Guest posts by Daxx

97

Religion / Re: Why do ppl from other religions fight against each other?

« on: March 10, 2011, 08:30:28 pm »

The only state-supported atheistic ideology that has ever been used to justify murder on religious grounds was anti-theistic Marxism as practiced* by totalitarian dictators in the USSR, China and a few other communist countries. I suspect that the people in power in those states would (and in fact did) purge political opposition on whatever grounds they could get away with. It's sort of like claiming that communism was responsible for those same murders, which is equally stupid.

*I would use the word "distorted" here, but that's a more lengthy discussion in and of itself.

98

Politics / Re: The US should RAISE taxes

« on: March 10, 2011, 08:04:59 pm »

The US is largely in trouble for two reasons:

Firstly, your military spending is out of control beyond all reason. You were on the way to balancing the budget and stemming your national debt before you slashed taxes and went off to war (which you're still paying for and you will probably continue to do so for at least another decade). It currently accounts for 40% of global military spending, is six times larger than the next country (China), and is approximately equal to the military spending of the next 15 countries combined.

Secondly, your right wing seems to have this obsession with tax cuts for the super-rich and corporations. If you want  to get up in arms about people not paying their taxes, then you need to look at your major corporations and super-rich who pay very little actual tax due to loopholes, creative accounting and tax write-offs. Simply claiming that the top earners pay 50% of tax without context doesn't actually reflect any understanding about how progressive taxation systems in general or your tax system specifically works*, and ignores the fact that related to wealth distribution this means that the top 5% actually pay less tax on their wealth than the rest of the population. It might be because this is what I'm trained for, but this sort of deliberate misrepresentation irritates me massively (I guess it's the same problem physicists have with most sci-fi).

It's worth pointing out for historical context that a rate of 35% on the top bracket (marginal from ~$380,000+, if I am correct) is insanely low. Historically income taxes were much higher (90% for that top bracket during the 40s and 50s, for example, and 70+% all the way through until Reagan).

*Even if you earn $400,000/year, you do not actually pay 35% of that in tax, because the tiered tax system means that 35% is the marginal rate - earnings below the top bracket are taxed at the appropriate levels for that tier, meaning that the majority of their reported earnings are taxed at a lower rate.
This image reflects the actual proportion of peoples' incomes that are taxed at any given level.
[/image]

99

Politics / Re: The Real Unemployment Numbers

« on: March 10, 2011, 07:34:31 pm »

Measuring unemployment is actually very difficult, and when you mix in the general political motivation for incumbent governments to report unemployment to be as low as possible and opposition groups to report it to be as high as possible, it becomes almost impossible to get a true figure.

For example, there are invariably different forms of structural unemployment in an economy, and the size of the actual population who are able and willing to work is not the same as the total size of the population. For instance, governments don't usually count children or people who have retired as unemployed, even though they are people who are not in work. Similarly some people are incapable of working due to disability. Some people choose not to work because they are in a relationship where they are financially supported or they have savings/investments enough to support themselves. Some people are unemployed because they are lazy and do not want to work. Some people have the wrong skills and/or qualifications for available jobs. Some people see certain jobs as "beneath them" and will refuse to work below a certain pay grade, or may not be willing to take a step down when in six months time another more appropriate and highly-paid job might come along. Some people are forced to leave work to be full-time carers or parents. Some people are short-term unemployed in very fluid jobs markets and may only spend a few days or weeks without a job.

Considering how complex this is, it is tempting (and many governments in fact do) measure unemployment by the "claimant rate", which is equal to the number of people currently claiming unemployment benefits of some kind. However, this measure too fails to account for a number of reasons why people are not working, so must be compared to estimates on the size of a country's available labour, and fails to account for reasons that a person may not be working but may be claiming, or claiming whilst working, and so forth. There are various other measures that are similar to this, and most rely on similarly complex reporting methods.

