President Trump

User avatar
jimli
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1633
Joined: June 11th, 2006, 8:50 pm

Re: President Trump

Post by jimli »

Oh man I've been missing out on a hell of a thread...
AdmiralMotti89 wrote:For example, you must have your own opinion on how debt monetization increasing inflation would affect the poor relative to the rich.
Oh I do, I definitely do, what kind of person wouldn't??!? You say yours first tho'.



mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

rhendon wrote:
mserisman wrote:
rhendon wrote: Yea half live in more expensive places. The other half lives in cheaper places. The national average for rent is 1400 a month according to 1 site. It is 950 according to another. The cheaper one lists the state of Washington at 1159. The cheaper one also lists Austin at 1400 a month.
Shows how misleading stats are.. in a few seconds I looked up Seattle (about $1900) and Spokane (about $960). So State levels are pretty meaningless.

Anyway, curious as to one aspect of this conversation. Is this entire conversation just hypothetical philosophy? Are people here impacted by poverty and feel they have no options?
Ignore added. Its just not worth discussing things with you. You live a very sheltered life full of bias and it isn't worth the time or effort to discuss them with you.
You have zero idea of what my life has been like. Literally zero. What a ignorant statement to make.

When I see posts like this I understand why we have lost our ability for any rational dialog in this country.
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

arebelspy wrote:What a privileged position to view discussions of poverty as "hypothetical philosophy."

You really don't know anyone near the poverty line? Or even sub-30k gross?

Could be time to go meet some new people, if that is the case. :)

Regardless of if you do or don't know someone in that position, poverty isn't hypothetical philosophy just because I'm not poor.

Is talking about malaria hypothetical philosophy to me just because I don't have malaria? No, of course not. I still care about the issue, and take action on it (donate to Against Malaria).
Do you realize that 99% of this thread is people debating constructs like politics and economics, none of which are part of their daily lives and purely for the debate of it?

Does it matter, yes it does. Let's use your malaria example. We could be discussing ways to treat malaria, while actually not doing anything about it. or, one could be discussing malaria treatments because they are leading an actual initiative to treat malaria (e.g., Bill Gates Foundation, etc). If its the former, then yeah its an interesting debate and nothing more. If its the latter then I would be interested in helping. Does either have anything to do with whether people have malaria, or course not.

To answer your question, yes, I am currently sponsoring several people in AA who are at about the $0 income line right now, and I am part of many non-profits that work with Foster Children, and underprivileged kids. So, this is part of my life every day. In my own life I have had money and no money, and while I was born in America with educated parents, (which by itself is privilege on a global scale) I am hardly a silver spoon recipient.

But, if this is just another ideological debate, then that's less interesting. If there are people currently who have needs, then I am willing to help. When people ask for help I provide it to the best of my ability.... to whom much is given, much is expected.

But, sure, throw out your self righteous comments assuming I live in some ivory tower if that suits you as well... :roll: .. what a d-bag response that was Joe.
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

AdmiralMotti89
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1975
Joined: February 28th, 2016, 3:38 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA

Re: President Trump

Post by AdmiralMotti89 »

jimli wrote:Oh man I've been missing out on a hell of a thread...
AdmiralMotti89 wrote:For example, you must have your own opinion on how debt monetization increasing inflation would affect the poor relative to the rich.
Oh I do, I definitely do, what kind of person wouldn't??!? You say yours first tho'.
Debt monetization in a sustained deficit increases inflation. https://www.hoover.org/research/government-debt-bomb
Inflation can harm the poor more. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4397534?se ... b_contents
If you want to argue that inflation benefits debtors instead of creditors, you won't get a lot of pushback. I don't know which factor tends to influence the whole more in most circumstances towards a net positive or net negative to the poor, especially when other factors like savings are added.
Eric Garchow
My eBay Store 10% off orders of 10+ items, plus free shipping on orders of $50+
My Trade Thread
My videos/photos of opening sealed SWCCG + other SWCCG things.
My Frequently Updating SWCCG Wants List

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16499
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: President Trump

Post by arebelspy »

Wasn't trying to be a dbag erisman. You said "just curious" so I tried to answer with:
1) A lighthearted "you should try hanging out with poor people more so this isn't hypothetical for you" IF that's the case that you really don't know poor people who are impacted daily by the policies we're discussing (and a smiley face) and

2) with a practical, real example of something you might not be affected by yourself (malaria) but something you still care about, discuss, and take action on.

