Support NeoGAF

[Chichikov]

Hey, PoliGAF, a question for settling bar bets and such:

What numbers and stats can be used to compare how liberal or conservative an era we live in? Is there a resource one can use to quickly and easily compare tax rates, areas of spending, amount of regulation, etc. from different decades (or semi-decades)?

I would look at services offered by the government and the tax code.

 

[empty vessel]

Unfortunately a lot of those jobs were there due to an artificial economy. Our number 1 goal shouldn't be to get to where we were before.

Are you saying we should stay at 9% plus unemployment because it's where we are supposed to be? (And, what, 20% or so real unemployment?)

Hey, PoliGAF, a question for settling bar bets and such:

What numbers and stats can be used to compare how liberal or conservative an era we live in? Is there a resource one can use to quickly and easily compare tax rates, areas of spending, amount of regulation, etc. from different decades (or semi-decades)?

Not that I know of, although it would be great to have a website that was clean, comprehensive and easy to obtain data/information from about these things.

 

[Byakuya769]

Unfortunately a lot of those jobs were there due to an artificial economy. Our number 1 goal shouldn't be to get to where we were before.

You're becoming a very serious person.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I have a feeling we're going to be hearing a lot about voter fraud from liberal blogs next week. The recall polls are quite close and will be determined by voter turnout, and suppression. I'm not suggest some massive conspiracy, just saying we're already seeing a rather vigorous suppression campaign being done in broad daylight for all to see. Personally I don't think dems can retake the Wisconsin senate regardless; don't they have to win every election?

Oh well, at least we'll have Eznark reporting from the front lines as he casts his votes

 

[cartoon_soldier]

I have a feeling we're going to be hearing a lot about voter fraud from liberal blogs next week. The recall polls are quite close and will be determined by voter turnout, and suppression. I'm not suggest some massive conspiracy, just saying we're already seeing a rather vigorous suppression campaign being done in broad daylight for all to see. Personally I don't think dems can retake the Wisconsin senate regardless; don't they have to win every election?

Oh well, at least we'll have Eznark reporting from the front lines as he casts his votes

If those ballots had been mailed by liberal organizations we would have already had a media uproar, but we never have those over conservative voter supression.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

You're becoming a very serious person.

Who died and named you David Brooks?

 

[Byakuya769]

Who died and named you David Brooks?

We share the same last name, so it is my right to name who is Very Serious and who is not. You my friend, are not very serious, and likely fails to understand the pain that entitlement recipients need to endure so that we get back on the right track.

 

[Loudninja]

Walker On The Recalls: ‘If Given The Facts They’re Going To Make Good Decisions’

Walker now says that result is "out of our hands" and with the voters.

"I believe if given the facts they're going to make good decisions," Walker told reporters, after a ceremony opening the State Fair in Milwaukee. "Sometimes they're going to be decisions that side with me, sometimes they're going to be with others, but I'm going to respect their decision."

However, Walker stood by his predictions that voters would realize the benefits of his legislation: "I think slowly they will see, and overall the school programs have gotten better."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...eyre-going-to-make-good-decisions.php?ref=fpa

Heh.

 

[ToxicAdam]

From Andrew Sullivan's Facebook:

bububu we need more people voting!

 

[Invisible_Insane]

We share the same last name, so it is my right to name who is Very Serious and who is not. You my friend, are not very serious, and likely fails to understand the pain that entitlement recipients need to endure so that we get back on the right track.

The day a Brooks accuses me of being "serious" is the day that I will quit politics for good.

David Brooks should go back to Canada and lecture people there about austerity.

 

[Byakuya769]

From Andrew Sullivan's Facebook:


bububu we need more people voting!

Dahahahahahahah, I have a feeling that guy flips a coin every election.

Oh, and ToxicAdam follows Andrew Sullivan - dahahahaha.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

From Andrew Sullivan's Facebook:

bububu we need more people voting!

That the population is by and large stupid does not mean they deserve to be stripped of rights.

I wish there was a way to weight votes by the informed-ness of the person voting, though.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Oh, and ToxicAdam follows Andrew Sullivan - dahahahaha.

He had it posted on his blog. I'm a grown-ass man, I don't facebook.

That the population is by and large stupid does not mean they deserve to be stripped of rights.

I wish there was a way to weight votes by the informed-ness of the person voting, though.

The sad part is this guy is probably more informed on a wide range of topics than people who never vote. That's why I am firmly against on-line voting, vote by mail or mandatory voting that some people espouse.

 

[gcubed]

If those ballots had been mailed by liberal organizations we would have already had a media uproar, but we never have those over conservative voter supression.

we can send some black panthers out there

 

[A Human Becoming]

That the population is by and large stupid does not mean they deserve to be stripped of rights.

I wish there was a way to weight votes by the informed-ness of the person voting, though.

I say just end things like the Rock the Vote campaign. An uninformed vote is worse than not voting at all. Last November I didn't vote because I hadn't taken the time to learn about all the candidates. I am a Yellow Dog Democrat no longer.

 

[Scrow]

I wish there was a way to weight votes by the informed-ness of the person voting, though.

god damn, yes. this is the holy grail of democracy for me. if only it were possible

 

[Branduil]

That the population is by and large stupid does not mean they deserve to be stripped of rights.

I wish there was a way to weight votes by the informed-ness of the person voting, though.

god damn, yes. this is the holy grail of democracy for me. if only it were possible

I believe we tried that, it was called "white male landowners." But I'm sure it would be much fairer the second time.

 

[mckmas8808]

Are you saying we should stay at 9% plus unemployment because it's where we are supposed to be? (And, what, 20% or so real unemployment?)

.

Well you mean 20% or so underemployment right?

No I'm saying that maybe unemployment will be between 6-7% for a while due to high productivity and things of the like.

 

[Byakuya769]

He had it posted on his blog. I'm a grown-ass man, I don't facebook.

Ah man, no Friend Follow Friday for you then.

The sad part is this guy is probably more informed on a wide range of topics than people who never vote.

His level of reasoning makes me think he may take in more information about various topics, yet fails to understand or wrestle with any of them.

And that's not a "how CAN you like a CONSERVATIVE!?!" take. It's just baffling that he would be attached to those issues but disregard them to vote for someone he "likes" that has positions opposed to his.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

I believe we tried that, it was called "white male landowners." But I'm sure it would be much fairer the second time.

Terrible, horrible, no-good, very-bad example.

Even from the post you quoted, it should have been abundantly clear that I don't favor restricting the electorate. I want everyone to participate. But I think it's a stretch to claim that we should want everyone's opinion to matter equally. Someone who thinks the government shouldn't interfere with his Medicare is not well disposed to make decisions about government.

 

[Branduil]

Terrible, horrible, no-good, very-bad example.

Even from the post you quoted, it should have been abundantly clear that I don't favor restricting the electorate. I want everyone to participate. But I think it's a stretch to claim that we should want everyone's opinion to matter equally. Someone who thinks the government shouldn't interfere with his Medicare is not well disposed to make decisions about government.

In theory representative government is supposed to act as exactly the kind of "stupid filter" you are talking about. In theory.

 

[worldrunover]

Terrible, horrible, no-good, very-bad example.

Even from the post you quoted, it should have been abundantly clear that I don't favor restricting the electorate. I want everyone to participate. But I think it's a stretch to claim that we should want everyone's opinion to matter equally. Someone who thinks the government shouldn't interfere with his Medicare is not well disposed to make decisions about government.

You're sledding down a slippery slope here. I'd just leave things at your first comment and move on.

From Andrew Sullivan's Facebook:



bububu we need more people voting!

See? And you all thought Undefeated didn't touch people's lives!

 

[Invisible_Insane]

In theory representative government is supposed to act as exactly the kind of "stupid filter" you are talking about. In theory.

And so we should do nothing to adjust the theory when it doesn't work?

You're sledding down a slippery slope here. I'd just leave things at your first comment and move on.

A slippery slope to what, O Ominous One?

 

[worldrunover]

And so we should do nothing to adjust the theory when it doesn't work?

A slippery slope to what, O Ominous One?

To allowing people to determine who does and does not have valid opinion / knowledge when it comes to voting. There's simply no way to be able to parse people's votes. We elect congressmen for this purpose, that is going to have to be good enough.

 

[empty vessel]

That the population is by and large stupid does not mean they deserve to be stripped of rights.

Not to mention, there are reasons why the population is by and large stupid, i.e., causes. That doesn't mean there isn't generally a baseline of stupidity in any given society, but societies can indeed raise and, in our case, lower, that baseline. Having a news media, for example, would help. We lack that almost entirely. As would not having such inequality that it utterly destroys the foundation of education (stable and dependable environments). As would, believe it or not, nationalized health insurance. As would more empowered unions (more leisure time).

 

[empty vessel]

I say just end things like the Rock the Vote campaign. An uninformed vote is worse than not voting at all. Last November I didn't vote because I hadn't taken the time to learn about all the candidates. I am a Yellow Dog Democrat no longer.

What does this mean? That you would consider voting for Republicans? Or that you would consider voting third party? If neither of those are true, there is nothing wrong with voting a straight ticket without knowing a damn thing about any of the candidates. I say that as somebody who doesn't vote straight Democratic, mind you. But I also say that as somebody who doesn't think voting is all that important. If all one does is vote and nothing more, that person may as well not have done anything. It won't matter.

Well you mean 20% or so underemployment right?

No I'm saying that maybe unemployment will be between 6-7% for a while due to high productivity and things of the like.

Well, no, you didn't make a descriptive prediction. You made a normative statement: "Unfortunately a lot of those jobs were there due to an artificial economy. Our number 1 goal shouldn't be to get to where we were before." I just don't understand what you mean by this, that our goal should not be to get back to the unemployment levels we had before? Are you really saying we should have 6-7% unemployment?

And what do you propose to do about that 6-7% of people you are condemning? Do you agree they ought to be fully supported by society since we are imposing unemployment on them? In other words, we should give them a house, food, clothing, health care, electronics, etc. that they would have if we did not impose unemployment on them? Don't we owe people things for denying them the ability to earn a living through work?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Today the president will announce new steps aimed at helping the nation’s one million unemployed veterans get back to work. In a speech at the Washington Navy Yard, the president will challenge the private sector to hire 100,000 veterans or their spouses by the end of 2013 and will propose extending tax credits for wounded warriors and service members returning from combat.

“The president feels that our veterans who have served the country, put their lives on the line and are coming into a difficult labor market, deserve all the support we as a country can give them to find new careers, new private sector job opportunities that will allow them to have economic security for themselves and their families,” an administration official said.

The president will advocate for a “Returning Heroes Tax Credit,” which would offer participating companies a $2,400 tax credit for hiring short-term unemployed veterans. The White House would also offer additional incentives of $4,800 to companies hiring service members who have faced unemployment for six months or longer.

“This is not a tax credit that we believe necessarily has to be continued indefinitely, but we believe that with the significant number of veterans entering the workforce at a time of significant long-term unemployment as our nation is recovering from the worst recession since the Great Depression, that this is both appropriate and fair and something the American people will strongly support,” the official said.

The president will also propose continuing an existing tax credit for firms that hire veterans with disabilities and increasing the credit to companies that hire wounded warriors who have faced long-term unemployment. “We believe that this is right from an economic point of view, right from a values point of view, right in terms of honoring the brave men and women who have put their lives on the line for our country and have already sacrificed so much,” the administration official said.

In addition to tax incentives, the president will float the idea of a “reverse bootcamp” to help veterans transition back into the workforce. The idea is just one concept that will be considered by a new task force working to ensure the career readiness of veterans.

The bootcamp would be an extended transition period on the back end of service where members would receive counseling, learn more about the benefits available to them, and pursue job training opportunities.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...e-new-steps-to-get-veterans-back-to-work.html

I wonder how the GOP will come out against this. Not that I can disagree with them too much, this sounds like an election time gimmick. And haven't we already learned these tax credits don't convince companies to hire anyone...

 

[cartoon_soldier]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...e-new-steps-to-get-veterans-back-to-work.html

I wonder how the GOP will come out against this. Not that I can disagree with them too much, this sounds like an election time gimmick. And haven't we already learned these tax credits don't convince companies to hire anyone...

I believe he is hoping that since this is a program FOR veterans the GOP won't oppose it.

 

[planar1280]

I believe he is hoping that since this is a program FOR veterans the GOP won't oppose it.

or he is hoping that this program is for veterans and GOP still opposes it

 

[Byakuya769]

$4,800 tax credit for a $30,000+ liability. Who is going to jump at this when demand is nowhere to be found?

I believe he is hoping that since this is a program FOR veterans the GOP won't oppose it.

or he is hoping that this program is for veterans and GOP still opposes it

or he is just a coward toying around with election season gimmicks instead of aggressively attacking the nation's problems.

 

[mckmas8808]

Terrible, horrible, no-good, very-bad example.

Even from the post you quoted, it should have been abundantly clear that I don't favor restricting the electorate. I want everyone to participate. But I think it's a stretch to claim that we should want everyone's opinion to matter equally. Someone who thinks the government shouldn't interfere with his Medicare is not well disposed to make decisions about government.

My goodness. Dude really? Why should your vote matter more than some 30 year old chick that gets her news from the Daily Show only?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

To allowing people to determine who does and does not have valid opinion / knowledge when it comes to voting. There's simply no way to be able to parse people's votes. We elect congressmen for this purpose, that is going to have to be good enough.

Bachmann. Gohmert. Etc.

EV makes a great point about education, too. Generally, though, I think we need to consider some slightly anti-democratic reforms in the interest of making the country easier to govern. (that sounds kind of SomeDude-ish, I know.)

My goodness. Dude really? Why should your vote matter more than some 30 year old chick that gets her news from the Daily Show only?

Age or gender don't have anything to do with what I was suggesting, I don't see why you'd invoke them. We require people to demonstrate basic competencies before they conduct any number of activities that have the ability to potentially harm others. Why not voting?

What if, for example, you designed the system (I haven't thought this out rigorously) such that if you opted to take an exam demonstrating broad civic knowledge, your vote could be weighted accordingly, but everyone's vote counts as at least one vote.

 

[ReBurn]

Who gets to write the test?

 

[ToxicAdam]

The Part D drug benefit, created under the George W. Bush administration, allows seniors and others on Medicare to sign up for a privately administered, government-subsidized health plan to get their prescriptions.

Popular with beneficiaries, the program has also proven far less costly than budget analysts originally expected, in part because of competition among private plans and the growing use of less expensive generic drugs.

In 2012, the average Part D plan will charge seniors about $30 a month, the Department of Health and Human Services said.

That's down from $30.76 in 2011 and would mark the second time average premiums have declined since the drug benefit was initiated in 2006.

By comparison, overall healthcare spending in the U.S. is expected to grow by nearly 5% a year between now and 2014, according to the latest estimates by government actuaries. Premiums on many private medical insurance policies are rising even more sharply.

http://www.latimes.com/health/la-na-medicare-benefits-20110805,0,6684671.story

 

[mckmas8808]

Well, no, you didn't make a descriptive prediction. You made a normative statement: "Unfortunately a lot of those jobs were there due to an artificial economy. Our number 1 goal shouldn't be to get to where we were before." I just don't understand what you mean by this, that our goal should not be to get back to the unemployment levels we had before? Are you really saying we should have 6-7% unemployment?

And what do you propose to do about that 6-7% of people you are condemning? Do you agree they ought to be fully supported by society since we are imposing unemployment on them? In other words, we should give them a house, food, clothing, health care, electronics, etc. that they would have if we did not impose unemployment on them? Don't we owe people things for denying them the ability to earn a living through work?

We shouldn't want to do whatever is neccessity to get to a 4.5% unemployment rate if it's just going to burst again. I'd rather our economy have a +2.8% GDP every year and a 6.5% unemployment rate for the next 10 years, than have a +4.5% GDP growth and a 4.5% unemployment rate for 3 years and then just blow up again.

Basically I want a more stable growth economy. And I do think they should be supported by society, but probably not to the levels that you would like them to be. No electronics either. And I never ever said that we should deny people a living. Where are you getting that from?

 

[Particle Physicist]

.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Who gets to write the test?

An independent panel of psychometricians, sociologists, and civic historians chosen at random from a pool of interested applicants, with the objective of writing questions at an average difficulty of the 12th grade level.

 

[mckmas8808]

Bachmann. Gohmert. Etc.

EV makes a great point about education, too. Generally, though, I think we need to consider some slightly anti-democratic reforms in the interest of making the country easier to govern. (that sounds kind of SomeDude-ish, I know.)


Age or gender don't have anything to do with what I was suggesting, I don't see why you'd invoke them. We require people to demonstrate basic competencies before they conduct any number of activities that have the ability to potentially harm others. Why not voting?

What if, for example, you designed the system (I haven't thought this out rigorously) such that if you opted to take an exam demonstrating broad civic knowledge, your vote could be weighted accordingly, but everyone's vote counts as at least one vote.

I invoked age and gender just as an example. But wouldn't your system work against the poor and less privileged? This idea honestly sounds so elitist lol.

 

[Cyan]

Who gets to write the test?

A committee, of course! Each side could contribute questions so it wouldn't be unbalanced.

Is global warming real?
a) Yes.
b) Conpsircay Al Gorebillionaire hoaks graaaah!

Did man come from monkeys?
a) Of course not.
b) I am bound for eternal hellfire.

 

[Dude Abides]

Who gets to write the test?

ACORN.

 

[besada]

Great post.
And generally speaking, local governments have much more immediate impact on people's life and can wield much more power than most people imagine.

The problem is that local government is full of crazy.
Seriously, if you think Washington is bad, talk a walk on the wild side and go to your state's capitol or city hall.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Weird puppet shows in Olympia. I watched crazy eyes glitter in the dark near the municipal building. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears on Boehner's cheeks...

But seriously, while I do absolutely agree it's the way to go, I shudder to think what the establishment reaction will be if the local order of bipartisan things is threatened in a meaningful way.

Coming from Texas, I can't disagree with you vis a vis local craziness.

Also, I forgot, I'm contractually obligated to mention http://fairvote.org every time I discuss this subject.

ACORN.

FreedomWorks!

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I have a feeling we're going to be hearing a lot about voter fraud from liberal blogs next week. The recall polls are quite close and will be determined by voter turnout, and suppression. I'm not suggest some massive conspiracy, just saying we're already seeing a rather vigorous suppression campaign being done in broad daylight for all to see. Personally I don't think dems can retake the Wisconsin senate regardless; don't they have to win every election?

Oh well, at least we'll have Eznark reporting from the front lines as he casts his votes

Democrats need to win half of the 6 GOP recall elections (so three) to gain the senate.

 

[gcubed]

I invoked age and gender just as an example. But wouldn't your system work against the poor and less privileged? This idea honestly sounds so elitist lol.

It is, and I feel its a stupid discussion to have in any seriousness. Why not just create a caste system, the poor dumb plebes don't deserve anything anyway

 

[Invisible_Insane]

It is, and I feel its a stupid discussion to have in any seriousness. Why not just create a caste system, the poor dumb plebes don't deserve anything anyway

Clearly my intent is to create a stalking horse for a caste system. That's a reasonable interpretation of what I'm saying.

 

[besada]

I'm down with it if we can make talking news heads part of the untouchable caste.

 

[Plumbob]

Why does he need Clinton? He's already following the same Republican-lite economic policies. His administration is currently arguing with a straight face that new free trade deals will be job creators!

Somebody needs to read up on free trade...specifically the benefits of specialization and consuming outside of a country's individual production possibility frontier.

 

[empty vessel]

Somebody needs to read up on free trade...specifically the benefits of specialization and consuming outside of a country's individual production possibility frontier.

Which may or may not benefit any given individual, depending upon how the country's resources are distributed internally. Looking at what benefits "the economy" as a whole is rarely an adequate metric for determining what is one's own interest (or even in the majority's interest). What do I care if the country grows wealthier faster if because of inequality I see even less gains from it than I would have if it had grown slower and the gains been more equitably distributed?

 

[Plumbob]

Which may or may not benefit any given individual, depending upon how the country's resources are distributed internally. Looking at what benefits "the economy" as a whole is rarely an adequate metric for determining what is one's own interest (or even in the majority's interest). What do I care if the country grows wealthier faster if because of inequality I see even less gains from it than I would have if it had grown slower and the gains been more equitably distributed?

Getting rid of protectionist policies is not inconsistent with some wealth redistribution within an economy. The Eurozone's a good example.

 

[eznark]

Generally, though, I think we need to consider some slightly anti-democratic reforms in the interest of making the country easier to govern. (that sounds kind of SomeDude-ish, I know.)

Horrifying

 

[ReBurn]

Getting rid of protectionist policies is not inconsistent with some wealth redistribution within an economy. The Eurozone's a good example.

But the Eurozone's not doing to hot right now, right?