Can you be liberal and Christian at the same time?

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Spooky, May 23, 2018.

  1. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    With liberal Christian thieving KKK churchstate arsonists having cost the US more than 24 US Constitutions, 24 old testaments, 24 presidential presented old glorys for business excellence & 24 DOI after more than 200 + years why did these Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities sell out the USA for their second coming costs with a patriot act education of "death to the infidels" & "serve the Pope or die" promoting a society as one nation under God ...…..
     
  2. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    The law of economics creates ignorant lefty histrionics education as if the statistical probability of Nazington, Drugs of Christianity Crusades; formerly known as Washington, D.C. wouldn't have more supreme swastika up Uranus court national religion tautology where no one steals & burns US Constitutions in this country according to the Fuhrer's Brainwashing Inquisition support of KKK churchstate lynching enforcement serving & protecting sociopsychological human farming within the republic rising above genocide with a Christian Nation democracy of democide .
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
  3. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow, now that is just crazy on several levels!

    You're ignoring that the sales price of a house isn't dependent on what you paid for it. If you had to sell your house in 2012 you may have gotten pennies on the dollar.

    Perhaps it's also worth noting that when you borrow money it is a standard western assumption that you will pay for the privilege of holding that money. That privilege you pay for is independent of the value of your house. So, when you claim interest as part of the value of your house you're just fooling yourself.

    Also, paying taxes and insurance are costs of living, not something added to the value of a house. If I buy your house I don't care if you had it insured or if you paid your taxes.
     
  4. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK, there are lots of answers to this one.

    But, how about this:

    Analysts say that those with a 4 year degree earn on average at least a million dollars more over their lifetimes than do people with high school only.

    They pay taxes on that extra million dollars, which surely amounts to more than the cost of their education. Beyond that, they create economic activity through their use of the remainder of that extra million dollars.

    What you are doing is guessing that YOU know what education causes that extra million. I would claim you just plain do not know that. In my high tech career I've hired numerous people with degrees in English, in communications, in psychology, etc., because they know how to learn and have insights into important aspects of any serious product my group created. They understand or can learn about potential customers and market segments. They can identify and fix the stupid user interface decisions that often come out of those with a purely technical focus. Product art, sales, etc.

    Another point is that many of those getting 4 year degrees in fields we tech folks consider "softer" are taking that as a first step. Their economics degree, poly sci degree (or whatever) is their step toward business law masters programs where they can be invaluable in opening foreign markets or whatever.

    Again, you can NOT look at a college freshman and decide that his success in education is going to be less valuable to our total economy than the cost of his tuition.
     
  5. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The question I was asking was basically "would you be willing to sell a house after living in it for 20 years for the same price you paid for it?"
     
  6. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    At least a million dollars more in income should easily allow them to repay the cost of their education, while those who do not prosper greater as a result of acquiring a degree or dropping out of college should be held responsible for their decisions. People generally are more likely to exert greater effort when spending their own money to get their monies worth.
     
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And, I answered that.

    Your house has the value that the current market assigns to it through supply and demand.
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The point here is that it is worth it to America to have more people get 4 year degrees.

    And, if what it takes is tuition, that's well within the value that we'll get back.
     
  9. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    It certainly wasn't worth it to Byrd's liberal Christian KKK churchstate of West Nazi Germany Virginia master race democide; where the degree of every form of tyranny over the mind of man determined probability of whom got to graduate for America to profit .
     
  10. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're going to have to use plain text. I don't have your decoder ring.
     
  11. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And you would be willing to sell at the same or a lower price than your original cost?
    Take into account that our currency only diminishes in value over time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
  12. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The real point is that IF a college degree actually increases the individuals earnings, then the individual should pay for it. Note that the greater earnings will be paid for by the consumers who in that way are also paying for the tuition.
     
  13. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The ignore list helps.
     
  14. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're still missing the point that an object has the value that the economy assigns to it.

    You may or may not decide to sell your house at that value, but you can't really change what people will offer by very much. You can fix it up or do a better job of advertising, but in the end it will be up to buyers to decide what they are willing to pay for it.

    Normally speaking, a seller decides they want to sell their house. So, they hire an agent to evaluate the house to help you set an asking price. Then they will list your house. If you don't agree with the market analysis for your house, your agent may decide to walk. They only get paid if the house sells. You get to decide on offers made, but if someone offers your asking price you are committed to the sale.

    If you think your house is worth more than the market does, that's tough beans. Maybe you need to decide not to sell. And, the longer your house sits on the market the more people are going to guess there is something wrong with it - and the more your agent is likely to dump you.
     
  15. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Generally speaking, would you expect house values (prices) to rise, remain the same, or decrease over time, noting that recessions don't last forever.
     
  16. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Or the way during the Holocaust the object value was genocide to the economy or how talk to the hand is the value to liberal Christian democracy democide Nazi economics; as yet another forum message board is similarly engrossed in it's super ego valuing how America is surpassing Nazi Germany economics of the 1930's.
     
  17. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Decode Star Bellied Sneeches with stars upon thars where American Jews can't call American Nazis Nazis but a ring of American Nazis does whatever it's plainly liberal cross conditioned indoctrinated Islam Christiananality pedophile mentality chooses to.
     
  18. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I an certainly promoting an economic system that incorporates elements of central planning, operating alongside neoliberal competitive free markets.

    Why is this not rational?

    (The discussion between you and WillReadmore is based on considerations within the present economic system, which is patently failing many individuals, and nations; eg, Trumpy is certainly 'stirring the pot' internationally at present, in attempting to deal with these issues).

    The very concept of a full-time minimum wage that is below poverty level, is indicative of the failure of the present system

    Since it's not necessary for any individual to be living in poverty - the resources exist to house, feed, clothe and transport everyone, and connect everyone to the internet - therefore establishing universal above poverty level participation in the economy ought to be the minimum requirement of government.

    The person who cleans the bathrooms in the 'wealth-creating' private sector ought to be considered to have a minimum agreed (above poverty) economic value.

    I have already commented on the value of education which extends beyond that which in your words can "be put to gainful use", and I have shown that societies can immediately become much wealthier simply by printing the money (like private banks do) to pay for universal education to the highest levels, commensurate with students' abilities. Note: Einstein discovered that E=mc.c ,and he bequeathed that (in the future, infinite wealth creating) teaching to society, for free. Therefore education itself can be 'free', without implications for inflation, because no ' limited' or scarce, physical resources were consumed when Einstein bequeathed that discovery to the world.

    Obviously taxation is one of the great ideological divides. A public sector that can fund itself, in order to ensure universal above poverty level participation in the economy without claims on private sector wealth, will go a long way to eliminating this ideological divide. Btw, a person who is, eg, assisting an elderly person with activities of daily living, to remain in their own home, is certainly a "productive member of society", even though he is not involved in the process of creating consumer goods, which appears to be your sole measurement of 'value' for the economy.

    Will you insist that such public sector money printing will result in inflation, when the money is being used to fund desirable, and 'valuable' activity? Why should this cause inflation any more than money printing by private banks to facilitate competitive, profit-based resource consuming activity, when the public sector does not compete for, or place any extra demand on private sector development of limited physical resources? (not even taking into account the tremendous private sector waste of resources eg in advertising junk for a consumer society addicted to junk consumption, production and transportation of unhealthy processed foods and beverages, and the costs of transporting same).

    You and WillReadmore have discussed this in terms of orthodox neoliberal (supply-side) economics.

    For my part, I consider housing to be a basic human right; obviously there is a role for the pubic sector, where private sector housing prices are beyond the reach of a basic living wage. Therefore I consider your question to be of import to the private sector only.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2018
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Amen.

    I'm not actually a supply sider - I tried to keep it simple for the specific question at hand.

    Here in Seattle analysts say we need 14,000 more living units that are within "low income" reach - a rather startling measure of how far off we are from meeting the goal of housing for humans. Plus, the price of housing in Seattle continues to climb and nation-leading rates.

    The variety of reasons people are living on the street is a strong clue that there isn't any pure economic model that is going to solve the problem. We're going to need all possible improvements to get where we need to be.
     
  20. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is substantially what exists now, and your emboldened words I presume to mean 'by the Federal government'?

    People should earn, at a minimum, according to the value of the work they perform.

    Printing money does not create wealth, it simply results over time the devaluation of the money as prices and wages adjust upwards to reflect the true value of the exchange medium relative to the goods and services it is exchanged for.

    People value others for many differing reasons, and I wholly accept and support private charities.

    Banks don't 'print' money, but the interest charged and paid by banks increases the need to print more money occasionally, and inflation is a result.


