6 hours ago, Gannan said:

Except in basically every country in Northern Europe, which is pretty much what democratic socialism is. It goes farther than I would but it’s worked fine for those countries

Those countries aren’t socialist. They are capitalist societies with a significant safety net. Sweden tried to go the socialist route in the 70s and the results were horrible. Then in the 90s made reforms to scale back the welfare state, deregulate the economy, and get back to a capitalist driven society.

There’s also additional societal and cultural differences that enable their social safety nets to exist and remain financially viable.

For example let’s look at two big things that people discuss when it comes to safety nets/public spending.

1) healthcare/health insurance. Sweden has a national healthcare system. We obviously do not. Sweden also has a population that is significantly more healthy than ours. Their adult obesity rate is about 18%. Ours is 37%. Obesity is a main driver for a slew of health issues that lead to extensive medical costs. Much easier to have a publicly funded healthcare system when you have a population that is healthy.

2) childcare. In Sweden, childcare is heavily subsidized. There is a max free based on income. For 1 child, the max fee is 3% of gross income. For the 2nd child, it’s 2%, the third child is 1%, and the 4th child and beyond is free. In Sweden, birth rate rate INCREASES with income. Low income earners have the lowest birth rate (under 1), and then each income quartile has an increase in fertility rate. In the US, we have the exact opposite. Birth rate DECREASES with income. The lowest income households have the highest birth rates.

You can’t have a heavily subsidized childcare system like Sweden has when birth rate is inversely related to income.

5 hours ago, Gannan said:

I’m not saying it would work here or that I want it here. I just caution against being so dismissive. The young people I know think they will never be able to afford a home because a home in a decent neighborhood costs around 3 quarters of a million dollars. That’s a problem. If we don’t address it, we will see more of this.

I agree that is a problem. Heck we bought our current home in 2020. If it was on the market today, we would not be able to buy it. And I know I’m not alone in that regard.

But you fix a problem by addressing the root cause of the problem. And the root cause of the problem isn’t that "millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying enough taxes” which seem to be the democrats only policy idea on a national level.

1 hour ago, Phillyterp85 said:

I agree that is a problem. Heck we bought our current home in 2020. If it was on the market today, we would not be able to buy it. And I know I’m not alone in that regard.

But you fix a problem by addressing the root cause of the problem. And the root cause of the problem isn’t that "millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying enough taxes” which seem to be the democrats only policy idea on a national level.

The only solution is a concerted effort to expand the supply of affordable housing in lower middle class communities.

There's two things constraining this: retirement aged folks living in them alone longer than previous generations, and lack of new construction unless it's "luxury" single or townhome communities. The latter has as much to do with NIMBYism as anything, because existing homeowners pull the ladder up on "affordable home" construction, which drives up the cost of new construction further for builders to overcome NIMBYs.

49 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

The only solution is a concerted effort to expand the supply of affordable housing in lower middle class communities.

There's two things constraining this: retirement aged folks living in them alone longer than previous generations, and lack of new construction unless it's "luxury" single or townhome communities. The latter has as much to do with NIMBYism as anything, because existing homeowners pull the ladder up on "affordable home" construction, which drives up the cost of new construction further for builders to overcome NIMBYs.

How are you defining "affordable housing”?

Another very important factor is we need long term sane policy from the Fed when it comes to setting interest rates. Low interest rates inflates the price of assets. One of the biggest myths out there in real estate is that low interest rates increases the purchasing power of the consumer, and that’s not the case. Low interest rates increase the amount of debt you can afford, not the amount of square footage of house you can afford.

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

The only solution is a concerted effort to expand the supply of affordable housing in lower middle class communities.

There's two things constraining this: retirement aged folks living in them alone longer than previous generations, and lack of new construction unless it's "luxury" single or townhome communities. The latter has as much to do with NIMBYism as anything, because existing homeowners pull the ladder up on "affordable home" construction, which drives up the cost of new construction further for builders to overcome NIMBYs.

The rate at which housing has gone up over the past decade or so is really alarming.

If you want to see the long term effects of an Islamic-Communist being a Mayor of a large city, take a look at London. Outside of the "London Banana" it is an ever increasing crap hole. We have foreign enclaves where local councillors are running to be an MP in another country, street gangs are in constant turf wars, you wear a nice watch, its not long for your wrist, the local transport system is constantly running out of money etc.

A vote for Mandani, was a vote for New Yorkers to make their lives worse. Do I have sympathy for what happens? Nope

7 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

The rate at which housing has gone up over the past decade or so is really alarming.

A consequence of a near 10 year period of zero or near zero percent interest rates that began in 2009.

🙄

Y'all are so dramatic. New York will be fine. Not to be both sides guy, but the dude is neither going to completely solve homelessness/the housing crisis nor is Sharia law going into effect. He's a Fing mayor. Calm your boobs.

10 hours ago, Gannan said:

Watching the speech now. Dude is a good orator whether you like what he’s saying or not.

He is very skilled and I do believe it's the socialist wing's time to shine. Trump already normalized extremely high tariffs, one of the biggest hurdles socialists had for it to be viable. Trump and the Republicans have completely lost their way as a populist party and the anger against the billionaire class that has poked its head out and shown their faces way too much for their own good is ripe as a two week banana for political weaponization.

4 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Those countries aren’t socialist. They are capitalist societies with a significant safety net. Sweden tried to go the socialist route in the 70s and the results were horrible. Then in the 90s made reforms to scale back the welfare state, deregulate the economy, and get back to a capitalist driven society.

There’s also additional societal and cultural differences that enable their social safety nets to exist and remain financially viable.

For example let’s look at two big things that people discuss when it comes to safety nets/public spending.

1) healthcare/health insurance. Sweden has a national healthcare system. We obviously do not. Sweden also has a population that is significantly more healthy than ours. Their adult obesity rate is about 18%. Ours is 37%. Obesity is a main driver for a slew of health issues that lead to extensive medical costs. Much easier to have a publicly funded healthcare system when you have a population that is healthy.

2) childcare. In Sweden, childcare is heavily subsidized. There is a max free based on income. For 1 child, the max fee is 3% of gross income. For the 2nd child, it’s 2%, the third child is 1%, and the 4th child and beyond is free. In Sweden, birth rate rate INCREASES with income. Low income earners have the lowest birth rate (under 1), and then each income quartile has an increase in fertility rate. In the US, we have the exact opposite. Birth rate DECREASES with income. The lowest income households have the highest birth rates.

You can’t have a heavily subsidized childcare system like Sweden has when birth rate is inversely related to income.

Every advanced economy on the planet is a hybrid, some have more of this or that. Americans have been brainwashed into believing healthcare is some magical hex that crosses you over into socialism. None of that is the biggest economic issue at the quarter mark of the 21st century, the biggest issue is income inequality. Capitalism "won" the 2oth century and now we are economically productive beyond our wildest dreams. And yet, 3/4 of the population is getting left behind. Stopping immigration and stifling globalization doesn't solve that issue.

8 hours ago, Bill said:

The problem is neither side is going to do D about it.

The read I’m getting from the left tonight is that "super leftism wins”, like a Bizarro 24 take about how MAGA won because trans Guatemalans were reading imported books to kids.

At the end of the day, it’s the Economy, and a surprising number of people don’t get that.

I don't disagree with any of that. When Mamdani fails to deliver they will look right. Rinse repeat.

4 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Those countries aren’t socialist. They are capitalist societies with a significant safety net.

That's what Mamdani, AOC, Bernie are advocating for. I agree that Sweden and Finland are not the United States, and that it can't work here. They think it can. Of course they are misguided and wrong, but compared to what Trump and the republican fascist party is offering, its no wonder that people will support it.

4 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

I agree that is a problem. Heck we bought our current home in 2020. If it was on the market today, we would not be able to buy it. And I know I’m not alone in that regard.

But you fix a problem by addressing the root cause of the problem. And the root cause of the problem isn’t that "millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying enough taxes” which seem to be the democrats only policy idea on a national level.

Same. And my wife and I both make really good money.

I'm not saying the democrats are great and offer any real solutions. I'm just saying our choices are democrats, and Trump style fascism. Given those choices, I'll pick the democrats every time. Most effective democrats tread water economically. They try a few small fixes, but nothing major. The ACA is the only significant thing they did, and really it was a far cry from the "socialist medicine" boogyman the right rheeeed about.

3 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

The only solution is a concerted effort to expand the supply of affordable housing in lower middle class communities.

There's two things constraining this: retirement aged folks living in them alone longer than previous generations, and lack of new construction unless it's "luxury" single or townhome communities. The latter has as much to do with NIMBYism as anything, because existing homeowners pull the ladder up on "affordable home" construction, which drives up the cost of new construction further for builders to overcome NIMBYs.

My wife pointed that out in our neighborhood. Our development was built in 1984. Most of the homes on our street are original owners still. Many are widows and widowers.

1 hour ago, UK Eagle said:

You wear a nice watch, its not long for your wrist

Just buy a cell phone

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

Same. And my wife and I both make really good money.

I'm not saying the democrats are great and offer any real solutions. I'm just saying our choices are democrats, and Trump style fascism. Given those choices, I'll pick the democrats every time. Most effective democrats tread water economically. They try a few small fixes, but nothing major. The ACA is the only significant thing they did, and really it was a far cry from the "socialist medicine" boogyman the right rheeeed about.

Same here. bought in 2019, yeah we remodeled, but it's tripled in value. Awesome, but bye bye mobility. My entire street is being bought up by mega gazillionaires tearing down and building 2-3m+ apartments. We'll never be able to buy in this area again.

12 minutes ago, Gannan said:

That's what Mamdani, AOC, Bernie are advocating for. I agree that Sweden and Finland are not the United States, and that it can't work here. They think it can. Of course they are misguided and wrong, but compared to what Trump and the republican fascist party is offering, its no wonder that people will support it.

Funny how marketing works, because even Elon Musk has admitted than the near future will require basic income. Mamdami/AOC/Bernie are 100% correct, the billionaire class is ripe to be the next big political villain. Getting rid of immigrants and "transgender for everyone" hasn't made anybody's lives better. But these dudes have punchable faces everyone recognizes and they've publicly crossed the line with government. Some of the old school socialist ideas of what to do with that money may be whack, but they have the hot iron and decades of moral commitment to the cause to burn. MGT seems to know what's up. That girl is the canary in the coalmine for MAGA

56 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Just buy a cell phone

And that's not long for you either. Walking on a street, sitting outside at a cafe. I see it, I want it., I have it.

Gangs on eScooters/mopeds scope you out and steal it before you know what happened. And the kicker is, you can tell the Police its at this address, and they won't get it and tell you not to try either. Some people track their phones or earbuds around the world, I suppose out of morbid curiosity.

When the Mayor says crime is down, its reported crime, because why report something when the Police don't care?

Millennials and Gen Z combining forces to ruin a city. Well, that's nice.

1 hour ago, Gannan said:

That's what Mamdani, AOC, Bernie are advocating for. I agree that Sweden and Finland are not the United States, and that it can't work here. They think it can. Of course they are misguided and wrong, but compared to what Trump and the republican fascist party is offering, its no wonder that people will support it.

Are they though? They seem to be advocating for a system in which "the rich" pay for a bunch of "free" services for everyone else, in a society which already has a problem of imbalance when it comes to who pays/who receives when it comes to our tax dollars.

1 minute ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Are they though? They seem to be advocating for a system in which "the rich" pay for a bunch of "free" services for everyone else, in a society which already has a problem of imbalance when it comes to who pays/who receives when it comes to our tax dollars.

C'mon man. Clearly the people who pay all the income taxes aren't paying their fair share!

The difference is in those Western European "utopias" that they love so much, EVERYONE pays income taxes and the tax burden isn't nearly so progressive. There's also the lower standard of living and anemic economic growth. But hey -- they all have free, but awful, health insurance.

The answer is simple -- capitalism has done more to improve the living standard of all people, and lift more people out of poverty, than anything else in history. But it also creates unequal outcomes, whereby those who take risk and succeed get stupid rich. But people cry and whine about the outcomes, but they didn't want to take the risk. But no politician is willing to tell people the truth, so they tell them who to blame and then try and "fix" things that aren't broken, and of course make everything 10x worse.

6 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

C'mon man. Clearly the people who pay all the income taxes aren't paying their fair share!

The difference is in those Western European "utopias" that they love so much, EVERYONE pays income taxes and the tax burden isn't nearly so progressive. There's also the lower standard of living and anemic economic growth. But hey -- they all have free, but awful, health insurance.

The answer is simple -- capitalism has done more to improve the living standard of all people, and lift more people out of poverty, than anything else in history. But it also creates unequal outcomes, whereby those who take risk and succeed get stupid rich. But people cry and whine about the outcomes, but they didn't want to take the risk. But no politician is willing to tell people the truth, so they tell them who to blame and then try and "fix" things that aren't broken, and of course make everything 10x worse.

Agreed. One of the great things about America that Trump hasn't destroyed yet, is its not hard for someone to invest a little money and see huge returns on those investments to over time acquire wealth. It has to be easier for an every day person to get rich here than it would be in any other country. It would be disastrous to mess with that. However, and we've talked about this many times, it's not something people think about when they go to vote.

9 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

C'mon man. Clearly the people who pay all the income taxes aren't paying their fair share!

The difference is in those Western European "utopias" that they love so much, EVERYONE pays income taxes and the tax burden isn't nearly so progressive. There's also the lower standard of living and anemic economic growth. But hey -- they all have free, but awful, health insurance.

The answer is simple -- capitalism has done more to improve the living standard of all people, and lift more people out of poverty, than anything else in history. But it also creates unequal outcomes, whereby those who take risk and succeed get stupid rich. But people cry and whine about the outcomes, but they didn't want to take the risk. But no politician is willing to tell people the truth, so they tell them who to blame and then try and "fix" things that aren't broken, and of course make everything 10x worse.

Shut up and give me free stuff!

11 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

C'mon man. Clearly the people who pay all the income taxes aren't paying their fair share!

The difference is in those Western European "utopias" that they love so much, EVERYONE pays income taxes and the tax burden isn't nearly so progressive. There's also the lower standard of living and anemic economic growth. But hey -- they all have free, but awful, health insurance.

The answer is simple -- capitalism has done more to improve the living standard of all people, and lift more people out of poverty, than anything else in history. But it also creates unequal outcomes, whereby those who take risk and succeed get stupid rich. But people cry and whine about the outcomes, but they didn't want to take the risk. But no politician is willing to tell people the truth, so they tell them who to blame and then try and "fix" things that aren't broken, and of course make everything 10x worse.

Shut up Vikas. Nobody is after your curry arse. It's the class above you that's out of hand, they warped democracy and capitalism itself. It is increasingly difficult to classify what we have now as competition based capitalism and ludicrous to assume it will provide better standards of living for even the bottom 75% going forward.

3 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

Shut up Vikas. Nobody is after your curry arse. It's the class above you that's out of hand, they warped democracy and capitalism itself. It is increasingly difficult to classify what we have now as competition based capitalism and ludicrous to assume it will provide better standards of living for even the bottom 75% going forward.

We have a chance to have the first trillionaire ever and you're fighting that?

14 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

C'mon man. Clearly the people who pay all the income taxes aren't paying their fair share!

The difference is in those Western European "utopias" that they love so much, EVERYONE pays income taxes and the tax burden isn't nearly so progressive. There's also the lower standard of living and anemic economic growth. But hey -- they all have free, but awful, health insurance.

The answer is simple -- capitalism has done more to improve the living standard of all people, and lift more people out of poverty, than anything else in history. But it also creates unequal outcomes, whereby those who take risk and succeed get stupid rich. But people cry and whine about the outcomes, but they didn't want to take the risk. But no politician is willing to tell people the truth, so they tell them who to blame and then try and "fix" things that aren't broken, and of course make everything 10x worse.

Yup. I’ll also add that people focus on income inequality when the focus should instead be on income mobility. There will always be income inequality and there SHOULD be income inequality. If there’s no income inequality it means there’s no opportunity for income growth. So don’t focus on what the gap is between income quartiles and how we "fix” that. Focus on what the likelihood is of the 22 year old entering a the workforce at income level A is going to be able to be able to get to income level B 10 years from now.

I’ll also add, what are 3 barriers to your typical middle class person living out the "American Dream”. The cost of housing, the cost of education, and the cost of healthcare. AKA the 3 industries that the government has heavily gotten involved in to try to "fix” to "improve access”.