Page 84 of 113 FirstFirst ... 347480818283848586878894 ... LastLast
Results 1,661 to 1,680 of 2259

Thread: *** OFFICIAL 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Race Thread ***

  1. #1661

  2. #1662
    It would be hilarious if Andrew Yang somehow gains in popularity because of Daniel Negreanu.


    Last edited by TheXFactor; 12-10-2019 at 01:18 AM.

  3. #1663
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    357
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,344
    Yang is already super popular in that certain demographic (young, computer savvy, mainly but not exclusively white) and if there was a twitter poll for president he’d probably win. Problem is he’s struggling to break 4% overall as nobody else is considering him.

  4. #1664
    Nova Scotia's REAL #1 Webcam DJ sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    5547
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    24,538
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post
    Yang is already super popular in that certain demographic (young, computer savvy, mainly but not exclusively white) and if there was a twitter poll for president he’d probably win. Problem is he’s struggling to break 4% overall as nobody else is considering him.

    his mandatory minimum income idea has a ton of potential but somehow he makes it gimmicky. bad look.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  5. #1665
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4735
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,426
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post
    Yang is already super popular in that certain demographic (young, computer savvy, mainly but not exclusively white) and if there was a twitter poll for president he’d probably win. Problem is he’s struggling to break 4% overall as nobody else is considering him.

    his mandatory minimum income idea has a ton of potential but somehow he makes it gimmicky. bad look.
    It has a ton of potential, all right -- the potential to lead to economic disaster.

    Yang's plan to give $1000/month to every adult American would cost $2.5 trillion per year. Go break out the calculator and do the math yourself.

    That's equivalent to about 67% of the entire amount this country spends on healthcare per year! It's a staggering sum of money, and "taxing the rich more" won't even come close to raising it.

    It will also have the unintended consequence of disincentivizing lower wage work. It creates a huge law of diminishing returns for getting a minimum wage job. Right now the adults holding those jobs have the choice between working these shit jobs or homelessness, so obviously they stick it out at the unpleasant job. However, once these people are guaranteed $24k/year, they won't bother to keep these crap jobs just to put a bit more money in their pockets. They'd rather have the free time and lack of responsibility, and will simply subsist on the $24k which they were already used to having as their income anyway.

    Lest you doubt my theory, we already tried a lesser form of this, and it was a disaster. Due to the troubled economy following the 2008 recession, unemployment payments were extended to a maximum of 99 weeks (almost 2 years), a nearly fourfold extension from the previous 26 weeks. Rather than serve as a needed safety net during the tough job market, these extended unemployment checks simply discouraged those people from finding work, and many low wage employees simply chose to not get a job and stay on unemployment benefits for the full 99 weeks. This was despite the fact that they could have made more money if they went back to work. The free time plus the unemployment check was worth giving up the slightly higher standard of living. This program was considered a failure, and those taking advantage of the long benefits were derisively referred to as "99ers". It was such a disaster that this has never been considered since.

  6. #1666
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post


    his mandatory minimum income idea has a ton of potential but somehow he makes it gimmicky. bad look.

    Lest you doubt my theory, we already tried a lesser form of this, and it was a disaster. Due to the troubled economy following the 2008 recession, unemployment payments were extended to a maximum of 99 weeks (almost 2 years), a nearly fourfold extension from the previous 26 weeks. Rather than serve as a needed safety net during the tough job market, these extended unemployment checks simply discouraged those people from finding work, and many low wage employees simply chose to not get a job and stay on unemployment benefits for the full 99 weeks. This was despite the fact that they could have made more money if they went back to work. The free time plus the unemployment check was worth giving up the slightly higher standard of living. This program was considered a failure, and those taking advantage of the long benefits were derisively referred to as "99ers". It was such a disaster that this has never been considered since.
    shout out Onestep

     
    Comments
      
      SPIT this: hof
      
      Tellafriend: giggling

  7. #1667
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Yang's plan to give $1000/month to every adult American would cost $2.5 trillion per year. Go break out the calculator and do the math yourself.

    That's equivalent to about 67% of the entire amount this country spends on healthcare per year! It's a staggering sum of money, and "taxing the rich more" won't even come close to raising it.
    Taxing the rich... isn't how he plans on paying for it.

