• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Paul Krugman - "All the Nominee’s Enablers"

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:
A couple of weeks ago Paul Ryan, the speaker of the House, sort of laid out both a health care plan and a tax plan. I say sort of, because there weren’t enough details in either case to do any kind of quantitative analysis. But it was clear that Mr. Ryan’s latest proposals had the same general shape as every other proposal he’s released: huge tax cuts for the wealthy combined with savage but smaller cuts in aid to the poor, and the claim that all of this would somehow reduce the budget deficit thanks to unspecified additional measures.

Given everything else that’s going on, this latest installment of Ryanomics attracted little attention. One group that did notice, however, was Fix the Debt, a nonpartisan deficit-scold group that used to have substantial influence in Washington.

Indeed, Fix the Debt issued a statement — but not, as you might have expected, condemning Mr. Ryan for proposing to make the deficit bigger. No, the statement praised him. “We are concerned that the policies in the plan may not add up,” the organization admitted, but it went on to declare that “we welcome this blueprint.”

And there, in miniature, is the story of how America ended up with someone like Donald Trump as the presumptive Republican nominee and possible next president. It’s all about the enablers, and the enablers of the enablers.

To put it bluntly, the modern Republican Party is in essence a machine designed to deliver high after-tax incomes to the 1 percent. Look at Mr. Ryan: Has he ever shown any willingness, for any reason, to make the rich pay so much as a dime more in taxes? Comforting the very comfortable is what it’s all about.

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
Number in Poverty and Poverty Ratio.jpg

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
View attachment 67203979

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________

Old hat that you are parading there; very old and wore out, indeed. I didn't realize you were so conservative. And that you continuously traipse about that poverty muck is sad, sad propaganda. Define poverty as it is internationally, so it can be compared, why don't you. And I do not mean like the GINI is for the EU. I mean really comparable, if you know how to.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
73,682
Reaction score
42,062
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
View attachment 67203979

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________

If that family of four had one full time worker earning the average US wage (link below provides that by industry) they would be far above the poverty level. With the exception of retail trade (at about $17.50/hour) or leisure and hospitality (at about $14.50/hour), a single full time worker could support a family of four at or above the poverty level ($24K/year or about $11.50/hour) making about half of the industry average hourly wage.

Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted
 
Last edited:

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
View attachment 67203979

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________

You do understand that real poverty has fallen by something like 70 percent since 1981 and by about 20 percent between 2010 and 2012 alone? And you know that it was mostly American doing that improved the lot of so many? So stop trying to provoke unhappiness, when actually we should be proud and rejoice.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
If that family of four had one full time worker earning the average US wage (link below provides that by industry) they would be far above the poverty level. With the exception of retaill trade (at about $17.50/hour), a single full time worker could suport a family of four at or above the poverty level ($24K/year or about $11.50/hour) making about half of the industry average hourly wage.

Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

The thing with this "poverty line" is that the it goes up, if median income goes up. It is a political tool more than it is a statistically useful index. That is not to say that there are no applications of the poverty line, the GINI etc. But this is not such.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
77,408
Reaction score
32,974
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The nominee...
Hillary-Clinton-Young-Cons.jpg

and the nominees enablers...
-1x-1.jpgdebbie-wasserman-schultz-angry.jpg
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
If that family of four had one full time worker earning the average US wage (link below provides that by industry) they would be far above the poverty level. With the exception of retaill trade (at about $17.50/hour or leisure at about $14.50/hour), a single full time worker could suport a family of four at or above the poverty level ($24K/year or about $11.50/hour) making about half of the industry average hourly wage.

Yes, well if everybody were obtaining the average wage, we'd have no poverty at all wouldn't we?

But that aint gonna happin under the present circumstances, is it?

Unless you're a magician with a magic wand, which you are are not.

So, explain yourself ...
______________
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent


Yes, well if everybody were obtaining the average wage, we'd have no poverty at all wouldn't we?

But that aint gonna happin under the present circumstances, is it?

Unless you're a magician with a magic wand, which you are are not.

So, explain yourself ...
______________

Why should he "explain" himself. That would be more your job. Why do you continuously feed misleading data into the discussions? You know that it should not be used in the way you use it. So why do you do it?
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It is a political tool more than it is a statistically useful index..

The Census Bureau is now publishing "political tools"?!?

Prove it, if you are so sure.

M r a ...
_________________
 
Last edited:

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
73,682
Reaction score
42,062
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian


Yes, well if everybody were obtaining the average wage, we'd have no poverty at all wouldn't we?

But that aint gonna happin under the present circumstances, is it?

Unless you're a magician with a magic wand, which you are are not.

So, explain yourself ...
______________

I thought that I had explained having one full time worker making just over $11.50/hour would take that family of four out of poverty. Perhaps the key to not being poor is having at least one family member with an average wage (or half that in most occupations) full time job. I agree that getting and keeping such a job is a lofty goal but most (85% to 87%?) manage to do so.
 
Last edited:

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Why should he "explain" himself. That would be more your job. Why do you continuously feed misleading data into the discussions? You know that it should not be used in the way you use it. So why do you do it?

To upset people like you who don't like factual evidence. And, of course, your usual response is as above.

I will remind you, this is an economics forum. If you have something to say in rebuttal, sustain it with factual evidence.

Otherwise, you're just pissing into the wind with silly comments about how "the factual evidence is not factual".

You are "in denial" - face it ...
______________________
 

FieldTheorist

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
3,325
Reaction score
2,348
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
View attachment 67203979

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________

That's true, the only problem is that the Democratic party is too busy fighting for the TPP, another ***-ramming of US families, to bother to seriously take Republicans to task for the despicable, abhorrent policies that they've done and continuing to do.

I hate everything about Trump except that I do agree with one aspect of the people who're voting for him: The system is broken and must change. Unlike Trump supporters, I understand that the majority of the system being broken is because of money in politics and because of Reaganomics. Neoliberalism is a ****ing farce that's been perpetuated with devastating (and frankly evil) effect on the poor, middle, and working classes for the benefit of the top .1%. I would like change that actually addresses income inequality, rather than as an excuse to introduce a new oppression of the poor, working, and middle classes --authoritarianism.

But instead, I'm now largely locked into voting for an abhorrent corporatist to stop Trump, so I can get "no change" instead of "wildly negative change." I really cannot understand what my fellow American voters are thinking. They have their heads up their asses when they show up at the voting booth.
 
Last edited:

Absentglare

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
36,073
Reaction score
6,861
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
From here: All the Nominee's Enablers

Excerpt:

Were the Replicants to win control of each our three parts of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) then we can kiss good-by to any progress towards repairing the nation of its overbearing Income Disparity. Which has incarcerated 15% of our population into an existence below the Poverty Threshold ($24K yearly, family of four) since 1965.

Hard to believe that? Yes, it is, so see the Census Bureau data:
View attachment 67203979

Fifteen percent of our population is nearly 50 million American men, women and children - or about the size of California and Illinois combined ...
__________________________

Great link, love these two :

"Political analysts who tried to talk about the G.O.P.’s transformation, like Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, were effectively ostracized for years. Instead, the respectable, “balanced” thing was to pretend that the parties were symmetric, to turn a blind eye to the cynicism of the modern Republican project.

...

The point is that this kind of false balance does real harm. The Republican establishment directly enabled the forces that led to Trump; but many influential people outside the G.O.P. in effect enabled the enablers. And so here we are."


The uninformed, unbiased voter tends towards the middle ground, and the politicians have been exploiting this phenomenon by dramatically exaggerating to ensure the middle lines up firmly on their side of the agenda.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
MADE IN CHINA

That's true, the only problem is that the Democratic party is too busy fighting for the TPP

As much as I could agree upon a great deal of what you comment, I must disagree about TPP.

It is unfortunate the way it has been both deliberated and explained.

I will be brief about its main thrust. TPP was developed by twelve Pacific-centric countries (Australia, America, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam and Japan), and with the unique exclusion of China. The primary intent of TPP - if China wants to join it, and it does - is to stop Chinese copy-cat production of patented products and processes. This assures that said patents remain fund-generators for its creators and thus increases the investment pool with which to germinate further inventions/innovations.

With China signing a TPP agreement, the country will be required to respect patent rights. Which helps American companies to employ Americans.

The production of American goods that has gone to China started leaving the US long before the Bamboo Curtain came crashing down in 1991. They started going from the North to the South (USA) in the 1970s, then to Mexico/Central America, then to the Philippines and finally to China in '91.

We can blame the impact upon American jobs on its true perpetrator - the American public that wanted manufactured goods that were Made Cheaper Elsewhere. (No service industries have moved to China, you will note. Only production has done so.)
_________

 
Last edited:

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I thought that I had explained having one full time worker making just over $11.50/hour would take that family of four out of poverty. Perhaps the key to not being poor is having at least one family member with an average wage (or half that in most occupations) full time job. I agree that getting and keeping such a job is a lofty goal but most (85% to 87%?) manage to do so.