    Perhaps Quonset huts in heavy industrial areas would help, providing them with most basic and inexpensive shelter and nearby access to prospective employment.
     
  21. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The primary question I've yet to see answered is, if initially something is worth zero and years later things which initially had a value of $1 have acquired a value of $100 as a result of inflation, what would that which initially was worth zero be worth?
    0 1 2 4
    0 2 4 8
    0 4 8 16
    0 8 16 32
    0 16 32 64
     
  22. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Well Nazism which was worth zero to humanity; now has the liberal Christian supreme swastika up Uranus court of lynching enforcement economics worth an acquired thru national religion Islam Christiananality pedophile mentality jihad crusade pyramid scheme as standard for survival of the fittest fascists thieving US Constitution & old glory arsonists; inflating their master race super egos whilst emptying others pockets & beliefs values; making one nation under God with equal justice under law in worth far less than 21st century Fourth Reich Nazism.
     
  23. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We misunderstand one-another completely, on this point.

    The Federal govt. is operating within the global neoliberal competitive free market system. The system itself is dysfunctional; not only does it entrench poverty within nations, it entrenches trade disadvantage between nations (hence the current international mayhem, despite the existence of the WTO which is supposed to enable orderly trade relations).

    By the introduction of an "element of central planning", I mean creation of an institution with global oversight, eg, along the lines envisioned by JM Keynes in his "clearing union" concept.

    And as for internal (national) affairs, with the current system it makes little difference whether the Dems or Repubs are in govt., as far as those living in poverty are concerned, because the Left will never be able to raise enough public funds via taxation to eradicate entrenched poverty. (I sent a note to Bernie Sanders making this exact point, but did not receive a reply).

    .

    You say "should" ; and I suppose, given the current neoliberal supply side economic orthodoxy, which means we must all compete against one-another for our economic position in the community, then you need to believe this so that your level of prosperity (your own "value"/wealth) is not reduced by any dreaded 'socialistic' tendencies in the community.

    But I am seeking a system that assigns "value" to public sector employment funded via money printing as described, separate from the private sector, to overcome this impasse.

    Why do prices and wages adjust upwards if eg, unemployed teachers are paid by a separate govt account funded by money printing? (The elimination of the unemployment welfare bill itself would create huge efficiency gains in the economy).

    But sufficient funds to eradicate poverty will never be raised either by generally acceptable taxation levels, or by "private charities".

    [However, I do think parties of the Left should look more closely and transparently at the issue of " tax justice", by examining exactly how much tax is paid at each level of income; the Repubs want taxes as low as possible over all income ranges, but if the electorate could see that the tax system is unjust for the majority of people, given astronomical CEO wages etc (no -one is "worth'" that much, least of all parasitic bankers with their fancy financial derivative creations - "financial weapons of mass destruction", according to Buffett) then govt might be able to raise more money for worthwhile community causes, such as eliminating homelessness].

    So who does 'print' the bloody stuff......?

    Bit of a skinflint when considering other peoples amenities?...... in a system that cannot even guarantee a living wage for fulltime work.....but I do understand your concerns, as outlined above.

    [btw, if you had bought a house in Detroit in 1960 for say $20k , then after 30 years instead of "inflating" to say the expected $200k, it would likely have become worthless...oh what a wonderful system, (to borrow from the Toyota advert)].
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
  24. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is your primary question?

    Digging a hole and filling it in again has no value, but any constructive or desirable participation in the economy always has value, regardless of the value a competitive, profit-based neoliberal economic system might assign to said participation.

    My primary question is: how much are Einstein's and countless other discoveries worth, even thought they were bequeathed for free?
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
  25. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm fervently in opposition of continued movement towards a "One World" form of government.
    .

    Yes "should" is the appropriate word. Competition is a factor we each have to deal with in our lives, and the 'socialistic' tendencies of a community are not so imposing that they cannot be easily dealt with.
    I don't understand your obsession with 'money printing'. Public sector employment should be no greater than what the people accept to be needed/necessary and are collectively willing to pay for.
    .

    Printing money is not creating additional value, but only reduces the relative value of the total money that exists. Even during the gold rush days, when the miners were finding more gold, the cost of their needs and wants locally adjusted upwards relative to the value of the gold.
    .

    The most rational solution to most problems are found at their source. Poverty generally is a result of the supply of people exceeding the employment needs of the community.
    .

    The Treasury, actually the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
    .

    What is considered 'full time' work?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2018

Share This Page