Author Topic: political hobbyist thread  (Read 15159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #275 on: October 21, 2021, 09:04:56 AM »
I think the fact that the CTC is not just done through Social Security is the biggest problem as it has kept some of the poorest kids from receiving it for no real reason is way worse than the rest of the crap.
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #276 on: October 21, 2021, 10:51:57 PM »
I think the more absurd part is Shor understands issue/policy polling to be almost universally b.s., subject to bias in the writing of polls etc. but then goes on to do it anyway while claiming he doesn't. The reason isn't simply the polling, is largely because the vast majority of the electorate simply does not think about policy questions in any logical/reasonable way that is recognizable or discernable to some egg head like shor.

i'm pretty sure shor would disagree with both points.

i assume that he thinks that his own polling methodology is better than most and probably doesn't think it is universal bs.  at the very least he'd think that comparisons between issues polled using the same methodology are internally valid.

i don't have to assume, because i've seen him express it a number of times, that he doesn't think that the majority of the electorate does not have policy preferences.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #277 on: October 22, 2021, 08:59:47 AM »
I wouldn’t go so far as to say the public “doesn’t have policy preferences” but I think it is pretty difficult to measure it, Shor may do it better than others but as presented it looks shoddy as far as drawing the conclusions from it he does, and I think the underlying tendency of the polity is to pick a side and reverse engineer the policy positions. Didn’t we just see this pretty clearly with Trump? Not to over learn the lesson, but I think it is a high bar to claim that the American public has strong beliefs on the intricacies of the CTC and he doesn’t come close to clearing it.
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #278 on: October 22, 2021, 03:45:36 PM »
i don't think means testing the ctc, as polled and as generally processed by voters, is all that intricate.  it's just like, do you think the govt should give most people money to help pay for their children or only give money to poor people with children?

the main point shor tries to make is not ctc specific, but that in general, many libs process opposition to social spending programs "as americans don't like to give poor people money" and this way of thinking about why people object to social spending programs is falsified (on average or perhaps on the margin - obviously individuals may have all sorts of divergent reasons) by the finding that means testing almost always increases support for a social spending program.

personally, i think this is very easy to understand and i find it weird that a lot of econ/policy types i follow on twitter struggle to understand it.  trying to state it concisely, i'd put it as something like - for social spending programs that voters categorize as chiefly charitable rather than chiefly a form of communal insurance/annuity, voters prefer to see that recipients are both in need of, and deserving of, assistance rather than see that the benefit is available to a greater number of people.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #279 on: October 27, 2021, 08:59:29 AM »
@sys

I think this article does a pretty good job in summing up why I think it is important for the Democrats to pass the CTC, not means test it to death and also if possible make it permanent as well as expanding Medicare coverage. These are direct, relatively uncomplicated benefits that come directly from the government (the CTC is very unnecessarily complicated and a worse policy because it is routed through the IRS but still).

I know you just don't like the CTC, but I wonder if you disagree with the article.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-worry-a-lot-about-policies-that-win-elections-thats-short-sighted/
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #280 on: October 27, 2021, 10:38:58 PM »
@sys

I think this article does a pretty good job in summing up why I think it is important for the Democrats to pass the CTC, not means test it to death and also if possible make it permanent as well as expanding Medicare coverage. These are direct, relatively uncomplicated benefits that come directly from the government (the CTC is very unnecessarily complicated and a worse policy because it is routed through the IRS but still).

I know you just don't like the CTC, but I wonder if you disagree with the article.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-worry-a-lot-about-policies-that-win-elections-thats-short-sighted/

my understanding is that the typical timeline for newly introduced benefits is that they decline in popularity following introduction for like 4-5 years, then gain popularity.

i don't agree on the ctc.  i think ctc proponents are deliberately (or perhaps, genuinely, but incomprehensibly) blind to the fact that it is not a universal policy.  it explicitly is only available to parents of minor children, and i think it is unlikely that individuals to whom this benefit is not offered will come to love that it is offered to others and not to them - especially if it is available to people with much higher incomes than most of the people to whom it is not available.

that said, it is not now a high salience issue (look no further than the lack of discussion on this board) and i don't expect it will suddenly become a high salience issue in 2022.  if adopted permanently, it will at some point by perceived as status quo and most people will not consider it either way in electoral decisions unless it is forced up as an issue.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #281 on: October 28, 2021, 09:50:00 AM »
@sys

I think this article does a pretty good job in summing up why I think it is important for the Democrats to pass the CTC, not means test it to death and also if possible make it permanent as well as expanding Medicare coverage. These are direct, relatively uncomplicated benefits that come directly from the government (the CTC is very unnecessarily complicated and a worse policy because it is routed through the IRS but still).

