The All Things Political Topic - We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office

[Elerond]

3 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Im not sure I understand you, if I buy a house from someone or a  property developer and I get a loan from the bank the money goes to them. The bank doesnt have that money anymore and you pay the bank back

The money I give to the person who owned the property doesnt necessarily end up in the same bank? What do  you mean by " comes back to circulation  " ? Because the risk to the bank is where people dont pay back  the loan and they have to absorb the debt or auction the house which is never ideal 

 

I mean that developer usually takes loan for its project which it pays with money it gets from the home buyer/s

And developer also pays salary for its builders and other staff. So money spend in the houses don't just sit somewhere without being used and when money is in circulation bank is able to get more money from market to loan it to other buyers.  So as long as bank keeps interest rates that it pays to other banks and financiers lower than interest rate it takes from home buyers it is able to make profit with money it never had.

[alanschu]

4 hours ago, Elerond said:

So as long as bank keeps interest rates that it pays to other banks and financiers lower than interest rate it takes from home buyers it is able to make profit with money it never had.

This reminds me of some banks (and especially places like World Financial Group) that sell the idea to people to take out loans and invest it because they can get a better return on the market. That stuff can work but you have to be pretty willing and able to accept that type of risk and I find the WFG types especially are indifferent towards the economic realities of people as long as they can close out the loan.

Stuff like that I find pretty predatory. Kinda like selling the idea of a time share as an investment (my Dad got hooked on that once. Interestingly the way out was to literally just stop paying for it. They just accepted the breach of contract and I suspect had no issues looking on selling it to the next sap).

[Bartimaeus]

Sarah Palin defeated in Alaskan statewide congressional special election by Democratic Mary Peltola, first time Democrats have controlled the seat in 49 years. This seat will be re-contested with more or less the same candidates in November, but still a pretty notable loss.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[rjshae]

22 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Sarah Palin defeated in Alaskan statewide congressional special election by Democratic Mary Peltola, first time Democrats have controlled the seat in 49 years. This seat will be re-contested with more or less the same candidates in November, but still a pretty notable loss.

The interesting aspect for me was how the election was resolved using a ranked choice method, rather than the traditional plurality vote. My mathematical side is pleased with the outcome.

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, rjshae said:

The interesting aspect for me was how the election was resolved using a ranked choice method, rather than the traditional plurality vote. My mathematical side is pleased with the outcome.

While (probably?) not as bad as choose-one systems, it still seems like ranked choice voting has a little too much unnecessary strategic voting. As an example, see this Alaskan election: Republicans screwed themselves out of this seat by not voting strategically and eliminating the secondary Republican (28%) instead of Sarah Palin (31%) first. If the order had been switched and Sarah Palin eliminated first, the secondary Republican would have won 55-45 instead and we would not be talking about this*. Approval voting is the commonly touted alternative to ranked choice in order to further reduce strategic voting, but treats your approved choices as being equal without preference, which I don't think is great either (...and I think if the system were adopted, people would eventually start to figure out that the system will wash out their actual first choices if they also approve of secondary candidates, which would start to create some wacky results when you have a large field of candidates and highly splintered/non-plural approval percentages).

*Though the Democrat outperforming Alaska's generic Republican tilt of +15 would still be somewhat notable for November in the face of Democrats overperforming in every special election thus far, it's not quite as striking as her winning outright. Sarah Palin was a pretty uniquely disliked candidate (albeit one with a fervent base that clearly should not have voted her first over the other guy if they wanted Republicans to control this seat), which exaggerates how well Mary Peltota did. She will probably lose this seat in November unless voters make the same error.

(e): Fun fact: winning this Alaskan House seat more than doubled (104%!) the total landmass House Democrats control in the U.S., .

Edited September 1, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

22 hours ago, Elerond said:

I mean that developer usually takes loan for its project which it pays with money it gets from the home buyer/s

And developer also pays salary for its builders and other staff. So money spend in the houses don't just sit somewhere without being used and when money is in circulation bank is able to get more money from market to loan it to other buyers.  So as long as bank keeps interest rates that it pays to other banks and financiers lower than interest rate it takes from home buyers it is able to make profit with money it never had.

Yes absolutely, I didnt understand your initial post because I thought you were saying when loans are approved the money is now circulated in only a positive way. But the banks still need the loan repaid which means loans have to always be something that needs to be paid back 

But I see what you mean and I agree 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

4 hours ago, rjshae said:

The interesting aspect for me was how the election was resolved using a ranked choice method, rather than the traditional plurality vote. My mathematical side is pleased with the outcome.

Its a pity for the Democrat support predictions  that it happened in Alaska, is that a state where people can vote? I thought only wild animals and people who like the solidary nature of the wild  live there , I cant imagine they have much culture wars influence?

I am more concerned with the reality of how in swing states like Pennsylvania primary elections on both the left and right are being won by people who have more populist views or like to promote culture wars rhetoric. Its not good when candidates who have real political or business experience lose to the likes of Oz or Fetterman

And the decisions in Congress need to made by people have a real understanding of the consequences of what they vote for 

 

 

 

[rjshae]

10 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

While (probably?) not as bad as choose-one systems, it still seems like ranked choice voting has a little too much unnecessary strategic voting. As an example, see this Alaskan election: Republicans screwed themselves out of this seat by not voting strategically and eliminating the secondary Republican (28%) instead of Sarah Palin (31%) first. If the order had been switched and Sarah Palin eliminated first, the secondary Republican would have won 55-45 instead and we would not be talking about this*. Approval voting is the commonly touted alternative to ranked choice in order to further reduce strategic voting, but treats your approved choices as being equal without preference, which I don't think is great either (...and I think if the system were adopted, people would eventually start to figure out that the system will wash out their actual first choices if they also approve of secondary candidates, which would start to create some wacky results when you have a large field of candidates and highly splintered/non-plural approval percentages).

Approval voting is used in scientific bodies, and it makes sense to use that there as they are professional colleagues. I'm not concerned about the specific tactics this (ranked choice) voting method encourages as much as I am the general direction. The two party political divide in the USA is maintained by the plurality voting method and neither party wants it to change. Ranked/preferential voting methods have better mathematical properties that should help to erode this divide. It's not perfect, but it is an improvement.

Edited September 2, 2022 by rjshae

[rjshae]

6 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Its a pity for the Democrat support predictions  that it happened in Alaska, is that a state where people can vote? I thought only wild animals and people who like the solidary nature of the wild  live there , I cant imagine they have much culture wars influence?

Yes they can vote, and they have been influential at times in national politics.

[Gromnir]

HA! Good Fun!

ps we keep mentioning how not a biden fan is Gromnir. however,

is few things any recent President has said with which we agreed so unequivocal... and yet is more than passing curious how in 2022 a US President had to answer such a question the way he did not the mention the heretofore improbable pushback biden receives for making such observations. water is wet. not controversial. hardly praiseworthy.  brave new world territory.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Gromnir

[Zoraptor]

Liz Truss is British Prime Minister- and with the perfect situation for stability of the parliamentary Conservatives preferring Sunak while the general membership preferred Truss. Always great when you pick your current leader based on how well they can LARP a previous leader, and always fun when you get someone who is going to (try to; practically she'll be LARPing Meatloaf* at best rather than Maggie) cut taxes, reduce the deficit and subsidise energy, simultaneously.

*"two out three ain't bad"; deficit is a problem for the next government yet again

[alanschu]

8 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

deficit is a problem for the next government yet again

It seems increasingly that deficit is only a problem for the next government iff that government isn't a conservative one.

[Zoraptor]

George Osborne did at least try to live up to the Tories rhetoric on the deficit via his austerity policies, and he wasn't that long ago. Though that focus was disastrous in just about every other respect.

[Malcador]

Will be managed by making people work harder.  Apparently 48 hours a week isn't enough.

[Gromnir]

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

Speaking of Biden, he seems to think enough is enough and there is no reason for the US to become increasingly dependent on Chinese chip manufacturing

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/62803224

 

[alanschu]

9 hours ago, Gorth said:

Speaking of Biden, he seems to think enough is enough and there is no reason for the US to become increasingly dependent on Chinese chip manufacturing

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/62803224

 

This does remind me a lot of how I find some degree of Conservatives (although can come from anywhere) that will point to China as being the problem for things like climate change, human rights abuses, taking jobs etc... but that the interdependence was non-trivially impacted by a lot of American companies recognizing an opportunity to save on assorted manufacturing costs (and the labour costs associated with that) by moving stuff off shore. A British friend of mine got upset at some of his friends commenting about how China is so bad for emissions while UK is so much better, because you can't really be proud of that was a big reason why your emissions improved was that you relocated a lot of your emission production to places like China via multinational corporations.

