makes EIGHT times more sense to just forgive the first $12k in taxes someone is required to pay

10/16/2019 5:11:50 PM

So Yang calls his UBI plan a solution to automation, but how does $1000/mo actually help someone whose job has been automated out of existence? Truckers make nearly $60k/yr on average.

10/16/2019 6:12:33 PM

the unfettered free market will take care of the rest

10/16/2019 6:53:59 PM

if choices were warren or yang...it would be a choice between 2 things that would never happen. medicare for all or 1000/month

10/16/2019 11:39:55 PM

This truck is phenomenal



[Edited on October 17, 2019 at 9:41 AM. Reason : ^ Yang's attitude is also medicare for all, as you can find on his truck]

10/17/2019 9:16:20 AM

Quote :

" makes EIGHT times more sense to just forgive the first $12k in taxes someone is required to pay"

wut



the owner of that truck ^ is the guy I posted on the last page, and is the truck driver that Andrew mentioned in the last question of the debate

Quote :

" So Yang calls his UBI plan a solution to automation, but how does $1000/mo actually help someone whose job has been automated out of existence? Truckers make nearly $60k/yr on average."

UBI is not intended to replace existing jobs or wages. But it is a way to give people an income floor and better ease people into finding new jobs/careers as the economy and job market shifts.

Those shifts are going to happen either way, so yeah it's def gonna help as $1000/month > $0/month. Plus, Yang is proposing that as automated trucking takes on a bigger share of the labor, some part of the money generated through those efficiencies should specifically be set aside as severance as those jobs are reduced. are any other candidates offering better solutions for Americans, or even just specifically the 3M+ truckers plus the 7M+ people employed in fields related to trucking activity who will be directly impacted by just this single technological change?

but don't just take my word for it. Since Yang is only given 8 minutes to speak out of a 3 hour debate, Yang will be live-answering voter questions for 10 hours straight tomorrow. Feel free to submit your question on his website I'm sure this question or one similar will come up

https://www.yang2020.com


[Edited on October 17, 2019 at 10:38 AM. Reason : .]

10/17/2019 10:25:19 AM

Quote :

"makes EIGHT times more sense to just forgive the first $12k in taxes someone is required to pay"

I will ask this again....but more slowly

How...much...income....do...you need to make...to have...a 12K tax bill?

If you make zero, you have zero. With UBI if you make zero you have 12K. At least you can eat.

10/17/2019 9:42:24 PM

I like Yang, but I also like the title of this article

https://slate.com/business/2019/10/andrew-yang-automation-unemployment-freedom-dividend.html

10/17/2019 10:35:19 PM

https://www.yang2020.com/live/

10/18/2019 10:46:22 AM

Just about to share this^, lol

10/18/2019 11:02:30 AM

Today's Reddit AMA

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/djpf40/iama_presidential_candidate_andrew_yang_ama/

Back on YT Livestream in a bit





[Edited on October 18, 2019 at 2:09 PM. Reason : hard at work!]

And the Quora AMA

https://www.quora.com/profile/Andrew-Yang/answers

[Edited on October 18, 2019 at 5:31 PM. Reason : .]

10/18/2019 1:56:36 PM

Here's Part 3 of Friday's 10 hour Q&A



here's the twitter Q&A segment

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1185236056020586496


Harvard Economist Greg Mankiw making the case for why Yang's Freedom Dividend funded by a VAT is better than an equivalent means-tested, targeted social safety net system funded by a wealth tax





[Edited on October 21, 2019 at 9:16 AM. Reason : ]

10/20/2019 6:33:00 PM

The real candidate and human being caring about us, not the power.

10/20/2019 7:53:26 PM

My Yang Bill

10/21/2019 1:33:54 PM

realize this thread is about #yanggang...who I am not. Hear me out, maybe I can offer some insight.

I am in outside sales, which is currently salary+commission, but will move into straight commission starting at the beginning of July 2010. I have been in this position since July 2009. I have competition from several direct manufacturing sales reps, large distributors, and local distributors. Here are the advantages and disadvantages of each:

Direct Advantages: Immediate knowledge of new technology, no middle man mark up, one shipping bill (paid by manufacturer or buyer of goods), access to larger range of non-commodity items, control inventory, have access to many distributors that can effectively sell their goods which increases market share, and set prices of commodity they manufacture.

Direct disadvantages: Typically have 1-3 sales reps per region (i.e. southeast, mid-atlantic, northeast, etc.) limiting the number of accounts they can successfully manage/cold-call, lack physical customer service or physical technical service available to or affordable for smaller users or altogether, are sometimes not trustworthy because they will go in behind their distributors that sell their commodity to one account in large quantities (i.e. they missed a big account, and have found out about it through a distributor selling their particular product) which leads to the distributor not selling their product anymore, have too many distributors selling the product ultimately driving the set price down through deviations, possibly rely on distributors to actually sell the product, and competition from other direct sources.

Large distributor advantages: have access to other commodities that go hand in hand with other manufacturers (poor example- grocery stores sell milk as well as cereal), get direct pricing, many locations regionally or nationally easing the shipping burden of buyers with multiple locations, personal service either customer or technical, many sales reps that are able to cover a broader territory, access to multiple manufacturers of the same commodity allowing to keep prices in check, service programs that smaller companies can't offer and direct providers can't match in price or value, and experts of many many commodities as opposed to one or a few.

Large distributor disadvantages: smaller local distributors creating price wars (think Michael Scott Paper Co vs Dunder-Mifflin), direct mfg's going in behind and stealing business, limited access to all of the mfg's (you won't find Harris Teeter name brands in Food Lion and visa versa), can't truly set prices because it's based on both supply and demand, territory management, and tough growth prospects in slower economies (this is true for direct as well really)

Local distributor advantages: Typically a good ol' boy setting where the seller and the buyer know each other for years (this does happen at all levels, but mostly at the local level), local folks are right down the street and can be used in emergencies, if the local guy buys at high enough volumes then there is no shipping charge to the end user, and access to both direct mfg's and large distributors.

Local distributor disadvantages: easily beaten in price, array of commodities, array of technology, lack of trained staff, low cash flow, etc etc etc.

This is what I have noticed in my six months, I am sure there are plenty more that need mentioning. The way I am setting myself apart as a sales person is this: I go after the big accounts right now while I am new. The big accounts, if I land them, will take care of me while I am new and building a customer base. The money made off of those allows me to focus free time on smaller accounts that get me higher margins. I build up big accounts, I would like to have 5-10 of these, then get 20-30 medium accounts. If I lose 1 or 2 big accounts, the 20-30 medium accounts keep me afloat while I go after new big accounts. I don't really waste time on small accounts simply because they basically pay for breakfast or something really small.

I will say this, if you can't get a big account in the first 6-8 months (assuming you have cash flow that you can ride this long) you could be in a world of trouble. If you can get one, it will really make going after the others a lot more enjoyable and less stressful. It's simply just very exhausting wasting any time on anything other than big accounts in the very beginning. You work just as hard on the medium sized accounts and see 1/3 to 1/36 of the money in my situation.

10/22/2019 12:01:14 AM

^I like your platform. You have my vote.

#OutsideSalesParty

[Edited on October 22, 2019 at 9:19 AM. Reason : ]

10/22/2019 9:19:25 AM

Yang walked back his M4A support, said M4A is too disruptive

10/23/2019 2:45:35 PM

source: https://twitter.com/NicoleSganga/status/1187030344303820801

10/23/2019 4:43:08 PM

So some insurance companies gave him a bunch of money?

10/23/2019 5:14:27 PM

Yang's quote was "I support the spirit of what Bernie is trying to accomplish. I do think that outlawing private insurance in a very short period of time is too disruptive and I would not do it"

And most Americans do not WANT their private health insurance outlawed.

Yang is about incentives and structuring incentives in the economy to serve the public good.

if you want more context than a 10 second response to a reporter affords, this video may interest you.



[Edited on October 23, 2019 at 6:41 PM. Reason : .]

10/23/2019 6:36:25 PM

I'm not watching a dang video.

10/23/2019 6:40:02 PM

that's why I used the phrase may interest. some people prefer to be more informed than others

[Edited on October 23, 2019 at 6:48 PM. Reason : you can skip to minute 11, 16 and 20 if you want less context and more direct soundbites]

10/23/2019 6:45:35 PM

No one is watching any of these videos

M4A has strong support, the only reason support for removing private insurance (which is really a key part of m4a) is lower is because of misinformation. Americand dont actually like their private insurance, favorability is low, they have just been told terrifying lies from both parties. The way to combat that is to keep speaking about the advantages of M4A, not to make a cowardly statement about how it's too disruptuve

As a non-real candidate he has a unique ability to make these kinds of statements, hes just not making them about m4a because hes a libertarian who doesnt support it

[Edited on October 23, 2019 at 7:00 PM. Reason : .]

10/23/2019 6:59:04 PM

YOU may not want to watch the videos, and that's fine. but the data shows that the reality is that many Americans are increasingly interested in and liking what they hear from Yang campaign

Most Americans recognize that soundbite-based politics is not substantive enough to encapsulate an authentic evaluation of the challenges that America faces and the various proposed solutions to those challenges

Quote :

" And most Americans do not WANT their private health insurance outlawed."

Quote :

" Americand dont actually like their private insurance, favorability is low"

both of these things can be true at the same time. again, Yang favors using incentives to spur organizations and people to make choices that are optimal for the whole. freedom of choice and personal autonomy are important principles in this country. we will succeed by recognizing this truth and using it to benefit all Americans

[Edited on October 23, 2019 at 8:00 PM. Reason : Make America Think Harder]

10/23/2019 7:27:42 PM

You can't support the tech bro math guy with a graph that has an unlabeled and unclear y axis. "wow yang has 100 interest, that can't be beat!"

As for "Americans want choice"
https://twitter.com/robdelaney/status/1186101406807318528?s=19

10/23/2019 8:09:04 PM

Quote :

"some people prefer to be more informed than others"

Some people just don't like watching videos and would rather read shit to be informed.

10/23/2019 8:12:25 PM

^^^ tHe mArKeT cAn SoLvE iT


^
Videos are harder to fact check or watch critically, theres a reason the right radicalizes people with videos

[Edited on October 23, 2019 at 9:41 PM. Reason : Has nothing to do with being informed, written > video ]

10/23/2019 9:39:19 PM

not trolling, im genuinely interested in that last comment, please explain your theory on video fact checking and radicalization.

that almost sounds thread worthy.

10/24/2019 9:03:21 AM

Andrew Ti of the "Yo Is This Racist" podcast spends alot of time calling a Yang a white nationalist bootlicker. Good times.

10/24/2019 10:09:02 AM

Quote :

" You can't support the tech bro math guy with a graph that has an unlabeled and unclear y axis"

it's relative to the other candidates, so of course you can. But if you still want to dismiss GOOGLE'S data, here's some more for you

Yang is in the top 2500 of sites in the US by traffic, and keeps moving up. That's a pretty good measure of interest.



Compared to
Warren #4318
Bernie #5677
Biden #10,321
Buttigieg #13,704

Quote :

" Some people just don't like watching videos and would rather read shit to be informed."

okey dokey


[Edited on October 24, 2019 at 11:18 AM. Reason : .]

10/24/2019 11:11:04 AM

you've repeatedly posted metrics like this and it's odd that you think they mean anything

10/24/2019 11:17:00 AM

it's odd that you think search engine volume and website traffic are not relevant metrics of interest

[Edited on October 24, 2019 at 11:24 AM. Reason : I bet if Bernie had Yang's numbers in these respects you'd be happy to note them]

10/24/2019 11:22:34 AM

well i wouldn't, because they don't mean much

is a website even the main online method of interaction for anyone under 40?

[Edited on October 24, 2019 at 11:34 AM. Reason : are they real people, etc...]

10/24/2019 11:33:49 AM

Evidence of interest, yes. Evidence of favorability, no.

Even if you were to be able to filter by political preference, select liberal, and type Trump into the analytics, you'd see him with higher relativity than those other candidates.

I suspect the high google research is due to the unfamiliarity with him as a candidate and that his message is interesting and googling is the easiest way for them to learn more.

10/24/2019 11:35:02 AM

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-04-30%202016-06-26&geo=US&q=Bernie%20Sanders,Hillary%20Clinton

10/24/2019 11:43:26 AM

Quote :

" Evidence of interest, yes. Evidence of favorability, no."

Indeed. Garnering awareness and interest is the first step for somebody who was/is pretty much unknown. As people learn more about his candidacy, his support rises. Yes, I'd like to see his polling numbers rise faster than they have been, but these things take time. I've been a UBI advocate for many years and it still took me a solid 1.5 months to go from the first time I became aware of Yang's candidacy to actually considering myself a supporter.

The good news is that with the $10M raised in Q3, the campaign can start putting those resources to good use getting his message out. Yang has always said that the campaign will peak at the right time, and while yes I am a little impatient, I believe that his message fundamentally is a compelling alternative to the other candidates and he will continue to rise in support

[Edited on October 24, 2019 at 12:02 PM. Reason : .]

10/24/2019 11:59:57 AM

Quote :

"I believe that his message fundamentally is a compelling alternative to the other candidates and he will continue to rise in support"

What exactly is his core message?

10/24/2019 12:01:40 PM

Quote :

"it's relative to the other candidates, so of course you can. But if you still want to dismiss GOOGLE'S data, here's some more for you"

I didn't dismiss anything, but attempt to translate your plot to anything that matters. Does it mean 100 people are searching for yang, in which case who cares, or 100,000,000 in the which case HOLY SHIT. How many people do you think use YouTube as their primary source of information on a candidate? How many search in YouTube directly? Etc etc. It's a sign of interest in some way, but totally unquantifiable.

10/24/2019 12:14:17 PM

It's a relative map for all series, with 100 representing peak over the x axis, which is time. The take away isn't 100 people or 100,000, or even 1 Billion. The take away is that of those interested in democratic political candidates, and let's suggest that is a proxy for likely voters, that Yang is receiving the most search interest.

With that said, this graph, which is also from Google Trends doesn't line up with the one posted above, so I'm curious how the two conflate.

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/275653/

10/24/2019 12:39:12 PM

But that is meaningless without telling me how many people overall are doing searches, at a minimum.

It's the reason always put the number of people polled, at a minimum.

10/24/2019 12:55:00 PM

Quote :

" how many people overall are doing searches"

all of them

10/24/2019 1:01:16 PM

^^ that is akin to saying population sampling isn't a meaningful statistic. Relative grouping beyond a minimum sample size is meaningful. Google Trends doesn't show results for data below a minimum threshold.

10/24/2019 1:13:33 PM

SO WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD

Your post is like you didn't even read mine. A population sampling wouldn't be released without saying the size of the sample.

10/24/2019 1:22:06 PM

The point is that when taking a population sample, the size of that sample doesn't matter because it is statistically the same as the whole population, meaning you can simply say "all of them", such as ^3. The two make no difference in outcome or in general significance of the data presented.

10/24/2019 2:09:24 PM

1. That is not true at all, sample size obviously matters
2. YouTube search data is not anywhere the same as a randomized poll. The former is a self selected community.

10/24/2019 2:15:34 PM

1. incorrect. once a population sample size (google's minimum data threshold) has been calculated at a particular confidence interval (in this case 2 standard deviations, or 95%), any size above that is statistically meaningless. Thus, once the baseline has been established, which it has, the nominal value doesn't matter when interpreting the meaningfulness of the data.

2. Yes and no. Within any set of random data there is a normalization of the data, re: Central Limit Theorem. Youtube viewership is a random set of data given that no one is self selecting or grouping people for the purpose of the study. They are also results aggregated over a large and varied region. That said, there is some accuracy since it is a narrow set of randomized data, restricted only to YouTube users. A more fair sample would have been for data that included books, youtube, general web research, and inquiries with friends and family. So, you're correct in stating that this wouldn't apply toward the entire electorate. It likely is indicative of both middle class and up and skews younger. While that matters for what the larger picture may be, it in no way means that the graph shown wasn't self explanatory or doesn't have clear meaningful value. Nor does it mean that the graph needs further labeling or explicit sample data to communicate a valid point.

10/24/2019 2:33:01 PM

So Google can do a sample of 1 and that's a sample of the electorate?

And if it's NOT a sample of the electorate then it is, in fact, not useful for a presidential election. Telling me that YouTube users have "interest" (which we haven't even covered, this term is completely unexplained, is it total searches for the name, total unique users, etc?) doesn't tell me at all about his chance to win the primary.

10/24/2019 2:42:58 PM

reaching pretty hard guy to suggest that the #1 most used website on the planet might not be dealing with statistically significant populations on their trends page.

look, you like somebody other than Yang, I get it. support your "team", great! but you are just making yourself look silly with this line of discussion. I suggest sticking to "Yang is only at 3%" or even "people actually want single payer" for substantive arguments against Yang

10/24/2019 2:47:10 PM

I wasn't making an argument against yang? I was saying that graph doesn't tell me anything and is poor from a technical graphics standpoint. I also didn't claim that the site didn't use a big enough population, I was specifically asking what population they used.

I found a pretty long explainer that kinda flies in the face of the "self explanatory" claim
https://medium.com/google-news-lab/what-is-google-trends-data-and-what-does-it-mean-b48f07342ee8
It seems that the trends can't differentiate from one person doing 10 searches and 10 people doing 1 search?

10/24/2019 2:57:38 PM

Quote :

"I was saying that graph doesn't tell me anything"

okey dokey

10/24/2019 3:38:57 PM