Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 363: SEC Speed

(+) Yeah! (+)

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Rent is an issue of the market being trash. There's not enough affordable housing, developers seek profits and so increase the rent or build more expensive apartments, low financial incentives to build low-income housing to demand and to top it all off nobody wants it to be built near them once you clear the rest of the hurdles.

This is something UBI helps with but doesn't effectively solve because the real problem are these structural issues. Could work as a quick bandaid for a while until housing is built, though.

honestly the housing doesn't even need to be built, just used. like right now cities like nyc are completely messed up on rent prices and covid proved a few different reasons why prices are massively artificially inflated. one group of people would rent multiple apartments just to say they were renting them or as a third city home. another group would rent places to be airbnbs. while some elements are 'let the market decide,' other elements just don't make any sense right now and even my old ass building has at least 5 vacancies because the rent's too high and it hasn't had that issue in 30 years.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Lol you literally just cut out half of what you actually said lolololol. That's kindergarten shit.

Corrik, your argument was that neither side gives a shit about sticking it to the rich because both sides essentially want to hurt the middle class so that everyone is equally poor, rather than elevating anyone.

The next post you made suggested lowering the minimum wage.

It's not unreasonable to see those two posts in rapid succession and think you're offering up "lower the minimum wage" as an alternative to the current system where politicians don't do anything to stick it to the rich.

---

Perhaps if the US actually had proper social housing this wouldnt be an issue!

There is an incredible model of how housing should work in Singapore.

---

Last page of this topic really makes the US sound like a third-world country

Cause it is haha woo

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Last page of this topic really makes the US sound like a third-world country

Cause it is haha woo

Always gonna happen when people engage with him!

---

Wanglicious posted...

honestly the housing doesn't even need to be built, just used. like right now cities like nyc are completely messed up on rent prices and covid proved a few different reasons why prices are massively artificially inflated. one group of people would rent multiple apartments just to say they were renting them or as a third city home. another group would rent places to be airbnbs. while some elements are 'let the market decide,' other elements just don't make any sense right now and even my old ass building has at least 5 vacancies because the rent's too high and it hasn't had that issue in 30 years.

Yeah that's part of the economic incentives I mentioned. Without any outside force it's totally fucked. Landlords can do this because they believe that this is the most profitable play for them.

People are focused on building more housing because a large increase in affordable supply will force the high rents of these vacant places to come down (and in some areas it is an issue of not enough housing), but if you'd rather forcibly regulate the rent price that will help too. The way things are right now we probably need both.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

Last page of this topic really makes the US sound like a third-world country

Cause it is haha woo

Always gonna happen when people engage with him!

I'm pretty sure that's not the issue in this case.
---

It kind of is when you consider that that is literally the dominant train of thought in America still. Decades of brainwashing that all policies short of absolute neoliberalism are communist. Its the exact opposite of what the communists did in Weimar Germany, where they accused the social democrats of being social fascists - except this time if youre not all the way to the right economically, youre a commie.

Luckily this attitude has been changing a lot recently, and you can see it in both polls and in the discourse online. This is actually one good thing the internet has done for politics, and I think Bernie deserves a lot of credit as well for normalising social democratic policies.

---

Inviso posted...

Corrik, your argument was that neither side gives a shit about sticking it to the rich because both sides essentially want to hurt the middle class so that everyone is equally poor, rather than elevating anyone.

The next post you made suggested lowering the minimum wage.

It's not unreasonable to see those two posts in rapid succession and think you're offering up "lower the minimum wage" as an alternative to the current system where politicians don't do anything to stick it to the rich.

No. He is being dumb. Don't justify nonsense. He needs to know he is being dumb. Stop sticking up for nonsense because he is "on your side".

---

Corrik7 posted...

No. He is being dumb. Don't justify nonsense. He needs to know he is being dumb. Stop sticking up for nonsense because he is "on your side".

It's not nonsense. It might not have been your intention, but that is the exact attitude your posts conveyed, hence me trying to spell out how it came across.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

It kind of is when you consider that that is literally the dominant train of thought in America still.

That's why I think Corrik brings value to this topic despite almost never chatting with him personally. He probably has the most uniquely 'murrican mindset of anyone here. What's more American than spending a good chunk of the past year on unemployment while arguing vehemently *against* raising the breadcrumb wages of those beneath you?

---

As a business owner I wouldn't be surprised if rent control caused the quality of housing to plummet. Building more housing is definitely a better solution than rent control

---

Corrik also has personal, direct contact with people of multiple shades on the right. There's value on seeing that too, especially when it's him seeing crazy and irrational takes.

---

Kinglicious posted...

Corrik also has personal, direct contact with people of multiple shades on the right. There's value on seeing that too, especially when it's him seeing crazy and irrational takes.

I mean that's probably true for a lot of people here (unless they have taken the steps of removing those friends/relatives from their social media profiles, or removing themselves from social media entirely). We all have those contacts who have treaded further and further right, and we know primarily what motivates them. For most of my family and friends, it's a fear and disdain for blacks, Muslims, and immigrants from third world countries.

---

Inviso posted...

It's not nonsense. It might not have been your intention, but that is the exact attitude your posts conveyed, hence me trying to spell out how it came across.

No. His exact words he conveniently left out when showing I said that. Because I never said to do that to stick it to the rich. I said both parties are for the rich. I then talked about things in the confines of our current system. You can sit here and act like people are out to help the poor yadda yadda while they are trying to pass SALT tax deductions with a straight face all day, but it just makes you look like a fool. Yes, Democrats are fools. Republicans and Democrats pit the middle against the lower all the time to keep you preoccupied while protecting the rich.

Regardless though Tony made up nonsense then picked out something that said half of what he said minus all the nonsense to try and justify his dumb comment.

---

Anyone against minimum wage has to explain what they think will go different this time than all of human history under capitalism where not having a minimum wage let to such massive poverty and violence that the state was forced to implement a minimum wage to hold together the capitalist economy. And the reason you are all having so many arguments about the precise best bandaid is because capitalism is full of contradictions and is inherently inhumane. Also to whoever said the state making goods is communism, it isn't, there isn't a state in communism. That's socialism, which is a transition period between capitalism and communism.

Samurai7 posted...

As a business owner I wouldn't be surprised if rent control caused the quality of housing to plummet. Building more housing is definitely a better solution than rent control

Theres a pretty clear consensus among economists that rent control hurts on net. And yeah, making it easier to build more housing would help a lot. In a lot of places its obscenely hard to get new construction approved.

---

fuming posted...

Anyone against minimum wage has to explain what they think will go different this time than all of human history under capitalism where not having a minimum wage let to such massive poverty and violence that the state was forced to implement a minimum wage to hold together the capitalist economy. And the reason you are all having so many arguments about the precise best bandaid is because capitalism is full of contradictions and is inherently inhumane. Also to whoever said the state making goods is communism, it isn't, there isn't a state in communism. That's socialism, which is a transition period between capitalism and communism.

I think my stance of no minimum wage + UBI is pretty self explanatory

---

Corrik7 posted...

No. His exact words he conveniently left out when showing I said that. Because I never said to do that to stick it to the rich. I said both parties are for the rich. I then talked about things in the confines of our current system. You can sit here and act like people are out to help the poor yadda yadda while they are trying to pass SALT tax deductions with a straight face all day, but it just makes you look like a fool. Yes, Democrats are fools. Republicans and Democrats pit the middle against the lower all the time to keep you preoccupied while protecting the rich.

Regardless though Tony made up nonsense then picked out something that said half of what he said minus all the nonsense to try and justify his dumb comment.

Do you not understand how making a comment that says all you just said (about how the system is broken and both parties don't give a shit and the GOP wants to give everyone crumbs to keep the rich rich while the Dems want to make everyone poor so the rich stay rich,), and then following that up with a post about how you believe the minimum wage should be LOWERED, comes across as though you feel like lowering the minimum wage would be at least SOME KIND of solution to the above-mentioned issue? Can you at least accept that the flow of those two posts carries the implication that "The system is currently broken" -> "This (minimum wage is too high) is something that should be fixed" -> "This fixed thing will fix the broken system"?

---

No nordic countries have the minimum wage, because they dont need it. The social safety net and public services are so good it was never a necessity.

But that (+UBI) only works if you have those strong benefits systems and strong public services (including affordable/public housing). You cant replace those with just UBI, though it can be a good supplement.

Though also, if you did reach a point where the minimum wage was no longer necessary, what good would it do to remove it? None, because while people would not go into poverty, you would just increase inequality by making the lowest paid poorer and potentially the richest richer. And everybody benefits from greater equality in the long run.

All this is to say that yes, the minimum wage is only really needed to prop up neoliberalism, but if you already have it getting rid of it would only make things worse no matter what.

---

Inviso posted...

Do you not understand how making a comment that says all you just said (about how the system is broken and both parties don't give a shit and the GOP wants to give everyone crumbs to keep the rich rich while the Dems want to make everyone poor so the rich stay rich,), and then following that up with a post about how you believe the minimum wage should be LOWERED, comes across as though you feel like lowering the minimum wage would be at least SOME KIND of solution to the above-mentioned issue? Can you at least accept that the flow of those two posts carries the implication that "The system is currently broken" -> "This (minimum wage is too high) is something that should be fixed" -> "This fixed thing will fix the broken system"?

No, I don't understand how someone can try to call out something as being stupid while not realizing that there supposed gotcha is fucking stupid in the process, figuring they had to add words to make it stupid.

---

aww yeah no more lou dobbs

---

Fox News shifting to even further right wing propaganda but having to cut Dobbs...not good for them!

---

Corrik: Raising the minimum wage doesnt solve anything, this is just to cater to the rich.

Corrik, right after: They should lower the minimum wage.

Corrik now: Those things arent related.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik: Raising the minimum wage doesnt solve anything, this is just to cater to the rich.

Corrik, right after: They should lower the minimum wage.

Corrik now: Those things arent related.

Correct
Correct
Correct

See. You aren't that dumb. So why act like it, bud?

---

---

Corrik7 posted...

If anything they should lower the minimum wage. If people are willing to work jobs for whatever wage, they should be allowed to. The effort these fast food restaurants put into arguing for $15 hour wages would easily net them a $15 hour job if they invested that same effort. The problem is that people want to be paid more for jobs that people willingly take at that wage. It's just laziness.

Ok, I know I'm late to the party, but fucking what

---

If you had an acceptable level of UBI, which to be fair Corrik has advocated for, then I can at least see a scenario where a minimum wage is pointless

You definitely cant do it without that though
---

Jakyl25 posted...

If you had an acceptable level of UBI, which to be fair Corrik has advocated for, then I can at least see a scenario where a minimum wage is pointless

You definitely cant do it without that though

Somehow I don't think his argument was predicated upon an acceptable level of UBI existing

But maybe I'm wrong!

---

We should have UBI.

That said, minimum wage and being against right to worker is in theory anti-worker. People should be able to have jobs without being forced into a union and jobs for the amount they are willing to work for lol.

---

Corrik7 posted...

That said, minimum wage and being against right to worker is in theory anti-worker. People should be able to have jobs without being forced into a union and jobs for the amount they are willing to work for lol.

That works maybe on a small scale. Even then I doubt it. It'd pretty quickly become a race to the bottom with bigger corporations in play.

---

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/02/05/congressional-report-reveals-manufacturers-knowingly-sold-toxin-tainted-baby-food

Everyone read this.

---

For too long we've lived under the tyranny of experts who think they know more about how to take care of babies than normal people. Why, 100 parts per billion rounds right down to zero, so it can't possibly be a problem! Besides, if the baby wants to eat something else, they're more than welcome to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get an honest job so that they can buy the food they want to eat, like McDonald's or a cool refreshing Coca-cola!

---

unions demonstrably result in better wages and conditions for workers, and the decline in the previous decades is very much tied to the decline in union jobs, minimum wage demonstrably results in a better situation for workers than not having one assuming everything else the same as they are now, right to work demonstrably results in less bargaining power and leeway for workers at their jobs, you cannot possibly spin any of those things as being anti worker.

Im going to want a less biased source than common dreams. It said in the article no amount is shown to be safe which made me raise my eye as a standard of 0.0 Ppm seems impossible to achieve.

Having said all that I don't have a problem with food standards as long as they are reasonable ( and 0.0 ppm isnt). Not sure why you want to make it a political issue.

---

https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/2021-02-04%20ECP%20Baby%20Food%20Staff%20Report.pdf

the report itself is pretty illuminating, particularly section II starting on page 13

---

fuming posted...

unions demonstrably result in better wages and conditions for workers, and the decline in the previous decades is very much tied to the decline in union jobs, minimum wage demonstrably results in a better situation for workers than not having one assuming everything else the same as they are now, right to work demonstrably results in less bargaining power and leeway for workers at their jobs, you cannot possibly spin any of those things as being anti worker.

Curious to hear if you have ever actually worked in a union.

---

The biggest companies in America go to great lengths to make sure their work force isn't unionized. I'm sure they do that for their employee's benefit and not the fact that they would have to pay the base line worker more or give them basic benefits.

---

hockeydude15 posted...

The biggest companies in America go to great lengths to make sure their work force isn't unionized. I'm sure they do that for their employee's benefit and not the fact that they would have to pay the base line worker more or give them basic benefits.

Yeah, this is just common sense.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Curious to hear if you have ever actually worked in a union.

yes, I have, not that it would matter what my answer was at all.

I checked in on Dave Cullen out of morbid curiosity, and he's still peddling nonsense about communist takeovers and the Great Reset and Agenda 31 and other ridiculous crap. Could only make it a few minutes into two of his videos. He called the media potentially jumping the gun on calling Biden the election winner a coup. Uh, okay.

It does feel though that the Democrats didn't really learn a whole lot from 2016 and Biden's campaigns were basically the same as Hillary Clinton's, which I think is one reason some insist Biden could not have actually won the election. That being said though, I think Biden having a drastically different public image than Hillary Clinton and campaigning on completely different issues, along with the social climate of 2020 being very different from 2016 all made up the difference. Plus it's not like Trump's campaigns were amazing in 2016 either. From where I'm standing I'm getting the impression Trump and much of his base are stuck in 2016 and act like nothing has changed. Also us having actually had four years of Trump as President couldn't have changed things, nope. What losers.

---

fuming posted...

yes, I have, not that it would matter what my answer was at all.

Absolutely it would. Peddling theoretical arguments versus having dealt with actual unions can change opinions.

---

hockeydude15 posted...

The biggest companies in America go to great lengths to make sure their work force isn't unionized. I'm sure they do that for their employee's benefit and not the fact that they would have to pay the base line worker more or give them basic benefits.

Obviously it costs a ton of money dealing with a union. Duh.

---

Yeah because theyre demanding things that benefit the workers

This is such a weird circular argument
---

I just find it strange that Corrik rightfully recognizes the class struggle that is central to the conditions of inequality in America, but also seems to want a system where laborers bid their wages down against each other to get hired by businesses

Its just perpetuating the thing you know is wrong with America
---

Speaking of wild things in America that dont happen in most countries, being fired for organising, WTF?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Yeah because theyre demanding things that benefit the workers

This is such a weird circular argument

Maybe?

Unions are good and bad. I have said this since inception because I have dealt with them.

But, being pro-worker should be allowing a worker to make their choices of how they wish to be employed. I would argue being against right to work is not pro-worker but just anti-company.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Speaking of wild things in America that dont happen in most countries, being fired for organising, WTF?

For organizing a union? Against the law to fire people for that reason.

---

If a company wants you gone they will find reasons to fire you. So yea you can't get fired for trying to unionize but show up 2 min late for your new midnight shift that you were suddenly put on and out you go.

---

Most states employers don't even have to give a reason for firing you. They just do it.

---