Economic Models/Systems For Society Today/Tomorrow

[StrayDog]

7 hours ago, Canuckle said:

 

It is a lot. It’s certainly too many. And it’s even more shocking when you consider that the total number of Americans who die each year is just over 3 million. So shocking that you might be wondering where this number comes from, and that’s totally fair.

The exact number, 874,000, comes from a Columbia University study conducted in 2011, which studied deaths between 1980 and 2007. Because of the age of the study and the worsening economic conditions we’ve been facing in the past several years, we may well have broken the 1 million mark by now. 

 

 

 

The 3 bolded statements don't mesh up. 

I also did not read the "study" since the link did not actually bring me to Columbia University's site, so I question the validity of it.

[Canuckle]

15 hours ago, StrayDog said:

The 3 bolded statements don't mesh up. 

I also did not read the "study" since the link did not actually bring me to Columbia University's site, so I question the validity of it.

 

It brings you to the study, genius.  It's called a mirror link.

 

Also "didn't read it." Hahahaha

 

Shocker there. You're 2 for 2, bud.

 

Also read those three bolded statements very closely. They add up to your reading comprehension being extremely poor.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Canuckle
make that 3 for 3 Hahahhahahahhahaha

[StrayDog]

3 hours ago, Canuckle said:

 

It brings you to the study, genius.  It's called a mirror link.

 

Also "didn't read it." Hahahaha

 

Shocker there. You're 2 for 2, bud.

 

Also read those three bolded statements very closely. They add up to your reading comprehension being extremely poor.

While I'm glad you finally recognize my genius, the link did not bring me to anything resembling an accredited site and that makes me question whether or not it is legitimate. A random website might work for an anarchist, but for a regular person it means the study is probably not valid. You can either give me a link to the actual study on an accredited academic site or I'm going to ignore it.

And while I admit my math might not be the best, it's difficult to join together "maybe 3 million a year" with the exact number being less than a million in 2011 and "we think it likely it's over a million now". The jump from 1 million in the year of the study with a guaranteed 3 million dead per year is a stretch for me.

My reading comprehension is fine. Your ability to explain things, however, is very lacking. 

I think I'll leave it at that. You can reply, and I'll probably read it. But I think I'm done attempting to have a conversation with your link-fest. It's too bad too; the socialism you put forth might have merit, but if you're an example of the average anarchist it's not something I want anything to do with. Good job turning away someone who might have supported you because you refused to have an actual conversation. Score one for anarchy, I guess......

[Canuckle]

1 hour ago, StrayDog said:

While I'm glad you finally recognize my genius, the link did not bring me to anything resembling an accredited site and that makes me question whether or not it is legitimate. A random website might work for an anarchist, but for a regular person it means the study is probably not valid. You can either give me a link to the actual study on an accredited academic site or I'm going to ignore it.

And while I admit my math might not be the best, it's difficult to join together "maybe 3 million a year" with the exact number being less than a million in 2011 and "we think it likely it's over a million now". The jump from 1 million in the year of the study with a guaranteed 3 million dead per year is a stretch for me.

My reading comprehension is fine. Your ability to explain things, however, is very lacking. 

I think I'll leave it at that. You can reply, and I'll probably read it. But I think I'm done attempting to have a conversation with your link-fest. It's too bad too; the socialism you put forth might have merit, but if you're an example of the average anarchist it's not something I want anything to do with. Good job turning away someone who might have supported you because you refused to have an actual conversation. Score one for anarchy, I guess......

 

Peer reviewed study by the The American Journal of Public Health (AJPH) from the American Public Health Association (APHA) conducted at Columbia.

 

"Random website."

 

Ahahahhahahahaha

 

Hahahahahahahahahah

 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Canuckle
this is amazing. keep going.

[Canuckle]

42 minutes ago, StrayDog said:

While I'm glad you finally recognize my genius, the link did not bring me to anything resembling an accredited site and that makes me question whether or not it is legitimate. A random website might work for an anarchist, but for a regular person it means the study is probably not valid. You can either give me a link to the actual study on an accredited academic site or I'm going to ignore it.

And while I admit my math might not be the best, it's difficult to join together "maybe 3 million a year" with the exact number being less than a million in 2011 and "we think it likely it's over a million now". The jump from 1 million in the year of the study with a guaranteed 3 million dead per year is a stretch for me.

