Post: #401

(02-27-2019 04:02 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 04:31 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  

(02-20-2019 06:50 PM)911 Wrote:  

(02-20-2019 03:50 AM)floor7 Wrote:  



A fan of Andrew Yang.

This guy is worth a second look, he seems like a decent candidate, at least by the Dems' standards (granted those have been abysmal). Probably the most competent of the bunch, he's got a bit of Lee Kuan Yew in him.

Being a fan of Lee Kuan Yew and what he was able to do in a single lifetime (i.e. turn Singapore from a backwater town into a major world player), I decided to watch the entire interview. For anyone that hasn't watched videos on Lee Kuan Yew and have an interest in how to build/run societies, I highly recommend looking over some videos of/about him on YouTube. Fascinating guy.

One of the most under rated figures of modern history. Massively influential to huge numbers of people outside the highly successful country he founded. Modern China wouldn't have done what they did unless he had shown them how. they sent over 22,000 official to Singapore to study their successes.

Also, the biggest case of Going Galt in history. Singapore was expelled from Malaysia because Lee Kuan Yew was advocating for equal rights for everyone (and to maintain Malaysia's slender Muslim voting majority) and proceeded to leave them in the dust.

One little tidbit of Lee Kuan Yew's character that sticks out in my mind (might get a detail or two wrong but the gist of the story is correct):

When he moved into a fancy house as leader with his wife and kids, he had maids and butlers naturally. While hanging around the house, he observed how one of his young kids would constantly roll a ball down a hill and a butler would constantly go fetch and bring the ball back to the kid.

Shortly thereafter, he told his wife that they were leaving the fancy house and going back to more modest living; this included getting rid of the butlers and maids.

He said his kids needed to learn how to struggle and learn from the consequences of their actions. That having a pampered lifestyle would destroy their ability to handle adversity later on in life.

Smart dude.

Post: #402

(02-26-2019 05:20 AM)BlueMark Wrote:  While I like Andrew Yang based on Black Knight's post, I can't help feel that he is running for president in the wrong country. In a place like Singapore or Japan, his message would have a much better reception, compared to the race-to-the-bottom political theater of the USA.

Most American voters are too economically challenged, easily influenced by the media, don't bother thinking, or just flat out can't see past the short term and their own immediate bubble. I wish Yang the best of luck in the face of that obstacle. He deserves a better electorate.

Funny how you mention two of only a handful of places (Japan and Singapore) I would consider relocating to in the future.

I'm not at a point where I'd abandon ship yet and I would much prefer bringing some of the good aspects of places like Japan and Singapore to the US vs having to relocate. But having lived all over the US, I'm sort of resigned to the fact now that the current culture in the US really can't produce some of things I want to see in a society overall; or the odds of it are very low. This has been tolerable in the past but between things like:

1. Trump's punting on immigration reform.

2. Retards like Kamala Harris seriously advocating for repatriations.

3. Retards like Elizabeth Warren pushing for wealth taxes.

4. The overall rise of a anti-white/anti-male attitudes in society in general.

5. Half the population thinking Hillary was worth voting for.

6. Trump's mere existence inducing violent TDS in people.

7. A healthcare system still functionally broken and expensive.

8. The entire ruling class eager to start dumb wars.

9. Trump selling out MAGA people and employing dual citizens like Kushner.

10. Liberal migration to conservative states; thereby destroying once safe havens from the worst of liberal politics plus flipping them in elections.

11. We have a First Amendment supposedly (freedom of speech) but there is a coordinated attack from the left to silence/deplatform every conservative voice in the modern day digital town squares. Trump isn't doing shit about it except tweeting it seems. His kid was just on Tucker Carlson explaining how this is a major issue and how he is "gonna use his platform" to get the message out. The fuck? YOUR DAD IS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! Call him and tell him to get on it ASAP. Obama can do executive orders allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the US for years but Trump can't get an AG to go after the tech sector for discrimination over mundane conservative oriented speech?

...I'm just almost ready to check out. Feels like I'm living in some bizzaro land where up is down, water is dry, and stupid is smart.

