this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
343 points (94.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36180 readers
488 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yes!!! Usually its police departments protecting them, but being a henchman is Bernie's job guarantee program.

OTOH, if everyone in America is working security or mass deportation/incarceration, then there are fewer people available to make stuff.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe, but not much of one. Honestly anyone supporting or protecting them is almost as bad as being them. Some technical terms would be sheltering, aiding, and abetting.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 weeks ago

How exactly are you defining "trickle down economics"? It has been my experience that a lot of people use that term differently.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

No, this is effectively the Broken Window Fallacy - a debunked theory where it proposed that breaking windows (or similar) stimulates the economy because it would cause people to buy new windows and pay for the installation. But it doesn't work like that. It's just a drain on the local economy.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not to be confused with Broken Window Theory, which posits that the presence of broken windows, graffiti, and other forms of vandalism creates lawlessness because people see that the laws aren't enforced. The idea is that greater criminality is encouraged through the lack of action on minor criminal acts.

We need someone to Broken Window geometric postulate.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

The broken window theory certainly applies to the wealthy.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

For clarity, would you mind outlining exactly how what OP proposed is an example of the Broken Window Fallacy?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Instead of broken windows needing replacement, we have broken CEOs needing protection. Causing destruction as a way to "spur the economy" isn't really a productive thing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Instead of broken windows needing replacement, we have broken CEOs needing protection.

Hm, but a possible effect, imo, is that this incentivizes those companies to start being more consumer-friendly — perhaps they make a connection that predatory policies are a risk to their safety so, to mitigate that risk, they take more consumer-friendly position. However, I think where that idea may break down and become more like the broken window fallacy is if people get the idea that policies will keep improving if CEO's keep getting killed — I think that would just make it so that insurance companies are too scared to operate, which would shift the supply curve to the left ^[1]^.

References

  1. "Change in Supply: What Causes a Shift in the Supply Curve?". Author: "Akhilesh Ganti". Investopedia. Published: 2023-08-31. Accessed: 2024-12-10T07:12Z. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/change_in_supply.asp.
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The only caveat would be is if they were going to hoard that money anyways it might not make it into anyones hands.

"Trickle" would definitely be the key word though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

That is the rub with it. It assumes full employment. Capitalism produces a surplus, and because of it, people just plain don't have to work very much to get all the basic needs met. Keynesianism was the liberal attempt at fixing this, basically by throwing their hands up and looking for ways to dig ditches to have them filled back in again. The leftist solution is to reduce working hours so you can focus on things that aren't work, or just letting people not work altogether.

Keynesianism is the only thing that's kept Capitalism going this long. The right is trying their hardest to dismantle it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No. Trickle down economics refers to things that benefit the wealthy (mostly government policies, particularly related to taxes and subsidies) that will allegedly benefit everyone by “trickling down.” Supply-side economics are an example of trickle-down economics. Trickle-down economic policies have been shown to effectively increase income inequality and studies suggest a link between them and reduced overall growth.

Giving the wealthy tax breaks in the hopes that they’ll spend the extra money they have available on security details, on the other hand, would be an example of trickle down economics.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago

Trickle down economics refers to things that benefit the wealthy (mostly government policies, particularly related to taxes and subsidies) that will allegedly benefit everyone by “trickling down.”

Addressing specifically the point of taxes (eg lowering taxes on the wealthy), I think it's important to note the idea of the Laffer Curve.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What needs to be remembered is both police officers and security details get just as fucked by medical insurance and other corps same as other. Same run arounds we all do. Anyway that is a bit of a non sequitor from me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And yet, despite being the ones with the power (compared to the rest of us), they still lick the boot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

never know. may not try as hard as necessary on this one.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I read earlier that there are more than 200 detectives working on this.

Whether one sympathizes with this particular crime aside, that is insane. They are openly showing the population that they give hundreds of times the resources to crimes against the wealthy than they do to those against your average everyday individual. And somehow nobody's focusing on that. How is it okay that you get more than 200 detectives looking for the murderer of some random CEO, while the murder of some random retail worker or office worker would get maybe two detectives with a full case load?

They're not even pretending to not be corrupt.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

yeah I was thinking about how many murders happened in new york since this one and a week before. I hope they are working as hard as those chicago cops hanging in the aldermans office.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There is no such thing as trickle down economics. The key part of that false hood is the trick part.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

We won't see trickle down economics unless rich people trickle down piss down their trousers out of fear.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No because 1) that thing doesn't exist and 2) nothing of value is created out of it.

It's like paying one team to dig holes during the day, and another to fill them up during the night.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

If you are asking this seriously, trickle-down economics is an absurd nonsense theory, there are no examples of it.

Also, money changing hands is not what creates wealth, and those security details would be just an artificially maintained middle-class that can never be large.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Trickle down economy is a thing….but only in costs, not in profits.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago

Just like a piñata, you have to hit it for the candies to fall down

load more comments
view more: next ›