    It will also have the unintended consequence of disincentivizing lower wage work. It creates a huge law of diminishing returns for getting a minimum wage job. Right now the adults holding those jobs have the choice between working these shit jobs or homelessness, so obviously they stick it out at the unpleasant job. However, once these people are guaranteed $24k/year, they won't bother to keep these crap jobs just to put a bit more money in their pockets. They'd rather have the free time and lack of responsibility, and will simply subsist on the $24k which they were already used to having as their income anyway.
    Since you're mentioning 24k/yr, I assume you're talking about a couple? I think most people would still choose to work and make 48k/yr tho. And if somebody (or a couple?) is currently making 24k/yr they actually wouldn't get Yang's $1k/mo. This is because if you're currently making $24k/yr you're probably relying a lot on government assistance already. Yang doesn't just give everybody $1k/mo, it's $1k/mo in total government assistance you can get. So if you're already getting $300/mo from food stamps and a $250/mo housing voucher, now you'll only get $450/mo from UBI.

    Lest you doubt my theory, we already tried a lesser form of this, and it was a disaster. Due to the troubled economy following the 2008 recession, unemployment payments were extended to a maximum of 99 weeks (almost 2 years), a nearly fourfold extension from the previous 26 weeks. Rather than serve as a needed safety net during the tough job market, these extended unemployment checks simply discouraged those people from finding work, and many low wage employees simply chose to not get a job and stay on unemployment benefits for the full 99 weeks. This was despite the fact that they could have made more money if they went back to work. The free time plus the unemployment check was worth giving up the slightly higher standard of living. This program was considered a failure, and those taking advantage of the long benefits were derisively referred to as "99ers". It was such a disaster that this has never been considered since.
    This... isn't equivalent at all. The money they received was contingent on them not working. So of course many people would choose not to work (Onestep). If somebody says I'll give you $20k/yr to not work, or you can get a job and make $27k/yr, of course many people will choose the $20k and not work for $7k effective. If you say I'll give you $20k/yr and you can choose to work or not, most people would choose to work and now make $47k.

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Don’t try facts and logic with Druff on this issue; it only generates cognitive dissonance.

  8. #1668
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post


    his mandatory minimum income idea has a ton of potential but somehow he makes it gimmicky. bad look.
    It has a ton of potential, all right -- the potential to lead to economic disaster.

    Yang's plan to give $1000/month to every adult American would cost $2.5 trillion per year. Go break out the calculator and do the math yourself.
    I doubt that Yang would be able to give $1000 to every American. Maybe to the homeless and people on a very limited income.

    California has a very serious homeless problem.

    What are they doing to fix the problem?

    Nothing.

    No subsidized housing.

    The only thing they give to a few people who apply for benefits are about $200 worth of food stamps a month and a big fuck you. Maybe a free meal on Thanksgiving.

    Politicans and local government officials are anxious to steal that money. Voters approved over a Billion dollars for subsidized housing in Los Angeles for the homeless years ago but that housing will never get built unless politicans/public officials/building contractors etc. can pocket most of that cash.


  9. #1669
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    357
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,344
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post


    his mandatory minimum income idea has a ton of potential but somehow he makes it gimmicky. bad look.
    It has a ton of potential, all right -- the potential to lead to economic disaster.

    Yang's plan to give $1000/month to every adult American would cost $2.5 trillion per year. Go break out the calculator and do the math yourself.

    That's equivalent to about 67% of the entire amount this country spends on healthcare per year! It's a staggering sum of money, and "taxing the rich more" won't even come close to raising it.

    It will also have the unintended consequence of disincentivizing lower wage work. It creates a huge law of diminishing returns for getting a minimum wage job. Right now the adults holding those jobs have the choice between working these shit jobs or homelessness, so obviously they stick it out at the unpleasant job. However, once these people are guaranteed $24k/year, they won't bother to keep these crap jobs just to put a bit more money in their pockets. They'd rather have the free time and lack of responsibility, and will simply subsist on the $24k which they were already used to having as their income anyway.

