Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
There's nothing stupid about spending $100,000 today in order to knock 4% off your $1,000,000 income's tax rate for the next eight years.
"Spend money to make money" and all that.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Jul 2nd 2019 at 11:21:07 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.If the problem was simply "Flint had no money" then just giving it to them would have been a solution.
But the problem was "Money could have been acquired but wasn't because the officials didn't give a crap".
Still doesn't mean being a billionaires is not inherently a exploitative existance.
"You can reply to this Message!"Frankly, that sounds like, "I don't approve of him because he didn't fund my charity instead."
Also, SOME of the objections to the existence of billionaires comes in large part from Insane Troll Logic in some respects because there's a lot of people who seem to act as if they have Scrooge McDuck Money Bins. I don't think a lot of Americans really understand how economics works with determining a person's wealth because the vast majority of an individual's wealth is usually in non-liquid assets like stock.
The fact he gave 4 billion dollars in stock that is healthy to these causes is a great thing but the healthy part of the stock is a thing that means it's almost impossible to normally give away this sort of wealth.
A lot of wealth basically IS the functioning of a healthy company.
And yes, throwing money at many projects flat out doesn't work without care because take a look at Kentucky (which is my go to Evil Is Petty) were the state successfully raised 200 million dollars for the state lottery to improve education.
The Usual Suspects (GOP) then lowered the education budget by, I shit you not, 200 million dollars. You need infrastructural changes to things like Flint and less evil politicians. It's not up to billionaires to fix Flint or East Chicago, it's the people whose jobs are not to make the problem worse.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 2nd 2019 at 10:35:03 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.We previously had a discussion about the DNC's decision to not have a specific climate debate, I don't remember the thread consensus but I believe there were a few people unhappy about the decision to not have debate specifically for Climate Change.
With that in mind, I have some news that should please ya'll. The DNC is considering whether or not to have a specific Climate Debate
.
I didn't fault them for not having one but I'm happy they've changed their mind, all the same, I think it's clear at this point that there's no way that Climate Change as an issue can be properly addressed in a normal debate. So I'm in favor for it.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThe thing is they can get devalue their stock, make the company more ethical and less profitable, their stock will loose value but the people working there will gain money, that’d be a huge charitable contribution.
Now there is an obvious problem there, there are laws preventing even majority stock holders from doing that, they are legally required to but profit before ethics.
I’m not sure it’s actually possible to run a business 100% ethically, on some level you’re always exploiting someone, often your employees, but when not them it’s often contractors, if not them than it’s often the use of unethical suppliers, or simply suppliers who use unethical suppliers.
Now in the end we just kinda accept that that’s the way it is for most businesses, in the end a single individual can’t really change the entire system, or even just the bits of the system that connect to their business. But it becomes much harder to just brush aside when it’s being done by billionaires who try and tout themselves as morally righteous.
Edited by Silasw on Jul 2nd 2019 at 5:47:04 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThe Scrooge McDuck Money Bins exist. They're called Offshore Tax Havens, and they're used to straight up hide wealth from the U.S.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
![]()
If I recall, there was no thread consensus.
This is heartening news, though the downside is we'll likely have to slog through more of Hickenlooper's "Why don't we just be nice to fossil fuel companies?" rhetoric.
Either way, we need to at least be talking about climate change, existential threat that it is, so hopefully they choose to do one.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Jul 2nd 2019 at 1:53:02 PM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerI admit my own socialism comes from the perspective that capitalism's problems are not the system of labor itself but its lack of regulation (that may be impossible to fix as resources are placed in the hands of those who will encourage their benefit from them above other considerations) rather than the system itself. Because capitalism does have one major benefit and that is the production of wealth. Capitalism is not a cherry pie but a cherry pie machine.
The issue is figuring out how to get everyone a cherry pie rather than starting with the premise everyone should only get one, which is two very different issues even if there's no reason Warren Buffett should have 100 cherry pies (and yet, he's the guy who owns the cherry pie factory—does giving it to the workers automatically lead to the best production of cherry pie for all vs. Buffett who is the cherry pie savante).
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 2nd 2019 at 11:02:38 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.When there are a finite number of cherry pies, then one person having too many prevents others from getting one.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Exactly my point.
Capitalism means there doesn't have to be.
Acting like there is and making economics based on the concept of limited cherry pies versus making more is an unhealthy economic model IMHO.
Which is essentially why credit is awesome.
Because credit divorced economics from "real" wealth and allowed the pie to flow.
And now I sound like a Syndicate Technomage running a bakery.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 2nd 2019 at 11:06:06 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters."Just make more pies" caused the economic collapse of Germany, leading directly into the rise of the Nazi Party.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.So Trump just escalated another trade conflict, by putting billions worth of tariffs on Europe, because only the US is allowed to subsidize the aerospace industry?
This ride is getting tiresome, and the only way it stops is if Trump gets turfed by a Democrat who generally accepts the foreign policy and trade consensus.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.So a new Quinnipiac poll shows Harris in a dead heat with Biden
, at 20% and 22%, respectively.
Of all the people who would step up to challenge Biden, I did not think it would be Harris, but I'm quite impressed.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Addendum to [1]
Unless, of course, it's time to start lobbying. Then they'll spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just to avoid losing money.
There's a trope to describe that specific brand of stupidity, but I'm not sure which one.
i'm tired, my friend