https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/bernie-sanders-economic-policy-lloyd-blankfein-goldman-sachs-ceo-a9334956.htmlBernie Sanders’ economic policies would be good for the American economy, according to a new book by a renowned economist.French economist Thomas Piketty said history has many examples of extreme inequality fostering healthy social democracies. His comments come days after a former Goldman Sachs chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, said on Twitter that Sanders would “ruin our economy.”In an interview with Bloomberg, Piketty cited Sweden as an example. At the start of the 20th century, Sweden — now held up as an egalitarian country — was entirely controlled by wealthy elites and voting rights were determined by property. Within a very short space of time, and with little economic disruption, it became the social democratic nation that we now know.This precedent bodes well for Mr Sanders' policy goals of reforming American capitalism, Piketty suggested.In his new book Capital and Ideology, Piketty examines the relationship between inequality and ideology, and how they shape each other. The Sanders campaign has promised systemic change through economic policy to tackle inequality — higher taxes of the rich, a wealth tax, a minimum wage, and “workplace democracy”.Piketty, like Mr Sanders, advocates a progressive tax on wealth. “Remember that the US is actually the country that invented progressive taxation of income and wealth in the 20th century,” he said.
>>550749Citing 30 years of data showing that US workers have not seen any real per capita growth in that period, Piketty also said no country has a national determinism about economics and the US is not necessarily wed to its current system. Things can change very quickly. “Warren and Sanders are not radicals, they are moderate social democrats by European standards … and the ideology of the US is changing,” he said.Piketty’s first book, 2014’s best-selling Capital in the Twenty-First Century, is said to have foreseen the Trump presidency — predicting that voters who felt marginalised by globalisation would turn to radical solutions outside of the realms of traditional politics.Could there be parallels in support for the Sanders campaign? A portion of the electorate that again feels left behind in a highly unequal society, who could turn away from "business as usual" solutions, and wants real structural change. In a discussion with the Financial Times, Piketty described the two different policy reactions to this scenario — the first wants to regulate the movement of goods and people, the other wants to regulate the movement of capital. One focuses on external factors (immigrants, unfair trade deals), the other on internal factors (inequality, education, health) advocating structural change at home.At this early stage of the primary campaign it is still unclear whether the American voter will opt for the latter, and embrace Mr Sanders.
>>550749>Listening to the French>about economics Hearty chuckle
>>550751>Adam Smith FRSA was a Scottish economist, philosopher and author as well as a moral philosopher, a pioneer of political economy and a key figure during the Scottish Enlightenment, also known as ''The Father of Economics'" or ''The Father of Capitalism''.>scottishOH NO NO NO NOHow long have you gone without realizing your economic system was invented by a haggis-muncher
>>550754>your comment>relevant Pick one and only one
>>550749Is this the same economist that said Trump would cause a recession that we would never recover from?
>>550756>Your comment here >>550751>RelevantPick one.
>>550763>no u The left simply cannot banter
>>550749Glad someone noticed the Trump Tax Scam isn't working.
>>550749Of course, it's obvious that paying workers more in wages and benefits will be good for the economy. Greedy small business owners think it will hurt their bottom-line, but if people in general have more money to spend the overall economy and business will increase. It's a matter of being short sighted or thinking about the long term, and conservatives can't seem to think beyond the next election cycle. If you think trickle-down economics works after all these decades of clear proof that it doesn't, you should be taken out back and shot.
>>550785>you should be taken out back and shot.Oi, none of that. It's the right wingers who use violence to make a point. We just use facts.
>>550785>Greedy small business ownersImagine actually saying this unironically and thinking any of your opinions or beliefs are even remotely relevant
>>550786>It's the right wingers who use violence to make a point. We just use facts.No, pretty sure you use violence, especially when your facts get proven to be MSM propaganda. You just label everyone with any sort of right wing beliefs as a fascist so when you do get violent you already have an excuse.
>>550785This. The right can't make policy, they can only meme.
>>550789Property damage isn't great, but it's definitely better than murder, or committing mass shootings
>>550757There's four more years in that retards term. Relax jew
>>550796Luckily, the left engages in all three and then blames their victims for what they were wearing or thinking at the timeNice try at goal post shifting though.
>>550749"The guy from Israel will be good for the economy." - Some Jew./thread
>>550798Remember Cesar Sayoc?Remember the Coast Guard guy?The Wal-Mart guy?Buncha crazy left wingers!