    Lest you doubt my theory, we already tried a lesser form of this, and it was a disaster. Due to the troubled economy following the 2008 recession, unemployment payments were extended to a maximum of 99 weeks (almost 2 years), a nearly fourfold extension from the previous 26 weeks. Rather than serve as a needed safety net during the tough job market, these extended unemployment checks simply discouraged those people from finding work, and many low wage employees simply chose to not get a job and stay on unemployment benefits for the full 99 weeks. This was despite the fact that they could have made more money if they went back to work. The free time plus the unemployment check was worth giving up the slightly higher standard of living. This program was considered a failure, and those taking advantage of the long benefits were derisively referred to as "99ers". It was such a disaster that this has never been considered since.
    I’ve never seen someone talk about something with so much authority when it is clear they know next-to-fuck-all about a subject

  10. #1670
    Quote Originally Posted by TheXFactor View Post
    It would be hilarious if Andrew Yang somehow gains in popularity because of Daniel Negreanu.


    Sad no one pointed it out already:

    High Roller tournament with special appearance by Dutch Boyd, is he going to be dealing it?
    When faced with a difficult decision, ask yourself "What would Micon do?", then do the opposite.

    PFA Rookie of the Year 2012: The Templar (unknown)
    PFA ROTY 2013: Jasep $5000+
    PFA ROTY 2015: Micon's gofundme legal defense $3k begging for 100k:
    PFA ROTY 2018: 4Dragons
    PFA ROTY 2019: Dutch Boyd: Mike Postle soul reader or rfid reader.

  11. #1671
    Wow, I'd love to win brunch with Dutch Boyd

  12. #1672
    Yang just qualified for the debate. December debate stage is now set:
    Joe Biden
    Bernie Sanders
    Elizabeth Warren
    Pete Buttigieg
    Amy Klobuchar
    Tom Steyer
    Andrew Yang


    7 person debate should be interesting

  13. #1673
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -168
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,266
    A 5,000-Year-Old Plan to Erase Debts Is Now a Hot Topic in America
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...now-in-america

    In ancient Babylon, a newly enthroned king would declare a jubilee, wiping out the population’s debts. In modern America, a faint echo of that idea -- call it jubilee-lite -- is catching on.

    Support for write-offs has been driven by Democratic presidential candidates. Elizabeth Warren says she’d cancel most of the $1.6 trillion in U.S. student loans. Bernie Sanders would go further -– erasing the whole lot, as well as $81 billion in medical debt.

    But it’s coming from other directions too. In October, one of the Trump administration’s senior student-loan officials resigned, calling for wholesale write-offs and describing the American way of paying for higher education as “nuts.’’

    Real-estate firm Zillow cites medical and college liabilities as major hurdles for would-be renters and home buyers. Moody’s Investors Service listed the headwinds from student debt -– less consumption and investment, more inequality -- and said forgiveness would boost the economy like a tax cut.

    While the current debate centers on college costs, long-run numbers show how debt has spread through the economy. The U.S. relies on consumer spending for growth -– but it hasn’t been delivering significantly higher wages. Household borrowing has filled the gap, with low interest rates making it affordable.

    And that’s not unique to America. Steadily growing debts of one kind or another are weighing on economies all over the world.

    The idea that debt can grow faster than the ability to repay, until it unbalances a society, was well understood thousands of years ago, according to Michael Hudson, an economist and historian.

    Last year Hudson published “And Forgive Them Their Debts,’’ a study of the ancient Near East where the tradition known as a “jubilee” -- wiping the debt-slate clean -- has its roots. He describes how the practice spread through civilizations including Sumer and Babylon, and came to play an important role in the Bible and Jewish law.

    Rulers weren’t motivated by charity, Hudson says. They were being pragmatic -- trying to make sure that citizens could meet their own needs and contribute to public projects, instead of just laboring to pay creditors. And it worked, he says. “Societies that canceled the debts enjoyed stable growth for thousands of years.’’

    Forgiveness was good for the economy, would be a modern way of putting it. In an October paper, Moody’s examined how that might apply if America writes off its student debts.

