Students support socialism but think like capitalist

[ch33zw1z]

So I guess the take away here is we should limit how much someone can earn.

 

[soulcougher73]

I’m pretty convinced we have no resident conservatives who are actually smart. Not even a hint of spark in your brains. I’m beginning to think it’s all Republicans. They just dumb people.

 

[pmv]

As a capitalist, I believe anyone whose GPA falls too low, but is judged 'too big to faiil' should get a GPA bailout. Plus of course you should be able to inhereit your parent's GPA, and to lend it out at rate of GPA interest to your fellow students, rather than have to study for it yourself.

 

[Paratus]

Obviously in a capitalist GPA system the ones who work hard get the good GPAs, the ones who don’t get poor GPAs and the ones who are stupid but rich have their mommy’s and daddy’s buy them the best GPAs. Which is fair because anything else is evil socialism.

 

[Mai72]

Many of these "socialist" are all going to change their stance when they all enter the workforce. Why? Because living is EXPENSIVE! Their pie in the sky ideas will all fade when they are in the workforce for a few years and discover that the government is stealing 1/3 of their paycheck via taxes. Their attitudes will change when they put in 60 hours and get little back. I think it's funny that many of these people who scream at the wealthy for income inequality all have smartphones, apple products, come from nice homes, nice cars, and all going to expensive universities.

BTW, a high GPA doesn't coorelate to finanical success. I've met plenty of people who didn't attend college, yet they were millionaires. They were just willing to outwork most people, and they gained the skills needed to succeed. You can have a nice living as a college grad, but will most of these grads develop wealth? No. They'll instead fall into the trap of consummerism which will in turn keep them trapped spinning their wheels. Like a hamster in a cage. Spend spend spend. I have to go to work, so I can pay for things I really don't care about anymore. And, the higher you move up financially, the more you are taxed. That's called bracket creep. The wealthy know this, so they find ways to shield their wealth from uncle Sam.

 

[ivwshane]

Many of these "socialist" are all going to change their stance when they all enter the workforce. Why? Because living is EXPENSIVE! Their pie in the sky ideas will all fade when they are in the workforce for a few years and discover that the government is stealing 1/3 of their paycheck via taxes. Their attitudes will change when they put in 60 hours and get little back. I think it's funny that many of these people who scream at the wealthy for income inequality all have smartphones, apple products, come from nice homes, nice cars, and all going to expensive universities.

BTW, a high GPA doesn't coorelate to finanical success. I've met plenty of people who didn't attend college, yet they were millionaires. They were just willing to outwork most people, and they gained the skills needed to succeed. You can have a nice living as a college grad, but will most of these grads develop wealth? No. They'll instead fall into the trap of consummerism which will in turn keep them trapped spinning their wheels. Like a hamster in a cage. Spend spend spend. I have to go to work, so I can pay for things I really don't care about anymore. And, the higher you move up financially, the more you are taxed. That's called bracket creep. The wealthy know this, so they find ways to shield their wealth from uncle Sam.

You clearly don't know how taxes work. /facepalm

 

[UglyCasanova]

Good Grief putting in a decent social safety net that everyone benefits from is hardly giving the idle handouts.

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

 

[Mai72]

You clearly don't know how taxes work. /facepalm

My defintion of bracket crrep was lame, and I'll admit that. But, I was on the right track.

Bracket creep: https://www.aier.org/article/bracket-creep-real-problem-taxpayers

Nothing raises Americans’ ire more than tax increases, but most of us don’t know that we face a hidden income-tax hike almost every year that the economy grows. Since 2013, these tax increases have cost the median earner about $195, and higher earners have paid thousands. This seems counterintuitive, since rates have not changed since 2013 and brackets have been adjusted for inflation. But due to the peculiar math of a progressive tax system, our tax burden tends to drift upward over time. The phenomenon is called bracket creep.

When an individual gets a new job at a higher salary, a larger proportion of his earnings are in a higher tax bracket, meaning he pays a higher percentage of his income in taxes. Agree or disagree with the system, this is how it was designed. But inflation and real economic growth, economy-wide forces that tend to push incomes up over time, have the same effect. When these forces cause everyone’s salaries to rise, people who work the same job and stay at the same point on the income distribution will pay a higher tax rate.

 

[brycejones]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

derp

 

[brycejones]

My defintion of bracket crrep was lame, and I'll admit that. But, I was on the right track.

Bracket creep: https://www.aier.org/article/bracket-creep-real-problem-taxpayers

And guess what it was made worse by the "tax cut".......

Yes the GOP did that.

 

[Paratus]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

The social safety net is what protects you when failing out of school.

Besides many conservatives want to make up their own answers to science issues and have them count so I can understand your point.

 

[Jhhnn]

Many of these "socialist" are all going to change their stance when they all enter the workforce. Why? Because living is EXPENSIVE! Their pie in the sky ideas will all fade when they are in the workforce for a few years and discover that the government is stealing 1/3 of their paycheck via taxes. Their attitudes will change when they put in 60 hours and get little back. I think it's funny that many of these people who scream at the wealthy for income inequality all have smartphones, apple products, come from nice homes, nice cars, and all going to expensive universities.

BTW, a high GPA doesn't coorelate to finanical success. I've met plenty of people who didn't attend college, yet they were millionaires. They were just willing to outwork most people, and they gained the skills needed to succeed. You can have a nice living as a college grad, but will most of these grads develop wealth? No. They'll instead fall into the trap of consummerism which will in turn keep them trapped spinning their wheels. Like a hamster in a cage. Spend spend spend. I have to go to work, so I can pay for things I really don't care about anymore. And, the higher you move up financially, the more you are taxed. That's called bracket creep. The wealthy know this, so they find ways to shield their wealth from uncle Sam.

The old Libertopian characterization of taxes as theft... how quaint. How utterly delusional.

 

[whm1974]

The old Libertopian characterization of taxes as theft... how quaint. How utterly delusional.

As I know all to well as I fell for that as well.

 

[Vic]

I'm a diehard capitalist. The problem here is that the 'conservative' definition of socialism has become any instance of the public's money being spent for the benefit of the people, rather than into the deep pockets of their masters.

 

[Vic]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

Why not have a system with no teachers, just grades? Why should I have to pay for your teacher just because you're unable to learn the material on your own?

 

[Moonbeam]

Lets not lose sight of the fact that conservatives have been scientifically demonstrated to be low level thinkers. These simple minded comparisons between GPA and income are about as deep as they can think. Conservatives are highly reactive to emotional distress and avoid any ideas that challenge their security like ideas that are nuanced or include shades of gray. This is exactly as one would predict from the fact that self reported conservatives have brain scans that show larger amygdalas and smaller cingulates than self reported liberals. Everybody tries to avoid negative feelings and they have brains that exaggerate feelings of threat rather than repress them in favor of reasoning. In today's modern America, this phenomena has reached paranoid proportions such that conservatives are living in an alternate reality bubble and threaten everybody's safety. Madness has taken control of our political system.

 

[Jaskalas]

But, under government regulations, the productive workers must divide their product with the idle.

Many of these "socialist" are all going to change their stance when they all enter the workforce.

Enter the workforce? You are selling the same recycled propaganda as the quote above.

I mentioned the working poor.

• Today 73 percent of workers earning under $15 per hour nationwide are older than 25.
• Households with at least one worker earning under $15 an hour include over:
  • 125 million people
  • 31.5 million children
  • That’s more than 42 percent of the children in the US.

Enter the workforce? Do you hate the American people so, that you ignorantly throw this scorn onto them?

These people, through no fault of their own, are part of an economic system that increasingly leaves them behind. Impoverished and destitute. In need of greater subsidies to sustain them. And these workers, they are consumers. Capitalism REQUIRES their health and vitality. We need them to have a sizable stake of economic liquidity so that they can fully participate in the flow of goods and services. So the rich people you ignorantly pride yourself with, may continue to enjoy that wealth.

You are right Mai, something has been taken from us. It is called Income Inequality, and it is increasing. Another way of saying it, workers today earn less than their parents did. Their children will earn even less. That's also called Trickle Down.

Back in 2008, for some reason, we all started talking about the economy a whole lot. Back then I followed the Libertarian mantra. You know it well. But the posters here had some real points on providing Stimulus to ensure we maintain a certain level on economic liquidity. So starting around that time I was real curious, and starting looking around for various solutions. Democrats were quite vocal regarding their solutions. Where were the Republicans? What are their solutions?

10 years later, that question has never been answered. I have since concluded that Republicans have no plan.

Let me repeat. Republicans understand economics SO BADLY that they think we can fuck over the workers, the consumers of their products, and somehow they can still wake up behind their gated walls without the world burning down around them tomorrow. News flash, you are still part of this world. If our people are deprived of enough liquidity, enough value for their labor, !@#$ is going to hit the fan real quick. Real bad. American workers are ALREADY, TO THIS DAY, poor enough for that to occur. Except we have tax returns and food stamps and a real hodgepodge of bureaucratic "welfare" programs intended to try and keep people afloat. So they can still participate in the economy and not go French Revolution on our arses.

We need a fully realized, fully funded, a fully robust social safety net. We need to prepare for tomorrow by absorbing the lessons of the past 40 years of trickle down. And what it means for us as Capitalism evolves and drops labor. We can plan for and adapt to properly accommodate these changes. We can sustain our people by ensuring they will ALWAYS have a piece of the American economy. We just need to give it to them. Novel idea right? Keeping the consumers... consuming. By making sure they have enough cash. By giving it to them, one way or another.

Enter... Basic Income. Paid for by a 25% tax which, ironically, can pay for itself by virtue of the "nest egg". A baby is born, $1,000/mo becomes $216,000 by the time they turn 18 years old. Find a partner and PAY CASH for a house. Poof, mortgages and rents are history for over half the population, and massively reduced for the rest. Suddenly, for workers, that 25% has paid for itself with the practical abolition of those monthly house payments. And you still have that $1,000/mo income for each person coming in. Regardless of employment or location. Americans will be free to move and work where ever they please, with the security of knowing they can take their time to do it right. To work towards their dreams, instead of slaving for or begging for basic necessities.

In America's short lived golden age, our workers enjoyed more wealth than today. It's about time we gave it back to them. For the greater prosperity of our country. To SAVE our markets and our Capitalist system. You cannot survive if you leave your consumers behind. Basic economic liquidity 101. It's past time we did something positive on that front.

 

[UNCjigga]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

It's called Pass/D/Fail, and it's how all the capitalists with MBAs from very fine schools are graded.

 

[alcoholbob]

Soviet Union had fine scientists and engineers, and did more with less their paltry resources in the space race...also China has some of the best universities and produces far more engineers and scientists than the U.S and has a far better academic tradition. Seems like OP is conflating academics with economics.

 

[pmv]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

Where does this come from - this constant confusion between 'socialism' and 'charity'?

"Socialism" has never really been about "compassion". That would be charity, or maybe even Christianity (or religion in general).

The traditional socialist complaint about capitalism is not that it's not 'compassionate', it's that it simply doesn't _work_ for a great proportion of the population. And socialism isn't supposed to be about the fortunate benevolently giving some stuff to the unfortunate. The question is whether capitalism can meet the needs of the majority. If it fails to do that, that majority will withdraw their consent from it (there's no reason why they should consent, if it doesn't meet their needs) and it will be in catastrophic trouble.

I'm not even agreeing with the socialist perspective. I don't believe it has panned out. I'm just pointing out it's not what conservatives seem to constantly think it is (a form of charity that depends on the consent of the 'haves').

What is actually being talked about is not socialism anyway, it's social-democracy or capitalism plus a little bit of redistribution/strategic state intervention. And that is a highly technical question of economics, not one that a dumb GPA analogy addresses at all. There's just no comparison between the two things - there is no accumulation of grades akin to accumulation of capital, no such thing as a grades liquidity crisis, no grade-based equivalent of a financial market, no inheritance, no increasing returns to scale, no class-stratification, no asymmetry of information, none of it. It's just a poor analogy, one that seems to be based on refusing to acknowledge that there's any more to economics than the concept of 'charity'.

 

[Blackjack200]

We need an academic safety net so that nobody fails a class. Share your grades if you’re compassionate.

What is the purpose of your metaphorical school? Is it for the students to learn as much as possible, or is it to sort the class into winners and losers? The deserving and the non-deserving?

 

[Blackjack200]

Where does this come from - this constant confusion between 'socialism' and 'charity'?

"Socialism" has never really been about "compassion". That would be charity, or maybe even Christianity (or religion in general).

The traditional socialist complaint about capitalism is not that it's not 'compassionate', it's that it simply doesn't _work_ for a great proportion of the population. And socialism isn't supposed to be about the fortunate benevolently giving some stuff to the unfortunate. The question is whether capitalism can meet the needs of the majority. If it fails to do that, that majority will withdraw their consent from it (there's no reason why they should consent, if it doesn't meet their needs) and it will be in catastrophic trouble.

I'm not even agreeing with the socialist perspective. I don't believe it has panned out. I'm just pointing out it's not what conservatives seem to constantly think it is (a form of charity that depends on the consent of the 'haves').

What is actually being talked about is not socialism anyway, it's social-democracy or capitalism plus a little bit of redistribution/strategic state intervention. And that is a highly technical question of economics, not one that a dumb GPA analogy addresses at all. There's just no comparison between the two things - there is no accumulation of grades akin to accumulation of capital, no such thing as a grades liquidity crisis, no grade-based equivalent of a financial market, no inheritance, no increasing returns to scale, no class-stratification, no asymmetry of information, none of it. It's just a poor analogy, one that seems to be based on refusing to acknowledge that there's any more to economics than the concept of 'charity'.

You are the only one in this thread with a grasp of this, I think. One important critique of capitalism by socialists is that it facilitates the theft of labor by the elites.

I can’t argue with your belief that socialism hasn’t “panned out”. But I would argue that just means we need to find new models, because capitalism is making us miserable and it will kill us all before long.

 

[fskimospy]

They are both something you work to acquire.

You’re right, it is common that people are born with a 900.0 GPA and then continue to earn more GPA working at their dad’s GPA company.

Whoever made this video is either an idiot or is trying to dupe you.

 

[JSt0rm]

Interesting video, the students all say they favor the idea of socialism and spreading the wealth around, as one put it there’s a lot of excess in America. But asked if they would be willing to share part of their gpa with students with less high of a gpa the breaks screech, the responses are all "no I worked hard for it, it’s mine". You can see them visually rethinking their world right there in front of the camera, good stuff.

Do you think you have deep thought?

 

[fskimospy]

I wonder how many times the person who made that video had to edit out people calling them a moron for making such a dumb comparison.