American audio industry may suffer a blow..

[Irvrobinson]

That's exactly what the electoral college does. Levels the playing field for all. Same reason for the number of Senators.

That's not correct. The Electoral College, and the Senate for that matter, makes voters in low-population states count far more than voters in high population states. These were unfair compromises established to get the low-population states to join the Union. They don't level the playing field, they imbalance it. Screw less populous states. I live in one of them, so I'm not biased the way I suspect you think I am.

 

[shadyJ]

Not me. If the Democrats put up Elizabeth Warren I'm voting for Trump. Same with Bernie.

Elizabeth Warren is not a socialist. In Europe her positions would be considered centrist. Trump is a banana republic dictator wannabe. Bernie is a socialist but hardly a far left socialist.

 

[herbu]

Screw less populous states.

Hmmm. So the country should be controlled by the will of a half dozen metropolitan areas? Interesting. Like 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch. Balanced. But what will you eat when the sheep is gone? I, for one, am happy we're a Republic.

Just saw Hillary saying "civility" cannot return until Dems win. Chief snowflake. Encourage misbehavior until we win. Abandon civility when somebody disagrees with you. Well, the metropolitan areas are there. That's who I want to run the country.

 

[Steve81]

These were unfair compromises established to get the low-population states to join the Union.

Unfair is a matter of opinion. Why would a state wish to join a union knowing it would effectively have no political voice, particularly given that the colonies had just fought a war over their lack of representation in government?

 

[everettT]

That's not correct. The Electoral College, and the Senate for that matter, makes voters in low-population states count far more than voters in high population states. These were unfair compromises established to get the low-population states to join the Union. They don't level the playing field, they imbalance it. Screw less populous states. I live in one of them, so I'm not biased the way I suspect you think I am.

Never implied you had had a bias.

Elizabeth Warren is not a socialist. In Europe her positions would be considered centrist. Trump is a banana republic dictator wannabe. Bernie is a socialist but hardly a far left socialist.

Good thing we aren't in Europe

 

[shadyJ]

Good thing we aren't in Europe

A good chunk of Europe has a higher standard of living than the US.

 

[KEW]

Really, James, even assuming there was some Russian influence, do you really think it influenced the election at all? I don't. Not a bit.

I think it is mostly impossible to pin down the influence of the Russian effort to provide misinformation (or heavily biased presentation of actual information).
However, do not be too quick to dismiss the ability to influence the course of history.

Here is a provocative NPR interview of the authors of "Like War: The Weaponization of Social Media". Included are instances of using Social Media in Gang Warfare as well as ISIS using it to effectively win wars against superior defenses.
It is a real and effective method of promoting an agenda!

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/655824435/the-weaponization-of-social-media-and-its-real-world-consequences

Probably most interesting is China's new Orwellian "Social Credit Score" where they monitor your on-line profile and give you (Chinese citizens) a score (like our credit score) which reflects how well you support "The People's" Government. This score effects your profile in such influential venues as on-line dating.

It is ~40 minutes long and available as a Podcast (as well as the linked audio file),but here is the website. A very thought provoking listen!

This is a huge factor in the present and future control of people and it will be interesting to see how the US and other countries navigate through it!

 

[Irvrobinson]

Elizabeth Warren is not a socialist. In Europe her positions would be considered centrist. Trump is a banana republic dictator wannabe. Bernie is a socialist but hardly a far left socialist.

Warren wants to tax me at a 50% marginal rate. NFW. And her regulation ideas on business are pretty much socialist.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-shouldnt-be-accountable-only-to-shareholders-1534287687

 

[Irvrobinson]

Hmmm. So the country should be controlled by the will of a half dozen metropolitan areas? Interesting. Like 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch. Balanced. But what will you eat when the sheep is gone? I, for one, am happy we're a Republic.

Just saw Hillary saying "civility" cannot return until Dems win. Chief snowflake. Encourage misbehavior until we win. Abandon civility when somebody disagrees with you. Well, the metropolitan areas are there. That's who I want to run the country.

It's called being a democracy. What we have is too skewed for my taste.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Unfair is a matter of opinion. Why would a state wish to join a union knowing it would effectively have no political voice, particularly given that the colonies had just fought a war over their lack of representation in government?

It's called being a democracy. (Well, technically we're a republic, but that's another argument.) What we have now is a tyranny of the minority.