My reading comprehension is fine. Your ability to explain things, however, is very lacking. 

I think I'll leave it at that. You can reply, and I'll probably read it. But I think I'm done attempting to have a conversation with your link-fest. It's too bad too; the socialism you put forth might have merit, but if you're an example of the average anarchist it's not something I want anything to do with. Good job turning away someone who might have supported you because you refused to have an actual conversation. Score one for anarchy, I guess......

You're embarrassing yourself dude.

 

Estimated Deaths Attributable to Social Factors in the United States

Sandro Galea MD, DrPH, Melissa Tracy MPH, Katherine J. Hoggatt PhD, Charles DiMaggio PhD, and Adam Karpati MD, MPH

Author affiliations, information, and correspondence details

 

At the time of this study, Sandro Galea and Melissa Tracy were with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and the Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY. Katherine J. Hoggatt was with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Charles DiMaggio is with the Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University. Adam Karpati is with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, NY.

Correspondence should be sent to Sandro Galea, MD, DrPH, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 168th St, Room 1508, New York, NY 10032-3727 (e-mail: sgalea@columbia.edu). Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the “Reprints/Eprints” link.

 

Peer Reviewed

 

Contributors

S. Galea wrote the first draft of the article, supervised data analysis, and serves as study guarantor. M. Tracy was responsible for data collection and analysis, with input from K. J. Hoggatt. C. DiMaggio contributed to the meta-analytic methods. S. Galea and A. Karpati conceptualized the study and its design. All authors provided critical edits on drafts of the article and approved the final version.

Accepted: November 19, 2010

Published Online: October 20, 2011

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Canuckle
un fucking real

[Playoff Beered]

18 hours ago, Canuckle said:

You're embarrassing yourself dude.

 

Estimated Deaths Attributable to Social Factors in the United States

Sandro Galea MD, DrPH, Melissa Tracy MPH, Katherine J. Hoggatt PhD, Charles DiMaggio PhD, and Adam Karpati MD, MPH

Author affiliations, information, and correspondence details

 

At the time of this study, Sandro Galea and Melissa Tracy were with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and the Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY. Katherine J. Hoggatt was with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Charles DiMaggio is with the Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University. Adam Karpati is with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, NY.

Correspondence should be sent to Sandro Galea, MD, DrPH, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 168th St, Room 1508, New York, NY 10032-3727 (e-mail: sgalea@columbia.edu). Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the “Reprints/Eprints” link.

 

Peer Reviewed

 

Contributors

S. Galea wrote the first draft of the article, supervised data analysis, and serves as study guarantor. M. Tracy was responsible for data collection and analysis, with input from K. J. Hoggatt. C. DiMaggio contributed to the meta-analytic methods. S. Galea and A. Karpati conceptualized the study and its design. All authors provided critical edits on drafts of the article and approved the final version.

Accepted: November 19, 2010

Published Online: October 20, 2011

 

You linked this to claim capitalism kills millions a year. Please point out where in this study they conclude it's capitalism that's causing all these deaths. 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Playoff Beered

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

 

You linked this to claim capitalism kills millions a year. Please point out where in this study they conclude it's capitalism that's causing all these deaths. 

 

Because we all know no one dies in a  socialist country. 

[Canuckle]

1 hour ago, Playoff Beered said:

 

You linked this to claim capitalism kills millions a year. Please point out where in this study they conclude it's capitalism that's causing all these deaths. 

 

Handwaving so fast and hard you're flying!!

 

Read the study by the PhD's, comrade. It's right there.

[Bob Long]

5 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

 

Handwaving so fast and hard you're flying!!

 

Read the study by the PhD's, comrade. It's right there.

 

PhD's? On tenure?

[Playoff Beered]

11 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

Handwaving so fast and hard you're flying!!

 

Read the study by the PhD's, comrade. It's right there.

 

I read it, couldn't find any of the PhD's saying capitalism is the cause. Couldn't even find the word capitalism used once. Did notice that estimates was used exactly 69 times  and estimate 102 times though.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Playoff Beered

[Canuckle]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

Because we all know no one dies in a  socialist country. 

 

Who said they didn't.

 

What's in contention is the notion that capitalism is some great God send pulling people out of poverty and saving lives when we know for a fact this isn't the case. Capitalism is killing the planet and killing us.

 

It's funny. The Black Book of Communism was released back in 1997 and people love taking those figures as historical fact. Easy to digest, easy to reference. Socialisms killed yadda yadda.

 

But what people don't know is that the The Black Book of Capitalism was released the following year.

 

"Le livre noir du Capitalisme (The Black Book of Capitalism) is a 1998 French book published in reaction to The Black Book of Communism (1997). Unlike the earlier work, Le livre noir du capitalisme's primary goal is not to try to attribute a number of victims to the political system in question. Rather, the body of the book comprises a series of independent works from various writers who each voice their critique on various aspects of capitalism.

 

Topics covered range from the African slave trade to the effects of globalization.

An appendix provides an incomplete list of 20th-century death-tolls which editor Gilles Perrault attributes to the capitalist system. The list includes certain death-tolls covering the two World Wars, colonial wars, anti-communist campaigns, repressions and mass killings, ethnic conflicts, and victims of famines or malnutrition; bringing the incomplete total to 100 million deaths attributed to capitalism in the 20th century."

 

But of course the later is handwaved as false and propaganda and the former taken as fact.

 

 

 

[Canuckle]

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

PhD's? On tenure?

 

Peer Reviewed

 

Contributors

S. Galea wrote the first draft of the article, supervised data analysis, and serves as study guarantor. M. Tracy was responsible for data collection and analysis, with input from K. J. Hoggatt. C. DiMaggio contributed to the meta-analytic methods. S. Galea and A. Karpati conceptualized the study and its design. All authors provided critical edits on drafts of the article and approved the final version.

[Canuckle]

7 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

 

I read it, couldn't find any of the PhD's saying capitalism is the cause. Couldn't even find the word capitalism used once. Did notice that estimates was used exactly 69 times  and estimate 102 times though.

 

Just because YOU can't understand that capitalism is a primary variable in social outcome doesn't mean it isn't true.

 

Do we need to go over this study line by line, section by section so you can understand it?  Sure sounds like it.

[Playoff Beered]

3 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

Just because YOU can't understand that capitalism is a primary variable in social outcome doesn't mean it isn't true.

 

Do we need to go over this study line by line, section by section so you can understand it?  Sure sounds like it.

 

It's just you saying all the deaths attributable to social factors are caused by capitalism. The authors said no such thing. Your argument is a total failure.

 

[Bob Long]

43 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

 

Peer Reviewed

 

Contributors

S. Galea wrote the first draft of the article, supervised data analysis, and serves as study guarantor. M. Tracy was responsible for data collection and analysis, with input from K. J. Hoggatt. C. DiMaggio contributed to the meta-analytic methods. S. Galea and A. Karpati conceptualized the study and its design. All authors provided critical edits on drafts of the article and approved the final version.

 

Neat. Who paid for that?

[Canuckle]

Probably the IMF. They HATE capitalism. Oh wait....

 

Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective

 

Summary:

This paper analyzes the extent of income inequality from a global perspective, its drivers, and what to do about it. The drivers of inequality vary widely amongst countries, with some common drivers being the skill premium associated with technical change and globalization, weakening protection for labor, and lack of financial inclusion in developing countries. We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down.

 

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/Issues/2016/12/31/Causes-and-Consequences-of-Income-Inequality-A-Global-Perspective-42986

 

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Canuckle

[Bob Long]

5 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

Probably the IMF. They HATE capitalism. Oh wait....

 

Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective

 

Summary:

This paper analyzes the extent of income inequality from a global perspective, its drivers, and what to do about it. The drivers of inequality vary widely amongst countries, with some common drivers being the skill premium associated with technical change and globalization, weakening protection for labor, and lack of financial inclusion in developing countries. We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down.

 

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/Issues/2016/12/31/Causes-and-Consequences-of-Income-Inequality-A-Global-Perspective-42986

 

 

 

So nothing you have criticized about capitalism cant be fixed within a capitalist system. So far I just see you quoting theory.

[Playoff Beered]

11 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

Probably the IMF. They HATE capitalism. Oh wait....

 

Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective

 

Summary:

This paper analyzes the extent of income inequality from a global perspective, its drivers, and what to do about it. The drivers of inequality vary widely amongst countries, with some common drivers being the skill premium associated with technical change and globalization, weakening protection for labor, and lack of financial inclusion in developing countries. We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down.

 

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/Issues/2016/12/31/Causes-and-Consequences-of-Income-Inequality-A-Global-Perspective-42986

 

Great, another study that not even one time in its 39 pages uses the word capitalism. You would think that these studies would use that word if it was to blame for all that you claim.

 

[Canuckle]

55 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

 

It's just you saying all the deaths attributable to social factors are caused by capitalism. The authors said no such thing. Your argument is a total failure.

 

You're inability to comprehend is the only failure here. But we've been over that like 50 time now haven't we, mr. black pot.

4 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

[Shits pants]

 

Thats okay. Potty training can be hard for some.  I'm not mad at you

Edited October 27, 2023 by Canuckle

[Canuckle]

15 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

So nothing you have criticized about capitalism cant be fixed within a capitalist system. So far I just see you quoting theory.

 

Capitalism created the mess.

 

More capitalism will not fix it.

 

You sound like you work at the fucking Fraser Institute talkjng like that LMAO

 

 

[Alflives]

23 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

Probably the IMF. They HATE capitalism. Oh wait....

 

Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective

 

Summary:

This paper analyzes the extent of income inequality from a global perspective, its drivers, and what to do about it. The drivers of inequality vary widely amongst countries, with some common drivers being the skill premium associated with technical change and globalization, weakening protection for labor, and lack of financial inclusion in developing countries. We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down.

 

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/Issues/2016/12/31/Causes-and-Consequences-of-Income-Inequality-A-Global-Perspective-42986

 

 

It would be great if all people agreed to share the work, and the wealth. Is it actually possible though? IMHAO it’s not possible. There will always be the ever present need for humans to compete. It’s a survival of species thingy. Just read this thread. It’s definitely expressing our competitive nature. We will “fight” for our position. Even if it’s just words on a hockey forum, we compete. It’s just how many humans are wired. And maybe if we weren’t there wouldn’t be any humans? 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

 

Capitalism created the mess.

 

More capitalism will not fix it.

 

You sound like you work at the fucking Fraser Institute talkjng like that LMAO

 

 

Fraser institute? I don't think they'd pay my rates.

 

I'd really like it if you could manage a practical example to discuss vs the theory word salads.

[Playoff Beered]

10 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

You're inability to comprehend is the only failure here. But we've been over that like 50 time now haven't we, mr. black pot.

 

Thats okay. Potty training can be hard for some.  I'm not mad at you

 

When all else fails, call people names and make up fake conversations.

 

[Canuckle]

17 minutes ago, Alflives said:

It would be great if all people agreed to share the work, and the wealth. Is it actually possible though? IMHAO it’s not possible. There will always be the ever present need for humans to compete. It’s a survival of species thingy. Just read this thread. It’s definitely expressing our competitive nature. We will “fight” for our position. Even if it’s just words on a hockey forum, we compete. It’s just how many humans are wired. And maybe if we weren’t there wouldn’t be any humans? 

 

Healthy competiton is fine.

 

But when it leads to the pain and suffering for the vast majority of humans literally dying on the streets , living in slums, etc. when others have excessively more than they need then it's not ok.

And as capitalism chugs along it leaves more and more in it's wake.   We're watching the middle class dwindle away to become lower class. Watching their dollars stretch and still not get by. Capitalism is a system of trickle up economics.  And there's no way around it.  Private property for private gain. And sooner or later someone has it all, while everyone else has nothing. Like playing a game of Monopoly aka The Landlords game.

 

How do people think these fascist populous leaders get elected?  Things are going economically south again. And people look to that powerful figure to bring them back to the good times. 

 

You know for a couple guys @Bob Long @Playoff Beered who champion capitalism and claim to be anti fascist and anti republican they sure do a hell of a lot of defending the very systems and conditions that allows these fuckers to come to power in the first place.

 

Capitalism leads to fascism, boys.

 

And you don't you forget it.

 

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

[Fills diaper and drags it across wall]

 

Oh fer fuck. Again!?!? What have I told you!!!

Edited October 27, 2023 by Canuckle

[Canuckle]

11 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

Fraser institute? I don't think they'd pay my rates.

 

I'd really like it if you could manage a practical example to discuss vs the theory word salads.

 

Fraser Institute is brain cancer. Lol

 

Practical v Theory.  Like what?

 

Also, why did @Ribs say I was "getting personal" when I called you a billionaire simp the other day? You a lawyer for the Aquilini Investment Group or something?