After 50 Years Of Failed Predictions, Science Is In Crisis

[Dexter]

 

I feel I've adequately explained my views on this and that we're just going to go in circles now. I've been going on since last night in two different threads. I'm tired.

[Cyber Liberty]

I feel I've adequately explained my views on this and that we're just going to go in circles now. I've been going on since last night in two different threads. I'm tired.

You should be tired. Trying to defend indefensible views is hard work, requiring a lot of word-twisting and goal-post moving.  Conservatives balk at that stuff.

See you on the next thread!

[Smokin Joe]

Dexter,  I am guessing that you recently finished college, and that you are now facing a sizeable student loan debt that is charging 6.78% interest.  If this is the case, you have my sympathy.  And you also have someone who argued bitterly against those government bureaucrats who took over the student loan industry in order to "help" students.  (Bernie Sanders was one of them).  Just to give you a full picture, the interest on my student loans which were incurred before Obama took office were a paltry 2.32%.  This was due to a competitive market where many lenders were competing for my business.  Now that Big Brother Socialism has taken over, students are stuck with a government monopoly that sets the rate at 6.78%.  Furthermore, that same government must now incur more debt because it now has to come up with the funds for your college instead of leaving it up to the banks.

So yes, I would be bitter too.  But socialism is at fault here.  Socialism is to blame.  So ask yourself, would you prefer the free market 2.32% rate that I paid?  Or do you prefer the 6.78% rate that socialism dictates?

You left out the inflation which accompanies easy money: It costs more to attend for a year at my alma mater than it did to be there for four when I went, for tuition, fees, room and board.

[Smokin Joe]

You took my statement to an extreme that is unrealistic. I never said driven people won't stop be driven if they have no opportunities to elevate themselves as individuals. They won't raise it to 100% because that would be absurd and it wouldn't work. Nobody is talking about raising the tax rate to 100%. I don't feel like you're arguing honestly. You know that's not what I'm talking about.

There is a point where you can make more money doing some slug job, when the taxes have been taken out. You have little or no responsibility, few hassles, few headaches, it's almost like a vacation. I work in an industry where pay fluctuates often with commodity prices--as do work opportunities. At some point, you say "I won't do it for that" and go Galt. I have done so in the past and will do so in the future. Just for the record, my job is a passion, not just a profession, but I won't be giving away skills and expertise acquired over decades, either.

[Oceander]

Driven people aren't going to stop being driven because of a higher tax rate. I don't answer the question because I already answered it and I just disagree with what's implied.

Absolutely wrong.  They may last longer because they have a higher tolerance for pain, but eventually, they find alternatives. 

And it’s the alternatives that actually end up sucking a lot of value out of the economy.  Why do you think that employer-provided health insurance was never treated as taxable income?  It’s a valuable asset, after all?   Because that allows employers to pay higher without increasing the employees tax burden.

Then there are tax shelters.  In the 1960s and 1970s, when the top marginal bracket was 90%, high income earners engaged in all sorts of tax shenanigans in order to generate paper losses that they could use to shield their very real income from tax.

Reagan and the Republicans in the 1980s got rid of that in large part by lowering the rates, coupled with some very punitive anti-avoidance measures in the tax code.

But that still exists.  Particularly in the quasi-socialist countries you think so worthy of emulating.  For most Europeans with above-median wealth, the question isn’t whether you’re engaged in offshore tax evasion, but rather what tax haven you use, and how likely is it your name will show up in the next set of the Panama Papers.

[roamer_1]

Driven people aren't going to stop being driven because of a higher tax rate. I don't answer the question because I already answered it and I just disagree with what's implied.

Au Contrar...

I am not rich, but I once was doing pretty good...
As I rebuild, one thing that I am certain of... I will never again get bigger that that which I can handle myself.

No more employees. Never again.
That means no more monster corporate business, and I am alright with that.
I can make between fifty and a hundred bucks an hour all by myself, without all the bricks and mortar, without 10 service vehicles, without the massive investment outfitting those trucks and a shop, without all the headaches of employees, and without the government stone around my neck.

Piss on it. All of it.
And I am by no means alone. It is a thankless thing to be in business anymore. I will do for myself, and no others, and I will do much better.

Go get in business for yourself before you make statements you are not qualified to make.

[The_Reader_David]

"Science" isn't in crisis, but "Climate Science" is.  It's not Science, it's data-(mal)driven Propaganda.

Oh, I don't know about that.  There's string theory which has failed predictions in a different sense:  it fails to make any testable predictions at all, yet claims to be science.

[Sanguine]

Oh, I don't know about that.  There's string theory which has failed predictions in a different sense:  it fails to make any testable predictions at all, yet claims to be science.

String theory is based on measurements and math.  To date, it has not been proven, and is not considered proven science.

[Wingnut]

String theory is based on measurements and math.  To date, it has not been proven, and is not considered accepted science.

One of Hawkings theories was just debunked.  Not sure which one.

[Sanguine]

One of Hawkings theories was just debunked.  Not sure which one.

It may have been the "information can pass through black holes" one.  It wasn't as much debunked as it was found to be lacking.