 

[pewternhrata]

Warren wants to tax me at a 50% margin rate. NFW. And her regulation ideas on business are pretty much socialist.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-shouldnt-be-accountable-only-to-shareholders-1534287687

Cant read the article as I'm not a member. Curious about it though. I did see "-that enables businesses to turn a profit. What do Americans get in return?
I'm assuming it does not go on about how great it is to be able to run a business and make money...I could be wrong..........

What's up with this socialist push btw, its everywhere, do 'they' not understand that it will increase taxes and decrease personal earnings? I mean we all want more, but I dont want the gov taking the majority of my money while telling me how to spend what little is left. (Well not telling me, but forcing me with more taxes on commodities they deem unnecessary) That will def drive up the cost of audio gear...

 

[Irvrobinson]

A good chunk of Europe has a higher standard of living than the US.

Right. A small bunch of low-population countries like Switzerland, Norway, etc. The high population countries (Germany, France, Spain, etc.) don't. That doesn't make "a good chunk".

 

[Steve81]

It's called being a democracy. (Well, technically we're a republic, but that's another argument.) What we have now is a tyranny of the minority.

As you said, we're not a democracy, we're a republic. More specifically, we're a constitutional republic with a founding document that lays out clear constraints on the power of our government in order to help prevent true tyranny of the majority or minority. One can argue that the Constitution is imperfect, and I certainly won't disagree. OTOH, those "unfair compromises" had a clear purpose in building a union of semi-sovereign states. The attitude of "screw the less populous states" has the obvious ramification of further straining and possibly breaking that union, especially given the tensions/divisions that exist today.

 

[lovinthehd]

Abandon civility when somebody disagrees with you.

Yeah, the right and especially current crop of republicans never does this sort of crap, especially the drumpf. LOL.

 

[shadyJ]

Right. A small bunch of low-population countries like Switzerland, Norway, etc. The high population countries (Germany, France, Spain, etc.) don't. That doesn't make "a good chunk".

France and Germany do have a higher standard of living. If we add up the population of countries in mainland Europe that do have a higher standard of living than the USA, it adds up to 210.6 million people. If we include the UK and Ireland, it adds up to 281 million people.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Warren wants to tax me at a 50% marginal rate. NFW. And her regulation ideas on business are pretty much socialist.

Google says that the current top marginal tax rate in the US is 39.6%, which applies to income over $418,400 (single) and $470,000 (married). So, at what percentage does fair taxation go from "fair" to "unfair", i.e. "socialist"?

As for business regulation, the term is so large in scope, it's difficult to know what you mean. While the financial crisis caused widespread devastation amongst American and European financial institutions, Canadian banks came through it practically unscathed. Although there are many factors accounting for this, Canadian bank regulations played a major role. So, there is a place for reasonable regulation. What constitutes "reasonable" or "socialist" regulation is up for debate, I guess...

 

[Steve81]

Google says that the current top marginal tax rate in the US is 39.6%, which applies to income over $418,400 (single) and $470,000 (married). So, at what percentage does fair taxation go from "fair" to "unfair", i.e. "socialist"?

IMHO, it's less about the rate, and more about how wisely the money is being used.

Of course, one should keep in mind, federal income tax is only a portion of the taxes most people pay. In my neck of the woods, there are state and local income taxes, property taxes, sales tax (including "sin taxes"),and FICA to consider. It all adds up to a pretty healthy percentage of my paycheck, and I'm hardly a 1%er.

 

[highfigh]

Really, James, even assuming there was some Russian influence, do you really think it influenced the election at all? I don't. Not a bit. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly three million, and only won because of our obsolete electoral college. And that was against HRC, who wasn't exactly a stellar candidate. The real problem is, who will the Democratic Party put up as a candidate? A semi-socialist? Some high-tax, anti-business, the-poor-are-noble-and-the-rich-are-evil leftist? If that happens, even I'll vote for Trump. The Democrats had better grow some brainpower right now to be in a position to win. They aren't. Not even close.

Obsolete? You really want one state to determine the outcome of the election only because they have so many people the number of delegates is roughly equal to ten smaller states and they're politically slanted one way or the other? California has more people than Canada- does that state's general population agree with your views? We aren't a pure democracy- it's not as simple as that and if it were, it would be mobocracy, not DEmocracy.

Odd thing about the wealthy- so many of the people with the most money are Democrats.

 

[highfigh]

That's exactly what the electoral college does. Levels the playing field for all. Same reason for the number of Senators.

Representatives, not Senators- each state gets two Senators, but the representatives are based on population.

 

[everettT]

Representatives, not Senators- each state gets two Senators, but the representatives are based on population.

Was referring to Senators being equal representation of the states.