Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Higher taxes leads to lower GDP growth and lower taxes to higher HDP growth.
Harry Truman,
If that was true then Mongolia and Paraguay would be really prosperous countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates
Mongolia has had GDP growth rates of about 8 or 9% until just recently.
If you start with $1.00 and get another $1.00 what is your growth rate?
＠Mykcob4 "the actual effect is corporate spending instead of holding"
Don't we want the corporations to spend their money? It doesn't matter whether the corporations spend it internally on more employees, or externally on goods and services, because the end result is more profits and more jobs/wages somewhere in the economy.
The question is where the corporations spend their money. Logically you want them to spend their money by buying, hiring, paying dividends and wages, and investing in your own country. The tax system can encourage or discourage that. It'll be interesting to see how Trump's proposed border adjustment tax affects the American economy. It has the virtue of simplicity, but I'm guessing it'll cost jobs and make many products, especially cars, unaffordable to ordinary Americans.
There is no way trumps proposals are going through as is. Just like taxes = dead weight loss in pure economics (economics 101, you can graph it.) Creating trade tariffs/taxes does the same thing, dead weight loss.
Everyone overall benefits from trade, however, those that work in industry where the other country has a comparative or absolute advantage, will lose out, while those working in industry where their country has the advantage win. Of course we also have plenty of situations where countries will subsidies their own goods creating unfair trade. (US is just as guilty of this as any other country.)
@LogicForTW:
As you say, everyone benefits from trade. You sell what you have to get what you want.
"those that work in industry where the other country has a comparative or absolute advantage, will lose out"
One of the big lessons of economic history is that comparative advantages are continually churning. You always need to be looking for the next advantage. The trick is to make the transitions as quick and easy as possible and set up systems to help people through the disruptions.
But many politicians rely on support from specific industries and instead fight to prop up dying industries. It's as if they think American supremacy in iron and steel production is an eternal religious truth. Too bad the Japanese, the Koreans, the Chinese, and now the Indians didn't accept that.
I've always thought that America's true comparative advantage is science. Growing up, I was awed by the Apollo program and the achievements of Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Edwin Hubble, Grace Hopper... And I then I read that well over a third of 21st century Americans still believe in the literal Genesis story. WTF.
I can't speak as any kind of expert on large corporate finances. I do know that large corps get away with things that a medium or small business could not. Large corps don't pay taxes, they usually don't even pay property taxes. Yet, for the last 30 some odd years we as a nation have treated them as if they are individuals. They enjoy freedoms and privileges that individuals should have (but don't). They can make large political contributions where an individual is limited. Big business benefits from society far more than individuals do, and yet they don't contribute to that society. Sure they employ a great number of people but they need those people for production. Whereas you and I contribute to overall society and reap little in return by comparison. Republicans call taxation as wealth redistribution, but the fact is that wealth redistribution actually exists far greater in consumerism. Far taxation provides two vital elements.
1) It contributes to the society by paying for necessities thus lowering the price by having a single payer.
2) It acts as a balance to make the playing ground fair and competitive.
It builds the middle class and provides an opportunity for less fortunate.
This is a great benefit for large corporations as well because a well educated and physically healthy population is far more productive. This brings more profits for those corporations.
Mykcob4
In an ideal world, you're right. Big corporations are simply smarter than politicians and bureaucrats. In fact, they buy and sell politicians and cherry-pick the best of the bureaucrats. In Japan, senior bureaucrats typically retire in their mid-50s and are then employed by major corporations that want to use their contacts and inside knowledge. The Japanese call it "descending from heaven." I'm sure similar things happen in the US and other countries. In UK, big corporations typically have former politicians (people with "Sir" or "Dame" on the front of their names) on their boards of directors. I see these things as corrupt.
The cost of taxation has never been spread evenly. It falls heavily on some and not at all on others. So those who pay have to pay proportionately more. We need a tax net that is broader, simpler, and lighter with minimal compliance costs. When taxes are lower, more people and companies pay them because of diminishing returns on the costs of avoidance and the risks of evasion. I also think the bulk of taxes should be levied indirectly on added value (i.e.consumption taxes) rather than directly on income.
@Algebe
I'll just say I disagree with a sales tax only tax base program. I really don't want to get into the details of it. It is too complex an issue. I simply don't want to commit that much energy to such a discussion. I see your points, all valid, but I have mine, also valid. Just too much to wade through.