I know you just don't like the CTC, but I wonder if you disagree with the article.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-worry-a-lot-about-policies-that-win-elections-thats-short-sighted/

my understanding is that the typical timeline for newly introduced benefits is that they decline in popularity following introduction for like 4-5 years, then gain popularity.

i don't agree on the ctc.  i think ctc proponents are deliberately (or perhaps, genuinely, but incomprehensibly) blind to the fact that it is not a universal policy.  it explicitly is only available to parents of minor children, and i think it is unlikely that individuals to whom this benefit is not offered will come to love that it is offered to others and not to them - especially if it is available to people with much higher incomes than most of the people to whom it is not available.

that said, it is not now a high salience issue (look no further than the lack of discussion on this board) and i don't expect it will suddenly become a high salience issue in 2022.  if adopted permanently, it will at some point by perceived as status quo and most people will not consider it either way in electoral decisions unless it is forced up as an issue.

Well by that standard Medicare and Social Security are not universal either, that is a dumb side step.  I don't know the exact number, but a huge percentage of Americans have children at some point like 75% and 40% currently have children under 18. Are there people that will become enraged by this?  Yes of course, but not that many and you are part of that minority.

As far as the actual point of the policy (poverty reduction) goes, Bruenig has talked about this a lot but there just isn't much poverty in households without non-workers and non-workers overwhelmingly fall in to one of the following categories: 1) Children 2) Disabled 3) Elderly 4) Caregivers 5) Students

We have Social Security benefits for the Elderly and Disabled categories, Caregivers had some benefits that were subsequently pulled from the infrastructure bill, Students are kind of a transitory category and we have federal subsidized student loans to target them and Children we have the CTC, which is not my ideal policy but addresses this group.

As for salience--A lack of discussion on this board of upper middle class white guys is not exactly a representative sample.  I personally like having a good chunk of my hefty day care payments taken care of by Uncle Joe and absolutely think that while it could be branded and sold a little better, for millions of parents getting a check cut each month is a pretty big deal and can be pointed to and it would be a disaster to have it suddenly turned off on the democrat's watch. 

As far as means testing it--the entire point of making it more universal is to make it more popular because the type of anti-poverty programs that are consistently cut, marginalized, demonized, and get way more hate are targeted, means tested, anti-poverty programs like SNAP, TANF, Section 8, Free and reduced lunches etc.  I tend to think the reason why so many moderates/Republicans want to means test it is so they can kill it/demonize it as "welfare" for lazy/poor people like they do with our extremely weak welfare state already.

It is fine if you don't like it but it is a big improvement on the status quo and it is foolish to think that people won't miss it.

https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/basicfact-alt.pdf
https://news.gallup.com/poll/164618/desire-children-norm.aspx
https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2018/09/18/the-best-way-to-eradicate-poverty-welfare-not-jobs/
« Last Edit: October 28, 2021, 09:54:56 AM by Kat Kid »
@bentren

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 36710
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #282 on: October 28, 2021, 11:47:59 AM »
@sys

I think this article does a pretty good job in summing up why I think it is important for the Democrats to pass the CTC, not means test it to death and also if possible make it permanent as well as expanding Medicare coverage. These are direct, relatively uncomplicated benefits that come directly from the government (the CTC is very unnecessarily complicated and a worse policy because it is routed through the IRS but still).

I know you just don't like the CTC, but I wonder if you disagree with the article.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-worry-a-lot-about-policies-that-win-elections-thats-short-sighted/

my understanding is that the typical timeline for newly introduced benefits is that they decline in popularity following introduction for like 4-5 years, then gain popularity.

i don't agree on the ctc.  i think ctc proponents are deliberately (or perhaps, genuinely, but incomprehensibly) blind to the fact that it is not a universal policy.  it explicitly is only available to parents of minor children, and i think it is unlikely that individuals to whom this benefit is not offered will come to love that it is offered to others and not to them - especially if it is available to people with much higher incomes than most of the people to whom it is not available.

that said, it is not now a high salience issue (look no further than the lack of discussion on this board) and i don't expect it will suddenly become a high salience issue in 2022.  if adopted permanently, it will at some point by perceived as status quo and most people will not consider it either way in electoral decisions unless it is forced up as an issue.

