Thread: Tax the Rich

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

Education - I let the statistics on our educational system speak for themselves. If you're happy with the results, we won't bother arguing about it any further. But the last time I checked we weren't looking so good. Our kids can't read, write, or find the countries that are kicking our ass on a map. But they know all about how to put on a condom. Not that they do, but they've been given the proper instruction. For all the money we spend on education, the success rate sucks. But yes, they know about Darwin.....or, maybe they don't. Maybe that's just another thing they should be learning.

It seems to me that the US education system is pretty good. Not as good as those of other countries with more government involvement, but better than the one of countries with less. Of course, you can argue like the Republican party has done for decades that the department of Education should be closed and the education should be left alone to the states or the people. I think what this would result in is more americans with very low skills who are doomed to life of poverty, and better education for those who currently fall on the upper end of the socioeconomic spectrum. In my opinion that would be overal bad for the country as a whole, although people like me would fare better at least in medium term.

Just look at the fundamental economics data - the biggest factor correlating with a person's earnings is education. Or take a look at the unemployment rates in the different education & skill levels.

The times when one could make a decent living with low skilled work are decades back. Most of those jobs are now done by robots and anybody who wants a decent living in the future ought to have skills that a robot doesn't. Unless the society decides on a different distribution of the generated wealth, but seeing how popular 'socialism' is in US I'd say that's unlikely.

Originally Posted by earcutter

The link under "Don't Americans have a much lower life expectancy than those elsewhere?" was a power point that didn't list it's sources. Sigh.

Indeed, the 'The truth about health spending in America' as the article claims it is based on a power point presentation of assertions, without any explanation of where the raw data came from and how was it analyzed to yield those graphs.
The author of said power point comes off more like a salesman than a scholar (cf. his published work).

A lot of what are considered low skill jobs but were well paying have disappeared and reappeared off shore. It would still be possible to make a decent living if the jobs still existed in the numbers they did previously in the western world. Global free trade pretty much put an end to that. They are now asking for ridiculous educational qualifications for some of these few remaining low skill jobs. So many more people have better educations today that the value of education becomes diluted. If we finally get to the stage where everyone has a post secondary education you will need a BA just to scrub toilets. Even the well educated types will be in big trouble when we finally get artificial intelligence in machines to a certain level.

I think education can be a bit of a red herring or smoke screen to hide behind. OTH creating the need for more post secondary education has helped that industry a lot. Anyway just a different and irreverent view of this lemming like supposed need for higher and better education.

Bob

That's not really true - US produces more industrial output than it used to with much less workers and more robots. Except that now the workers need to be able to operate the robots instead of doing their job. That's what 'increased productivity' means. It doesn't mean that all of a sudden the physical skills of humans have increased ten fold, rather they have invented machines that can do the same operation at ten times the speed.

I know that a lot of the inner workings of things our society relies on are not visible, but the relying on machines instead of people is at unprecedented level.

And yes, one day not too far in the future you will need a Ph.D. to scrub toilets. Because the scrubbing of the whole city's toilets would be done by smart machines with AI and the few people who control them would need to have the skills to properly operate such technology.

The only thing that globalization does is increasing the competition, the same way at one point the shoemaker had to only compete with the other guys on 'Shoemaker St.', they they had to compete with the guys in the other town, then across the whole state, then the whole country...
There is an increasing number of people who go to those 'off-shore' countries because they can make more money than they can make in the west (again those would be 'high-skilled' jobs, like organizing a start-up business that meets a need in that country). What I'm saying is that in an increasingly globalized world your skills matter more than your pace of birth.

Originally Posted by gugi

That's not really true - US produces more industrial output than it used to with much less workers and more robots. Except that now the workers need to be able to operate the robots instead of doing their job. That's what 'increased productivity' means. It doesn't mean that all of a sudden the physical skills of humans have increased ten fold, rather they have invented machines that can do the same operation at ten times the speed.

I know that a lot of the inner workings of things our society relies on are not visible, but the relying on machines instead of people is at unprecedented level.

And yes, one day not too far in the future you will need a Ph.D. to scrub toilets. Because the scrubbing of the whole city's toilets would be done by smart machines with AI and the few people who control them would need to have the skills to properly operate such technology.

The only thing that globalization does is increasing the competition, the same way at one point the shoemaker had to only compete with the other guys on 'Shoemaker St.', they they had to compete with the guys in the other town, then across the whole state, then the whole country...
There is an increasing number of people who go to those 'off-shore' countries because they can make more money than they can make in the west (again those would be 'high-skilled' jobs, like organizing a start-up business that meets a need in that country). What I'm saying is that in an increasingly globalized world your skills matter more than your pace of birth.

You used to be able to make a decent living in the clothing manufacturing industry and now they are off shore for the most part. You did not see highly highly automated assembly lines where the recent fire in Bangladesh killed all those factory workers. So apparently in order to compete globally you do not necessarily need an education. Just a cheaper labour source than what is available at home in a lot but not all cases.

Yes, robotics/automation have made humans redundant in the work place. Those many humans that have so been made redundant far out number the people who now maintain those automated systems. Point is not every redundant worker will find a job no matter how much re education they get. Simply a matter of fewer and fewer job positions being chased by ever increasing numbers of humans that are well educated. Makes you wonder what you will do to be productive when all you can do is use the toilet regardless of how good an education you have got.

No argument that skills matter more than your place of birth. No country has a monopoly on intelligence either and while the few go off shore to do start ups for companies it will not be long before they are redundant too as the indigenous population rapidly gains those same skills and adds to the competition in those fields too.

There never has been enough work to go around but the the amount of work/jobs that will provide a family with a decent standard living with one wage earner is getting thinner by the minute regardless of level of eduction. The big joke in all of this is that when I was younger people were actually turned down for jobs because they were over qualified for the position. There is no way, it seems, you can be over qualified today for even what some would call menial jobs.

Bob

There is just something fundamentally wrong with feeling that if somebody is doing better then you they owe you something...

Sounds like Simple Green Eyed jealousy to me, and the excuses/reasons of why they are rich and keeping it and you're not are just that, "Excuses"..

The entitlement attitude.. wait let me guess "You didn't build that"



And No I don't make over $250K never have, never will, but I don't feel anyone that who does owes me anything...

ps: that number $250K for a married couple and $200k if your single has made me realize that the Gays that are fighting for Legalized Marriage must have flunked out of math class

Originally Posted by Crotalus

All this talk about closing tax loopholes, they are talking about stealing your 401K and taking away tax "deductions" like mortgage interest.

Question: When was the last time you itemized deductions and used the tax credit on mortgage interest? If you have never used it, why raise the red flag as if you would be hurt by it being removed? Just wondering.

Randy

Originally Posted by earcutter

The link under "Don't Americans have a much lower life expectancy than those elsewhere?" was a power point that didn't list it's sources. Sigh.

Maybe not Conover's source, but interesting data:

Accidents, Murders, Preemies, Fat, and U.S. Life Expectancy - Reason.com

Originally Posted by gssixgun

There is just something fundamentally wrong with feeling that if somebody is doing better then you they owe you something...

Sounds like Simple Green Eyed jealousy to me, and the excuses/reasons of why they are rich and keeping it and you're not are just that, "Excuses"..

The entitlement attitude.. wait let me guess "You didn't build that"



And No I don't make over $250K never have, never will, but I don't feel anyone that who does owes me anything...

ps: that number $250K for a married couple and $200k if your single has made me realize that the Gays that are fighting for Legalized Marriage must have flunked out of math class

Yea, there is something fundamentally wrong with thinking that just because they are doing better than you, they owe you something. OTH there is also nothing wrong with thinking that everyone should pay their fair share of taxes according to income. I don't mind pulling on my oar but I do resent slackers resting on theirs. Construe that as jealousy if you will but it is not of their wealth but of their ability to shirk their responsibility to contribute equitably. No sense of entitlement there other than a sense that they are entitled to and should pay their fair share. The rub is what is a fair share? Everyone has a different idea on that.

Bob

Originally Posted by gssixgun

ps: that number $250K for a married couple and $200k if your single has made me realize that the Gays that are fighting for Legalized Marriage must have flunked out of math class

Bahahahahaha! Except of course the whole benefits thing but yeah - weird how they penalize married folks. I never did understand why...