Where do you fall on the political spectrum?

[Attacker3]

It is definitely too long and needs simplification, but more than that it's still too full of holes for megacorps to exploit. Even with all this regulation supposedly "hindering" them, many pay zero taxes year after year or even take corporate welfare from taxpayers. Corporations for the most part already have zero allegiance to the country they were founded in, zero regulation just means regressing all the way back to child labor.

I think you misunderstand the point of regulation. It's not for the consumer's protection. Generally. regulation is there to benefit the corporation, causing a higher cost of entry for new competition. And you gotta ask yourself, if 170 THOUSAND pages can't stop a corporation from not paying taxes, what will? The government is ineffective at even securing funding for itself! You have two options. either the government is run by the corporations, allowing them to pay almost no taxes, or that they're incredibly ineffective, and frankly, dumb to a point where they can't plug a tax loophole in 170 thousand pages of regulations.

I would also like to say that child labour isn't inherently a bad thing. It's been a part of society for a very long time, and the only reason it has went out of style in the western world is because we as a society have created enough capital to make employing children a terrible way to make cash. Why would you have an unskilled, untrained, uneducated, and undisciplined worker, when you can wait for them to go through education, and hire a person who is at the very least educated. You wonder why most jobs require a high school degree? That's why. Child labour wouldn't be a thing in the western world without regulation. The reason why it's a thing is poorer countries is the fact that they haven't built up enough capital, and have not created a lot of jobs that require education.
If a family can not survive unless their 8 year old child works, then I say let them work. Putting regulations in place to prevent them from doing so just causes needless deaths of families who collapse under their own weight.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

The cross-thread irony here is staggering

I would prefer if you didn't offer your snide remarks instead of an actual argument. There is a difference between parenting and political ideology. Perhaps I should have said "political ideologies" instead of ideas. I apologize for the confusion.

 

[Xzi]

Child labour wouldn't be a thing in the western world without regulation.

There are already corporations that use overseas child labor and sell their products in the US, so "it couldn't happen here" seems awfully naive. You're right though, the more likely scenario without regulation is that corporations just decide existing employees can survive off a $0.05/hr minimum wage.

And what do you think will happen if we cover up all of those holes?

All the businesses leave the country cause it's too expensive.

Oh lordy, I'm clutching my pearls as we speak! God forbid all the biggest leeches on the system ever left and allowed smaller businesses to rise up to take their place.

 

[Attacker3]

There are already corporations that use overseas child labor and sell their products in the US, so "it couldn't happen here" seems awfully naive. You're right though, the more likely scenario without regulation is that corporations just decide existing employees can survive off a $0.05/hr minimum wage.

If the companies paid people only $0.05/hr, prices would shift accordingly. That's how the market works. And yes, there are corporations that use child labour, and if you read my post. you would realize that I said it happened in places that haven't built up enough capital! Even if it does not look like that, those corporations are building up those countries. It happened in Europe a while ago. Before, the kids would help with the farming, and the cooking, and the cleaning on the farm, or go into a "trade" and work there at the age of 12. They married young, worked young, and had children young. As they built themselves up, they found out that the more complicated jobs required education, so they started replacing the child workers with people who were educated. It became much more economically sensible to put someone through school than to have them work. School is an investment, and an educated worker makes much more capital than someone who does not. You will see in the next 50 to 100 years those places that were being paid pennies an hour will be paid reasonably well, enough to not be in extreme poverty. This can be seen in the data showing people living in poverty. I just wish we could how how good capitalism could do without being shackled to government regulations in the US, because places without these regulations are growing at an extremely pleasing rate. Capitalism creates wealth.

 

[Xzi]

If the companies paid people only $0.05/hr, prices would shift accordingly. That's how the market works.

Rofl, that's not how inflation works.

 

[Attacker3]

If the companies paid people only $0.05/hr, prices would shift accordingly. That's how the market works. And yes, there are corporations that use child labour, and if you read my post. you would realize that I said it happened in places that haven't built up enough capital! Even if it does not look like that, those corporations are building up those countries. It happened in Europe a while ago. Before, the kids would help with the farming, and the cooking, and the cleaning on the farm, or go into a "trade" and work there at the age of 12. They married young, worked young, and had children young. As they built themselves up, they found out that the more complicated jobs required education, so they started replacing the child workers with people who were educated. It became much more economically sensible to put someone through school than to have them work. School is an investment, and an educated worker makes much more capital than someone who does not. You will see in the next 50 to 100 years those places that were being paid pennies an hour will be paid reasonably well, enough to not be in extreme poverty. This can be seen in the data showing people living in poverty. I just wish we could how how good capitalism could do without being shackled to government regulations in the US, because places without these regulations are growing at an extremely pleasing rate. Capitalism creates wealth.

