sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
No bio...
User ID: 636
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
2d ago
It looks like the motte mostly doesn't even know what to say to this guy.
"I'm back. I forgot my drum."
Yes. I think there's a >50% chance that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is lower when Trump officially exits office than it was when he came in.
I had Gemini vibe code this chart of relative changes in debt to GDP over the course of the presidential terms starting from 1966 when the FRED data starts. Of the 11 past presidents (plus Trump I) in the dataset, 5 ended with a debt to GDP ratio better than the one they started with. So knowing nothing about a president at all, we should expect a 45% chance that the deficit to GDP ratio will fall over their tenure. Despite being such a believer in Trump's abilities, you think he's only a little bit better than the base rate in this department.
Trump's first term of course was ruinous for the debt to GDP ratio, but let's let him off the hook because COVID (the massive spike was during Trump's term, not Biden's).
Biden left office with debt to GDP slightly lower than when he came in. Is your prediction here that basically Trump is going to have a similar effect on debt to GDP as Biden did? Not only did Biden manage a modest decrease as well, he was the only guy who managed to reduce debt to GDP by at least 5pp at some point during his term except Clinton! All this without 4D tariff nonsense, but for Trump we have to consider trusting the plan to get the same result, because...?
If we're gonna impoverish people with tariffs, job losses, breaking of government norms, and the rest of Trumponomics, is the best that we can expect simply a replacement-level reduction in debt to GDP? If that's what you consider "a start", you should be singing Biden's praises for giving us that start.
Consider me unimpressed.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
4d ago
The issue is nominal deflation and that has not happened with computers, there has been inflation.
This can't be true, right? The original 8GB iPhone was $600 at the time. The 128GB Pixel 9a launched at $500.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
5d ago
Tolstoy had the following to say about the peak of the peasant work year.
The day on which Sergey Ivanovitch came to Pokrovskoe was one of Levin’s most painful days. It was the very busiest working time, when all the peasantry show an extraordinary intensity of self-sacrifice in labor, such as is never shown in any other conditions of life, and would be highly esteemed if the men who showed these qualities themselves thought highly of them, and if it were not repeated every year, and if the results of this intense labor were not so simple.
To reap and bind the rye and oats and to carry it, to mow the meadows, turn over the fallows, thrash the seed and sow the winter corn—all this seems so simple and ordinary; but to succeed in getting through it all everyone in the village, from the old man to the young child, must toil incessantly for three or four weeks, three times as hard as usual, living on rye-beer, onions, and black bread, thrashing and carrying the sheaves at night, and not giving more than two or three hours in the twenty-four to sleep. And every year this is done all over Russia.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
5d ago
"Very droll, minister."
Hopefully the Census is capturing the legions of pseudoscience majors in this statistic as well.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
5d ago
Self report life satisfaction is very similar between Thailand and the US and is slightly higher in the US.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/happiness-cantril-ladder?tab=line&country=THA~USA
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
5d ago
Ctrl f "social" bro
It's got science in the name.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
6d ago
This is a bullshit false dichotomy. How about just incentivizing the 72% of STEM grads who don't work in a STEM job to actually work in STEM, if we have such a skills shortage?
This number includes social science majors (for whom there are no jobs in their chosen field) and people who work in management (who would not necessarily be better off as ICs).
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
7d ago
Poland wasn't doing better to begin with, though.
That's the whole point. All these countries started in roughly the same place.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
7d ago
One defense of these kind of raids is that it doesn't do America any good to have foreign companies build factories in the US if they are going to staff those factories with an imported workforce instead of Americans,
It does, of course. The Koreans also participate in the local economy.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
7d ago
That's hardly the question. The question is, had they been able to attract immigrants, would they have done better? The answer is clearly yes, for a sufficient quality of immigrant.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
7d ago
Regrettably, nobody has figured out how to rerun history and at experts agree that no two things are exactly alike. The upshot is that any example of a failing country with zero economic migrants can be explained away by some other factor surely being the decisive one.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
8d ago
cause dejure
You mean "cause celebre", or perhaps "cause du jour."
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
9d ago
Huh, I always took you for a fellow Euro.
Too far, bro. Too far.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
9d ago
Yeah, we can quibble over the precise formulation, if you want, but the birth rates are what are. So I'm not sure what point you're making here.
The point is that "people aren't having kids" is a strong statement that's clearly evidence of some kind of catastrophe, which is presumably why you framed the question that way. People having one or two kid instead of two or three is less clearly so.
Also... the statistics you cited are from nearly a decade ago for some reason?
Unfortunately that's the most recent chart I could find for this.
Sure. I'm not exactly one of those types either, but his criticisms targeted a much larger group (like people worried about capitalism turning into neo-feudalism, which would include that well-known far-rightwinger Yannis Varoufakis).
Literally who? His party has zero seats, so this is another point in favor of the people OP is criticizing not being popular.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
9d ago
Statistics tell a different story, though.
No, they don't. 86% of women aged 40-44 (as of 2016) had at least one child. Perhaps you meant to ask a different question?
Funnily enough, I don't see much connection to reality in this criticism. Why is everyone screeching about "far right" parties performing well in Europe? Why is Europe adapting it's laws to enable more online censorship? Why is the UK arresting comedians for tweets? Those are not things that happen when a group is out of touch with the normies.
Despite the screeching, none of the far right parties want to throw homosexuals off rooftops, strip normies of the franchise, or 'conscript wombs'. That's why they are popular.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
11d ago
Are you suggesting that you figured out what timecube is actually about?
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
13d ago
I would narrow it to "Consider that perhaps a plan exists rather than think he's flailing around and screwing with things for no reason.
Talking about Trump doing things for "no reason" is basically a strawman of the anti-Trump position. If I ended up in a situation where I found myself trying to land a 747, I wouldn't be doing things for "no reason" in the cockpit, but it would be a mistake to think that I had a coherent plan to land the plane except to the extent that I'm aware that landing the plane requires reducing speed and reducing altitude.
And as I mentioned, it's not a given that Trump is actually trying to land the plane at all. He may be content to let the next guy try to land it instead.
If you don't think there's a plan, then what exactly are we seeing? And why does it often seem to work out for him?
Very astute, and this ties in to your final point. "The plan," to the extent that it exists, is mostly around Trump increasing his status and self image rather than helping the country. And I think that works perfectly - Trump is certainly better off than he was before he took office. Is the country? Not so sure about that.
I'm guessing that he's aiming/hoping for unleashed economic growth
Yeah, sure, everyone loves economic growth, or at least, they say they do. However, the problem is that not every policy actually increases economic growth, and for people like Trump who have a multi-decade bee in their bonnet about certain policies (like tariffs), it's implementing the policy that's the focus rather than achieving economic growth.
Let's get down to brass tacks here. Do you actually think that Trump is going to make a dent in the debt crisis? Or is this all just playing devil's advocate? Because if you really do think that he's going to make an impact, I'm much less interested in discussing the 4D chess moves that may or may not suddenly come down the pipe without warning and much more interested in putting down some actual predictions about the debt to GDP ratio and seeing who's right in three years, because I don't think that either of us is going to convince the other.
And if you don't actually believe, then this whole conversation is pointless.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
13d ago
I think its worth considering that Trump may be aware of the fact that this current situation is unsustainable AND that making the needed cuts is going to be exceptionally politically unpopular, and that his ultimate approach to addressing this might be something people haven't considered yet.
I mean, yeah, you're not saying "trust the plan", you're merely saying "it's worth considering if we should trust the plan". I don't know that this is a major distinction.
What is the behavior of Trump we would expect to see in the world where:
-
He has a secret weapon for addressing the debt crisis, versus
-
He has no secret weapon
And does the Trump of our reality behave more similarly to Trump 1 or Trump 2? Well, the most basic graph would suggest Trump 2. Yes, perhaps there are some epicycles that can be added, but where's the payoff? Shall we make a bet about what this graph is going to look like when Trump leaves office and see which one of our theories is a better predictor of reality?
Otherwise, what exactly do you think his motivations are? Just ignore the debt issue entirely and try to kick the can until he leaves office in a few years? I'm trying to understand the mindset that suggests that Trump acts at semi-random or that he is SOLELY self-interested and doesn't have any goal other than wealth accumulation.
I don't know that his goal is wealth accumulation, I suspect he has already accumulated enough, or at least, it's not his primary goal. I think Trump's primary goal is something like status. He wants people to think that he's the best, that he's the Big Guy. That's why so much of his politics seem to revolve around the respect and deference that he receives, or does not receive, from the people at the other end of the table ("did you say, 'thank you, Mr President'?"). I don't think that the debt crisis is that important to him, and kicking that particular can down the road is a time honored bipartisan tradition at this point. Why not him too?
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
13d ago
The fact that there are no persons who can be held to account for any given decision benefits the entire structure, and makes it easier to pull off graft and rig things for the outcomes that they find preferable.
Who said anything about nobody being held accountable?
But if it is generally known that you can earn millions via graft if you attain public office, you will attract a lot of people who might not do the 'right' things.
Who said anything about allowing graft in public office?
I'm definitely NOT talking about "Classical" libs when I say this, in point of fact.
That's strange considering that the guy you responded to was talking about exactly this particular classical lib.
I have to say this conversation is very bewildering. The poster you responded to made a specific claim about a specific guy, you responded saying that people like that guy all think that we just need good people running the show for everything to be OK. I point out that this is exactly the opposite of what that guy thinks and you respond with a bunch of non sequiturs that seem to have no relation to anything I said, and then deny that you're talking about that guy at all.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
13d ago
This is just a motte and bailey, right?
Bailey: The US needs to avoid going bankrupt. We (well, not we, since functor is not an American) need Trump to take extraordinary measures to achieve this and should trust the plan.
Counter: Trump is only making the debt crisis worse.
Motte: It's actually impossible to address the debt crisis.
Wait a minute, why are we trusting the plan again?
No leaders needed, just the abstract forces of 'good people' making decisions en masse without being beholden to the fickle, stupid electorate.
It's funny that you say this because this is basically a complete misunderstanding and, really, the exact opposite of the classical liberal worldview that Munger endorses. From another interview:
Michael Munger: Yeah. 'That's not real capitalism. But, what if it's true that, as industries mature, they find that crony capitalism is more profitable in an accounting sense than playing it straight? Then I do this thing that I would criticize in other people. What I will say is, 'Oh, we need better people. All we need is better politicians that don't engage, don't allow this rent seeking.' Or, 'We need better CEOs [Chief Executive Officers].' That's the one thing, Russ, that you know that I cannot say--
Russ Roberts: it's against the rules--
Michael Munger: because the premise is: You cannot say, 'Good people.'
Russ Roberts: Right. 'We need'--our premise, our team, is that incentives matter, institutions matter. And with bad incentives, the best people become corrupted. And with good incentives, not-so-great people do the right thing. So, that's the--right. So you can't say that... Before we go on, I want to read the Milton Friedman quote that came to mind a minute ago, that I think deep and important. He says,
It's nice to elect the right people, but that isn't the way you solve things. The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right things.
So, the point there is that--the counterpoint to that is that, eventually, the political system is going to be structured by capitalist influence to give out those goodies, so that even good people do the wrong thing.
The classical liberals emphatically do not think that if you just put the right people in the right place then everything will be OK. This is, in fact, the contrary perspective they are arguing against and that you are implicitly defending- that if you just install /ourguy/ in the oval office or as permanent secretary of the department of administrative affairs, or, worst case, if we could just fill the deep state with /ourguy/s then finally we would retvrn to the vaunted glory days.
It's remarkable that 250 years after Adam Smith, the classical liberal worldview is so hard to understand and so easy to round off to the complete opposite. Perhaps this is due to its great success turning it into the water we swim in.
Working class because my income mostly comes from labor and not investments.
Am I doing this right?
More options
Context Copy link