i'm just always kind of amazed by this outpouring of united states economic talk and am thinking you are a really studied dude and then i hang in mtl and think about how it's such an outlier when it comes to cities of that critical mass that are affordable and think maybe you have figured out how to game the system somehow
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:17 (eight years ago) link
teach me yr flopways
the united states is economics
― smoothy doles it (nakhchivan), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:18 (eight years ago) link
we're so much more, we have some nice bars
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:19 (eight years ago) link
for all the talk of craft beer, you really can drink a lot cheaply
acknowledging that whats happening is a political/ideological struggle wld be much more enlightening that yr prosumer totemic relationship to research is
or you cld continue read the economist like its a text book, a tragic customer of sophistry
― lag∞n, Friday, January 29, 2016 4:11 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
https://yuq.me/achievements/01/116/SqoYFcH0hf.jpg
i've long know ilx overall was but i genuinely never suspected you were this corny. as someone who admires you a lot it's kind of eye-opening tbh
my serious answer to this patronizing admonition (tragic consumer of sophistry lmao) is that there are political/ideological and non-political/ideological parts to poverty/income inequality/teh struggle. i think partisan leftists tend to ignore the non-political ideological parts and yeah for sure a lot of economists and technocrats ignore the political/ideological parts. i try to be open minded and read both critically because i care and am very interested by this stuff and always have been
― flopson, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:20 (eight years ago) link
Most economists and technocrats are heavily invested in and committed to the neoliberal hegemony, that's how they got to be technocrats.
― petulant dick master (silby), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:21 (eight years ago) link
hence my skepticism of the ycombinator ppl even muttering the words "basic income," they are very idealistic in that they think they can address any problem from the bay area/cloud, but they tend to see only the things that exist in their sphere as problems
there's always an angle
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:25 (eight years ago) link
When is Bnad going to come back and talk about West Berlin?
― all official correspondence concerning "chili cook-off" (El Tomboto), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:26 (eight years ago) link
flopson you do not at all seem to be placing the ecnommics you are citing within any ideological context, and in fact seem completely unaware that yr views align perfectly with certain ideology, if you werent all i am the first person to ever look at a chart about it it wld be easier to take
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:28 (eight years ago) link
i meanyou realize that theres tons of research that indicates that the decline in unions are a huge part of the decline of the middle class right, its just not the stuff you like
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:29 (eight years ago) link
tim o'reilly's response and editing of that paul graham essay isn't perfect but it gets at the core of the way tech figureheads word things -- any time problems with economics or labor are brought up when it comes to income inequality they instantly think it's either an indictment of their wealth or a call to action for them to personally weigh in on the problem
it's like the classic relationship stereotype where one partner comes home from work and lays out the issues of the day and their significant other, instead of being a sympathetic ear, thinks they need to break down the problems through conversation and address them all personally. maybe it's time for them to be supportive
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:30 (eight years ago) link
― petulant dick master (silby), Friday, January 29, 2016 4:21 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
many are for sure and large parts of it still have that culture. but krugman and stiglitz are prob the most prominent public-facing economist, so that's good i guess. and imo the neoliberal consensus within the profession is cracking. there's also been a huge tendency towards empirical and away from theoretical work within the profession, which has allowed a lot of smart leftists to rise to the top of the profession (people like Suresh Naidu or Arin Dube, whose minimum wage research is a huge push behind the current wage of increases)
― flopson, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:34 (eight years ago) link
do public-facing economists have much actual sway on the market
imo the most influential economist in the US is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chair_of_the_Federal_Reserve
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:36 (eight years ago) link
i appreciate flopson in this thread (which may be more damning than lag∞n's condemnation). tbh i don't even really get a sense of lag∞n's objection to this discourse except "lol economist" (?) and "unions" (ok)
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:36 (eight years ago) link
I mean, I like pointing to Krugman articles and acting like he's being listened to by heads of industry but uhhh remember Alan Greenspan?
isn't the entire idea behind basic income that you get to keep capitalism/neoliberalism and just have a comprehensive and robust safety net?
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:37 (eight years ago) link
― Mordy, Friday, January 29, 2016 4:36 PM (6 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
yes the ultimate lol chart v lol unions battle of 2016 great contribution mordy
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:38 (eight years ago) link
you're lashing out but i'm not your enemy lag∞n. look within.
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:38 (eight years ago) link
the Fed chairperson is probably the 3rd most powerful person in DC, so yeah
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:38 (eight years ago) link
omg what is with this thread and lo qual passive aggression u guys r so bad at it
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:39 (eight years ago) link
btw my earlier point about their being an upper-bound for promotions in union-led workforces (with management being non-union) applies in the corporate world, too. since i've been a wage slave post-college, the number of people in management who started at the entry level (most of whom are still college-educated in my industry) who worked their way into upper management has shrunk, to be replaced by people who started in business management and worked upward
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:40 (eight years ago) link
I mean that's a possible idea but not a very ambitious one. The authors of Inventing the Future, a provocative book I just read/am in love with, advocate the basic income as a platform for a counterhegemonic left to pursue politically. Like the neoliberal consensus and austerity politics are premised on the artificial maintenance of scarcity. Basic income is a post-scarcity policy.
― petulant dick master (silby), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:41 (eight years ago) link
the government could create the money to give to people as a basic income for free but chooses not to because of the ideological dominance of neoliberal austerity.
― petulant dick master (silby), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:43 (eight years ago) link
I don't disagree but even then it's an outgrowth of capitalism. It doesn't entail nationalizing any industries and there's a clear precedence for it already in welfare. wasn't this marx' theory of history? technology cures scarcity, it becomes more profitable for capitalism to feed ppl for free than to charge them and it ushers in the end of history?
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:44 (eight years ago) link
yeah while the initial pitch wld be keep everything the same just give everyone money one has to think that it wld end up being a pretty socially transformative thing
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:45 (eight years ago) link
things dont have to be socailism to be radical
i think it's valuable for this reason tho - zizek claimed "it is easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism" so this allows for radical change w/out forcing ppl to imagine the impossible
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:47 (eight years ago) link
nb i agree 100% that it's a radical and fantastic idea and i'm in favor 👍
― Mordy, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:48 (eight years ago) link
It's probably a mistake to imagine that the end of history has happened or is imminent. People have been wrong about that repeatedly.
― petulant dick master (silby), Friday, 29 January 2016 21:50 (eight years ago) link
history is... constantly ending... think abt it
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 21:56 (eight years ago) link
just a continuous, unending now... history's ended.. war to win all wars
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 22:01 (eight years ago) link
the technocratic paper of record examines the silicon valley-basic income connection http://www.vox.com/2016/1/28/10860830/y-combinator-basic-income
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 22:15 (eight years ago) link
other hypothesis: ppl figure out how to get paid under the table more easily, cash transactions flourish
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 29 January 2016 22:27 (eight years ago) link
i love cash tbh feels good to hold
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 22:28 (eight years ago) link
cold, hard, stinky cash
― rap is dad (it's a boy!), Friday, 29 January 2016 22:33 (eight years ago) link
its good
― lag∞n, Friday, 29 January 2016 22:34 (eight years ago) link
dean baker:
First, the robots taking all the jobs story is almost absurd on its face. How fast do we think productivity will grow that demand and reduced hours cannot keep pace? Productivity grew at a 3.0 percent annual rate from 1947 to 1973. We saw rapid growth in pay and living standards and very low rates of unemployment. Do we think the story would have looked worse if annual productivity growth was 4.0 percent?It is almost impossible to imagine a story where productivity growth suddenly jumps from its current rate of less than 1.0 percent annually to a pace so rapid that we are losing jobs left and right due to improvements in technology. It is possible to tell a story where the Fed raises interest rates to slow the economy and job creation even as technology is displacing more and more workers. That is a plausible story given that we have had several members of the Fed’s Open Market Committee that sets interest rates who have been worried about hyper-inflation. But the problem in that case is crazy-bad Fed policy, not robots taking jobs. And, we do the country a horrible disservice if we imply that the problem is somehow technology rather than the people running the Fed.
It is almost impossible to imagine a story where productivity growth suddenly jumps from its current rate of less than 1.0 percent annually to a pace so rapid that we are losing jobs left and right due to improvements in technology. It is possible to tell a story where the Fed raises interest rates to slow the economy and job creation even as technology is displacing more and more workers.
That is a plausible story given that we have had several members of the Fed’s Open Market Committee that sets interest rates who have been worried about hyper-inflation. But the problem in that case is crazy-bad Fed policy, not robots taking jobs. And, we do the country a horrible disservice if we imply that the problem is somehow technology rather than the people running the Fed.
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/cheap-thoughts-on-productivity-growth
― illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 30 January 2016 09:14 (eight years ago) link
Still have no idea the difference btwn this and yknow adequate unemployment benefits
― broderik f (darraghmac), Saturday, 30 January 2016 11:27 (eight years ago) link
About 10k/annum to you and me.
― ledge, Saturday, 30 January 2016 13:07 (eight years ago) link
Looking at the green party's policy document and it's more like 5k. Great, the magical unicorn that no-one has promised me is already failing to live up to expectations. https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/assets/files/Policy%20files/Basic%20Income%20Consultation%20Paper.pdf
― ledge, Saturday, 30 January 2016 13:30 (eight years ago) link
shd be owgg
― lag∞n, Saturday, 30 January 2016 15:19 (eight years ago) link
lol shd be pegged to just above the poverty line imo eliminate poverty altogether
― lag∞n, Saturday, 30 January 2016 15:20 (eight years ago) link
otm
you have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get unemployment benefits and the state workers reviewing crap are way overworked. likely to get some notice a year after you stopped collecting benefits related to some arcane piece of paper they think you didn't mail in triplicate
― μpright mammal (mh), Saturday, 30 January 2016 15:50 (eight years ago) link
just gimmie the cash! damn
― lag∞n, Saturday, 30 January 2016 16:01 (eight years ago) link
if we make it too easy for people to survive, will there still be any exceptionalism in america? will excellence itself become extinct, like hereditary aristocracy?
― reggie (qualmsley), Saturday, 30 January 2016 17:06 (eight years ago) link
do we have that much exceptionalism now? how many people are working a job they're exceptional at rather than the first one they were offered when they needed to pay rent?
― ciderpress, Saturday, 30 January 2016 17:32 (eight years ago) link
doesnt matter america has fulfilled its destiny of inventing the internet now its time to kick back in ones government issue yurt and game
― lag∞n, Saturday, 30 January 2016 17:34 (eight years ago) link
I imagine that a universal basic income for adults would fuel a boom in additional housing units, as more young adults can afford to live on their own. Also could spark increased migration to small towns, where cost of living is cheap, but well-paid jobs are few.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Saturday, 30 January 2016 21:05 (eight years ago) link
yeah my yurt is definitely gonna be in the middle of nowhere in northern new england or the upper midwest i've got this planned out already
― ciderpress, Saturday, 30 January 2016 22:02 (eight years ago) link