I suppose the appeal of someone like Yang for me is that he seems to cut out a lot of the worst tendencies of the modern day democrat party and is willing to acknowledge problems and issues that democrats (and many republicans) have long ignored. Unfortunately given the demographic trends, they are probably going to have a super majority in the relative near future and I do not want to live in a country with your typical SJW/anti-male/anti-white democrat is running the show. The professional, personal, and legal consequences have already been apparent for the past decade with the rise of this type of democrat and a psycho democrat running things with no checks is gonna kick everything that hurts guys like us into overdrive.

If Yang can lead the party or at least become a major player in democrat politics, I think that would be good for US society overall even if you don't vote for him in the end. We truly need a better class of politicians in the US and the democrat party really needs some semi-sensible people in it to shift directions from an entirely batshit crazy group to at least tolerable. Trump is overseas right now trying to do some ultra delicate negotiations that involve a possible major trade war (China) and a temperamental nuclear power (N. Korea) and the democrats decide to run convicted liar Cohen out for a giant clown show TODAY of all days? This is beyond absurd.

But there is a major flaw and this is alluded to in the post I quoted: I don't think majority of the current democrat party membership is going to suddenly become "enlighten" to Yang's viewpoints. They will still harbor all their worst tendencies and will let them all out when Yang is no longer hypothetically a big player in the party. Or, they will just undercut him the same way the GOPe is undercutting Trump. We get the society we deserve because of the people in it, for better or worse. Hence, why I'm close to checking out.

That all said, even if you don't feel comfortable voting for Yang in a hypothetical general election showdown, getting him exposure to a greater amount of people I think is good for the US. It at least it provides a path out for some of the more semi-sensible people in the US who might not be comfortable with voting GOP but don't align themselves with the batshit crazy wing of the democrat party.

Too early to call it for sure (need to see him in debates) but I'm probably voting for Yang in the democrat primaries if he makes it that far into the process.

Post: #403

(02-27-2019 04:48 PM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Funny how ... if he makes it that far into the process.

The underlying 'damned if you do / damned if you don't' situation.

Attempt to prop up an already sagging & shaking house of cards.
Or let the whole sorry mess collapse to allow the survivors to rebuild anew...?

Ed Latimore :

Post: #404

(02-26-2019 01:35 PM)The Black Knight Wrote:  He was born and raised here. He has roots. Dude went to a high end prep boarding school; he didn't grow up in some ghetto asian enclave having his ethnic background values constantly reinforced. His parents came legally and were educated professionals; they didn't cross the border illegally and didn't learn the language. He has a stay at home wife with kids and sold a company. I would say he is part of American culture.

Yes he is part of American culture, but he espouses principles and policies that by and large go against what made his family, and him, successful.

That is unforgivable in my estimation, as much as it is stupid and shows he's more of a political opportunist than a realist.

But that's my opinion on him, well grounded in en face analysis --- and admittedly it doesn't matter since this guy doesn't have a rat's chance in hell, anyway.

Post: #405

(02-27-2019 09:14 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

(02-27-2019 04:48 PM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Funny how ... if he makes it that far into the process.

The underlying 'damned if you do / damned if you don't' situation.

Attempt to prop up an already sagging & shaking house of cards.
Or let the whole sorry mess collapse to allow the survivors to rebuild anew...?

The American people have demonstrated repeatedly in the past 3 decades that they are not capable of handling this country's representative democracy.

They had plenty of chances to elect an outsider who was genuinely concerned about the direction in which the country was headed: Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, and perhaps a few others.

Instead, they continued to let the media manipulate them into voting for the candidates that were acceptable to the establishment, under the belief that they'd otherwise be throwing away their vote or voting for a racist.

That they elected outsider Donald Trump is just another symptom of the problem: The American electorate is so beholden to media manipulation that it took a brash, arrogant, charismatic billionaire with plenty of business and TV experience to break through to them. There are very few Americans who fit that mold.

I'm not going to go too deep into the doom and gloom, but at this point I've given up on any hope of democratically getting the American ship of state back on course. The only way things could get righted is with a Lee Kwan Yew-style dictator.

Post: #406

BlueMark makes a good point. Rational and intelligent people like Yang have no chance. Americans want an arrogant asshole who's gonna bullshit them and tell them how great everything is. Ron Paul went over everyone's head because he didn't market himself as well as the other candidates and was more interested in actual policies. Pat Buchanan has been making sense since the Ice Age and still nobody gives a fuck. Even in high school and college, who are the types who get the most pussy and the most attention? The loud and obnoxious "jock" dudes. Meanwhile no one cares about the soft-spoken frail guy who is a computer science major.

Can someone think of the last time we had a president who wasn't a bullshitter? Jimmy Carter maybe? And he was a one-term guy. He is even remembered as "weak". Good luck to Yang, though. He deserves a better electorate.

Post: #407

It's a shame that the brash, larger than life television personality to make a surprise grab for the reins of DC wasn't R. Lee Ermey.

I think we'd be having some far different conversations right now if that had been the case (early death notwithstanding).

Post: #408

Yang killing it on Tucker Carlson. Near the end I thought Tucker was going to high-five him.

Post: #409

I thought the same thing. What happened to the wizard he had on his campaign in 2016?

I think I'll do a post endorsing Yang.

(03-01-2019 09:46 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  BlueMark makes a good point. Rational and intelligent people like Yang have no chance. Americans want an arrogant asshole who's gonna bullshit them and tell them how great everything is. Ron Paul went over everyone's head because he didn't market himself as well as the other candidates and was more interested in actual policies. Pat Buchanan has been making sense since the Ice Age and still nobody gives a fuck. Even in high school and college, who are the types who get the most pussy and the most attention? The loud and obnoxious "jock" dudes. Meanwhile no one cares about the soft-spoken frail guy who is a computer science major.

Can someone think of the last time we had a president who wasn't a bullshitter? Jimmy Carter maybe? And he was a one-term guy. He is even remembered as "weak". Good luck to Yang, though. He deserves a better electorate.

Don't blame voters. People are irrational all the time everywhere, especially in groups. You should know this. You're on a game forum.

Good people often fail because they just don't know how to communicate to this side of human nature. Same reason why highly intelligent guys often aren't as successful as people with less intelligence but good social skills. They're a victim of their own intelligence and think they need to communicate that way but it just doesn't work like that.

Yang's campaign could use some guys like us on it. Hell, I might even think of working on it. I wouldn't vote for him over Trump but like somebody else said, his coming to further prominence would be good for the country. It would raise awareness about the automation issue and could help the Democrats reject the "social justice" lunatics.

Post: #410

(02-26-2019 04:31 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Some PROS I heard:

1. He really gets it on many fronts; especially how the tech sector is wiping out entire industries and making out like bandits while everyone else is holding a big bag of shit. And ultimately, what this is doing to society and especially men. He gets that if you destroy a ton of men economically, the society is pretty much lost.

2. His basic case on UBI is that we need it ASAP because there is no way to create enough jobs to replace what will be rapidly lost over the next several decades due to AI/automation/robots and that 12k/year will cushion the blow; giving people a lifeline to work with. Money will come primarily from streamlining welfare benefits and a VAT (valued added tax); with the intention that if companies are gonna kill massive amount of jobs, the overall society should benefit as well and a VAT will redistribute some of the gains. This makes sense even though it goes against initial intuition.

3. He emphasized on numerous occasions not just men, but how blue collar white men especially, are really getting the shaft in modern times and how the current democrat party doesn't give a shit about them.

4. Middle aged truckers and most people are not going to learn to code. Re-training into hot sectors for most people is a proven failure.

5. I dig his emphasis on how being a stay-at-home parent or taking care of an elderly parent isn't really acknowledged by modern economic standards and the measuring standards of a country's success need to change. He wants to move from GDP being the primary metric to other things that measure human well-being (suicide rates, mental health, mortality, etc).

6. Free college is stupid and won't fix anything. He says what anyone with common sense knows: we don't need more college grads; we need more vo-tech/apprenticeship training into jobs that are way less likely to be automated.

7. Regarding feasibility of implementing a UBI: it's very possible because while the government sucks at lot of things, it's pretty good at giving (certain) people money.

Although Yang seems like someone who actually gives a fuck about America and isn't just in it for himself (unlike every other Dem), his idea on the UBI won't work.

Funding the UBI without a wealth tax (aka a net worth tax) is impossible. Either you take money from the rich and give it to the poor, or the poor get jobs. Or the poor starve.

A VAT tax is just a sales tax and would just be a tax on people who have a UBI. So you get 12K a year, and the prices of all the goods have gone up 10-20% because of a VAT. VAT doesn't help the poor at all, it crushes them.

It sucks that only Warren is advocating a wealth tax idea, because it is by far the most fair form of taxation that affects the rich in a way that doesn't affect the poor.

Post: #411

(03-04-2019 03:55 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 04:31 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Some PROS I heard:

1. He really gets it on many fronts; especially how the tech sector is wiping out entire industries and making out like bandits while everyone else is holding a big bag of shit. And ultimately, what this is doing to society and especially men. He gets that if you destroy a ton of men economically, the society is pretty much lost.

2. His basic case on UBI is that we need it ASAP because there is no way to create enough jobs to replace what will be rapidly lost over the next several decades due to AI/automation/robots and that 12k/year will cushion the blow; giving people a lifeline to work with. Money will come primarily from streamlining welfare benefits and a VAT (valued added tax); with the intention that if companies are gonna kill massive amount of jobs, the overall society should benefit as well and a VAT will redistribute some of the gains. This makes sense even though it goes against initial intuition.

3. He emphasized on numerous occasions not just men, but how blue collar white men especially, are really getting the shaft in modern times and how the current democrat party doesn't give a shit about them.

4. Middle aged truckers and most people are not going to learn to code. Re-training into hot sectors for most people is a proven failure.

5. I dig his emphasis on how being a stay-at-home parent or taking care of an elderly parent isn't really acknowledged by modern economic standards and the measuring standards of a country's success need to change. He wants to move from GDP being the primary metric to other things that measure human well-being (suicide rates, mental health, mortality, etc).

6. Free college is stupid and won't fix anything. He says what anyone with common sense knows: we don't need more college grads; we need more vo-tech/apprenticeship training into jobs that are way less likely to be automated.

7. Regarding feasibility of implementing a UBI: it's very possible because while the government sucks at lot of things, it's pretty good at giving (certain) people money.

Although Yang seems like someone who actually gives a fuck about America and isn't just in it for himself (unlike every other Dem), his idea on the UBI won't work.

Funding the UBI without a wealth tax (aka a net worth tax) is impossible. Either you take money from the rich and give it to the poor, or the poor get jobs. Or the poor starve.

A VAT tax is just a sales tax and would just be a tax on people who have a UBI. So you get 12K a year, and the prices of all the goods have gone up 10-20% because of a VAT. VAT doesn't help the poor at all, it crushes them.

It sucks that only Warren is advocating a wealth tax idea, because it is by far the most fair form of taxation that affects the rich in a way that doesn't affect the poor.

UBI won't work if you have to borrow money at interest in order to finance it. It would work if the Treasury can issue the payments interest free.

Post: #412

Quote:UBI won't work if you have to borrow money at interest in order to finance it. It would work if the Treasury can issue the payments interest free.

But this is inflationary.

You can avoid inflation just by directly taxing the net worth of the rich. No money is added or lost from the system in this way.

Post: #413

Rich donors can buy both parties for a fraction of what it would cost to feed the proles.

Post: #414

Ultimately, I think Yang has a point, about 30 million workers currently in the workforce will be replaced by machines over the next 2 decades. There are a number of reasons why you don’t want 30 million unemployed workers walking around your country.

UBI could help.

After listening to the JRE podcast with Yang, he seemed to mostly want to bring this up at the debates. IF he gets his message out, I actually think his campaign could pick up steam because none of the other candidates even dare address this problem and I think this could resonate with a lot of workers.

That said, I think the fix is in, Kamala will win the dem nomination and the Democrat national committee will see to this come hell or high water. We learned as much in 2016

Post: #415

Problem is this "need" for UBI is clearly not predominantly driven by an organically occuring automation of jobs perspective. But from global offshoring of jobs, offshoring of capital, too much immigration, and women working when they can peacefully exist without working.

The media would have you think automation is 80% of the problem, but I bet it is more like 20% of the problem, at most. If the other factors were corrected we'd clearly be in a "don't need UBI yet" situation. I.e., not time for the star trek economy yet, and no need to think about their communist utopia for another couple hundred years.

Post: #416

I like Yang but agree that this UBI is pipedream that even if implemented wouldn't work because of inflation. It's already bad now, imagine what would happen to your purchasing power when everyone gets 1k/month. The owner class will just increase the price of everything since they know you can afford it, just like what happened with student loans.

Taxing net wealth sounds more plausible but the rich will just move their assets offshore to the many tax haven countries. Nobody has been able to answer how it would be possible to enforce this wealth tax.

Post: #417

Quote:Every international student will get a green card, says US presidential hopeful Andrew Yang
Democrat would open door much wider after Donald Trump administration’s tighter controls on visas for Chinese citizens and foreign students

The man who hopes to become the first Asian-American president of the United States has vowed to welcome immigrants into the country with open arms if he wins a race against incumbent Donald Trump, who two years ago ran a campaign with tough immigration policies as its centrepiece.
Andrew Yang, the American son of Taiwanese immigrants who has announced his intention to run the race in 2020 as a Democrat candidate, has called the current US immigration system “ridiculous” and said he would like to see more immigrants into the country.
“I would staple a green card to the diploma of any international student who graduates from an American university,” Yang said as he spoke to the South China Morning Post on Monday.

So he wants to turn our colleges, which are already getting too expensive for native citizens, into an unlimited immigration pathway for primarily Chinese and Asian students.

Why, it's almost as if his first loyalties lie with his ethnic group, and not the people who live in the nation he's nominally a part of!

But god, you'd have to be some kind of CRAZY RACIST to think that, though, right?

Post: #418

(03-04-2019 03:55 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 04:31 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Some PROS I heard:

1. He really gets it on many fronts; especially how the tech sector is wiping out entire industries and making out like bandits while everyone else is holding a big bag of shit. And ultimately, what this is doing to society and especially men. He gets that if you destroy a ton of men economically, the society is pretty much lost.

2. His basic case on UBI is that we need it ASAP because there is no way to create enough jobs to replace what will be rapidly lost over the next several decades due to AI/automation/robots and that 12k/year will cushion the blow; giving people a lifeline to work with. Money will come primarily from streamlining welfare benefits and a VAT (valued added tax); with the intention that if companies are gonna kill massive amount of jobs, the overall society should benefit as well and a VAT will redistribute some of the gains. This makes sense even though it goes against initial intuition.

3. He emphasized on numerous occasions not just men, but how blue collar white men especially, are really getting the shaft in modern times and how the current democrat party doesn't give a shit about them.

4. Middle aged truckers and most people are not going to learn to code. Re-training into hot sectors for most people is a proven failure.

5. I dig his emphasis on how being a stay-at-home parent or taking care of an elderly parent isn't really acknowledged by modern economic standards and the measuring standards of a country's success need to change. He wants to move from GDP being the primary metric to other things that measure human well-being (suicide rates, mental health, mortality, etc).

6. Free college is stupid and won't fix anything. He says what anyone with common sense knows: we don't need more college grads; we need more vo-tech/apprenticeship training into jobs that are way less likely to be automated.

7. Regarding feasibility of implementing a UBI: it's very possible because while the government sucks at lot of things, it's pretty good at giving (certain) people money.

Although Yang seems like someone who actually gives a fuck about America and isn't just in it for himself (unlike every other Dem), his idea on the UBI won't work.

Funding the UBI without a wealth tax (aka a net worth tax) is impossible. Either you take money from the rich and give it to the poor, or the poor get jobs. Or the poor starve.

A VAT tax is just a sales tax and would just be a tax on people who have a UBI. So you get 12K a year, and the prices of all the goods have gone up 10-20% because of a VAT. VAT doesn't help the poor at all, it crushes them.

It sucks that only Warren is advocating a wealth tax idea, because it is by far the most fair form of taxation that affects the rich in a way that doesn't affect the poor.

In the Great Depression, the wealthy folk (including a few of my relatives on one side of the family) were absolutely willing to watch the entire country burn and every one of the poor workers (who they had fucked over) starve to death. Millions did starve to death...mostly men. They didn't care then, they care even less now. Back then they couldn't jump on private jets and fly to New Zealand...now they can.

FDR had more power and better support than Trump by far, and he could not force the rich folk to pony up. The Federal government literally does not have the power, no matter what socialist visionaries think. The wealthy can buy anyone, invent a million obstacles. Short of civil war, you can't force them. Again, read about FDR. He tried everything, while simultaneously shooting down radicals like Huey Long who actually did want to start a civil war.

FDRs solution finally was to get the US into WW2, then threaten the wealthy with the death of their sons in combat if they didn't buy war bonds. That is how the US ended the Depression..with war bonds. "Either buy war bonds or your sons die without ammo" was a literal sentence repeated by sales reps.

Joeseph Kennedy for example lost his eldest son in WW2. You bet that FDR loved that.

Anyway, how does this affect the modern world? People haven't changed one bit. The baby boomers are the biggest narcissists in history and will never admit to their financial crimes against the middle class.

Why do you think they hate Trump so viciously? Because he represents the middle class workers, and no wealthy person wants to be confronted by their victims.

Post: #419

Quote:So he wants to turn our colleges, which are already getting too expensive for native citizens, into an unlimited immigration pathway for primarily Chinese and Asian students.

I’d be fine with adding more Chinamen. They are not a bunch of rapists and drug dealers like the Mexicans.

And it’s not like they are trying to steal the blue collar jobs, they are here to open restaurants, become entrepreneurs, and run shady gambling dens.

What’s not to love?

Post: #420

AI and most futurist claims are like most modern alarmist "scenarios" --- kernels of the truth but in general, more fiction than reality.

Post: #421

It’s already happening. Look at farming or mining or manufacturing, basically all of the work done by humans ten or 20 years ago is now being done by machines. We have self driving cars now but they are not quite as good as a human driver. They will be.

All of the mom and pop stores that are being replaced by amazon, are being replaced largely by machines in warehouses. How exactly is the onslaught of machines more fiction than reality?

Post: #422

Basic bitch boomer tries to argue against Yang's UBI proposal. Expect a lot of this from conservatives if awareness grows for UBI. Conservatives are totally fucking helpless against it as an argument, because all they can do is spout loser platitudes and recite nonsense talking points they've heard from other people. (The one I'm seeing now is that UBI will cause "cost-push inflation", I.E. if everyone has an extra thousand dollars in their pocket, the price of everything will automatically rise to cancel out that 1000$ exactly. It's an argument that's complicated, hard to understand, and also laughably stupid.)

On the other hand, the #YangGang does make a pretty compelling argument.

Post: #423

DeliciousTacos, on the other hand, is a master of compelling arguments.

I have no answer for this damning condemnation. These words are our generation's 95 theses.

If it's a choice between having my policy decisions made for me by some random Chinese technocrat, or Ben "I'm super-smart because I win debates with 19-year olds" Shapiro, then fuck it, I'm siding with the technocrat. At least he's got a fucking original idea.

#YangGang! Yang 2020!

Post: #424

Fuck, if you go looking there are a lot of really solid arguments for Yang.

Post: #425

(03-07-2019 11:53 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

Quote:So he wants to turn our colleges, which are already getting too expensive for native citizens, into an unlimited immigration pathway for primarily Chinese and Asian students.

I’d be fine with adding more Chinamen. They are not a bunch of rapists and drug dealers like the Mexicans.

And it’s not like they are trying to steal the blue collar jobs, they are here to open restaurants, become entrepreneurs, and run shady gambling dens.

What’s not to love?

While we're doing open racism (which I'm totally cool with) can I explain that Chinamen are soul-less hive-type insectoids who in any large numbers will vote you out of freedom and into Maoist statism?

Seems to me like those Mexican drug dealers are closer to the free-market libertarian principles America was founded on than the Chi-bees will ever beeeee.