2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Charlie Foley

Good summation. No arguments.
Personally I hate getting bogged down with these labels.

For me its about common sense. Everyone can have a piece of the American Dream and it is easy...if the government allows it.
But it does not because it is controlled by Corporations.
So we have the American Nightmare for many instead.
 
Red Dreams said:
@Charlie Foley

Good summation. No arguments.
Personally I hate getting bogged down with these labels.

For me its about common sense. Everyone can have a piece of the American Dream and it is easy...if the government allows it.
But it does not because it is controlled by Corporations.
So we have the American Nightmare for many instead.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of people who freak out about government “control” but are more than happy to have corporations run everything. Ben Shapiro
 
Charlie Foley said:
There are a lot of people who freak out about government “control” but are more than happy to have corporations run everything. Ben Shapiro
Click to expand...

A lot of it is to do with being 'brainwashed'. The liberal media is doing it now with labelling Bernie a Pinko/Commie whatever.

Just thought of Lennon's lyrics..."keep you doped with religion, sex and tv"
 
Charlie Foley said:
I would say that’s social democracy. Different to democratic socialism in that it is not post-capitalist. For example in Sweden a big part of the economy is private sector (I think about 90%).

From what I learned when studying pol sci, that is the closest model to what Bernie Sanders advocates/closest ideology to what he espouses. He’s not a socialist or even a democratic socialist though he calls himself as much. I’m not sure if he’s being deliberate in that ‘mistake’ as a political tool or if he’s just misunderstanding what those labels mean. I tend to think it’s the latter but can’t see inside his head!

I agree in your support of the Scandinavian model. Not just compared to the US model but also countries like Ireland/UK (which we learned of as the Anglo-American model I think...it was 9 years ago so forgive me!)

I also wholeheartedly agree with you that we should care less about what’s in a label (and just ask what is effective), but we do, and as someone who enjoys definitions and classifications I guess I am part of the problem. However people do care so it’s important to be accurate. I think it’s unfortunate that people seem to ignore the science of political science from the perspective of describing ideologies or social/eco systems. People think it is a matter of personal opinion or perspective when it’s not. That allows the talking heads on Fox to spout their nonsense which itself feeds into this mistake. I have a conservative uncle who tells me Ireland is a socialist country, the EU is socialist etc. I pointed out why this not true. He first said “well to me it is,” which is utterly illogical as it’s not about oneself (anymore than I could say “you might call toast toast but to me it’s a banana”). The next day he texted me “correcting himself” by quoting Wikipedia and saying Ireland in fact is a social democracy. I said I wish!

I have rambled a bit here so back on track, when I see people say to Americans Bernie is a socialist, I find that annoying. “Well, they’re wrong if they think that” isn’t particularly satisfying an answer, and most people who say it disparagingly at least tend to not be interested in learning why it’s not accurate.

@Carolina Red would appreciate your thoughts on the more ‘academic’ stuff
Click to expand...
Good post here and I agree with a lot of what you’ve said. I especially agree with the statements you make about people ignoring the labeling aspect of political science... to people that have studied it, labels do mean something and it isn’t bad to get nuanced about them and about how to describe things within politics.
 
There was another thread where @oneniltothearsenal was discussing how these labels were not relevant today.
Now if you take the three examples raised just now.
We do not have pure capitalism here in the US. There are regulations but they have been removed slowly and now aggressively by the Trump administration.
And @firestarter's example is nothing to do with Socialism. Its a totalitarian system.

What is common about both though is a small group of people and their cronies are enriching themselves at the expense of the vast majority.

The Swedish/Danish example is where we need to get to at least. I'm sure we can go further.
 
Charlie Foley said:
There are a lot of people who freak out about government “control” but are more than happy to have corporations run everything.
Click to expand...
I have a colleague who is a self described libertarian. We had a conversation this past Friday where he said he wouldn’t mind if even things like the police or fire departments were privatized, and when asked how the poor would have police or fire dept protection, he had no answer. He also said that he was against the government telling people how much profit they could make, but then said he didn’t agree with medicine companies price gouging for medicines. I’m left scratching my head there.
 
