What do you think about Mike Huemer?

[Red]

I watched the whole thing. I did not understand everything, as it is English without subtitles.

Then just say that you don't understand it before making assertions about what the make of the video is trying to say.

But almost everybody is seeking power.

Doesn't mean they have any way of getting it.

In democracies the poor don't pay income tax, in dictatorships they do, that brings the average tax rate down.

Ummm... no. In the USA, the poor (that is, most of the people) don't pay income tax.

The USA is not a dictatorship you moron. And most of the people are not poor, it's just that there's a stigma against the poor. I think I'd rather be poor in the US than in Croatia, US poor is much better than Croatian poor (plus Medicaid is probably better than Croatian universal healthcare).

I'm not sure where you're getting this bullshit, I suspect that you've been brainwashed with nationalistic Croatian propaganda that makes Croatia look like the best place to live, so as to keep the people ignorant of what it's like in actually developed countries.

That is called progressive tax rate, and is an idea almost exclusive to the USA. Most democracies have a flat tax rate, which means everybody pays taxes, proportional to their income. In Norway, everybody pays around 50% of their income to taxes.

Do some basic fact-checking before you make an ass out of yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_ ... rect_taxes

Norway has, like several other Nordic countries, adopted a dual income tax. Under the dual income tax, income from labour and pensions is taxed at progressive rates, while capital income is taxed at a flat rate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressi ... Modern_era

By the mid-20th century, most countries had implemented some form of progressive income tax.

Well, it is hard to tell. We do not know much about what is happening in North Korea.

We know enough to know it's a haven of human rights abuse.

Oh, and when I used that argument, Tell me if you see a negative correlation between lockdown strictness and COVID-related mortality (and here are some studies that show there is no such correlation)., that was not a good argument?

I meant it rhetorically. I already explained why democracies are better places to live.

Clearly, democracy does not always lead to social and economic freedoms. Democracy creates incentives for spreading misinformation and for censorship.

Not if you manage to properly educate the people.

Almost all Internet shutdowns happen at the time of the elections in African democratic countries, in a supposed attempt to prevent the spreading of fake news. And many, if not most of, dictators have been democratically elected.

Most of Africa is authoritarian regimes. Those are not fair elections.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

I am not sure what you mean.

You're not understanding what it's like to live in a democracy compared to a dictatorship.

And maybe it was. The concentration camps in the USA were allegedly a lot less populated during Trump presidency than now.

I'm talking about life for the AVERAGE AMERICAN you idiot, not just one policy.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tensio ... 021-04-15/

Sorry, I worded it wrongly. I wanted to say that dictatorships probably have a strong incentive to appear to be working in the interest of the common people. Like Belarus organized massive public gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic, to make its citizens feel like they are freer than people in neighboring countries. Much more so than Croatia did.

Then what was your point then?

As far as I know, there are almost no primary sector economies these days. That is, only some tribal societies are primary sector economies.

Do you even know what a primary sector economy even is? Define it for me.

Well, I hope the book is much more rigorous. The video literally cites no statistics to support its case. If the book is much more rigorous, the author of the video has probably misunderstood the book drastically.

No he hasn't. I've read the book myself.

[teo123]

Then just say that you don't understand it before making assertions about what the make of the video is trying to say.

Because that would make me look lazy and unwilling to discuss.

Doesn't mean they have any way of getting it.

So, why do some people have a way of getting power, and some do not? The video claims to explain the entire political science, yet it does not even attempt to answer this most basic question.

The USA is not a dictatorship you moron.

Never said it is. I just said that US is one of few countries out there with a very progressive tax rate (so that the poor do not pay any taxes). It is not as if dictatorships almost always have a flat or regressive tax rate, while democracies always have a progressive tax rate.

And most of the people are not poor, it's just that there's a stigma against the poor.

The bottom 53%, when it comes to income, in the USA pay no income tax, right? That is what I was saying: in the USA, and almost only in the USA, the poor pay no income tax.

I think I'd rather be poor in the US than in Croatia, US poor is much better than Croatian poor

Wow, I thought you were rejecting all the US conservative propaganda. I thought only far-right (more right-wing than PragerU, like Blue Collar Logic) in the USA says it is better to be poor in the US than an average person in Europe.

so as to keep the people ignorant of what it's like in actually developed countries.

So, what do you think, am I spoiled by living in a first-world country that is Croatia so that I do not understand Somali problems, or am I brainwashed by Croatian propaganda to fail to realize how poor Croatia really is? You cannot claim both.

Do some basic fact-checking before you make an ass out of yourself.

Well, I know American conservatives (PragerU...) are advocating a flat tax rate, and are citing its success in Europe, especially Nordic countries, as an argument. I haven't heard the other side, though.

We know enough to know it's a haven of human rights abuse.

How do we know that?

Not if you manage to properly educate the people.

