• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Five Economic Reforms Millennials Should Be Fighting For

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


Jun 3, 2002
And yet this article reads *exactly* like a compendium of virtually every leftwing-loon economic non-argument we're all subjected to on a daily basis.

One does like to think that belief in such old, discredited ideas is just tongue-in-cheek, but no, people actually believe such horseshit. Unfortunately, far too many holding a public office as well.
Link it, troll.


Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
lol. . . There is a bit of cognitive dissonance required to support the working class and illegal aliens isn't there?
Anti immigration policy is big government. You realize that, yes?


Golden Member
Oct 26, 2004
I find the level of screeching about communism, left wing loons, etc. all very amusing in regards to number 2 on that list. A negative income tax is hardly a new or novel idea, the idea to pay everyone a basic amount of money has been floating around forever. Even the left wing loon economist Milton Friedman supported a version of a negative income tax for low earners.


Of course, we all know Milton Friedman was a pinko-commie-hippie-America-hater so I will let you resume your regularly scheduled frothing.


Jul 29, 2001
I know of the existence of sovereign wealth funds, but not their specifics. I would imagine that there would be rules against a sovereign wealth fund investing within its own borders - having your own government also be your landlord / client who is trying to make money from you sounds like an enormous conflict of interest.

Definitely not against the idea in principle, though.
But that's the thing... the sovereign wealth fund doesn't have to have the fiduciary duty to maximize profit.

Norway's fund has a bunch of large companies excluded from its holdings for ethical reasons. It can't invest in tobacco, nuclear arms, land mines, or companies that commit human rights violations (they pulled their investment in Walmart in 2006 because of this).

Now that said, the sovereign wealth fund could decide what is best for the country in terms of return. Should a Canadian sovereign wealth fund charge market rates for the high-end condos it owns in downtown Vancouver? Or should it build some mid-range condos instead, accepting a lower return but providing some social benefit to the neighbourhood?