|
McAlister posted:Clinton's suggestion was basically means testing, pay less/nothing to people who don't need it and more to the people who do. Making it into a proper social insurance program rather than treating it like an investment portfolio. She had to tip toe around it some and focused on how moms work hard but that work isn't recognized by the program ... but reading between the lines it sounded like means testing. Which I fully support. We are DINKs and don't need anything from Social Security. Death to the concept that you are owed from SS proportional to what you put in. From each according to their income, to each according to their need. It should be noted that conservatives also support means testing because it makes it easier to target social security for cuts when they can paint it as free money for the mooching, undeserving grasshoppers who live off of the backs of hard-working, future-thinking ants such as themselves and their constituents.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:28 |
|
|
McAlister posted:She had to tip toe around it some and focused on how moms work hard but that work isn't recognized by the program ... but reading between the lines it sounded like means testing. Which I fully support. We are DINKs and don't need anything from Social Security. Death to the concept that you are owed from SS proportional to what you put in. From each according to their income, to each according to their need. You may believe this is good policy, but it's incredibly awful politics. SS and Medicare are beloved programs precisely because they're not means-tested. It's nearly impossible to frame them as a handout where the government takes away ~your tax dollars~ and gives them to people who are lazy and weak and don't deserve them. To see this in action, just look at how the general public doesn't give a poo poo about Medicaid and food stamps. Those are both excellent programs that are extremely efficient stimulus; it's much better as a matter of policy to give money to poor people, both because they need it and because they'll spend it, in turn promoting other economic activity down the line. But if you're a conservative politician who doesn't believe in government assistance, it's not hard to whittle away at these programs. For example, if you propose to cut the Medicaid eligibility cutoff from 100% of federal poverty level to 75%, you can sell it as cutting back on wasteful government spending, and you can get away with it because you're only hurting a relatively small number of people, many of whom don't vote. I personally disagree with the idea that means testing is good policy in the first place because it makes programs harder to administer, confuses the eligibility requirements, and requires a lot of complicated mechanisms to adjust to local cost of living, but I think those issues are all less important than the political ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Yeah social security is strong because it's for everyone, even people who know they will never need it. Now, getting rid of the payroll tax cap, I'll get behind that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:I have a feeling that Hillarly is more left of Bill but is afraid of alienating people. I think this is a record time for people to posit that My Candidate is actually secretly much more to the left than they claim to be. 2016 is gonna put 2008 to shame.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
For your enjoyment: Democratic debate on SNL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfmwGAd1L-o Featuring maybe the most perfect impression casting in snl history, larry loving david as bernie sanders. He's not even acting, he's just playing larry david. Also of note is alec baldwin as jim webb, and lincoln chafee just having a real great time. In past elections, SNL representations of candidates had a huge effect on their public perception (or maybe just or maybe it's the other way around!). Either way a good watch to get an idea of the way the mainstream views the democratic cadre this cycle. Milk Malk fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Oct 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
I also think that we should take social security away from the rich, in addition to their lives and their property.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:I also think that we should take social security away from the rich, in addition to their lives and their property. I only think we should take 2/3, which I guess is why I'm not getting invited to the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Milk Malk posted:Featuring maybe the most perfect impression casting in snl history, Nah. https://screen.yahoo.com/george-bush-taxes-cold-opening-000000334.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I only think we should take 2/3, which I guess is why I'm not getting invited to the revolution. So, take their SS and their property, but leave the to live a short, miserable life of destitution?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I only think we should take 2/3, which I guess is why I'm not getting invited to the revolution. You're third against the wall, sorry about that 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I only think we should take 2/3, which I guess is why I'm not getting invited to the revolution. It seems wasteful to leave them social security if you've already guillotined them and taken their mansions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Milk Malk posted:For your enjoyment: Democratic debate on SNL This is really loving awesome I hadn't seen the whole thing " I got one pair of underwear