@mykcob4: "Just too much to wade through."
Agreed. And not relevant enough to atheism, either. Although for some people, political and economic theory is akin to religious dogma.
@ Harry
Your argument is essentially atheists should be republicans or at the least conservative and you so ardently supported that Idea that you voted in Trump. Though now in retrospect you call him a shithead and his daughter one too. However you were willing to blindly follow him as a result of blind loyalty to a philosophy (conservatism)
Most of the "Liberals and progressives" on this site have spent hours arguing their own stance and are not afraid to step out of their ideological comfort zones when challenged.
How can you call yourself a skeptic when you still blindly follow an Ideology.
The United states has the strongest Border and military the world over.
They have the toughest vetting process for any immigrant/refugee
regulation of arms reduces gun violence. It has worked. there is evidence but you bring up ideology to support your stance not data.
you call immigrants as terrorists. Again backed by no Data.
Most of the american armed forces equipment and strategies originated in Nazi germany. They were assholes because of their Ideology but still at the forefront in certain other spheres.
Your entire rant just seems loaded with Ideology and somehow you seemed to have latched on to some weird notion of atheism and want us to partake of your fantasy.
Just because you say so does not make progressives Nazis nor does it make Gun violence a choice.
"Your argument is essentially atheists should be republicans or at the least conservative and you so ardently supported that Idea that you voted in Trump. Though now in retrospect you call him a shithead and his daughter one too. However you were willing to blindly follow him as a result of blind loyalty to a philosophy (conservatism)"
That wasn't what I was saying at all. I said that progressives and socialists want to force their beliefs on everyone else- they believe guns are had, and therefore want to prohibit everyone from owning them, and they believe that global warming is real, and so want to force everyone else to act in accordance with that. The right isn't much better, but its different when a community who knows better espouses such things.
@harry Truman
As I posted in an earlier post to you, I am a socialist. Please provide documentation in which I -- at any time -- attempted to "force" my belief on you ... or anyone else.
Before I continue, you need to know a little of my background. I owned my own (micro) business for 32 years. My largest number of employees was two. My average annual revenue (sales) was about $1.2 million. My average annual income was in the mid five digits ... a very middle class income.
I sold my business and retired at age 54 in 2012. I retired with a sizable retirement nest egg. Since I was self-employed, my only "retirement" source of income is from what I saved/invested and from the proceeds of the sale of my business until I'm able to start drawing Social Security from the U.S. at age 66 and a half ... a few years down the road.
I learned very early that the only way I could prosper as an individual under capitalism was to beat it at its own game. In other words, I had to apply capitalist business practices on a personal basis: reduce my expenses in order to maximize my personal net (after all expenses) income. I lived my life (and continue to live) very frugally. As just one example: I didn't take a vacation -- a major annual expense expense for most Americans -- in all the years I owned the business.
So you see, I know about capitalism. I lived it and succeeded under it. There isn't a single aspect about capitalism that I don't know and/or have experienced. That is exactly why I am a socialist.
Let's return to the aspect of "force" that you referred to. We live under a global system of capitalism. For the sixty years that I've been alive. I haven't had a choice -- or the liberty -- to live my life outside the exploitation and oppression of capitalism. Global capitalism has been forced upon me for 60 years.
If I were to start publicly and massively advocating the overthrow of the capitalist system and the State that protects it, I would be murdered by the State as the enforcer of the ruling capitalist elites.
U.S. Libertarians talk a lot about offering "maximum liberty/freedom." What they don't say is that the liberty/freedom they offer is limited to their own set of principles. A person willing to be submissive and obedient to the principles of U.S. Libertarianism would, in theory, enjoy the benefits touted under those principles.
For those, like me, who would NOT submit to those principles; not so much. Any dissent would be quickly squelched via private security forces, law enforcement forces, or the military.
By the way, what you believe to be socialism is actually State Capitalism as defined below....
Regardless of what you read, listen to, or believe; real socialism has NEVER been implemented -- ever. If the economic and political system involves a State and a system of money and wages ... it's not real socialism.
For complete details, see: http://www.worldsocialism.org/english/how-wsm-different-other-groups
@Mbrownec: "Regardless of what you read, listen to, or believe; real socialism has NEVER been implemented -- ever."
