wealth inequality

[Tijuana]

Same point that I made above; the USA is in this weird place where the States act like they're way more independent than they actually are. I can't think of any circumstance where Canadian provinces acted like they were in "competition"; most business is either resource-based (forestry, agriculture, etc; Nunavut isn't likely to outcompete BC for foresting bids) or location-based (most retail outlets, where you want a distribution network).

The idea that you'd fuck over your own population to try and attract a bunch of minimum-wage jobs just never emerges as a real option.

But, what if you have a shit load of unemployed people? What is the lesser evil? No jobs or low paying jobs? It kind of depends on the circumstance.

[Mormolyce]

Comfortable people are weak and lazy. The public opinion may be that but throwing an ever expensive army into the hell mouth of an insurgency will be difficult. Look how quickly the War on Terror fell apart as American's got sick of it and the war effort declined. And that was when we were attacked. Invasion for pure resource gathering will have about as much support.

You could've spent the next century in Iraq, pumping more and more dollars and soldiers' lives into it, and it still would've collapsed the moment you left. That's what happens when you expect a puppet government to stand on its own.

[Bodakane]

If you stated a fact in rebuttal, it would be the first today.

[COLOR="#417394"]No, I think people who break the law should always be prosecuted. By just using basic logic and science, the only person who can 100% stop the corruption from happening, is the politician.

You see, my position has a logical and clear solution. Your solution calls for people to suddenly stop being assholes, which is unlikely, and has no means for being implemented.

You didn't offer a fucking solution. That's ridiculous. And the same can be said for your stance, in that you just want people to stop being assholes.

Its real simple, PACs & lobbies should be illegal as well as non anonymous donations. That would make an impact.

If you remove the means of corruption then corruption will have a harder time happening. Then good people will start running for government positions. Real simple, the way the founding fathers intended.

[Tijuana]

You didn't offer a fucking solution. That's ridiculous. And the same can be said for your stance, in that you just want people to stop being assholes.

Its real simple, PACs & lobbies should be illegal as well as non anonymous donations. That would make an impact.

If you remove the means of corruption then corruption will have a harder time happening. Then good people will start running for government positions. Real simple, the way the founding fathers intended.

Wait, were talking about bribes. Now campaign donations are bribes? LOL wat?

If you want to remove the core means of corruption, then we need to get rid of all tax deductions. That is the currency of corruption. Plus, they are all immoral anyway. Every single one of them.

[Mormolyce]

Well unlike the AU, a steak dinner doesn't cost 40$ in the U.S. Nor are our utility bills 800$ plus

You're eating steak dinners on $25k p.a.?

I don't really know how to compare that because "steak dinner" isn't really a thing here. Sometimes I make eye fillet (tenderloin in the US?) and two of those set me back about AUD$12.

Utility bills? What's that, per annum?

[Cthulhu 2020]

Then why did your guys vote against a bill that gave them every single thing they wanted, minus votes. If it wasn't the votes, why did they not support Rubio's bill?

"Your guys?"

Last I knew it passed the then Democrat controlled Senate, and came to a halt in the Republican controlled congress where it went to die. I never looked at the roll call, so who all voted against it, and it'll probably be easy to tell why. I'm guessing blue dog Democrats, but you're also acting as if the Democrat position on illegal immigration is some kind of hive mind that wants mass illegal migration for the votes, which has always been good for a laugh whenever someone claims that.

[Endus]

But, what if you have a shit load of unemployed people? What is the lesser evil? No jobs or low paying jobs? It kind of depends on the circumstance.

Those provinces with higher unemployment are typically not preferred locations for pretty much the same reasons. You're not going to put a manufacturing plant in PEI or Newfoundland, because both are islands with limited transport options to ship product off-island.

Canadians are also pretty willing to move to other provinces, generally.

[Cthulhu 2020]

If you stated a fact in rebuttal, it would be the first today.

This is like the MMO-C equivalent of calling someone a poopy face. A fact you don't like is still a fact.

[xChurch]

I've really never understood the resistance to a min wage hike from lower and middle-class people when it should mean that anyone making above it has grounds to argue for a raise relative to what the increase was.

[Tijuana]

"Your guys?"

Last I knew it passed the then Democrat controlled Senate, and came to a halt in the Republican controlled congress where it went to die. I never looked at the roll call, so who all voted against it, and it'll probably be easy to tell why. I'm guessing blue dog Democrats, but you're also acting as if the Democrat position on illegal immigration is some kind of hive mind that wants mass illegal migration for the votes, which has always been good for a laugh whenever someone claims that.

I'm not saying the citizens care about that. But if you think you need a hive mind to do the math on what happens if you flip Texas blue, I mean I just don't think you are giving the DNC enough credit.

- - - Updated - - -

This is like the MMO-C equivalent of calling someone a poopy face. A fact you don't like is still a fact.

Yep. And it would still be the first from you today. Do you see the irony of defending your lone fact with emotion, as a means to prop up your argument that your positions are not all based in emotion?

[Cthulhu 2020]

I'm not saying the citizens care about that. But if you think you need a hive mind to do the math on what happens if you flip Texas blue, I mean I just don't think you are giving the DNC enough credit.

So do you have that roll call? After all, it passed the Democrat controlled Senate and was then cock blocked by republicans in the house. A roll call would be pretty helpful, otherwise it looks like your claim that many Democrats voted against it is BS.

Yep. And it would still be the first from you today. Do you see the irony of defending your lone fact with emotion, as a means to prop up your argument that your positions are not all based in emotion?

Lots of facts that you don't like, but at least you had the sense to recognize all the minimum wage bills getting cock blocked by the right.

[Sorrior]

Or we could just grow the economy and live in paradise like 1950s white america. The best times in history are periods of high growth. I'll never understand why the left would sacrifice the benefit of all, just to keep the wealthy from benefiting also. Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face...

The very time period you mention had the wealthy paying 70-90% taxes and a livable wage that today would be 26 dollars minimum if accounting for both inflation and productivity

Thus making our arguments for us and negating yours

- - - Updated - - -

When have I ever talked about punishing illegals? Quote please. Since I'm a grown up, and not a partisan hack, I can hold both the position that I feel compassion for illegal aliens, but also see the problems they create. If I only have 5 steaks, and a family of 5, that neighbor kid is gonna have to go around dinner time. That doesn't make me a mean person, that is just reality.

I don't get your OBSESSION with everyone shouting loudly from every roof top that we should punish employers. I literally have not disagreed with that point even once, and you keep throwing it back at me. Why? I agree. Why do you keep using it as a counter point?

Seriously guy, you are like so full of emotion, you don't even realize it. We are discussing complex things and having a bit of fun with it. And then you come in all "RICH GUY BAD. STEAL FOOD FROM POOR." It really puts a damper on the discussion because we have to pick apart all your confused and misguided claims. Seriously, just reread some of your counter points and note how they are all nearly 100% emotion, with little fact or logic.

- - - Updated - - -



Not at all. I have very mixed views. Hell, I support basic income, gay rights, and a number of issues that live on the left. The left has some great ideas. The right has some great ideas. The intended purpose of our government, is to choose which problem gets which solution. Instead we have crybaby assholes (the politicians) who endlessly argue about who is more mean or naive. I don't really think that advances us in any way.

Ok I agree with you their and on basic income among other things.

[Gestopft]

At some point, it becomes so burdensome, that you eat up all the growth with compliance.

I agree that bureaucracy and regulations can be cumbersome, and can be expensive, but behind your statement is the implication that if you took away some of the compliance costs, you'd get more growth, which I don't think is necessarily true. My argument is that a struggling consumer class is responsible for far more of the slow growth than burdensome regulations. Keep in mind that the US is still in the top 10 in ease of doing business- I don't think it's regulations that are killing growth as much as you think.

Anyway, if you reduce overhead via lower compliance costs, you have a few options for what to do with the extra money:
1) Invest in new employees.
2) Invest in services to improve your business
3) Keep it as profits

Numbers 1) and 2) are incentive-dependent. You are only going to pick those options if you believe that it will be profitable for your company. Number 3) is its own incentive. If you don't need to hire new employees or contractors, you won't. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you are going to provide jobs.

[Tijuana]

So do you have that roll call? After all, it passed the Democrat controlled Senate and was then cock blocked by republicans in the house. A roll call would be pretty helpful, otherwise it looks like your claim that many Democrats voted against it is BS.




Lots of facts that you don't like, but at least you had the sense to recognize all the minimum wage bills getting cock blocked by the right.

But we don't know if they would vote on a reasonable figure, since there has yet to be one proposed.

[Theinquisition]

Seriously?

What kind of person do you think all those offered bribes calls to the government? I mean you can't fucking be serious? Do you think people that try to hire someone for murder are wrong or is it just the people that take the job? I mean come the fuck on.

this serious has to be explained to you?

The corruption lies on the side who has the ABILITY to make desired change with a bribe. the government has the ability to change regulations or enact laws that benefit the entity doing the bribing.

It certainly doesn't make the business ethical, but the gov't official would be the one taking the brunt of the penalty.

[Sorrior]

AH yes the "90% marginal tax rate" myth.

You do realize that damn near NO ONE actually paid those taxes right? there were a myriad of loopholes and deductions that could be used to get out of paying that much.

the biggest reason that the 50's were a economic "golden age" for the U.S. is because most of the industrialized world was blown the fuck up 10 years prior and were still recovering. the U.S. was the only major economy still making shit people wanted.

- - - Updated - - -



why is it not?

Yes and they use loopholes today to pay far less abd sometimes pay nothing but instead GET paid(see GE)

[Tijuana]

I agree that bureaucracy and regulations can be cumbersome, and can be expensive, but behind your statement is the implication that if you took away some of the compliance costs, you'd get more growth, which I don't think is necessarily true. My argument is that a struggling consumer class is responsible for far more of the slow growth than burdensome regulations. Keep in mind that the US is still in the top 10 in ease of doing business- I don't think it's regulations that are killing growth as much as you think.

Anyway, if you reduce overhead via lower compliance costs, you have a few options for what to do with the extra money:
1) Invest in new employees.
2) Invest in services to improve your business
3) Keep it as profits

Numbers 1) and 2) are incentive-dependent. You are only going to pick those options if you believe that it will be profitable for your company. Number 3) is its own incentive. If you don't need to hire new employees or contractors, you won't. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you are going to provide jobs.

Well, now we are playing chicken and egg. You say the low growth is harming the poor, and I agree. But I don't see it that the low growth is caused by the poor. Regulation is CERTAINLY not the core problem of the poor growth; I'm sorry if I made it sound that way. It's just another straw piled upon the camel. The biggest problem currently is the whole Obamacare fiasco. Like it or not, it's a big additional cost to the employer. Any chance at growth for many businesses was eaten up by that, and then we will sort of have to adjust over time to account for it, likely via price increases/inflation.

[Cthulhu 2020]

But we don't know if they would vote on a reasonable figure, since there has yet to be one proposed.

Do you think they've all been $15/hr or something? I guess you haven't been paying attention to like half of them. Republicans have this new found fetish in stopping pretty much any bill regardless of merit.

[Theinquisition]

Yes and they use loopholes today to pay far less abd sometimes pay nothing but instead GET paid(see GE)

Well the argument that can be made is that companies use the tax breaks to invest the money and hire more people, who than pay more taxes than the company would have been paying to begin with. I'm not sure if its the case or not, but I do know we have some of the highest corporate taxes in the world, which really impacts how competitive we can be in the world market.

[Tijuana]

Yes and they use loopholes today to pay far less abd sometimes pay nothing but instead GET paid(see GE)

I have yet to see a tax deduction that was fair. At the end of the day, they all cause those who do not get them, to have to pay a higher tax. They sound like a discount, but the money is still collected from others in reality.

- - - Updated - - -

Do you think they've all been $15/hr or something? I guess you haven't been paying attention to like half of them. Republicans have this new found fetish in stopping pretty much any bill regardless of merit.

Do you know how many states have a higher minimum than the federal minimum?