The h Bar

Sir Cumference

02:16

Did Pythagoras or Euclid come up with the 2-norm?

Because it's called both the Pythagorean theorem and Euclidean norm

Nihar Karve

03:34

Would you count $c = \sqrt(a^2 + b^2)$ as a Euclidean norm? How would you define 'coming up with it'?

If it's any help, Pythagoras came ~200 years before Euclid

Sir Cumference

03:57

@NiharKarve more or less the idea that taking two lengths, squaring them, summing them and taking the square root would give you a new (useful) length

that's not exactly an intuitive thing for most people to come up with

Nihar Karve

04:15

Well, I assume it would be Pythagoras then

That's not to say it wasn't known in the Early Babylonian era

Secret

04:41

Quantum Field Theory visualized

►

hmm...

123

Hi Morning...!

Secret

I am guessing trying to do the direct functional integration of the photon field with the electron field is too hard which is why it needs to be split up into feymann diagrams

123

Why Rocket motion can not be (or hard to) explain by newton's law??? What is the problem.

Pls help me out guys.

Nihar Karve

@123 @danielunderwood gave a brief answer to that - what part do you still not understand?

123

Sorry i did not see that i was busy. Is that yesterday??

JMac

04:47

@123 It can be explained by Newton's laws quite well. The issue is that it's not as straightforward as most types of motion because the forces are due to some of the mass being ejected quickly from behind. There are different ways to look at it, but when you do it as force over time, there's a good amount to consider with the changing mass, and momentum transfer between the ship and the expelled fuel.

123

Thanks i see.. Excellent. great explanation

Azmuth

Most of the Rockets use channel profile, realtime SCADA kinda systems, they don't give a damn to any laws whatsoever....

JMac

Like the "rocket equation" is in terms of delta v

123

If mass is changing continuously in rocket. Does it follow law of conservation??

Azmuth

yes

JMac

04:50

Well yeah, mass is only conserved in isolated systems, if you look at just the rocket when it's expelling mass, that's not an isolated system, mass is leaving.

Azmuth

That's the highest number of stars I've got till now!

Nov 3 at 13:26, by Azmuth

Programmers often confuse between Halloween and Christmas because Oct 31 = Dec 25.

Nihar Karve

@123 briefly, $F = m\ddot{x}$ won't hold because mass is also changing, so you have to make it $F = \frac{dp}{dt} = \dot{m}\dot{x} + m\ddot{x}$, using the product rule

123

Hi @Azmuth

How it follow law of conservation of momentum. If it changing mass continuously .

Sir Cumference

the total mass of the system is constant

just the mass of the rocket is changing

123

@NiharKarve Yes i used this so many times. But did not connect it with physical problem. Now it explain rocket problem. Thanks

danielunderwood

05:02

Rockets work because of conservation of momentum. If you have no external forces, then $\frac{dp}{dt} = 0 \implies m \ddot{x} = - \dot{m} \dot{x}$, which is where the rocket equation mentioned above comes from.

If the mass is ejected one way, the rest of the rocket needs to speed up in the other direction to conserve momentum

123

@danielunderwood Superb.. :O

It means mass loss is taken by speed increase of rocket and momentum conserved?

Nihar Karve

Yes

123

Hmm... Thank you guys..

I have question about tension force of Atwood Machine. I have read SE thread of tension but did not explained me well.

3

A: Can two bodies of different mass attached at ends of string passed over a frictionless pulley produce equal tension on both sides?

That is a really good question that usually books fail to address in an intuitive way. Let me give you a step by step intuitive explanation by looking at the Atwood's machine: Start with the balance of forces around the cable: $$𝑭_𝟐−𝑭_𝟏=𝒎𝒂$$ F2 is greater than F1 since the cube has m...

4

Q: Pulley system: how can tensions be equal throughout a entire rope if the weights on opposite ends are different?

More weight means more pulling force, and thus more tension force. Like this answer says, however much force you pulling with is equal in magnitude to the tension force. If that is case, how then can tensions forces in this photo be equal if their sources are of different weight:

9

Q: When is tension constant in a rope?

Suppose we have a massless rope with pulling forces applied at each end. In which scenarios is the tension in the rope constant throughout? For example if there is a knot in the rope the tension is not constant throughout (why?. Similarly if the rope is hung over a cylindrical pulley of non-negli...

homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics forces free-body-diagram string

These i have read. But how tension in rope segment by segment work still not clear.

What happened at left side of tension segment by segment where mass $m_1$ which is lower than right side $m_2$. Thus $m_2 > m_1$.

JMac

05:27

@123 Imagine a very stiff massless vertical spring (i.e. an ideal rope) holding a mass still. When you pull on the spring with a force equal to it's weight, but in the opposite direction, it stays still, and tension in the spring equals the weight of the mass and the force opposing it.