These figures are very easy to manipulate on both the incumbent and the opposition sides. It's very easy to point to a figure and say "they're lying, this is the true unemployment rate" without context, and since the issue is extraordinarily complex it is very easy to mislead people. Essentially understanding what particular employment rates mean and why they are at the levels they are is something that needs serious analysis, and is unlikely to be the sort of thing you can use as a soundbite whilst retaining any sort of accuracy or context.

100

War Archive / Re: War - Rules

« on: March 09, 2011, 01:31:48 am »

I think it's an excellent idea. We should really be putting more emphasis on teams to decide their own organisational structure anyway; putting together a team that works like a well-oiled machine is a vital part of War.

101

Auction Archive / Re: Daxx

« on: March 08, 2011, 01:31:09 am »

It's moments like these that make me want to get the band team back together.

It's 104 players to go, we got a full Vault of cards, half a thread of deck ideas, it's dark... and our frogs have sunglasses.

Spacebar.

102

Forum Bugs, Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Enforce Sticky Threads

« on: March 08, 2011, 12:12:20 am »

I might compile one if I get some spare time. As a general rule of thumb, though, you can report anything that you think is breaking forum rules (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?action=rules), or the spirit of the rules. The moderators will make a decision about whether something is breaking the rules or not, and what remedy is needed if any. You can also report threads that need janitorial tasks like moving/deleting/locking/merging; this is very helpful and I would estimate that over half of the reports we get are ones like this.

Yes, there is a rule about not reporting frivolously, but that's mostly to stop people just randomly spamming the report button. Don't feel like I'm going to slap you with a warning if you're trying to make my life easier. If it makes you feel better, I occasionally give karma to people who report helpfully.

103

Forum Bugs, Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Enforce Sticky Threads

« on: March 07, 2011, 10:26:31 pm »

Feel free to report all of those things. Don't worry about burdening the mods.

104

General Discussion / Re: Would you Like new elements?

« on: March 07, 2011, 07:04:26 pm »

I know that what I'd like to see is fewer people abusing the English language. But I guess we can't get everything we want.

105

Forum Bugs, Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Enforce Sticky Threads

« on: March 07, 2011, 06:59:13 pm »

As always, using the Report To Moderator function will get something to the mods' collective attentions a lot faster. I know as far as I'm concerned that the Reports are the first thing I check every time I log on, and I can't read every single thread on the forum.

106

Forum Bugs, Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Inbox size

« on: March 06, 2011, 02:20:41 pm »

There are plenty more spaces than 10. They're just paginated.

107

Religion / Re: The purpose of religion.

« on: March 06, 2011, 05:02:34 am »

Have there been any sightings of dragons, like the ones mentioned in Revalations?

haha no i don't think so. there was a sighting within the past hundred years that is closely described by moses. "angels with 1000 eyes in giant wheels" i think it says. anyway there are people (atheists i might add) who claim to have experienced this.

The problem with this is the inherent confirmation bias in looking for examples of UFO "sightings" that might possibly be in some way related to any one of a number of ambiguous references in Revelation/Isaiah/your eschatological book of choice. The number of leaps you have to go through in order to make these connections undermines the connection you are trying to draw.

Also, do you have any references or links to some of the things you're specifically citing? I'd be interested to read some of them.

108

Religion / Re: Welcome to Tea Party Christianity

« on: March 06, 2011, 04:53:53 am »

Of course tarring the whole group with the same brush is sloppy thinking. But it's not inaccurate to generalise a group based on trivially establishable common features if you acknowledge that you're generalising. The overwhelming majority of teabaggers are white. The overwhelming majority are Christians. The overwhelming majority are conservatives. The overwhelming majority get their information from Fox or other conservative sources. Islamophobia is rife across the entire US, not just the tea party, as is the attendant racism.

If anything, looking at the original libertarian membership who are/were more progressive is taking the uncharacteristic extreme of the group, not the other way around. Social Conservative influences have dominated the discourse and promotion of the Tea Party since it entered the mainstream consciousness, and as a result it's not just the public perception that's changed.

But we're mixing politics with our religious discussion now. We should probably turn towards religion some time soon or I'll have to move the thread.