Political Digression Thread -- Save UP! Move the politically focused stuff here

[urbanlover568]

5 minutes ago, Rufus said:

Unfortunately I think it highlights the problems of an economic system working as also a political system. I would say there are no successful countries that are either capitalist or socialist. But, I would say Scandinavia does a great job of combining a heavily service-based economy and capitalist system with increased social programs and participation. 

The taxes in the US will have to increase to match the Nordic Model. The VAT in those countries is 25% for example compared to the US's 7%. And you have to get government approval for a medical procedure. 

https://taxfoundation.org/bernie-sanders-scandinavian-countries-taxes/#:~:text=Top personal income tax rates,and Sweden's is 57.1 percent.&text=However%2C tax rates are not,of Scandinavian income tax systems.

[SgtCampsalot]

43 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

Can you name a successful truly socialist or communist country? 

Cuba - *especially* so, because they have thrived and gained their quality-of-life and health in spite of murderous sanctions, and coup/military attempts over the decades from the US.

Also, let me redirect your question: Can you name a truly Socialist country that has not been intentionally besieged economically and militarily by the US? I can't think of one. This list needs to include coups whose combatants are trained/supported by US intel agencies, etc. The US state is terrified of any successful examples of indigenous/populist Socialism. 

Edited September 15, 2020 by SgtCampsalot

[urbanlover568]

1 minute ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Cuba - *especially* so, because they have thrived and gained their quality-of-life and health in spite of murderous sanctions, and coup/military attempts over the decades from the US.

Also, let me redirect your question: Can you name a truly Socialist country that has not been intentionally besieged economically and militarily by the US? I can't think of one. This list needs to include coups whose combatants are trained/supported by US intel agencies, etc. The US state is terrified of any successful examples of indigenous/populist Socialism. 

You are going to list CUBA as a answer? WOW! I know Cuban's who would disagree with you. 

[SgtCampsalot]

9 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

You are going to list CUBA as a answer? WOW! I know Cuban's who would disagree with you. 

The Cuban revolutionaries were up against a brutal dictator that had been oppressing, murdering, and torturing its citizens, especially its most indigenous population, under puppet control from the US/Spain and their corporations, for centuries.

Slavery had only ended in Cuba ~50 years before the revolution. The majority of the population worked hard labor under plantation economies.

The most exiles from Cuba after the revolution were regime-loyal, and/or plantation/land owners who refused to give up their private land and wealth.

I don't suppose to know if they went about it in the "right" way, but also any of us sitting in our comfort cannot possibly know what we would have done living in that kind of society. Revolutions don't just happen, there's a damn good reason for them (unless they are fomented by proxy, like the US does constantly).

Also, yes, today Cuba has some of the highest quality of life and healthcare in the world. That's EXTREMELY admirable given the assault they endured by the US for decades.

Edited September 15, 2020 by SgtCampsalot

[kermit]

1 hour ago, urbanlover568 said:

The taxes in the US will have to increase to match the Nordic Model. The VAT in those countries is 25% for example compared to the US's 7%. And you have to get government approval for a medical procedure. 

https://taxfoundation.org/bernie-sanders-scandinavian-countries-taxes/#:~:text=Top personal income tax rates,and Sweden's is 57.1 percent.&text=However%2C tax rates are not,of Scandinavian income tax systems.

Nordic countries consistently show the highest rates of happiness in the world. Most Scandanavians feel like the taxes they pay are in line with their satisfaction with the services they receive. If we switch to that sort of healthcare funding system here my family would certainly be better off (swapping a 25% VAT for my health insurance payments plus the employer contribution).

Is government approval there any different than insurance company approval here? I have lost count of how many medical procedures my insurance company has found a way to not pay for here. But your gatekeeper statement is wrong, there is a parallel private healthcare system (I have used the one in Sweden, I assume similar systems exist in the other Nordics) that functions exactly as healthcare in the US  (payment = access).

Edited September 15, 2020 by kermit

[davidclt]

4 hours ago, urbanlover568 said:

The taxes in the US will have to increase to match the Nordic Model. The VAT in those countries is 25% for example compared to the US's 7%. And you have to get government approval for a medical procedure. 

https://taxfoundation.org/bernie-sanders-scandinavian-countries-taxes/#:~:text=Top personal income tax rates,and Sweden's is 57.1 percent.&text=However%2C tax rates are not,of Scandinavian income tax systems.

My first kneejerk response to this was going to be, "So‽"

As it stands now, I have to get approval from my insurance company for medical procedures. In addition to  this approval, I get to pay $854/month (medical and dental) and then pay family deductibles of $10k. Assuming a salary of $100,000, that means it's 20% of my income and I have the pain of dealing with my insurance company and even then I'm never convinced something won't come up. Tell me how having to deal with Medicare like insurance would be a bad thing? The for-profit model of healthcare in the U.S. is horrifically broken. The ACA (aka ObamaCare) was a half-assed, neutered answer to providing healthcare and remains under Republican attack with no replacement.