Now imagine the upwards force is greater than the weight of the mass. The system accelerates upwards, but the tension in the spring is still just the weight of the mass downwards, and the rest of the upwards force accelerates the mass/spring system. The tension in the rope is very similar, except the upwards force is pointed downwards by the rope and pulley, and caused by another mass.

123

@JMac what happened to the tension segment by segment on the string by weight and acceleration on each side?

JMac

@123 Actually I think I worded that wrong, the tension in the spring is the force of the weight upwards along with the extra force accelerating it upwards. Anyways, the tension is the same all through the rope in a rope pulley system. On one side (with more mass) the rope is falling with the tension opposing the weight but not fully, on the other side, the tension is greater that the weight and so that mass accelerates upwards.

Since the rope doesn't stretch, the accelerations of both sides must be equal and opposite as well.

123

@JMac Thanks for explaining. I know Tension is same on each side due to massless string (or very low mass compared to hanging masses).

JMac

Yeah you need to assume the string is massless for it to make sense.. It's always important to pay attention to the assumptions like that too, since ideal cases aren't always exactly like real life.

123

I wanted to know the left side lower mass $m_1$ a bit of string going upward due to acceleration than lower bit of sting relaxes than it again stretched by weight.

This explanation i need to understand. What happened bit by bit

@JMac Yes you are right.

Secret

05:41

$$\int D[\phi] \int_S d \mathbf{x} \Psi^* (\mathbf{x})[\phi]F_{\mu\nu}[\phi]F^{\mu\nu}[\phi] \frac{i\gamma^\mu\partial_{\mu}\psi (\mathbf{x})}{m_e} \Psi(\mathbf{x})[\phi]$$

pretty sure... that's not how it works...

JMac

@123 tension in an ideal massless rope is pretty boring bit by bit. At every point along the rope, tension is pointed in opposite lengthwise directions on each segment of the rope, and the tension in the opposite directions is always equal.

123

But SE thread what i shared. They emphasize it need to be understand at every point along the rope. That's why i confused.

@JMac Your explanation is pretty well to understand. But i cant figure out what happened at every point. That's why i asked question

JMac

Not sure what one you're talking about.

123

Above i shared SE thread.

JMac

You shared three though.

123

05:46

Yes in those thread they said tension need to be understand segment by segment.

How make new line of text in LateX

I want to write line by line.

Kenzo Tenma

Some people just intentionally initiate fire (violence) so that they can later get credit for putting it off. That's what I learnt from this amazing song.

DJ Snake - Magenta Riddim

►

123

What ideal conditions need to be taken in Atwood Machine \\For String : \(a) Massless (negligible small compared to hanging mass) \(b) Non-stretchable string \\\\For Pulley : \(a) Frictionless (because heat not loss and resist acceleration) \(b) Massless (Moment of interia not effect the acceleration)

What else ideal conditions need to be taken. And my conditions are Ok or not?

Nihar Karve

06:11

@Secret where did that come from xD

Secret

just... smoshing the electromagnetic tensor with the spin 1/2 field equation and taking the intuition that the interaction dynamics has to be a functional integration across all possible field configurations and the spacetime region of interest

I am trying to figure out what the whole electron field and electromagnetic field interacting with each other look like without trying to break it down into pieces like feymann diagrams or asymptotics etc.

I just want to see what that functional integral look like without assuming the interacting field is decomposable into small steps

this also means, not assuming we are working on just one or a direct product of hilbert spaces

Azmuth

06:55

hi

user400188

07:45

How can I tell when an edited question (closed as a dupe) has left the review cue?

JingleBells

08:29

I'm confused about a thing with derivatives and how the error is measured in machine learning. If I have a cost function $J(w)$ that's dependent on some weight $w$, to find the derivative (the slope of the tangent line) that's going to tell me how to tweak the $w$ so the cost is minimized, don't I need to have the whole cost curve so I can do the small change with the limit approaching 0...?

When I plot $J(w)$ and $w$, at the start, I just choose some random value for $w$ to start with, but how do I calculate the derivative of $J(w)$ at that chosen $w$ wthout first knowing the whole curve? I need a small change to do the limit with, etc...?

Nihar Karve

What do you mean? The affine and activation layers are all indirectly functions of the weights, so you can use the chain rule

JingleBells

I mean, my goal is to find the derivative of $J(w)$ for some $w$, and when I apply the derivative rules on $J(w)$ I have everything I need to calculate it but to calculate a derivative, don't I need to introduce some small change which to reduce to zero with a limit... I don't understand how the system can know which way to reduce the function by only having one weight to start with. It doesn't know what happens when the weight goes up or down, and somehow it knows :D

Nihar Karve

Are you essentially asking why gradient descent works?

JingleBells

I guess

Nihar Karve

Are you aware of any other optimisation algorithms?

JingleBells

08:40

I don't think so, but I'm trying to understand gradient descent now :P

I understand gradient descent but I'm confused as to how the derivative finds the slope of a tangent line of a single point on the $J(w) - w$ graph

Nihar Karve

I mean, that's what the derivative is

JingleBells

There are infinitely many ways that this tangent line can be positioned on the single point of the $J(w) - w$ graph and yet, without having the costs for other weights, the derivative knows how to position the tangent line (slope). That's impossible.

