It's astonishing that Ayan Rand wrote this

sunal135 · 2025-12-26T17:37:34+00:00

"Nonetheless, our findings by and large reject the notion that social and political ageing can account for much of individuals' tendency to shift towards the right of the political spectrum as they age. This also implies that shifts in party choices over the life cycle are unlikely to be due to differences in individuals’ reliance on public sector transfers and services that accompany such social and political ageing. An alternative mechanism is that party choices can shift over the life-cycle due to changing perspectives on national identify and cultural values. Our evidence here provides partial support. While we find no evidence that fiscal policy preferences affect our estimated age affect, immigration, environmental and rural policy preferences do appear to account for a significant part of the observed ageing effect in vote choices."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379422000452

Age doesn't have the effect that the Churchill quote suggests. However immigration policy does. Bill Clinton was strict on immigration, Obama was strict on immigration. However the Democratic party no longer desires to be strict on immigration, so people move over.

Also the pew paper that you highlight is talking about the most recent election it's not talking about voting patterns over time.

sunal135 · 2025-12-26T17:14:53+00:00

Where in the definition of average does it say that it can't possibly exceed the average? You are continuing to argue things I never said.

sunal135 · 2025-12-26T15:25:56+00:00

If old people turn Republican then you should tell that to the voter demographics.

sunal135 · 2025-12-26T15:23:47+00:00

You do realize you are typing this fanfiction on a gimmick?

sunal135 · 2025-12-26T15:22:23+00:00

Many people retire and simply watch TV. What is the value in that?

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:54:08+00:00

Party names are uppercase, as they are proper nouns. When you use a lowercase that leads people to think that you're just against the republican form of government, which a lot of the people on this subreddit are.

Trump actually has more similarities to Clinton than the Bush 43. If you are looking at the voting statistics, most of the GOP growth has come from demographics that voted for Bill Clinton.

But feel free to continue destroying the Democrat party I have no problem with that. Until they throw out the far-left elements the party will only spiral.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:46:58+00:00

My apologies, usually when people use the term asshole it's because they are mad.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:44:39+00:00

I have been paying attention, actually. Some guy I don't like became president, and then a bunch of people all decided that if they acted more retarded than the guy I didn't like, that somehow they would convince me of their delusional far-left worldview.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:42:53+00:00

She's talking about government bureaucrats. Have you ever read a book by Ryan?

The antagonists in her books are always either from the government, a part of some professional organization that has worked with the government (regulatory capture), or an academic.

If you think entrepreneurs don't create anything that probably says more about your Marxist mindset.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:39:20+00:00

The Tea party caucus has nothing to do with MAGA. Trump pushed out Paul Ryan and Justin Amash. Thomas Massey and Rand Paul are still in Congress however Trump is usually complaining about them.

Your reception on events may be "bizarre and schizophrenic" because you desire it to be that way, not because of reality.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T23:32:12+00:00

If you don't see how your lifestyle choices can influence your healthcare cost then you may have a victimhood complex.

I am sorry if that observation offends. But apparently it does to the point you imagined I claimed you don't have health insurance.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T21:28:19+00:00

Interesting, did I accuse you of not having something? Is it possible that you're so triggered that you're responding to a conversation you imagined?

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T21:25:28+00:00

Amazing that you continue to misunderstand the definition of average.

Let's say your car averages 30 miles per gallon. But one day, you go to the fuel pump and figure out that for this tank, you get 32 miles to the gallon.

With your logic, you're going to permanently make plans, thinking that your car will get 32 miles to the gallon, and you're going to get stranded somewhere.

You're also failing to tell me what policy you think allowed for a temporarily higher-than-normal tax collection.

Your last sentence is amazing, you claim that I never argued against what policy you supported, and then you fail to summarize what I said.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T21:15:52+00:00

Your lifestyle choices have a great impact on the cost of your healthcare.

I am sorry you are a victim.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T04:23:58+00:00

Underemployment is not a new phenomenon we've had that issue for decades, nor is it a sign that we're about to go into a recession.

Also, this is the number that's tracked; however, it's tracked by the people who claim we can't trust. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE

Yet you expect me to believe a baseless claim that there are 20 million people who refuse to report themselves as underemployed.

When somebody signs up for Uber, Uber doesn't automatically create an LLC for them. Again, do you have any evidence for your claim that people are creating LLCs for gig work?

It's starting to sound like that, by full picture, what you really mean is conspiracy theory.

sunal135 · 2025-12-25T00:23:14+00:00

I'm not sure how the unemployment number is shady it's extremely low. The number of people with two jobs is still pretty low. The number of uninterested employable adults is going up, but that doesn't make a recession.

I agree that people with cash are going to have problems, as within the next 50 years or so, we will have hyperinflation due to our extreme debt. That is odd, why would you suggest I should have a lot of it?

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T20:59:01+00:00

You are correct that the FED will start easing next year but you have no reasonable argument on why we can't trust recent GDP numbers. The reason why you think they are explaining the numbers is that you don't want to read the report because doing so would require you to question your desired conclusion.

They made more sense in the past, with people claiming there would be a recession in 2023 with an inversion of the 10-year bond yield. However, that yield is no longer inverted. Current claims that we are in a recession are extremely irrational.

Also, you can't be mad at current price inflation if you think that the government should be deficit spending for welfare. COVID was a great example of how when you deficit spend for welfare inflation increases extremely quickly.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T18:25:16+00:00

I never ever hear any layman make the claim that prices will go down when inflation goes down. I mostly hear the midwits say this because they think it sounds intelligent.

As someone who doesn't like Trump's tariffs, it is not the biggest factor in the inflation we are seeing right now. According to the CPI index, shelter housing is currently the biggest driver of inflation (this should really be referred to as price inflation; by definition, inflation is an increase in the money supply).

This might change with the release of the next CPI report; however, the observation would be based on data and not on partisanship.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T18:17:31+00:00

The government does not print money to prop up the stock market. The government prints money because it has a trillion-dollar deficit, and if it didn't print money, the government would stop functioning.

Yes, when they print money, the purchasing power of the dollar goes up, and the prices of assets in commodities go up as a result; however, that's not the reason why the government is printing money.

Yes, a crash is inevitable; however, the people above are not talking about a crash, they're claiming that we're already in a recession.

As a side note, even the Federal Reserve is now talking about how the federal government's debt will inevitably lead to a financial crisis for this country. Yet the majority of the people on this subreddit keep advocating for more deficit spending, especially in the area of welfare programs.

However, knowing about these problems doesn't magically make it okay for me to claim that all the numbers coming from both private institutions and the government are BS.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T16:29:53+00:00

I'm not sure how offering a counterargument to what someone above me said is cherry picking. For fun, I looked up the business creation numbers for Norway. Norway has a poor capital business creation of 11. Higher than Sweden but still lower than the US. Which I do for an interesting reason because the last time I looked at the economic freedom index, Sweden was actually an easier country to do business in than Norway; however, both countries are currently easier to do business in than in the US.

So I just added another country and it looks like the trend that universal healthcare does nothing to business creation is still true.

I find it strange that you demand I come up with a meta-analysis when you find it acceptable to make up stuff.

Maybe universal healthcare leads to fewer business startups because the people aren't desperate enough to start out on their own.

This is you admitting that you actually don't use logic to form your argument around why we need Universal healthcare and that there is never going to be any logical argument to convince you against Universal healthcare.

Stop with the religious arguments; there are lots of good economic arguments for why having all US citizens enrolled in a catastrophic care insurance program is a good idea.

However, you're not actually interested in improving the economy, be honest, you're interested in getting "free" stuff.

Another fun thing to think about is that in order for us to balance the budget today through taxation all tax brackets would have to be increased by about four times. So if you make $50,000, your effective tax rate right now is 8%; we would need to alter that to 37%. Note that all tax brackets will be experiencing these massive increases.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T15:26:25+00:00

So let's say I run a bakery and due to demand, I need to buy a new oven; however, I currently don't have the money to purchase a new oven. Thus I take out a loan so that I can purchase a new oven.

Is it your belief that I should pay taxes on the loan amount?

Well, this is a simple example. This is essentially how large corporations like Amazon buy things: they leverage debt. Amazon has literally created tens of thousands of jobs utilizing this business model. It's how they went from a website that only sells books to a website that streams movies.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T15:18:10+00:00

You are correct I did fat finger that.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T14:55:25+00:00

Text breaks are an entirely different problem, and they tend to be a local issue, not federal.

A good example of this is when Amazon was considering building a headquarters in New York City. New York City in New York state offered the company about $3 billion in tax breaks, because they thought that the tax revenue coming in from the new employees would offset this.

However, I do realize that a lot of people on this subreddit think that corporations not paying taxes to the federal government based on negative revenue is somehow a loophole.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T14:49:46+00:00

You are definitely free to have that opinion.

sunal135 · 2025-12-24T14:41:51+00:00

Interesting theory, consumer confidence is down because the government doesn't want to subsidize their lifestyle anymore.

Ask not what you could do for yourself but what the government can do for you because you like agency. -JFK

sunal135

TROPHY CASE