SigmatheZeta
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2021
- Messages
- 615
- Gender
- she/her
- Basic Beliefs
- Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
Look at this yeen go, people. His rhetoric sounds like, "Stick with me, and you'll never go hungry again!"
But then the speech goes,
"Of course, quid pro quo, you're expected
To take certain duties on board
The future is littered with prizes
And though I'm the main addressee
The point that I must emphasize is
You won't get a sniff without me!"
I mean Disney really did try to warn us about men with big egos that make people a lot of promises.
We ignored the warning, and when the yeens were going like...
"Oooooo, la-la-la!
We'll have food!
Lots of food
We repeat
Endless meat"
...we thought it was a joke. It did not register in our minds that it was real until we literally saw the yeens goose-stepping through Charlottesville, Virginia. Those were the yeens. It was news from the future, people.
People, read the UCLA study that I posted above, please. Read at least the abstract, which I quoted in its entirety.
The research clearly demonstrates that the most economically disadvantaged regions of the country would actually benefit from targeted stimulus, especially with a focus mostly on education. See the UCLA study. It is imperative that all of you to understand that so-called "supply-side economics" sometimes work, but they only work under certain types of economic conditions.
For example, it is basically impossible to actually go hungry or without shelter in New York City unless you are just not trying to take advantage of the opportunities that you have, but only a very small number of people there are actually going to become billionaires. The shelters there actually tend to be well-funded, whether they receive the funding from the local government or NGOs. New York City takes care of its own. They have abundant resources. They are deservedly proud of their city. If New York City is not taking care of its own, it's not for lacking the ability. If that single city declared national independence, they would be too populous to qualify as a "micronation." That dragon can fly on its own wingspan. Congratulations to them.
On the other hand, I came from an economically disadvantaged area, and I did not see any so-called "trickle-down," there. I saw a corrupted power class and a society that was just not going to grow anytime soon. There were literal drive-by shootings in a town with only slightly more than 1,000 people living in it. The corruption there is actually pretty unbelievable. The town that I came from actually had a contraction in the local population since I left. The education system was basically a warehouse with human bodies in it, and while I tested as gifted, I ended up becoming an autodidact with lopsided academic development and relatively few of the skills and habits that were needed to survive in the higher education system.
Read the UCLA study, please. It really does a lot to demystify the reasons why there is such conflicting evidence regarding supply-side economics. The reason why is that mega-billionaires are not really something to worry about in an extremely advanced economy. It is actually a good thing if an economy has successfully attracted the world's most gifted individuals. We should not really be disappointed if not all of us are able to do the same things that only a uniquely talented handful of individuals in the world are able to do. On the other hand, areas like the one that I lived in are in a malaise that they need to be jogged out of in order to recover their capacity for developing on their own. The social and political dysfunctions of those cultures tend to hinder the development of people that could otherwise act as their leaders. They need investment, especially in their education systems.
^My initial discussion on it is located there.
We need regionally targeted spending on developing those areas that are not yet able to provide fully for their own people's health. I would never counsel to give medicine to a healthy child, but a town with barely more than 1,000 people living in it that has drive-by shootings at the local gas station is not the healthy child. They are socioeconomic train-wrecks. I saw what was going on myself. It was a nightmare.
The current research really supports my case for targeted regional investment, especially focused on the education system. Rural areas that have been cultural laggards in spite of an abundance of natural resources need comprehensive reform.
But then the speech goes,
"Of course, quid pro quo, you're expected
To take certain duties on board
The future is littered with prizes
And though I'm the main addressee
The point that I must emphasize is
You won't get a sniff without me!"
I mean Disney really did try to warn us about men with big egos that make people a lot of promises.
We ignored the warning, and when the yeens were going like...
"Oooooo, la-la-la!
We'll have food!
Lots of food
We repeat
Endless meat"
...we thought it was a joke. It did not register in our minds that it was real until we literally saw the yeens goose-stepping through Charlottesville, Virginia. Those were the yeens. It was news from the future, people.
People, read the UCLA study that I posted above, please. Read at least the abstract, which I quoted in its entirety.
The research clearly demonstrates that the most economically disadvantaged regions of the country would actually benefit from targeted stimulus, especially with a focus mostly on education. See the UCLA study. It is imperative that all of you to understand that so-called "supply-side economics" sometimes work, but they only work under certain types of economic conditions.
For example, it is basically impossible to actually go hungry or without shelter in New York City unless you are just not trying to take advantage of the opportunities that you have, but only a very small number of people there are actually going to become billionaires. The shelters there actually tend to be well-funded, whether they receive the funding from the local government or NGOs. New York City takes care of its own. They have abundant resources. They are deservedly proud of their city. If New York City is not taking care of its own, it's not for lacking the ability. If that single city declared national independence, they would be too populous to qualify as a "micronation." That dragon can fly on its own wingspan. Congratulations to them.
On the other hand, I came from an economically disadvantaged area, and I did not see any so-called "trickle-down," there. I saw a corrupted power class and a society that was just not going to grow anytime soon. There were literal drive-by shootings in a town with only slightly more than 1,000 people living in it. The corruption there is actually pretty unbelievable. The town that I came from actually had a contraction in the local population since I left. The education system was basically a warehouse with human bodies in it, and while I tested as gifted, I ended up becoming an autodidact with lopsided academic development and relatively few of the skills and habits that were needed to survive in the higher education system.
Read the UCLA study, please. It really does a lot to demystify the reasons why there is such conflicting evidence regarding supply-side economics. The reason why is that mega-billionaires are not really something to worry about in an extremely advanced economy. It is actually a good thing if an economy has successfully attracted the world's most gifted individuals. We should not really be disappointed if not all of us are able to do the same things that only a uniquely talented handful of individuals in the world are able to do. On the other hand, areas like the one that I lived in are in a malaise that they need to be jogged out of in order to recover their capacity for developing on their own. The social and political dysfunctions of those cultures tend to hinder the development of people that could otherwise act as their leaders. They need investment, especially in their education systems.
Trickle Down Economics is Misunderstood and Straw-Manned
Billionaires do not really benefit from the most disadvantages Americans continuously failing to fully get their shit together. It is not a win/lose scenario to fight back against inequality. If a large percent of people are living on meager wages, it is probable that they are not really making...
iidb.org
^My initial discussion on it is located there.
We need regionally targeted spending on developing those areas that are not yet able to provide fully for their own people's health. I would never counsel to give medicine to a healthy child, but a town with barely more than 1,000 people living in it that has drive-by shootings at the local gas station is not the healthy child. They are socioeconomic train-wrecks. I saw what was going on myself. It was a nightmare.
The current research really supports my case for targeted regional investment, especially focused on the education system. Rural areas that have been cultural laggards in spite of an abundance of natural resources need comprehensive reform.