Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > Halls of Lordaeron

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 08-30-2017, 08:26 AM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
That is because my arguments are so good that everyone is speechless.
That's certainly what you tell yourself.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 08-30-2017, 08:36 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
That's certainly what you tell yourself.
Can't you just take the joke?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 08-30-2017, 08:51 AM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,693
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Can't you just take the joke?
Negative.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 08-30-2017, 08:58 AM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Can't you just take the joke?
I honestly don't think she's joking anymore.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 08-30-2017, 12:31 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Can't you just take the joke?
I am just a Peejay!
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 09-01-2017, 02:43 PM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

People are struggling to get gasoline for their cars--we are like a third world country.
__________________
Member #14
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:11 PM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

What are the odds of any Republicans internalizing lessons from this hurricane? Will they realize how bad their ideas are?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topof...903-story.html
__________________
Member #14
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 09-04-2017, 04:44 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kakwakas View Post
What are the odds of any Republicans internalizing lessons from this hurricane? Will they realize how bad their ideas are?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topof...903-story.html
I saw a very good analysis the other day from some German folks.


Americans are very good at being SPONTANEOUSLY heroic, we'll dive in to save people from drowning or burning buildings, we'll start sudden donation campaigns for loved ones cancers or surgeries, we'll rush to disaster areas to volunteer, etc...

We're patriotic by slapping flags everywhere and reciting the pledge of allegiance and being fiercely protective of anyone badmouthing our country...


But we're bitterly resistant to paying the taxes each month that'd provide the infrastructure and services for things like FEMA or the Coastguard to be properly funded. Or planning cities for people rather than businesses so there's greenery to absorb excess water and polluted air.

Or voting and being politically active outside of the presidential election.


Basically, we all like to be heroes rather than caretakers.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 09-06-2017, 10:34 AM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

USD continues to spiral...

__________________
Member #14
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 09-06-2017, 10:43 AM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

"Somehow, it is Obama and the Democrats fault"

*sigh*


Is this a good time to talk about the perception of Democratic states subsidizing Republican ones?

Especially when comparing the stance on hurricane recovery bills?
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 09-06-2017, 10:52 AM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
"Somehow, it is Obama and the Democrats fault"

*sigh*


Is this a good time to talk about the perception of Democratic states subsidizing Republican ones?

Especially when comparing the stance on hurricane recovery bills?
Red staters affected by hurricanes should just pull themselves out of the flood waters by the bootstraps. It's not my fault they didn't pay for good enough flood insurance and get themselves into trouble. They should at least be drug tested before they get my money.
__________________
Member #14

Last edited by Kakwakas; 09-06-2017 at 12:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 09-06-2017, 05:24 PM
Kellick Kellick is offline

Site Staff - Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 12,052
BattleTag: Pyrolithic#1538

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kakwakas View Post
USD continues to spiral...
*Boilerplate disclaimer about Kellick being a neophyte in the realm of economics*

Now I'm hardly an expert, so feel free to yell at me and call me an idiot if I'm hilariously off-base (Author's note: Plz no bully), but purely going off of that graph (and disregarding the impact of everything else that's been going on in that exact same period), it seems more likely that this is just the dollar reacting poorly to uncertainty, rather than any substantive policy enacted by the Trump White House.

Now sure, you can argue that his behaviour is responsible (whether wholly and in part) for the perceived political uncertainty in the United States, which tends to hurt markets, though I'm loathe to put much stock in the contents of a single graph (especially one with such a limited scope and data).
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 09-06-2017, 05:36 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
*Boilerplate disclaimer about Kellick being a neophyte in the realm of economics*

Now I'm hardly an expert, so feel free to yell at me and call me an idiot if I'm hilariously off-base (Author's note: Plz no bully), but purely going off of that graph (and disregarding the impact of everything else that's been going on in that exact same period), it seems more likely that this is just the dollar reacting poorly to uncertainty, rather than any substantive policy enacted by the Trump White House.

Now sure, you can argue that his behaviour is responsible (whether wholly and in part) for the perceived political uncertainty in the United States, which tends to hurt markets, though I'm loathe to put much stock in the contents of a single graph (especially one with such a limited scope and data).
I will protect you from bullies Kellick!
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 09-12-2017, 04:36 PM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

Why do so many right-wingers fall for voodoo economic myths now?

