Corporations give campaign contributions so candidates run ads. They CAN'T force the public to vote for these candidates. Just because people don't use their heads when voting doesn't mean business owns government.
>Third world countries are taking our jobs
It is more efficient to outsource jobs because products can be made cheaper in foreign countries. Everyone laid of can get other jobs or try to get skills that Ooga Booga doesn't have. This drives prices down and gives people incentives to gain valuable skills.
>Financial markets are a fraud
Even if you can't understand something, it still may be important. Sargoy on a justice democrats stream suggested to Kulinski that company stock should be given to workers and capital should be raised by crowdfunding. In others words, the workers should be given ownership of the means of production (remember! stock is OWNING part of the company) and people should donate money to companies they support (because that is definitely a sustainable way to raise millions of dollars).
Also, financial markets are not just a form a legal gambling. Sure, they could be used that way, but their primary purpose is for raising capital and mitigating risk.
>Free trade is detrimental of the working class
Does it make sense to put trade barriers between countries, yet not between individual U.S. states? Trade barriers between states in the early Union are exactly what paralyzed it. Then the barriers are abolished, the U.S. fights for global trade (threatening Japan until they opened trade), and we become a world power. But free trade is obviously horrible! How dare you suggest that poor John Smith should have to compete with Ooga Booga for shekels! Have you no heart?
>Muh regulations, minimum wage, free health care, progressive taxation, excessive immigration, rich oppression!!!
The list goes on. Go read an economics book already.
> Not sure if you actually spend time thinking and writing this out or if you just wrote bullshit in an attempt to be a troll - either way I'm responding, so I guess you win?
All of your ideas, thoughts, feelings, intuitions, opinions, conjectures, and beliefs are retarded. I'm not sure if you, personally, consider yourself a smart or clever individual. Maybe you're on the fence about that at this point in your life? Regardless, I'm going to make this very clear: you sir, are an idiot. I'm not saying this to hurt you. My sincerest wish is that - in the future - you type out a post and then simply read it. After reading it you call to mind this very response and delete everything you wrote, because it assuredly will not be worthwhile.
Nicholas Scott
/thread
Cameron Green
>They CAN'T force the public to vote for these candidates
There were more candidates than two in the murican elections, but anyone cared for them? No, because they didn't get support from the corporations.
Nolan Rivera
You're a dumb cuck
Chase Wright
Most people don't care enough to look beyond the two major candidates. No amount of reform can fix laziness.
Parker Brooks
Elaborate.
>All your opinions are retarded. This is not an argument.
Christian Reyes
>you sir
Brayden Jenkins
¡Jeb!, Rato, and Rubio all blew Trump out of the water in terms of donations, and didn't get any support
Robert King
Trump doesn't need donations, he owns a corporation, jackass.
Adrian Nguyen
If you look at spending rather than income, Trump spent significantly less yet still won (I don't have the date for this image, yet this trend continued through the whole election season). Corporations can't just fund politicians until they win. Candidates still need popular support.
Ayden Bell
>popular support
Heh heh heh.
Luke Rogers
Trump won according to the Electoral College i.e. he was popular within the right states. That is a consequence of the Constitution, not corporations. Either way, Trump has shit "muh jobs" policies like 20% Mexican tariffs, etc.
Hudson Taylor
>implying I was supporting the idea that corporations can fund politicians until they win
He just didn't need donations
Easton Gomez
Fair enough.
Beyond that, why are protectionist policies gaining so much traction? Popular candidates and Youtuber's are shilling this economic poison, either because they don't know better or they are taking advantage of people's macro-economic ignorance. Yet there is overwhelming evidence that these policies hinder economic prosperity. China didn't go from shit to not-so-shit from from the wonders of protectionism and social programs.
Mason Turner
Democracy doesn't work. Protectionism sounds good, and it's terrible side effects come more slowly than it's immediate benefits (some local job creation, etc.)
Benjamin Rodriguez
Currently, we have a republic, which is much more advantageous (people only have to be informed enough choose the right candidates).
Personally, I think we should have some kind of independent trade and finance board to handle these matters. It could be structured in a manner similar to the Fed. They could have longer terms and could be impeached if they do any thing shady. Their main purpose would be to handle trade in a manner most beneficial to long term prosperity.
I haven't given this enough thought to have a cohesive plan. Its an idea at least.
David Rodriguez
socialist measures will always prevail when you have a democracy it might take years, decades, or a century or two but if you have a democracy you will eventually have full blown socialism
Eli Foster
Yay! It's black history month!
Grayson Phillips
Do you mean U.S.S.R tier or Scandinavian tier? Either way, cite evidence.
Carson Walker
I don't know much about economics, but here's my two cents.
>Everyone laid of can get other jobs or try to get skills that Ooga Booga doesn't have. This drives prices down and gives people incentives to gain valuable skills. This makes sense in theory, but it's pretty hard for people to find jobs. It is true that outsourcing jobs overseas will make products cheaper, and will drive down prices, but there still aren't enough jobs to go around. Bringing jobs back to the country would definitely make a lot of things more expensive, but it would still create new jobs.
Cooper Price
Its not about low prices. Its about people keeping their job. People often rather sit and die than learn a new skill.
Colton Hughes
It may be valuable to start planning and developing skills for a new job while still employed at your old job. The threat of unemployment should encourage people to develop back-up plans.
Additionally, the unemployed should spare no effort in getting a job, developing any source of income, and cutting expenses. You have no other employment, so you might as well be productive.
Jaxson Stewart
>Being a commie OP avocated for free trade and a capatlisitic republic, you should take your own advice and delete your post.
Caleb Clark
The economy doesn't exist for the economy's sake. The economy exists to serve the people of the country. In all economical matters, the well-being of the people should be considered, and not just "Did the number go up? Good."
Lucas Allen
Whats your point? They long term growth of the economy has given us the great prosperity we have today. Thus, long term growth is in the best interests of the people.
Please give examples of how the well-being of the people is not sufficiently considered.
Luis Jenkins
It is harder to buy a car or house today than it was 60 years ago. There are plenty more statistics that show that the economy is not moving in the interest of the average citizen.
Connor Watson
>given (((us))) the great prosperity we have today
Austin Diaz
But there are people who are working really hard to find a job, and can't.
The example I just gave. Obviously outsourcing jobs overseas would help overall economic growth, but having jobs outsourced overseas makes it a lot harder for people in the U.S. to find jobs.
Logan Sanders
Do happen to have any of these statistics so we may discuss them?
We have longer life expectancy, don't live in shit-tier huts, and Jews don't really own that much of the economy, since most companies are public corporations. They do have greater economic success, however, on par with Asians.
Always have a backup and always try to gain new skills (even if you are in a comfortable position). Please cite information about how difficult it is to get a job. Unemployment statistics do not seem to be unreasonable high by historic standard. Anecdotal evidence is insufficient.
New jobs are created all the time. It is this fact that ensure that a rising population does not have rising unemployment. Outsourcing does not guarantee a tight job market.
>The economic recovery, officially underway since June 2009, is still leaving millions of working Americans behind.
>Legislation to increase the minimum wage, support labor organizing and collective bargaining, and better regulate scheduling practices are among the measures that would permit workers scrambling to make ends meet with “a patchwork of paychecks” to attain economic security.
It says nothing about outsourcing. It also doesn't say if we were better off economically in the past. Nice try. You need to find evidence that if we limit outsourcing, the number of jobs will increase. I do not believe such evidence exists. Prove me wrong.
>Outsourcing also increases U.S. unemployment. The 14 million outsourced jobs are nearly double the 7.4 million unemployed in the United States. If all those jobs returned, it would be enough to also hire the 5.6 million who are working part-time but would become full-time positions.
>That assumes the jobs could, in fact, return to the United States.
Their entire argument is based in speculation. The overseas jobs pay significantly less. How could they expect to return these jobs if businesses would have to pay much higher wages and social security? They speculate jobs can return, yet do not prove jobs can return. Better luck next time.
David Phillips
No, some jobs could definitely be brought back to the US. What's unclear is whether or not enough jobs could be brought back to the United States in order to give jobs to everyone who is unemployed.
>How could they expect to return these jobs if businesses would have to pay much higher wages and social security? It's simple, you put tariffs on goods manufactured overseas to give businesses a financial incentive to bring jobs back to the United States.
Daniel White
Some jobs could be brought back, but at a significant cost to the consumer. Putting tariffs of cheaper foreign goods is essentially consumers subsidizing the low skill workers who refuse or are unable to gain skills needed to get a real job.
We don't need unskilled, labor intense businesses anymore. It would be better to help these people get skilled jobs rather than subsidizing their inadequacies.
Jose Diaz
Why is it that total retards always appeal to >MUH ECONOMICS ?
Pic related. Economics is a joke of a field and economists can't even agree on anything or make meaningful predictions. You could pick any random opinion about how the world should work and you could probably find an economist somewhere that agrees with you. Saying x is true because of economics is literally worthless.
Benjamin Murphy
Yes, it would be better to help these people get skilled jobs, but there aren't enough jobs in the U.S., and unskilled jobs are better than no jobs. Also, I never said that bringing jobs back to the U.S. wouldn't raise the prices of goods, I just said that it would bring jobs back.
>Putting tariffs of cheaper foreign goods is essentially consumers subsidizing the low skill workers who refuse or are unable to gain skills needed to get a real job. A lot of skilled workers can't find jobs either. There are people out there with college degrees who can't find jobs.
Jordan Richardson
...
Jacob Gomez
Lol
Colton Thompson
Really stupid picture/quote. The internet facilitates creating relevant connections.
Owen Martin
There are enough jobs for skilled workers. How do I know this? The wages are higher, indicating demand. If you are a skilled worker and are having trouble finding a job, you could always accept a lower pay.
Often times, unemployment among-st college graduates stems from those with no real skills and shitty meme-degrees.
Aiden Campbell
Its not bait, you're just a flaming retard. How do you account for all those economists that disagree with your assertions in the OP?
Read an economics journal. :^)
Adam White
Protip: having a college degree is not a skill
John Johnson
>Be an economic ideologue >Be a literal socialist/communist >"Hey everyone I have the complete economic truth that solves all your issues" >Wonder why there is so much disagreement >Don't realize you serving your agenda
This happens all the time. People create "legitimate arguments" that obviously are completely unbiased and have nothing to do with their closely held ideological beliefs.
Then they try to predict the future. Obviously this is a realistic goal. "I can use advanced mathematics to predict what you are going to buy/sell next."
Camden Gray
People don't vote third party because they are jokes now.
Last time a third party had any significant support was Ron Paul.
You might as well just stay home instead of voting third party
>Libertarian party Somehow became the cuck party and now supports big government and Hillary
>Green party Extreme far left anti vaccine no border SJW and shilled for Hillary
>Constitutional party Might as well just be called the 2nd amendment party
All the independent candidates are just retards with too much money.
Charles Hill
Well said my fellow redditor.
Christian Brown
Even democrat and Republican have numerous and important similarities; it makes them joke tier.
>both protectionist >both want progressive taxes and social programs >both want some government healthcare >both want U.S. hegomony >etc.
Ryan Nelson
NOT
Aiden Richardson
fpbp
Kevin James
whoa check out this hyperfaggotry! anyway i think you should know that when people say corporations are taking over the world its because they, in the form of political lobbies, can get congressmen to pass legislation that supports whatever cause they want by paying them off and offering gifts and vacations. also, any single person that claims to "understand economics" is a useless pathetic lying piece of scumsucking trash, which is what you are OP.
Hudson Lee
Clinton's campaign used traditional, expensive, tactics like lots of mail and call centres. Trump got cable and local channels to give him free airtime by being an ass and leveraged much cheaper digital distribution.
Jason Parker
You should read 'capital in the 21st century' if you haven't. There is an increasingly unequal distribution of power and wealth occurring in developed countries that is certainly a bad thing for society. GDP growth is not anywhere near a perfect proxy for the wellbeing of society; we should use a range of measures that measure economic, population health and environmental outcomes. Increasing standards of living for the people is not just about making 'the pie grow'. I am not a protectionist, but there are definitely problems that arise from unfettered capitalism. There is no way that individuals acting in their own interests all of the time without regulation can lead to a democratic, cohesive and just society over the long term. The most successful societies, across the aforementioned outcome measures, demonstrate a moderate level of considered planning and intervention.
Jordan Walker
>capital in the 21st century capital in the 21st century
Jason Torres
There are laws against political corruption. If these are not enforced, you could not realistically expect further regulations, often suggested by those in the picture, to be enforced either. Regardless, you don't have any solid evidence that this is happening. Citation is needed (Also, insults are not an argument. Prove that no one can have any understanding of economics).
>There is an increasingly unequal distribution of power and wealth occurring in developed countries that is certainly a bad thing for society. Please explain why this is a bad thing for society. It would be interesting to read "Capital in the 21st Century," yet I don't have the time right now. I will look into it in the future. Please include its relevant arguments. Also, I never suggested that we should go without regulations, only that we should strive for a free market and this would be the best for societies long term prosperity.
Kek.
Pic. Semi-related, I just wanted a picture for this post.
Sebastian Robinson
>being Libertarian and support military industrial complex >Libertarians on the government payroll in the military Laughingsluts.jpeg
Is there any one group more retarded than these welfare queens?
Ethan Diaz
>Please explain why this is a bad thing for society youtube.com/watch?v=XIUWZnnHz2g Here is a video explaining why neoliberalism is a bad thing in terms that a 10 year old could understand.
Jordan Anderson
to be fair there is one thing the "small state!" crew got right. without a strong sense of community and moral obligation to serve the government redistribution of wealth will never reach the target audience it will only feed bureaucracy and institutionalized corruption.
so while i agree it would be nice if we all could help the poor to live with more dignity i just can't see it work in practice. you would need some miracles to change human nature.
Ryder Thomas
This video is very low quality. Sure, a 10 year old could understand it, but that doesn't make it right. First off, I ignore the minority discrimination argument; This is not the focus of the thread. Secondly: >Uses of anecdotal evidence >This "evidence" is just telling stories that sound compelling >"No social safety net will lower spending" >"This forces everyone to use credit for everything they cant afford" >"Then the economy collapses!" >What evidence is there that this will happen? >"Public services that go private cost more money!!!!" >How do we know this? >Even if costs do go up, it COULD be because only the people that really need these service use them. >Who knows? This entire video is one huge non-argument. Maybe this man has an agenda?
Gavin Howard
Fuck off, commie pinko.
Xavier Perez
In a scenario where the's a currency, financial and state collapse, you better cross your finger you don't really rely on outsource jobs.
Because you'll find your country without the means to produce anything and without the purchase power to make imports.
Yet, autarchy is pursued actually believing it leads to more prosperity, which is absolutly wrong.
