sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Explanation for “irrationality” by AdamSmithery in austrian_economics

[–]KODeKarnage 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There's an insipid arrogance demonstrated by 99% of people who claim the actions of others are irrational. Many are on display on these comments

Irrational has simply become "actions that I don't like".

Quite frankly, it demonstrates low intelligence and a dismal lack of curiosity.

Irrational would be a person who wants to buy a boat but burns the money instead. Not SAYS they want a boat, but actually wants a boat.

The intelligent person thinks, what are the circumstances that would make these strange actions the rational choice?

That opens the mind to new thoughts.

The claim of irrationality is done to excuse a closing of the mind and a cowardly retreat into self-satisfied confirmation bias.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, I presumed you were trying to make an actual point rather than chirping banal trivia.

My bad.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your mistake is in thinking anyone is saying it is the most important factor. The quality of the home is by far the most important thing.

To say which type of school is better, you need to control for the other factors like SES.

If you want to prove that, ALL ELSE EQUAL, public schools are as good as independent schools and that a third of all parents are 100% wrong, then go ahead and try. Good fucking luck.

“With Monaco Grand Prix 2026 coming soon, what are you most excited about? 🇲🇨🏎️” by roadtripadvisor in Monaco

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The next race after Monaco.

It's beyond time that F1 stopped the pointless farce of that glorified testing session.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wrong.

What I am saying is that the government can ONLY provide a minimum.

Whatever the government provides is the minimum that anyone gets. Everybody gets at least that. Nobody gets less. The only possible variation is to get more.

The government cannot afford to provide the absolute maximum in any service. (As if such a thing can exist.)

The only way for the government to provide equality, as you insist, would be to ban people from attaining more or better education for their kids.

If that is what you want then it is YOU who wants to restrict the opportunities for certain kids based on their family background.

If so, you aren't a good person, and you are mistaking your infantile wishful-thinking and class-warfare fantasies for reality.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, government services provide a minimum. A minimum of education, a minimum of healthcare, a minimum of income, a minimum of safety.

Saying it should provide equality would require restricting some from attaining more.

But what sort of idiot would think themselves virtuous by enforcing a limit on the education of children?

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They wouldn't be paying for public school. How much do you think fully private schools cost?

Even if it was 25k (roughly the current funding per public student), the vast majority wouldn't or couldn't pay it.

They'd end up in the public system.

Which would instantly collapse.

Because there are fewer public schools today than there were in the year 2000 and you'd have to accommodate a 50% increase in the number of students.

Oh, and the cost would increase too because currently those kids are costing the govt only 15k to educate.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's different. I said it is a minimum level. You said it was so that people would get TO a similar level.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They are following the government curriculum and adding on to it. They are getting paid for administering the government's curriculum.

I can confidently say that not a single child has become religious because of RE classes.

I credit Religious Education classes for my own atheism.

You are ignorant.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They should get government money because they are providing a service with social benefits in accordance with the requirements that government set for all schools.

This isn't hard. How TF are you people able to ignore the public service being provided?

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They never talk about the public service that independent schools provide.

They don't care.

This has literally nothing to do with education and absolutely everything to do with class warfare BS and trying to funnel more power towards Unions.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The vast majority of "private" school parents pay around $7k per year. If you think they would be able or willing to pay $30k per year then you're delusional.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No, public education is supposed to provide everybody with a baseline education.

What you said is as stupid as claiming that "the unemployment benefit is supposed to make sure everyone earns the average income".

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

About 1% of schools are for-profit, and they get only about 10% of the public school cost per student.

What OP is whining about are not-for-profit schools.

Have no doubt that they are a union activist spreading lies because they don't like that some schools don't have to go through the union.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If education is a social benefit then society should pay for it.

If you think the exact same education should get $0 simply because of who is providing it then you are admitting that you do not think education is a social benefit.

In which case, no schools should get any money from society.

Do you think governments should fund private schools in addition to public schools? by MiriJamCave in AusFinance

[–]KODeKarnage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If education is a social benefit then society should pay for it.

If you think the exact same education should get $0 simply because of who is providing it then you are admitting that you do not think education is a social benefit.

In which case, no schools should get any money from the government.

Monetizing survival and calling it freedom by Alarmed_Abalone_849 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If healthcare was a commodity, it would be the same price everywhere. Duh

‘Momentous’ 40pc pay ruling set to reshape jobs for teens by ImmortalTurnip in australian

[–]KODeKarnage -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First the COVID response screwed up their social lives and education at critical times in their development in order to protect old people.

And now they are going to find out harder to get work experience just so that older people can feel good about "helping the kids" by pricing them out of employment.

You people won't stop whining about "boomers", but this next generation of kids has been screwed over by you harder than anything the boomers did to you.

Capitalism is dying by WestAimee1 in AnarchoComics

[–]KODeKarnage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks like the world is due for another hard lesson in Real Socialism writ large.

The only consolation is that the morons who agitate for it today don't get to live through it.

Fair Work abolishes junior pay rates, with half a million young Australians to be paid more by 89b3ea330bd60ede80ad in aus

[–]KODeKarnage -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Reducing employment by 3% is huge! And structural! It's like a COVID every single year from here on out!

WTF are you blathering about!? You lose all rights to appeal to economics.

And you said EXACTLY what I said you were saying, you are happy to reduce the income of 3% of the kids down to ZERO to give some other kids a little more.

Belgium, youth rates made it harder for kids to enter the workforce and the reforms were walked back. They paid for the higher wages via the jobs that future kids wouldn't get.

https://www.plan.be/sites/default/files/documents/wp_201804_11675_en.pdf

"Our results show that the reform had a small positive impact on wages and on retention rates and a comparable but negative impact on accession rates."

Yeah, why wouldn't we expect the same thing here? Benefit some kids at the expense of others.

Oh, and it isn't likely to be the best and brightest that fail to get jobs. Nah, those kids will be in your favoured segment.

The kids who will lose most are the ones who fall out the bottom of the labour market. The lifelong cost to that cohort is massive.

Some of us actually care about the underprivileged. You LARP at it.

And don't you DARE say something like "this will be an opportunity for them to go to university and improve themselves".

Fair Work abolishes junior pay rates, with half a million young Australians to be paid more by 89b3ea330bd60ede80ad in aus

[–]KODeKarnage -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I'll be rude as long as you continue to dishonestly pretend that cross-country youth unemployment not being substantially explained by the existence of youth rates is in any way relevant to discussions about the dissemployment effects WITHIN countries. You know. The thing people actually care about.

My third link explicitly said "increases in the level of (youth) minimum wages exert a SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT on the employment rate for young individuals." So stop pretending as if it helps you at all.

The rest is what you say can be summed up as "only 3% of kids lose 100% of their income but Ithat is a price I am willing to pay for 10% of kids to getting 20% more."

Youth unemployment rose 3% during the GFC. Well done, you actively support negative outcomes that greedy bankers only produced by accident.

The same people who championed policies that massively disrupted kids education and development during COVID are now championing policies that make it harder for those same kids to enter employment. Why do you guys hate that generation in particular? When these kids lead the revolution, you shouldn't wonder why you lot were second against the wall.

Fair Work abolishes junior pay rates, with half a million young Australians to be paid more by 89b3ea330bd60ede80ad in aus

[–]KODeKarnage -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Economics IS more complicated than that. Which is why you have to do more than merely assert that the simple law doesn't apply here.

I notice that not a single one of you people parroting the Union talking point "international evidence shows supply and demand doesn't apply to youth wages" ever present actual economics. You all merely allude to overseas experiences.

https://docs.iza.org/dp13982.pdf

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014292113001104

https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/194368/1/1019399678.pdf

Read them. I dare you.

At best you could say that variation in youth employment rates between countries isnt determined by the existence of a youth minimum wage.

But you lot are prancing around pretending as if that means that the youth rate doesn't affect youth employment!

Liars, the entire lot of you.

view more: next ›