What is the incentive to properly educate people in a democracy? Just like in a dictatorship, rulers in a democracy want people to believe the propaganda.

Those are not fair elections.

I thought claiming that goes against the basic principles of social sciences. It is doubting the government statistics, is not it?

You're not understanding what it's like to live in a democracy compared to a dictatorship.

What makes you think you do?

I'm talking about life for the AVERAGE AMERICAN you idiot, not just one policy.

OK, so, what evidence do you have life for an average American is better under Biden? This broken link you provided?

Access Denied

Our apologies, the content you requested cannot be accessed.

Sorry, that is not evidence, you presumably just copied a link from Google without even checking that it actually points to a still-existing web-page, yet alone what that web-page actually says.

Then what was your point then?

That is absurd to say dictators have no incentive to please the common man, and only have an incentive to please the keys to power.

Do you even know what a primary sector economy even is?

Primary sector economy is one in which most people are employed in the production of food, characterized also by both high natality and high mortality.

I've read the book myself.

Congratulations! So, how rigorous is it? Does it cite any statistics? Does it try to do any slightly complicated statistical analysis, such as calculating the p-values?

[Red]

Because that would make me look lazy and unwilling to discuss.

No, that'd make you look honest, instead of a dumbass who thinks they know what they're talking about.

So, why do some people have a way of getting power, and some do not? The video claims to explain the entire political science, yet it does not even attempt to answer this most basic question.

How does anyone get into power? It's something that's often out of our control.

The bottom 53%, when it comes to income, in the USA pay no income tax, right? That is what I was saying: in the USA, and almost only in the USA, the poor pay no income tax.

It's more complicated than that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXCGbAv8YPw

Wow, I thought you were rejecting all the US conservative propaganda. I thought only far-right (more right-wing than PragerU, like Blue Collar Logic) in the USA says it is better to be poor in the US than an average person in Europe.

People refer to the rich parts of Europe, not a shithole country like Croatia.

So, what do you think, am I spoiled by living in a first-world country that is Croatia

Croatia is not considered a first-world country, it's just a better place to live than Somalia. That isn't saying much though.

so that I do not understand Somali problems, or am I brainwashed by Croatian propaganda to fail to realize how poor Croatia really is? You cannot claim both.

Yes I can, you can easily be spoiled by the democracy (what of it that you have) with a corrupt government that likes to spread propaganda about its country.

Well, I know American conservatives (PragerU...) are advocating a flat tax rate, and are citing its success in Europe, especially Nordic countries, as an argument. I haven't heard the other side, though.

AFAIK that's mostly Eastern Europe. Not the most prosperous places.

How do we know that?

TONS of testimonial witnesses and journalists getting into the country. If the North Korean government really had nothing to hide they wouldn't be so secretive.

What is the incentive to properly educate people in a democracy?

People need to vote politicians in that would do this.

Just like in a dictatorship, rulers in a democracy want people to believe the propaganda.

It's already been explained to you that the US school system teaches its students about the horrible things the government did. It may be the case in your country, but not everywhere.

I thought claiming that goes against the basic principles of social sciences. It is doubting the government statistics, is not it?

You'd be a moron to believe everything these governments say.

BTW that example you mentioned in an earlier reply was CRITICAL of doing such a thing.

What makes you think you do?

Unlike you I decided to educate myself about it. It isn't hard.

Access Denied

Our apologies, the content you requested cannot be accessed.

Sorry, that is not evidence, you presumably just copied a link from Google without even checking that it actually points to a still-existing web-page, yet alone what that web-page actually says.[/quote]
It's probably your shitty-ass Croatian internet, it works fine on my end. I have a feeling the website is blocked in your country because it revealed corruption in your government.

Use a VPN, or just try refreshing. The link works fine.

That is absurd to say dictators have no incentive to please the common man, and only have an incentive to please the keys to power.

No, it isn't. They have no reason to please the common people, all that does is siphon money away from their keys to power. The keys to power WILL replace the dictator if he isn't keeping them pleased (you'd know that if you watched the video). The dictator NEEDS the keys to power to be loyal, otherwise he can't get anything done.

Why do dictatorships right now have some of the lowest standards of living and human development, and democracies have the highest standards? Your argument makes no sense.

Primary sector economy is one in which most people are employed in the production of food, characterized also by both high natality and high mortality.

No, not just food, natural resources in general. It could have high mortality but that isn't inherent. Authoritarian countries tend to be primary-sector economies.

Congratulations! So, how rigorous is it? Does it cite any statistics? Does it try to do any slightly complicated statistical analysis, such as calculating the p-values?

Shut up Teo, No one thinks you're smart, you're just making yourself look stupid when you obviously don't understand how the social sciences work.

Maybe read the book yourself, you be the judge. I am not going to teach you the whole thing.

