Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Polls: Favorite Movies (Results), 1945 (Results), 1929 awards (Apr 4th), South Asia (Apr 25th), Doubling the Canon (Ratings Apr 30th)
Challenges: Doubling the Canon, Nordic, 1950s
Film of the Week: The Music of Chance, May nominations (May 1st)
World Cup S4: Round 1 schedule, 1F: Brazil vs Greece vs Japan vs Poland (Apr 5th), 1G: Germany vs Pakistan vs Ukraine vs USA (Apr 22nd)

The Political Lounge

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 24122
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

Re: The Political Lounge

#6721

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » February 15th, 2020, 8:31 pm

Cippenham wrote:
February 15th, 2020, 4:27 pm
It doesn’t mean it cannot be done better, as there is waste
This is true of everything everywhere, doesn't matter if it's run by governments, NGOs, public corporations, private corporations, anything. No business is fully efficient, neither in monetary terms nor in productivity terms nor in any other measure. There's always waste because sometimes the control needed to eliminate waste ends up costing more than the waste itself, people make mistakes, contingencies and safeguards need to be made that are sometimes never used, etc. The difference is that when a bureaucrat has a 500K salary everyone is up in arms, but if that same person doing the same job for the privatized service makes the same it's just normal business, gotta be competitive. We're paying for it all the same, through taxes for things run by government or through costs for things run by private enterprise. The biggest wastes of public money aren't public services, they're government contracts through obscure bidding processes enabled by privatization of services the government should be hiring people to do directly.

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6722

Post by Pretentious Hipster » February 16th, 2020, 3:23 am

Legalizing marijuana here was a great example. It was government run in Ontario. They were sold out of most products within days. The right were like "typical of the government to fuck up". Doug Ford decided that private companies can sell weed too. The result? Everything was quickly sold out again.


User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6724

Post by Pretentious Hipster » March 3rd, 2020, 3:25 am

Netanyahu won again...

Cippenham
Donator
Posts: 13087
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: Dorset England
Contact:

#6725

Post by Cippenham » March 3rd, 2020, 12:33 pm

Isnt he facing charges

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6726

Post by Pretentious Hipster » March 3rd, 2020, 1:45 pm

Cippenham wrote:
March 3rd, 2020, 12:33 pm
Isnt he facing charges
Yes... and he still won. He claims it's his biggest victory



Cippenham
Donator
Posts: 13087
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: Dorset England
Contact:

#6729

Post by Cippenham » March 17th, 2020, 9:54 pm

https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Is ... ing-621145

This is interesting, from a Nobel laureate too


User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 10477
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#6731

Post by St. Gloede » March 20th, 2020, 10:13 am

A recession is likely coming.

Businesses will collapse.

Yes, including "too big to fail".

I would like to remind you of the options on the table for governments around the world (aside of letting it all crash and burn):

1. Massive give-away stimulus package that will be taken out in profits by the owners (u)
2. Interest-free/low rent loans :thumbsup:
3. Buy-ins (l)

And of course, we can expect most Liberal governments around the world to just throw money at billionaires. :facepalm:

This means money is taken away from regular people and used to shore up and enrich those at the top.

The moderate, even centre-right alternative, is to support these businesses with loans and at least get the money back.

Though the best option is to buy-in, or even take over the businesses. This ensures that what would have been taken out in profits go back to the people.

What matters to a market economy is that the products are produced, consumers have purchasing power and that investments are made. Private owners getting richer is not needed. If they fail, but are to continue to make profits if fixed, why not shore up/strengthen the economy by having the money go to all. This leads to 2 advantages:

1. More money in the bank, which can be used to fund services and even decrease taxes (l)
2. Increased control of the economy, meaning push-back from capitalists (i.e. threatening to leave/outsource) have less consequence and allows countries to have more power in decisions such as working hours (6 hour days/4 day weeks anyone?). :wub:

User avatar
weirdboy
Donator
Posts: 3633
Joined: Jan 03, 2016
Contact:

#6732

Post by weirdboy » March 20th, 2020, 10:19 am

St. Gloede wrote:
March 20th, 2020, 10:13 am
A recession is likely coming.
I'm not sure I agree with this whole "likely" bit.

User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9701
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#6733

Post by Knaldskalle » March 20th, 2020, 3:54 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
March 20th, 2020, 10:13 am
A recession is likely coming.

Businesses will collapse.

Yes, including "too big to fail".

I would like to remind you of the options on the table for governments around the world (aside of letting it all crash and burn):

1. Massive give-away stimulus package that will be taken out in profits by the owners (u)
2. Interest-free/low rent loans :thumbsup:
3. Buy-ins (l)

And of course, we can expect most Liberal governments around the world to just throw money at billionaires. :facepalm:

This means money is taken away from regular people and used to shore up and enrich those at the top.

The moderate, even centre-right alternative, is to support these businesses with loans and at least get the money back.

Though the best option is to buy-in, or even take over the businesses. This ensures that what would have been taken out in profits go back to the people.

What matters to a market economy is that the products are produced, consumers have purchasing power and that investments are made. Private owners getting richer is not needed. If they fail, but are to continue to make profits if fixed, why not shore up/strengthen the economy by having the money go to all. This leads to 2 advantages:

1. More money in the bank, which can be used to fund services and even decrease taxes (l)
2. Increased control of the economy, meaning push-back from capitalists (i.e. threatening to leave/outsource) have less consequence and allows countries to have more power in decisions such as working hours (6 hour days/4 day weeks anyone?). :wub:
I'm personally in favor of option 0. Let it crash and burn. If companies and corporations are willing to live by the market they must be willing to die by the market. Government interventions every time something goes bad is just encouraging risky and reckless behavior. I'm strongly opposed to unregulated capitalism for the good times and socialism for the bad times.

It'll suck, but maybe, just maybe, it'll prevent this from happening again in 10 years. The coming recession/depression is basically just a continuation of the previous Great Recession. There were no major institutional changes or changes in how corporations operate, so we end up in the same mess again. The only thing achieved with the massive injection of cash into the system (bailouts, "quantitative easing" and so on) was a respite until things once again became unsustainable. And this isn't just Covid-19, we had the inverted yield curves before that, covid-19 is just the trigger.

I doubt, though, that either of the two parties is willing to let it crash and burn (other than a few Republicans who'll scream about it, knowing full well that it won't happen and that's the only reason they voice their opposition).
ImageImageImageImage

Please don't hurt yourself, talk to someone.

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6734

Post by Pretentious Hipster » March 22nd, 2020, 2:59 am

Maybe I should join the Kristiania Bohemian movement.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 10477
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#6735

Post by St. Gloede » March 23rd, 2020, 9:30 am

Cippenham wrote:
February 14th, 2016, 11:28 pm
Dolwphin on Feb 14 2016, 02:05:20 PM wrote:
xianjiro on Feb 14 2016, 03:26:36 AM wrote:Took the quiz linked by @Clip... and found out - wait for it - I'm a liberal. Shock.

But I still refuse to join the Democratic Party.
The funny thing is that in Europe "Liberal" is considered right-wing and the antithesis of socialism. But in the US the words have different meanings and liberalism is considered left-wing. In reality the words original meanings are quite accurate for US politics: a center-right (D) vs. extreme right (R) spectrum.

In my country Sanders would be considered a centrist. Maybe center-left because the country have moved significantly to the right since the 1990s. In the US he is a socialist. Funny how labels work.
That is why I think I am liberal.. :rolleyes: :) I would support right wing Democrat or moderate Republican so would like Clinton and Kasich to win probably
Reminder.

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6736

Post by Pretentious Hipster » March 30th, 2020, 2:28 am

https://tiermaker.com/create/political-ideologies-46003

Dunno quite a few of these. Also wtf fascist-communism is a thing?

User avatar
Kublai Khan
Posts: 1007
Joined: Nov 09, 2014
Location: Sarasota, FL
Contact:

#6737

Post by Kublai Khan » March 31st, 2020, 9:21 pm



I think Trump is leaving our relationship with North Korea worse than he found it.

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19907
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#6738

Post by Pretentious Hipster » Today, 1:03 pm

I should mention that I was somewhat of a tankie back then and it was when I was still newer in politics. It was quite silly of me. The reason why I did it was because I (still) believe that the ussr did some aspects better than in America. They were imperialist as well too which I hate, but I do find it funny because Lenin was against imperialism. That being said, I still do believe that they were better than nazi Germany. I mean, there was a 60 hour work week in Germany and they even privatized welfare. To call them socialists too is so fucking stupid.

That being said, what is my affiliation now? I am torn between marxist-leninist and anarcho-syndicalist. I will do more reading about both to help decide.

Post Reply