We need to stop taxing the people driving the economy so much more than the people leeching off of it.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...lthy-investors
__________________
Member #14
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 09-15-2017, 05:59 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Something I have always felt interested in is the concept of constitutional economy.

As always a fan of Milton Friedman I thought this chart helped explain a big part of it.



This is basically a big reason why governments are so inefficient. Why the EPA gets marked down by the IG for having a cultural of complacency when it comes to the tax payer's money or why they only put employees on administrative leave for sexual harassment or watching pornography at work. The incentive to protect the environment in an efficient and optimal way just isn't there. Bureaucracy mostly works as a way to consolidate political power to further political ambitions. Failing to offer a quality service doesn't mean you lose power because the revenue is involuntary. The money will come in regardless.

The incentives here are actually pretty perverse. Government don't save money from year to year because if they do they will lose funding. The majority of Americans don't pay taxes and while taxes on other people indirectly impacts other people it does so in a disproportionate way. Half of the politicians benefit from a bloated government work force because it creates a steady stream of revenue from compulsory public union dues and gains the loyalty of powerful people. With the combined forces of government employees, students, academics, ect... there aren't a lot people that even impacted by taxes or regulatory policy. You can see a dynamic where since the Republicans who court a lot more tax payers don't offer as much benefits, job security, or public unions like the military as the politicians that don't have to show any regard to the tax payers do. The former has to balance between tax paying voters and government services and the later does not so they simply offer as much benefits as they can. That tax and regulatory policy ends up being implemented unfairly which reduces competition and entrepreneurship. It can all be traced to the perverse incentives our system gives to government economy.
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:09 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-wa...didates-to?amp

Well this is good, hopefully it will spread and become a national requirement
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 09-16-2017, 06:31 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

PJ, governments are inherently inefficient. Their model should not be an efficiency model, but a model that ensures its services to the entirety of its citizens. So long as there is minimal corruption and reasonable use of resources, then I'm okay with with government inefficiency. The US Post Office is extraordinarily inefficient, but it has to be because it delivers your international postcard to your grandmother's farm in the middle of Nowhere Dakota. And it's that inefficiency in the US Post Office that effectively subsidizes and empowers alternative postal services to operate.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 09-16-2017, 02:48 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
PJ, governments are inherently inefficient. Their model should not be an efficiency model, but a model that ensures its services to the entirety of its citizens. So long as there is minimal corruption and reasonable use of resources, then I'm okay with with government inefficiency. The US Post Office is extraordinarily inefficient, but it has to be because it delivers your international postcard to your grandmother's farm in the middle of Nowhere Dakota. And it's that inefficiency in the US Post Office that effectively subsidizes and empowers alternative postal services to operate.
I think it can be both more efficient and more optimal. The reasons it isn't isn't just because of the USPS situation you just described. Government employees are very difficult to fire for poor performance and there is a lot of redundancy. A lot of this has to do with the way public unions bargain against tax payers with politicians. There was a very big difference between government employees and military personnel in this regard. The former could do the exact same job but not have to meet the same standards but get paid more. There was a joke that civilian employees could get away with sexual harassment and it was very true. The EPA had issues firing a serial sexual assaulter and an employee that downloaded and watched porn 2-6 hours a day for years. I knew of civilian employees who got away with lewd comments and casual sexism.

A manufacturing plant will have industrial engineers that try to save costs by trimming down employees and processes. The reason they do this is because if the company can save money they can offer a cheaper product and pay the remaining employees more while producing the same value. The government doesn't really operate that way. The civilian jobs are really cushy and nigh unfireable. The benefits are higher than what you would see working for a company. You can see how in DC all this concentrated spending drives up demand so much that the cost of living is ridiculous. Typically when that happens they just have to spend more money in order to accommodate that.

For something like housing I think having the federal government involved just produces a worse outcome than if they weren't involved at all. Getting rid of that wouldn't be lowering the prioritization of affordable housing. It would be an acknowledgment that the government simply makes the situation worse. The government should focus on things that have positive externalities but even then the systems that underline this should be changed. The more efficient and optimal the system runs the less poverty there will be and other sort of economically human progress.
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 09-16-2017, 03:11 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Youve been using that same anecdote for years
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 09-17-2017, 05:52 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
I think it can be both more efficient and more optimal.
It obviously can, but I don't think that efficiency or "the bottom line" should be the goal of government services, but, rather, the goal should be the people. And I do think that you can agree that

Quote:
I knew of civilian employees who got away with lewd comments and casual sexism.
Sadly, that is just like in the private sector too.


