Logic and Balance Sheet Mathematics
Dec. 3rd, 2017 06:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wallbratBrowsers are closed. Social media programs terminated. Music playing in the background. Good. I might actually be able to concentrate. I'm not placing any larger wagers on that but let's see what happens.
People don't like getting into discussions with me because I'll use logic and math on them. I tend to be nice and lead them down the garden path but it always ends up with logic and math. Logic is bad enough because it calls the validity of their opinions into question. When you back up logic with math, especially balance sheet mathematics, then you start to see facial tics develop, their blood pressure begins to rise and the volume raises quickly. That's when I tend to exit the conversation. I don't have time for infantilism and I make no secret of the fact that I view that final result as such. If my logic and math didn't piss them off then my exiting usually does. Time is the one commodity that you can't make more of and I don't like to waste mine.
The last conversation was about the Republican Tax Bill, which has since passed. It started out nice enough. It ended with my leaving the conversation due to cursing. My gender and parentage were called into question before I left, I believe. My logic wasn't complicated either. It never is and that may be the root of the issue. Anything I state can be easily looked up and I'm willing to be proven wrong. I think that last part infuriates people the most.
Back during the Obama Administration, the attempt to get free college approved was blocked. The reasoning was that it was too expensive. Cost estimates ranged from six billion yearly to 130 billion over the course of ten years I believe. The point is that the cost was in the billion dollar range and on the lower end of it at that. Our government spends more than that on defense.
The new tax plan, or the rehashed plan, depending on your viewpoint, gives tax cuts of around 1.3 trillion dollars or so to the wealthy. That's 9-10 times higher than the most expensive estimates for President Obama's college plan. It also cuts out health care for millions, possibly consigning them to a lingering death because they no longer have access to health care. The bill was written by those that have the best health care currently available in this country, for free.
What I want to know is since they saved us several hundred billion dollars by denying the college plan, why would they approve 1.3 trillion? It's not money going out. It's money coming in that's lowered instead. Loss of revenue amounts to the same thing as spending money, it's just a matter of direction.
What does it make better for the country? I know the tax cuts are paid for by cuts to insurance and other areas as well as adding to the national debt. That's basic balance sheet mathematics. The money has to come from somewhere so that it passes basic scrutiny. I'm more focused on the one area that this person refused to look at. He may not have liked my pointing out the huge difference in the amounts but he went to pieces when I brought up the other side of it.
What do the politicians get out of this? Politics function on balance sheet mathematics. Something is placed or done in column A and a corresponding thing is placed or done in column B. While that's simplified a bit, the point remains. Politicians don't do anything without getting something in return. So what did these people get that justifies killing millions?
Was that too blunt? I don't think so. He seemed to think it was, hence the bulging veins and the eye
popping. When you're discussing anything that involves loss of life then you need to be extremely blunt. I don't believe in “Acceptable Losses” Humans are not pawns and this is not a fucking chess game. Moving right along then...
The new tax bill will cause millions to be without health insurance. Because of that, many of them will be dead in the next ten years. If they do not have access to health care then that is a realistic estimate and it's a conservative estimate at that. Most of the people I'm talking about are only alive today because they currently have health care.Where's the other side of the equation then? The politicians received something for doing this. The question is, what did they get and why are we not investigating it?
I may need to stay away from political discussions for a while. Apparently, logic, mathematics and critical thinking don't mix well in this area.
People don't like getting into discussions with me because I'll use logic and math on them. I tend to be nice and lead them down the garden path but it always ends up with logic and math. Logic is bad enough because it calls the validity of their opinions into question. When you back up logic with math, especially balance sheet mathematics, then you start to see facial tics develop, their blood pressure begins to rise and the volume raises quickly. That's when I tend to exit the conversation. I don't have time for infantilism and I make no secret of the fact that I view that final result as such. If my logic and math didn't piss them off then my exiting usually does. Time is the one commodity that you can't make more of and I don't like to waste mine.
The last conversation was about the Republican Tax Bill, which has since passed. It started out nice enough. It ended with my leaving the conversation due to cursing. My gender and parentage were called into question before I left, I believe. My logic wasn't complicated either. It never is and that may be the root of the issue. Anything I state can be easily looked up and I'm willing to be proven wrong. I think that last part infuriates people the most.
Back during the Obama Administration, the attempt to get free college approved was blocked. The reasoning was that it was too expensive. Cost estimates ranged from six billion yearly to 130 billion over the course of ten years I believe. The point is that the cost was in the billion dollar range and on the lower end of it at that. Our government spends more than that on defense.
The new tax plan, or the rehashed plan, depending on your viewpoint, gives tax cuts of around 1.3 trillion dollars or so to the wealthy. That's 9-10 times higher than the most expensive estimates for President Obama's college plan. It also cuts out health care for millions, possibly consigning them to a lingering death because they no longer have access to health care. The bill was written by those that have the best health care currently available in this country, for free.
What I want to know is since they saved us several hundred billion dollars by denying the college plan, why would they approve 1.3 trillion? It's not money going out. It's money coming in that's lowered instead. Loss of revenue amounts to the same thing as spending money, it's just a matter of direction.
What does it make better for the country? I know the tax cuts are paid for by cuts to insurance and other areas as well as adding to the national debt. That's basic balance sheet mathematics. The money has to come from somewhere so that it passes basic scrutiny. I'm more focused on the one area that this person refused to look at. He may not have liked my pointing out the huge difference in the amounts but he went to pieces when I brought up the other side of it.
What do the politicians get out of this? Politics function on balance sheet mathematics. Something is placed or done in column A and a corresponding thing is placed or done in column B. While that's simplified a bit, the point remains. Politicians don't do anything without getting something in return. So what did these people get that justifies killing millions?
Was that too blunt? I don't think so. He seemed to think it was, hence the bulging veins and the eye
popping. When you're discussing anything that involves loss of life then you need to be extremely blunt. I don't believe in “Acceptable Losses” Humans are not pawns and this is not a fucking chess game. Moving right along then...
The new tax bill will cause millions to be without health insurance. Because of that, many of them will be dead in the next ten years. If they do not have access to health care then that is a realistic estimate and it's a conservative estimate at that. Most of the people I'm talking about are only alive today because they currently have health care.Where's the other side of the equation then? The politicians received something for doing this. The question is, what did they get and why are we not investigating it?
I may need to stay away from political discussions for a while. Apparently, logic, mathematics and critical thinking don't mix well in this area.
