I seriously doubt that taking away the minimum wage will satisfy Joe in Pennsylvania. He still loses out to a worker in China who has much, much more purchasing power for that $2/day he gets than Joe will for whatever the lowest amount it is that he'll accept.

I'm also opposed to direct economic interventions- I (presumably) agree with you that it's extremely preferable for any intervention (which has to be seriously justified) to simply generate new incentives or disincentives instead of throwing a wrench in the market and directly preventing actors from trying out certain paths. That's a big part of why Trump's trade policy- especially his proposed restrictions- is extremely stupid and does not hold up to the slightest amount of economic scrutiny.

I would if you're not putting your regulations on the table forcing companies to move overseas.

That's an extremely flawed narrative. It's not regulations. It's the reality that there's much, much cheaper labor in China than we can get here- because of poverty, because of access to resources, and because of a lack of human rights. Scrap the EPA regulations, scrap minimum wage laws, and I guarantee to you that Rust Belt workers will come back and complain- at the very least about perpetually declining wages.

No serious economic analyst- i.e., someone who got a goddamn degree in the field and is a respected researcher, not someone who just reads shit online- backs your claim here. It's just a straight-up consequence of free trade that we're forced to either maintain comparative advantages or give up on industries where we don't have them.

Regulations certainly won't stop robots, either.

In fact this goes beyond manufacturing jobs. It is easy for people in East Europe and Asia to do the same thing we do here for less.

That's exactly the case. Unskilled labor is cheaper abroad, period, largely due to much lower cost of living and higher poverty rates. Regulations don't make our labor cheaper, for sure, but they are not among the key reasons that we no longer have a comparative advantage in car manufacturing (we weren't going to sustain that for a long period of time, anyway).

Edited 11/28/2016 02:48:11

Knyte is truly cancerous. He refuses to admit that lowering the cost of labor would make many companies move over here to reduce other costs (transporting the assembled products from Asia to here f.e). He's stuck in his own bubble and always will be, seeing reality not as it is but through stained glass, where him and what he supports can do no wrong and he is always purely logical with no irrationality.

2/10 I've had more intelligent discussion with Karl

No, I'm saying that scrapping regulations would not meaningfully reduce the cost of labor to the point that we get companies building iPhones here instead of in China.

There's economic realities we can't change driving this, not regulations. It's partly because China has a much lower cost of living and also partly because China is just in a much better position than we are to run a factor-driven economy.

Manufacturing jobs are our past, not our future; I don't see why you're so hellbent on expanding that sector in the first place. We straight up do not have a comparative advantage there and have no path to building one in the medium or long term.

You're saying I'm in a bubble, but at the same time you have to put words in my mouth to get an argument you have a hope of responding to.

Manufacturing economic narratives out of thin air (and sketchy online libertarian publications), though, I guess that's an industry you'd have a comparative advantage in.

@Tabby: Protectionism is the stupidest economic policy possible. You simply cannot disguise economic realities- especially not at the immense cost you now place on consumers. I'd recommend picking up an economics textbook (econ 101 should do) and learning about absolute vs. comparative advantages- there's no way that we can be economically shut out in all industries at once. There's always somewhere for us to move to.

Edited 11/28/2016 02:53:35

@knyte: I'm not disagreeing with comparative advantage. I'm saying that it's blacks and hispanics who go down before us palefaces do. So your joy about the plight of white blue collars is premature.

That said, I have nothing at stake if industrial jobs come back or not since I'm not part of the working class. I find it strange, though, that you keep insinuating that the only real reason anyone would vote Trump is because they are racist, sexist, homophobic scum. Either you dislike PC -> alt-right -> racist, or you want to keep your job -> want to take them away from blacks & Mexicans -> racist.

How do blacks have anything to do with the issue of rural white jobs?

Because there is not just white working class but also black working class.

Also as I have said before, racism, sexism and homophobia are independent of each other. Don't ever combine them because they are unrelated to each other.

I sincerely hope you will be able to overcome your autism someday because that way you just get sarcasm instead of it having to be explained to you.

