinese stuff. It is a vicious circle as we race to the bottom.

That is where I believe as much as a business focused person Trump is, has said hold on, we are committing suicide.

Couple things,

1) Lost jobs in regards to manufacturing would probably not lower wealth because like stated above, it's an unskilled job so you most likely aren't downgrading anymore then where you were at. That's why I said this has nothing to do with the wage disparity. If you make minimal wage you can't make less. You then would just be unemployed.

2) I won't go back into the argument from the other day but Americans have a consumption fetish and would prefer price over quality. There is a niche market in america that would disagree obviously, but statistically speaking, americans will choose price over quality. The only way you compete is getting rid of labor laws.

3) How is it a vicious cycle if most of our country who wanted to work was employed pre coronavirus and 71% of nonfarm payroll jobs were services? To me it sounds like we're more successful than China. We are able to provide jobs that require a skill that provide us with higher salaries.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by jk1937

very well said.

also people instantly jumping to a hate crime is ridiculous when its crimes between races. it hurts the validity of true hate crimes. also when is the last time you saw a black on white crime labeled a hate crime. some people are just are awful humans that commit violent crimes of all colors that has nothing to do with the race of the victim.

Black on whitw is not labeled a hate crime. Pretty sure the employee from Macys he was beaten for nothing was a hate crime, but only white people are charged with hate crimes. If it is not going to work both ways get rid of hate crime laws. Citizens need to be protected equally not based on the color of their skin.

[ilovethelakings]

Originally Posted by coltsnsox07

Thank goodness their finally renaming the Eskimo Pie, that'll fix everything.
Still not as bad as what they called Brazil nuts in Georgia when I was growing up...

Yeah...They were not only called that in Georgia. As a little kid, I didn't understand the reference. When I got older and the light bulb finally went off, I was really surprised that some people I loved referred to them in that way.

[OscarOne]

Originally Posted by Clark

It depends how you define manufacturing. BTW, STEM is systemically racist according to our friends on the left.

https://www.shutdownstem.com/

You should take the time to understand what they are trying to say. Not that you would care, but still.

From someone that is active in this movement:

"I can unpack that a bit. They don't mean, to the best of my knowledge, that teaching, research, and scientific inquiry are bad. They mean that academia does actively harmful things that we need to change: centering the work of white scholars and erasing other contributions; relying on biased systems of evaluation, hiring, and promotion; inviting police onto campus and into student residences and dining halls; moving slowly to embrace anti-racist pedagogies and ways that admissions tests like the SAT erode equity. Or look at the #blackintheivorytower hashtag for examples of racism in contemporary academia. That is what they are critiquing, rather than scholarship itself. (Though, of course, a rethinking of how we do scholarship will be involved.)"

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by trixstar

The way you talk to people doesn’t really even deserve my response but A) I didn’t recall the New York Times article about the topic so I had to google it. B) the New York Times is fake news remember?!? Now he’s admitted it so I guess it really wasn’t fake news. The “trade deal” is an absolute joke and farmers are still being paid welfare due to the mess we’re in. I don’t think we should be doing any type of deals with a country that has people in what are basically concentration camps.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50511063

Right, you're so upset about concentration camps.

I don't know why you guys don't just own the fact that you put out phony outrage any time Trump does something you don't like. I mean, can you show me the time you spend in real life bringing awareness to Chinese concentration camps?

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by OscarOne

You should take the time to understand what they are trying to say. Not that you would care, but still.

From someone that is active in this movement:

"I can unpack that a bit. They don't mean, to the best of my knowledge, that teaching, research, and scientific inquiry are bad. They mean that academia does actively harmful things that we need to change: centering the work of white scholars and erasing other contributions; relying on biased systems of evaluation, hiring, and promotion; inviting police onto campus and into student residences and dining halls; moving slowly to embrace anti-racist pedagogies and ways that admissions tests like the SAT erode equity. Or look at the #blackintheivorytower hashtag for examples of racism in contemporary academia. That is what they are critiquing, rather than scholarship itself. (Though, of course, a rethinking of how we do scholarship will be involved.)"

If that's what they mean, they should come up with a better slogan than "Shut down science, technology, engineering and math." It sends an inaccurate message.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by OscarOne

You should take the time to understand what they are trying to say. Not that you would care, but still.

