The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 20, 2017, 08:42:16 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: UQM development migrated from Subversion to Git

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderators: Michael Martin, fossil, Lukipela)
| | |-+  Trump
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Author Topic: Trump  (Read 667 times)
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3575


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #15 on: June 21, 2017, 07:25:04 pm »

Zanthius, you're not really helping your case there.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #16 on: June 21, 2017, 07:31:21 pm »

Again, a bigoted worldview. It's quite possible that there's a better solution.

It is a possibility that there is a better solution, but since you are not presenting such a solution, but rather focusing on calling my worldview bigoted, you seem to be arguing much in the same way as what you accused Hillary Clinton of. She accused Trump supporters of being a basket of deplorables, while you are accusing me of having a bigoted worldview. Do you think Trump supporters learned anything from being called a basket of deplorables? Do you think I learned anything from you telling me that I have a bigoted worldview?

If you had told me exactly why a more progressive tax system isn't necessary to decrease the wealth inequality, or if you had presented me with a better solution, then maybe I would have learned something....

Or, alternatively, it's quite possible that some people don't see a problem with a small percentage of the population controlling 80% of the wealth.

If I am working 10 hours a day, and can't make enough money to pay my rent, then I think it should be quite obvious to me that my problem is that I don't earn enough money per hour, or that I am paying too much rent. The problem is probably not that there are too many Mexicans.

 
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 07:44:00 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3575


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #17 on: June 21, 2017, 07:57:45 pm »

I think it was the part where you said,

"I must admit that I now have much more respect for the black people in the United States, than for the white people. Because the black people seemed to be able to see what kind of a person Donald Trump is."

Over-generalization is bad, mmmkay?
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #18 on: June 21, 2017, 08:08:43 pm »

I think it was the part where you said,

"I must admit that I now have much more respect for the black people in the United States, than for the white people. Because the black people seemed to be able to see what kind of a person Donald Trump is."

Over-generalization is bad, mmmkay?

You are probably right, because if I turn the argument around in my brain, and say that I have much more respect for white people than for black people for some reason, it sounds very racist.
Logged
Julie.chan
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


Sharing is good.


View Profile WWW
Re: Trump
« Reply #19 on: June 21, 2017, 08:13:48 pm »

Quote
but since you are not presenting such a solution

I'm not arguing with you on this point. I support progressive taxation. I'm just explaining what sort of arguments people who disagree with you would use. My argument isn't that  you're wrong; it's that people who disagree with you don't do so because they're stupid or ignorant, but rather because they have different values or perspectives than you do. Essentially, I am advocating the principle of charity.

When I say you are presenting a bigoted worldview, I mean that it is bigoted to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid, rather than to consider their views on equal terms with your own. I wasn't even referring to the blatant racism, but yes, that too is bigoted; just an unimportant side-issue and therefore not what I was addressing.
Logged

Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #20 on: June 21, 2017, 08:25:48 pm »

I'm not arguing with you on this point. I support progressive taxation. I'm just explaining what sort of arguments people who disagree with you would use. My argument isn't that  you're wrong; it's that people who disagree with you don't do so because they're stupid or ignorant, but rather because they have different values or perspectives than you do. Essentially, I am advocating the principle of charity.

Okay, but I am not saying that people that disagree with me on every issue is stupid/ignorant, just on some issues. I don't necessarily think that rich people that are against more progressive taxes are stupid and/or ignorant. I would rather call them a bit egoistical, since they seem to care more about increasing their own wealth, than about the prosperity of all people and society in general.

When I say you are presenting a bigoted worldview, I mean that it is bigoted to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid, rather than to consider their views on equal terms with your own.

Do you think that every opinion is equally valid? But then we can't necessarily say that racism is bad either, just that the "racists" have a different opinion that isn't necessarily better or worse than our own.

« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 09:05:18 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2017, 09:27:48 pm »

(click to show/hide)

Whoops, it appears my list only goes to 47 people. Then it appears everything is alright Smiley
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 09:30:13 pm by Scalare » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #22 on: June 21, 2017, 09:37:23 pm »

Whoops, it appears my list only goes to 47 people. Then it appears everything is alright Smiley

Ok, but why should I believe that, and not this (http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp). You can find conspiracy theories claiming almost anything on the Internet today, and they haven't been convicted of any of these murders, right? Well, innocent until proven guilty.  I don't see any reason to start believing in random conspiracy theories, unless I am presented with hard evidence.

Logged
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #23 on: June 21, 2017, 09:48:23 pm »

All the signs point to it, and you should know that the american justice system is bought.
I guess afterwards you can always say 'wir haben es nicht gewusst', even in this century.
Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3575


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #24 on: June 22, 2017, 12:33:26 am »

I asked for two for a reason. Kenneth Starr of all people, no friend of the Clintons, concluded that they didn't have anything to do with Vince Foster's death. If your list is populated with nothing better than that…

let me glance down the list and pick some out randomly.

> 9 - James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people which contained names of influential people who visited Prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas

This doesn't point to them at all. There would be hundreds of people who would want to do such a person in, and that's assuming it really was murder.

> 13 - Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client, Dan Lassater, was a convicted drug distributor.

This doesn't sound like the kind of person they would want to kill, even if they were totally 100% evil - he was useful and on their team.

Screw it. Either pick two to present in depth or…

Well. The argument wasn't so much over whether they're actually mass-murderers, but whether they're seen that way. So yes, it appears that someone has managed to paint them that way, to people who have low evidentiary standards.
Logged
Julie.chan
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


Sharing is good.


View Profile WWW
Re: Trump
« Reply #25 on: June 22, 2017, 07:23:46 am »

Do you think that every opinion is equally valid?

By default, yes. Both "invalid" and "unsound" have very specific meanings, and they need to be proven before they can be soundly asserted.

Quote
But then we can't necessarily say that racism is bad either, just that the "racists" have a different opinion that isn't necessarily better or worse than our own.

Yes, that is true. It's subjective.
Logged

Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #26 on: June 22, 2017, 09:12:03 am »

By default, yes. Both "invalid" and "unsound" have very specific meanings, and they need to be proven before they can be soundly asserted.

Ok. Let me ask you. Do you think 0.7% of the world population would be able to control 45.6% of the world's wealth, if the poor people were more informed (better educated)?

If I was alone in a room with 100 people, and I had 45.6% of the wealth in the room, don't you think the 99 other people in the room (many of them starving) would start to complain, and force me to give them some of my wealth? And how would I (being only 1 individual) be able to prevent them? Especially if the room was a democracy, where they could vote on if I should give away some of my wealth or not, and I would need to accept the vote.

By the way, we are Bayesians here, so saying that something needs to be "proven" is a bit misleading. We rather talk about degrees of probability in Bayesian statistics.
Here a page I have made to explain Bayes' theorem (http://www.archania.org/bayes_theorem_explained.html)
« Last Edit: June 22, 2017, 11:53:32 am by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3575


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #27 on: June 22, 2017, 02:17:06 pm »

Well, SOME of us are Bayesian.
Logged
Julie.chan
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


Sharing is good.


View Profile WWW
Re: Trump
« Reply #28 on: June 22, 2017, 03:12:32 pm »

Quote
Ok. Let me ask you. Do you think 0.7% of the world population would be able to control 45.6% of the world's wealth, if the poor people were more informed (better educated)?

Yes. I don't see why that would make it impossible.

Quote
If I was alone in a room with 100 people, and I had 45.6% of the wealth in the room, don't you think the 99 other people in the room (many of them starving) would start to complain, and force me to give them some of my wealth? And how would I (being only 1 individual) be able to prevent them? Especially if the room was a democracy, where they could vote on if I should give away some of my wealth or not, and I would need to accept the vote.

What context are you talking about here?

First of all, I don't think most normal people concern themselves with how much money everyone in a room has. If you have $20 and someone has $200, you don't go demanding that the person with $200 give handouts to everyone so that the amount of money everyone has is equal.

Secondly, and more importantly, people treat situations involving small groups they are a part of very differently from situations involving the entire population of the United States. If a situation where someone having $200 matters does come up, it's not going to play out the same way as some rich person you don't even know the name of having millions of dollars while you only have a few thousand and can't pay the bills.

Quote
By the way, we are Bayesians here, so saying that something needs to be "proven" is a bit misleading. We rather talk about degrees of probability in Bayesian statistics.

That's pedantic. "Proven" in this sense means that sufficient evidence is provided to support the claim.
Logged

Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #29 on: June 22, 2017, 04:00:47 pm »

First of all, I don't think most normal people concern themselves with how much money everyone in a room has. If you have $20 and someone has $200, you don't go demanding that the person with $200 give handouts to everyone so that the amount of money everyone has is equal.

Sure, but I am not talking about a difference between $20 and $200, but rather the difference between $20 and $20 000 000. A little inequality isn't necessarily a bad thing. It might even make lazy people work a bit harder. But when 0.7% of the world population controls almost half of the world's wealth, it isn't necessarily beneficial anymore.

Secondly, and more importantly, people treat situations involving small groups they are a part of very differently from situations involving the entire population of the United States. If a situation where someone having $200 matters does come up, it's not going to play out the same way as some rich person you don't even know the name of having millions of dollars while you only have a few thousand and can't pay the bills.

Maybe because it becomes more abstract when there are more people, and we don’t know most them. And it doesn’t help if the government is feeding us propaganda telling us that wealth “trickles down” when you have less taxes for the rich, even though there is little empirical evidence for this (http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/pn_15_4.pdf , https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/21/offshore-wealth-global-economy-tax-havens , http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/business/12scene.html).

But there are two ways which increasing the progressiveness of the tax system can make it economically easier for poor people:

  • One reason, is that increasing the progressiveness of the tax can just as well mean less taxes for the poor, as more taxes for the rich. So poor people might actually pay less taxes in a more progressive tax system.
  • Another advantage, is that since we are getting much more taxes from the rich, we might be able to offer free healthcare, free education, and free public transportation for everyone. Rich people don’t necessarily care so much about such public goods, but for poor people such public goods can make a huge difference in their lives.

So, my question is. If a more progressive tax system can make it economically easier for poor people, why didn't all the poor people vote for Bernie Sanders? Maybe because they are ignorant due to a dysfunctional educational system?

« Last Edit: June 22, 2017, 04:13:30 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!