Carolina Red said:
I have a colleague who is a self described libertarian. We had a conversation this past Friday where he said he wouldn’t mind if even things like the police or fire departments were privatized, and when asked how the poor would have police or fire dept protection, he had no answer. He also said that he was against the government telling people how much profit they could make, but then said he didn’t agree with medicine companies price gouging for medicines. I’m left scratching my head there.
Click to expand...

They paint themselves into a corner.

That is the point.
 
Red Dreams said:
They paint themselves into a corner.

That is the point.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s a weird way of thinking. He also tried to argue that companies like Amazon and Walmart have ultimately been a net positive to the economy because their efficiency outranks the detriment they’ve caused to small businesses.

I’ve got another colleague hoping that the UAW/GM strike will lead to the end of the UAW... he also doesn’t understand why GM can’t just hire the striking workers back individually.
 
Carolina Red said:
I have a colleague who is a self described libertarian. We had a conversation this past Friday where he said he wouldn’t mind if even things like the police or fire departments were privatized, and when asked how the poor would have police or fire dept protection, he had no answer. He also said that he was against the government telling people how much profit they could make, but then said he didn’t agree with medicine companies price gouging for medicines. I’m left scratching my head there.
Click to expand...

Because most people don’t actually invest their time on learning to differentiate between political ideologies, so they ended up defining themselves, most often erroneously, with something which a key feature or two they identify with.

This is an excellent video on the nature of wealth, class, and everything in between in the US, including a fairly dead on explanation about Trump’s populist appeal.

 
Carolina Red said:
Yeah, it’s a weird way of thinking. He also tried to argue that companies like Amazon and Walmart have ultimately been a net positive to the economy because their efficiency outranks the detriment they’ve caused to small businesses.
Click to expand...

Think we...at least most of us here take a view about how all of us are affected.
Now let me state I don't agree with those who go the other way either. A totally Socialist Society or its variants.
That is where we get into trouble.

Once we surrender authority to any type of government, we are screwed.
Democracy needs to remain at grassroots level.
Now that may be cumbersome and slow but it is safer.
A slight tangent.
I prefer Proportional representation. We need to do away with the Electoral College for example. Also change how the Senate is made up. The sparsely populated states having the same votes as the more populated states is unfair.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Because most people don’t actually invest their time on learning to differentiate between political ideologies, so they ended up defining themselves, most often erroneously, with something which a key feature or two they identify with.

This is an excellent video on the nature of wealth, class, and everything in between in the US, including a fairly dead on explanation about Trump’s populist appeal.

Click to expand...

Natalie Wynn is good stuff. A friend of mine introduced me to her channel earlier this year.

I’ll watch that video tonight and tomorrow (not much free time to watch stuff during football season)
 
Eboue said:
  • universal
  • free at the point of service (no deductibles, no copays, no premiums, no lifetime caps, etc)
  • includes mental health services
  • significant savings on administrative costs
  • all money reinvested back into system (any system with private insurers by definition takes money out of the system and is less efficient)
Click to expand...

Thanks,

You think she will water down the commitment post nomination or after the presidential election?
 
Carolina Red said:
I have a colleague who is a self described libertarian. We had a conversation this past Friday where he said he wouldn’t mind if even things like the police or fire departments were privatized, and when asked how the poor would have police or fire dept protection, he had no answer. He also said that he was against the government telling people how much profit they could make, but then said he didn’t agree with medicine companies price gouging for medicines. I’m left scratching my head there.
Click to expand...

Notwithstanding socioeconomic impact, he has a point. There's a reason why the masses trust Apple with faceid and not the government, and it's not *just* complacency. Corporations need to care about peoples rights, or they will lose customers. The state can simply trample of them with no repercussions.

Imagine a fictional town with 2 different independent police departments. Every resident has the same income but some are white/black/blue/whatever. Each resident has the opportunity to choose which police department represents him and can arrest him. It's an imperfect example, but you can see inherent advantages. For example when the white neighbourhood watch dude shoots the unarmed black guy, or the white officer does.

I obviously don't think privitization is the answer, but some sort of index linked pay or something would be very interesting.
 
owlo said:
Notwithstanding socioeconomic impact, he has a point. There's a reason why the masses trust Apple with faceid and not the government, and it's not *just* complacency. Corporations need to care about peoples rights, or they will lose customers. The state can simply trample of them with no repercussions.

Imagine a fictional town with 2 different independent police departments. Every resident has the same income but some are white/black/blue/whatever. Each resident has the opportunity to choose which police department represents him and can arrest him. It's an imperfect example, but you can see inherent advantages. For example when the white neighbourhood watch dude shoots the unarmed black guy, or the white officer does.

I obviously don't think privitization is the answer, but some sort of index linked pay or something would be very interesting.
Click to expand...
You know we tried the whole privatization thing here once with airports. I think it was Pittsburgh or Philadelphia that went private and the whole place turned to shit and the experiment was reversed. Turns out the private sector really isn't so great at providing basic need type services like transportation without having corporate revenue desires get in the way.
 
Red Dreams said:
I don't get all this Coronation of Warren already.
Let the primaries play out.
Importantly why should we settle when we can have the real thing.
Click to expand...

There’s no coronation. People simply see the trend lines moving heavily in her favor over the past few months, at the expense of all other candidates. Since there is considerable policy overlap between her and Sanders (also given she’s a decade younger), it will be very difficult for him to win - especially given the Dem party’s 15% proportional delegate system where anyone who can finish a given primary with 15% or more gets something and those who don’t get zero. That works out very nicely for Biden and Warren since Joe is very strong in the south and will probably win each of those states. If Sanders doesn’t meet the 15% threshold in the south (and elsewhere where he is weak) then getting to the magic number becomes almost impossible since he would have to share delegates with Warren and Biden elsewhere.

What he needs is for Warren to collapse so he can frame the primaries similarly to how he did against Hillary - a simple choice between establishment and progressivism. The chances of Warren suddenly collapsing are however very slim. She has the best momentum at the moment.
 
owlo said:
Imagine a fictional town with 2 different independent police departments. Every resident has the same income but some are white/black/blue/whatever. Each resident has the opportunity to choose which police department represents him and can arrest him. It's an imperfect example, but you can see inherent advantages. For example when the white neighbourhood watch dude shoots the unarmed black guy, or the white officer does.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it is quite imperfect. Imagine a town like Haringey... serious crime, but people cannot afford to pay for the police they need...
 
owlo said:
Notwithstanding socioeconomic impact, he has a point. There's a reason why the masses trust Apple with faceid and not the government, and it's not *just* complacency.
Click to expand...

Yes its called marketing and PR. Edward Bernays to Brain Solis. Planned obsolescence to coercive psychology. Apple branding is very cult like in its psychological mechanism.


owlo said:
Corporations need to care about peoples rights, or they will lose customers.
Click to expand...

This is demonstrably not true and one of the most pie in the sky, idealistic comments I have read on this forum. From air pollution to water poisoning, energy deregulation to the derivative crisis, real estate red lining to the Battle of Blair Mountain, history very clearly proves you wrong. Corporations don't give two shits about people's rights as long as they can squeeze a short term profit gain.


owlo said:
Imagine a fictional town with 2 different independent police departments. Every resident has the same income but some are white/black/blue/whatever. Each resident has the opportunity to choose which police department represents him and can arrest him. It's an imperfect example, but you can see inherent advantages. For example when the white neighbourhood watch dude shoots the unarmed black guy, or the white officer does.
Click to expand...

Police and fire are services that should never, ever be privatized (along with healthcare, prisons, other utilities) because the profit motive will inevitably create mismatched incentives for what is the most beneficial to the population of citizens.
 
Even in a country like India where corruption is much higher, I'm never in support of privatizing essential services. There are loud calls for privatizing BSNL which provides telephone and internet access and I can bet that it's going to be a disaster. Private companies don't give a feck about reaching remote places if there's no profit. When there is profit motive, you can bet the private companies will prioritize profit over services. It's a really really bad idea.
 
Raoul said:
There’s no coronation. People simply see the trend lines moving heavily in her favor over the past few months, at the expense of all other candidates. Since there is considerable policy overlap between her and Sanders (also given she’s a decade younger), it will be very difficult for him to win - especially given the Dem party’s 15% proportional delegate system where anyone who can finish a given primary with 15% or more gets something and those who don’t get zero. That works out very nicely for Biden and Warren since Joe is very strong in the south and will probably win each of those states. If Sanders doesn’t meet the 15% threshold in the south (and elsewhere where he is weak) then getting to the magic number becomes almost impossible since he would have to share delegates with Warren and Biden elsewhere.

What he needs is for Warren to collapse so he can frame the primaries similarly to how he did against Hillary - a simple choice between establishment and progressivism. The chances of Warren suddenly collapsing are however very slim. She has the best momentum at the moment.
Click to expand...

Its important for Bernie to show clear distinctions between himself and Warren starting at the next debate.
She is riding on his coat tails without actually offering real Progressive policies.
 
Red Dreams said:
Its important for Bernie to show clear distinctions between himself and Warren starting at the next debate.
She is riding on his coat tails without actually offering real Progressive policies.
Click to expand...

She is pretty much offering up what she has been promoting for the past six years. Also, I don't think Sanders can distinguish much between her since they are in agreement on a vast majority of policies.
 
Raoul said:
She is pretty much offering up what she has been promoting for the past six years. Also, I don't think Sanders can distinguish much between her since they are in agreement on a vast majority of policies.
Click to expand...

If she is willing to take money from Corporations, there is no way she and Sanders are alike.
yes. She talks the talk.

Medicare For All is a good example.
 
Red Dreams said:
If she is willing to take money from Corporations, there is no way she and Sanders are alike.
yes. She talks the talk.

Medicare For All is a good example.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this means little to your average Dem voter outside the Kyle Kulinski/TYT bubble. Infact, a significant portion of her support probably comes from people who see her as a decent compromise between Sanders and Biden.
 
Raoul said:
Unfortunately, this means little to your average Dem voter outside the Kyle Kulinski/TYT bubble. Infact, a significant portion of her support probably comes from people who see her as a decent compromise between Sanders and Biden.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with what you say.

The point I was making is she is not the same.

Here is an interview Bernie did and must say he looks healthy.



Warren said 'she is a capitalist through her bones. I'm not.': Bernie Sanders
 
Things like a wealth tax although it sounds great to masses, is probably not going to work - after all only 4 countries in the world have a wealth tax. If it was such a great thing, it would have been implemented at a larger scale globally. On the other hand, increasing the minimum wage to $15/hr should be a no brainer as it helps the poorest get some relief. The knock-on effect it will probably to raise the salaries for the next rung of workers (the people who are currently making $15/hr) to $20 or $25, so that's good as it takes care of a large chunk of the population.

I also think we're getting left behind on education. USA used to be the best country as far as higher education was concerned. Now I'm not sure that's the case. We're saddling recent grads with $100k in debt as soon as they get their diploma. "Go follow your dreams and listen to your heart", but until next month when those payments start kicking in. That's not freedom, that's serfdom, and it's bullshit.

We're also doing poorly on math and sciences vis-a-vis other countries by any quantifiable measure, and schools are not preparing grads to compete on an equal footing in a competitive global labor marketplace. China is taking steps to ensure every student takes at least 4 years of computer science, I think the figure in the US is presently <5%. So good luck competing with the Chinese in 10-15 years when coding/programming becomes the new manufacturing.

That's not a business issue, that's a government issue and that's something that doesn't get enough airwaves because it doesn't involve sucking up to the electorate.
 
Red Dreams said:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/14/ber...tax-rate-to-35percent-ban-stock-buybacks.html

  • Bernie Sanders introduces a plan that would reverse President Trump’s tax cuts for corporations, returning the corporate tax rate to 35% from 21%.
  • The Corporate Accountability and Democracy Plan would also eliminate many of the tax breaks and loopholes in the tax code and do away with off-shore tax havens.
Click to expand...
I obviously don't believe any kind of corporate tax evasion is a good thing but what would happen to America s ability to be the economic power house it is today? Aside from the obvious China and Russia not playing by the rules - Europe s more than close ties to its banking systems and seperate tax rates for multi nationals, state owned companies, turning a blind eye to bribery etc. doesn't exactly make it holier than thou either. In other words - how do you successfully play it clean and be successful when the rest of the world doesn't either?

Let's for the sake of argument say it does work wonderfully for American businesses and DoJ can now go back to coming down hard on foreign companies like with Volkswagen and FIFA - what is that going to do for their desires to do business here?

Playing devil s advocate here.
 
Redplane said:
I obviously don't believe any kind of corporate tax evasion is a good thing but what would happen to America s ability to be the economic power house it is today? Aside from the obvious China and Russia not playing by the rules - Europe s more than close ties to its banking systems and seperate tax rates for multi nationals, state owned companies, turning a blind eye to bribery etc. doesn't exactly make it holier than thou either. In other words - how do you successfully play it clean and be successful when the rest of the world doesn't either?

Let's for the sake of argument say it does work wonderfully for American businesses and DoJ can now go back to coming down hard on foreign companies like with Volkswagen and FIFA - what is that going to do for their desires to do business here?

Playing devil s advocate here.
Click to expand...

How does what Bernie suggest make the US less of an economic powerhouse.
If anything it will attract more investments.
More confidence in the integrity of business institutions.
 
Red Dreams said:
How does what Bernie suggest make the US less of an economic powerhouse.
If anything it will attract more investments.
More confidence in the integrity of business institutions.
Click to expand...
I don't think you re reading what I'm trying to say - how many of those corporations actually want full blown "integrity" is what I'm saying. Every company has some major skeletons in the closet - save for maybe a Costco (but hell who knows what they re hiding... Those huge teddy bears are probably stuffed with the wool of mutated sheep).
 
Redplane said:
I don't think you re reading what I'm trying to say - how many of those corporations actually want full blown "integrity" is what I'm saying. Every company has some major skeletons in the closet - save for maybe a Costco (but hell who knows what they re hiding... Those huge teddy bears are probably stuffed with the wool of mutated sheep).
Click to expand...

How does allowing Big corporations not pay their fair share of taxes (tax avoidence) help anyone except themselves.
This leaves the country's expenditure to be a greater burden on those who are actually paying their fair share.

Our Debt increases.
 
Red Dreams said:
How does allowing Big corporations not pay their fair share of taxes (tax avoidence) help anyone except themselves.
This leaves the country's expenditure to be a greater burden on those who are actually paying their fair share.

Our Debt increases.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I'm saying - it benefits them to not do it.
 




That’s a yikes from me, dawg.

A Trump train propaganda machine backed by Facebook is quite frightening, and not limited to elections. Twitter itself most likely will follow suit, given Jack Dorsey’s response to conservative, alt-right and white nationalist accounts.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:




That’s a yikes from me, dawg.

A Trump train propaganda machine backed by Facebook is quite frightening, and not limited to elections. Twitter itself most likely will follow suit, given Jack Dorsey’s response to conservative, alt-right and white nationalist accounts.
Click to expand...


fb owns whatsapp, and whatever western parties/"russia" get from manipulating fb is nothing compared to the unbetable machine on whatsapp from the indian (and apparently also brazilian) right-wing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.