• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
adam387 said:
I think it's a combination of factors. I do think Independents are more interested in the GOP shit show, so that will hurt Bernie. I also think Democrats are coming back home as well. I still think Rubio being competitive may help Hillary here.

If she had another week, maybe she could shake enough support lose to get within 5, but I doubt it. If she's within 9, then my Iowa and NH predictions are correct: neither would win by double digits.
Click to expand...

As far as I can work out, there's no real evidence of that. Registered Dems seem to have been stuck in NH for about three weeks now with no change.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
theprodigy said:
What.

hey guys Super Bowl starts in an hour, who are you guys rooting for
Click to expand...

I suppose Denver .I'm already pressing my luck with my Bernbro. I honestly don't care, though. Carolina is fine. Denver is fine.

Not my Brownies. : sobs hysterically : Maybe next year. Maybe next year.
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
adam387 said:
I think it's a combination of factors. I do think Independents are more interested in the GOP shit show, so that will hurt Bernie. I also think Democrats are coming back home as well. I still think Rubio being competitive may help Hillary here.

If she had another week, maybe she could shake enough support lose to get within 5, but I doubt it. If she's within 9, then my Iowa and NH predictions are correct: neither would win by double digits.



Considering there's literally 0% chance of me having a first born....I feel confident in that wager :p

I don't hate Bernie at all. Never have. I hate a lot of the people he's surrounded himself with, but that's neither here nor there.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I need to get my sarcasm detector checked out with... (back to learning about the greatest drivers of healthcare in this country which are all ultra preventable until the bad expensive stuff happens)

artificial wombs one day maybe
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Makai said:
I don't think most independents share Huelen's candidate preferences.
Click to expand...
I don't remember exactly where I saw it, but there was an assertion, which doesn't sound far-fetched, that many NH independents are disaffected moderate Republicans who are being drawn back by the prospect of stopping Trump.

There's more action on the GOP side. They can be a part of Kasichmentum.

There's probably a large chunk of "independents" who are really closet Republicans nationally as well, but who don't want to associate with the label post-Bush years.
tmarg said:
Wouldn't the independents pulled favor the more moderate candidate? Most independents aren't in the Bernie "democrats aren't left enough" camp.
Click to expand...
Could be drawn to the fight the power, money out of politics, underdog message. Could be strategically trying to prolong the Dem nomination and or weaken the eventual nominee. Could just be a secret Republican who will vote for anyone against Hillary Clinton.
 
T

tmarg

Member
Crab said:
Yup. I think the upset on the Rep side has pulled them over, which is hurting Sanders.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the independents pulled favor the more moderate candidate? Most independents aren't in the Bernie "democrats aren't left enough" camp.
 
D

dabig2

Member
Coriolanus said:
*reads*
*looks up fred hampton*
*looks up cointelpro*

... man, shit like this almost makes me think that having incompetent police might be a blessing in disguise.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a pretty sordid history. Read up on what Richard Daley and the 1968 Democrat National Convention for even more ass showing by this country.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
theprodigy said:
What.

hey guys Super Bowl starts in an hour, who are you guys rooting for
Click to expand...
Denver, because I cannot support a thug like Cam Newton who ruined the sanctity of the game by celebrating after touchdowns.

Jesus fucking Christ, I sued to hate Cam Newton for proper reasons. You know, because he played for Auburn. I'm not god forbid a Bama fan, fuck them even harder, but damn, I've been to the 2011 Iron Bowl in Jordan–Hare Stadium and let me tell you, a pox on this place, a pox on it all. PossibleNukeArea.jpg.
But all of a sudden, I see my hate bandwagon is filled with racist fucks. What the hell?

p.s.
The Panthers are going to crush the Broncos.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
tmarg said:
Wouldn't the independents pulled favor the more moderate candidate? Most independents aren't in the Bernie "democrats aren't left enough" camp.
Click to expand...

Yes. I think that is why you are seeing Kasichmentum, at a guess. I would bet Kasich and Sanders performance is quite strongly negatively correlated.

Edit: unless you're asking why independents are voting Sanders?
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
tmarg said:
Wouldn't the independents pulled favor the more moderate candidate? Most independents aren't in the Bernie "democrats aren't left enough" camp.
Click to expand...

Maybe they're the single-issue atheist candidates I was talking about who are getting worried about Trump winning and would prefer to vote Trump instead of Sanders.

After all, NH is the most atheist state in the nation other than Vermont.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Maybe they're the single-issue atheist candidates I was talking about who are getting worried about Trump winning and would prefer to vote Trump instead of Sanders.

After all, NH is the most atheist state in the nation other than Vermont.
Click to expand...

...did you just describe the largest political bloc in NH as single issue atheists?
 
E

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
My 2020 prediction: Peyton Manning runs as Republican candidate for the presidency.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
shinra-bansho said:
I don't remember exactly where I saw it, but there was an assertion, which doesn't sound far-fetched, that many NH independents are disaffected moderate Republicans who are being drawn back by the prospect of stopping Trump.

There's more action on the GOP side. They can be a part of Kasichmentum.

There's probably a large chunk of "independents" who are really closet Republicans nationally as well, but who don't want to associate with the label post-Bush years.
Could be drawn to the fight the power, money out of politics, underdog message. Could be strategically trying to prolong the Dem nomination and or weaken the eventual nominee. Could just be a secret Republican who will vote for anyone against Hillary Clinton.
Click to expand...

I remember there being polling to this effect over the first few years of Obama's presidency and again in 2012. Bush turned a lot of republicans off the party, they'll still vote for them but they didn't want to be associated with them otherwise.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
ugaboga232 said:
Perhaps I need to get my sarcasm detector checked out with... (back to learning about the greatest drivers of healthcare in this country which are all ultra preventable until the bad expensive stuff happens)

artificial wombs one day maybe
Click to expand...
I'm a firm believer in adoption. I want to be a dad more than anything, but I have no desire to spawn a child the traditional way. There are too many amazing kids that need loving homes for me to consider bringing another one into the world. I respect that that's just my opinion, though.

Plus, I've always assumed I'd end up alone, so a child is a way to force someone to put up with me.
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
adam387 said:
I'm a firm believer in adoption. I want to be a dad more than anything, but I have no desire to spawn a child the traditional way. There are too many amazing kids that need loving homes for me to consider bringing another one into the world. I respect that that's just my opinion, though.

Plus, I've always assumed I'd end up alone, so a child is a way to force someone to put up with me.
Click to expand...

Yea im the same in the sense that there will always be ppl to care for why add more to the group.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
ugaboga232 said:
Yea im the same in the sense that there will always be ppl to care for why add more to the group.
Click to expand...

True. This is way off topic, but it reminds me of something RuPaul says. We in the LGBT community often have to make our own families. Luckily, that's not something that happened to me. My entire family has been completely accepting of me.


tmarg said:
You should put that on the application form.
Click to expand...
LOVE ME.

tumblr_lvvb0fWDwH1qc1vfso1_500.gif
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
I'm utterly ambivalent about the Super Bowl. I won't even be watching. One of the biggest Mardi Gras parades of the season rolls one block from my house in about an hour.

If the Broncos win, I'm happy for the hometown guy (Manning) doing well.
If the Panthers win, I get to point & laugh at our rivals being the only NFCS team without A Ring.

Bring on the draft already.

---

I'm home for a 30-minute parade break.
Damn, she really is closing. Pay no attention, voters! Look at the ball! Look at the Halftime show!
Damn, Rubio really did step in a big pile of elephant dung! {*dances The Robot*}
Tuesday is looking better and better.

tumblr_neylp8CyGR1u2d5kzo1_400.gif
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
dabig2 said:
Yeah, it's a pretty sordid history. Read up on what Richard Daley and the 1968 Democrat National Convention for even more ass showing by this country.
Click to expand...

Hrm, to read up on that is to also read up on Ribicoff and on what McGovern did to Daley (eventually), so there were a coupla nice silver linings.

Bits about him being recognized as pretty much saving Chicago, in spite of being a racist shitheel, were fascinating.

Saddest bit is that his kind of narrative still gets quite a lot play down here.
 
E

East Lake

Member
Ogrekiller said:
In other words:

Climate change is not happening because snow is still falling. I saw it, the experts honestly don't know what they're talking about.
Click to expand...
First, climate change is a hoax started by the Chinese. Second, if you read my posts I didn't necessarily disagree with the argument, but mentioned that generally boasting about credentials is embarrassing and is as bad as any of the stuff he is complaining about. Third, in defense of campfire there is a mildly interesting paper here.

Most prevailing literature places the tax incidence of both the employer and employee payroll tax on the wages of the employees. Links here, here, and here.

There's something special about that last one. (well special for disastermouse and tmarg) No assumptions! it actually happened. Chile lowered their payroll taxes on employers, and wages went up. Crazy, I know.
Click to expand...
If you've read the paper on Chile let me know your thoughts ogrekiller. iirc it looks at wages that rose in a single year, 1981. Payroll taxes for employers were reduced and payroll taxes for employees were increased and wages increased as well.

If you've read it let me know your thoughts. It may be correct but I've only looked at certain sections so far. What was more interesting was that I wasn't quite aware of the the history behind it. This increase in wages happened during a time with a us installed dictator, labor rights were cracked down on, economics reforms were led by the chicago school, and social security was privatized.

In 1980 the military government decided to introduce a sweeping reform to the retirement system. In an effort to increase the attractiveness of the new system, and in order to reduce political opposition, contribution rates under the new system were lowered; as a result, those individuals that joined the new system experienced an average increase of net take-home pay equal to10% (Iglesias and Vittas, 1992). It was expected that, given the anticipated higher rates of return on the accumulated funds, the lower contributions would be enough to finance higher replacement rates for pensions.

The core of Chile’s new system are individual retirement accounts managed by private companies known as “Administradoras de Fondos de Pensiones”, AFPs. Each AFP can manage only one retirement fund; likewise, each participant can have only one
retirement account. A key feature of the system is that it is mandatory for individuals working for a formal employee. Participants can freely decide which AFP will manage their retirement funds, and are free to transfer their funds across the different
management firms.
Click to expand...
This paper has more details on the structure and history of the reforms.

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty/sebastian.edwards/draft3.pdf

The Pinochet government eliminated the bargaining power of workers by suspending collective bargaining and prohibiting union activity. Wage readjustments were decreed by the government. These adjustments were based on partial indexation to past inflation in 1974-75, and on total indexation beginning in 1976. Total indexation to past inflation combined with declining inflation resulted in rising real wages. Employment growth was sluggish in the mid-1970s, and the government’s main solution was a program in which the unemployed performed public works for reduced wages.

This was a paradoxical time in Chile’s economic history, a time that some Chileans referred to as the “boom”. Output growth averaged 7.9 percent per year from 1977 to 1981, the availability of imported goods increased dramatically, and inflation finally fell to 9 percent in 1981 (see Tables A1 through A3). But not all Chileans were taking part in this “boom”: unemployment remained stubbornly high at 15 percent, real wages were still 27 percent below their 1971 level, and income inequality was worsening as the richest 20 percent were gaining an ever-larger share of income.

The Labor Plan of 1979 of Labor Minister Jose Pinera did little to cheer the working class. The new labor law greatly reduced workers’ bargaining power by further repressing labor unions, restricting collective bargaining to the firm level, allowing for termination with loss of severance pay when strikes continued for 60 days, and allowing for arbitrary dismissals. General Pinochet, however, stated proudly that the new labor law “assures workers an increase in remuneration of at least 100 percent of the increase in the cost of living” through its mandatory 100 percent indexation of wages to past inflation.

Financial liberalization begun in 1974 with privatization, the removal of credit and interest rate ceilings, and a drastic reduction in reserve requirements (from 85 percent to 10 percent on demand deposits) was completed in April 1980 with the removal of controls on foreign borrowing by banks. (see Table A9 for measures of savings.) The large Grupos had benefited greatly from the government regulations on private capital mobility as they did have access through their banks to private foreign lending. Since the grupos were able to borrow at relatively low international interest rates and lend at high Chilean lending rates, they were able to earn large arbitrage profits.

The grupos practiced unbridled self-lending (for example, in 1982 Banco Santiago granted 42 percent of its loans to its grupo) to expand into the export sector, getting heavily involved in timber, mining, paper and fishing. However, as prices in Chile rose relative to those in foreign markets, export profitability declined substantially. In late 1980 a number of grupo-related firms started to face serious financial trouble, but were kept afloat thanks to the refinancing of bad loans. In April 1981 the grupos
’ financial fragility became apparent not only to the Chilean authorities but also to international lenders as the Crav grupo declared bankruptcy.

The abundance of foreign credit in the early 1980s provided the financing necessary for the unsustainable explosion in private expenditures at the time of the boom. By the end of 1981 Chile was burdened by a large foreign debt and an insolvent domestic financial system (see Table A8). The fixed exchange rate combined with backward wage indexation and the massive capital inflows to lead to a 35 percent real appreciation, which greatly reduced the competitiveness of the export sector. In 1982 the bubble burst: real output collapsed 15 percent and the unemployment rate shot up to 30 percent. Real interest rates rose, the currency was devalued sharply, and roll-over of domestic debt was curbed. In 1982 over 800 firms declared bankruptcy and in 1983 regulators had to reassume control of the five largest private banks.
Click to expand...
And here's another.

https://www.unc.edu/home/pconway/aea2000/Chilemac.pdf

It's possible that wage paper is right, but I'm inclined not to immediately take it at face value without knowing more about the situation.
 
D

Diablos

Member
theprodigy said:
are you guys just messing around, because what Crab said isn't exactly difficult to comprehend (even if you disagree)
Click to expand...
It doesn't make sense.


Go Broncos or Panthers, I don't really care as the Steelers didn't make it. I do think the Panthers will win. I'm gonna say 27-10 final score.
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
East Lake said:
First, climate change is a hoax started by the Chinese. Second, if you read my posts I didn't necessarily disagree with the argument, but mentioned that generally boasting about credentials is embarrassing and is as bad as any of the stuff he is complaining about. Third, in defense of campfire there is a mildly interesting paper here.

If you've read the paper on Chile let me know your thoughts ogrekiller. iirc it looks at wages that rose in a single year, 1981. Payroll taxes for employers were reduced to zero and payroll taxes for employees were increased and wages increased as well.

If you've read it let me know your thoughts. It may be correct but I've only looked at certain sections so far. What was more interesting was that I wasn't quite aware of the the history behind it. This increase in wages happened during a time with a us installed dictator, labor rights were cracked down on, economics reforms were led by the chicago school, and social security was privatized.

This paper has more details on the structure and history of the reforms.

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty/sebastian.edwards/draft3.pdf

And here's another.

https://www.unc.edu/home/pconway/aea2000/Chilemac.pdf

It's possible that wage paper is right, but I'm inclined not to immediately take it at face value without knowing more about the situation.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I was doing, boasting about my credentials. Next time I'll make sure to hide the fact that I have any kind of authority on the subject. That will surely help things, and you'll be able to sleep at night.

And let me know when you decide that study isn't credible because of outside factors that I in no way endorse.

It's like you think the economist just looked at wages before the tax cut, and after, and was like yep, there's the result I wanted!

All outside factors are controlled for through instrumental variables.

Edit: I do like that you're providing citations now though. They still don't in any way respond to my arguments, but it's a start!
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Ted Cruz's America would still struggle to be a nation as stupid as Russia:

Russian prosecutors have begun considering whether media coverage of the unexpected friendship between a male tiger and goat at a safari park in the country’s far east counts as gay propaganda.

Novosibirsk lawyer Alexei Krestyanov complained to the prosecutor general last month that information about the animals living together could harm children by provoking “interest in non-traditional sexual relations”.

“I think the positive coverage of this topic is nothing less than interference in the personal lives of minors, which is what hidden propaganda is, and public, active imposition of homosexuality,” Krestyanov wrote.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ccuse-unlikely-animal-chums-of-gay-propaganda
 
TheLaughingStock

TheLaughingStock

Member
Ogrekiller said:
Great. Where's the plan to overhaul the system from the bottom up? The movement at all levels to change and reform government, overthrowing the establishment and supplanting the parties with people that can meaningfully enact change? Where are the resources, the funds? Where is the 50 year plan to change the system?

It took the Koch brothers 40 years and billions of dollars to enact their 50 state plan and it ALMOST worked. You guys better have that kind of long term dedication and planning.
Click to expand...

People who believe in big gov't for them rather than for you didn't craft a coherent master plan from the late 1960s-present. They went out talking up ideas, changed perceptions about the system, passed laws, and here we are. Nobody sat down and mapped out reliably where they were going to be in 2016 50 years ago. That's a waste of time.

Here's one area where we can start and try to make things right.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phil-angelides/last-chance-for-justice_1_b_9135572.html

And generally speaking, nobody has to rock the boat per se. Another area where a lot of progress can be made is with taxes. If mainstream Repubs want to pass more tax cuts and run big deficits fine. Don't let their ideology default to the rich should benefit the most. That's the main problem with their proposed tax laws outside of being IMO poor for bang for buck. People keep letting things like the Bush tax cuts go through without changing the disproportionate nature. Otherwise, they're fine.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
TheLaughingStock said:
And generally speaking, nobody has to rock the boat per se. Another area where a lot of progress can be made is with taxes. If mainstream Repubs want to pass more tax cuts and run big deficits fine. Don't let their ideology default to the rich should benefit the most. That's the main problem with their proposed tax laws outside of being IMO poor for bang for buck. People keep letting things like the Bush tax cuts go through without changing the disproportionate nature. Otherwise, they're fine.
Click to expand...

This is a trap.
If you let them do that, they'll gladly do it, then move on to their next talking point, which is "gotta reduce the deficit", at which point they'll once again resume slashing welfare while still driving up the budget.

See: Kansas.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Coriolanus said:
This is a trap.
If you let them do that, they'll gladly do it, then move on to their next talking point, which is "gotta reduce the deficit", at which point they'll once again resume slashing welfare while still driving up the budget.

See: Kansas.
Click to expand...

State governments have to cut programs to pay for tax cuts since they have to balance budgets though. Federal governments don't have to balance the budget. Eisenhower is the only Republican president since Coolidge that didn't increase the national debt a huge amount.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
79
5K
Skifi28 replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2022 Edition
3 4 5 6 7
333
78K
zephiross replied
Top Bottom