Quote:
Government employees are very difficult to fire for poor performance and there is a lot of redundancy. A lot of this has to do with the way public unions bargain against tax payers with politicians. There was a very big difference between government employees and military personnel in this regard. The former could do the exact same job but not have to meet the same standards but get paid more. There was a joke that civilian employees could get away with sexual harassment and it was very true.
Quote:
A manufacturing plant will have industrial engineers that try to save costs by trimming down employees and processes. The reason they do this is because if the company can save money they can offer a cheaper product and pay the remaining employees more while producing the same value. The government doesn't really operate that way. The civilian jobs are really cushy and nigh unfireable. The benefits are higher than what you would see working for a company. You can see how in DC all this concentrated spending drives up demand so much that the cost of living is ridiculous. Typically when that happens they just have to spend more money in order to accommodate that.
The problem, PJ, is that this does not happen as often as you would think that it does, or at least the employees who receive the bigger share of "more" tends to be at the upper echelons while the mid and lower echelons tend to receive substantially less of the "more pay." A manufacturing plant can offer more to those employees, but will they? That is the big question, especially when cost efficiency, the bottom-line, and the management's own incentives for increasing their salary are at play. You are correct that civilian jobs are "cushier" in that there are more protections at stake, including those horrible Constitutional ones that always get in the way, but that's an opportunity cost that's being made by these employees. Because there is more money in the private sector for equivalent or similar positions but that comes with less job security. You are right that the benefits are higher for working in the public sector than the private sector, but that is also, in part, because the private sector has changed in that regard. Many companies are phasing out the whole system that used to be in place where employees would be hired at 22 out of college, work at the company until retirement, and receive full benefits. The private sector is not what it used to be. And working at a manufacturing plant always comes with the once unthinkable risk of being outsourced overseas. My home county was once a major furniture manufacturing hub. Once. Even back in the late '80s, I recall watching my father being laid off because even pre-NAFTA, local manufacturing was dying in favor of cheaper labor. We can talk about gross GDP, the private sector, trickle-down economics all you want, but after almost 30 years, my county has not recovered nor is there much of a sign that it will. Our local economy is being sustained by our unusually high public sector. I apologize for this small off-topic rant.

Also, PJ, I doubt that things would be much different in DC if the private sector had greater sway there. In fact, as we see in areas such as in San Francisco Bay Area and New York, it would probably be worse in DC if the private sector had more sway precisely because how spending would be more concentrated and further driving up demands. It would be such that high paid lobbyists would have a greater ability to live in the DC Metropolitan area than the actual government employees themselves.

Quote:
For something like housing I think having the federal government involved just produces a worse outcome than if they weren't involved at all. Getting rid of that wouldn't be lowering the prioritization of affordable housing. It would be an acknowledgment that the government simply makes the situation worse. The government should focus on things that have positive externalities but even then the systems that underline this should be changed. The more efficient and optimal the system runs the less poverty there will be and other sort of economically human progress.
I disagree, especially since I have friends in New Jersey who are currently being evicted by landlord using legal loopholes to boot out all their tenants so they can drive up the prices of their flats. I'm fairly certain this landlord would have kicked everyone out sooner if they had the opportunity. Because people are means and not ends. Vienna is a major city, or at least Austria's largest city, and housing is affordable because of government rent control. In contrast, housing is not affordable - or increasingly less so - in the SF Bay Area because there is a lack of affordable housing, rent control, and a lot of predatory housing developments (e.g. Russian and Chinese foreign investments that drives up costs and removes supply for city/area natives). I think that letting the private sector having free reign of something as critical as housing (i.e. something incredibly low on the hierarchy of basic human needs) would lead to the most optimal results for the greatest number of people. Producing more wealth means little when it also produces more poverty and economic disparity between classes.