    ...
    There is more details in the article. But what interested me here was learning that the Old Testament debt-forgiveness ‘Jubilee’ was preceded over a millennium by a Babylonian tradition. The Great Flood myth and civil punishment codes apparently weren’t the only elements the Old Testament authors borrowed from ancient Mesopotamia culture.

     
    Comments
      
      devidee: jooooooosury
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellafriend View Post
    There is only one scumbag here:


    ME

  14. #1674
    Gold Jayjami's Avatar
    Reputation
    353
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Wofford Heights, CA
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by SPIT this View Post
    Yang just qualified for the debate. December debate stage is now set:
    Joe Biden
    Bernie Sanders
    Elizabeth Warren
    Pete Buttigieg
    Amy Klobuchar
    Tom Steyer
    Andrew Yang


    7 person debate should be interesting
    Uh, not with any of these seven dwarfs. Adios, Kamala, Tulsi, and Corey.
    Name:  C9EC733A-1C3C-42A6-B84D-0634915E4947.png
Views: 116
Size:  157.4 KB
    Last edited by Jayjami; 12-10-2019 at 02:15 PM.

  15. #1675
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayjami View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SPIT this View Post
    Yang just qualified for the debate. December debate stage is now set:
    Joe Biden
    Bernie Sanders
    Elizabeth Warren
    Pete Buttigieg
    Amy Klobuchar
    Tom Steyer
    Andrew Yang


    7 person debate should be interesting
    Uh, not with any of these seven dwarfs. Adios, Kamala, Tulsi, and Corey.
    Name:  C9EC733A-1C3C-42A6-B84D-0634915E4947.png
Views: 116
Size:  157.4 KB
    Getting rid of some of the riff raff

  16. #1676
    Nova Scotia's REAL #1 Webcam DJ sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    5547
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    24,538
    should be a 4 person debate by now. klob yang steyer are the old people in the club at this point.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  17. #1677
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post
    should be a 4 person debate by now. klob yang steyer are the old people in the club at this point.
    Meh, wait until Iowa to narrow it down to 4. Kerry was at 4% at this point in 2003. I believe Clinton and Carter was also in single digits

     
    Comments
      
      sonatine: point taken

  18. #1678
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4735
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,426
    Blog Entries
    2
    Okay, so I will admit that I hadn't looked at Yang's plan prior to now because he's not a serious candidate, and he has no chance.

    However, since we are discussing the matter now, I decided to delve into it.

    First off, I see that indeed he's not planning to directly tax the rich in order to get the $2.5 trillion. Actually, it's $2.8 trillion, because the figure of the number of US adults I got was incorrect.

    Anyway, he's planning upon a 10% VAT, which would be a disaster. Some states like California have regions with as much as an existing 10% sales tax, so this would be a huge new sales tax burden. It would also be a regressive tax and hurt the poor most. Laughably, Yang tries to address this by claiming that the prices of manufacturing goods would come down under this plan (???), so it would mostly offset the 10% increase in price. L O fucking L.

    Also, the 10% VAT would fall way short of raising the required money, even with Yang's other proposals such as raising capital gains tax. It would only get about halfway there, according to this study.

    Again, this would also disincentivize minimum wage work. SPIT This tried to claim that it's not equivalent to the 99-week unemployment abused by Onestep and others, as unemployment benefits don't allow you to work (at least not on the record), whereas a UBI would allow you to work without penalty. However, I think he's also not understanding how awful and tedious minimum wage jobs tend to be. People are creatures of habit. If a couple is subsisting on $24k per year -- or something close to it -- and they can get the same $24k per year while not working, they will maintain the same lifestyle and not have to work. This won't be true for everyone, but it will be true for a lot. You wrongly assume that they will go work a minimum wage job to make double the money. These jobs suck so much that the people holding them are really doing so out of necessity. Take away the absolute necessity, and a lot of people will simply choose to do nothing, or to take gig/part-time work in order to supplement what they need to get by.

    SPIT This also says that the $1000/month will also replace the welfare system, and will save a lot of money there. However, the entire amount of welfare in the US is about $1 trilion, so Yang is essentially increasing this by a factor of 3. Even if you take all of Yang's awful proposals on how to raise the money, and even if you factor in the $1 trillion in welfare savings, we still fall short.

