What's new

Kamala Harris for Pres

Are we really going to ignore that Thriller called illegal immigrants cheap labor? And used that as a reason for why they shouldn’t be deported? And nobody else thinks that’s remotely racist?
 
Why do you say that?

Because everything he advocated has been debunked as ********. If his economic policies are so effective why is Chile not a modern developed advanced economy? The Chicago school after Pinochet coup was basically handed control of the Chilean economy, the consequences for Chileans was crushing poverty a complete suppression of human rights and every so often execution at the hands of their own government. Let alone the misery caused by neo-liberalism in the rest of the world. I could go on for hours but I haven't got the time
 
Do you not remember what you even posted an hour ago?
I have posted a lot in the last hour. If you want to discuss it then there is a button where you can quote a post instead of going back to something after the discussion has shifted.

Cool thing is that if I posted it then there is a record of it in this very thread so there is still time for you to quote and discuss it!

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Are we really going to ignore that Thriller called illegal immigrants cheap labor? And used that as a reason for why they shouldn’t be deported? And nobody else thinks that’s remotely racist?
Do you have data showing that illegal immigrants typically are paid better than most Americans?

I can see how you can think it's racist. At the same time it might be true (for reasons out of their control)

You could say illegal immigrants are cheap labor due to the fact that is hard to get high paying jobs when you are not a legal citizen, not because of their race but because the system is designed to not give high paying jobs to people without citizenship. I don't think that's racist.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Milton Friedman fathered the trickle-down economic policies of Reagan, which was built on the theory that if corporations make more money, they'll pass the additional profits down to their employees.

It caused the gap between the middle and upper class to widen dramatically.

He's not the father that economic policy, its goes all the way back to Adam Smith, Friedman's contribution is to keep these ideas alive after they were abandoned during the great depression.
 
Do you have data showing that illegal immigrants typically are paid better than most Americans?

I can see how you can think it's racist. At the same time it might be true (for reasons out of their control)

You could say illegal immigrants are cheap labor due to the fact that is hard to get high paying jobs when you are not a legal citizen, not because of their race but because the system is designed to not give high paying jobs to people without citizenship. I don't think that's racist.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Saying that they shouldn’t leave because they’re cheap labor is racist.
 
Because everything he advocated has been debunked as ********. If his economic policies are so effective why is Chile not a modern developed advanced economy? The Chicago school after Pinochet coup was basically handed control of the Chilean economy, the consequences for Chileans was crushing poverty a complete suppression of human rights and every so often execution at the hands of their own government. Let alone the misery caused by neo-liberalism in the rest of the world. I could go on for hours but I haven't got the time
Screenshot 2024-08-16 at 8.34.29 PM.png

Interesting...markets do work.

"In the end, the Chilean [economy] did quite well, didn't it?"

MILTON FRIEDMAN: "Oh, very well. Extremely well. The Chilean economy did very well, but more important, in the end the central government, the military junta, was replaced by a democratic society. So the really important thing about the Chilean business is that free markets did work their way in bringing about a free society."
 
Last edited:
Do you have data showing that illegal immigrants typically are paid better than most Americans?

I can see how you can think it's racist. At the same time it might be true (for reasons out of their control)

You could say illegal immigrants are cheap labor due to the fact that is hard to get high paying jobs when you are not a legal citizen, not because of their race but because the system is designed to not give high paying jobs to people without citizenship. I don't think that's racist.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
I’ll put it this way Fish.

If Trump had said that, half this board including Thriller would be in hysterics.
 
Right, I could've worded that better. I more meant to say he was the driver of Reaganomics.

The real genius of Friedman is that he managed to unravel the post war economic boom and post war society and allowed for the transfer the wealth that had flowed into the hands of the middle and working classes back to the elites.
 
View attachment 17063

Interesting...markets do work.

No not really, Chile benefitted from the most favourable conditions from the US. Also what share of that GDP do Chileans actually have themselves how much is expatriated to the American corporations that own their economy? Also the majority of that economic growth is after the end of the dictatorship and return to democracy. Also from a moral standpoint do a quarter million people need to die for the market to work?
 
Saying that they shouldn’t leave because they’re cheap labor is racist.
Not only that but it is advocating for exploitation.

We need a sensible immigration policy. I'm for nearly open boarders, but I understand that isn't for everyone. Whatever policy we have as far as numbers go, the more important thing is for it to work efficiently so that a person can apply and get approval or disapproval within days or weeks, not months or years.
 
The concern with Reaganomics is how it funnels the vast majority of the total wealth to the elites, while everybody else suffers.
LOL. They "suffer" with the highest standard of living in the world.

The thing about Reaganomics is how it ferrets out the phony and insecure. If you want to see how an economic system effects an income group then look at how much better the lives of that income group get over time. If you are a bad person then compare this income group to that income group. Socialists are bad people. When the Khmer Rouge took power, the poor were reduced from living in shabby houses to working in fields with a gun to their head, and the wealthy were reduced to working in fields with a gun to their head. The Socialists did a great job with economic equality but that doesn't mean the poor were better off under Socialism.

Neoliberal economics do facilitate an unequal distribution of prosperity but the results are far superior to socialisms equal distribution of misery.
 
The concern with Reaganomics is how it funnels the vast majority of the total wealth to the elites, while everybody else suffers.
Screenshot 2024-08-16 at 9.07.16 PM.png

Looks like Chile is right in the middle of the South American countries.


Lets see if Chileans want to get out of Chile to the USA like other countries:
Screenshot 2024-08-16 at 9.13.59 PM.png

And dont say its about population size, 6th largest populous country in SA, and they are not even on this list.

Doesn't sound like they are failing.

Also, there will always be negative bi-products of any economy. Free markets do reward the wealthy, because once you obtain wealth, it is much easier to add to it, then starting from nothing. But at least free markets give people a chance to obtain wealth.

That is why I am pro social programs to help people get opportunities if they want them. You can't force anyone to take risks or go after opportunities. Lots of people like comfort and security of a job with an established company or government.
 
And dont say its about population size, 6th largest populous country in SA, and they are not even on this list.

Doesn't sound like they are failing.

Also, there will always be negative bi-products of any economy. Free markets do reward the wealthy, because once you obtain wealth, it is much easier to add to it, then starting from nothing. But at least free markets give people a chance to obtain wealth.

That is why I am pro social programs to help people get opportunities if they want them. You can't force anyone to take risks or go after opportunities. Lots of people like comfort and security of a job with an established company or government.
What are your thoughts on wages increasing at a slower rate than the cost of living? I don't think it's controversial to point out that comfortably supporting a familiy on one income is much more difficult today than it was in previous decades.

Do you attribute this to something other than the ever-increasing gap between the upper class and the middle/lower classes? (Not trying to be antagonistic - I'm genuinely curious of your thoughts).
 
What are your thoughts on wages increasing at a slower rate than the cost of living? I don't think it's controversial to point out that comfortably supporting a familiy on one income is much more difficult today than it was in previous decades.

Do you attribute this to something other than the ever-increasing gap between the upper class and the middle/lower classes? (Not trying to be antagonistic - I'm genuinely curious of your thoughts).
Don't worry. We can just put our children to work to help support the household (I kid. I'm raising a family on a single income and doing fine. And I am probably on the lower end of middle class. Though I only have one kid and bought my home during the recession in 2008. Thank God for the recession lol)

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top