Political Matrix

[kishnevi]

Still going on about the money supply?  Can you please answer my question from earlier, and if I missed it, reanswer it?  Which measure of the money supply has doubled? 

Not being an economist, I don't keep that sort of information on file.  But all that money the government put into TARP and the stimulus package--wasn't that a substantial addition to the money supply? Approximately equal to the amount of money already in circulation.

Now I notice that you said that the price of plenty of things you buy has gone up over the last year.  Is that a new situation, or have you noticed that before?

Prices increased sharply roughly two and a half years-three and a half years ago, then remained stable until about a year ago, when they began to rise, and still are rising. The rate of increase is not as sharp as it was during the prior increase, but is steadier and seems to be lasting longer.

I am, btw, talking about prices of a loaf of white bread, a box of brand name cereal, etc.

As to CPI, of course the components are changed over time.  How else would prices be tracked over decades?  People do not use the same household items they did fifty years ago, for instance, so substitutes must be found.  I dare say that the common items have even changed perceptibly over the past decade.

The instance I gave was one in which a lesser quality item was substituted for the item originally in the "basket of goods", even though the equivalent to the original item was readily available on the shelf next to the substitute. 

An analogy:

Suppose your local grocer offered a loaf of premium bread for $2.00.  It also offered a loaf of regular enriched white bread for $1.50.  At a certain point in time, it discontinued the premium bread and replaced with a "new improved" version--say it was now enriched with calcium and some of the ingredients were changed to improve the flavor--and priced at $2.18.  I think most people would say the "new improved" version was the equivalent which should be substituted for the old version in CPI measures.  But the government decided instead to use the white bread as the substitute. 
And the CPI can be tricky.  Take the case of a computer.  Take computer A, which ten years ago was near top of the line and cost $1500 and take computer B, which is near top of the line top today and costs $2000.  That's a 33% price increase, right?  Well, if the computer has 25 times the processing power, 30 times the storage, dozens of free software titles that did not exist, and comes with ancillaries that are far superior to what existed ten years ago, is that really inflation? 

Your post very clearly implies that the government manipulates CPI to make numbers look good, which is a serious implication, so something more substantive should be offered.

I'm giving details of something that occurred directly in my purview during the Clinton Administration, as evidence that manipulation was done in the past.  Since our store has apparently been dropped from the research route,  I can't tell you more firsthand.  But obviously manipulation is possible, and I wouldn't trust the CPI unless I had confirmed that no such manipulation had occurred.

As to your hypothetical about the computer--I would say that for purposes of determinging the CPI, a baseline, lower end computer shoudl be used.  For instance,  a computer that could allow for average gaming, internet, and home business use.

[71 dB]

Here is how to get 100% employment NOW!

At 10% Unemployment all one would need to do is adjust the workweek from 40 hour to 36 hours. 

At 20% Unemployment all one would need to do is adjust the workweek from 40 hour to 32 hours.

from: An Economic Bill of Rights

"30-Hour Work Week: A 6-hour day with no cut in pay for the bottom 80% of the pay scale."

Of course with a 30 hour work week we would have a labor shortage but that might be good for workers.  With a labor shortage we can gain back the losses given over to past three decades.  In the 1960's a family of four could be supported by one income, now it requires two.

Shorter workweek is a good thing. Technology and increased efficiency is allowing us to have more free time. We should use that opportunity. Even if we earn less money, our quality of life will improve when we spend more time with our families and friends instead of working. That's also ecological when we don't spend that much money on things we don't need.

The problem of unemployment is much more difficult than that. We have lowered the costs of work so much that now we have lots of  people without workmanship who are too talentless/lazy to support themselves working. Two possible solutions:

1) We raise the costs of work. This means that prices of products and services will raise. Now we can hire ineffective workforce paying them less than others and these people can still support themselves with work.

2) We adopt general income system. Now talentless people can increase their incomes working when there's work to be done somewhere. The pay can be low since most of their incomes is general income.

[Florestan]

Economic score: +5.16
Social score: +5.91

Your score pegs you as economically capitalist and socially authoritarian.

Capitalists generally support an open free market and lower taxes, but also support government restrictions on blatantly abusive industry. Capitalists also often differ from their more extreme peers in that, while they may support significantly lower taxes, they are less apt to support complete elimination of taxation or near-complete elimination of government.

Social authoritarians generally believe that the country is moving toward immorality and that the government should assure it does not. Social authoritarians oftentimes believe that the government should be operated in a religious context, or at least with heavy consideration of moral values.

I certainly agree being labeled capitalist but I strongly object to being authoritarian. Or is this what they call now someone who supports a free and moral society?

[71 dB]

I certainly agree being labeled capitalist but I strongly object to being authoritarian. Or is this what they call now someone who supports a free and moral society?