>>550801Remember the Las Vegas shooter?The Aurora theater shooting?Remember that dude who shot up the congressional baseball game?Remember all those inner city shootings in heavily Democrat controlled districts that account for the majority of all gun crime and mass shootings, that the media glazes over constantly because they don't care about black people and treat inner city violence as a normality?Remember all those leftists who bragged and still brag about openly assaulting right wingers?Remember all those leftist media personalities who were sending death threats to a group of high school kids and called for people to shoot up and bomb their school?Remember all of those things that happen outside of your narrow MSM blinders?
piketty is a "top economist" because of his book which he wrote with an ideological bias and sold to people with the same bias
>>550806I remember half of those having No proven ideological leaning.But if you wanna go further, remember the Oklahoma City Bombing?Remember Eric Rudolph?Remember the California Synagogue shooting?Remember the Kroger shooting in Kentucky?Remember the Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting?Remember the guy who rammed his fucking car into a crowd of counterprotesters in Charolottesville?Remember the Portland Train attack?Remember the planned parenthood shooting in Colorado Springs?Remember the Charleston church shooting?Remember the Overland Park community center shooting?Remember the Wisconsin Sikh Temple shooting?Holy shit, you're a fucking hypocrite. Muh MSM goggles. Try looking up some actual statistics, retard.
>>550825>I remember half of those having No proven ideological leaning.Tu quoque :)>Try looking up some actual statistics, retard.See>Remember all those inner city shootings in heavily Democrat controlled districts that account for the majority of all gun crime and mass shootings, that the media glazes over constantly because they don't care about black people and treat inner city violence as a normality?Lets see those statistics!
>>550827Statistics? Okay!https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/As of the Wal-Mart shooting last year, right wingers have officially surpassed religious extremists in number of deadly attacks. Oh, and that graph also includes the two marks for leftist ideologies (black separatist and militant feminist)...waaaaaay down at the bottom.Mike drop.
>>550831>new americaLOLhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_America_(organization)>Although the organization describes itself as "non-partisan", its policy views have been characterized as centrist, liberal or left-leaning. The New America Foundation has been criticized for its perceived close ties with Google, including its decision to fire an employee who criticized Google as a monopoly. The organization, however, has denied improper influence.>Mike drop.Mic*Also, again, you keep completely ignoring all those inner city shootings in heavily Democrat controlled districts that account for the majority of all gun crime and mass shootings. Almost like you don't care about black people. Typical leftist.
>>550835>shooting the messengerfucking weakhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Right-wing_extremism_and_anti-government>According to a 2017 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent). The total number of fatalities is about the same for far right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period (106 and 119, respectively). 52 percent of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event—an attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016."
>>550835>complains about leftists always turning to violence>gets bfto>B-B-BUT WHAT ABOUT THE INNER CITIESif you are under the impression that petty violent crime has a political leaning you have your head so far up your ass that you can see the back of your teeth.
>>550749>((Blankfien)) says ((Sanders)) will be good for economyWhat about ((Bloomberg))
>>550864Mike 'bribe the zoomers' BloombergMike 'under 20? Give em a 50' BloombergMike 'money makes the polls go round' BloombergMike 'meme money magic' Bloomberg
>>550866Yeah, that ((Bloomberg))
>>550835>talks about moving goalposts>receives a perfectly valid table of data with perfectly valid sources>but rejects table of unbiased data anyway because 'm-muh Liberal website..."okay
>>550857Pretty sure most inner city nigs vote Republican anyways. The entire place is filled to the brim with Uncle Ruckuses
>>550785yes, paying the middle earner more is essential to a healthy economy.but democrats take that and toss it to the extreme with 'lets tax the rich out of existence and also give criminals and the poor literally everything for free"the end result of that mentality is that those middle earners will foot the bill as the gibs need to be gibben, and the rich know how to avoid taxes.
>>550877And you have what basis for this wild speculation, upon which you are condemning an entire party?That's like saying 'republicans are corrupt'.
>>550796Thank you, I was saying this just yesterday. I think they should adjust their methods when it comes to that, cause theor presence is vital to stopping actual organization of facists in the street.The left is tolerant, but they represent the hard line that we won't America just be walked over into fascism. As long as they cool it on the property destruction (which once again, is definitely not as bad as the things the people they are there to break up do), I think they are going to be an important bulwark as America is slipping closer to fascism than away from it in the past few years, but moreso lately.
>>550884>The left is tolerant*except of those with differing opinions
>>550887Listen buddy, if your idea of speaking a different opinion is to shoot up a synagogue, bomb a planned parenthood clinic, or drive your car at speed into a crowd, we are gonna have a fucking problem.
>>550890>Listen buddy, if your idea of differing opinion is isolated incident by a few disturbed individuals that definitely describe an entire political ideology then we can’t be friends. Thanks for reminding me to attend my weekly extremist meeting this Saturday. Randy the black baby beater is bringing pizza!
>>550892Now, when you say "black baby eater" are you referring to a man who eats black babies, or a black man who eats babies?
>>550892Review your history:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Right-wing_extremism_and_anti-government
>>550897That is horrible! Well, that’s what I thought until I stumbled upon a few pages that said they were related...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimeshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forwardhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_StalinDo you prefer to murder your people like Mao, Stalin, or Lenin? Or is your method of murder and execution different and they didn’t employ the “real” version of your ideology?
>>550878they are though.they both are.also wild speculation comes from the kind of shit they propose. or did the green new deal, and democrat talks of "reparations taxes" not happen?or how NY is rapidly going from one of the safest cities in the world back to the bad old days of the 70's and 80's due to liberal policies designed to be "equitable" and fix "racial injustices" such as decriminalizing quality of life crimes, and eliminating bail unconditionally, or eliminating stop and friskor let's ignore how in California, if you are an illegal you can get free healthcare, a driver's license, the works. if you are rich, you have the money to burn anyway so it doesn't bother you. But if you are in the middle, you pay some of the highest taxes in the nation, and are basically unable to live in California comfortably, even if you make a 3 figure salarymy point is that sure, middle class definitely needs to be adjusted to make more money. but the current democratic platform, while it might *say* it wants that, if it does anything at all in that respect, renders it effectively worthless, as their policies would result in consequences that negate any gain made.>sanders increases the amount of money made by the middle class>but now your income taxes are also significantly higher because he also implemented socialized medicine and that money needs to come from somewhere, and he also expanded welfare and poverty programs, and that needs to be funded somehow because "muh black americans muh racial justice"the rich person can avoid higher tax rates because being rich isn't just about your paycheck, but about your net worth and how much you have invested in assets and what you are worth as a person, and that isn't taxable. and the poor don't have money to give.
>>550900>they didn’t employ the “real” version of your ideology?Given that they objectively didn't, that would surely be a fair argument for him to use. So it would make sense the actions in other countries would be related since America was doing all of those too, because nametags don't dictate policy.
>>550900Are you really equating liberals in the states with Commies 50 years ago. Tell me what massacre Obama and Clinton committed.
>>550939>Yes, we know what’s best for you. To show you we know best, we’re going to point guns at you to make sure you do your fair share of work for the community>>550940They massacred the middle class and grew the government to cover even more of our lives. Ah fuck I forgot, politicians know what’s best for me and should be responsible for feeding my children and housing me. There’s no way I can be trusted as an individual to be a responsible citizen, I need to be told what to do and when to do it.
>>550945>>Yes, we know what’s best for you. To show you we know best, we’re going to point guns at you to make sure you do your fair share of work for the communityNow that we've done America, which do you want to do next?
>>550958Post an example of where this happened or happens in America.
>>550960Kent State. Whiskey Rebellion. Wounded Knee. Japanese concentration camps.Strikes in general if you don't do them the way the government wants you to, aka ineffectively. United Mine Workers of Americais probably the one you're most familiar with when things like these come up.
>that op image...and the LEFTYPOL refugees start flooding in
>>550963>These several small occurrences are comparable to the mass murder and oppression inflicted by collective governments and ideology
>>550935>NY is rapidly getting bad againThat kind of thing happens when the cost of living rises faster than wages, anon. People become increasingly desperate, and seek other paths to success outside the legal route>illegals can get all these things in californiaIn certain municipalities, sure, but immigrants use healthcare services way less than whites, and undocumented immigrants less so>sanders' plan has to be paid for somehowYou can google his plan, anon. Your rates don't go up unless you're making six figures, and the tax he's proposed on trading should raise a shit ton of money for those programs as well. You're concerned, and i get that, but he's well aware that it'd be political suicide to raise rates for people like us>tax rates don't effect the richRaise the corporate gains rate, bernie's proposing a tax on wall street trading, and lower the floor on the estate tax. Also consider that congress could be cutting defense spending to balance the budget, and you have zero reasons why you should foot the bill for this
>>550966What is a collective but many occurrences? A mountain is not so simply because you can piecemeal it into small rocks?Is a goalpost moved still the same argument?But sure, let's take the whole Americas and their ideology.How many are poor and homeless? Without a job, waiting in food lines, even turned away for the day because of such demand to survive? Do children not go hungry because profit is above human life? Is the Great Depression not taught anymore?Fucking idiot.
>>550975Poor today isn’t the same as poor 100, or even 50 years agoPoor means have a studio apartment with AC, heat, a toilet, a refrigerator, running water, a 32 inch tv, a smartphone, a car outside, and food in your stomach. People being “poor” means nothing, it’s the perception that they’re poor. Does bezos have more money than he needs? Sure, that doesn’t stop you from finding happiness and more importantly meaning in life. No one is homeless and jobless in this country except for the retards who have zero transferable skills. There’s no such thing as a society where everyone is in perfect condition and taken care of. Where do you get these stupid fucking ideas?
>>550982>smartphone, a car outside, and food in your stomach>pooruh, no.
>>550983So you blame society and the entire system for the individual not being able accrue basic necessities? In a country where 95% of the population can afford all three of the things I just listed you are going to really say that it’s the systems fault and it should be restructured? Are you saying the individual bears no responsibility for the state of their condition?
>>550982>No one is homeless and jobless in this country except for the retards who have zero transferable skills.Man, this is the quality of argument here.Is it because of the weekend?
>>550990Fuck off bootlicker. The state isn’t the solution to every fucking problem you have.
>>550988>95% of the population can afford all three of the things I just listedCome back when you actually have a realistic picture of poverty in this country.
>>550995Why are there so many poor people? How did they get so poor?
>>550993That isn't even close to what was being argued. If anything, what I've posted would be anti-state.
>>550788Someone's never worked at a private fast food franchise before
>>550877>tax the rich out of existencewhich tax proposal is supposed to tax the rich out of existence? is it the 70% marginal tax rate of solely the income above $10M? or is it the 0.5% tax on stocks or the 0.1% on bonds? explain to me how these people will be struggling under these figures
>>551022Inb4 'book how will the millionaires survive on 3m a year, they'll magically take all their business and leave never kind that's not how economics works~'
>>550900which policy of which democrat involved the seizure by the government of the means of production?
Reminder to Trump botshttps://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/09/20/trump-has-created-15-million-fewer-jobs-than-obama/#16ee7b3c27ce>Obama laugh.jpg
>>551027High marginal income tax rates are a tool that effete ruling class layabouts like to use to insure that nobody else will ever be able to challenge their wealth, power and status no matter how hard they try to earn it, thats why George Bush Sr was so vocally against Reagan's tax cuts and made an effort to reverse them.Letting people keep what they earn works out better for everyone.
>>551049Why aren't capital gains taxed the same as ordinary income? I mean, the super-rich don't pay the top marginal rate anyway.
>bernie is somehow elected>california rises 1000ft in height>massive vein of gold, diamonds now easily mined>all rejoice, he somehow did this>it doesn't make a single difference>reparations also
>>551051back before the reagan tax cut happened, high income earners were paying a much higher rate of tax than the inherited wealth class because the born-rich didn't pay much income tax, they paid mostly capital gains which was taxed at a lower rate back then. people who were paying substantial income taxes outnumbered the the inherited wealth class by a lot, the income tax payers voted for reagan and the income tax cut
>>550998Different here. I'll humour you. When others get more, others get less. When rich owners get more, poor workers get less. Pretty straightforward. There's X amount of money at any given time. Only the amount X can be distributed to people. Not more. For example, if rich people get 90 percent of the X, others can only get 10 percent. It's not rocket science.
>>550751>be american>break leg>ambulance man : that'll be 3000 dolla plus tip>hospital : that'll be $250000 plus tip
>>550786>Oi, none of that. It's the right wingers who use violence to make a point. We just use facts.Antifa would disagree.
Fascinating how the Democrat version of Socialism is always modeled after the racist blonde-blue eyed, non-diverse Scandinavian ideal, and never the corrupt reality it would be in messy diverse brown countries Venezuela or Cuba.
>>551094Lmao imagine coping this hard
>>551088>When others get more, others get less. When rich owners get more, poor workers get less. Pretty straightforwardIt's only straightforward if you view the economy as a fixed pie, and have a 4th grade level understanding of economics>Only the amount X can be distributed to people. Not more. For example, if rich people get 90 percent of the X, others can only get 10 percent. It's not rocket science.You're right, that right there is a 4th grade level understanding of economics, as I said
>>550855>moving the goal posts to an even narrower focus>>550857>>550870>defending such buffoonery because they can't admit to their own violenceYou all flinch with chimp rage every time you see a red hat in public. You constantly are thankful you don't have a firearm because you're sure you'd use it angrily.
>>550890>if your idea of speaking a different opinion is to shoot up a synagogue, bomb a planned parenthood clinic, or drive your car at speed into a crowdAnd if you apply this straw man to everyone vaguely right wing you ever talk to, you'll never have to acknowledge their points ever again! Yay!
>>550967>That kind of thing happens when the cost of living rises faster than wages, anonThank the NY state government for jacking up said cost of living. They have to pay for the huge raises they gave themselves somehow, after all.
>>551120It is a fixed "pie" in any moment. There's not more of the "pie" that there is any given time. Surely you understand that. If budjet for a country is 20 trillion, there isn't more than that. If corporation has a budget 20 billion, there isn't more than that. If a corporation makes 10 billion in profit and gives it all to their owners, nobody else gets nothing. The point is how we distribute the money that is available at any given time.>4th grade level understanding of economics>le you can't understand economicsNot an argument. Everybody who uses "you don't even understand economics" is so full of shit themselves. You didn't make any argument. You just attacked me for "not knowing economics". But that's bullshit made up by you.I made you an argument, you just used an ad hominem. It's not economics really, it's very basic logic. Theres X amount of money any given time, and only that can be distributed. If rich people get more, others get less. Basic logic.
>>5511341/2>It is a fixed "pie" in any momentNo, it's not.>There's not more of the "pie" that there is any given time. Surely you understand that.I understand that it's factually wrong to claim such a thing and you are wrong for believing it to be true.>If budjet for a country is 20 trillion, there isn't more than thatThe budget of a country's government and its economy are not the same thing. >If corporation has a budget 20 billion, there isn't more than that.What is liquidity? What are assets? Do you even know what these terms mean?> If a corporation makes 10 billion in profit and gives it all to their owners, nobody else gets nothingDo you understand what the difference between profit and revenue is? Do you understand that corporations and businesses don't work in the way you just described?>The point is how we distribute the money that is available at any given time.You don't "distribute" money, that's neither how money nor healthy economies function.>Not an argument. Everybody who uses "you don't even understand economics" is so full of shit themselvesIt is an argument, what is not an argument is claiming that if you don't understand economics then no one else does either. This is also referred to as projection.
>>5511342/2 >You didn't make any argument.I did, I argued that you don't know what you're talking about and have a 4th grade level of understanding of economics. This is common for people who believe in retard-tier shit like socialism and wealth redistribution. >You just attacked me for "not knowing economics". But that's bullshit made up by you.No, anyone reading your posts can clearly see you don't understand economics, and what little understanding you do have is incredibly simplistic and based on faulty and naive logic.>I made you an argument, you just used an ad hominemThat's not an ad hominem, you seriously do not understand economics and everything you have said is an easily debunkable falsehood. >It's not economics really, it's very basic logicIt is basic, which is why it's very wrong logic.>Theres X amount of money any given time, and only that can be distributed. Endlessly repeating this doesn't make it any less wrong. Value can be found in things outside of money and said things can be bartered and exchanged in place of money. Wealth and value exists outside of what the fiat currency supply is. THIS is basic logic, what you keep endlessly spouting is baby's first naive socialist nonsense.>If rich people get more, others get lessSomebody gaining something does not mean someone else necessarily loses anything. This is childish as fuck and wreaks of self importance and greed.The reason you can't not see everything as a fixed pie fallacy is you view yourself a regulatory and redistributionist champion who thinks an economy begins and ends with a nations GDP and its monetary supply. Not only are you incapable of understanding that an economy and a market are far larger than arbitrary constraints set down by a government, you are actively repulsed by the notion and have adopted narrowly authoritarian ideals because you find them to be cathartic, much in the way a 4th grader would imagine being the boss of their mommy and daddy.
>>551120It is a fixed pie, that's how artificial scarcity works.>>551139>>551140There isn't even an argument here, you're just insulting and shaking your head.
I am not even the guy you are debating.>>551139>>551140>you have a 4th grade understanding of economics>you cannot increase “the pie”Anon, it is you who are projecting. I am not even sure a 4th grader would miss this as badly as you have. Increasing $ to “c” absolutely increases GDP. GDP determines tax revenue (depending on your tax structure varies how much it does so). Stay in school anon-you will sound less retarded.
>>551142>It is a fixed pie, that's how artificial scarcity works.We don't have artificial scarcity, we have real scarcity. We do not live in a post-scarcity society. The fact that you think we do further illuminates your naive grasp of economics and the world.>There isn't even an argument here, you're just insulting and shaking your head.I delineated exactly what my argument was and why your argument is wrong. You are triggered by it and can't refute single one of my points because deep down you know I'm right.>>551146>I am not even the guy you are debating.Sure you're not, and I bet you do back flips into your Maserati every day>Increasing $ to “c” absolutely increases GDP. GDP determines tax revenue (depending on your tax structure varies how much it does so)Did you miss the entire point of my argument that an economy exists outside of a nation's GDP and budget? Because not only are you refusing to acknowledge this, I specifically pointed out that your petty tyrant naivety prevents you from being capable of doing this, as is the case with most retard-tier socialist followers who are incapable of thinking outside of the narrow state-approved box they dream of being in control of.Cope, seethe, dilate, etc.
THE RIGHT HAS CRAZIES WITH GUNS ANDTHE LEFT HAS CRAZIES WITH CALCULATORSThe problem is, getting crazy with a calc is going to show holes in our "logical economy"[power vacuum protip: if companies leave a country in protest of high taxes, other companies will move in and make money in their stead]
>>551171>everyone who disagrees with me supports Trump>schizoposting ENHANCE
>>551163> Did you miss the entire point of my argument that an economy exists outside of a nation's GDP and budgetI did because I would have told you how retarded you are. Fuck you are dumb. Please tell me you do not vote.
>>551163If we don't have artificial scarcity with money, why don't we just print more and hand it all out to those without?
>>551177>>551177>I did because I would have told you how retarded you are.But it's not retarded, it's a fact. You can't even begin to refute my point about it because your brain is incapable of doing so. You're conditioned to not be able to think out of a state-prescribed thought box. An economy neither begins nor ends with a nation's budget and GDP, there is much to it beyond that, entire facets that don't even involve fiat currency. This is a basic economic fact that you're too stupid to grasp. You will never stop being wrong about economics. You have terminal brain worms.>Fuck you are dumb. Please tell me you do not vote.I only vote when it means voting no on school budgets and other government programs, otherwise I don't vote. I do this specifically to spite you, and only you. Cry about it.
>>551181>If we don't have artificial scarcity with money, why don't we just print more and hand it all out to those without?Look who just hopped out of a time machine from the Wiemar Republic everybody!
>>551183>Wiemar RepublicThat's my point?
>sanders>goodnot even once>>550800based
>>550788Lots of greedy fuckers in small business, I've worked for four of them myself across four different industries. there are good and bad people at every level and size of the business world, yes corporations are a huge problem but the old timey idea about the "hard workin, tough but fair" small business owner is some retarded holdover concept from like the 50s. sadly the truth is that most people are greedy, lazy shitheads
>>550982this is without a shadow of a doubt one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen
>>551163you have mental problems, you should try therapy
>>550806There's a massive difference between being someone with a political belief (aka nearly everyone on Earth) and committing a crime, and being someone with a political belief and committing a crime with the specific intent of furthering those beliefs.Since you're most certainly a tribalist retard who won't accept any right-wing examples I use, I'll just use left-wing examples here:The congressional baseball shooting? Political violence, the shooter was motivated by his political beliefs.The Aurora theatre shooting? Not political violence, the attack had absolutely nothing to do with the shooter's political beliefs.
>>550945>free healthcare, free tuition, subsidized housing, and other benefits for the poor trample upon my freedom!In what fucking way, anon? Take your ancap bullshit somewhere else, boomer
>>550963>using examples of capitalist/imperialist massacres in an argument against communismNot a communist, but wtf
>>551126How has the state of NY jacked up the cost of living. Show your work, anon
>>551347Go to sleep little commie
>>550750It has been proven that Piketty is a lying piece of shit, taking data out of his ass and not from reliable sources - literally spreading his socialist agenda.
>>551346>freeIt isn't free retard, they have to get that money from somewhere. If they don't tax me directly, they just inflate the currency and tax my savings instead.
>>551350>socialism! ooo~Go back to bed, boomer. What do you think social security and Medicare are?
>>551353>they have to get that money somewhere From the rich, not you, yes>they'll tax me indirectly by inflating currencyWhy would they do this, though? What do they gain from that?
>>551357I don't agree or am against anything in this thread.Inflation helps banks. I give bank 20$, or equal price of a lamp. Much later, bank gives back 20$, worth much less than lamp.Bank used your money to buy 500000 lamps. In meantime.
>>551357>From the rich, not you, yesIf you took literally 100% of all of the 1%'s assets, you couldn't finance a single year of current federal spending. Then you'd have nothing to collect the next year.>Why would they do this, though? What do they gain from that?What do you mean? They don't have to broaden the tax base or raise taxes on anyone. That's basically what Republicans do, cut taxes, never cut spending, and borrow the money from the fed (which would cause inflation, since that is new money) or the public via government bonds.The most effective way to raise tax revenues is to have a broad tax base, more people paying into the system. You know those countries like Sweden that have large welfare states lefties love? The taxes on the average person are much higher than they are here, meanwhile taxes on businesses are actually fairly low. That's because they know you have to have lots of people paying into the system instead of just trying to pilfer from the top. The people at the top don't actually have as much as you think to begin with, and they find way to get around it. The more you attempt to take from them, the higher incentive they have to try to avoid taxation. For instance during the era of 90% top marginal tax rates in the US, it was incredibly easy for wealthy people to get exemptions in the tax code. To the point of people being able to get tax breaks that only applied to a single transaction.
>>551362>If you took literally 100% of all of the 1%'s assets, you couldn't finance a single year of current federal spending.You are factually incorrect anon. Total wealth in the US is over 100 trillion. The top 1% of that control 35-40% of the wealth. The Federal Budget is 4.8 trillion. That your math is off by more than a factor of five it might be time for you to reevaluate your assumptions about this topic.
>>551353Yes it has to. And where do you think people who have the money get THEIR money? From other people. If you tax people, corporations etc. you can use that money to by work like healthcare and products for healthcare, and when you buy those you will give money for their services and products. Then those people will get money that they can use for products and services and get taxed for services like healthcare. It's cycle. The faster and better the money cycles, the faster the growth. Money doesn't grow on trees. Rich people, everyone else get their money from other people.
>>550785It's basic game theory in action. It's the reason why everyone tries to offload training now too (which is why entry positions have those "five years of experience" requirements now). Efficiency gains/automation are also squeezing the job markets, and not enough new jobs have been created to offset the old jobs lost, so high (and qualified) labor supply means employers have most of the bargaining power when it comes to setting wages, hours, requirements, etc.
>>551362>if you took 100% of the 1%'s assetsRight well i'd rather take a portion of their assets, and their massive revenue to pay for these things. They'll still have plenty of assets, they'll still make plenty of more money, and we'll have what we need>bad decisisions made in the pastThis doesn't answer my question at all, anon
>>551347It's an argument against state, capitalist and communist included.
>current year USA>economypick one
>>551365This anon gets it
>>551375Ah ok then
>>550749Anti-communist propaganda in the US has been so effective, that it still reverberates now as anti-socialism or just socialist politics in general. Americans are wage slaves with stockholm syndrome.
>>551397Boomers are wage slaves with Stockholm syndrome. Young folks are more open to democratic socialism.
>>551408Can't blame boomers forever, your fellow youngins are falling into the conservative trap as is typical in history.
ResidualCorn is a loser
>>550940Obama bombed a hospital retard
>>551375Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum I smell the blood of an Ancap
>>551183> Women writing men
>>551932Couldn't you have added>An-cap bum"To make it rhyme? I'm not the same poster but this pathetic attempt of antagonizing someone 100% means you got a Boomer mindset
>>552078Not a bad idea.And if you think that ancaps don't automatically deserve mockery you have not spent enough time trying to listen to them.
>>551408I long for the day when old people frightened by buzzwords stop being in charge of this country.
>>550749>piketty>top economistlol, he wrote one partisan pop science book that took wing