Nihar Karve

Just think about 2D for now - how can there be infinitely many tangents to a curve at a point?

For a differentiable function there is exactly one

JingleBells

But the tangent line depends on other points, which the derivative doesn't have access to

Nihar Karve

Hint: what does the derivative operator act on? Is it a standalone point?

JingleBells

08:53

No, it acts on the standalone point and a small difference along the curve, which it doesn't know.

Nihar Karve

The derivative acts on the whole function to produce another function

Think about what "the derivative of f(x) = x^2 with respect to x is f'(x) = 2x" means

JingleBells

Ahh, I think I get it

It intrinsically calculates f(a+h) - the small difference to do the limit as it approaches 0...

So the derivative actually does calculate a second point with which to find the tangent line of the first one?

it's f(a + h)

Nihar Karve

If you want to think about the slope at each point as the line connecting it with an ever-closer point on the curve, that's fine

JingleBells

That's how I think about it

I was confused because I forgot that the derivative calculated that ever-closer point that's needed to find the tangent line

Nihar Karve

fair enough

JingleBells

09:01

Thanks for helping! :)

Nihar Karve

No problem :)

RewCie

10:01

My New Laputapu was delivered today, Dell Inspiron, 8 GB Ram, Ryzen AMD 5 Quad Core Processor, feather touch keyboard, 512 GB SSD

Back one is VAIO, i5, 6th Gen

Comtupar Engynar

ACuriousMind

@user400188 Unfortunately, that's not so simple. Moderators can directly go to the review from the question, but other users can't (I don't know why). If you can see physics.stackexchange.com/review/close/history (I'm not sure how much rep is necessary for that), you can try to find the question in there and when you click on one of the "Closed" or "Leave Open" for it you can also see whether the review is finished or not

John Rennie

@RewCie very nice :-)

RewCie

@JohnRennie Yes sir :-)

John Rennie

And the AMD CPU is a monster! For the first time AMD have beaten Intel in laptop CPUs.

RewCie

I also did Benchmarking, AMD is double of that i5 6th Gen.... almost double at just a bit more than same cost.

Just a question, how do we Shutdown in Window 10? :P

John Rennie

10:10

@RewCie to be fair the single thread performance isn't that much faster, and in everyday usage it's the single thread performance you notice.

RewCie

@JohnRennie No idea of thread performance....

I just brought AMD because it was being purchased more than Intel and saw doing better than Intel.... :P

John Rennie

@RewCie that's the shutdown link.

RewCie

@JohnRennie Oh okay, I used power button to shut it directly :P :E

John Rennie

Or if you're a command line addict open a command prompt and use shutdown /s /t 0

RewCie

yes, I'm command line addict!

John Rennie

10:12

I think the power button puts it into suspend.

i.e. the same as just closing the lid.

RewCie

@JohnRennie I'm sure it was shutdown (control panel settings)

John Rennie

OK

RewCie

In linux, it's easy systemctl poweroff

John Rennie

Except that it's shutdown -h now in some distros ...

RewCie

yes, in Mint^

John Rennie

10:14

While shutdown /s /t 0 has worked ever since NT3.1 back in 1992

RewCie

@JohnRennie There was also some remote shutdown option too... I guess.... using -i switch...

John Rennie

Oh wait, do I meen 1994? Can't remember. Too many brain cells have died since then.

@RewCie shutdown /s /t 0 /m targetpc

RewCie

I used to hack into Computer Lab Computers using -i option to interupt other computers and shutdown :P

John Rennie

Amuse your friends by shutting down their workstations while they're working on something critical :-)

RewCie

That's what I used to do in my Computer Lab...

Also there was Net user piping command too!?

I'd bruteforce their disks and delete their assignments :P

Until, they started using Linux....

They had firewalls too.

John Rennie

10:17

I bet you were popular :-)

RewCie

Yep, very much... I was the teachers' favourite student then! :P

C/C++ all was easy for me, I had already done them in 8th grade and was only amusing myself for 11th and 12th grades XD :)

John Rennie

Can anyone remember if closing a question removes it from the HNQ?

RewCie

ACuriousMind

@JohnRennie Yes, but don't close it just to remove it from the HNQ, flag it for mod attention instead, we can remove w/o closing

John Rennie

@ACuriousMind thanks :-) Actually this is related to the SciFi SE not us.

ACuriousMind

10:24

their mods can do that, too :P

John Rennie

10:34

@ACuriousMind This is why I asked

ACuriousMind

ah

story-id questions are the homework-like questions of sites like that in terms of how controversial they are, right?

John Rennie

I was 99% certain that closing a question did remove it from the HNQ but suffered a momentary crisis of confidence.