Sorry if it came off as rude. Please reread in that context/tone, and ignore any parts that still come off rude. :)

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16499
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: President Trump

Post by arebelspy »

AdmiralMotti89 wrote:I don't know which factor tends to influence the whole more in most circumstances towards a net positive or net negative to the poor, especially when other factors like savings are added.
Wait, what? You've been arguing against inflation as you said it's bad for the poor, and one of the items on your unexplained list, and now you admit you don't know if it helps them? You just did a little research and found out the other side of the argument, or what? :lol:

I've been trying so hard to ignore your mistaken economic theories, but hard to ignore you finally coming out and flat out contradicting yourself.

(licensing? lolol.. that's a shiny bauble libertarians like to play with becuase it's one of the very few things that makes it seem like smaller government would be better for the poor, though in actuality would do almost nothing)

Rich people don't like inflation for a reason. It helps workers much more than savers. That doesn't mean we should purposefully pursue inflation, as it isn't an effective strategy for dealing with poverty, any more than amputation is an effective strategy for the itchy mosquito bite on your leg. But it doesn't mean the opposite, either (what you've been arguing for--less inflation, to try and help the poor??).

AdmiralMotti89
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1975
Joined: February 28th, 2016, 3:38 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA

Re: President Trump

Post by AdmiralMotti89 »

arebelspy wrote:
AdmiralMotti89 wrote:I don't know which factor tends to influence the whole more in most circumstances towards a net positive or net negative to the poor, especially when other factors like savings are added.
Wait, what? You've been arguing against inflation as you said it's bad for the poor, and one of the items on your unexplained list, and now you admit you don't know if it helps them? You just did a little research and found out the other side of the argument, or what? :lol:

I've been trying so hard to ignore your mistaken economic theories, but hard to ignore you finally coming out and flat out contradicting yourself.

(licensing? lolol.. that's a shiny bauble libertarians like to play with becuase it's one of the very few things that makes it seem like smaller government would be better for the poor, though in actuality would do almost nothing)

Rich people don't like inflation for a reason. It helps workers much more than savers. That doesn't mean we should purposefully pursue inflation, as it isn't an effective strategy for dealing with poverty, any more than amputation is an effective strategy for the itchy mosquito bite on your leg. But it doesn't mean the opposite, either (what you've been arguing for--less inflation, to try and help the poor??).
This seems disproportionately antagonistic. Like I said, I don't know that inflation harms the poor more. But I buy into the arguments that it does (especially those that look of cost of living increases versus real wages increases). But if someone wants to argue the opposite, I can't prove them wrong, especially the more factors that are introduced. That's not a contradiction at all, much less a "flat-out" one. Others on my list I am pretty confident are (rather easily) demonstrably more burdensome on the poor, like the suspension of drivers licenses for unpaid traffic tickets, for example.

As for some easing of licensing, even if it does "almost nothing" for the poor, that doesn't mean it does nothing, and that doesn't mean it's "mistaken."

If you want to take the time to lay out an argument clearly showing that inflation overall benefits the poor more than the rich, I'll read it and maybe you'll convince me. But like I said, there won't be a lot of pushback from me. And besides, something tells me your main interest in posting wasn't actually about getting to the bottom of the issue of inflation, which is one less reason for me to really engage.
Eric Garchow
My eBay Store 10% off orders of 10+ items, plus free shipping on orders of $50+
My Trade Thread
My videos/photos of opening sealed SWCCG + other SWCCG things.
My Frequently Updating SWCCG Wants List

User avatar
jimli
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1633
Joined: June 11th, 2006, 8:50 pm

Re: President Trump

Post by jimli »

AdmiralMotti89 wrote:
jimli wrote:Oh man I've been missing out on a hell of a thread...
AdmiralMotti89 wrote:For example, you must have your own opinion on how debt monetization increasing inflation would affect the poor relative to the rich.
Oh I do, I definitely do, what kind of person wouldn't??!? You say yours first tho'.
Debt monetization in a sustained deficit increases inflation. https://www.hoover.org/research/government-debt-bomb
Inflation can harm the poor more. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4397534?se ... b_contents
If you want to argue that inflation benefits debtors instead of creditors, you won't get a lot of pushback. I don't know which factor tends to influence the whole more in most circumstances towards a net positive or net negative to the poor, especially when other factors like savings are added.
Look, my initial comment came out of my constant desire to make jokes, because "For example, you must have your own opinion on how debt monetization increasing inflation would affect the poor relative to the rich." is just a hilarious thing to hear someone say.

But you linked to some research articles, so I clicked on them. I read the opinion article in the first link, and the abstract of the academic article in the second link. Here's how the relevant parts of the two articles compare with your summary of them.

First link, your summary: "Debt monetization in a sustained deficit increases inflation."
First link, the most relevant text that relates to your summary, emphasis mine: "And deficits can lead to inflation if central banks monetize the government debt"

Second link, your summary: "Inflation can harm the poor more."
Second link, abstract: "This paper analyses class specific inflation rates for 1989-90 and 1990-91 and concludes that the 1990-91 inflation hurt the poor more since food price rise was substantial in this period. It also shows shifts in pattern of inflation rate across expenditure classes between 1989-90 and 1990-91 and establishes inverse association between inflation rate and total expenditure in the latter period."
(I guess you're not wrong. It can harm the poor more, but I don't really know how I or anyone can use that data to arrive at an "opinion on how debt monetization increasing inflation would affect the poor relative to the rich" in general.)

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

arebelspy wrote:Wasn't trying to be a dbag erisman. You said "just curious" so I tried to answer with:
1) A lighthearted "you should try hanging out with poor people more so this isn't hypothetical for you" IF that's the case that you really don't know poor people who are impacted daily by the policies we're discussing (and a smiley face) and

2) with a practical, real example of something you might not be affected by yourself (malaria) but something you still care about, discuss, and take action on.

Sorry if it came off as rude. Please reread in that context/tone, and ignore any parts that still come off rude. :)
I did and answered it.

There was no reason to go that way, and it's telling you did.

I was asking for two reason:

- debates for the sake of debates are interesting in an abstract way, but that is the sort of "limousine liberal" approach, so not so interesting and usually so transparently hypocritical that its not worth the time.

- if anyone actually needs help (not in general but specifically who is posting here) then I am happy to help.

The first two responses to my post both went immediately into derogatory accusations. Why do you suppose that is?
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16499
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: President Trump

Post by arebelspy »

Because it's pretty crazy and outside our realm of experience to even be able to question if talking about poverty is just theoretical.

AdmiralMotti89
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1975
Joined: February 28th, 2016, 3:38 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA

Re: President Trump

Post by AdmiralMotti89 »

jimli wrote:First link, your summary: "Debt monetization in a sustained deficit increases inflation."
First link, the most relevant text that relates to your summary, emphasis mine: "And deficits can lead to inflation if central banks monetize the government debt"
Strictly according to the way that's worded I can understand your skepticism. But getting deeper into it, in sustained deficit, if the government monetizes the debt, they release bonds, and then print money to buy up the ones that remain unsold. Other things equal, the result is inflation.

As for the second link, it's fair to say like you did that that is inconclusive for establishing the general effects of inflation as a whole on the poor. If someone had other examples of inflation with different affects on the rich, then those would need to be weighed.
Eric Garchow
My eBay Store 10% off orders of 10+ items, plus free shipping on orders of $50+
My Trade Thread
My videos/photos of opening sealed SWCCG + other SWCCG things.
My Frequently Updating SWCCG Wants List

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

arebelspy wrote:Because it's pretty crazy and outside our realm of experience to even be able to question if talking about poverty is just theoretical.
It literally would have never crossed my mind.. ever.. that someone would assume what you did. I guess I give you way too much credit.

Let me illustrate:

person A: What are the best ways to treat hemorrhoids? What methods work? Why?
person B: Is this a hypothetical discussion?
person A: Wait, you don't understand that hemorrhoids are real?

Now, we would all rightly think person A to be either a complete idiot, or a d-bag. Of course person B is meaning the "hypothetical" question to be specific to whether the discussion involved person A actually having hemorrhoids, not whether they in fact exist. Its basic human interactions, and not complex at all to understand the point of the question.

So, the fact you and the Rhendon assumed my question was whether "poverty itself was hypothetical", as opposed to whether the person posting was "themselves struggling with poverty", shows either an alarming lack of intelligence (which I know does not apply to you), or you are just being a d-bag for effect and for your audience here.
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

The good news is that on a global scale we are making great progress against poverty. Still a long, long way to go, but there is zero doubt it is head din the right direction.
https://www.economist.com/international ... me-poverty
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

User avatar
Advocate
Advocate
Posts: 36486
Joined: October 29th, 2002, 5:18 pm
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
GEMP Username: advocate

Re: President Trump

Post by Advocate »

yesterday seemed bad for Trump (Cohen stuff, not manafort).
Image
@swccg - Twitter
@swccg - Instagram
swccgpc - Twitch

User avatar
Aglets
Rules Advocate
Posts: 19312
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 9:08 pm
Location: Bel Air, MD

Re: President Trump

Post by Aglets »

Advocate wrote:yesterday seemed bad for Trump (Cohen stuff, not manafort).
Great job Scott getting us back on topic, heh.

I completely agree.

Now we find out if a President has to answer subpoena or if he can be indicted.
Image
Rian Johnson wrote: I would be worried if everybody across the board was like "Yea, that was a good movie." It's much more exciting to me when you get a group of people who are coming up to you.....really really excited about it. And then there are other people who walk out literally saying that was the worst movie I've ever seen. Having those two extremes to me is the mark of the type of movie that I want to make.

User avatar
WiseMarsellus
Member
Posts: 17423
Joined: February 26th, 2007, 9:33 am

Re: President Trump

Post by WiseMarsellus »

for sure those questions, if asked, will be answered by the supreme court. which is going to make this confirmation hearing maybe the most political one ever
tom kelly
Image Image Image Image
check out my youtube page for swccg video content, and my twitch for swccg live streams!

User avatar
Gergall
Member
Posts: 20299
Joined: December 9th, 2002, 1:14 am
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: President Trump

Post by Gergall »

WiseMarsellus wrote:for sure those questions, if asked, will be answered by the supreme court. which is going to make this confirmation hearing maybe the most political one ever
You don’t fill Supreme Court vacancies in the final year of a presidency.
Spoiler
Show
:rimshot
Greg Zinn

Image

User avatar
dorshe1
Member
Posts: 8422
Joined: June 13th, 2013, 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Holotable username: dorshe1
GEMP Username: dorshe1
Contact:

Re: President Trump

Post by dorshe1 »

Gergall wrote:
WiseMarsellus wrote:for sure those questions, if asked, will be answered by the supreme court. which is going to make this confirmation hearing maybe the most political one ever
You don’t fill Supreme Court vacancies in the final year of a presidency.
Spoiler
Show
:rimshot
That one's actually pretty funny!

Thanks!
Image

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: President Trump

Post by mserisman »

Aglets wrote:
Advocate wrote:yesterday seemed bad for Trump (Cohen stuff, not manafort).
Great job Scott getting us back on topic, heh.

I completely agree.

Now we find out if a President has to answer subpoena or if he can be indicted.
Nah. For anyone else, yes I agree. For Trump?

What did we learn that was new?

- Trump paid off women he slept with, to be quiet.
- Trump surrounds himself with people of questionable ethics
- Trumps people used campaign money to pay off these women

All of this we already knew.

Is any of it tied to Russia? Nope.

Does anyone outside of liberals and CNN appear to care? Nope.

Trump, on a daily basis, does the worst stuff ever uttered publicly by a President.

Trump has a closet that looks like this:

Image

So, how bad are the Democrats that they can't even look reasonable in comparison to this guy? How bad are the Republicans who go along with this clown rodeo every day?

It's a new world folks, stop expecting the old world standards to apply.
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

User avatar
Aglets
Rules Advocate
Posts: 19312
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 9:08 pm
Location: Bel Air, MD

Re: President Trump

Post by Aglets »

Would you like to go on record and say that Trump will not be indicted or forced to answer a subpoena within his first term?
Image
Rian Johnson wrote: I would be worried if everybody across the board was like "Yea, that was a good movie." It's much more exciting to me when you get a group of people who are coming up to you.....really really excited about it. And then there are other people who walk out literally saying that was the worst movie I've ever seen. Having those two extremes to me is the mark of the type of movie that I want to make.

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic”