|
Why is Barack Obama legitimizing Scott Walker by responding to him? If he wants to legitimize a republican primary challenger he should constantly get in a war of words with Ted Cruz as if he were actually afraid of him, same thing Reid did to choose his 2010 primary opponent.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
Reminder that every dollar spent on food via ebt card generates like $2 of commerce. While $1 in tax breaks for Scrooge McKoch generates like a quarter of commerce. Obama's playing the long game. Get the GOP to stumble over itself to rebuttal Trollbama and someone's bound to roll an ankle or pop a knee.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Reminder that every dollar spent on food via ebt card generates like $2 of commerce. While $1 in tax breaks for Scrooge McKoch generates like a quarter of commerce. How much does a dollar spent in EBT generate in tax revenue?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
I think Walker is already legitimate enough regardless of Obama. He's the favorite tool of big money and would be a great president for them as he'll do whatever they ask, not ask questions, and doesn't care about the disastrous results both because he has no morals and because he is very stupid. They are going to try and push him although he's running up against the entrenched Bush machine that's been in power since Nixon. Obama saying he's kind of a dumbass that that doesn't understand stuff is fine by me since it reinforces the notion that he's really lame and no one really wants to vote for that even out of Obama hatred. If Obama came out strong against him and made him feel like a genuine threat I could see it building some spite momentum, but occasionally dropping lines about how he's a joke probably won't hurt that much and might deflate some enthusiasm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How much does a dollar spent in EBT generate in tax revenue?  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How much does a dollar spent in EBT generate in tax revenue? Who gives a gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Who gives a gently caress? This isn't the line of thinking which gets EBT expanded. If $1 of EBT generates $2 of taxes during the fiscal year, then yeah, you can make a great economic case for EBT. If it generates $2 of private enterprise spending? That won't balance your state budget and win you re-election.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Radish posted:I think Walker is already legitimate enough regardless of Obama. He's the favorite tool of big money and would be a great president for them as he'll do whatever they ask, not ask questions, and doesn't care about the disastrous results both because he has no morals and because he is very stupid. They are going to try and push him although he's running up against the entrenched Bush machine that's been in power since Nixon. Obama saying he's kind of a dumbass that that doesn't understand stuff is fine by me since it reinforces the notion that he's really lame and no one really wants to vote for that even out of Obama hatred. If Obama came out strong against him and made him feel like a genuine threat I could see it building some spite momentum, but occasionally dropping lines about how he's a joke probably won't hurt that much and might deflate some enthusiasm. And besides, arguing against Walker's "ideas" and treating him as a proxy for the GOP has a net positive effect for the Dems, in my opinion. Dude is almost as unlikable as Cruz.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Who gives a gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:This isn't the line of thinking which gets EBT expanded. Oh right asshats only care about bottom line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Surely there's got to be a point of diminishing returns for EBT, right? Clearly right now it's a big return on investment, but I wonder if it'd continue with the same ratio with more funds poured into it.DemeaninDemon posted:Oh right asshats only care about bottom line. I see you've yet to acquaint yourself with reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
zoux posted:Here's an idea, what if all the poor people just loving died? Just like, and hear me out, what if they just all loving starved to death and died? "We must expand execution to include lesser crimes!" - Chief Justice Griffin, "Judge Dredd"
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:And besides, arguing against Walker's "ideas" and treating him as a proxy for the GOP has a net positive effect for the Dems, in my opinion. Dude is almost as unlikable as Cruz. It irritates me because candidate Obama said he'd be on the lines with unions, but when poo poo went down in WI, where the gently caress was he? Now you want to fight walker? Now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
Anyone who's looked at WA states senate budget (the R one) knows exactly how serious they are about fiscal conservatism, or anything they claim to stand for outside of less government.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Oh right asshats only care about bottom line. That's not even true, the reality is even worse than this. Many Republicans would still oppose EBT even if you could somehow get them to agree that it's revenue neutral, they philosophically oppose the idea. They think giving those lazy poors something that they didn't earn themselves is immoral and bad for society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Honestly the Republican Party should change their name, because what they practice isn't even honest conservatism any more. They're honestly closer to anarcho-capitalists than proper conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Remember, Walker's the one who is skipping payments on his state's debt. He's fiscally conservative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Honestly the Republican Party should change their name, because what they practice isn't even honest conservatism any more. They're honestly closer to anarcho-capitalists than proper conservatives. The Confederate Party, or the Confederate Party USA (CPUSA) for shits and giggles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Warcabbit posted:Remember, Walker's the one who is skipping payments on his state's debt. He's fiscally conservative. He can go hit up Money Tree if collections starts harassing him. Freedom bitch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Warcabbit posted:Remember, Walker's the one who is skipping payments on his state's debt. He's fiscally conservative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Quote of the afternoon - "Rand Paul has been mugged by reality, and he’s adjusting a bit — but only a bit. From my point of view, he’s not really come to grips with the world as it is.” ~Bill Kristol
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Honestly the Republican Party should change their name, because what they practice isn't even honest conservatism any more. They're honestly closer to anarcho-capitalists than proper conservatives. I wonder how much time it would buy us collectively to just start calling them that outright, and then when they object just say "please explain how you are conservative" forcing them into defense against the Socratic method.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:I wonder how much time it would buy us collectively to just start calling them that outright, and then when they object just say "please explain how you are conservative" forcing them into defense against the Socratic method.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Republicans call Democrats socialists and communists all the time, it's only fair play to call them anarchists in return. How can they be anarchists if they're authoritarians? Checkmate libtrad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:How can they be anarchists if they're authoritarians? Checkmate libtrad. Republicans want to destroy America as we know it and grind it down into countless petty corporate tributaries. Their vision of the future is Shadowrun, but without the cool magic poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Who's vision of the future is making Anime real?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
zoux posted:Who's vision of the future is making Anime real?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Anarcho-Capitalism. The boot of the corporation stomping the face of the worker forever, without any government interference. Corporations becoming sovereign entities capable of making their own laws, effective for those employed by them, being the highest authority in the land. Snowcrash, but without all the...um...pizza delivery ninjas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:How can they be anarchists if they're authoritarians? Checkmate libtrad. We actually have a whole thread dedicated to that. You should read it! (No seriously read it folks it's pretty good)
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Surely there's got to be a point of diminishing returns for EBT, right? Clearly right now it's a big return on investment, but I wonder if it'd continue with the same ratio with more funds poured into it. EBT's involve the purchase of staples, so they pretty much are rather reliable up to the point of saturation. People have to eat and have clothing and shelter. Once those basic needs are satisfied in some ways you start to get into the 'Spend vs Save' considerations. EBT's also allow them to replace the limited money that they do earn with the EBT funds, possibly allowing them to make those Spend vs Save decisions. vvvv The entire Revenue-Neutral / Revenue-Generating are BS terms created by those that want to kill the government. The biggest question should be 'Does this help the welfare of the citizens or not?' Taerkar fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Oh right asshats only care about bottom line. Welcome to policy work, hope you don't share your opinions in public because you'll get nowhere, do nothing, and be nobody. e: I'm not asking whether EBT is revenue-neutral, I'm asking if EBT is revenue-generating. Revenue-neutral is a bit of a partisan issue these days, while revenue-generating allows additional tax breaks, exemptions, credits, and special priviledges to offset. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Surely there's got to be a point of diminishing returns for EBT, right? Clearly right now it's a big return on investment, but I wonder if it'd continue with the same ratio with more funds poured into it. There's a point of diminishing returns for everything, including education, healthcare, and infrastructure. This simple fact does not constitute an argument that we have reached or passed that point. This argument requires extra substance when applied to the public welfare, which should be measured in terms of harm avoided or good done rather than cost effectiveness (since cost effectiveness requires an objective goal to hit and it's hard to say we are at aggregate X nutrition and need to be at Y) boner confessor fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:It irritates me because candidate Obama said he'd be on the lines with unions, but when poo poo went down in WI, where the gently caress was he? The Walker recall was the dumbest loving political move ever short of the Watergate break in. WI Democrats deserved that rear end reaming and they deserved having to take it alone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
Texas Democrats are pretty incompetent. WI Democrats should not be incompetent knowing they are a blue state. Walker is still a poo poo head and doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Welcome to policy work, hope you don't share your opinions in public because you'll get nowhere, do nothing, and be nobody. Hi Rand Paul. Edit: really though the narrative of snap shouldn't be about revenue at all. It's spending to feed people so they can contribute to society. Islam is the Lite Rock FM fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Snowcrash, but without all the...um...pizza delivery ninjas. The first time I read Snow Crash it really hit me that this was the world Ron Paul wanted to make and I was horrified. I get the feeling more than a few Paultards got the same idea as me and thought that was awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Hi Rand Paul. That's in fact the opposite of Rand Paul's position. I know it can be hard to tell the difference from so far to the left.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Texas Democrats are pretty incompetent. WI Democrats should not be incompetent knowing they are a blue state. Walker is still a poo poo head and doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt. WI hasn't been a blue state since 2010. They're a purple state for now and likely to be a red state in 2020, should the census be done in a Republican wave, or even lean, year. Two redistrictings in a row in favor of one party equal four decades of future talent for that party from the ambitious whom know where their bread is buttered and cheese is curded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:There's a point of diminishing returns for everything, including education, healthcare, and infrastructure. This simple fact does not constitute an argument that we have reached or passed that point. This argument requires extra substance when applied to the public welfare, which should be measured in terms of harm avoided or good done rather than cost effectiveness (since cost effectiveness requires an objective goal to hit and it's hard to say we are at aggregate X nutrition and need to be at Y) Calm your mantits, I wasn't implying that we were anywhere near that point for EBT. I think it's a fantastic program! We should fund it more! I was wondering at which point further funding would stop being effective, not that we'd ever come within striking distance of that point. Taerkar posted:EBT's involve the purchase of staples, so they pretty much are rather reliable up to the point of saturation. People have to eat and have clothing and shelter. Once those basic needs are satisfied in some ways you start to get into the 'Spend vs Save' considerations. Point-of-saturation makes sense, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
Brannock posted:Calm your mantits, I wasn't implying that we were anywhere near that point for EBT. I think it's a fantastic program! We should fund it more! I was wondering at which point further funding would stop being effective, not that we'd ever come within striking distance of that point. I think maybe it is you, who should be calm *holds out hand for songbird to land on*
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:23
|
|