Ditto for real capitalism. Which is a pity, because real capitalism is very democratic and can produce huge benefits for everyone. Of course, that would require a neutral government capable of establishing and enforcing fair rules that apply equally to everyone. Every member of that government should have the words "Nothing is too big to fail" tatooed on their foreheads.
Your definition of state capitalism describes the current situation in China with its massive state-owned enterprises. The whole thing is a house of cards.
I'm not sure how industry would work under your world socialism model. Capitalism is a way of sharing risks and gains so that we can build factories, buy planes and ships, and hire people. Wisdom gained through succsses and failures is shared through the stock market and used to guide decisions about future investments. How would you spread risk and share wisdom under your world socialist model?
I agree with the "no business is to big to fail" tattoo idea.
I done a lot of reading on economics and capitalism. There are better systems than pure capitalism, but I do not see how we get there from here.
Utopia, for instance I think anyone would agree is better, but how do we get there? Obviously the communism route does not work.
I too have figured out how to game the current us capitalism system, just like how I would quickly learn how to game a pure capitalism system.
In pure socialism, risk is spread out to everyone evenly, if I understand it correctly. But I will let Mbrownec answer that one.
"Your argument is essentially atheists should be republicans or at the least conservative and you so ardently supported that Idea that you voted in Trump. Though now in retrospect you call him a shithead and his daughter one too. However you were willing to blindly follow him as a result of blind loyalty to a philosophy (conservatism)"
That wasn't what I was saying at all. I said that progressives and socialists want to force their beliefs on everyone else- they believe guns are had, and therefore want to prohibit everyone from owning them, and they believe that global warming is real, and so want to force everyone else to act in accordance with that. The right isn't much better, but its different when a community who knows better espouses such things.
I supported Trump because he wasn't Hillary- no other reason. It has nothing to do with conservatism. Like I said before, I am a libertarian, not conservative.
Harry let me argue from another standpoint.
Do you believe people have the right to chose to not immunise their kids?
"Why should the government and liberals force people to get vaccines?"
If you feel that people should have the right to chose no, then what about the child who is left bereft of the opportunity to combat life threatening diseases with the help of certain preventive medications. You live in a developed world, thus you aren't exposed to many preventable diseases affecting children so much so that there is a need for them to battle for their lives in an Intensive care setup.
So In this instance the rights of the kids for survival outweighs the rights of the parents to chose not to immunise their kids.
Now when it comes to firearms. There is evidence to show that mass shootings decrease dramatically with gun control laws. There is a precedent and a lot of data to support this fact. which would imply that peoples right to not get shot in mass shootings "trumps" your right to bear a dangerous weapon.
As for Climate change, well it takes more blind faith to believe climate change is a hoax than it takes to believe in a god. The glaciers are melting, the weather has drastically changed, droughts have increased. The data and consensus in the scientific community is unanimous.
There is also a shift in world policies towards a more green energy or renewable energy development planning. Would you duck your head underground and still burn fossil fuel or be part of the change. India for one is embracing green energy. We have started to incentivise Solar power and wind power on a large level already with grants ready for any form of renewable energy harvest. I heard that China was disinvesting in coal and investing in green energy. This all made more solid after the paris treaty.
However Trump just decided to back out of it. Bad for the planet, Bad for Business.
Now I understand most people despised Hillary clinton and maybe you should, I heard there was cheating in the democratic primary and so on. But between trump and her she was by far the better candidate. At the very least she stood for Ideas that were for the better of the your country. She wanted gun control and not prohibition of firearms. Trump is just a point of ridicule. America is the forefront of Industry and technology but with things as they stand, I doubt it will last. Europe seems geared to give you a tough fight If India and China don't race ahead.
Fortunately Harry is/was not old enough to vote.
Hillary = Bad, trump = worse there is no contest, its not even close, trump is far far worse then Hillary ever was, as bad as Hillary is. If anything, by measure of how deeply embarrassing it is to be an American these days.
Bringing it back to atheism, the far right and trump is one of the worse things to happen to the freedom of being atheist w/o persecution etc in a long time. And I am the militant type of atheist that feels religions need to be gone... yesterday its holding humanity as a whole back.
All else being equal, I do not believe parents should chose not to vaccinate their children for certain diseases- however, many children are allergic to them, and they contain mercury, so the issue is more complicated than that.
Prohibiting people from owning certain weapons is not the same as preventing a shooting- just because a person might misuse a weapon doesn't mean they should be banned. Last I checked you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, which kind of requires you to have committed a crime prior.
Everything that you are talking about on global warming is total bullshit. The icecaps melt DURING THE SUMMER EVERY YEAR. They refreeze every year too. In fact, Antarctic sea ice has grown. Furthermore, this 'green energy' is very inefficient. If you were going to replace fossil fuels, the only effective alternative is nuclear energy, but you people hate that stuff.
lies, lies, lies
From where, Harry, are you getting your information about global warming?
That Antarctic sea Ice is growing? From NASA. That ice caps melt and refreeze? Reality.
Don't tell Harry Truman; antarctic sea ice reached a record low earlier this year.
Harry, you need to read more thoroughly. https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-dim...
Sounds like you do not understand global warming at all. Of course ice melts and forms each year based on the seasons, no one is contesting that. But the overall long term trend points to serious melting going on. And global warming is only a small part of the whole concept of climate change.
Yes climate change happens naturally, but the rate that it is happening now is not natural. Even Trump admitted recently that global warming is real. If that idiot can admit he got it wrong, whats left for global warming deniers? Exxon, royal dutch shell, etc etc all have come out saying yes, human caused global warming is real. If all the big players with an agenda to minimize/hide human caused climate change are admitting to it, you are just left with Koch brothers brain washing.
@Harry Truman "however, many children are allergic to them"
That's a reason to ensure that as many children as possible are vaccinated. There will always be some who can't be vaccinated for various reasons, including all newborns. So if vaccination rates go down, those children will be most vulnerable when the diseases come back. The mercury-based preservative used in vaccines has been proven to be very safe, with very rare cases of minor allergic reactions. The autism link is a fallacy. Even with the mercury, vaccines are certainly safer than polio or diphteria, etc.
"global warming is total bullshit"
Climate change is a fact. Just ask the mammoths. The only controversial aspects are the extent to which the present warming phase is caused by human activities, and whether or not reducing anthropogenic CO2 emissions will have any significant effect on the trend. People have certainly poured lots of CO2 into the air since the Industrial revolution, and that may have affected the climate to some extent. But if you stick a knife in someone, do they get better as soon as the knife is pulled out, or do they just bleed faster? Reducing CO2 emissions now could have unpredictable effects.
I don't think these questions are debated enough because of religious zeal on the part of some climate change extremists.
Green energy is getting better. Solar panels are getting cheaper and more efficient, and now there are even solar roof tiles. When combined with improved battery technology, solar power could make a big difference, not only to the environment, but also to people's bank balances. With solar-equipped homes and electric vehicles, we could chop two big items out of household budgets.
Nuclear energy requires massive up-front capital expenditure. Finding suitable sites is difficult because of the NIMBY reaction, which is understandable given the stupid things that the nuclear industry has done. Tokyo Electric Power was warned years ago about the tsunami threat to its plant in Fukushima. They could have spent a few million building a seawall. Instead they and the Japanese government are now spending hundreds of billions trying to make the damaged plant safe.
Nuclear energy is not a good choice for earthquake-prone countries, as the Japanese have discovered. And then there's the fuel problem. I don't think anyone's come up with a truly safe way to dispose of radioactive waste.
"I don't think anyone's come up with a truly safe way to dispose of radioactive waste."
We could launch it into outer space.
Time works pretty well. Launching into space? That is about the most dangerous thing you can do with nuclear waste; if anything goes wrong you got a BIG problem.
They mostly store the spent fuel rods in cooling tanks, and when they get cool enough, they just store them in back parking lots of the nuclear power plants.. (really does happen!)
Nuclear waste is a problem of public misinformation/ coal burning produces lots more nuclear waste then nuclear does, and it releases much of it strait into the air.
Yeah launching nuclear rods into space is a bad idea, plus far to expensive, even though the waste is small, its still heavy, and much too hot to launch into space for years.
They are getting better at creating reactors that use 80 percent of the uranium instead of just a few percent of it, creating much less waste, and the waste is much easier to deal with (not as nearly as radioactively hot for nearly as long)
Course if we ever crack deuterium based controlled fusion reaction, we can toss out the idea of electric/gas bills. Unfortunately many billions have been spent on research on this with little progress over the last 5 decades or so.
I do think small (50 megawatt) nuclear reactor idea is a good one, have not seen yet why that would not work other than the need for a public opinion/culture change against the idea of nuclear = bad.
Pages