@knyte: I'm not disagreeing with comparative advantage. I'm saying that it's blacks and hispanics who go down before us palefaces do. So your joy about the plight of white blue collars is premature.

Last I checked the rural Midwest ain't exactly a hotbed of diversity. Urban workers will be hit, no doubt, but they're in a far better position to move to new industries than people living in towns that don't have a ton of economic diversification. Geographically, there's not a whole lot we can do to save these regions in the short-term, just the people.

I find it strange, though, that you keep insinuating that the only real reason anyone would vote Trump is because they are racist, sexist, homophobic scum.

I've explicitly stated otherwise on multiple occasions. Again, if you have to put words in my mouth to have something you can argue against, odds are you're the one living in a bubble full of narratives.

Edited 11/28/2016 03:44:57

I've explicitly stated otherwise on multiple occasions. Again, if you have to put words in my mouth to have something you can argue against, odds are you're the one living in a bubble full of narratives.

I guess you have, but you also said, among other things:

There's very few racists that appreciate being called racist. Unfortunately, we stigmatized the label far more than the actual act of racism.

Doesn't matter a bit to me, though, if The Lord, Adrijan, and others get triggered when they get called what they are.

and:

I certainly don't see you as a racist and obviously don't see my friends who support(ed) Trump as racists. I'm talking about a specific (but large) subset of Trump voters- the "hidden white voters" in the Midwest who swung this election.

So your message I a bit unclear, can you understand why someone would get the idea that you think all Trump voters are racists?

Is this discussion taking internet space away from important discussions such as killing all the people who have sex?

2/10 I've had more intelligent discussion with Karl

arguably knyte is the most intelligent talker on WL after the sons of the Adduti family so don't lie.

that said, he is pretty elitist. I went back in time to 1789 to see his forefather killed in the anti-elitist revolution in France.

Edited 11/28/2016 04:48:44

Жұқтыру is a racist

Haven't read the thread, but downvoted because Billy Balls.

You can't shut us down. Don't underestimate me and my teammate. We are strategic !!! We are also funded by the Clinton Foundation, so is Fizzer.

It seems we dominate in the field of shilling in Warlight as well as playing it !

Edited 12/3/2016 16:03:10

I've lived in three countries for years, learned the people, the culture. Everywere the same: old versus young, black versus pink, dildos versus nondildos, rich versus poor. It means shit anyway. As long as there are ways to stop people going the way Syria, Yugoslavia, Lebanon, Kamboga went it's all ok. Also soon you will have no race problem due to the fact that most Americans will be mixed race.

The stranger prophecy of the ashlanders is indeed interesting. A person of a certain sign born to uncertain parents will expel the n'wah from Morrowind.

The system that elects the president (electoral college, state-based system) is obviously not as democratic as is could be. But its purpose is to keep the political system from changing too much. And it seems to have worked. The counties/states/people that supported Trump are largely against continued (social) change, for various reasons.

But that isn't really the issue here. Older, whiter, Republican voters are more reliable voters. Even with a candidate like Trump, they turn out to vote. Younger and "minority" voters are less reliable when it comes to voter turnout. When voter turnout is low, Republicans tend to win; when voter turnout is high, Democrats tend to win. Clinton spent her ad money attacking Trump and didn't offer a persuasive enough message to inspire people to overlook her flaws and go vote. The election focused on negatives, and the result was relatively low voter turnout. Clinton won more votes, Trump won more delegates (they meet to vote later this month).

Will the system change? No. Why would the Republicans vote to change the electoral college? Over 90% of their voters are white. The demographics of the country are changing, and the people's views on policy are more and more in line with the Democrats. Why change a system that allows 1 vote in a small Republican state like Wyoming to be equivalent to about 4 votes in California or New York? Why would the Republicans water down the power of their voters on purpose? Demographics are against them, but they have an edge in terms of the electoral college. Gore won by about 500,000 votes in 2000, but Bush became president. Now Trump loses by over 2 million votes and will be president. Why change a system that allows you to win when you have fewer total votes? Republicans will cling to the electoral college as long as they can, and will only decide to change it if/when the Republican platform becomes more welcoming to non-white voters.

Edited 12/9/2016 12:26:21