Perhaps you don't see how morality and freedom are sometimes in contradiction?

[Teresa]

Economic score: +5.16
Social score: +5.91

Your score pegs you as economically capitalist and socially authoritarian.

I certainly agree being labeled capitalist but I strongly object to being authoritarian. Or is this what they call now someone who supports a free and moral society?

It might be how you answered other questions, as I answered this question with Agree
And checked the box This is a critical issue to me. 

12. The government should work to reduce children's exposure to offensive radio and television content.

My Social score: -6.09 and it pegged me as socially libertarian.

Social libertarians generally believe that the government should not judge morality, and are generally against the illegalization of things that do not directly affect other people in a negative way. Many strong social libertarians may also be social progressives, favoring legislation to correct what they see as socially backwards governmental regulation, although some simply wish for the government to make little judgment on social matters.

So this test is not perfect as you know I am anti-porn, anti-excessive violence and sex in media even for adults as I believe it is a detriment to society as a whole.  However I am pro-gay marriage as I have known gays and they are regular moral people and I believe deserve marriage as much as anyone.  Indeed the ones I know are religious despite several bible passages against men lying with men.  I attended a gay wedding of a friend at a gay Church.  I am reminded of Christ saying to love the sinner and hate the sin.  And those without to sin to throw the first stone.  In addition  we are all sinners, so we cannot judge others, indeed it is blasphemy to do so.  Thus I am for gay marriage, if they are going to be together I would rather they be monogamous.   

I am also for the legalization. or at the very least the decriminalization of drugs.  As we are never going to win the war on drugs and it just increases crimes of every type.  The legalization will mean billions of tax dollars drastically needed to pay down the debt.  I do think drugs should be sold in state drug stores so that the government has control of the distribution.

So in short the test is not perfect. 

[Florestan]

Perhaps you don't see how morality and freedom are sometimes in contradiction?

Morality and freedom are never in contradiction since you can't have one without the other. It's morality and libertinism that are in contradiction.

[Florestan]

It might be how you answered other questions,

I am against gay marriage for the same reasons JdP stated. I think abortion should be legal only in a few cases (i.e. rape or when the mother's life is threatened) and it should be paid by the person who wants it (or her relatives, or private charities) not by the taxpayers at large. In sexual matters I believe that what two or more people do in their private home is no business for the government but I also believe government has a duty to promote and encourage public decency and prevent and discourage public immorality. In short, I am for personal responsibility and restraint and freedom under law. How authoritarian is that?

[Teresa]

I am against gay marriage for the same reasons JdP stated. I think abortion should be legal only in a few cases (i.e. rape or when the mother's life is threatened) and it should be paid by the person who wants it (or her relatives, or private charities) not by the taxpayers at large. In sexual matters I believe that what two or more people do in their private home is no business for the government but I also believe government has a duty to promote and encourage public decency and prevent and discourage public immorality. In short, I am for personal responsibility and restraint and freedom under law. How authoritarian is that?

Not really to me, but authoritarianism is in the eyes of the beholder.  After all my strong anti-porn, anti-violence stance has been called authoritarian by at least ten members here.  Before I actually knew a few gay people and knew someone who had to make the hard decision to go through an abortion, I believed much as you do, so I do respect your beliefs in these social issues.   

[71 dB]

Morality and freedom are never in contradiction since you can't have one without the other. It's morality and libertinism that are in contradiction.

No matter how you define moral, it will contradict a certain forms of freedom. For example, Teresa thinks porn is amoral. That kind of morality removes freedom to consume porn. The essence of this question is the fact that any moral system bans certain things, hence limiting freedom.

This is not a big problem if we create such a moral system that limits freedom minimally and at the same time we accept the freedom that is left.

[Saul]

I came to the conclusion that Teresa's writings are nothing but a fountain of hogwash.
Therefore, I will concentrate responding to those who are willing to listen. I promise you guys, that talking to her about politics is a total waste of time.

I wouldn't mind talking to her about, cooking, baking, shopping, travel, and many other issues that wont take us into politics. This is the topic where she unfortunately, losses all sense of logic, and wisdom.

Its pointless to discuss these things with her, she is not willing to change a single millimeter, of her rock solid rubbish opinions that make no sense, and that's a shame.

[Florestan]

No matter how you define moral, it will contradict a certain forms of freedom. For example, Teresa thinks porn is amoral. That kind of morality removes freedom to consume porn.

Porn should be available only to those who want it. The current level of public pornography is appalling.

[Gurn Blanston]

I came to the conclusion that Teresa's writings are nothing but a fountain of hogwash.
Therefore, I will concentrate responding to those who are willing to listen. I promise you guys, that talking to her about politics is a total waste of time.

I wouldn't mind talking to her about, cooking, baking, shopping, travel, and many other issues that wont take us into politics. This is the topic where she unfortunately, losses all sense of logic, and wisdom.

Its pointless to discuss these things with her, she is not willing to change a single millimeter, of her rock solid rubbish opinions that make no sense, and that's a shame.

Well said, Saul. Although I should warn you that her opinions on music and audio equipment are equally bizarre and intractable, so you want to avoid those altogether. I'm pretty sure you will be hard-pressed to find something of mutual interest where any opinion offered is not already set in stone. Just sayin'...

[oabmarcus]

Porn should be available only to those who want it. The current level of public pornography is appalling.

Supply meeting demand. Everyone wants it, excerpt you apparently.

[71 dB]

Its pointless to discuss these things with her, she is not willing to change a single millimeter, of her rock solid rubbish opinions that make no sense, and that's a shame.

Funny, this is what I think about your opinions Saul.

[71 dB]

Porn should be available only to those who want it. The current level of public pornography is appalling.

How do you define public pornography?

[DavidRoss]

...authoritarianism is in the eyes of the beholder.  After all my strong anti-porn, anti-violence stance has been called authoritarian by at least ten members here.

No, an authoritarian is someone who wants everyone's behavior (everyone else, at least!) to be controlled by an authority.  No one regards you as authoritarian because you disapprove of porn and violence, but rather because your solution to these issues (and every other issue!) is to empower an authoritarian government to force everyone to conform to your wishes.

One of the most obvious lessons of history and human nature--reinforced by the 20th Century's record of horror--is that power attracts those who would abuse it.  Time and again, well-intentioned idealists who are woefully ignorant of history, human nature, and their own dark sides have sought to create utopias through behavior control enforced by a strong authority.  The method itself is flawed.  You cannot force people to be wise, to make morally intelligent decisions.  Force creates its own resistance to force.  And when you create institutions with the power to compel others' behavior, you can be sure that the most ruthless and depraved will seek that power and use it for bad ends. 

The "political matrix" test in this thread might be of some limited value (very limited, given the nature of the questions!) in identifying your beliefs, but it has no value whatsoever in determining whether those beliefs have any basis in reality.  Yours do not.  They indicate serious deficiencies in basic understanding of economics, political science, human nature, morality, and so on.  Your heart may be in the right place, but your head lags far behind.

The personal liberties, individual rights, and human dignity you correctly value are not compatible with the authoritarian economic and political systems you support.  Without grasping that elemental fact, you imagine we have a choice between a real and imperfect (but improving) social structure like our own, and a theoretically ideal but practically impossible idealistic fantasy.    When comparing reality with fantasy, of course reality suffers.  But when comparing the reality of daily life for even our worst off citizens with the reality of daily life for all but the ruling elite in the REAL (not imaginary) "Progressive" states of the 20th Century, it should be bloody obvious even to the slowest of learners which system is truly compassionate and democratic and promotes real liberty and freedom and human dignity.

[Philoctetes]

Well said, Saul. Although I should warn you that her opinions on music and audio equipment are equally bizarre and intractable, so you want to avoid those altogether. I'm pretty sure you will be hard-pressed to find something of mutual interest where any opinion offered is not already set in stone. Just sayin'...

I feel like I'm in an episode of the Twilight Zone.

[Gurn Blanston]

I feel like I'm in an episode of the Twilight Zone.

Picture if you will... it's just that we've been over those topics already, so I am already prepared to throw all my CD's in the trash and get SACD's, and also to make sure that there is only loud & exciting music from the late Romantic recorded on the new SACD's. Why fight it? 

[DavidRoss]

I came to the conclusion that Teresa's writings are nothing but a fountain of hogwash.
Therefore, I will concentrate responding to those who are willing to listen. I promise you guys, that talking to her about politics is a total waste of time.

I wouldn't mind talking to her about, cooking, baking, shopping, travel, and many other issues that wont take us into politics. This is the topic where she unfortunately, losses all sense of logic, and wisdom.

Its pointless to discuss these things with her, she is not willing to change a single millimeter, of her rock solid rubbish opinions that make no sense, and that's a shame.

No one who has read more than one or two of her posts expects Teresa to make an effort to understand other points of view any more than we expect it of you or any other of the lovable characters around here who teach us all so much about humility and gratitude.  Most respondents really address her ideas rather than her person, and not so much for her sake as for the sake of others who may be equally misguided but who enjoy the capacity to learn.

[Florestan]

Supply meeting demand.

BS. Porn is a clear case of supply creating demand.

Everyone wants it,

More BS. Ask your mother, sister, wife or daughter.

excerpt you apparently.

I watch it now and then, so BS again.

How do you define public pornography?

Just walk into a store selling newspapers and magazines and have a look around. Or turn on the TV and watch prety much any entertainment broadcasting. You'll know instantly what I mean .