Random Political Thoughts without Memes

D

david starling

Well-known member
moonkat235 said:
Kind of a side note. I'm digging the article I linked above. The whole goal of our discussion seems to be how to facilitate economic growth, development and reduce poverty, right? I'm like trying to figure out what South Korea did to succeed.

I don't think it's so simple as lowered taxation and less regulation, though I know you didn't mean that was the whole picture when you said it. You simplified the process for sure, which makes sense, because I'm not that knowledgeable on the mechanics of politics or economics.

I'm reading the military government invested heavily in education, specifically in disseminating technical knowledge to business enterprises. I think the government's role in getting from a 3rd world status to 'developed' status has a lot to do with smart investments, not so much limited spending. I mean, in a mostly agrarian country, which South Korea was back in the 1950s, how many entrepreneurs could there really be? I think the government's role was to inspire entrepreneurship and provide the necessary skills to create enterprises, ya feel?

I'm still dissecting the article, but this is just what I think so far.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing the internet sales had a lot to do with it.
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
moonkat235 said:
Kind of a side note. I'm digging the article I linked above. The whole goal of our discussion seems to be how to facilitate economic growth, development and reduce poverty, right? I'm like trying to figure out what South Korea did to succeed.

I don't think it's so simple as lowered taxation and less regulation, though I know you didn't mean that was the whole picture when you said it. You simplified the process for sure, which makes sense, because I'm not that knowledgeable on the mechanics of politics or economics.

I'm reading the military government invested heavily in education, specifically in disseminating technical knowledge to business enterprises. I think the government's role in getting from a 3rd world status to 'developed' status has a lot to do with smart investments, not so much limited spending. I mean, in a mostly agrarian country, which South Korea was back in the 1950s, how many entrepreneurs could there really be? I think the government's role was to inspire entrepreneurship and provide the necessary skills to create enterprises, ya feel?

I'm still dissecting the article, but this is just what I think so far.
Click to expand...

Ok so first of all, lets be honest and admit that the South Korean goverment recieved a large amount of foreign aid from the U.S. during that period of time. So it is fair to point out that a large amount of that goverment spending came at the cost of the american taxpayer, and not of south korean citizens. Of course, we can understand the context of that aid, that Korea was recovering from a war, and we can also congratulate the goverment of 1966 for doing a great job handling those funds and putting them to work. However, we need to be factual and realise that the goverment of South Korea, got all that money, without getting in debt (they did not borrow it, they got it for free). So in simple terms, a large amount of what they were able to do during the late 60's and early 70's was through the generosity of the U.S. taxpayers, which obviously removes the negative implications of goverment spending, because they had more money to invest in goverment programs.

Now to the tax issue. It is true that corporations in South Korea in the late 60's actually contributed with very high taxes. But the key is looking at wages. At that time, wages were very very low. Thus, while corporations did pay a lot of taxes, the costs of production they had was low. So, it sort of balanced out for the corporations, through cheap labour. If we look further into the coming decades, the 70's and 80's, you will see that South Korea had numerous tax reforms. In many of them, they added a lot of insentives and tax deductions, which functionally lowered taxes for corporations. If you look at the wages graph, you will notice that through the decades, wages in South Korea have risen.

Finally there is another problem with big spending: inflation. The usual strategy for goverments when in debt, and suffering fiscal deficit is to print more money to cover the debts they have, this leads to devaluation of the currency. This problem usually hits harder on the working class population, who not only see the little money they have loose value, but unlike the upper richer class do not have their savings in foreign currency (rich people in South Korea were more likely to convert their money into U.S. dollars). And infact... if we look at South Korea... you will notice that the big spending of the late 60's, lead to a large inflation during the 70's, that slowly went down in the 80's when the goverment began reducing its public spending. Below I'll post a graph on South Korean inflation.

So there is a correlation between wages and taxes. At higher taxes, South Korea had lower wages. But at lower taxes, South Korea had higher wages. So the conclusion is that what takes people out of poverty is the reduction in taxation, which boosts economic growth, and thus wages. If you look at countries with similar histories, you will notice that as soon as taxes go down, wages begin to rise. As for goverment spending, you can spend as much as you need, as long as you have a balanced budget. If you keep spending by borrowing money, eventually you will end up with a financial crisis. The South Korea is a weird example, because they had lot of spending with someone elses money (again, for totally comprehensible reasons). But usually, goverment spending needs to match tax revenue.

Here are some graphs
South Korean inflation rates
https://tradingeconomics.com/south-korea/inflation-cpi

south-korea-inflation-cpi.png



South Korean corporate taxes rate
https://tradingeconomics.com/south-korea/corporate-tax-rate
south-korea-corporate-tax-rate.png



South Korea Minimum Wages growth
https://tradingeconomics.com/south-korea/minimum-wages
south-korea-minimum-wages.png
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Just to mention that I don't classify informational graphics as "memes", as long as they intelligently illustrate a political or economic point of view.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:
MAGA as a slogan is both vague and controversial. Has anyone definitively stated it?
It may have played a role in antagonizing the Native American activist
because of his own personal interpretation.
Click to expand...
MSM had a narrative to push. They had NO interest in finding out the truth
or getting the students’ perspective.
Instead, they were more focused demonizing Trump supporters
based on nothing more than the color of their skin.
GUILTY: Being White & Wearing a MAGA Hat in Public :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrPsWv1y9DQ
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Dirius said:
Yes but the media narrative regarding the Buzzfeed dossier, was clearly trying to show it was true. They brought in people to talk about how they were almost sure (but not entirely it was true). That is just unethical, in any way you can look at it. They overwhelmingly favoured the possibility it was true, before they had even gotten confirmation.

As for the issue with the MAGA hat teens, the whole video showed the kids did not harras the native american activist, and that he himself walked into the area were the kid was standing and began druming right on his face. There is an hour video showing this. But the media showed only a brief cut, a few minutes showing the kid smirking at the native american activist. Then it was also revealed the man is a professional activist that does this sort of thing on a regular basis.

I agree with you Fox news is biased. All the media is biased. But I don't see Fox news using fake reports in the past few years. They have a biased point of view about every story, yes. But they don't outright lie. Maybe they lied back in Obama days, I'm not saying they aren't capable of doing it. But in Trump era, they have done pretty solid reporting. And also pretty solid interviews.
Click to expand...
STUDENTS OF COVINGTON HAVE BECOME SYMBOLS OF FAKE NEWS
Celebrities walk back attacks on MAGA hat students :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSGYCHZCYWw
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
MAGA hats stand for returning to a time prior to the Civil Rights movements, (according to Trump himself). For this reason they are blatantly offensive to minorities and those in favor of women's rights. They are, however, protected by the First Amendment, same as wearing a swastika or a KKK insignia.
 
Oddity

Oddity

Well-known member
A MAGA hat isn't the same thing as a KKK hood, David. Just because someone likes some aspect of the past (like near-full employment, money being worth something) doesn't mean they approve of all of it.
 
BlackLioness87

BlackLioness87

Well-known member
MAGA hats are offensive to common sense. How long has "America" been great?

Just an opinion from a person born in the "south end" of America.
 
BlackLioness87

BlackLioness87

Well-known member
Even changing the slogan, Trump isn't a Messiah. Even if he were to reform something, people often forget the power behind the throne. If the "puppeteers" don't agree they will wipe Trump off the map.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
BlackLioness87 said:
Even changing the slogan, Trump isn't a Messiah. Even if he were to reform something, people often forget the power behind the throne. If the "puppeteers" don't agree they will wipe Trump off the map.
Click to expand...

Trump chose the slogan he wanted. He isn't about making things greater moving forward, he wants to go back.
Any President has to go along with the Military Industrial Complex. There is some leeway domestically though.
 
Tandy

Tandy

Banned
david starling said:
Women and minorities "knew their place". Gays were "queers and faggots", lived in fear, and mostly "stayed in the closet".
Click to expand...

I see this type of retro-fitting as bad. If 25% of world population has this view, what about the 75% that don't? Why do socialists focus on the minority of has nots when the majority has? Is the world poor overall or just those who live in the dark ages who liberals want to keep there by presumed victimization in a modern world.

The democratic leadership lives in million dollar homes and gated walls just like the conservatives. The poor democrats live on welfare and **** jobs just like the illegals. The world drives drunk, rapes and murders and raises kid inspite of being called faggots queers and living in fear and still we survive and the truth is - those who believe in themselves do it without the government to tell them how to.

Flaming hate of any type, presented as sympathy, is always a problem.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
Tandy said:
I see this type of retro-fitting as bad. If 25% of world population has this view, what about the 75% that don't? Why do socialists focus on the minority of has nots when the majority has? Is the world poor overall or just those who live in the dark ages who liberals want to keep there by presumed victimization in a modern world.

The democratic leadership lives in million dollar homes and gated walls just like the conservatives. The poor democrats live on welfare and **** jobs just like the illegals. The world drives drunk, rapes and murders and raises kid inspite of being called faggots queers and living in fear and still we survive and the truth is - those who believe in themselves do it without the government to tell them how to.

Flaming hate of any type, presented as sympathy, is always a problem.
Click to expand...

I don't know any socialists. Those are people who want to do away with private enterprise. I have known many Liberals, and none of them wanted that.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:
Here's a slogan that would have made some sense--"Make America Greater"! But, that's not what Trump's about.
Click to expand...
david starling said:
Tax rate on the wealthiest was 90%! Lots of jobs!
Click to expand...
david starling said:
Women and minorities "knew their place". Gays were "queers and faggots", lived in fear, and mostly "stayed in the closet".
Click to expand...
david starling said:
Two years in prison for even a miniscule amount of marijuana!
Click to expand...
david starling said:
The military Draft! (For those without phoney bone spurs!)
Click to expand...
david starling said:
And, that new fangled music!:pinched: America was sure "greater" before all of that!
Click to expand...
david starling said:
Trump chose the slogan he wanted. He isn't about making things greater moving forward, he wants to go back.
Any President has to go along with the Military Industrial Complex. There is some leeway domestically though.
Click to expand...
Why is Robert Mueller Not Being Investigated Over Victimizing Trump? :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnBwIH1icIs
.
 
Top