Liberals vs Conservatives, Who's Smarter?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by b etor
oh, i voted i have a huge banana cuz i will get some of that stuff eventually.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Real wages are the same. Standard of living has increased. Couple reasons for this.

1. Things get cheaper over time. Yes in real terms you make as much as you did then, but you can afford more because things are much cheaper.

2. Compensation is greater. Compensation does not equal wages. Say your employer provides a health plan, where you had none. That is an improvement in your standard of living.

No. Things get more expensive over time. Gas, housing, HEALTH CARE. In fact, health care costs are the only reason compensation has increased.

So if we eliminated income disparity, we eliminate poverty?

I'm not really talking about income disparity. We need talk about things how they are in the real world. What we are talking about is progressive taxation so that everyone gets their needs met. That's not really fixing income disparity. It's just taxing the rich to make a more just society.

Poverty in absolute terms has nothing to do with income disparity. When you are too poor to afford things like a roof over your head and food, the problem is not that people are making more money then you.

No, but the problem is that there aren't government programs working for you so that you do have a roof over your head.

Ask anybody. Is a 35 hour work week a long one?

It's a short work week, and that's how we like it. That leaves us more time to laugh, love, **** n' drink licka ... and help the revolution come quicka!

I asked a question. How much money do you need to be elite? I am curious. Everyone throws around terms like 'working class' and insists that there are classes of people without really wanting to define those classes.

I don't know the answer to that. I don't know anyone who makes that much money.

Why is inherited money a bad thing. Shouldn't we encourage people to be thrifty enough to pass their wealth down to their children, to ensure they have a better life then they had?

So that some children can continue starving today.

Oh, I don't dispute some are lazy. Adam Smith would insist that unless there are incentives for production it is in the worker's interest to do as little work as possible. Hence the need to reward those who are more productive.

I don't think he said that. He was talking about business people, not workers. He did say that the government should leave the business person alone, but that's not the same thing. A progressive income tax does not disrupt the "invisible hand." And while government spending takes resources away from the private sector this can correct a market failure, something that was not thought of yet in Adam Smiths time.

How would you propose to reduce the poverty of those who can't afford food or a roof over their head? I have no problem helping those people. It's helping the lower 20 percent, irrespective of standard of living that bothers me. Particularly when they have a better standard then I do.

Hey, a lot of them have a higher income than me too. I didn't know that you believed in government assistance to the needy, because that's not conservative too me.

Fact of life. The market doesn't treat all degrees as equally valuable. You can say that they reward degrees in high demand, but the converse is that they punish those with degrees in low demand.

Can't argue with that.

No, people become doctors because they want to serve people, they have the skills and dedication to get through the school, and because they will advance their position in society. If you don't compensate them for their sacrifices you get a shortage of doctors, which benefits no one.

Just as we have here in Canada. You folks have a better system, here we have to wait 6 months for basic surgery because of this shortage.

There's a shortage of doctors in the US too, as far as I'm concerned, although not as bad. I do notice that a lot of people who have the potential to be good doctors decide on other professions where they can make more money. I don't see how lower taxes can fix that problem though.

When I work for myself, the incentive is to produce the highest quality of work so that I get more work. When I am working for other people, there is no incentive to do more then what is expected.

If I work twice as hard as other people, and get paid the same, what does that tell me? I'm wasting my time. I agree people should do more then what is expected out of personal character, but that runs contrary to human nature.

The thing is that what is expected, is very high. If you don't put out quality work you will get fired, you won't get a good recomendation, and things get tough. There is plenty of incentive to work hard, besides pay. The've got us by the balls. That's why we don't like to work, and we want higher pay.

[Ben Kenobi]

No. Things get more expensive over time. Gas, housing, HEALTH CARE. In fact, health care costs are the only reason compensation has increased.

Computers, stereos, vehicles, consumer electronics, fridges, etc. The list goes on.

Yes some goods do get more expensive, such as food, housing and gasoline, but pretty much everything else has gone down in price.

I'm not really talking about income disparity. We need talk about things how they are in the real world. What we are talking about is progressive taxation so that everyone gets their needs met. That's not really fixing income disparity. It's just taxing the rich to make a more just society.

Ok, that's something entirely different then I thought you meant. The system of taxation isn't really something that conservatives agree upon. It is quite an argument, as to what is the best level of taxation. Some say to maximise government revenues, others say that it's the lowest level to manage essential services, and so on. Some favour flat and fair taxes, and some do want to keep the progressive tax system.

No, but the problem is that there aren't government programs working for you so that you do have a roof over your head.

Are government programs (especially federal ones) the best way to do this? I mean it has to work on a local basis since the poor people aren't going to see their representatives in Washington.

It's a short work week, and that's how we like it. That leaves us more time to laugh, love, **** n' drink licka ... and help the revolution come quicka!

Sounds good to me, just don't leave the rest of us. :P

I don't know the answer to that. I don't know anyone who makes that much money.

What makes someone working class? Since you know more folks who make that much.

So that some children can continue starving today.

True of any kind of wealth not just inherited. It seems to bother you if someone passes money down to their kids? Does it seem unfair?

I have no problem if people help their kids that way and I expect to do the same for mine.

I don't think he said that. He was talking about business people, not workers. He did say that the government should leave the business person alone, but that's not the same thing.

He said that it was best if each is motivated by individual self-interest. It's not in your self-interest to work harder then you need to in order to get paid unless they are incentives.

A progressive income tax does not disrupt the "invisible hand." And while government spending takes resources away from the private sector this can correct a market failure, something that was not thought of yet in Adam Smiths time.

Business ventures failed at that point too. The invisible hand was a way in which to explain how everyone benefited from market forces indirectly.

Hey, a lot of them have a higher income than me too. I didn't know that you believed in government assistance to the needy, because that's not conservative too me.

Depends on what you mean by assistance. I think there are better ways to help them then through federal assistance.

There's a shortage of doctors in the US too, as far as I'm concerned, although not as bad. I do notice that a lot of people who have the potential to be good doctors decide on other professions where they can make more money. I don't see how lower taxes can fix that problem though.

You have less of a shortage then here. We train doctors to see them go to the US so they can do better.

The thing is that what is expected, is very high. If you don't put out quality work you will get fired, you won't get a good recomendation, and things get tough. There is plenty of incentive to work hard, besides pay. The've got us by the balls. That's why we don't like to work, and we want higher pay.

Those are all incentives, yes. But if you work just as hard as everyone else, where is the incentive to work harder?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Computers, stereos, vehicles, consumer electronics, fridges, etc. The list goes on.

Yes some goods do get more expensive, such as food, housing and gasoline, but pretty much everything else has gone down in price.

The only thing you might need out of those is a vehicle, and the prices for those hasn't gone down at all. I bought a car for $300 in 1985. Maybe the price of a fridge has gone down, but that's included in rent usually.

Ok, that's something entirely different then I thought you meant. The system of taxation isn't really something that conservatives agree upon. It is quite an argument, as to what is the best level of taxation. Some say to maximise government revenues, others say that it's the lowest level to manage essential services, and so on. Some favour flat and fair taxes, and some do want to keep the progressive tax system.

Maximise revenues? I guess you are talking about the supply-siders? That's always good for a laugh.

Anyway, the most conservative people don't believe in govt assistance or progressive taxation. I didn't remember how conservative you are.

Are government programs (especially federal ones) the best way to do this? I mean it has to work on a local basis since the poor people aren't going to see their representatives in Washington.

Absolutely they are the best way to do it. Compare the situation in the US to that of Sweden and other countries with more government assistance.

What makes someone working class? Since you know more folks who make that much.

Most people.

True of any kind of wealth not just inherited. It seems to bother you if someone passes money down to their kids? Does it seem unfair?

I think it's authoritarian in nature. I don't really oppose it for that reason. I'm just against the way the wealth is used, not particularly the way that it is passed down.

He said that it was best if each is motivated by individual self-interest. It's not in your self-interest to work harder then you need to in order to get paid unless they are incentives.

The incentives for workers that he saw was to make work easier (increase productivity), and that had nothing to do with compensation. It had to do with being lazy.

Business ventures failed at that point too. The invisible hand was a way in which to explain how everyone benefited from market forces indirectly.

Nah, he didn't think of that. That came after Marx. Alfred Marshall and a couple other people are known for the idea of consumer surplus. To me it only means that the market benefits the rich more than the poor. Duh, we kinda figured that already, but supposidly it's a big deal to show it with a graph.

Depends on what you mean by assistance. I think there are better ways to help them then through federal assistance.

revolution.

Those are all incentives, yes. But if you work just as hard as everyone else, where is the incentive to work harder?

I think everyone works as hard as they can, because they have to.