Yes, you're right. That would do it if applied to all workers; that is, all with a job, or unemployed seeking jobs.

Leaving supposedly only the unemployed below that threshold-income. But those below the poverty threshold are also the long-term unemployed, unskilled mostly.

Which means, to my mind, we must make an effort to assure that they never "drop" into that classification. It's the pits, from which one never exits over a lifetime.

The 89% of Americans graduating from High School, and the other 11% who will retake their studies to obtain that classification also need a guaranteed Tertiary Education.

Our country is Rich Enough to do at least that for them. (Given that we already spend 20% of the Federal Budget on the DoD, that allows errant presidents to start foreign wars that never end.)

Who would pay for it? Higher taxation on the Rich 'n Easy-lifers who's Income Taxation should NEVER EVER HAVE BEEN LOWERED BELOW THE 90% LEVEL WHERE IT WAS (before LBJ started tinkering with it in the 1960s).

800px-Historical_Marginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Income_Earners.jpg


Yes, soak the ultra-rich. The Free-ride Is Over ... !
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The Census Bureau is now publishing "political tools"?!?

Prove it, if you are so sure.

M r a ...
_________________

As I said, it it useful for some questions. But for measuring poverty? You haven't had much to do with poverty and income distribution, have you. Poverty is, when you have $ 2 PPP a day. At $20.000 you belong to the global middle class. In Europe there were slightly under 10 percent in real poverty in 2015. How many were there in the US?
https://blogs.worldbank.org/develop...y-global-poverty-basically-unchanged-how-even

Yes. Calling your numbers poverty is a political populism to emotionalize the debate.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
To upset people like you who don't like factual evidence. And, of course, your usual response is as above.

I will remind you, this is an economics forum. If you have something to say in rebuttal, sustain it with factual evidence.

Otherwise, you're just pissing into the wind with silly comments about how "the factual evidence is not factual".

You are "in denial" - face it ...
______________________

That very good and defines your level. You look up a word and link it.

PS: I believe I did point out to you somewhere, why the statistics you are using are so profoundly a false argument. I am not sure, what your point is and what motivates you to want to sell a discredited societal model instead of one that might work, but it is really remarkable.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
That very good and defines your level. You look up a word and link it.

PS: I believe I did point out to you somewhere, why the statistics you are using are so profoundly a false argument. I am not sure, what your point is and what motivates you to want to sell a discredited societal model instead of one that might work, but it is really remarkable.

No, you just stated that they were "false".

I repeat: You are in an economics forum and the burden of rebuttal, especially of statistical data obtained by recognized agencies, is YOURS AND YOURS ALONE TO SUPPLY.

For the moment, you are just flailing.

Over and out! Get it?
___________________________
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
No, you just stated that they were "false".

I repeat: You are in an economics forum and the burden of rebuttal, especially of statistical data obtained by recognized agencies, is YOURS AND YOURS ALONE TO SUPPLY.

For the moment, you are just flailing.

Over and out! Get it?
___________________________

Nobody questioned the correctness of the values. That is why your argument is so hapless. The use was false and populist. Poverty is an arbitrary term. While you are saying that somewhere environs of $ 20.000 is poor the global definition of poor used by the World Bank is at about $ 700 on a PPP basis. Now I understand how politicians and populists would not be able to sow the dissatisfaction they crave by asking voters to think about their situation compared to the poor. Populism demands that the largest possible number is unhappy enough to vote for stupid policies. And that is exactly the effect of social programs persons use of a ludicrously high index and calling it "Poverty Line".

Actually, those people should be proud that they have helped so many out of poverty. And you, that you say we should be ashamed, should be telling the Europeans that they should be doing more to reduce real poverty on their continent instead of preaching old fashions and delegitimized social democracy.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent


Yes, you're right. That would do it if applied to all workers; that is, all with a job, or unemployed seeking jobs.

Leaving supposedly only the unemployed below that threshold-income. But those below the poverty threshold are also the long-term unemployed, unskilled mostly.

Which means, to my mind, we must make an effort to assure that they never "drop" into that classification. It's the pits, from which one never exits over a lifetime.

The 89% of Americans graduating from High School, and the other 11% who will retake their studies to obtain that classification also need a guaranteed Tertiary Education.

Our country is Rich Enough to do at least that for them. (Given that we already spend 20% of the Federal Budget on the DoD, that allows errant presidents to start foreign wars that never end.)

Who would pay for it? Higher taxation on the Rich 'n Easy-lifers who's Income Taxation should NEVER EVER HAVE BEEN LOWERED BELOW THE 90% LEVEL WHERE IT WAS (before LBJ started tinkering with it in the 1960s).

800px-Historical_Marginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Income_Earners.jpg


Yes, soak the ultra-rich. The Free-ride Is Over ... !

I see you are back trying to sow discontent and weaken the country. There is no question that the country needs some important changes made. But they are not a retarding policy of social democracy.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
You do understand that real poverty has fallen by something like 70 percent since 1981 and by about 20 percent between 2010 and 2012 alone?


Proof please. I want to see where those numbers come from, because they don't agree at all with the infographics I posted ...
_____________
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,574
Reaction score
1,465
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
IN DENIAL

Poverty is an arbitrary term.

Nonsense. The Census Bureau defines it very well indeed.

For your edification, here, where once again it is seen stated that the poverty threshold for a family of 4 is an income of $24K yearly.

Which you patently refuse to acknowledge.
_______________________
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Proof please. I want to see where those numbers come from, because they don't agree at all with the infographics I posted ...
_____________

That is probably, because you are not looking at real poverty at a global level and are instead focusing on local poverty as defined to fit certain political agendas. But, since you are interested in poverty, you might want to worry the World Bank data as I had proposed you do in another post.
Here are some infos on real poverty:

https://blogs.worldbank.org/develop...y-global-poverty-basically-unchanged-how-even

Poverty | Data

Note, since we are in an economic forum, that the world is highly integrated and that partial analysis is much more difficult than a local graph that can be totally correct, but at the global level is pathetic to the point of being a lie or populism, as the case may be. The numbers you see here correspond to the expansion of trade and comparative advantages in production between the poor and the relatively wealthy. As the US was the main driver of free trade the impact has been relatively great on the development of US wages as the global poor began to compete for capital stock and were increasingly capable of competing directly with American labor.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
IN DENIAL



Nonsense. The Census Bureau defines it very well indeed.

For your edification, here, where once again it is seen stated that the poverty threshold for a family of 4 is an income of $24K yearly.

Which you patently refuse to acknowledge.
_______________________

Look. One of my degrees and my first professional work were in quantitative economics. So yes. I know the definitions. And I know, when someone is arguing a political corner with falsely used data.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
If that family of four had one full time worker earning the average US wage (link below provides that by industry) they would be far above the poverty level. With the exception of retail trade (at about $17.50/hour) or leisure and hospitality (at about $14.50/hour), a single full time worker could support a family of four at or above the poverty level ($24K/year or about $11.50/hour) making about half of the industry average hourly wage.

Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

Chicken Little likes to walk in the woods. She likes to look at the trees. She likes to smell the flowers. She likes to listen to the birds singing.

One day while she is walking an acorn falls from a tree, and hits the top of her little head.

- My, oh, my, the sky is falling. I must run and tell the lion about it, - says Chicken Little and begins to run.

She runs and runs. By and by she meets the hen.

- Where are you going? - asks the hen.

- Oh, Henny Penny, the sky is falling and I am going to the lion to tell him about it.

- How do you know it? - asks Henny Penny.

- It hit me on the head, so I know it must be so, - says Chicken Little.

- Let me go with you! - says Henny Penny. - Run, run.

So the two run and run until they meet Ducky Lucky.

- The sky is falling, - says Henny Penny. - We are going to the lion to tell him about it.

- How do you know that? - asks Ducky Lucky.

- It hit Chicken Little on the head, - says Henny Penny.

- May I come with you? - asks Ducky Lucky.

- Come, - says Henny Penny.

So all three of them run on and on until they meet Foxey Loxey.

- Where are you going? - asks Foxey Loxey.

- The sky is falling and we are going to the lion to tell him about it, - says Ducky Lucky.

- Do you know where he lives? - asks the fox.

- I don't, - says Chicken Little.

- I don't, - says Henny Penny.

- I don't, - says Ducky Lucky.

- I do, - says Foxey Loxey. - Come with me and I can show you the way.

He walks on and on until he comes to his den.

- Come right in, - says Foxey Loxey.

They all go in, but they never, never come out again.
 
Top Bottom