re: Any takers for a discussion about “Marxian economics”?

quote:

---

If someone can’t afford daycare, saying that someone in Uzbekistan doesn’t have running water won’t help

---

Uzbekistan has better water than us because they don’t put fluoride in it


Probably don’t need running water because you can just go drink from a river because they don’t have Monsanto in Uzbekistan

quote:

---

everything the government does is a pay for something scheme. Whether it’s tax cuts for certain people or buying stocks in certain companies or bailing out certain companies in other ways. It seems like people recognize this and many prefer regular citizens who aren’t already wealthy and powerful to benefit while many other citizens want the privileges of government favors concentrated where most of the wealth and power already can be found.

---

Yes ma'am, you are correct. One day our descendants will look back and wonder why we allowed organized criminals govern us.

quote:

---

What is more likely is that the shift from an economy where production of goods played a larger role in employment and wages, to one where services dominate and goods are seen as nothing more than to be consumed is the cause.

---

Correct.

Also, in the scenario where the artificially low wages of illegals are replaced by higher wages of Americans, total wages (nationally) would likely decrease a bit, due to inefficient allocation of resources due to paying more for lower-level products (the consumable goods).

quote:

---

American Exceptionalism. Entrepreneurial success. It's why America maintains the most upwardly mobile society in history.

---

This is the goal of privatizing public institutions? To make them exceptional? Yikes.

quote:

---

we still only see 45% growth in the median.

is that a feature of capitalism or is a bug in the particular economic path we chose?

---

Only 45%?

I think we've found the problem.

Only 45% brings to mind "Ten Men at the Bar" parable:

(We've all heard it)

Every night, ten men go out for beer and the total bill comes to $100.
They decide for purposes of affordability that their bill the way Americans pay their taxes, it wouldn't be split equally at $10 each. Instead, they decide to divide the bill according to their wealth and income for fairness:

The first 4 men (the poorest) pay $0.
The 5th man pays $1.
The 6th man pays $3.
The 7th man pays $7.
The 8th man pays $12.
The 9th man pays $18.
The 10th man (the richest) pays $59.

All ten men drink together every night and seem happy with this arrangement.

Then one day, the bar owner announces a deal for the group: "Because you are such good customers, I’m lowering the price of your daily tab by $20. Your total bill is now only $80!"

The ten men still want to divide the bill in a way that reflects their tax system. Reducing the bill by $20 equally ($2 per person) won't work—the first four men pay nothing, so taking $2 off their bill would mean paying them to drink!

The bar owner suggests reducing each person's tab by roughly the same percentage:
So, for the poorest 4 Men, they still pay nothing i.e., no reduction
The 5th Man now pays $0 for a 100% reduction
The 6th Man now pays $2 instead of $3 for a 33% reduction
The 7th Man pays $5 instead of $7 for a 29% reduction
The 8th Man pays $9 instead of $12 for a 25% reduction
The 9th Man pays $14 instead of $18 for a 22% reduction
The 10th Man pays $49 instead of $59 for a 17% reduction

The first four continue to drink for free. The other six all save money, and the 10th man gets the biggest dollar cut ($10). But once outside the bar, the men start calculating their savings:
"I only got $1 out of the $20 savings!" declares the 6th man, pointing at the 10th man. "And he got $10!"
"That's right!" shouts the 5th man. "I only saved $1 too! It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I did!"
"That's true!" yells the 7th man. "Why should he get $10 back when I only got $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," scream the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all! The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surround the 10th man and beat him up.

The next night, the 10th man doesn't show up for drinks. The remaining nine sit down and order their drinks as usual. But when the bill comes, they discover something alarming: they are $49 short of paying the $80 tab.

Sort of follows the construct of the "only 45%" complaint.

As in what led to capitalism itself or what led to the current state of capitalism in the US?

100% true. But most of the countries that we think as communist or socialist (Soviet Union, China, etc.) are or were a lot farther away from actually being a communist or socialist country than a country like the US is from being a truly capitalist country.

quote:

---

They were fun jobs you are right about that but the 150 days was what they didn't have to work because of Catholic mandated feast days and Sundays. The rest of the time they worked. They worked but the lord and when what they owed them was paid they still had to work so they could pay taxes and provide for their families. Also a typical work week especially during harvest and planting season was around 60-70 hours a week. But to agree to your point mandatory feast days would be nice

---

They lived better lives than us


Monarchism is better than capitalism

quote:

---

The next night, the 10th man doesn't show up for drinks. The remaining nine sit down and order their drinks as usual. But when the bill comes, they discover something alarming: they are $49 short of paying the $80 tab.

---

I get it


This is like how America has a communist system where you’re forced to pay against your will to support a segment of society that are freeloaders and would gladly beat you up to steal from you

quote:

---

For illegals to be the cause then the effect would have to have accelerated in recent years. The numbers just do not support that.

---

Is this true if gov't support for illegals has spiked?