I'm actually not fundamentally against globalization (IMO there's a bit of an idealized world where we functionally have no borders because we're all on some level politically equal, with sufficient mobility that opportunities are not gated by "you're lucky enough to be a citizen born in X") sowing some seeds for stuff like this to happen because, unfortunately, we're not functionally borderless with political equality. I think it's very complicated as there is probably some value in providing that type of employment and whatnot in local regions, although our world is pretty interconnected now and it will have some knock on effects that are not always easy to truly anticipate.

It is unusual to see some degree of protectionism coming from the US. Even Trump had some despite being ostensibly free market supporting Republican, with his China trade war stuff... which I feel ran afoul with a lot of the business/rich demographic that often did business with China, but is actually particularly resonant with poorer demographics that saw jobs disappear overseas (often couched in varying degrees of xenophobia that can get fostered by some drum beaters).

[Gromnir]

we don't like throwing judges under the bus unless is particular egregious. have been trying to give the judge in the mar-a-lago search the benefit o' the doubt. unfortunate, the recent judge cannon bit is one o' those, you don't need to be a lawyer to spot stoopid issues. 

*shrug*

the documents marked top secret, secret and classified seized as part o' the mar-a-lago search, a search the judge cannon believes were legit btw, through some inexplicable alchemy of the presidential records act and public opinion o' all things, may have become privileged and could possible need be returned to trump.

...

ignoring the fact the reputational harms the judge identified is o' the kind and nature suffered by any potential target o' a criminal investigation, so nothing unique whatsoever 'bout trump's situation, the notion that GOVERNMENT documents not belonging to trump could be somehow be beyond the reach o' doj and the national archives because o' the Presidential records act, which were written specific to guarantee ex-Presidents would not retain the work product o' their office OR because trump's private lawyers viewed or commented on those documents is so utter insane we have difficulty mustering the will to even form a worthy response... sans an unintelligible string o' expletives punctuated by a liz lemon eye-roll. 

literal every defendant accused o' stealing documents from a former employer will be overjoyed to hear they may need only have an attorney peruse the alleged ill-gotten gains to trigger a special master requirement... 'cause o' public distrust in the fbi or something?

we will note judge cannon did kinda throw herself under the bus (via a footnote? serious?) by observing how any Presidential records case should necessarily have the dc court as the proper jurisdiction, effective suggesting she were an improper magistrate for the review o' the question she were current addressing.

*le sigh*

based on her comments from the transcript, we thought it were likely judge cannon would grant a special master, but her legal reasoning for doing so is just so utter devoid o' legal support we were genuine nonplussed. 

wtf

HA! Good Fun!

 

[BruceVC]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/queen-elizabeth-ii-what-to-know-about-the-british-monarchs-health-and-royal-lines-of-succession-11662650702?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo 

 

The Queen is under medical supervision as her doctors are worried about her health,  she is 96 and has lived an incredible life. Lets hope she is okay   

Edited September 8, 2022 by BruceVC

[Malcador]

Coincidence this happens after she meets Truss ? I think not.

[alanschu]

20 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Coincidence this happens after she meets Truss ? I think not.

Speaking of Truss, I did enjoy this interaction hahaha.

 

[Malcador]

4 minutes ago, alanschu said:

Speaking of Truss, I did enjoy this interaction hahaha.

 

Surprised she didn't say he was the leader of Iran.

[Gorth]

8 hours ago, alanschu said:

Speaking of Truss, I did enjoy this interaction hahaha.

 

English translation: "He is guilty as hell, but we need their oil"

[Hurlshort]

11 hours ago, alanschu said:

Speaking of Truss, I did enjoy this interaction hahaha.

 

I mean, it's a dumb question. What would you expect her to say about the leader of another country on a criminal matter that the UK has no jurisdiction over? I guess I'd need more context as to the setting of the question, but it just looks like a political gotcha moment.

[BruceVC]

42 minutes ago, Hurlshort said:

I mean, it's a dumb question. What would you expect her to say about the leader of another country on a criminal matter that the UK has no jurisdiction over? I guess I'd need more context as to the setting of the question, but it just looks like a political gotcha moment.

Of course it is, its also one of these well known politically controversial and SJW questions because everyone must be "outraged " by the killing  and publicly criticize the Saudi king despite how everyone has moved on and its well known how significant Saudi Arabia is in global oil production especially with how Putin is trying to use  energy to push Russian militancy and hegemony 

And its also well known how the Saudi king  doesnt like this type of direct  and public attention and commentary, so its an obvious attempt at a "gotcha " 

She gave the most appropriate response, well played 

Edited September 9, 2022 by BruceVC