Last edited by Genesis; 09-17-2017 at 05:54 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 09-17-2017, 08:59 AM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
It obviously can, but I don't think that efficiency or "the bottom line" should be the goal of government services, but, rather, the goal should be the people. And I do think that you can agree that
But you can't help people when you are wasting societies resources away like that. Our impediments to helping people are more deep than simple lack of trying. Those public employees benefit more than society at large does which has a negative impact on anyone not receiving the government money. Sometimes the economical choice is the better way to make things accessible and benefit the most people possible. We use copper instead of gold for conductors because copper is cheaper even if gold does a better job. In order to produce more we need to do things efficiently and constantly find better ways to do things.
Quote:
Sadly, that is just like in the private sector too.
It is a lot easier to discipline a private employee than a government civilian one. A uniformed government employee was a lot easier to reprimand than a civilian one because instead of reduced scrutiny they get more scrutiny. I think this sense of public service is missing in the government civilian work force. This is the same way with teachers in public schools that bring down our education system despite the fact that we spend more money on it than most countries do. Public education does a poor job at preparing people for what happens next for most people.
Quote:
The problem, PJ, is that this does not happen as often as you would think that it does, or at least the employees who receive the bigger share of "more" tends to be at the upper echelons while the mid and lower echelons tend to receive substantially less of the "more pay." A manufacturing plant can offer more to those employees, but will they? That is the big question, especially when cost efficiency, the bottom-line, and the management's own incentives for increasing their salary are at play. You are correct that civilian jobs are "cushier" in that there are more protections at stake, including those horrible Constitutional ones that always get in the way, but that's an opportunity cost that's being made by these employees. Because there is more money in the private sector for equivalent or similar positions but that comes with less job security. You are right that the benefits are higher for working in the public sector than the private sector, but that is also, in part, because the private sector has changed in that regard. Many companies are phasing out the whole system that used to be in place where employees would be hired at 22 out of college, work at the company until retirement, and receive full benefits. The private sector is not what it used to be. And working at a manufacturing plant always comes with the once unthinkable risk of being outsourced overseas. My home county was once a major furniture manufacturing hub. Once. Even back in the late '80s, I recall watching my father being laid off because even pre-NAFTA, local manufacturing was dying in favor of cheaper labor. We can talk about gross GDP, the private sector, trickle-down economics all you want, but after almost 30 years, my county has not recovered nor is there much of a sign that it will. Our local economy is being sustained by our unusually high public sector. I apologize for this small off-topic rant.
Manufacturing did take a hit due to outsourcing. The kind of jobs that were outsourced though are really monotonous and low skilled. It isn't just the college educated that got to stay with high wages. Your electricians and plumbers also get a lot of money at these kind of places. Manufacturing makes up a greater share of the economy in Indiana than in any other state. I think we were able to weather this because our government work force is very lean and our regulatory policy is much more sensible. It allows for less external costs for running a high energy industry like manufacturing. It was automation that made cars more of a luxury item in the first place. Without the assembly line only the rich would be able to afford them. Now most people own a car and our cars are evolving pretty quickly. Manufacturing is a secondary industry so it helps fuel the more tertiary industries in the surrounding area by producing something of value. Government spending just distorts it and makes everything really expensive like in the DC area.

Some jobs are expendable but I don't think that is normal. It costs a lot of money to find a new employee and train them so simply abandoning someone you invested so much in isn't feasible unless you are talking about some McDonald's Job that requires little training. Having an employee that understands how your company works is very valuable. As an worker you have to understand how to invest in yourself if you want a nice job. Without the government propping up certain people the livable wage would be lower and there would be more competition between businesses for labor.
Quote:
Also, PJ, I doubt that things would be much different in DC if the private sector had greater sway there. In fact, as we see in areas such as in San Francisco Bay Area and New York, it would probably be worse in DC if the private sector had more sway precisely because how spending would be more concentrated and further driving up demands. It would be such that high paid lobbyists would have a greater ability to live in the DC Metropolitan area than the actual government employees themselves.
Washington DC is kind of disgusting economically. A lot of government jobs, contractors, and lobbyists make a living off of the US tax payers. We end up with the richest cities in the country in Northern Virginia but also one of the highest rates of poverty in the district due to the insane cost of living. I am certain that if we slashed government spending in the area immensely and moved some of the agencies out to lower cost of living areas the prices would job there. It would be cheaper to operate outside of the enclave and I think it would become less of an echo chamber.
Quote:

I disagree, especially since I have friends in New Jersey who are currently being evicted by landlord using legal loopholes to boot out all their tenants so they can drive up the prices of their flats. I'm fairly certain this landlord would have kicked everyone out sooner if they had the opportunity. Because people are means and not ends. Vienna is a major city, or at least Austria's largest city, and housing is affordable because of government rent control. In contrast, housing is not affordable - or increasingly less so - in the SF Bay Area because there is a lack of affordable housing, rent control, and a lot of predatory housing developments (e.g. Russian and Chinese foreign investments that drives up costs and removes supply for city/area natives). I think that letting the private sector having free reign of something as critical as housing (i.e. something incredibly low on the hierarchy of basic human needs) would lead to the most optimal results for the greatest number of people. Producing more wealth means little when it also produces more poverty and economic disparity between classes.
If it is happening in New Jersey that means the federal HUD isn't helping them. Indiana is one of the best states to be a land lord and we have affordable housing. My rent is cheaper in Indiana than it was in any other location I have lived in. We used to have price controls on gasoline and all it did is lead to scarcities and long lines. When you neglect the producer they stop producing things. Price controls didn't show that we cared about energy. It made the situation considerably worse. Housing would fall to connected people to the landlord instead of the general public. Housing in a lot of European nations is generally smaller, less amnesties, and more expensive.

It doesn't just produce more wealth. It promotes housing development which is what the impoverished need. Government activism doesn't just make everything better or else we would abolish the free market completely and hand over the economy to bureaucrats. It would be a disaster. Everyone except the bureaucrats would be poor. I don't believe the government simply cares about people more or that anything we leave to the private sector is a form of neglect. We certainly don't neglect smart phones or cars because the government doesn't manage those. Getting rid of the HUD would save billions and allow the prices of housing to drop because there would be more of them and less restrictions on the kind of housing you could make. States could still maintain their own housing departments if they wish that offer more sensible regulations than what the federal government does. The incentive for the federal government to do so just isn't there.
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 09-17-2017, 03:48 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

http://www.politico.com/agenda/story...ry-lynn-000523

Hmm, instinctively I'm inclined to say Google is too big to attack, but a general anti monopoly platform is one I could see a lot of support for
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 09-17-2017, 04:17 PM
Kakwakas Kakwakas is offline

Elune
Kakwakas's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 8,387

Darkmoon Card: Elementals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story...ry-lynn-000523

Hmm, instinctively I'm inclined to say Google is too big to attack, but a general anti monopoly platform is one I could see a lot of support for
What do they think Google has a monopoly over?
__________________
Member #14
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 09-17-2017, 06:07 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,166

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kakwakas View Post
What do they think Google has a monopoly over?
The ability to actually give me the results I'm looking for when I run a search.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 09-18-2017, 04:53 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
But you can't help people when you are wasting societies resources away like that. Our impediments to helping people are more deep than simple lack of trying. Those public employees benefit more than society at large does which has a negative impact on anyone not receiving the government money. Sometimes the economical choice is the better way to make things accessible and benefit the most people possible.
Precisely, and have you considered the possibility that government services are the less-efficient but the more economical choice? Have you not considered that Universal Health Care is the economical choice that benefits the most people possible?

Quote:
This is the same way with teachers in public schools that bring down our education system despite the fact that we spend more money on it than most countries do. Public education does a poor job at preparing people for what happens next for most people.
You are speaking ignorance out of your element, PJ. As an analogy, you are essentially blaming "servicemen" for screw ups and policies of politicians in charge of the military. But imagine that would have to buy your own equipment out of your personal money if you wanted to serve in the military or do your job properly. Congrats on the life of your average teacher in America. I am not suggesting that teachers are perfect or blameless, but your soapbox moralizing is inappropriately misplaced.

Quote:
Manufacturing did take a hit due to outsourcing. The kind of jobs that were outsourced though are really monotonous and low skilled. It isn't just the college educated that got to stay with high wages. Your electricians and plumbers also get a lot of money at these kind of places. Manufacturing makes up a greater share of the economy in Indiana than in any other state. I think we were able to weather this because our government work force is very lean and our regulatory policy is much more sensible. It allows for less external costs for running a high energy industry like manufacturing. It was automation that made cars more of a luxury item in the first place. Without the assembly line only the rich would be able to afford them. Now most people own a car and our cars are evolving pretty quickly. Manufacturing is a secondary industry so it helps fuel the more tertiary industries in the surrounding area by producing something of value. Government spending just distorts it and makes everything really expensive like in the DC area.