@ACuriousMind no, story id questions are probably the most popular tag on the SFSE and have a large army of ~~geeks~~ enthusiastic researchers dedicated to answering them.

ACuriousMind

hm, probably another site I remember where they were contentious then

John Rennie

But it's common that the same story/novel is asked about more than once, and recurrences are closed as duplicates of the first such question.

But it's not always easy to answer the question by searching the site as people can remember the same book in many different ways, and it often takes a lot of work to identify it even if it is a duplicate. When you've spent a long time finding the book it's disheartening to have the question immediately closed.

ACuriousMind

10:56

yeah, sounds like they're closing the question as a duplicate based on what the answer is, not the question, but I see why that might be necessary in this case

Nihar Karve

11:23

What's the difference in the usage of tr and Tr? I can't remember exactly where or how they differ, but I recall seeing something about the distinction (almost certainly related to hep-th, by the way)

JingleBells

If you raise taxes to raise the minimum wage, doesn't that mean that companies are forced to spend more money on higher salaries? If that's so, doesn't that mean that companies will be also forced to raise their prices, making the whole cycle useless?

P.S I'm not sure how it works

Nihar Karve

Yes, raising the minimum wage may have an effect on inflation

And unemployment, obviously

To say that it's useless would be highly controversial

JingleBells

I'm just wondering how it works

Nihar Karve

It's almost exactly like you said

JingleBells

because raising the minimum wage would result in raised prices (because of raised taxes), which makes people unable to buy more stuff, no?

Nihar Karve

11:30

Raised taxes?

JingleBells

nvm, forget about the taxes

so let's say the government forces companies to higher their minimum wage, and that would mean that the company would have to raise their prices, which would result in the people with the raised minimum wage being unable to buy more stuff, so why raise minimum wage in the first place

Ratman

I am far from being en expert in this matter, but the idea in fact would be to cut the taxes to companies in order to increase minimum wage

Nihar Karve

The employees would receive higher wages, more employee satisfaction, there'd be less employee turnover and retraining costs, consumer demand is boosted, etc. etc.

JingleBells

@Ratman hmm, interesting, makes sense. So the government forces companies to up their minimum wage by taking less from them so they can give more to their employees. So the company financially doesn't feel much, but the government would have fewer taxes collected?

Ratman

obviously the applicability and convenience of this action depends higly on the country

JingleBells

11:38

Well, I'm just hearing that Biden plans to make healthcare in the USA cheaper or in some cases free, college cheaper, and in some cases free, he plans to invest a lot in green energy and I was wondering where will the government get the money from to do these stuff

Ratman

yes the government takes less, but a bigger economic disponibilty to workers could mean an increase in other sectors, so part ( only a little part) of these money can come back always as taxes in another form. Obviously only a little part otherwise i would have just invented a way to create richness out of nothing, so in the end government takes less anyway

JingleBells

But Biden will increase taxes from 37% to 39.2%. How is that taking less?

Ratman

no i was still talking in the general case not about US

it takes me time to write a reply ahahhaha

JingleBells

oh, no problem :D

I'm interested in what's going on in the US

ACuriousMind

@NiharKarve I don't think there's a universal convention for that, but sometimes you get that people use them for different representations (e.g. the lowercase one for the trace in the fundamental representation and the uppercase one for the trace in the adjoint representation of some Lie group)

Ratman

11:43

about the US personally I don't know much, but your question is well justified. Whenever a politician makes such promises you must always ask yourselves how he is going to do it, otherwise is pointless

ACuriousMind

@JingleBells The Wiki article has a pretty lengthy discussion of different economic models and how they match with case studies

Nihar Karve

@ACuriousMind is it also for some 'full-trace'/partial trace distinction?

JingleBells

@ACuriousMind thx i'll take a look

Ratman

yes wikipedia can do way better than me ahahahaha

ACuriousMind

could be, as I said I don't think there's a universal convention

JingleBells

11:45

I just see Biden promising all this stuff and I'm wondering where the money will come from :P

Nihar Karve

Ok, thanks

ACuriousMind

@JingleBells the particular process of rising wages driving rising prices you seem to imagine is called the price/wage spiral there

JingleBells

Mlright thx

Ratman

I too prefer Biden, but I can't talk properly from an economic point of view not being an expert. But for what Trump has done about climate change, the situation in Iran... and other stuff, I am happy with the results of the elections

Charlie

But Trump did nothing about climate change?

JingleBells

11:48

lol

Nihar Karve

xD

Charlie

oh you mean the opposite

Ratman

yes the opposite ahahah

it was in a negative sense

Nihar Karve

Ohh, with the results of the elections

I thought his presidency

JingleBells

I don't know exactly what Trump has done and what Biden will do, so I'm researching the scene a bit

But Trump was surely entertaining

He's a character, a clown with an ego, and that's funny to watch

Nihar Karve

11:49

I'm forecasting a large vacuum in the media

Ratman

@NiharKarve yes my bad, i wasn't clear

Charlie

None of those are qualities a president of the US should have

ACuriousMind

@Charlie any president or politician, really :P

Charlie

Exactly :p

JingleBells

@Charlie tell that to the 70 mil people who voted for him :P

Charlie

11:51

I would, personally, one by one if given the chance

JingleBells

If he does his job, I don't mind if the president is entertaining.

Charlie

He did not do his job lol

JingleBells

Then bye bye Trump

Charlie

I could see why someone (not necessarily you) having absolutely no investment in politics or the future of their country might have found the last 4 years entertaining, but for the majority of people it has been insufferable

JingleBells

But again, I'm researching so I can't make any opinions or take any sides yet

Charlie

11:52

I feel like if you've even glanced at the news occasionally at any point over the last 4 years that's enough to draw a negative opinion of Trump :P

JingleBells

@Charlie But 70 mil voted for him, you can't ignore that. That says something

I'm not taking Trump's side btw, nor Biden's. Not Yet.

Charlie

It does, it proves the effectiveness of running a political campaign like a cult

Nihar Karve

@JingleBells where are you from, just curious?

JingleBells

@NiharKarve Bulgaria

Ratman

@Charlie exactly

unfortunately it is an approach that is spreading in the form of populism, which for me is the exact opposit of what politics should do

Nihar Karve

11:56

I'm just excited to see how quickly Trump fades into obscurity

JingleBells

What has happened's happened. I'm interested in what's next. That's what I'll educate myself upon a bit :P

America should stop building walls and start building bridges.

Nihar Karve

Cheers, I'll drink to that

Nihar Karve

12:14

Metaphorically, of course please don't come for me

Prateek Mourya

12:30

Anyone here?

I figured out shapes of fluid when they are

Rotated about the axis passing through middle of cylinder

Which comes out to be a paraboloid around container

And when it's kept on a rod at a distance r

But now I want to figure out the shape of fluid when it's moving like earth

5

Q: Shape of a rotating fluid surface

I was going through fluid dynamics and I came upon this section on the shape of a liquid surface in a rotating cylindrical vessel. The working in the book is something like this: It considers a mass $m$ of water on the surface of the rotating liquid at a distance $x$ from its axis of rotation ....

newtonian-mechanics reference-frames centripetal-force fluid-statics centrifugal-force

Charlie

13:39

When we do Lebesgue integration, is this different from the integration where the $dx^i$'s appearing in the integral are differentials from exterior calculus?

RewCie

No idea bro

ACuriousMind

@Charlie that depends on how you defined the integration of differential forms :P

Charlie

D:

RewCie

:D:

Can we start polls in chat?

ACuriousMind

you might have defined it by pulling back along a chart and doing a Lebesgue integration on the $\mathbb{R}^n$, in which case the two are easily the same. But no one forces you to use Lebesgue integration, you could use any other notion, too

see also Wiki, where they explicitly don't care whether or not the integral on the $\mathbb{R}^n$ is Riemann or Lebesgue :P

RewCie

13:49

What should be the definition of a fit person?

ACuriousMind

Why should we care?

RewCie

Just asking, nothing here to care well...

It's getting cold here... I'm feeling soo cold in hoodies too.... Probably need to take overcoat out...

Charlie

atm it's in the context of regular analysis not on manifolds, it seems the "$d$" put in front of the measure function $\mu$ is notational to look like the differential forms

ACuriousMind

@Charlie ah, okay, then yes, that is a different integral - the measure is not a function you could take a $\mathrm{d}$ exterior derivative of, so $\mathrm{d}\mu$ is purely notational and not a derivative

Charlie

i seee

Prateek Mourya

13:57

Please answer my question once you are free

Nihar Karve

how do you get that double arrow over operators that Srednicki seems to love

in MathJax

ACuriousMind

@NiharKarve $\overset{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}$?

Charlie

like this? tex.stackexchange.com/questions/162337/double-headed-vector/…

RewCie

$\stackrel \leftrightarrow \partial$

\stackrel \leftrightarrow \partial

Nihar Karve

yes, thanks all

RewCie

14:11

What are some biggest unsolved mysteries that I can solve?

Nihar Karve

Quantising gravity, seems like your average homework problem

RewCie

Thanks, I've already a lot of backlog, no more homework problems.

Nihar Karve

Come on, it shouldn't take too long - a couple of hours at the max

RewCie

Time is relative. It's couple of hours for you, couple of lives for me.

Prateek Mourya

16:52

Please can anyone help with my question

@NiharKarve Below this message

Charlie

@PrateekMourya Usually "don't bug people to answer your questions" is a rule in the chat

Prateek Mourya

17:45

Ok

JingleBells

18:13

So taxes are forced altruism?

JMac

What do you mean by altruism here?

JingleBells

Well, taxes were created so that the government has money to pay for stuff that benefits society, right? So every individual is forced to spend a part of their money for the good of society?

By altruism, I mean doing something good for someone else for the sake of your own loss - such as giving a sandwich to a homeless person.

JMac

But you're also a part of society, so paying money to benefit society isn't necessarily a "loss" for you, unless you're in a position where you don't need any of the benefits of a society (which seems rare).

JingleBells

Yes, exactly. You pay taxes, but in return, you get roads, cheaper healthcare... just like you pay taxes to do good for society, society also pays you back in another form that the government policy decides?

Charlie

Yes, essentially

Living in a society that doesn't have rampant poverty (and as a consequence, crime), hunger, sickness etc. benefits everyone who lives in said society, so paying taxes is not a loss across the board for anyone.

JingleBells

18:31

Who said poverty, crime, hunger, and sickness are a consequence of low taxes?

Why do some people think it's fair that wealthier individuals should pay more taxes?

(I'm not saying it's unfair, I just wanna discuss it)

I'm talking about progressive vs flat taxation

Btw why am I forced to give money to the homeless and poor who don't do anything for society and are charged less (or no) taxes? If taxes are forced altruism, then why the poorer should contribute less, and the people who are actually productive are forced to contribute more?

JMac

You could argue that at some point, no person should really have that much more wealth than someone else, especially when wealth can have so much influence, and recognizing that a lot of the money the very wealthy have cannot be made without a large number of people who work beneath them for much less. And at some point you have to wonder why people really need to hoard that much money.

JingleBells

So you're saying that the wealthy should pay more taxes because they don't deserve the money?

JMac

@JingleBells Thinking of homeless and poor people as "people who don't do anything for society" can be a really bad way to look at it. Ideally you would want a society that instead helps the homeless get back on their feet so that they can contribute to society, or doesn't marginalize the poor so they can more comfortably contribute. Also, most tax systems aren't really making the people who are taxed go poor, especially if you start specifically taxing the wealthy more.

JingleBells

@JMac And how do you know that because homeless people have free food, free shelter, they essentially have no reason to work at all?

How do you know they are not just lazy and disincentivized because they can get by without working?

JMac

18:46

I don't think the ultra wealthy actually deserve to be ultra wealthy, no. That's basically saying they are worth like hundreds of thousands of times as much as the average person in their society. I don't think that's an accurate representation, those people couldn't be wealthy without an entire society of people getting ripped off for corporate interests to allow people with money to make it into more money.

Why can a rich kid live off inheritance and interest while a middle class people have to work their entire lives to be able to survive moderately comfortably? How is that fair, let alone for the much less fortunate?

JingleBells

I'm talking about homelessness and taxes, not if wealthy people should exist.

JMac

@JingleBells A lot of homelessness is caused by mental health issues and unfortunate circumstances. Not everyone is going to be a functional member of society, basically no matter what. I would much rather live in a world where those who could be, but get marginalized by circumstance, have that opportunity to improve themselves and be functional members of society instead of being pushed further to the side.

JingleBells

Yes, I understand your point of view. But are the majority of homeless people homeless because of mental health issues and can they improve so they can get up and work? Or are the homeless just lazy and benefitting from free stuff (that the actual productive people are forced to pay for)

Will giving homeless people free stuff unlock they work potential (if they even have any) or will it push them down the lazy line?

JMac

Does it really hurt the average person that much to help them? For someone like middle class, able to live comfortably, but not with a ton of extra money; having a bit more tax really isn't that bad, especially when only a few dollars from everyone a year adds up to a lot. But also, think about the really wealthy. Why they hell do they need a mega-yacht with a full crew on their budget?

Did someone like Jeff Bezoz really contribute so much to society that he should be able to live as a king for the rest of his life without ever risking going broke and never doing any more work? What's taxing them a few more percent? They still live great lives, and that's a lot of money to helping people.

JingleBells

You're changing the topic. I'm asking simply if giving homeless people, in reality, unlocks their potential or if it pushes them down the lazy hole even further, allowing space for more homeless people.

JMac

19:01

And this isn't like some simple answer. People are different, but looking at all homeless people as just lazy bums is incredibly ignorant IMO. I'm pretty sure there is plenty that shows in more social countries these problems become less prevalent.

JingleBells

But in that logic, looking at homeless people as contributors with locked potential is also incredibly ignorant.

JMac

I'm pretty sure that countries like USA which are more opposed to social programs generally have the worst problems with homelessness.

JingleBells

The last time I read, in the US homeless people are still getting free stuff. I think they should be given a choice: work or leave the country. Don't you think that's fair? And I agree that some people are mentally ill at this point in their life, so put them through some rehabilitation program instead of giving them free stuff. I'd be happy to pay taxes to rehabilitate homeless people and get them on their feet to work, but not to feed their lazy asses.

JMac

Another way to look at is it why would these people be eager to contribute to society when society has basically pushed them to the fringes? Reaching out and assisting is more likely to make them see society in a positive light and want to actually contribute.

JingleBells

Rehabilitation, not free stuff. Isn't that better to spend taxes?

JMac

19:10

@JingleBells " I think they should be given a choice: work or leave the country." So where do you expect homeless American citizens to go? America can't just ship them away to die with nothing in some country they aren't even from... why would any other country want that, or how would that be at all humane? People don't even choose to be born. Some would argue that food shelter and basic health care should be something universal, and that it's the extras on top of that people should work for.

JingleBells

Alright, let me put it this way. I would prefer it if my taxes were spent towards getting homeless people to work. Do you agree with me here? We both have the same goal of having homeless people work, don't we?

fqq

Many many homeless people are working, by the way

parade.com/643064/beckyhughes/…

some are children, some are unable to work for various reasons

Charlie

@JingleBells Because in a capitalist system services such as healthcare, education and housing can be prohibitively expensive for those who are not earning enough money.

JingleBells

@Charlie Got it

Charlie

@JingleBells Because they do not understand that a flat tax does not work

JingleBells

19:16

@Charlie Right, got it. I don't know the consequences of flat tax, but I'm more focused on the issue of homelessness at the moment.

Charlie

@JingleBells Because generally in the world we live in, rich people haven't earned what they have exclusively by themselves. A lot of wealthy people that are (self-proclaimed) "self-made" had private education, grew up in a good home, had access to healthcare, never struggled financially growing up etc.

Well a flat tax inevitably has to screw over the people on one end of the spectrum, right. If poor people are forced to pay huge portions of their income in tax they won't be able to afford basic necessities like food/rent, also low income people don't pay a very large fraction of the overall tax revenues collected by governments

But on the other hand, if wealthy people pay the same low tax rates poor people do there won't be any funding for public services which poorer people depend on disproportionately.

JMac

@JingleBells I would prefer if my taxes went to everyone being able to live some sort of life with basic necessities. Specifically trying to push everyone to work seems like a way to make people miserable, and I would rather encourage people to work by having people buy into the idea of a supportive society, and therefore feel more inclined to find how they can contribute and reap some of the extra rewards.

Charlie

I guess I shouldn't have said "on one end of the spectrum", poor people would essentially lose out in every way in a flat tax system

Either they don't have money because they're paying it all in tax or they don't have public services because there's no funding for them

JMac

Poor people like Donald Trump who makes so little he apparently pays $750 a year in federal taxes...

Charlie

Trump's $750 tax bill is kind of complicated since he's a business owner, it certainly makes for a good talking point if you're a Democrat but it's not unheard of or necessarily indicative of tax fraud for a wealthy person's income tax specifically to be low

JMac

19:22

But it does point to a problem, that people who are supposedly very wealthy can arrange for their "losses" in such a way that they basically pay nothing into the system, while still having access to so much more than the average person who pays more.

Charlie

Mostly, the concerns arising from the leak of his tax documents is that he owes a lot of money to other people, many in foreign countries, which raises the question of whether it's good to have a president who could potentially be manipulated by those who he owes money to

Oh lol you don't have to tell me how bad the tax system in America is :P

JMac

Canada really isn't that much better AFAIK. We have more social programs, but I'm pretty sure you can do similar tax shenanigans.

JingleBells

I forgot what we were discussing now.

Charlie

Essentially any country that allows the wealthy to have influence over legislation will have a similar issue :P

JingleBells

I lean towards the right, as you guys know, and I'm looking for a common point between us. I disagree with a lot of the things you're saying and I'm trying to find the essential difference of why we disagree on the way society should be run.

JMac

19:28

Anyone else watching the Trump tweets and laughing how twitter is flagging all of them.

Charlie

I'm not sure I've given any opinions, those are fairly logical consequences of a flat tax rate :P

JingleBells

Let's pick homelessness. What do you guys think is the difference between the way democracy views the issue and republicans view the issue? (and solutions)

Charlie

Whether or not those consequences are good or bad means prescribing a moral judgement, which would be opinion based

You'd have to be more specific, both parties would agree that "it's bad", they'd probably differ on how much responsibility an individual bears for being homeless and what the best ways to address homelessness are

JMac

I've always felt like the overly right leaning ideas of wealth are too disconnected from reality, possibly on purpose from the wealthy. There seems to be some general idea that being wealthy inherently means you've been successful and done something that made you worth that; when really I think luck and bias in the system is far too great of a factor for a fully capitalist system to actually be fair.

JingleBells

@Charlie Well, I'm sure both parties agree that homelessness is a problem. How do they differ on solution?

Charlie

19:34

I would hazard a guess that more Republicans believe in absolute free will than Democrats, the belief that people themselves are solely responsible for anything and everything that happens to them seems to lead to a lot of the opinions that lean Republican

fqq

the US are incredibly bad at dealing with it,regardless of which of the two parties is in charge

JingleBells

@Charlie How do they differ on solution?

Charlie

So for example a Republican might believe that the homeless person is responsible for their situation and it's up to them to get a job etc. and fix things for themselves

See "pull yourself up by your bootstraps"

JMac

I mean as a middle class North American white guy it could definitely make me feel better to assume things are totally fair and based on merit alone; but I've seen enough to highly doubt that.

Charlie

Whereas Democrats tend to advocate for social welfare programs that provide resources to people who desperately need them in order to assist them.

More or less, yeah

JingleBells

19:38

What are both parties goals? Do their goals differ?

What are they trying to achieve with those solutions and why?

JMac

To flail around hopelessly in the proper pattern to get people to vote for them again.

Charlie

The belief that society is only as strong as its weakest members is typically a more "left" opinion.

Republicans generally promote the idea that by being responsible for yourself you can succeed and that expecting "unearned" help from other people promotes laziness

JingleBells

Alright, Republicans want reduced homelessness, and Democracy wants reduced homelessness. Why do both parties want this? Do they differ in their whys?

Charlie

for the record the parties are the "Republicans" and the "Democrats", not "Democracy"

JingleBells

My bad, I was wondering this :D

Democratician

Charlie

19:44

Although given the current attempts to instil doubt in what is a fairly ironclad electoral system in America you're not totally wrong :P

JingleBells

@Charlie not totally wrong in what?

Charlie

If you asked me to nail down a common reason for wanting to reduce homelessness, I would say that in general it makes people feel bad to know that there are other people living on the streets without basic comforts that they take for granted

Don't worry :P

JingleBells

@Charlie I thought Democrats want to make homeless people happy and well by giving them food and health, and Republicans want to make homeless people work by giving them the choice of "work or starve", no?

Am I somewhat correct?

fqq

as a much as a quarter of homeless adults are working

Charlie

@JingleBells At least somewhat, sure. Democrats and Republicans are large groups of people, many of whom disagree internally with each other on how to address issues, so we are generalising a lot here

JingleBells

19:50

But why do Democrats want to make homeless people happy and well? So they can get to work?

Charlie

You'll also find that "the left" and "the right" vary a great deal between countries and cultures

fqq

by the way "starving" (food insecurity) and homelessness are obviously related, but also very different problems

some homeless people work, and most people who need help with food do have a home

JingleBells

@fqq I get that it's a messed up story with a lot of moving parts

fqq

@Charlie yes, in particular the US democratic party would be considered centre/centre-right/right wing in most of the world

Charlie

@JingleBells Not necessarily, the idea is again that society is only as strong as its weakest members. The goal would be along the lines of improving the average quality of life as much as possible.

JingleBells

19:54

@Charlie So the goal of Democrats is to have a "strong society"?

Charlie

I'm not sure what strong society means

JingleBells

Me neither, but you used it in your sentence :P

Charlie

That's a metaphor, stats like average quality of life, access to healthcare, access to education, access to food/water/housing are measures of how "strong" the society is here

JingleBells

Pff, I'm confused now as to what Democrats want with regards to homelessness and why they want it. Do they just do it out of a good heart, morals...?

Charlie

That's part of it,sure

JingleBells

19:58

Then of what will do Republicans want to heal homelessness?

Charlie

You'd have to ask a Republican :P

JingleBells

I doubt there's a one here :D

(except me maybe)

I'm barely a Republican lol, I'm still figuring out what I'm supporting

Charlie

Well why would you want to reduce homelessness?

JingleBells

I'm so confused as to what both sides want and how they differ

I see homeless people as potential individuals who can work and contribute to society's progress.

Charlie

I can only give you broad strokes, any two-party political system is going to be complicated to discuss because the two parties tend to divide up into many subgroups

JingleBells

20:01

I aim for work and progress, and if giving homeless people food and healthcare gets them to work, I support giving homeless people food and healthcare.

Charlie

Sure, I don't think many Democrats would disagree with that

JingleBells

The question is - does giving homeless people food and healthcare get them to work?

Charlie

People may need more than just those two things, but sure, they're in the right direction

JingleBells

If the data supports it, and if giving homeless people food, shelter, healthcare, and other things get them to a point where they can contribute and work, I support giving them free stuff (and I'd be happier to pay my taxes)

But I'm also wondering, is giving them free stuff the only way to get them to work?

Charlie

Do you have an alternative?

JingleBells

20:09

I don't, that's why I'm asking :D

maybe someone else has

So if both parties want to get homeless people to work, how do they differ on execution? If giving homeless people free stuff works, and there isn't another alternative, then what to Republicans support? (I'd have to ask a Republican? :P)

Charlie

Something along the lines of taking personal responsibility for their situation and using the opportunities afforded to them by living in a first world country to fix their situation themselves

JingleBells

So which solution statistically works better?

Caring or forcing?

or it's blurry?

Charlie

You'd have to look up the actual data I don't know it off the top of my head

But for what it's worth, telling large groups of people to "make better decisions" and "overcome their circumstances" does not generally fix problems in society

JingleBells

Whichever solution statistically gets the most homeless people to work, I support.

JingleBells

20:31

@Charlie @JMac Thanks for having the discussions with me.

Transcript for