People only support benefit programs that directly benefit themselves? I don't think any benefit program would exist if this were the cass?

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #283 on: October 28, 2021, 12:31:18 PM »
Well by that standard Medicare and Social Security are not universal either, that is a dumb side step.  I don't know the exact number, but a huge percentage of Americans have children at some point like 75% and 40% currently have children under 18. Are there people that will become enraged by this?  Yes of course, but not that many and you are part of that minority.

everyone either is old or expects to eventually be old.  of people who do not currently have minor children, the large marjority of them do not expect to have minor children in the future.  btw, i looked quickly and saw 40% as the number of us households with minor children.  the % of voters would be lower, but i don't have good estimate for how much lower.


As far as the actual point of the policy (poverty reduction).

pretty laughable to say that the point of the ctc is poverty reduction.  the expanded payments go out to households making up to 182k, which is about 300% of the median household income.  and you're arguing against means testing!


As far as means testing it--the entire point of making it more universal is to make it more popular because the type of anti-poverty programs that are consistently cut, marginalized, demonized, and get way more hate are targeted, means tested, anti-poverty programs like SNAP, TANF, Section 8, Free and reduced lunches etc.  I tend to think the reason why so many moderates/Republicans want to means test it is so they can kill it/demonize it as "welfare" for lazy/poor people like they do with our extremely weak welfare state already.

polling shows the exact opposite, and the empirical evidence that less broad benefits are more liable to be cut is sparse to nonexistent.

sorry if that conflicts with how you wish the world worked.


"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 33757
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #284 on: October 28, 2021, 01:21:41 PM »
I'd be more inclined to support eliminating the child tax credit than expanding it.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #285 on: October 28, 2021, 01:52:53 PM »
I'd be more inclined to support eliminating the child tax credit than expanding it.

i'm pretty ok with the current version being discussed.  i think the one year extension of the expanded credit will be seen as a coronavirus measure and not a permanent benefit.  making the basic ctc refundable actually does only benefit persons that need it and at a fraction of the cost of also making the larger benefit available to wealthy households.  paired with extending the eitc for childless adults helps make it more fair as well.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #286 on: October 29, 2021, 06:12:40 PM »
The whole problem of the tax credits is it doesn’t even reach the most needy.

As for the “universal” thing the I am not very sensitive to the SALT caucus arguments about property taxes killing middle class families or the “death tax” ruining family farms, but being over $100K with 3 kids is pretty different than a TINK household and thats the whole point of the CTC. Kids can’t work and thus this benefit is to guarantee at least a basic standard of living.
@bentren

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 13983
  • Distinguished Scholar/Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #287 on: October 29, 2021, 06:26:36 PM »
The whole problem of the tax credits is it doesn’t even reach the most needy.

As for the “universal” thing the I am not very sensitive to the SALT caucus arguments about property taxes killing middle class families or the “death tax” ruining family farms, but being over $100K with 3 kids is pretty different than a TINK household and thats the whole point of the CTC. Kids can’t work and thus this benefit is to guarantee at least a basic standard of living.

We talkin' bout throuples, here?

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #288 on: October 31, 2021, 11:00:07 AM »
Left, Right, and Center has both Bruenigs on this week if you can stomach it sys.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4lVBuR6cFZRywI9q23Harz?si=WuwIVtMiQCmg-oyNbc7hwQ
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #289 on: October 31, 2021, 01:27:26 PM »
under which label did they place each bruenig?
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #290 on: October 31, 2021, 01:32:24 PM »
They tagged team’d as the left


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
@bentren

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #291 on: November 15, 2021, 12:57:49 PM »



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #292 on: November 16, 2021, 08:29:51 PM »
i don't get it.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 18596
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #293 on: November 17, 2021, 07:19:45 AM »
I just thought the image was funny and Perry Bacon is an amazing name.  He used to be in the 538 podcast when I listened to it.
@bentren

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37857
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: political hobbyist thread
« Reply #294 on: November 17, 2021, 10:18:23 AM »
it's a good name.
"lol, i understand military logistics quite well, thanks."