Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by cook on July 19, 2019, 03:50:49 pm »

I like that term, compassionate capitalism.

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by Taalcon on July 19, 2019, 01:43:29 pm »

EXACTLY. It becomes a battle of rhetoric than a battle of actual ideas. And that's just not productive in actually contributing to solving problems.

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by Roper on July 19, 2019, 01:34:52 pm »

Quote from: Taalcon on July 19, 2019, 12:25:14 pm

And at this point, the word 'socialism' has sort of lost its meaning. It doesn't mean what the Right is loudly saying it means, and it doesn't mean what most of the Left who are embracing the word means either. It's why the specific ideas and implementations need to be approached head-on rather than the boogey-man of a word-as-concept.

I like what Jeff Dorfman wrote in Forbes last year:

Quote

Socialism can take the form of government controlling or interfering with free markets, nationalizing industries, and subsidizing favored ones (green energy, anyone?). The Nordic countries don’t actually do much of those things. Yes, they offer government-paid healthcare, in some cases tuition-free university educations, and rather generous social safety nets, all financed with high taxes. However, it is possible to do these things without interfering in the private sector more than required. It is allowing businesses to be productive that produces the high corporate and personal incomes that support the tax collections making the government benefits feasible. The Nordic countries are smart enough not to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

If the left insists on naming a system of generous government benefits combined with a free market democratic socialism, I cannot stop them. That seems unnecessarily confusing since the government is actually running no industries other than education (and meddling somewhat in healthcare). It certainly isn’t socialism. In fact, the only reason most such countries can afford those benefits is that their market economies are so productive they can cover the expense of the government’s generosity. Perhaps a better name for what the Nordic countries practice would be compassionate capitalism.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#16982d6b74ad

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by Taalcon on July 19, 2019, 12:25:14 pm »

I think these are all thoughtful. And it's why I like listening to the debates, and why it's important for them to play out publicly, so ideas can be engaged with, and hopefully the best ideas rise to the top.

I just wish that there was a candidate who would be able to engage with them intelligently from the other side of the aisle as well. you know, they way things should be. Get the best ideas, not just the strongest personality.

Since Trump's not railing against one of the already most hated people in America, Trump's got a super up-hill battle going into any one-on-one debate. I'm really interested in seeing how this plays out.

And at this point, the word 'socialism' has sort of lost its meaning. It doesn't mean what the Right is loudly saying it means, and it doesn't mean what most of the Left who are embracing the word means either. It's why the specific ideas and implementations need to be approached head-on rather than the boogey-man of a word-as-concept.

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by Roper on July 19, 2019, 12:02:33 pm »

My thoughts about one possible solution:

Provide businesses an incentive to pay better wages. If a business employs an hourly worker full time and pays that worker at least $15/hour, then that worker is eligible to enroll in Medicaid for health insurance.

I think it's a good compromise to the single-issue extremes which are being proposed.

In a few years: If a business employs an hourly worker full time at $20/hour, then that worker is eligible for Medicaid AND 128 credits of free tuition at a public college or university.

Businesses get a more educated, healthy, and productive work force. Government gets more tax revenue. The people at the lowest economic level have a path upwards. Huzzah! A win-win-win!

Whatever the solution, the costs need to shared. Corporations can't bear the entire burden. Neither can taxpayers.

I have lots of other ideas about retirement programs, family leave, etc. But this is a good place to start

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by N3uroTypical on July 19, 2019, 11:43:58 am »

Quote from: Roper on July 19, 2019, 11:22:47 am

I'm also sure there are people who would spend all their time playing Fortnite or using social media because they share a house or an apartment and wouldn't have to work.

That's one end of the scale. The other end has roaming gangs of predators, serial drug abusers, folks who choose the 'homeless beggar lifestyle', and people who seek to do evil with their free time and resources.

And let's be clear - we have plenty of those folks all across this 'Fortnite to rape gang' scale already. Anyone know the issues facing Seattle, or the "shooting gallery" issues in Vancouver, or the endemic homeless population issues in Washington DC? I hear Seattle has hired full-time employees to be the "poop patrol", cleaning the human feces off the streets.

Quote

basic income would need to have some kind of accountability measure attached

The church welfare system is a good example of a system that works. We don't just give people money, we only pay bills. And the bishop works with the recipient to make sure they're moving forward to self-sufficiency. Church aid is a temporary thing only. And it's paid for by voluntary contributions, not "mandatory" offerings (to the extent you can consider tithing 'mandatory').

If someone wanted to try a government version of the church welfare system, I'd be cautiously and unenthusiastically willing to entertain the notion.

General Discussion / Re: Current Events - US Politics Edition

« Last post by Roper on July 19, 2019, 11:22:47 am »

Guaranteed basic income is a consideration of human nature. I'm sure there are people who would move up the pyramid of Maslow's hierarchy if all of their time wasn't spent just trying to survive. I'm happy to support that. I'm also sure there are people who would spend all their time playing Fortnite or using social media because they share a house or an apartment and wouldn't have to work. I definitely don't want to enable that. So, if enacted, basic income would need to have some kind of accountability measure attached. Otherwise, I'm of the opinion that I can better decide how to charitably use the money I earn.

Edit: I think guaranteed basic income is a questionable solution to the living wage problem. In a more just and equitable world, businesses would be grateful for all the public help they've received to make them successful. In turn, they would pay their employees well. That's not reality. Businesses receive all kinds of public investment, then they do things like close factories and move to cheaper overseas labor markets. They employ part-time workers so they don't have to pay benefits. They rely on contract workers for the same reason. It's all in the name of maximizing value for shareholders. Businesses which operate with a conscience, which treat their employees well, are few. No business would survive or even exist without the public investments we have all made. Let's hold businesses accountable to give a return on investment in the form of better employee compensation.