What do the Left and Right agree on?

[Xzi]

If it wasn't bad for the company they'd already have done it. If a company could pay it's workers a thousand bucks an hour and still operate at the same level, they'd do it just to be competitive with their wages. If you had even the most basic understanding of how markets operate you would not be saying this at all. You also need to understand that the USA is not even close to being a free market. It's a corporatist hell-hole.

It's a corporatist hellhole specifically because it is a free market and corporations can do whatever they want to choke out competition. Stop pretending like CEOs would give out pay raises from the goodness of their hearts if the government would just let them. That's already allowed and it isn't happening. Best you'll get is a pay raise from places like Amazon, and then a discontinuation of bonuses and holiday pay to balance out the raise. Corporations are not loyal to workers any more, they haven't been since the 50s or 60s. Nor do they care about finding the 'best' people for the job, everybody is replaceable.

 

[SG854]

It's a corporatist hellhole specifically because it is a free market and corporations can do whatever they want to choke out competition. Stop pretending like CEOs would give out pay raises from the goodness of their hearts if the government would just let them. That's already allowed and it isn't happening. Best you'll get is a pay raise from places like Amazon, and then a discontinuation of bonuses and holiday pay to balance out the raise. Corporations are not loyal to workers any more, they haven't been since the 50s or 60s. Nor do they care about finding the 'best' people for the job, everybody is replaceable.

Let me ask you 2 questions.

Do you support Bernie Sanders?

And should we use Scandinavian countries like Sweden as a role model for how to structure our economy like Bernie says?

 

[Attacker3]

specifically because it is a free market

https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

Explain why United States ranks as #18 on how free their markets are, and every country above them in the other 17 rankings aren't corporatist hell holes? If America is so free, why are they ranked number 18? In your mind, do you consider thousands and thousand of regulations telling you what and what not to do "free"? In Hong Kong, guess what you do to get a business license? You stand in a line for 20 minutes, write down your business, and then they stamp it.

 

[Deleted User]

It's a corporatist hellhole specifically because it is a free market and corporations can do whatever they want to choke out competition.

I do agree that there are constantly people who want to screw over the free market, and we should obviously keep them from doing that. But saying that the corporatism is a direct result of free market is absurd.

Stop pretending like CEOs would give out pay raises from the goodness of their hearts if the government would just let them. That's already allowed and it isn't happening. Best you'll get is a pay raise from places like Amazon, and then a discontinuation of bonuses and holiday pay to balance out the raise. Corporations are not loyal to workers any more, they haven't been since the 50s or 60s. Nor do they care about finding the 'best' people for the job, everybody is replaceable.

And this is why we need to lower the barrier of entry for small business.

You see, you're looking at this all wrong. You think that if there is less regulation, CEOs won't do bat to pay their workers fairly, right?

Well I ask you look at the big picture. The reason why Amazon can get away with the stuff they do is because their workers have nowhere to go. Granted, it's difficult to achieve, but in a small-business-friendly world... Options pop up like magic.

 

[Foxi4]

The left prefers to raise wages, the right thinks we can make everyone rich just by lowering taxes. Lowering taxes does essentially nothing for low-income individuals though, as their taxes are already minimal.

That's the point of disagreement - perspective. What the left means by "raise wages" is to force private citizens, at the point of a gun, to enter into contracts that are not beneficial to them, which constitutes coercion. I would *love* for everyone to earn more, I just want them to do it themselves by becoming more skilled and thus more valuable to employers. What "lowering taxes" does is increasing the capacity of entrepreneurs to expand their companies and thus employ more people, which in turn increases demand, which in turn increases wages. An entrepreneur can buy a new location, they can't buy new people - they have to rely on the work force available. Y'know what they do when that workforce is no longer viable to employ due to artificially inflated wages? They close shop and move to India. The left is too focused on the number at the end of the paycheck and not focused enough on what that paycheck can afford to buy. The standard of living has been steadily increasing despite stagnant wages specifically because rampant capitalism has allowed the decrease in pricing. That's a whole different debate though, the whole point was that we both see the "problems", we just have vastly different solutions for them, which is why dialogue is important.

 

[Xzi]

https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

Explain why United States ranks as #18 on how free their markets are, and every country above them in the other 17 rankings aren't corporatist hell holes? If America is so free, why are they ranked number 18?

Because this is the inevitable result of unfettered capitalism. The market is only free until the biggest players establish themselves at the top, and then they use whatever tools are at their disposal to suppress competition. In America's case, we gave corporations so much freedom that they essentially bought out government, and now they set their own regulations. Capitalism has largely failed us in that regard.

Let me ask you 2 questions.

Do you support Bernie Sanders?

And should we use Scandinavian countries like Sweden as a role model for how to structure our economy like Bernie says?

I do support Sanders, though we don't necessarily need to borrow the entirety of somebody else's system. Just bits and pieces. A tax on gasoline to pay for increased investment in renewable energy sources, for example.

 

[SG854]

Because this is the inevitable result of unfettered capitalism. The market is only free until the biggest players establish themselves at the top, and then they use whatever tools are at their disposal to suppress competition. In America's case, we gave corporations so much freedom that they essentially bought out government, and now they set their own regulations. Capitalism has largely failed us in that regard.


I do support Sanders, though we don't necessarily need to borrow the entirety of somebody else's system. Just bits and pieces. A tax on gasoline to pay for increased investment in renewable energy sources, for example.

So you also support that we should structure our economy like Sweden right?

 

[Xzi]

So you also support that we should structure our economy like Sweden right?

We need more comprehensive social programs and more Socialist influences on our economic system, but no it doesn't have to be exactly like Sweden. The US is obviously a much larger country, so there are more moving parts to take into account. We need a system thoroughly customized for us.

 

[SG854]

Based on your previous posts you are for regulation correct.

Sweden industries are heavily deregulated. They have less regulation then the United States. @Attacker3 as shown by the link he posted. So if U.S. should be like Sweden then that means less government regulation.

The only way Sweden funds their social programs is by heavily taxing the poor. That’s the only way they can make it work. Because they know if they tax the rich out the ass, they will leave the country and their economy will plumit.

Low income earners is Sweden pay a lot more taxes then low income earners in America. People that are below average income pay 60% in taxes. People think that the rich pay more taxes but it’s the opposite, they pay less and poor pays more, that’s how they make their system work.

Not only that they privatized many industries getting rid of government control and privatized schools and social security. That’s how they make anything work.

Socialism’s is government owns the means of production which is what Sweden isn’t. That’s North Korea and Venezuela.

Just some things on how they make things work.

 

[JiveTheTurkey]

We need more comprehensive social programs and more Socialist influences on our economic system, but no it doesn't have to be exactly like Sweden. The US is obviously a much larger country, so there are more moving parts to take into account. We need a system thoroughly customized for us.

I think yes to more comprehensive social programs like say for disabled veterans, or the mentally unstable. Like when we had hospitals for crazies-before they were shutdown for the wierd and horrible shit but I think with modern tech we can have better hospitals for people like that.

 

[KingVamp]

So you also support that we should structure our economy like Sweden right?

I'm curious, why do you ask?

Edit: Welp, that's what I get for having so many tabs.

 

[SG854]

I'm curious, why do you ask?

Edit: Welp, that's what I get for having so many tabs.

So now you know what I’m trying to get at?

 

[Foxi4]

Every single "socialist wonderland" left-wing populist point their finger at when they criticise the U.S. have heavy restrictions on the use of social services, including and not limited to rationing of medical care, economies based on capitalist principles and heavily outsized taxation on private citizens, not corporations. There's a reason why Swedes do better in America than they do in Sweden. Once over a half of your income goes towards taxes, you're effectively a slave of the state. Me, I want to know that every penny I earn is mine and I can *choose* to spend it. Nothing good ever comes from safety - everything that has ever improved humanity came at a risk. Unfortunately, we teach people to rely on safety instead of being willing to take a risk, that's why they'll happily spend buckets of money on a lottery, but they won't invest that same money on the stock market, nor will they build their own companies. People want instantaneous rewards, not long-term success. It is for that reason that most lottery winners, no matter how much they win, quickly become poor again - no amount of free money can buy reason.

 

[SG854]

Every single "socialist wonderland" left-wing populist point their finger at when they criticise the U.S. have heavy restrictions on the use of social services, including and not limited to rationing of medical care, economies based on capitalist principles and heavily outsized taxation on private citizens, not corporations. There's a reason why Swedes do better in America than they do in Sweden. Once over a half of your income goes towards taxes, you're effectively a slave of the state. Me, AI want to know that every penny I earn is mine and I can *choose* to spend it. Nothing good ever cones from safety - everything that has ever improved humanity came at a risk. Unfortunately, we teach people to rely on safety instead of being willing to take a risk, that's why they'll happily spend buckets of money on a lottery, but they won't invest that same money on the stock market, nor will they build their own companies. People want instantaneous rewards, not long-term success. It is for that reason that most lottery winners, no matter how much they win, quickly become poor again - no amount of free money can buy reason.

Even the medical care they say we should emulate Canada and European countries.

But it’s more common for Canadians to go to the U.S. to get treatment then the other way around. Their government system has degraded. What they can get free in Canada they still come to the U.S. and pay for our Health Care.

Even the Primier of Quebec comes to the U.S. to get their Medical Care. And has since the 90’s. They don’t want to use the free Canadian system. Which isn’t actually free because taxes.

 

[Foxi4]

Even the medical care they say we should emulate Canada and European countries.

But it’s more common for Canadians to go to the U.S. to get treatment then the other way around. Their government system has degraded. What they can get free in Canada they still come to the U.S. and pay for our Health Care.

Even the Primier of Quebec comes to the U.S. to get their Health Care. And has since the 90’s. They don’t want to use the free Canadian system. Which isn’t actually free because taxes.

The waiting times are a big problem, which is why people choose to go to private institutions instead. Routine surgery can be delayed for years, by that point a minor inconvenience can become a major issue - people don't have the time to wait. Healthcare is a difficult subject to discuss though as, realistically, it's an industry where the customer doesn't get a choice - they either buy in or they, potentially, die. The U.S. isn't much better - the insurance system is messed up big time, a result of years of government intervention and no free market principles regulating it.

 

[KingVamp]

People think that the rich pay more taxes but it’s the opposite, they pay less and poor pays more, that’s how they make their system work.

I'm still trying to see if these claims, especially this one, are even true. This aside for now, the Nordic countries still seems to be the happiest places and have better services, so they must being doing something right.

 

[JiveTheTurkey]

I'm still trying to see if these claims, especially this one, are even true. This aside for now, the Nordic countries still seems to be the happiest places and have better services, so they must being doing something right.

I would like to know more about how their governments operate.

 

[Taleweaver]

What the hell does Moore's law have to do with a CO2 capturing plant?

Sorry, but you misread what I said and drew a wrong conclusion. It doesn't have anything to do with it in itself.

What I did say, however, was that the rate of increment in technology improvements need to grow, and needs to grow fast. An exponential growth that is typical for some phenomenon (AMONG WHICH Moore's law) would certainly help in the long run, but we're really running out of time to even achieve that.

The report you link recommends total net-zero CO2 across the globe, and mentions nothing about an apocalypse.

You haven't checked that link I wrote. Lemme summarize the summary even further.
3:07: "the direst report ever received"
3:22: "even half a degree celcius of a difference could be catastrophic"
4:49 "the difference between 0.5 and 1.5 degrees is massive"
6:06 "the fallout of two degrees celsius sounds truly biblical".

...but I give you credit: no mention of an apocalypse.

GG.

We will. You can't just reach net-zero emissions without stopping trillions of dollars worth of production, putting billions out of work. I mean, I suppose starvation is also a pretty good way to reduce emissions, but even then I don't think that I would enjoy seeings billions starve to death.

I disagree on two fronts.

Surely you've heard the known example of the melting of the polar caps. Those ice mountains reflect some of the sun's radiation back into space. Meaning: if temperatures rise, we will have more of the consequences we already see (longer, harder, tougher weather), a rising sea level AND further increased temperature. Each of these problems will require more manpower than is needed to solve the problem now...and as is shown, we cannot even solve that one problem. I bet that if these three problems are starting to appear, more people will be busy applying solutions from the shown remedies (e.g.: building higher embankments against the sea level) than finding a long term solution for the root cause.

The whole "putting billions out of work" is a flat out lie. What is needed is innovation, research and a whole lot of making new buildings. Old technologies need to be dismantled and replaced, lots of places need to be cleaned...there are, in fact, far more job opportunities than the current industry. Heck...the current industry could very well be the one doing all this. It's just that they need international laws to push them into that direction, because as it is, it's simply far more lucrative to stay the current course.

 

[dpad_5678]

That we should trust science over a book that incorrectly states that our planet is just 6000 years young. Both sides agree on that.





Oh fucking wait.

 

[SG854]

I'm still trying to see if these claims, especially this one, are even true. This aside for now, the Nordic countries still seems to be the happiest places and have better services, so they must being doing something right.

Here’s a really good documentary that everyone should watch. They are not a socialist paradise like Bernie says and he is completely clueless of Sweden’s economic system.

Sweden use to be one of the poorest countries in the world. Poorer then the Congo. Then they embraced laissez fair free market capitalism, heavily de-regulated and became one of the richest countries in the world.

Then they screwed it up by introducing socialism and regulation, stunted economic growth and dropped down in economic ranking. Then they made some reform heavily deregulated and saved their country from getting worse.

Even socialism didn’t work in Sweden. If it didn’t work in Sweden then what makes people think it’ll work in the United States with more diversity of people.

@Xzi was for minimum wage, but Sweden doesn’t have minimum wage laws, and U.S. does.



--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

The waiting times are a big problem, which is why people choose to go to private institutions instead. Routine surgery can be delayed for years, by which point a minor inconvenience can become a major issue - people don't have the time to wait. Healthcare is a difficult subject to discuss though as, realistically, it's an industry where the customer doesn't get a choice - they either buy in or they, potentially, die. The U.S. isn't much better - the insurance system is messed up big time, a result of years of government intervention and no free market principles regulating it.

There is a lot of statistics not taken into account when comparing U.S. to other countries like hidden costs.

There are lots of black markets in single payer countries, people pay extra to get ahead on the waiting list. A hidden cost not on statistics.

And since wait times are longer that is more time your out of work and loose money. Money lost can add up to more then what people in the U.S. pays. Another hidden cost.

And also people conflate with health care and medical care. If you are more reckless with your life, like people in the U.S., reckless driving and doings drugs, then this will bring down life expectancy. This is something out of medical systems control and not because of a poor system. This can affect statistics a bit lowering U.S. life expectancy.

Government run systems are also less efficient and more expensive. Canada Healh system is expected to ballon up in costs in the future taking up even more of the countries money.

But ya government intervention does screw up things.