Oh, and it's funny how these companies start paying their employees more. I thought that without regulations, companies would just pay them 0.05/hr

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Rofl, that's not how inflation works.

If the average person could not afford a loaf of bread priced at 3 dollars, people would sell their bread for less, thanks to the decreased costs of labour making it possible to sell it for cheap. And no, that's not how inflation works, because I'm not talking about inflation. Inflation happens when the demand is higher than supply for a good, which usually happens when there is an increase in wages. The inflation happens because supply cannot meet the demand, so people raise prices. A small and gradual change in wages allows markets to plan and slowly increase supply. Companies cannot just create an absurd amount of supply at once, which usually happens with minimum wage hikes.

 

[Xzi]

The inflation happens because supply cannot meet the demand, so people raise prices.

That's also not what inflation is. The dollar doesn't suddenly become worth more when you lower people's wages, it just means the people at the top are taking more of those wages for themselves. If the modern minimum wage had kept pace with inflation and we were making the same that people were in the 70s/80s, it would be at around $20/hr in 2018.

 

[KingVamp]

What's the point of laws? People just keep breaking them, so let's just get rid of all of them.

 

[Xzi]

What's the point of laws? People just keep breaking them, so let's just get rid of all of them.

It really is asinine saying corporations have to deal with too many regulations. The 2008 economic crash is what happens when they're allowed to let their ultra-capitalist wet dreams run wild; it's amazing what a short memory this country has.

 

[Attacker3]

That's also not what inflation is. The dollar doesn't suddenly become worth more when you lower people's wages, it just means the people at the top are taking more of those wages for themselves. If the modern minimum wage had kept pace with inflation and we were making the same that people were in the 70s/80s, it would be at around $20/hr in 2018.

Excuse me, yes it is. The Demand-Pull effect is one of the main causes of it, behind the money supply issue (Aka federal reserve just printing more money, which devalues the currency). The Cost-Push effect is also another reason for that. I encourage you to research the two, since minimum wage increases cause both the Demand-Pull effect and the Cost-Push effect, causing a double whammy of inflation.

What's the point of laws? People just keep breaking them, so let's just get rid of all of them.

I don't know what you're referring to, if you're talking about regulations, then you need to realize that nobody is breaking them currently, and that is the fault of the government for letting it happen, for either two reasons
1. They are incompetant
2. They are controlled by the corporations.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It really is asinine saying corporations have to deal with too many regulations. The 2008 economic crash is what happens when they're allowed to let their ultra-capitalist wet dreams run wild; it's amazing what a short memory this country has.

I remember this incredibly well. I remember it as a time where bailouts were plentiful, and many companies that should have went out of business in a capitalist economy were propped up the government. It's a sad day, because it was a time where companies got too greedy, and should have ended up failing, but instead were saved by the heroic government, and are allowed to be greedy without a care in the world, knowing full well if they screw up, they'll get saved again. That is not capitalist in any way.

 

[KingVamp]

I don't know what you're referring to, if you're talking about regulations, then you need to realize that nobody is breaking them currently, and that is the fault of the government for letting it happen, for either two reasons
1. They are incompetant
2. They are controlled by the corporations.

If this is the case,

1. Just means we need better (not necessarily more) regulations.
2. So, what makes you think no regulations corporations would be better?

 

[Deleted User]

Oh lordy, I'm clutching my pearls as we speak! God forbid all the biggest leeches on the system ever left and allowed smaller businesses to rise up to take their place.

You completely missed the rest of my post. By businesses, I meant small businesses. The mega-corps have enough money that they can easily dodge all the regulations. All youre doing by over-regulating the market is pissing off the small businesses.

 

[Xzi]

Excuse me, yes it is. The Demand-Pull effect is one of the main causes of it, behind the money supply issue (Aka federal reserve just printing more money, which devalues the currency). The Cost-Push effect is also another reason for that. I encourage you to research the two, since minimum wage increases cause both the Demand-Pull effect and the Cost-Push effect, causing a double whammy of inflation.

If you cut workers' wages to $0.05/hr, the same amount of money is still circulating. We'd still owe the same amount of money to various foreign banks. It wouldn't magically cost less to produce the same products, we're in a global market. At the same time, paying workers more doesn't have to mean increasing the cost of most products, especially since most aren't even made in the US. Productivity has gone up, but wages haven't kept pace.

I don't know what you're referring to, if you're talking about regulations, then you need to realize that nobody is breaking them currently, and that is the fault of the government for letting it happen, for either two reasons
1. They are incompetant
2. They are controlled by the corporations.

The Republicans are both incompetent and controlled by corporations. That doesn't mean we should let Wal-Mart run the country just because they're holding the government hostage at the moment.

You completely missed the rest of my post. By businesses, I meant small businesses. The mega-corps have enough money that they can easily dodge all the regulations. All youre doing by over-regulating the market is pissing off the small businesses.

Taxes fall into brackets for that very reason. If Republicans really did care about small business like they claim, then they'd raise taxes on corporations and lower them on small business. Lowering taxes for both just means the big fish eat the little ones that much quicker.

 

[Deleted User]

Taxes fall into brackets for that very reason. If Republicans really did care about small business like they claim, then they'd raise taxes on corporations and lower them on small business. Lowering taxes for both just means the big fish eat the little ones that much quicker.

Raise taxes? Where? All they'd do is outsource their production to a cheaper country and we lose out on even more money.

 

[Attacker3]

If this is the case,

1. Just means we need better (not necessarily more) regulations.
2. So, what makes you think no regulations corporations would be better?

1. And we haven't been able to do this yet, why? Oh right, they're incompetent. We've spent decades trying to make "better" regulations. If it's so easy, then why don't the guys in charge just do it?
2. Regulations are generally a barrier of entry to new companies who want to try and come into the fray. Corporations can foot the costs for regulations, but a new person can't easily foot the hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars it requires to get into something like the food industry, or even the automobile industry, places that desperately need competition.

If you cut workers' wages to $0.05/hr, the same amount of money is still circulating. We'd still owe the same amount of money to various foreign banks. It wouldn't magically cost less to produce the same products, we're in a global market. At the same time, paying workers more doesn't have to mean increasing the cost of most products, especially since most aren't even made in the US. Productivity has gone up, but wages haven't kept pace.


The Republicans are both incompetent and controlled by corporations. That doesn't mean we should let Wal-Mart run the country just because they're holding the government hostage at the moment.

I have no idea what kind of economics you're describing, but it sure isn't one on planet Earth. What you need to understand is companies subsist on people BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS. If people cannot buy their products because they are prohibitively expensive, then they MAKE NO MONEY. In a free market economy, companies would also be vying for the best candidates, upping prices I also see you're looking at this through a political lens instead of a purely economical one, so I don't really see a point in arguing, unless you want to put your biases aside and argue purely economics?

 

[Xzi]

Raise taxes? Where? All they'd do is outsource their production to a cheaper country and we lose out on even more money.

This has proven to be nonsense time and again. Plenty of presidents have raised taxes on corporations/the wealthy. They stay because America is an essential consumer market, not because they really have any loyalty to us. They use overseas tax havens or other methods to try to dodge as much as possible, even when their taxes get cut. And of course they sell in plenty of other markets too.

 

[Attacker3]

This has proven to be nonsense time and again. Plenty of presidents have raised taxes on corporations/the wealthy. They stay because America is an essential consumer market, not because they really have any loyalty to us. They use overseas tax havens or other methods to try to dodge as much as possible, even when their taxes get cut. And of course they sell in plenty of other markets too.

So you're saying we should raise taxes on people who don't even pay taxes? Hmm, something just doesn't add up.

 

[Xzi]

So you're saying we should raise taxes on people who don't even pay taxes? Hmm, something just doesn't add up.

They dodge as much as possible, but most still end up paying something. Just nowhere close to the percentage that the middle and lower classes have to pay. Obviously there are those corporations who do pay their fair share out of a sense of duty to the nation, but I'd likely count them few.

 

[Attacker3]

They dodge as much as possible, but most still end up paying something. Just nowhere close to the percentage that the middle and lower classes have to pay. Obviously there are those corporations who do pay their fair share out of a sense of duty to the nation, but I'd likely count them few.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/amazon-earned-5-6b-in-2017-but-paid-no-federal-taxes


And don't get me wrong, I totally support amazon in doing this. The less money the government gets, the better.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

By the way I'm signing off for the night, I'll continue this tomorrow night perhaps, but I am a very busy man, and I have stuff I need to do.

 

[Xzi]

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/amazon-earned-5-6b-in-2017-but-paid-no-federal-taxes


And don't get me wrong, I totally support amazon in doing this. The less money the government gets, the better.

Well you'd think so with the current administration, but they somehow still manage to fund shit like child detention camps.

Sponsored by New Balance I'm sure. /s

 

[Attacker3]

Well you'd think so with the current administration, but they somehow still manage to fund shit like child detention camps.

Sponsored by New Balance I'm sure. /s

That's a whole can of worms in itself, but I cannot argue that tonight. Have a good sleep, and go research the cost-push and demand-pull inflation for me, ok champ?