Some jobs are expendable but I don't think that is normal. It costs a lot of money to find a new employee and train them so simply abandoning someone you invested so much in isn't feasible unless you are talking about some McDonald's Job that requires little training. Having an employee that understands how your company works is very valuable. As an worker you have to understand how to invest in yourself if you want a nice job. Without the government propping up certain people the livable wage would be lower and there would be more competition between businesses for labor.
PJ, North Carolina weathered the hit to manufacturing as it diversified its economic sector (e.g. pharmaceutical, bio-engineering, banking, etc.), but my home county and the real, non-statistical lives of the people who live there did not. Growth is not always equal in the state or between states, and this is something that your theory-crafting of economic policy does not seem to get: real people have lives. This is not just a gig for your vain self-aggrandizing economic preaching. It astounds me that for all your shit about how "academics" play games with theoretical economic policies that affect real lives, how callously you seem to disregard real lives of real working people so that you yourself can sermonize your own ideologically-driven theoretical economic policies from an equally aloof and detached-from-reality perspective. You are just as bad sometimes as what you preach against.

Quote:
Washington DC is kind of disgusting economically. A lot of government jobs, contractors, and lobbyists make a living off of the US tax payers. We end up with the richest cities in the country in Northern Virginia but also one of the highest rates of poverty in the district due to the insane cost of living. I am certain that if we slashed government spending in the area immensely and moved some of the agencies out to lower cost of living areas the prices would job there. It would be cheaper to operate outside of the enclave and I think it would become less of an echo chamber.
Of course you are certain of that outcome when you point all blame and lay all fault at the feet of government spending. Nearly everything. I'm genuinely surprised that you have not blamed the terrible quality of Warlords of Draenor on big government spending. You're that much of a one note song. Given the higher costs of living in other heavily privatized urban areas (e.g. San Francisco, New York), do you honestly believe that costs of living in DC would go down if you slashed government spending? Sure, it would be cheaper for those agencies if you relocated said agencies, but the US government already does have localized agency branches across the US. There is also an economic benefit of having a centralized location for federal government agencies. And I strongly suspect that the opposite of what you predict would occur for DC's cost of living having witnessed it in action elsewhere.

Quote:
If it is happening in New Jersey that means the federal HUD isn't helping them.
Because, again, the federal government is always to blame.

Quote:
Indiana is one of the best states to be a land lord and we have affordable housing. My rent is cheaper in Indiana than it was in any other location I have lived in. We used to have price controls on gasoline and all it did is lead to scarcities and long lines. When you neglect the producer they stop producing things. Price controls didn't show that we cared about energy. It made the situation considerably worse. Housing would fall to connected people to the landlord instead of the general public. Housing in a lot of European nations is generally smaller, less amnesties, and more expensive.
There's also less demand to live in Indiana than elsewhere, PJ, so it's not as if Indiana is anywhere near the Candy Mountain you make it out to be. And where else have you lived apart from Utopindiana and Europeland? And where are you living in Indiana? It's not as if the costs of living in Indiana is comparative across the board to your military base in Germany. There are cheap places for housing development in both Germany and Indiana. (And US states are also different from nation-states, especially when comparing the 17th largest state in GDP with the 4th largest nation state in GDP.) My two-bedroom apartment in Vienna is larger, less expensive, and with more amnesties than an equivalent apartment in many other major US cities. I was essentially paying more per month for living in a much smaller graduate school-subsidized Berkeley dormatory room than in living in my current flat.

Quote:
It doesn't just produce more wealth. It promotes housing development which is what the impoverished need. Government activism doesn't just make everything better or else we would abolish the free market completely and hand over the economy to bureaucrats. It would be a disaster. Everyone except the bureaucrats would be poor. I don't believe the government simply cares about people more or that anything we leave to the private sector is a form of neglect. We certainly don't neglect smart phones or cars because the government doesn't manage those. Getting rid of the HUD would save billions and allow the prices of housing to drop because there would be more of them and less restrictions on the kind of housing you could make. States could still maintain their own housing departments if they wish that offer more sensible regulations than what the federal government does. The incentive for the federal government to do so just isn't there.
Your religious fervor for capitalism and the free market dwarfs your Christian piety. You have the most blind faith in your ideological brand of capitalism, and I am stunned by the sheer conviction you have in how the policies you advocate for would produce incredibly particular outcomes with positive results without any negative repercussions.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
realspace, serious business

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.