Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Great Minarchistan]

OH SH-

In all seriousness though, how can you be against 'usury' while not having any issue with rental of any good incl. housing?

Quit being pedantic and take a joke.

wait I thought you really did oppose usury

[Nakena]

Supposedly that didn worked very good I read somewhere. It may have been on NSG not sure though. Tito is still my all time favorite socialist. (sic!)

Well it worked better than the Soviet style system, but it did not work out as well as hope true.
Plus he borrowed way too much money to subsidize them.

The best option is a usually a mixed ownership model.
At least for the big corporations.

I believe a mixed model might be favorable to either the one or other extreme. I am quite pragmatic when it comes to economy.

[Jolthig]

Supposedly that didn worked very good I read somewhere. It may have been on NSG not sure though. Tito is still my all time favorite socialist. (sic!)

Well it worked better than the Soviet style system, but it did not work out as well as hope true.
Plus he borrowed way too much money to subsidize them.

The best option is a usually a mixed ownership model.
At least for the big corporations.

Pretty much after he died Yugoslavia went down the toilet

[Totally Not OEP]

Quit being pedantic and take a joke.

wait I thought you really did oppose usury

Unlike many autists on Right, I recognize that interest does play a role in economics and can't realistically be replaced. With that said, parasitical practices and such really do need to be ended/curtailed.

[Great Minarchistan]

wait I thought you really did oppose usury

Unlike many autists on Right, I recognize that interest does play a role in economics and can't realistically be replaced. With that said, parasitical practices and such really do need to be ended/curtailed.

based

[Soviet Tankistan]

Supposedly that didn worked very good I read somewhere. It may have been on NSG not sure though. Tito is still my all time favorite socialist. (sic!)

Well it worked better than the Soviet style system, but it did not work out as well as hope true.
Plus he borrowed way too much money to subsidize them.

The best option is a usually a mixed ownership model.
At least for the big corporations.

The Soviet Union had four different systems.

[Nea Byzantia]

Well it worked better than the Soviet style system, but it did not work out as well as hope true.
Plus he borrowed way too much money to subsidize them.

The best option is a usually a mixed ownership model.
At least for the big corporations.

The Soviet Union had four different systems.

All of which failed...

[Soviet Tankistan]

The Soviet Union had four different systems.

All of which failed...

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

[Jolthig]

All of which failed...

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

Long term results.

[Nea Byzantia]

All of which failed...

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

Definitely results.

[Novus America]

All of which failed...

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

[Totally Not OEP]

In the overall topic of the family, I think quite a bit could be done to improve the situation if we get the economics right. Money is the number one cause of divorces, delayed marriages and child bearing, and is often an element in the second largest factor of failed marriages, infidelity.

Now this I support.
Making families financially more stable is much superior than trying to terrorize people into staying in bad marriages (which would just discourage new ones).

Make families economically viable, more people have them.
Make draconian family laws and you actually discourage them.
Interesting note, Iran has a lower birth rate than the US.

Anyways boomers aside divorce rates have been dropping. And for boomers they are past child raising age anyways.

Institute a Border Adjustment Tax (BAT) of 20% and use it to fund the creation of the patched Cost-of-Living Refund (CLR), which would replace the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and pay out up to $4,000 annually to single workers and $8,000 for married couples.

[Fahran]

Now you engage in Lawyering, this is some real Protocols shit right here.

The only protocols I adhere to are sorority protocols, sir. And that is why my life is sadness.

Let the Wizardry begin...

Says the Orthodox Christian. Y'all have mysticism for days, Rasputin.

[Soviet Tankistan]

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

Long term results.

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

Definitely results.

And there were results. The USSR had the second largest economy and was a military powerhouse.

[Jolthig]

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

Yep. It is why Gorbachev became leader of the USSR because of the USSR's bad economics. Especially due to Brezhnev's continued stagnation of the economy and wasting it on Afghanistan

[Nea Byzantia]

Long term results.

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

Definitely results.

And there were results. The USSR had the second largest economy and was a military powerhouse.

And killed some 60 million Russian Orthodox Christians...

[Jolthig]

Long term results.

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

Stalin may have gotten the country industrialized, but at the cost of famines, purging the best generals, and mass production during World War II with help from the US's Lend Lease. Khrushchev also slightly liberalized the USSR economy. No doubt the USSR prospered for a while until Brezhnev.

[Soviet Tankistan]

Is failure determined by the method of production or the results?

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

The post-Stalin system started the decay. It failed long term while perestroika failed short term. The price system was not responsible, as it was previously a production and not a retail economy.

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

Yep. It is why Gorbachev became leader of the USSR because of the USSR's bad economics. Especially due to Brezhnev's continued stagnation of the economy and wasting it on Afghanistan

Gorbachev's economics were at fault along with Brezhnev's and Khrushchev's. He saw a problem in the non-Stalinist economy and made it worse by liberalization.

[Novus America]

Long term results.

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

Definitely results.

And there were results. The USSR had the second largest economy and was a military powerhouse.

And it was completely unbalanced and unsustainable. Growth for the sake of growth is not sustainable. Besides the NEP, the Soviet Union never developed a a proper demand based allocation and pricing model.

[Jolthig]

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

The post-Stalin system started the decay. It failed long term while perestroika failed short term. The price system was not responsible, as it was previously a production and not a retail economy.

Yep. It is why Gorbachev became leader of the USSR because of the USSR's bad economics. Especially due to Brezhnev's continued stagnation of the economy and wasting it on Afghanistan

Gorbachev's economics were at fault along with Brezhnev's and Khrushchev's. He saw a problem in the non-Stalinist economy and made it worse by liberalization.

Gorbachev's economics probably failed because he also introduced democracy. Compare with Deng Xiaoping of China, he was a lot more successful due to the dictatorship retained. Yeah they stagnated in 1989 but revived in 1992 after the tour.

[Soviet Tankistan]

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

And there were results. The USSR had the second largest economy and was a military powerhouse.

And killed some 60 million Russian Orthodox Christians...

Magic Stalin of course, he can murder 80 million Russians in his sleep without making a dent on the unstable and slowly reproducing population. This arcane sorcery is exactly why communism should not be allowed to prosper.

The system ended when a new one begun. Stalin's economy is not at fault for Gorbachev's when it ended after Malenkov. Similarly, the NEP is unrelated to the rest of the Soviet economy.

Stalin may have gotten the country industrialized, but at the cost of famines, purging the best generals, and mass production during World War II with help from the US's Lend Lease. Khrushchev also slightly liberalized the USSR economy. No doubt the USSR prospered for a while until Brezhnev.

Khrushchev started the end by spending too much on irrelevant endeavors.

[Novus America]

The long term results. Clearly the Soviets Union failed long term. Allocation without a properly functioning price system does not work.

The post-Stalin system started the decay. It failed long term while perestroika failed short term. The price system was not responsible, as it was previously a production and not a retail economy.

Yep. It is why Gorbachev became leader of the USSR because of the USSR's bad economics. Especially due to Brezhnev's continued stagnation of the economy and wasting it on Afghanistan

Gorbachev's economics were at fault along with Brezhnev's and Khrushchev's. He saw a problem in the non-Stalinist economy and made it worse by liberalization.

Production for the sake of production is wasteful. And unsustainable.
Why produce what people do not need?

Best example is Mao. Demanded massive increase in the production of steel, but just for the sake of making steel. Initially production (of super crappy steel and pig iron) skyrocketed. And then the whole thing crashed because there was insufficient demand and it pulled resources away from more productive uses.

You produce to meet a demand, not just for the lols.

Gorbachev did not even properly liberalize the economy. He demanded the production units become self sustaining government owned corporations, but refused to allow real price and currency reform. Naturally that blew up.

The PRC liberalized price and currency FIRST, before trying to create self sufficient enterprises.
Which is why they succeeded and the Soviets did not.

[Totally Not OEP]

Now this I support.
Making families financially more stable is much superior than trying to terrorize people into staying in bad marriages (which would just discourage new ones).

Make families economically viable, more people have them.
Make draconian family laws and you actually discourage them.
Interesting note, Iran has a lower birth rate than the US.

Anyways boomers aside divorce rates have been dropping. And for boomers they are past child raising age anyways.

Institute a Border Adjustment Tax (BAT) of 20% and use it to fund the creation of the patched Cost-of-Living Refund (CLR), which would replace the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and pay out up to $4,000 annually to single workers and $8,000 for married couples.

While we're at it, pass Warren's proposed Wealth Tax and Real Corporate Profits tax to fund the creation of a Negative Income Tax set at 150% of the poverty line with a 33% phase out rate.

[Novus America]

The post-Stalin system started the decay. It failed long term while perestroika failed short term. The price system was not responsible, as it was previously a production and not a retail economy.
Gorbachev's economics were at fault along with Brezhnev's and Khrushchev's. He saw a problem in the non-Stalinist economy and made it worse by liberalization.

Gorbachev's economics probably failed because he also introduced democracy. Compare with Deng Xiaoping of China, he was a lot more successful due to the dictatorship retained. Yeah they stagnated in 1989 but revived in 1992 after the tour.

It was more Deng understood the need for a functioning price and currency system.
My cat understands economics better than Gorbachev.

[Novus America]

Institute a Border Adjustment Tax (BAT) of 20% and use it to fund the creation of the patched Cost-of-Living Refund (CLR), which would replace the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and pay out up to $4,000 annually to single workers and $8,000 for married couples.

While we're at it, pass Warren's proposed Wealth Tax and Real Corporate Profits tax to fund the creation of a Negative Income Tax set at 150% of the poverty line with a 33% phase out rate.

Definitely a NIT based on the poverty line. I am somewhat partial to the Fair Tax proposal but not as the only tax. Border adjustment is good, the key is we have to be careful with any tax to prevent capital flight and loss of competitiveness.

We definitely need an outsourcing tax, and tax corporations exactly on the profits they make selling stuff here, not more shifting the profits to Ireland.