The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 46410 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
--- wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
--- wrote:
Leaving aside her appalling willingness to trade on fraudulent Indian heritage claims, she's a populist know-nothing of the Bernie Sanders sort. There is nothing new in the majority of her bad ideas.
But being a female is qualification enough these days, I suppose.
You're an idiot. She's absolutely brilliant with the fine print of policy in a way that Sanders could never touch.
I think you're misunderstanding.
My point wasn't that she lacks juridical competency. It was that she is, at heart, a populist. And like all populists - regardless of party affiliation - she is full of very bad ideas. In this respect, she differs from the Bernie Sanderses of the world in degree, not kind. Her know-nothingness is a function of these bad ideas, not her relative facility with legislative minutia.
--- wrote:
Three very bad EW ideas off the top of my head: $15 minimum wage, Accountable Capitalism Act, tying interest rates on student loans to the federal funds rate.
To anyone even remotely interested in understanding the consequences of economic policy, that last one is borderline disqualifying. It exposes the poverty of her understanding of economics something fierce.
I'm sorry I called you and idiot.
I agree with the part in large text.
As for the three examples you listed:
$15 minimum wage: In my view, this is basically a campaign headline (or a marketing headline, if you're Jeff Bezos). The WaPo article on this widely respected study makes my point for me:
Quote:
Experts cautioned that the effects of the minimum wage may vary according to the industries dominant in the cities where they are implemented along with overall economic conditions in the country as a whole.
Pushing the $15 MW narrative is rife with problems, but I can see why the populists candidates may want to campaign on it. In practice, I hope that such a measure would be subject to scrutiny and regulation across various industries/locations.
Accountable Capitalism Act: From wiki:
Quote:
It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending. Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter. The Act contains a "constituency statute" that would give directors a duty of "creating a general public benefit" with regard to a corporations stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.
Letting employees elect 40% of a BoD sounds like a bad idea to me; I would be more comfortable with something more like 20%, essentially 1-3 people acting on behalf of the employees within an otherwise more conventional (profit-driven) board. I DO like the idea of shareholders signing off on political spending and a corporate charter.
Tying interest rates on student loans to the federal funds rate: I dislike this for the simple reason that as a borrower, the idea of a variable interest rate is terrifying, regardless of what it may be tied to. It'd be a bitch to plan for upward mobility without a fixed student loan rate. But I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.
Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am Posts: 22203
I've been thinkin about youuuuuu
she's like the anti-hillary
doesn't take money from Oman
actually won elections on her own
likes blacks
_________________ All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone
Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am Posts: 22203
I've never been one to be like 'oh we need a black president' or ' oh we need a woman president' ... instead just wanting us to have the best candidate for the job
but i gotta say
with how bad DJT and co have made the public discourse around sexual harassment / the right to be a chauvinist / Roe v Wade / bullying / rape rage
we basically need a woman POTUS now to restore balance to the universe
_________________ All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone
The Dems will be putting up two women. Warren or Harris at the top. Harris, Gillibrand, Klobuchar, or Napolitano in the VP slot. My money's on Harris-Napolitano
I worry that you are right.
We need a Joe Biden type. We need a charismatic moderate. People aren't ready to hear about tax hikes and intense regulation. We need build back trust in the government before we nominate someone like Warren.
You mean Obama?
_________________ "I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle
No worries. I don't (usually) take N&D personally - we're just exchanging ideas!
It beats being called a racist or misogynist, which is the usual castigation my sort faces these days.
tragabigzanda wrote:
Pushing the $15 MW narrative is rife with problems, but I can see why the populists candidates may want to campaign on it. In practice, I hope that such a measure would be subject to scrutiny and regulation across various industries/locations....
...Letting employees elect 40% of a BoD sounds like a bad idea to me; I would be more comfortable with something more like 20%, essentially 1-3 people acting on behalf of the employees within an otherwise more conventional (profit-driven) board. I DO like the idea of shareholders signing off on political spending and a corporate charter.
Tying interest rates on student loans to the federal funds rate. I dislike this for the simple reason that as a borrower, the idea of a variable interest rate is terrifying, regardless of what it may be tied to. It'd be a bitch to plan for upward mobility without a fixed student loan rate. But I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.
The larger point I'd make is that it isn't enough for a candidate to campaign as a "champion of the working class" if the actual consequences of his or her policy prescriptions make exactly that constituency worse off than in the presence of an alternate policy (or no policy at all). In my estimation, price and wage controls are bad. Heavy-handed regulation is bad (though not all regulation is). Both prevent the kind of socioeconomic mobility that should be the end when pursuing policy to improve outcomes for the working poor. The most persuasive argument for freedom generally - and market freedom specifically - is as an economic means, not a philosophical end.
What matters when it comes to policy are outcomes, not intentions. And how they're packaged on the campaign trail is altogether irrelevant, at least for me. Part of the reason discourse is so uncivil right now is the unwillingness (inability?) to focus on substantive policy disagreements, instead choosing to get wrapped around the axle of what someone said or posted or tweeted. Everyone is so caught up in the noise that the signal is lost altogether.
I'm not even sure any of those thoughts were related to your response. I just wanted to post them.
Joined: Mon March 18, 2013 11:48 pm Posts: 5223 Location: A Dark Place
--- wrote:
Leaving aside her appalling willingness to trade on fraudulent Indian heritage claims, she's a populist know-nothing of the Bernie Sanders sort. There is nothing new in the majority of her bad ideas.
But being a female is qualification enough these days, I suppose.
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 46410 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
Warren could have cleared this up so easily like a year ago: "It was wrong of me to claim a heritage which, despite what I may have been told or may be reflected in a DNA test, in fact has had no bearing on my lifestyle or cultural upbringing."
Also, it's 2018 so I can't believe I can't believe this is a real thing.
_________________ "I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle
Warren could have cleared this up so easily like a year ago: "It was wrong of me to claim a heritage which, despite what I may have been told or may be reflected in a DNA test, in fact has had no bearing on my lifestyle or cultural upbringing."
Yes, that would be a good way to rationally respond to what has, from day one, been a legitimate complaint made in absolute good fai-
She certainly did better than my wife's family. They claimed Native American Heritage did the tests and got.........zero.....point.....zero.
“How much Sioux/Lakota/etc are you” is a conversation every Plains state white kid has a hundred times before they graduate, even though the answer is secretly almost always zero.
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:03 pm Posts: 9359 Location: Washington State
McParadigm wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
Warren could have cleared this up so easily like a year ago: "It was wrong of me to claim a heritage which, despite what I may have been told or may be reflected in a DNA test, in fact has had no bearing on my lifestyle or cultural upbringing."
Yes, that would be a good way to rationally respond to what has, from day one, been a legitimate complaint made in absolute good fai-
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum