Support NeoGAF

[bonercop]

I grew up relatively privileged but I have a strong aversion to cuts in the safety net. I don't know what caused it. But its really strong. It just feels immoral to me.

There is a difference between growing up in a bubble of privilege and simply being privileged. I assume you were more of the latter.

As for feeling that way...good! You should! Cutting safety nets is immoral... and bad economics too boot.

I'm under the impression that studies have shown that people retiring early is bad for the economy, probably for exactly the reason you stated--they're replaced with lower-paid workers, who have less money to spend.

Speaking of this(massive, massive) problem: I really wish Obama had made raising minimum wage a priority while he had the house and senate. It could have made a real difference with the economy.

 

[empty vessel]

I'm under the impression that studies have shown that people retiring early is bad for the economy, probably for exactly the reason you stated--they're replaced with lower-paid workers, who have less money to spend.

Somebody more familiar with actual data can say, but you would have to factor in that a person who retires isn't necessarily going to dramatically reduce their spending (especially if they are getting generous social security benefits), and the young worker who is starting will be spending more than if they were unemployed. So it's not quite this simple.

 

[Black Mamba]

Somebody more familiar with actual data can say, but you would have to factor in that a person who retires isn't necessarily going to dramatically reduce their spending (especially if they are getting generous social security benefits), and the young worker who is starting will be spending more than if they were unemployed. So it's not quite this simple.

If we lower the medicare age to everyone living, we eliminate the potential problem altogether.

Seriously, just fucking expand medicare to everyone.

I grew up relatively privileged but I have a strong aversion to cuts in the safety net. I don't know what caused it. But its really strong. It just feels immoral to me.

Paul Ryan grew up the opposite and look at him.

Pretty sure it has more to do with the general environment you're raised in than anything else.

 

[Samk]

Somebody more familiar with actual data can say, but you would have to factor in that a person who retires isn't necessarily going to dramatically reduce their spending (especially if they are getting generous social security benefits), and the young worker who is starting will be spending more than if they were unemployed. So it's not quite this simple.

Conversely, I've read that later retirement ages reduces the amount of young employees enter the workforce. Particularly in professional positions, older workers forced to work longer are more likely to get hired than fresh-outs.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Oh, btw. The actual cost for the website was around $70 million. That $500 million whatever number was the total amount of contracts awarded to whatever that Canadian company was since 2007.

Source? I have a few people who would find this interesting.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

There is a difference between growing up in a bubble of privilege and simply being privileged. I assume you were more of the latter.

As for feeling that way...good! You should! Cutting safety nets is immoral... and bad economics too boot.

My biggest beef is with people who can't see their own privilege I have a real aversion to that and those who confuse it exclusively with ability or merit. Here in DC its worse and more overt at least with some of the social circles I've run into (TBH its mostly republicans). Their complete lack of morality (and out loud embrace of it) and disdane for the real city of DC just represents the kind of ideas I'd like to think I'm trying to change. They feel like they're the smartest people in the world and their presence here is proof. They are smart but a bit more modesty about the help they've had would be appreciated.

 

[Oblivion]

So I watched the whole interview with Krauthammer on TDS, and that shit was weird, son. Krauthammer looked like he came out in support of medicare for all, and seemed puzzled as to why Obama didn't go that route. Jon did a pretty good job overall calling him on his bullshit.

 

[Oblivion]

Source? I have a few people who would find this interesting.

Here ye go:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/10/24/the-myth-of-the-634-million-obamacare-website/196585

 

[DEO3]

You know . . . the GOP's push for more and more corporate and donor money has completely backfired on them. Well, at least under the Citizen's United style system where unlimited money can go to private organizations. What appears to have happened is that zealot billionaires have created a bunch of different outside groups that all squabble with each other and fund extreme crazies. Freedomworks, Americans for Prosperity, Club for Growth, Madison Project, Crossroads, Heritage Action, etc. . . All sorts of crazies that are not under any unified control.

Candidates can get funded from these outside groups and then largely ignore what the party wants them to do since they are beholden to that outside group more than the party. Why do what Boehner wants you to do when Club for Growth (AKA Club for tax cuts to rich people) is footing the bill for your campaign?

The GOP is just not viable national party right now . . . they really have become more of a regional party.

Today's On Point with Tom Ashbrook had a really great discussion about this, definitely worth a listen: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/10/24/big-money-and-the-g-o-p-civil-war

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Here ye go:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/10/24/the-myth-of-the-634-million-obamacare-website/196585

Thanks!

 

[Oblivion]

Whoa. /Neo

Have you guys heard of this place called Silicon Alley? No, not Silicon Valley, in California. Silicon Alley in New York? Apparently it's a real place. It's like Silicon Valley's little East Coast brother.

 

[Aaron Strife]

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/ratings-change-a-democratic-tide-in-virginia/

You might recall that the Crystal Ball was the first ratings agency to tilt the race to ex-Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe (D), and we did so at the end of August. Today we move the race from Leans Democratic to Likely Democratic.

With the election dynamics moving in the Democrats’ favor, the race for lieutenant governor is now Safe Democratic.

Meanwhile, the battle between the Marks for the state’s attorney general position is going to be the real race to watch on election night. Because of the likely coattails from McAuliffe and Northam, we’re moving this very close race from Toss-up to Leans Democratic.

Virginia sweep, boom.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Whoa. /Neo

Have you guys heard of this place called Silicon Alley? No, not Silicon Valley, in California. Silicon Alley in New York? Apparently it's a real place. It's like Silicon Valley's little East Coast brother.

Surprisingly enough, I have. Dumb name though.

And I wouldn't necessarily call it 'little' now.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Today's On Point with Tom Ashbrook had a really great discussion about this, definitely worth a listen: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/10/24/big-money-and-the-g-o-p-civil-war

I think an underrated reason to explain the craziness of the GOP, aside from the right-lean of America in general compared to the First World, is that we have the weakest party structure. In most other countries, if you don't have the support of the party, you aren't running (unless it's as an independent).

As a result, the real loons, with exceptions, get turfed from the major parties. But here, all you need to be the nominee for a major party is get the most votes in a low turnout election.

 

[Piecake]

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/ratings-change-a-democratic-tide-in-virginia/


Virginia sweep, boom.

What a hell of a choice. How the hell did Virginia end up having to decide between those two turdbags?

 

[Black Mamba]

Well, I for one and convinced.

Spoiler

what the fuck

 

[Oblivion]

What's Kucinelli's plan for the puppy? To drown it?

 

[makingmusic476]

Go Daily Show:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nc-goper-fired-for-making-racist-comments-on-daily-show-video

 

[AniHawk]

i don't get it. it says he doesn't have a plan for the puppy. then it says all puppy. someone help me get it.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Well, I for one and convinced.

Spoiler

what the fuck

It was a line in the debate, still stupid

Edit:looks like it might have been a copyright photo used without permission haha

 

[Oblivion]

Go Daily Show:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nc-goper-fired-for-making-racist-comments-on-daily-show-video

I've asked this several times before, but seriously, what the fuck is wrong with these people? No, I'm not talking about their opinions. I'm talking about them expressing their opinions on a fucking liberal T.V. show. Is there no like quality control or anything in the right-winger echo chamber? Have none of his staffers who booked him for this interview informed him that he's treading into enemy territory? I mean, I could be a bit more forgiving if this was on Colbert, since many conservatives think he's a genuine conservative. But The Daily Show? Really?!

 

[Giant Panda]

Go Daily Show:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nc-goper-fired-for-making-racist-comments-on-daily-show-video

How on earth do these people not realize that you don't say this kind of shit on national TV? I'm glad he admitted voter ID is just to hurt Democrats though, yet another grain of sand on the beach of proof that the GOP are intellectually dishonest.

 

[Oblivion]

He's a precinct chairman. He probably doesn't have any staffers, or anyone to tell him this would be a bad idea.

Well, Chairman sounds like a pretty high ranking position. I'd be surprised if he didn't have any staffers. But even if he didn't, you'd think one of his friends or family members could have given him an FYI.

 

[Hop]

Whoa. /Neo

Have you guys heard of this place called Silicon Alley? No, not Silicon Valley, in California. Silicon Alley in New York? Apparently it's a real place. It's like Silicon Valley's little East Coast brother.

The Pacific NW tech corridor is regularly getting dubbed the "Silicon Forest". And tech companies in the midwest are considered part of the "Silicon Prairie".

In other news, people like naming shit for no reason.

 

[Oblivion]

The Pacific NW tech corridor is regularly getting dubbed the "Silicon Forest". And tech companies in the midwest are considered part of the "Silicon Prairie".

In other news, people like naming shit for no reason.

Midwest as in Northern midwest, or like Kansas Midwest?

 

[Hop]

Midwest as in Northern midwest, or like Kansas Midwest?

Kansas, Iowa, Chicago, and the like.

 

[Oblivion]

Kansas, Iowa, Chicago, and the like.

Eww...

Well, Iowa's kinda cool, I guess.

 

[Tamanon]

I've seen a few job offers in the Silicon Gravel Pit in South Dakota.

 

[zargle]

Midwest as in Northern midwest, or like Kansas Midwest?

kansas, iowa, missouri are usually the silicon prairie.

 

[sc0la]

Speaking of which, I am currently looking for a position with a silicon implant start-up if anyone knows one with some openings.

 

[Oblivion]

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Thursday he regrets being ‘too lenient’ in previous budget talks with Republicans. Reid said he and President Obama were too willing to compromise in talks that took place in 2011 and 2012, and that he intends to drive a harder bargain going forward.”

That's what I'm talkin' about!

 

[rocketknight]

Have we talked about Mitt Romney's secret room yet?

Then there’s that hidden room. The architectural drawings say it’s for "office storage." It measures 11 feet long and is lined with cabinets. The "hidden door," as it’s labeled on the documents, is masked as a bookshelf and swings into the study. There are no other details, and Romney’s spokeswoman declined to comment.

 

[zero_suit]

That's what I'm talkin' about!

I'm glad he's getting tougher.

 

[thepotatoman]

Guardian: Why the 1% should pay tax at 80%

This article is really barking up the wrong tree. At some point you actually do make less money in taxes at a higher rate than a lower one. It's the one thing that Reagan was right about.

But I still say put taxes up that high again. I think in the 50s-70s, it, along with unions, helped to build a stronger middle class because it created a soft price ceiling on income. CEOs have way too much bargaining power in the market today, which is what is causing our major inequality problems. We're in a time where businesses really want to lull away CEOs with a ever growing paycheck. This is good for CEOs, but bad for workers because larger and larger portions of the business's coffers are going to CEOs just so they don't have to bother with getting a new CEO every year.

Say a CEO is making 500k and needs see a 100k increase after taxes to make moving to another company worth it. In order to make that 100k incentive happen, that new business needs to pay 1 million a year to compensate for the taxes. It does deincentivize pay raises past that point, and that means the government makes less money in taxes, and thus why I said Reagan was right. But it doesn't deincentivize work because 500k is still a hell of a lot of money and I'm sure there's 5 equally qualified people right below him that could do the job just as well. The money saved from not paying so much money to CEOs can then be reinvested into other new jobs, and with enough new jobs on the market the people might have a better chance at bargaining for better pay.

Right now if you want to save money on a CEO by picking someone who hasn't had CEO experience, you would probably get a overall better deal in the first year since a CEO is rarely twice as good as next in line, but that CEO job on his resume that you just gave him is all the bargaining power he needs to extort you out of a ton of money in the next year. So given that, it's pointless to take a risk inside the company right now instead of just paying big money from the start to a guy that is already proven. 80% progressive tax brackets would fix that.

 

[Chichikov]

The point of very high rate on very high earners is not so much to generate revenue, but to reduce extreme inequality, reduce the amount of influence select individuals can have on our life and reduce the incentives for extreme greed.

 

[makingmusic476]

Guardian: Why the 1% should pay tax at 80%

This article is really barking up the wrong tree. At some point you actually do make less money in taxes at a higher rate than a lower one. It's the one thing that Reagan was right about.

But I still say put taxes up that high again. I think in the 50s-70s, it, along with unions, helped to build a stronger middle class because it created a soft price ceiling on income. CEOs have way too much bargaining power in the market today, which is what is causing our major inequality problems. We're in a time where businesses really want to lull away CEOs with a ever growing paycheck. This is good for CEOs, but bad for workers because larger and larger portions of the business's coffers are going to CEOs just so they don't have to bother with getting a new CEO every year.

Say a CEO is making 500k and needs see a 100k increase after taxes to make moving to another company worth it. In order to make that 100k incentive happen, that new business needs to pay 1 million a year to compensate for the taxes. It does deincentivize pay raises past that point, and that means the government makes less money in taxes, and thus why I said Reagan was right. But it doesn't deincentivize work because 500k is still a hell of a lot of money and I'm sure there's 5 equally qualified people right below him that could do the job just as well. The money saved from not paying so much money to CEOs can then be reinvested into other new jobs, and with enough new jobs on the market the people might have a better chance at bargaining for better pay.

Right now if you want to save money on a CEO by picking someone who hasn't had CEO experience, you would probably get a overall better deal in the first year since a CEO is rarely twice as good as next in line, but that CEO job on his resume that you just gave him is all the bargaining power he needs to extort you out of a ton of money in the next year. So given that, it's pointless to take a risk inside the company right now instead of just paying big money from the start to a guy that is already proven. 80% progressive tax brackets would fix that.

That's the point. Discouraging raises past a certain point, or rendering them completely impossible, leads to more money going towards workers, either through raises or new hires.

And those incomes will get taxed too.

Though the cutoff should be around 1.5-2 million. I think the 90% rates from the 50s hit dollars earned above what would be something like 3 million today.

 

[B-Dubs]

Have we talked about Mitt Romney's secret room yet?

Are you kidding me? I guess that's where he keeps the binders full of women.

 

[thepotatoman]

That's the point. Discouraging raises past a certain point, or rendering them completely impossible, leads to more money going towards workers, either through raises or new hires.

And those incomes will get taxed too.

Though the cutoff should be around 1.5-2 million. I think the 90% rates from the 50s hit dollars earned above what would be something like 3 million today.

Yeah, that's fine, with more tax brackets to fill the in between.

Edit: Also I'm slightly surprised to the response. It was always my too liberal for liberals viewpoint that would always get everyone upset at me for bringing it up, but here I guess you guys already knew and supported it before I said anything.

 

[Oblivion]

The point of very high rate on very high earners is not so much to generate revenue, but to reduce extreme inequality, reduce the amount of influence select individuals can have on our life and reduce the incentives for extreme greed.

But what if all the rich folk move to Canada or Somalia? The who will we tax?

 

[Mike M]

Are you kidding me? I guess that's where he keeps the binders full of women.

It's a panic room for when the peasants storm his home with pitchforks.

 

[Sibylus]

His entire desk surface is actually his binder cover.

 

[makingmusic476]

Yeah, that's fine, with more tax brackets to fill the in between.

Edit: Also I'm slightly surprised to the response. It was always my too liberal for liberals viewpoint that would always get everyone upset at me for bringing it up, but here I guess you guys already knew and supported it before I said anything.

I'm a socialist that believes all businesses should be cooperatively owned and managed by the very workers who cooperatively operate them, and I'm pretty sure Chichikov has specifically quoted and agreed with my opinion on that topic in the past.

thisispoligaf.gif

 

[theprodigy]

I'm a socialist that believes all businesses should be cooperatively owned and managed by the very workers who cooperatively operate them, and I'm pretty sure Chichikov has specifically quoted and agreed with my opinion on that topic in the past.

thisispoligaf.gif

eh, I don't go that far
thisisnotpoligaf.gif

 

[FyreWulff]

Have we talked about Mitt Romney's secret room yet?

In all honesty it's just a style choice to do the bookcase thing. Nothing to read into there.

 

[makingmusic476]

eh, I don't go that far
thisisnotpoligaf.gif

I meant you'll find a surprising number of people like that in poligaf, not that everyone in poligaf is like that. Suppose I should've been more clear!

 

[B-Dubs]

In all honesty it's just a style choice to do the bookcase thing. Nothing to read into there.

You know, when I think about it, if I had Romney's kind of money my house would be full of shit like that. There'd be all sorts of secret rooms and hallways and shit for no real reason other to have them. It would be a fucking Zelda dungeon. I mean, what else are you going to do with that sort of money?

 

[makingmusic476]

You know, when I think about it, if I had Romney's kind of money my house would be full of shit like that. There'd be all sorts of secret rooms and hallways and shit for no real reason other to have them. It would be a fucking Zelda dungeon. I mean, what else are you going to do with that sort of money?

We've got a hidden door in our lower-middle class house.

It leads to our super secret laundry room.

 

[Chichikov]

I'm a socialist that believes all businesses should be cooperatively owned and managed by the very workers who cooperatively operate them, and I'm pretty sure Chichikov has specifically quoted and agreed with my opinion on that topic in the past.

thisispoligaf.gif

I don't know about all (I really don't, I have not done an inventory of all possible business in my head), nor do I advocate banning for profit shareholder owned model.
I do however think that in many cases worker ownership is superior, for workers, the business and society as a whole.
I think we should encourage that model and I think we should experiment with it as a society, there are many ways to achieve that goal.

 

[Mike M]

My laundry room actually does have a freaky little Alice in Wonderland door that leads to my "crawl space."

Only my crawl space is 20 feet deep, so it's more like opening a door onto a fathomless void.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Are you kidding me? I guess that's where he keeps the binders full of women.

That, or...