addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1linklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Re: [The-Burnsville-Socrates-Cafe] 9/4/12 questions and discussion

From: Andrusela
Sent on: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:42 AM
I want to hear some discussion on that "just wage" question some time.
Be sure to ask that one again, whoever suggested it. I'm likely to
forget by the time I join you again on October 30th.

On 9/10/12, Jon Anderson <[address removed]> wrote:
> 9/4/12 questions and discussion
>
> 1-what is a just wage?5
> 2-if we raise taxes on the middle class and lower taxes for the upper class
> what will happen?4
> 3-why can't our elections be about information instead of the endless
> campaigning high price and dirty tricks?6
> 4-what do statistics prove?3
>
> ====================­====================­=
>
>
> why can't our elections be about information instead of the endless
> campaigning, high price and dirty tricks?
>
> Julene: so much wasted time and money!
>
> Jim: do you honestly think people are informed enough without the way it
> is?
>
> Julene: just focus on what each guy can do instead of negative campaigning.
>
> Jim: how bout a jury? Attack ads are like non-credible witnesses
>
> Julene: without negative ads we'd have time for real information to be
> disseminated and argued over.
>
> Jim: isn't negative ads merely criticizing somebody's ideas?
>
> Julene: up to a point but we spend too much time with the negativity. i
> don''t know how we'd enforce any good ideas we come up with here anyway!
>
> Jim: what would the perfect citizen look like? Your idea seems
> unattainable.
>
> Julene: seems like other countries do it better than we do by a long shot.
> How do they manage to restrict candidates and their supporters from going
> negative?
>
> Jon: how are they different? is it worse now?
>
> Julene: I think it's worse now.
>
> Larry: it's as bad during say John Adams' time
>
> Jim: [to Phillip] might the scientific method apply?
>
> Phillip: probably not
>
> Jon: can we quantify the heart and soul of a politician?
>
> Julene: no, probably not.
>
> Jim; good presidents do whatever it takes to get done what they want to get
> done. It's the sausage making metaphor.
>
> Jon: this is as old as mankind
>
> Larry: who's the target audience? probably 10% -- the so-called undecideds
> decide elections.
>
> Julene: true democracy has one person one vote. We now have money
> influencing elections, in effect giving wealthy individuals more votes.
>
> Jon: is it true that tax revenue pays for all campaigns in Norway?
>
> Julene: yes, I think so
>
> Jim: the UK seems pretty messy and ugly politically and their elections are
> paid that way.
>
> Larry: presidents alway get more exposure, hence they have distinct
> advantages over challengers. All incumbents have this edge. Letting
> challengers spend as much money as they can could help balance the fight.
>
> Jim: if you said we want to influence someone who already has all kinds of
> beliefs you will say vote for this person because he/she represent the most
> of your beliefs. That is   basically what the much maligned PACs do.
>
> Jim: a president who gets the same amount of money as his opponent can use
> his office to attract votes -- hence the edge of incumbency.
>
> Jon: this is standard incumbent advantage. Does spending really have greater
> effect?
>
> Julene: elections shouldn't be based on business model
>
> Jim: most of us are too busy to be adequately informed.  Also, truth is not
> universal.
>
> Julene: if all candidates were given the same money and time it would be
> better. Maybe handicap the money to benefit the non-incumbent.
>
> ====================­=====
>
> NEW QUESTION: What do statistics prove?
>
> Jim: Jon sent out an essay asserting once upon a time in America wages were
> better and our economy was healthier. To me his use of data causes
> conclusions that skip over other important considerations. Statistics are an
> abstraction that lack context and detail.
>
> [From here we devolved into a healthy argument about how the statistics were
> used in the essay in question. At the time I was unaware of different ways
> American wages over time can be measured. This particular author used
> average wages over time. I have since learned that median wages are a better
> indicator. Median wages over time, though, actually reveal a very similar
> graph as do average wages over time: middle class wages have been stagnant
> for about 30-40 years, while the top earners' incomes have increased
> dramatically. I also will soon be discussing those "other important
> considerations" with John Peloquin, our "token economist" in Burnsville. I
> am hoping the our token economist in St. Paul, Tor, will be able to join
> in.]
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on
> this mailing list ([address removed])
> http://www.meetup...­
> This message was sent by Jon Anderson ([address removed]) from The
> Burnsville Socrates Cafe.
> To learn more about Jon Anderson, visit his/her member profile:
> http://www.meetup...­
> Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] |
> [address removed]
>
>

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy