/liberty/ - Liberty

Gold, Property Rights, and Physical Removal

Index Catalog Archive Bottom Refresh
Name
Options
Subject
Message

Max message length: 12000

files

Max file size: 32.00 MB

Total max file size: 50.00 MB

Max files: 5

Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more

CAPTCHA
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and posts)

Misc

Remember to follow the Rules

The backup domains are located at 8chan.se and 8chan.cc. TOR access can be found here, or you can access the TOR portal from the clearnet at Redchannit 3.0.

/wsj/ - Weekly Shonen Jump

8chan.moe is a hobby project with no affiliation whatsoever to the administration of any other "8chan" site, past or present.

(1.70 MB 2575x2726 1563820365738.jpg)

INFOGRAPHICS, WE NEED MOAR Anonymous 11/17/2019 (Sun) 04:54:28 Id: 4f739b No. 694

Why are we so bad at infographics?
(53.99 KB 600x544 1535926038466.jpg)


Interventions that contributed to the rising cost of healthcare
(118.25 KB 992x736 health3.jpg)

(10.74 KB 477x510 1553372690384.GIF)

(141.16 KB 960x960 s3f.jpg)

(34.04 KB 600x469 5.jpg)

(163.74 KB 1210x942 6 (2).png)

(34.02 KB 923x662 6.png)

(440.48 KB 1113x443 gold standard.png)


Central banking
(179.90 KB 816x483 1453293846829.jpg)

(390.45 KB 987x885 1559205920732.png)


UNIONS: NOT the cause of our 40 hour workweek!
>>698
• So despite the data showing a clear decline in work hours all occurring prior to Unions having successfully lobbied Congress to legislate the 40 hour standard, people still mistakenly believe that Unions were to thank for our 8 hour day and 40 hour workweek. Our graph, from the study "Trends in Hours: The U.S. from 1900 to 1950”, shows the decline from 1830 to 1990. We had already reached the 40 hour standard by 1938 WITHOUT the need for legislation. Furthermore, as this study states, the "decline was not even across workers: it benefited mostly low-wage earners who used to work the most in 1900.” [14]

THE REALITY?
Labor unions had been trying for decades to legislate a shorter workweek but their goals simply weren't mathematically feasible until per capita GDP and productivity had first increased. Once they DID increase the demands of Unions were finally possible. This is far different, however, from falsely concluding that their demands were the SOURCE of said advancement. Just as in 1791 when Philadelphia carpenters went on strike seeking a 10 hour work day or in 1835 when different Philadelphia strikers did the same. Just as in 1864, when the Chicago labor movement began demanding an 8 hour work day, similar to the National Labor Union in 1866 who declared it necessary to free people from "capitalist slavery." Just as with the Illinois strike of 1867, or the 8-hour proclamation declared by President Grant in 1869, the central demands of labor organizers in the 1870's, the objectives of the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions in 1884, or the American Federation of Labor in 1888, all of whom sought an 8 hour work day, little improvement could have resulted had the economic circumstances not first allowed it. Yes, unions demanded a shorter work day, and yes, unions demanded a shorter workweek, but PRODUCTIVITY INCREASES and ECONOMIC GROWTH gave it to us.
____
Citations:

[1]
(note: figures may not add exactly up to 100% due to rounding.)
http://employees.csbsju.edu/jolson/ECON315/Whaples2123771.pdf

[2]
https://www.agclassroom.org/gan/timeline/farmers_land.htm

[3]
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2007/wp07105.pdf
(also the source of one of the graphs depicted in the video)

[4]
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8007.pdf

[5]
http://www2.lawrence.edu/fast/finklerm/DeLong_Growth_History_Ch5.pdf

[6]
http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/CT1970p1-06.pdf

[7]
U.S. Department of Interior (1883) Census (a.k.a The Weeks Report)
https://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1880a_v20-01.pdf

[8]
The Aldrich Report from the 1893 Senate Committee on Finance.
https://archive.org/details/wholesalepricesw03unit

[9]
http://www.nber.org/papers/w11931

[10]
Whaples (1990a)
http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9026669/

[11]
Jones (1963)
https://goo.gl/GszkyY

[12]
Owen (1976, 1988)
https://goo.gl/7m0Xws

[13]
(source is cited merely to confirm when the FLSA was passed)
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/national-fair-labor-standards-act-2953.html

[14]
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.149.8647&rep=rep1&type=pdf
(118.13 KB 450x358 gilded age (1).png)

(72.24 KB 471x249 gilded age (2).png)

(95.28 KB 466x521 gilded age (3).png)


The gilded age saw massive increases in real wages, living standard etc for the working class, more than anywhere in the world at the time and this was all thanks to massive increases in economic production due to our economic freedom.
(129.99 KB 1134x1357 567.PNG)

(95.05 KB 537x2414 1543294920738.PNG)


Taxes in the 50s were actually quite low and there were massive writeoffs.
(773.26 KB 1020x1020 1516501592036.png)


Anyway, I did my part.
(19.70 KB 480x272 43c.jpg)

>>694
Yes anon, I totally agree. /pol/ and /fascist/ do a great job at this and we must learn from them. For some reason they are good at explaining their more complicated concepts to the lowest common denominator, maybe because they are low IQs themselves. We must also remember the basic principles of graphic design and keep things very simple. An infograph is so supposed to be a summary of a TL;DR, the point is not to overwhelm someone with information, but to take overwhelming information and present it in interesting bite-sized pieces with colourful pictures and memes to help people interpret it. If even a 12 year old or an 80 IQ nigger can't understand the infograph, then for all intents and purposes it's useless.
(42.01 KB 672x453 somethingHappened1971.jpg)

(110.65 KB 780x439 somethingHappened1971-2.png)

(372.26 KB 2067x1562 somethingHappened1971-3.jpg)


Every possible metric you can imagine stopped improving around 1971. I wonder what happened in 1971.

(175.55 KB 720x1220 muhroads.jpg)

(113.35 KB 1388x970 muh Australia.png)

(1.67 MB 800x4773 homeschooling infographic.jpg)

(1.45 MB 1029x4529 gun_use_infographic.jpg)

(735.17 KB 648x3308 gun myths debunked.png)


(446.51 KB 720x960 google_cia.png)

(73.89 KB 800x500 gun violence chart.jpg)

(2.07 MB 5244x4054 cfr-imperial-council-hdm.png)

(2.64 MB 3781x2702 cfr-media-empire-hd.png)

(116.88 KB 1281x541 race_gun_murder.jpeg)

(210.44 KB 1024x576 usdpurchasingpowergraph.jpg)


>>720
Is anything in this video worthwhile?
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=skCQJxWLFsA

Why so many metrics?
>>740
You know, this may seem like an offhand comment, but it's very relevant. I think the reason libertarianism is shit at infographics is because:

- Infographics need some sort of statistics or metrics to display.
- A lot of libertarian economic theory is against aggregation--a la Hong Kong's Cowperthwaite's dictum against even collecting economic statistics.
- Given the previous two points above, it makes sense why there are so few good infographics.

Given this, it also makes sense why a lot of libertarian propaganda material is "some dude's face with a block-quote wall of text beside it."
>>740
This anon makes a good point. In a political world dominated by irrational, emotive decisions most often made by leftists, everyone else is losing a significant portion of their potential audience by relying on metrics to make their arguments. The clear solution is to sprinkle in some empathetic arguments that would be relatable to the audience that these people attract. The problem with this is that it would only work on the most uneducated actors in the argument. The base of supporters for, in particular, gun control is dishonest. Take, for example, first pic relate. It presents empathetic reasoning against gun control, explicitly countering the typical "think of the children" emotive argument used by gun-controllists. However, once prompted with their own emotive arguments as counter-arguments, most gun-controllists are suddenly interested in arguing logically, and will falsely identify the argument as a slippery slope fallacy, despite the argument itself proving that the claim is not fallacious—the slope is exactly as slippery as described.

Russia's development and industrialization are not a spectacular merit of Bolshevism and would have happened under other regimes.
>>887
>>856
>>721
>>720
>>702
>>701
>WORDS
>WORDS
>WORDS
These are supposed to be spammed everywhere and easy to understand, you guys are missing the mark pretty badly.
>>888
4 of the 5 images I posted weren't walls of text, and you clearly failed to read my other post entirely. You tell me who's missing the mark here.
(439.84 KB 1605x2137 real-minimum-wage_0.png)

(49.62 KB 600x345 US_state_vs_gdp.jpg)

(69.94 KB 638x479 gvt_spending_by type.jfif)



Forms
Delete
Report
Quick Reply