From someone that is active in this movement:

"I can unpack that a bit. They don't mean, to the best of my knowledge, that teaching, research, and scientific inquiry are bad. They mean that academia does actively harmful things that we need to change: centering the work of white scholars and erasing other contributions; relying on biased systems of evaluation, hiring, and promotion; inviting police onto campus and into student residences and dining halls; moving slowly to embrace anti-racist pedagogies and ways that admissions tests like the SAT erode equity. Or look at the #blackintheivorytower hashtag for examples of racism in contemporary academia. That is what they are critiquing, rather than scholarship itself. (Though, of course, a rethinking of how we do scholarship will be involved.)"

If I didn't care I wouldn't have posted the link.

From the website, "Black academic and Black STEM professionals are hurting because they exist in and are attacked by institutional and systemic racism"

I never provided my opinion, I provided a link and leave the reader to venture down that rabbit hole. Read/watch opinions from all sides of the debate and form your own opinion.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Couple things,

1) Lost jobs in regards to manufacturing would probably not lower wealth because like stated above, it's an unskilled job so you most likely aren't downgrading anymore then where you were at. That's why I said this has nothing to do with the wage disparity. If you make minimal wage you can't make less. You then would just be unemployed.

2) I won't go back into the argument from the other day but Americans have a consumption fetish and would prefer price over quality. There is a niche market in america that would disagree obviously, but statistically speaking, americans will choose price over quality. The only way you compete is getting rid of labor laws.

3) How is it a vicious cycle if most of our country who wanted to work was employed pre coronavirus and 71% of nonfarm payroll jobs were services? To me it sounds like we're more successful than China. We are able to provide jobs that require a skill that provide us with higher salaries.

I appreciate your thoughts and the discussion. However, in order for me to support my opinion would lead to the differences in our countries, such as social policies, values, culture, and political history.

I am trying my best to discuss the issues, find some common areas while respecting your country.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

I appreciate your thoughts and the discussion. However, in order for me to support my opinion would lead to the differences in our countries, such as social policies, values, culture, and political history.

I am trying my best to discuss the issues, find some common areas while respecting your country.

If you want to believe in fairy tales, be my guest. Your arguments are just how you feel with no substance. You say you want to compete with China in manufacturing but yet have discussed how you plan to keep labor costs down to the level china has.

It's fine to want manufacturing to come back to America, but to actually think it is feasible is a different argument.

[mattglet]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

It's a little more complicated than that.

I mean, if tariffs only hurt the country enacting them, then why did China retaliate against Trump's tariff by levying their own tariffs?

Too many people trying to boil global macroeconomics down soundbites.

Sure, it is obviously more complicated than that, but then we go down the rabbit hole of semantics.

So allow me to be more succinct: the tariffs imposed by Trump don't work. The various agricultural tariffs that were put in place hurt our farmers, who then needed to be bailed out (and Trump bragged out how much money he was giving them... c'mon man).

The steel industry - a highly publicized sector to benefit from the tariffs - has benefited a bit, but nothing to write home about. Add on the fact that the sector alone is such a small portion of the economy, and you start to see how much bluster there was behind it. Lastly, steel jobs are not increasing. New steel mills and manufacturing processes utilize automation more than ever, causing the number of people needed to run the mill to be lower than what was needed in the past.

China is also not projected to meet its Phase One "requirements". If they aren't purchasing from us, but our import prices continue to be high (costing the end-consumer more money), it doesn't balance out and we are on the short end of the stick.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by OscarOne

You should take the time to understand what they are trying to say. Not that you would care, but still.

From someone that is active in this movement:

"I can unpack that a bit. They don't mean, to the best of my knowledge, that teaching, research, and scientific inquiry are bad. They mean that academia does actively harmful things that we need to change: centering the work of white scholars and erasing other contributions; relying on biased systems of evaluation, hiring, and promotion; inviting police onto campus and into student residences and dining halls; moving slowly to embrace anti-racist pedagogies and ways that admissions tests like the SAT erode equity. Or look at the #blackintheivorytower hashtag for examples of racism in contemporary academia. That is what they are critiquing, rather than scholarship itself. (Though, of course, a rethinking of how we do scholarship will be involved.)"

Honestly I don’t understand how STEM is racist. SATs I understand which I’ve always thought was stupid. These test don’t test your knowledge which is why it’s an unfair test. People who have more money will have more practice taking them and the SAT based on how the SAT is built, it’s more about knowing how to take it then the content. Everything else seems like nonsense. The rest goes to the notion that there are people who are racist in every field but STEM alone isn’t racist.

[mnvikingstwins]

The Bubba Wallace Nascar trending incident looks even more fake than Jussie's story from last year

[cnewby]

Originally Posted by mnvikingstwins

The Bubba Wallace Nascar trending incident looks even more fake than Jussie's story from last year

Color me surprised.