You know, I said earlier I wouldn't be responding to you anymore, and I'm advising @thebestofenergy and @mikeminima256 to do the same. Not sure why I'm giving you the satisfaction. This is why you have no friends, Teo.

[teo123]

No, that'd make you look honest, instead of a dumbass who thinks they know what they're talking about.

I do not think so.

How does anyone get into power?

That is exactly what I have been asking, and you seem to be evading the question.

It's more complicated than that.

How did you learn English so well that you can understand those videos? Or are you just pretending to understand them fully?

People refer to the rich parts of Europe, not a shithole country like Croatia.

And if Croatia is such a shithole country, why do people who move to Germany mostly return?

Croatia is not considered a first-world country

Right, Croatia is a third-world country just like Switzerland.

Yes I can, you can easily be spoiled by the democracy (what of it that you have) with a corrupt government that likes to spread propaganda about its country.

OK, fair enough.

AFAIK that's mostly Eastern Europe. Not the most prosperous places.

Well, I have not studied it that much though. As far as I know, everybody or almost everybody in Nordic countries pays income taxes, and those are rather high taxes (around 50%). It is completely unlike in the USA, where most of the people pay no or next-to-no income taxes, but the top 1% pays 80% of their income in taxes (and they used to pay as much as 90% during 1950s). Plus, much of the government revenue in the USA comes in the form of essentially-arbitrary taxes added to everyday products (which is partly why bread is so expensive in the USA compared to Europe), and there is no such thing in most European countries. In Croatia, almost everybody pays 23% of their income in taxes, and most products are taxed at a rate of around 13%.

TONS of testimonial witnesses and journalists getting into the country.

So, why are they more trustworthy than the government?

If the North Korean government really had nothing to hide they wouldn't be so secretive.

They are as secretive as the vast majority of governments were at the beginning of the 20th century, or for most of the human history.

It's already been explained to you that the US school system teaches its students about the horrible things the government did. It may be the case in your country, but not everywhere.

So, you think that, in most countries, children are being told the truth about their countries history?

You'd be a moron to believe everything these governments say.

Well, the consensus among social scientists seems to be that we should indeed believe everything these governments say.

BTW that example you mentioned in an earlier reply was CRITICAL of doing such a thing.

So? It makes it clear what the consensus among social scientists is.

Unlike you I decided to educate myself about it. It isn't hard.

Well, it is hard to get properly educated about the very social sciences, because it is hard to differentiate between science and pseudoscience there.

I have a feeling the website is blocked in your country because it revealed corruption in your government.

The link is HTTPS, so, if somebody was tampering with the connection (ISP or the government), the browser would detect it and refuse to connect. In my experience, if a web-site is banned in Croatia (mostly Serbian websites) and you try to access it, you will get the "invalid certificate" error, and, if you click "proceed", you get redirected to a webpage on "zakon.hr" explaining why the website got banned.

Use a VPN, or just try refreshing. The link works fine.

Tried again, nope, I still get the same error message. And I will not try to use a VPN because I am a computer science student and I know how the Internet works, so I know it is ridiculous to expect a VPN to solve the problem. And that it is ridiculous to believe you that the link works for you.

They have no reason to please the common people

Common sense tells us he does, or else people will revolt. In a dictatorship, people feel an urge to revolt, much more so than in a democracy.

Why do dictatorships right now have some of the lowest standards of living and human development, and democracies have the highest standards?

Because that is not true. Consider the well-known cases of India and China, for example. And if you will claim India is not a democracy, you are probably committing the no-true-Scotsman fallacy.

No, not just food, natural resources in general.

Other natural resources are, by definition, a second-sector economy. Come on now, this is 7th-grade stuff.

you obviously don't understand how the social sciences work.

Oh, please, lecture me, how is that video science in any sense? Where are the measurements? Where is the statistical analysis of the measurements, preferably including the p-value? What observation would even falsify its claims?

Maybe read the book yourself, you be the judge.

Sorry, you have not convinced me it is worth the time. Maybe if it was in Croatian, but in English, so that I need to look up every other word in a dictionary...

[Red]

@teo123 I'm not responding to you. I can't take you seriously after you make arguments this bad.

Other natural resources are, by definition, a second-sector economy. Come on now, this is 7th-grade stuff.

Your inability to do the most basic fact-checking is why no one likes debating with you Teo, AND the fact that you think you're so obviously right, your arrogance is beyond intolerable. We should have banned you a long time ago.

[teo123]

@teo123 I'm not responding to you. I can't take you seriously after you make arguments this bad.

Other natural resources are, by definition, a second-sector economy. Come on now, this is 7th-grade stuff.

Your inability to do the most basic fact-checking is why no one likes debating with you Teo, AND the fact that you think you're so obviously right, your arrogance is beyond intolerable. We should have banned you a long time ago.

I did not expect you to respond really...