    There's also the general concept that people are being taxed so everyone can get $12k/year for just existing, and that we will all be paying for lazy, able-bodied people to be able to get by if they simply choose not to work. I find that to be an obnoxiously unfair burden put upon those who put out the effort to work. The welfare system has long been criticized for the same reason, but at least there were some reasonable justifications (such as what to do with the single mother who can't make enough money to pay or childcare while she's at work). Here all of those justifications are out the window. If someone simply chooses not to work, we are going to support them anyway. Terrible.

  19. #1679
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Okay, so I will admit that I hadn't looked at Yang's plan prior to now because he's not a serious candidate, and he has no chance.

    However, since we are discussing the matter now, I decided to delve into it.

    First off, I see that indeed he's not planning to directly tax the rich in order to get the $2.5 trillion. Actually, it's $2.8 trillion, because the figure of the number of US adults I got was incorrect.

    Anyway, he's planning upon a 10% VAT, which would be a disaster. Some states like California have regions with as much as an existing 10% sales tax, so this would be a huge new sales tax burden. It would also be a regressive tax and hurt the poor most. Laughably, Yang tries to address this by claiming that the prices of manufacturing goods would come down under this plan (???), so it would mostly offset the 10% increase in price. L O fucking L.

    Also, the 10% VAT would fall way short of raising the required money, even with Yang's other proposals such as raising capital gains tax. It would only get about halfway there, according to this study.

    Again, this would also disincentivize minimum wage work. SPIT This tried to claim that it's not equivalent to the 99-week unemployment abused by Onestep and others, as unemployment benefits don't allow you to work (at least not on the record), whereas a UBI would allow you to work without penalty. However, I think he's also not understanding how awful and tedious minimum wage jobs tend to be. People are creatures of habit. If a couple is subsisting on $24k per year -- or something close to it -- and they can get the same $24k per year while not working, they will maintain the same lifestyle and not have to work. This won't be true for everyone, but it will be true for a lot. You wrongly assume that they will go work a minimum wage job to make double the money. These jobs suck so much that the people holding them are really doing so out of necessity. Take away the absolute necessity, and a lot of people will simply choose to do nothing, or to take gig/part-time work in order to supplement what they need to get by.

    SPIT This also says that the $1000/month will also replace the welfare system, and will save a lot of money there. However, the entire amount of welfare in the US is about $1 trilion, so Yang is essentially increasing this by a factor of 3. Even if you take all of Yang's awful proposals on how to raise the money, and even if you factor in the $1 trillion in welfare savings, we still fall short.

    There's also the general concept that people are being taxed so everyone can get $12k/year for just existing, and that we will all be paying for lazy, able-bodied people to be able to get by if they simply choose not to work. I find that to be an obnoxiously unfair burden put upon those who put out the effort to work. The welfare system has long been criticized for the same reason, but at least there were some reasonable justifications (such as what to do with the single mother who can't make enough money to pay or childcare while she's at work). Here all of those justifications are out the window. If someone simply chooses not to work, we are going to support them anyway. Terrible.
    i don't have much of an opinion on this, but yang and others would tell you that with constant advances in robotics and artificial intelligence, there simply won't be nearly as many jobs in the future as there are now. hence the need for a guaranteed income.

     
    Comments
      
      devidee: We need immigration cause white peepoy won’t do jobs. Also, robots.
      
      sonatine: robots are not to be trusted

  20. #1680
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    99-week unemployment abused by Onestep and others, as unemployment benefits don't allow you to work (at least not on the record), whereas a UBI would allow you to work without penalty.

    Ummmm how do I abuse unemployment? I always file when im not working.
    It is in my bones which sucks so can make it hard to move sometimes. Trying to spend as much time with friends and family.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Give me the lowdown on the presidential race
    By Sloppy Joe in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-02-2019, 01:45 PM
  2. My nomination for world's greatest MILF
    By CrackPipes and Kakfights in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-18-2017, 05:16 PM
  3. Replies: 435
    Last Post: 11-05-2016, 08:45 AM
  4. Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-21-2016, 01:57 PM
  5. CNN Democratic Debate Poll Thread
    By Tyde in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-15-2016, 12:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •