The Fall of Big Data • Hacker News Board

Re: The Fall of Big Data

#31

Post by sudoscript » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 1:16 AM UTC

hga wrote: post #29

sudoscript wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics is not just about being right. It's about convincing others you are. That's where the left has failed (if you agree with their positions). Agreed, the left has real ideas for solutions to middle America. But these ideas are not what people want, so the burden is to prove that they work. Unfortunately for many of those ideas, such as universal income, it is still too early to say. Meanwhile other ideas, such…

Unfortunately for many of those ideas, such as universal income, it is still too early to say. As others have noted in this subthread, that's not a desired solution for many of these people. They want to earn their money, not "get a handout". Look at McGovern's 1972 campaign "Demogrant" proposal, $1,000 to every citizen, that's 5,750 in official 2016 BLS CPI dollars. As I saw them at the time, the most effective poli…

Oh, I definitely agree. I am not a UBI supporter by any means. Still, I think if the left can prove that it works on a smaller scale, and change people's mind, I'd be willing to reconsider (which is my default position on almost anything -- prove it and I'll believe it). But it's a long shot.

Re: The Fall of Big Data

#32

Post by clock_tower » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 2:02 AM UTC

lsc wrote: post #26

sudoscript wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone believes that the solution to poverty is welfare. I imagine many of his voters believe the solution looks more like protectionism. Which is basically what his plan is. I'm not claiming they're right. I'm just claiming that you can be a fiscal conservative and still think you have the solution to poverty.

But isn't protectionism a lot like inflation, in that it can stimulate labor demand while making things more expensive? (And is often called a hidden redistributive tax) My impression is that this party is as much against inflation as it is against handouts, while inflation occupies the same niche as trade protectionism in that it can stimulate job growth without seeming like a handout.

This is the first I've ever heard of protectionism as a form of inflation; I doubt that the average Trump voter would believe what you're saying here. I mean, I don't believe it, and I voted for McMullin.

Re: The Fall of Big Data

#33

Post by LordHog » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 2:10 AM UTC

I stopped reading after the first few sentences that were politically driven. Click bait?

Re: The Fall of Big Data

#34

Post by hga » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 11:31 AM UTC

clock_tower wrote: post #32

lsc wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't protectionism a lot like inflation, in that it can stimulate labor demand while making things more expensive? (And is often called a hidden redistributive tax) My impression is that this party is as much against inflation as it is against handouts, while inflation occupies the same niche as trade protectionism in that it can stimulate job growth without seeming like a handout.

This is the first I've ever heard of protectionism as a form of inflation; I doubt that the average Trump voter would believe what you're saying here. I mean, I don't believe it, and I voted for McMullin.

Well, technically it's a tax, but it doesn't matter to the consumer if it's a tax, especially one this upstream, that makes a commodity more expensive.

Re: The Fall of Big Data

#35

Post by lsc » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:41 PM UTC

quicklyfrozen wrote: post #18

lsc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is real desperation in this country. That's why Trump is President. People didn't vote for him because they are racist. They voted for him because they worry about putting food on their tables. They worry about being left behind in a world that has fewer and fewer ways for the average Joe to dream about a future. They're angry, rightfully so, and in Trump, they found someone willing to listen How do you square…

I have to assume that many don't want a safety net; they want to be able to be able to support themselves.

Which is fine... but personally, I don't see that much difference between charging a tax that makes my imported goods more expensive (in an effort to subsidize American workers) and, say, just setting up some sort of reverse income tax, or strengthening the Earned Income Credit or what have you so that you directly tax me and directly give those dollars to people who don't have competitive job skills. If anything, I bet the latter would be more 'efficient' in that I'd have to pay fewer dollars to keep those folks fed and housed, just 'cause if you make imports more expensive, sure, more stuff will be manufactured here, but most of that manufacturing is going to be done by robots, so it seems to me you'd mostly be making me pay more for stuff I buy, then turning around and increasing the demand for labor from people with my sorts of skills.