Thom Tillis' staffer succinctly summarizes most if not all of the Republican Party's stance on healthcare (in my estimation):

https://news.yahoo.com/thom-tillis-staffer-tells-cancer-003956979.html

Quote

"Well, you got to find a way to get it," the staffer said.

. . .

The response was snide: "Sounds like something you're going to have to figure it out."

 

[urbanlover568]

12 minutes ago, davidclt said:

My first kneejerk response to this was going to be, "So‽"

As it stands now, I have to get approval from my insurance company for medical procedures. In addition to  this approval, I get to pay $854/month (medical and dental) and then pay family deductibles of $10k. Assuming a salary of $100,000, that means it's 20% of my income and I have the pain of dealing with my insurance company and even then I'm never convinced something won't come up. Tell me how having to deal with Medicare like insurance would be a bad thing? The for-profit model of healthcare in the U.S. is horrifically broken. The ACA (aka ObamaCare) was a half-assed, neutered answer to providing healthcare and remains under Republican attack with no replacement.

Thom Tillis' staffer succinctly summarizes most if not all of the Republican Party's stance on healthcare (in my estimation):

https://news.yahoo.com/thom-tillis-staffer-tells-cancer-003956979.html

 

Insurance and government healthcare inflate prices across the board. Eliminating these will drop the costs.

Capitalism = self-charted destiny.

Socialism/Communism/Fascism  = government predetermined destiny. 

Quote

One reason for rising healthcare costs is government policy. Since the inception of Medicare and Medicaid—programs that help people without health insurance—providers have been able to increase prices.

https://www.investopedia.com/insurance/why-do-healthcare-costs-keep-rising/

[slipperypete]

21 minutes ago, davidclt said:

So‽

Best use of the interrobang I've seen all year. And it has been an interrobang kind of year. 

[urbanlover568]

2 minutes ago, slipperypete said:

Best use of the interrobang I've seen all year. And it has been an interrobang kind of year. 

How much of your income do you give to health charities? Or do you just want to force everyone to pay(Tax)? 

[davidclt]

1 minute ago, urbanlover568 said:

How much of your income do you give to health charities? Or do you just want to force everyone to pay(Tax)? 

I tithe my income across different organizations (Community = schools, land trusts, environmental causes. Healthcare = hospice, healthcare justice, elder care recognition, "causes" (cancer, HIV). Human Rights = ENC, EFF, ToY, UMC). Media = Public radio/TV, Internet Archive Wikimedia Foundation). That said, in a civil and rich society, providing accessible healthcare to all is civil and we have been less than civil for far too long. The Republicans are bereft of useful answers.

[urbanlover568]

Just now, davidclt said:

I tithe my income across different organizations (Community = schools, land trusts, environmental causes. Healthcare = hospice, healthcare justice, elder care recognition, "causes" (cancer, HIV). Human Rights = ENC, EFF, ToY, UMC). Media = Public radio/TV, Internet Archive Wikimedia Foundation). That said, in a civil and rich society, providing accessible healthcare to all is civil and we have been less than civil for far too long. The Republicans are bereft of useful answers.

I'm starting to see a theme here from the liberal folks, higher taxes more government mandates and control. Really sad... 

[davidclt]

57 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

I'm starting to see a theme here from the liberal folks, higher taxes more government mandates and control. Really sad... 

I'm starting to see a theme here from the conservative folks, "Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. F*ck you! I've got mine. I worked hard for all I have and no one is "entitled" to it. Don't raise my taxes and don't do sh*t for anyone who doesn't look, think or act like I do. Only 'job creators' and corporations are entitled to bail outs and support. Privatize the gains and socialize the losses." Really selfish and sad.

Until now @urbanlover568 , I've responded completely, respectfully, transparently to you. You persist the practice of ad hominem attacks in this forum and I personally do not feel like you are here to do anything other than troll people.

Edited September 15, 2020 by davidclt

[urbanlover568]

1 minute ago, davidclt said:

I'm starting to see a theme here from the conservative folks, "Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. F*ck you! I've got mine. I worked hard for all I have and no one is "entitled" to it. Don't raise my taxes and don't do sh*t for anyone who doesn't look, think or act like I do. Only 'job creators' and corporations are entitled to bail outs and support. Privatize the gains and socialize the losses."

Until now @urbanlover568 , I've responded completely, respectfully, transparently to you. You persist the practice of ad hominem attacks in this forum and I personally do not feel like you are here to do anything other than troll people.