OK, if you want, define stuff differently. I also did that in my paper, where I used the word "morphology" differently than it is normally used, though I warned about it to be sure there is no confusion. I think this is acceptable as long as you have something meaningful to contribute to the discussion, such as, in my case, results of my experiments. You seem not to have anything meaningful to contribute to the discussion, you seem to have what are blind guesses at best.
When you think about it, the claim that democracy is better than a dictatorship is about as extraordinary as the claim that preserving languages is a good thing. The damages that democracies do are obvious: democracies encourage, or even require (in case of Australia), people to lose their workdays waiting in long lines, sometimes hungry and thirsty, to vote. To vote who will be a powerless flower who will represent the country at some meetings ("powerless flower", "fikus bez vlasti", is a phrase used by anti-democracy Croatians, most notably Stjepan Mesić, to describe the role of the president in a democracy, which I think describes the situation well), while some unelected bureaucrats have way more power than the president does. All that in the name of a blind guess that it will somehow lead to better policies. And democracies also create obvious incentives for politicians to lie and censor stuff, because they want to influence the elections. You see why the claim that democracies help is extraordinary?

[Red]

OK, if you want, define stuff differently.

It isn't a matter of disagreeing on definitions, it's you literally not knowing what the terms even mean.

The primary sector of the economy includes any industry involved in the extraction and production of raw materials, such as farming, logging, hunting, fishing, and mining.

In macroeconomics, the secondary sector of the economy is an economic sector in the three-sector theory which describes the role of manufacturing. It encompasses the industries which produce a finished, usable product or are involved in construction.

When you think about it, the claim that democracy is better than a dictatorship is about as extraordinary as the claim that preserving languages is a good thing. The damages that democracies do are obvious: democracies encourage, or even require (in case of Australia), people to lose their workdays waiting in long lines, sometimes hungry and thirsty, to vote. To vote who will be a powerless flower who will represent the country at some meetings ("powerless flower", "fikus bez vlasti", is a phrase used by anti-democracy Croatians, most notably Stjepan Mesić, to describe the role of the president in a democracy, which I think describes the situation well), while some unelected bureaucrats have way more power than the president does. All that in the name of a blind guess that it will somehow lead to better policies. And democracies also create obvious incentives for politicians to lie and censor stuff, because they want to influence the elections. You see why the claim that democracies help is extraordinary?

Everything you wrote here is bullshit, but instead of arguing with you about it, how about you go live in an authoritarian country. Not visit, live in it. Or at the very least, ask people who have lived in both a democracy and a dictatorship. Then you can tell me how much better they are to live in than democracies.

[teo123]

It isn't a matter of disagreeing on definitions, it's you literally not knowing what the terms even mean.

OK, I am sorry, I did not know that many experts define those terms differently than my 7th grade history textbook and my 9th grade geography textbook.

Or at the very least, ask people who have lived in both a democracy and a dictatorship.

Well, there have been many people who lived both under a dictatorship and under a democracy and who say living under a dictatorship is better. Like around 60% of Russians, for example. And I guarantee you it is more than 60% of Croatians who think life under the dictatorship was better.
I must say I do not understand your position. You want a technocracy, not a democracy, right? Then why are you insisting that democracy does miracles? The idea of technocracy is a lot closer to a dictatorship than to a democracy. Democracy posits that the wisdom of the crowd works for political issues, that the crowd is a better judge of what is and isn't a good policy than experts are. Technocracy denies that, and rightly so.

[Red]

OK, I am sorry, I did not know that many experts define those terms differently than my 7th grade history textbook and my 9th grade geography textbook.

It's due to your country's shit education system.

Well, there have been many people who lived both under a dictatorship and under a democracy and who say living under a dictatorship is better. Like around 60% of Russians, for example.

You are aware that website is controlled by the Russian government right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_Beyond

Not sure if I should take such a statistic seriously.

And I guarantee you it is more than 60% of Croatians who think life under the dictatorship was better.

Nationalistic delusion (if it's even true).

I must say I do not understand your position. You want a technocracy, not a democracy, right?

50/50.

Then why are you insisting that democracy does miracles?

I never said that, fuck off with your strawman. I just said that democracies are objectively better places to live than dictatorships. Democracy still sucks, but it works better.

The idea of technocracy is a lot closer to a dictatorship than to a democracy. Democracy posits that the wisdom of the crowd works for political issues, that the crowd is a better judge of what is and isn't a good policy than experts are. Technocracy denies that, and rightly so.

Democracy works best if people are educated. Technocracy cuts out the middleman and just puts people who know what they're doing in charge, but that isn't a realistic prospect to have that as the entire government. The closest we can get is voting in people who will put experts as their advisors.

[teo123]

Well it's lame and useless and written in Croatia by some guy who doesn't think prisons exist.

By the way, @mikeminima256, do you think prisons exist? If so, why?