Progressives and The Venezuelan Political Tactics

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I do pity any children you may have, because I can just imagine you handing them a bill on their 18th birthday for all that you spend on them raising them.

That sounds far more like a libertarian plan than anything else.

Since that is bilby's position I am describing, either you are calling bilby a libertarian, or confessing you have no idea what libertarianism is about (same thing).

 

[bilby]

I do pity any children you may have, because I can just imagine you handing them a bill on their 18th birthday for all that you spend on them raising them.

That sounds far more like a libertarian plan than anything else.

Since that is bilby's position I am describing, either you are calling bilby a libertarian, or confessing you have no idea what libertarianism is about (same thing).

You are not describing my position. A society and a family are very different things - and confusing them is one of the common sources of stupidity in libertarian policymaking. Another being the dishonest attribution of their incorrect conclusions about their opponent's positions as being their opponent's actual positions.

Both are fairly effective in achieving popular support for bad policy; But as a means of determining what would constitute good policy, they are utter crap.

 

[steve_bank]

I see liberterians as moderate anrchists.

If we truly cut federal costs we could afford a lot morte necceasry spending.

What are the cost benfit results of thwe DOE?

The deprt,emt of education has spent a great deal of money with little apparent benfit in overall primary education.

If we spent money on what we need rather than what makes people feel good I'd suspect we'd be in decent shape/

The interstate through Ct was built when I was a kid. Roads and bridges built back then are deteriorating. Anyone who has driven coast to coast can attest to road conditions.

The grid needs upgrading.

Congressional pork is not exactly secret.

Candidates are promising a lot of 'free' programs. The decades of war has put us in debt to China. If the breaks are not put on sooner or later there will be a reality check.

Taxing the wealthy or upper percentile personal earnings is not going to sleeve anything. fiscal responsibility and simple arithmetic will.

Clinton among other things pushed welfare reform. Now there is a progressive saying everybody gets a min living wage working or not.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Since that is bilby's position I am describing, either you are calling bilby a libertarian, or confessing you have no idea what libertarianism is about (same thing).

You are not describing my position. A society and a family are very different things

Alright then. If you do improvements to your house that raises its property value, it will actually raise the property value of the neighboring houses. Since they are benefiting from your work, they should actually pay you to improve your house instead of you paying for it yourself.

 

[bilby]

Since that is bilby's position I am describing, either you are calling bilby a libertarian, or confessing you have no idea what libertarianism is about (same thing).

You are not describing my position. A society and a family are very different things

Alright then. If you do improvements to your house that raises its property value, it will actually raise the property value of the neighboring houses. Since they are benefiting from your work, they should actually pay you to improve your house instead of you paying for it yourself.

I am sure that you think that your response is somehow related to the post you quoted. But it isn't.

Your assumption that everyone should be paid for every single thing they do that benefits someone else, is deeply stupid. But even if it were true, your response would remain a non-sequitur.

One of the benefits human brains have over computers is the ability for nuanced thinking, and the employment of heuristics to allow a good answer to a problem for which no perfect answer can be calculated in a reasonable amount of time. Why your brain appears not to make use of this particular benefit, I do not know.

But as the answer to all sufficiently complex problems almost certainly lies at neither end of the spectrum of possible responses, your continuing insistence on a 'one size fits all' answer that can be applied to individuals, families, small neighbourhoods, large neigbourhoods, districts, states and nations, is doomed to failure. I do not share your belief that a principle that applies to a nation or state, should also apply to a suburb, family, or individual. There are frequently different optimum solutions at different scales.

 

[ZiprHead]

Since that is bilby's position I am describing, either you are calling bilby a libertarian, or confessing you have no idea what libertarianism is about (same thing).

You are not describing my position. A society and a family are very different things

Alright then. If you do improvements to your house that raises its property value, it will actually raise the property value of the neighboring houses. Since they are benefiting from your work, they should actually pay you to improve your house instead of you paying for it yourself.

What's the difference between the above and handing your kid a bill for his upbringing expenses on his 18th birthday? None.

I love this whole turn of the conversation. Usually, getting Jason to explain or justify his affinity for libertarianism is like pulling teeth. I suspect he knows when it's actually put into words how stupid and immature it really is and that's why he tends to not talk about it. But here it is, in all it's glory.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Alright then. If you do improvements to your house that raises its property value, it will actually raise the property value of the neighboring houses. Since they are benefiting from your work, they should actually pay you to improve your house instead of you paying for it yourself.

What's the difference between the above and handing your kid a bill for his upbringing expenses on his 18th birthday? None.

I love this whole turn of the conversation. Usually, getting Jason to explain or justify his affinity for libertarianism is like pulling teeth. I suspect he knows when it's actually put into words how stupid and immature it really is and that's why he tends to not talk about it. But here it is, in all it's glory.

But what I'm describing isn't the libertarian position. I'm exploring bilby's position that since other people will benefit from something he wants they should help pay for it. It is typical economic leftism.

I'm not sure what kind of profound confusion would make you say the principle of "I want you to pay for what I want" is libertarian.

 

[PyramidHead]

The government doing things is neither productive nor destructive without placing it in context of class structure. Under capitalism, the state cannot be relied upon to provide for the mass of people. It's just the way the system works. To even get a shot at political power, everyone has to appeal first and foremost to the rich, because campaigns are expensive. When they get into power, they consult experts to tell them how to legislate, who are usually corporate lobbyists. And to keep their power, they know they must preside over economic growth, and the way we define that is by investment (not working conditions, wages, or services for the poor). Therefore the state will always legislate in favor of capital without struggle from the working class. This is true of both parties and has been true for much of the last century in the United States.

It's therefore not enough to fight for changes to what the state provides its citizens. To secure anything durable or sustainable, there needs to be political and economic organization on a larger scale than simply voting for whatever politician seems friendliest. What's needed is a resurgence of the labor movement and the establishment of a party whose priorities are aligned with ordinary working people. That's the difference between the "good cop" policy proposals of an Elizabeth Warren and the movement-building empowerment of a Bernie Sanders.

 

[Canard DuJour]

It doesn't matter if my grandchildren will benefit form an infrastructure built today. What matters is that if I am asking for it to exist I should pay for it.

Speak for yourself.

I'm delighted that previous generations have provided me with access to education, healthcare and modern infrastructure. And I fully intend to pass more of the same on to subsequent generations.

If you don't like it, MOVE TO SOMALIA.

I'm not even sure in what sense I've ever "payed" for it, or ever could. Some govt bonds were issued as a synthetic legal obligation, which are private sector assets, will never be really payed off but could be payed off at any time by central banks changing digits on spreadsheets. The horror!

I haven't payed for it. The previous generations who created the infrastructure and institutions with ACTUAL WORK already payed for it

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It doesn't matter if my grandchildren will benefit form an infrastructure built today. What matters is that if I am asking for it to exist I should pay for it.

Speak for yourself.

I'm delighted that previous generations have provided me with access to education, healthcare and modern infrastructure. And I fully intend to pass more of the same on to subsequent generations.

If you don't like it, MOVE TO SOMALIA.

I'm not even sure in what sense I've ever "payed" for it, or ever could. Some govt bonds were issued as a synthetic legal obligation, which are private sector assets, will never be really payed off but could be payed off at any time by central banks changing digits on spreadsheets. The horror!

I haven't payed for it. The previous generations who created the infrastructure and institutions with ACTUAL WORK already payed for it

They built it and they paid for it, and you are glad they did so. Nothing you wrote contradicts what I wrote. You are, unknowingly, on my side of this instead of bilby's side which you mistakenly think you are on.

And so, since you say my side should move to Somalia (a very ignorant statement by the way since you have no idea what put Somalia into the condition it is today) then you are saying you should also move there.

And ZiprHead says bilby's position is the libertarian position, against all sense, knowledge, and rationality.

 

[Canard DuJour]

It doesn't matter if my grandchildren will benefit form an infrastructure built today. What matters is that if I am asking for it to exist I should pay for it.

Speak for yourself.

I'm delighted that previous generations have provided me with access to education, healthcare and modern infrastructure. And I fully intend to pass more of the same on to subsequent generations.

If you don't like it, MOVE TO SOMALIA.

I'm not even sure in what sense I've ever "payed" for it, or ever could. Some govt bonds were issued as a synthetic legal obligation, which are private sector assets, will never be really payed off but could be payed off at any time by central banks changing digits on spreadsheets. The horror!

I haven't payed for it. The previous generations who created the infrastructure and institutions with ACTUAL WORK already payed for it

They built it and they paid for it, and you are glad they did so. Nothing you wrote contradicts what I wrote. You are, unknowingly, on my side of this instead of bilby's side which you mistakenly think you are on.

They built it and IT PAYS FOR ITSELF is what I'm saying. I doubt that's what you're saying and you've already misrepresented everyone else at every step.

And so, since you say my side should move to Somalia (a very ignorant statement by the way since you have no idea what put Somalia into the condition it is today) then you are saying you should also move there.

No, I'm saying people who resent creating infrastructure for anything but their own immediate benefit should move there.

And ZiprHead says bilby's position is the libertarian position, against all sense, knowledge, and rationality.

I doubt anyone's position has anything to do with your definitions or perceptions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The road surface is replaced frequently. But that's a trivial fraction of the road itself. The cuttings, embankments, foundations, culverts, safety fences, etc. etc. last a LOT longer than the top layer of HMC or PCC.

I'm thinking of the roads in the city and I would say the replacement is close to 100% within one's working life. What's under the road gets dug up again and again to deal with the infrastructure under it.

Infrastructure usually benefits non-users, albeit indirectly. A new road I don't drive on might well reduce traffic on the roads I do use. Or it may simply mean that goods I buy are not delivered late; Or that people I work with are not late for work; Or that people elsewhere in the state (or the country) are able to be more productive, and therefore to pay more taxes, which are then spent on things that benefit me.

That's not the sort of stuff we are griping about. Virtually all the large (big enough to need infrastructure beyond simply the local roads the builder is already expected to pay for) projects are at the edge of town. Am I ever going to drive on those roads? No, unless I'm going somewhere in that development. Schools? Not unless I live in the development. Emergency response stuff--only if I'm in some epic event where they call in units from far away. Parks? I've walked across one (and parked in it) once because it was convenient to a trailhead that doesn't have it's own facilities. Libraries--there's a remote chance I might request a book from a library in the new development area. The big water project? If they weren't building we wouldn't have needed that tunnel under the lake. Nearly 100% of the benefit of the new infrastructure goes to the people living in the new developments.

Now, when you do things that actually benefit the people in general (say, the downtown redevelopment) I don't have a problem with paying for it. I do object to the new stadium going up because that's about benefiting the big guys. (Simple test: When the voters don't get a say in the matter it's almost certain it's for special interests. There was an advisory measure on the ballot that gave a very different impression of how the stadium would be funded, we weren't expecting $750m in bonds.)

 

[PyramidHead]

That's not the sort of stuff we are griping about. Virtually all the large (big enough to need infrastructure beyond simply the local roads the builder is already expected to pay for) projects are at the edge of town. Am I ever going to drive on those roads? No, unless I'm going somewhere in that development. Schools? Not unless I live in the development. Emergency response stuff--only if I'm in some epic event where they call in units from far away. Parks? I've walked across one (and parked in it) once because it was convenient to a trailhead that doesn't have it's own facilities. Libraries--there's a remote chance I might request a book from a library in the new development area. The big water project? If they weren't building we wouldn't have needed that tunnel under the lake. Nearly 100% of the benefit of the new infrastructure goes to the people living in the new developments.

How the fuck do you not understand that you benefit from all those things even if you don't directly use them, by simply living in a vastly and intricately interconnected society with people who do

 

[bilby]

Everyone benefits from schools - even people with no childen - because living in a place full of idiots sucks ass.

That I am here needing to explain this to supposed adults strongly suggests that we need to spend a great deal more in this area.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Here in the US, the schools are producing a place full of idiots. What, then, are we paying for?

 

[Patooka]

Here in the US, the schools are producing a place full of idiots. What, then, are we paying for?

That's what you get with limited regulation, genius.

 

[bilby]

Here in the US, the schools are producing a place full of idiots. What, then, are we paying for?

You pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

 

[Axulus]

Here in the US, the schools are producing a place full of idiots. What, then, are we paying for?

You pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

If this is peanuts, how do you classify the spending by other countries?

The United States spends more money educating its young people than any other nation, according to Education at a Glance 2017, the most recent study from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which compiles educational data from nations across the globe each year. In 2014, the U.S. spent an average of $12,157 per student on elementary and secondary education, over 30% more than the OECD average of $9,419. College spending, including technical schools and universities, was nearly $30,000, 75% more than the average spending of other countries in the OECD. Total U.S. spending averaged $16,268 per student, 51% more than the average for all of the countries included in the OECD study.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/what-country-spends-most-education.asp

 

[Canard DuJour]

No one will have to pay for student loan forgiveness. You have to understand how banking works to know why this is. And I don't mean the "banks loan out deposits" fantasy. The banks loan out money created by the Federal Reserve banking system out of thin air. If the government wants to forgive these loans they can do it with a stroke of a pen. The penstroke would eliminate the liability of the former student to pay back the loan and would eliminate the liability of the bank to pay back the loan from the Federal Reserve banking system. Everyone is happy with the bank losing out on the interest income only. The economy will have a boost in that the former student will be able to buy a home, a car, etc. instead of paying off the forgiven loan.

You've already been explained to how this is just fantasy. Trotting it out again doesn't make it any more true.

Explained by who? You? That's worth rather less than nothing. It's been explained by central banks which oversee the banking system, and confirmed empirically, that SimpleDon is right about how that works.

 

[Canard DuJour]

That's not the sort of stuff we are griping about. Virtually all the large (big enough to need infrastructure beyond simply the local roads the builder is already expected to pay for) projects are at the edge of town. Am I ever going to drive on those roads? No, unless I'm going somewhere in that development.

Yeah, you'd be better off with roads only in the middle of town. They could bring all the food, goods, trash etc in and out with, like, big helicopters.