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

[yanksfan1]

Ignore people like Shaun King, the only reason he is "relevant" is because people elevate him. He's basically a left-wing Tomi Lahren

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by jdandns

Those memorials are intended for the victims of the Holocaust and it is reasonable to separate those people out from the actions of any government that followed them.

I would like to believe this. It would be great.

Unfortunately, I have yet to hear a single voice in our situation mention the fact that the Confederacy and secession were largely filibustering projects enacted by the southern elites and could hardly be said to have represented the will of the average southerner.

Southerners, including Georgians, were not united in their support for secession. Although, according to historian Michael P. Johnson, more than half the popular vote for delegates to the Georgia Secession Convention of 1861 went to candidates who initially opposed secession, enough delegates shifted their votes to give secessionists a 166 to 130 majority in the first vote at the convention. The remaining antisecession delegates urged that the secession ordinance be put to the people for a vote. Fearing the outcome of such a move, secessionist delegates refused. Georgia, like the other seceding states, left the Union without submitting the issue to a direct popular vote.

Prior to the approach of the Union army, a good chunk of the southern population remained loyal to the US. It was only after shots were fired that loyalties shifted to the defense of home states.

It would nice if people could sit down and have honest, historically-accurate discussion of the Civil War, but I haven't seen that. And that's why I'm keeping an eye on how far this current cultural purge is going to let itself go.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

The high school dropout rate can be obviously a lot of factors which I won’t ignore. Specifically I want to touch on one factor though which is that some just don’t Care because they know from the start they won’t have the opportunity to go onto something else and they aren’t motivated because of it. Some of the biggest slackers in my school didn’t care about highschool since they had more interests in trades so high school was kinda a waste for them. They weren’t stupid by any means they were just more interested in fixing up a car then doing biology homework. And yeah I agree, some people will not work, but I don’t think you’ll find those people in a manufacturing plant either. I think a lot of those people in those situations would like better lives for themselves but it would cost them too much. I work at target over the summer and there’s so many good workers who can’t get out of this cycle and as a result their kids won’t either. They clearly are willing to work but don’t have the resources to get out of the cycle. Right now, some people need social programs and some take advantage of it. If we tried to get the people who really wanted to work higher paying jobs we could cut social programs on the people who don’t want to work.

I tried to take the high road because I didn't know you and thought I was communicating with a learned, experienced adult. I had no interest in discussing trade policy when our countries have so many differences.

But your post is so full of rambling nonsense without substance, that I now realize that Target employment and book smarts is the best option.

Once you have experience managing/negotiating/servicing individuals for 5 years, c'mon back for some discussion.

[RedSoxFan28]

Originally Posted by mike1498

No but do you know how much your state public school is? College is to expensive. To be fair I don't know the average cost of trade schools. Personally I wouldn't make education free or even subsidize it but rather put a price ceiling on the cost of education. School should not be a business.

I do. It is. Sounds like you're a little anti capitalism.

What range should the ceiling be? Would it be for tuition only or would room/board/ meal plan/etc be included? If the cap doesnt include the latter wouldnt schools just increase them to help with the loss from tuition?

Majority of colleges are "non profit", what should they cut to make up for the loss of income from the cap?

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

I would like to believe this. It would be great.

Unfortunately, I have yet to hear a single voice in our situation mention the fact that the Confederacy and secession were largely filibustering projects enacted by the southern elites and could hardly be said to have represented the will of the average southerner.

Southerners, including Georgians, were not united in their support for secession. Although, according to historian Michael P. Johnson, more than half the popular vote for delegates to the Georgia Secession Convention of 1861 went to candidates who initially opposed secession, enough delegates shifted their votes to give secessionists a 166 to 130 majority in the first vote at the convention. The remaining antisecession delegates urged that the secession ordinance be put to the people for a vote. Fearing the outcome of such a move, secessionist delegates refused. Georgia, like the other seceding states, left the Union without submitting the issue to a direct popular vote.

Prior to the approach of the Union army, a good chunk of the southern population remained loyal to the US. It was only after shots were fired that loyalties shifted to the defense of home states.

It would nice if people could sit down and have honest, historically-accurate discussion of the Civil War, but I haven't seen that. And that's why I'm keeping an eye on how far this current cultural purge is going to let itself go.

You seem to be making a point about secession not having been put to a popular vote having some sort of meaning. But I don’t know what that would be.

[DegaBama]

Originally Posted by mattglet

Is this like how the cases are low because we're not testing as much? I'm confused...

Naw. It just shows the death rate is not high.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

I tried to take the high road because I didn't know you and thought I was communicating with a learned, experienced adult. I had no interest in discussing trade policy when our countries have so many differences.

But your post is so full of rambling nonsense without substance, that I now realize that Target employment and book smarts is the best option.

Once you have experience managing/negotiating/servicing individuals for 5 years, c'mon back for some discussion.

It's okay I'm not offended. I've taken a few college level economics classes (Nothing crazy advanced just two intro courses and a level 300 so far). I tried asking you simple trade policy questions which you had no response to. I never said I was any more qualified than you to discuss politics or trade policy but I'm curious what your qualifications are based on that response. You deflect this question every time I ask it so I'll ask the "adult" one more time. With China's labor costs, how do you plan to compete with China? Please tell me Dr. Clark. I'm willing to change my stance (otherwise I wouldn't ask) but an answer would be appreciated so I can understand.

It's no surprise your best argument has to do with my age. That's what happens when your argument is no substance you need to attack someone for their age. For the educated adult you are, you have yet to explain to me how we COMPETE with china. Your adult experience should definitely help you with your answer, right?

Just FYI I actually use to have the same stance as yourself but by the couple classes I've taken so far based on what you say do not align with the actuality of our economy.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

You seem to be making a point about secession not having been put to a popular vote having some sort of meaning. But I don’t know what that would be.

Following context clues across a conversation is definitely a learned skill.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by RedSoxFan28

I do. It is. Sounds like you're a little anti capitalism.

What range should the ceiling be? Would it be for tuition only or would room/board/ meal plan/etc be included? If the cap doesnt include the latter wouldnt schools just increase them to help with the loss from tuition?

Majority of colleges are "non profit", what should they cut to make up for the loss of income from the cap?

Anti capitalism? Wouldn't putting tariffs on other countries be even more anti capitalism?

I'll admit I think the government would have to intervene in some way but what I'm more trying to get at is why hurt both countries through tariffs to protect low paying assembly line jobs instead of funding skilled jobs that have a higher salary potential. Obviously some people don't want to go into a trade or college. Let's take them out of the equation for a minute. For the people who do want to work, wouldn't it be a better return on invest to help them fund a higher paying job so they won't need things like UBI? The more people we can get out of the poverty level the less social programs we will need.

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Following context clues across a conversation is definitely a learned skill.

Your posts aren’t as coherent and your thoughts as organized as you think they are.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

It's okay I'm not offended. I've taken a few college level economics classes (I'm a finance major at the University of Delaware). I tried asking you simple trade policy questions which you had no response to. I never said I was qualified any more than you to discuss politics or trade policy but I'm curious what your qualifications based on that response. You deflect this question every time I ask it so I'll ask the "adult" one more time. With China's labor costs, how do you plan to compete with China? Please tell me Dr. Clark.

I believe that you interpret my lack of discussion on trade policies as a weakness and are pushing that perception to prove a point.

The reality is we have social policies that make our competitive advantage different than Americans. The obvious example is that we have universal health care. That is strong negotiating position when trying to offset Chinas labour cost advantage.

Another is the buying power of our dollar. If American corporations can reduce labour costs because your dollar is worth more than ours then they can offset the purchasing of resources (labour),

You have gone on about tariffs as a response to trade defects. Tariffs are not the only response to a trade imbalance. Reducing corporate taxes, investing in new technology and increasing efficiency, reducing "red tape" in order to respond to a changing marketplace, providing incentives to build new factories, etc. are ways to offset Chinese labour costs.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

I believe that you interpret my lack of discussion on trade policies as a weakness and are pushing that perception to prove a point.

The reality is we have social policies that make our competitive advantage different than Americans. The obvious example is that we have universal health care. That is strong negotiating position when trying to offset Chinas labour cost advantage.

Another is the buying power of our dollar. If American corporations can reduce labour costs because your dollar is worth more than ours then they can offset the purchasing of resources (labour),

You have gone on about tariffs as a response to trade defects. Tariffs are not the only response to a trade imbalance. Reducing corporate taxes, investing in new technology and increasing efficiency, reducing "red tape" in order to respond to a changing marketplace, providing incentives to build new factories, etc. are ways to offset Chinese labour costs.

This is actually substance and something we can discuss

1) The first major flaw is you're comparing the US to Canada both freely traded currencies. This is not the case with China's currency. They can artificially appreciate or depreciate their currency something both the US and Canada can do at least in the way they do it. That's why it's hard to compete with China overall because if they want to increase exports they can just depreciate their currency. I'll admit I don't understand completely how the Chinese are able to manipulate their currency the way they do, but I do know they have more control with appreciating and depreciating it versus other currencies.

2) I have discussed tariffs but I don't know if I brought up trade deficits. I don't know if that matters though because most the USA's GDP is service based so if I bake you bread and sell it locally, that will increase our GDP but doesn't affect the trade deficit. Like I said, if China has the comparative advantage in manufacturing then why would I want to spend more on XYZ if I'm fine running my bakery. My bakery will still increase GDP but it won't help the trade deficit unless I'm exporting my bread.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Anti capitalism? Wouldn't putting tariffs on other countries be even more anti capitalism?

I'll admit I think the government would have to intervene in some way but what I'm more trying to get at is why hurt both countries through tariffs to protect low paying assembly line jobs instead of funding skilled jobs that have a higher salary potential. Obviously some people don't want to go into a trade or college. Let's take them out of the equation for a minute. For the people who do want to work, wouldn't it be a better return on invest to help them fund a higher paying job so they won't need things like UBI? The more people we can get out of the poverty level the less social programs we will need.

It depends on how large this segment of people is. Not everyone can work highly skilled jobs or jobs that require 4-8 years of education. Not everyone wants to either.

We need a healthy job market at every pay and skill level. If there is a gap somewhere, workers cannot move from one level to the next.

I am not an expert in tariffs, but I do find it funny that when I was in school they were celebrated as a way to protect American jobs and level the playing field vs. cheap foreign labor. Now they are awful. We were our own best customer and would/could be again. We are the best consumer on the planet.

I live in a farm state and the farmers still praise Nixon for getting China to the table to buy all our seeds. He created that job gap that began to eliminate the lower middle and middle class workers and allow the upper middle class and wealthy run away from everyone else. It won't slow down any time soon either.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

Your posts aren’t as coherent and your thoughts as organized as you think they are.

I am able to follow them pretty well. One of the best posters here who is somehow able to remove almost all emotion and any bias from his posts. Pretty rare.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

Your posts aren’t as coherent and your thoughts as organized as you think they are.

Second only to the master critic and their sage critiques, it is often the most incompetent critic from which we can learn the most. Their flailings and rancor serving to outline the furthest boundaries to which one's words might be stretched and the utter depths to which they might be misunderstood. The fool's criticism reveals not by casting a work in new light, but by casting it in relief.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Second only to the master critic and their sage critiques, it is often the most incompetent critic from which we can learn the most. Their flailings and rancor serving to outline the furthest boundaries to which one's words might be stretched and the utter depths to which they might be misunderstood. The fool's criticism reveals not by casting a work in new light, but by casting it in relief.

I enjoyed this immensely.

[discostu]

"PRESIDENTIAL HARRASSMENT"

This is America.

[ilovethelakings]

Originally Posted by trixstar

Looks like they’re going to “wind down” CHAZ/CHOP in Seattle. I hope everyone had fun LARPing their communist anarchy

Who's going to have to clean up all of the turds on the sidewalks?

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Onions

It depends on how large this segment of people is. Not everyone can work highly skilled jobs or jobs that require 4-8 years of education. Not everyone wants to either.

We need a healthy job market at every pay and skill level. If there is a gap somewhere, workers cannot move from one level to the next.

I am not an expert in tariffs, but I do find it funny that when I was in school they were celebrated as a way to protect American jobs and level the playing field vs. cheap foreign labor. Now they are awful. We were our own best customer and would/could be again. We are the best consumer on the planet.

I live in a farm state and the farmers still praise Nixon for getting China to the table to buy all our seeds. He created that job gap that began to eliminate the lower middle and middle class workers and allow the upper middle class and wealthy run away from everyone else. It won't slow down any time soon either.

I agree with you with almost everything. I think it does depend on how big that gap is because you're right maybe it's not as big as I believe.

I think the change in thought process about tariffs comes from the new generations. The reason you guys praised tariffs was because price wasn't as important as quality. It's not the same anymore and you can see that with how materialistic we have become over the last few generations. Your kids definitely have more than you did growing up in terms of materialistic stuff. Increased wages between generations and increased technology definitely has a role in that but the cost of manufacturing does as well. So yes you are right, in your generation tariffs made sense.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by mike1498

I agree with you with almost everything. I think it does depend on how big that gap is because you're right maybe it's not as big as I believe.

I think the change in thought process about tariffs comes from the new generations. The reason you guys praised tariffs was because price wasn't as important as quality. It's not the same anymore and you can see that with how materialistic we have become over the last few generations. Your kids definitely have more than you did growing up in terms of materialistic stuff. Increased wages between generations and increased technology definitely has a role in that but the cost of manufacturing does as well. So yes you are right, in your generation tariffs made sense.

I am 40 years old. My guess is that our generations are not that far apart. We lost much of our middle class due to inviting in cheap labor competition. Some will argue that is a good thing in the long run. I just don't see it. We took out a rung of the ladder and it has been devastating.

We could raise the bar for the entire world, but we are now addicted to cheap foreign labor. It will probably take 30-40 years to do it, but most of today's generation don't care to invest that kind of time.

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Second only to the master critic and their sage critiques, it is often the most incompetent critic from which we can learn the most. Their flailings and rancor serving to outline the furthest boundaries to which one's words might be stretched and the utter depths to which they might be misunderstood. The fool's criticism reveals not by casting a work in new light, but by casting it in relief.

You said that you were concerned that if the BLM movement was successful in removing monuments that glorified oppression that this may embolden them to remove Holocaust victims memorials (which are totally the same thing as a statue honoring a confederate general) because some black people are anti Semitic.

Then you lamented that all Southerners got a bad rap being lumped in with slaveholders because they weren’t given a chance to vote on secession through statewide binding referendums (which I guess you think was the Constitutional way to secede?). And somehow that was related to potentially lumping Holocaust victims in with Israel’s government actions toward Palestine.

You just write a lot of words to hide poor reasoning and weak points. You’d benefit from some self scouting.

[Clark]

Originally Posted by mike1498

This is actually substance and something we can discuss

1) The first major flaw is you're comparing the US to Canada both freely traded currencies. This is not the case with China's currency. They can artificially appreciate or depreciate their currency something both the US and Canada can do at least in the way they do it. That's why it's hard to compete with China overall because if they want to increase exports they can just depreciate their currency. I'll admit I don't understand completely how the Chinese are able to manipulate their currency the way they do, but I do know they have more control with appreciating and depreciating it versus other currencies.

It is not a major flaw, it is reality. While textbook economists will provide you with an utopian view, I can speak from experience that the difference in our dollar has been a negotiated competitive advantage.

I have discussed tariffs but I don't know if I brought up trade deficits. I don't know if that matters though because most the USA's GDP is service based so if I bake you bread and sell it locally, that will increase our GDP but doesn't affect the trade deficit. Like I said, if China has the comparative advantage in manufacturing then why would I want to spend more on XYZ if I'm fine running my bakery. My bakery will still increase GDP but it won't help the trade deficit unless I'm exporting my bread.

I agree that the the labour market has moved to a service based economy, but that doesn't mean we have to abandon manufacturing. I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I am supportive of education to provide guidance. However, my best advice is not to take all theory as fact. Use it to understand challenges, but don't rely on it to your determent.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Onions

I am 40 years old. My guess is that our generations are not that far apart. We lost much of our middle class due to inviting in cheap labor competition. Some will argue that is a good thing in the long run. I just don't see it. We took out a rung of the ladder and it has been devastating.

We could raise the bar for the entire world, but we are now addicted to cheap foreign labor. It will probably take 30-40 years to do it, but most of today's generation don't care to invest that kind of time.

I agree with all this. Although our generations aren't far apart, China has made huge strides in between them so it's why it's completely different. I was more discussing how each generation has become more materialistic though. I'm not even stating that this is a good thing I'm just stating the actuality of it. Regardless, tariffs don't change how materialistic a society is.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by Clark

It is not a major flaw, it is reality. While textbook economists will provide you with an utopian view, I can speak from experience that the difference in our dollar has been a negotiated competitive advantage.




I agree that the the labour market has moved to a service based economy, but that doesn't mean we have to abandon manufacturing. I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I am supportive of education to provide guidance. However, my best advice is not to take all theory as fact. Use it to understand challenges, but don't rely on it to your determent.

It is service based because that is what is left after moving manufacturing almost entirely to China. It didn't really move to service, the service economy was always there, but now it is all that is left between it and skilled and the tech/higher ed jobs.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by Clark

It is not a major flaw, it is reality. While textbook economists will provide you with an utopian view, I can speak from experience that the difference in our dollar has been a negotiated competitive advantage.

I don't know what specifically you are referencing when you're discussing how Canada has benefited from the devaluation of their currency but if you're discussing the USA pegged to the Canadian dollar, this is a completely different situation. Canada wasn't trying to devalue its currency towards America by holding a large excess of US dollars in its reserves. From what I was reading, decreased oil prices is the reason why it's currency is being devalued. Oil prices have been tanking for years and for a country who is so dependent on exporting oil, low oil prices devalues the Canadian dollar.

China on the other has bought USA dollars to devalue their currency. China owns 3 trillion US dollars in their reserves. America has 139 Billion Chinese Yuan. This means if America wants to start throwing tariffs, then they have so much more leverage because they can just keep devaluing their dollar. That's what has been happening. Using tariffs doesn't solve the issue that China is still unfairly devaluing the dollar. When you think about it, the USA dollar is the most resistant currency to exposure so the Chinese can pretty much hedge their currency by owning our currency in case the economy goes belly up.

Just additional information, these are all reasons why bitcoin has gotten so much traction. Part of it is because of inflation scares with the recent stimulus package but it also prevents these types of currency manipulation from happening. That being said, I don't like the idea of bitcoin for a multitude of reasons.