Uh huh.



Yes, and income is also property.



Yes.



Okay.



Is it a socialist thing where you abhor people owning things. Just wondering where this mindset comes from. I wasn't "speculating" when I bought a house or a car and, again, why should government have a greater share of ownership in the property I buy than I do?



I suppose your economic theory provides housing for everyone which is why you think it's dumb to buy a personal home.



Of course they do but you have bizarre theories about this. The easiest way to spread the tax burden across as many people as possible is to do it through sales tax. Eliminate all other forms of taxation.



It's probably more fair than the current system which punishes all the people that do the work and receive the fewest benefits but I have never been a flat tax fan. Oh, and you were mistaken earlier. At least with regards to our federal tax. Gross income isn't taxed. I have minimal experience with state income taxes so I can't speak to that.

On the flip side, is it a conservative thing where you are fine with people owning people? Just wondering where this mindset comes from.

Yeahhh you post an awful lot of economics word salad. Like, whatever if you don’t know what you’re talking about, but you also don’t make any effort to learn.

”acceleration is also velocity”, yeah, whatever. Words have no meaning to you. Good job.

Only factories and other people.

Because market economies require voluntary exchange to function. Capital accumulation makes relationships increasingly coercive as individuals are robbed of their freedom to choose and negotiate. This leads to worse economic outcomes for everybody except, in the very long run, one person and his family.

You obviously weren’t and I don’t understand why you’ve wasted my time by pointing this out.

You’ve lost
me.

are you suggesting that an economy shouldn’t?

Oh. I guess you meant to imply it provides free housing. Okay.

I clearly said it isn’t, because personal housing has such advantageous tax treatment compared to everything else. But I guess since you don’t believe words mean things it exempts you from having to spend any effort to understand what you read.

Sales taxes are the absolute worst kind of tax. I cannot say this strongly enough. This is not a bizarre theory, this is the most mainstream economic fact you’ll ever encounter. Sales taxes do nothing but slow down the economy and shift the tax burden entirely to people who can’t afford it. Doing this would be a death blow for any country. It is literally a dumber
****ing idea than going back to tariffs and stamp taxes.

No, really. you are taxed on gross and businesses are taxed on net.

People who pay their US federal income taxes on net instead of on gross tend to end up in prison. So, fingers crossed I guess.

It would appear that Wookie's usual confusion between his political beliefs and actual knowledge about the things those beliefs claim, has tragically intersected with a domain that is more factually clear than the usual conservative schlock can sustain.

(I imagine the effect of tax policy on an economy is one of the more well-studied fields of economics, for obvious reasons.)

this is a really good analogy but I doubt he'll understand.

Great comment in the New York Times comment section to this article:



So Wookie, have you guys all lost so many of your own marbles that you plan to remain passive-aggressive observers to his charade, or are your conservative buddies in Congress going to reign in Trump before he gets all of our government's marbles (or maybe you don't care, since you already are beat up that the 'government already took too many of the private sector's marbles')?

Or is repealing Roe v. Wade important enough to you that you'd risk that just in order to wait long enough for RBG's seat to open up in order to install an "originalist"? Maybe that's the solution: turn the USA into a Putin-style autocracy, but by God at least we banned abortion (n.b.: Hitler also tried to ban smoking)

Well, it's not gross but perhaps net is not the most literally correct term either. It's what government defines net as far as personal income tax which allows for deductions from gross for whatever expenses the government deems deductible. So I'm willing to concede that we are both wrong in this instance.

You're right.

“doesn’t matter, we won”

acceleration = rate of change of velocity

income = rate of change of property

On the topic of California, it seems that the infamous Florida man has some competition.



Well, no, this is actually a really stupid chart. California is doing a good job at competing with Florida and Texas in terms of total population. durph

If this chart says anything at all, it's that we should be worried about Nevada man, seeing that it has about half the number of mass shootings as California does, but a tenth of the population.

Edit: ohh, nevermind. Almost all of those are from the same massacre that happened about a year ago in Nevada. :/

Yes, exactly. Wtf is wrong with people

well we are merciless reward seeking apes, soooo

chrrrrist

Yep. I'm a little puzzled by the Colorado number, actually; Columbine and Aurora together totaled 27, which shouldn't leave room for a third shooting with four or more victims.

Edit: Well, not with four or more fatalities, anyway.

Oh, so it is okay to use fictional definitions now. Got it.

Why did he have to run for president. Why did he do it?

Clearly, because he’s bad and orange.

lol, what a dunce.



https://apnews.com/019029c7971d4362989e2e35f29a42cf

Sort of sums up the man as either lying or schizophrenic. On second thought, both possibilities give him too much agency: many people who tell lies, like, say, Bill Clinton, seem to do so after careful thought. Not so with Donald, who just seems to be a fountain of bull****. It's like he never cognitively progressed to adulthood.

How about the fact that his appointment is unconstitutional, but nothing is going to be done to enforce the constitutions appointment process either now or ever again.

Hopefully there will be legal challenges? That said, thankfully, Trump has appointed someone to the Supreme Court who groks the Fuehrerprinzip.

Even if the stacked courts rule against the Trump administration, who’s gonna enforce em?

Congress passed veto proof sanctions against Putin and Trumps just ignored them, consequence free. He doesn’t give a ****. The GOP doesn’t give a ****.

“Doesn’t matter, we won.”

but her emails...

I imagine you probably also think economics is fictional as well.

Well, a lot of it actually is. Or maybe it's better to say "all models are wrong, some are useful".

That said, this chart hit hacker news the other day (though it is a couple years old now), and I'm sure the same applies to many economic models whose predictive power mostly amounts to over-fitting to the data.



On the other hand, I think you're wrong Wookie to dismiss definitions just because they are "made up". It's not really the analogies that Reid is trying to impart. They're just illustrations, to help give you a picture. An imperfect model. I mean - even I don't understand the dead cat. The math is how it really works.



(One of these days the voting public will be scientifically and mathematically literate enough that these kind of discussions will seem like painful anachronisms.)

Also, Wookie's comment really looks even stranger on second glance. Definitions are fiction, well, by definition. That's the definition of a definition. lmao

[quote=Lewis Carroll]
'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
[/quote]

Unfortunately, to understand the terms that economists use, one may have to become educated; however, doing so might constitute a violation of Wookie's principles.

tl;dr: language ≠ concepts

(This also feels a little like saying that syntax ≠ semantics)

That’s a lot of words to say “Wookie06 posts a lot of economics word salad”, which I already said earlier in this thread.

Don’t read that as a rebuke. Read it as a translation.

Wookie; money is property so higher income = you get property faster. Of course all other sorts of properties are bought with money, so yes it's a pretty clear relationship. I'm not sure what you mean by talking about definitions.

And as per velocity and acceleration, yes that literally is the definition so I assumed you were talking about property.

Also, money isn’t your property. 18 USC 333. Demand deposits also aren’t your property, they’re an insured liability of your bank. It’s not property until you buy it.

TIL, equation still holds though

Also, read your brokerage agreement, because your stock and bonds probably aren’t your property either. Neither is your house if you have a mortgage. Or your land if it’s freehold, which it almost certainly is unless it’s a homestead passed down for 200 years.

Basically you don’t own ****, peasant. But keep toiling and voting for the people who do. Maybe they’ll take pity on you eventually.

Why do you hate my truck equity, Jon??

forget to log into your Wookie06 account?

Ah, all this time we shoulda known Jon`C was a Russian bot. Putin trying to turn us communist and defame old glory. Spittin` on the flag and cohorting with the likes of Bill Ayers