I get it, you  socialism and hate capitalism.  Completely understand. 

[davidclt]

7 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

I get it, you  socialism and hate capitalism.  Completely understand. 

Nope, you are wrong. I like civil society where we treat all people with dignity and respect.

We are currently the most wealthy nation in the world with health care costs spiraling out of control, declining lifespans, increasing inequality, stagnant wages, executive compensation is at all time highs (enabled by fiscal policy which enables and then by extension makes boards excessively compensate and protect executives. We don't live in a capitalist society.

[urbanlover568]

1 minute ago, davidclt said:

Nope, you are wrong. I like civil society where we treat all people with dignity and respect.

We are currently the most wealthy nation in the world with health care costs spiraling out of control, declining lifespans, increasing inequality, stagnant wages, executive compensation is at all time highs (enabled by fiscal policy which enables and then by extension makes boards excessively compensate and protect executives. We don't live in a capitalist society.

 I like civil society where people are taxed heavily* 

 

[SgtCampsalot]

1 hour ago, urbanlover568 said:

 

Also, I'm no Tankie, but I do think it's crucial we look at a nation's actions in full context. 

 

[urbanlover568]

5 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Also, I'm no Tankie, but I do think it's crucial we look at a nation's actions in full context. 

 

If your taking lessons from the ANC, then look no further to your future unemployment projections. Socialist utopia. High unemployment, food lines, and complete dependance on government. 

[elrodvt]

@SgtCampsalotNever heard the term Tankie before. Thanks for the education. ;-)

[urbanlover568]

Fact of the day:

Edited September 16, 2020 by urbanlover568

[Nick2]

[SgtCampsalot]

When the Boomer memes come out the conversation stops. 

Edited September 16, 2020 by SgtCampsalot

[davidclt]

15 hours ago, urbanlover568 said:

I get it, you  socialism and hate capitalism.  Completely understand. 

Tell me again about why government run healthcare would be so bad (yay "Capitalism"):

Edited September 16, 2020 by davidclt

[atlrvr]

^^^ wait, we're vilifying CEO's now where the median wage of their employees (of which there are more than 250k represented above) is approximately 10% above the US median wage?  Let's also say that CEO's should make $0, and 100% of there previous salary should be redistributed to get he rest of the staff...those employees get less than $500/year raise... hopefully the budget rate CEO knows what they are doing cause there's a lot of jobs at risk otherwise...or was the suggestion that the government should take over, so no worries???

[elrodvt]

^In a perfect world sure. But this assumes CEO are paid based on performance. Which quite often ( since they all sit on each others boards) they are not. It's pretty hard for a CEO to get fired and when they are they get massive buyouts to reward  their incompetency.

A lot of these type of capitalist vs "socialist" arguments assume true capitalism which we i think you would agree we don't have. It's especially laughable when it comes to health care,  and this is where I think the government takeover talk primarily comes from.  In that "industry" capitalism requires shopping for the best deal while bleeding to death. 

So, I don't think anyone is proposing government take over of private industry taking place in a competitive marketplace. Anti-competitive environments are pushed repeatably by these large companies and since they now own the congress , post Citizens united, they often get whatever they want.  That needs to stop. AntiTrust needs to make a big comeback.

[atlrvr]

 

59 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

^In a perfect world sure. But this assumes CEO are paid based on performance. Which quite often ( since they all sit on each others boards) they are not. It's pretty hard for a CEO to get fired and when they are they get massive buyouts to reward  their incompetency.

A lot of these type of capitalist vs "socialist" arguments assume true capitalism which we i think you would agree we don't have. It's especially laughable when it comes to health care,  and this is where I think the government takeover talk primarily comes from.  In that "industry" capitalism requires shopping for the best deal while bleeding to death. 

So, I don't think anyone is proposing government take over of private industry taking place in a competitive marketplace. Anti-competitive environments are pushed repeatably by these large companies and since they now own the congress , post Citizens united, they often get whatever they want.  That needs to stop. AntiTrust needs to make a big comeback.

So, I actually do agree with the last part.  The first part irritates me because it's a tired trope that most CEO's are lazy and incompetent, and implies that most corporations are successful despite woeful management, which seems disingenuous.

But, like I said, I don't disagree with the last point, and I actually care far more about economics than I do politics.

Breaking up large corporations and therefore reversing the implied efficiencies of scale is a great way to increase frictional costs (otherwise known as the need for more well paying jobs).  If we agree the benefits of globalism at the expense the lower and middle class aren't worth it, I agree the appropriate steps are to break-up the large corporations.

The people of the U.K. support that hypothesis by voting for Brexit in most parts of the country (clearly not in global elite London though) and I can't wait to see Brexit in effect testing my economic theory that there will be a rise in median wages, and less income disparity overall.