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:The biggest changes are financial reform and campaign finance. Which she really wasn't as focused on prior to this year. There's reasons most pundits were surprised how progressive those polices were when she announced them. Again though I think it's because she's aware that's where her base and probably the overall voter is,. Thank you, I'll dig into that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:So, take their SS and their property, but leave the to live a short, miserable life of destitution? Yeah, I'm hiterally littler.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Republicans posted:It should be noted that conservatives also support means testing because it makes it easier to target social security for cuts when they can paint it as free money for the mooching, undeserving grasshoppers who live off of the backs of hard-working, future-thinking ants such as themselves and their constituents. This attack works if we view social security through a capitalist framework. If we view it as an insurance program rather than a savings account it has less traction. If you tie it emotionally to a family values narrative and make it about recognizing the unpaid work of mothers you defang attacks from the right further because they idolize the concept of a stay at home parent. Conservative women are mobilized against progressive women with propaganda about how important stay at home parenting is and insinuation that career girls look down on them for it - that's why Clinton's 80's quote refusing to "stay at home and bake cookies" was such a gaffe. It made people like me cheer but it "proved" the propaganda to conservative women. Making the dominant narrative about means testing being decrying the way SS-as-savings-account treats their raising kids as worth $0 and that this is wrong uses their own propaganda against them. To attack it under that narrative is to attack stay-at-home motherhood. Also, even if I never use my auto insurance I still want to have it. That's how insurance works. Getting nothing out of it means nothing went wrong. And even I don't expect to need social insurance I still want to have it, just in case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:I also think that we should take social security away from the rich, in addition to their lives and their property. Hildawg is Correct in that the rich should not be allowed to attend college (though not about the weird work-requirement thing).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Condiv posted:tpp for one, she was a strong supporter until recently She was a strong supporter years ago when she was part of the team crafting it, got quiet when she left government and was no longer in the know. Then negative after it came out and she read its final form which no longer had provisions she had crafted years ago when she was on the team. Furthermore, in the middle period when Nancy Pelosi was raising issues with it she said she stood with Nancy showing a negative turn prior to Bernie being a thing. http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/14/politics/hillary-clinton-trade-tpp-pelosi-obama/ At that point Bernie had just announced his candidacy and there was no polling on him. Do you seriously find it believable to claim that Bernie prompted those statements? That's the power of narrative. When you "know" that Bernie is "pulling Hillary to the left" that becomes your default explanation for any unexpected thing you hear about Hillary. "Oh! I didn't realize she was good there! Bernie must have pulled her to the left!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
McAlister posted:This attack works if we view social security through a capitalist framework. If we view it as an insurance program rather than a savings account it has less traction. If you tie it emotionally to a family values narrative and make it about recognizing the unpaid work of mothers you defang attacks from the right further because they idolize the concept of a stay at home parent. Means testing has nothing to do with providing more benefits to stay-at-home mothers, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Boon posted:Ben Carson on This Week this morning is pretty fantastic. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/18/ben-carson-saudi-arabia-osama-bin-laden-whereabouts?channel=us Here's the guardian's article on that. I haven't seen it but it sounds like he looked pretty bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:(before then her position was that she was somehow unable to comment because she was Secretary of State at a time when it was proposed). If we assume that she is a cautious person who doesn't like taking positions on things without researching them throughly and also assume that being Secretary of State is an extremely time consuming all-hours-of-the-day job and further assume that she is human and needs to sleep occasionally ... For example, she was once upon a time a big proponent of corn ethonal as a gas replacement but then research came out demonstrating that powering cars on corn is worse for the environment than gas and she had to walk that all back ... In Iowa ... An important primary state ... That loves corn. Was there not controversy via a vi whether or not the pipelines were safer than the alternative?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
You should have to take out gun insurance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Kafka Esq. posted:You should have to take out gun insurance. If we started requiring licenses, titles and liability insurance, no one would drive anymore!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
McAlister posted:At that point Bernie had just announced his candidacy and there was no polling on him. Do you seriously find it believable to claim that Bernie prompted those statements? I think, and this isn't the most prevalent view here for some reason, that Bernie Sanders hoped this would happen. He's a politician, he's actually running for the office, and he knows Clinton has fallen to a challenge from the left in the past. (Barely to her left in that case.) He put the message out that he wanted to pull her to the left, but now everyone's looking at him when she does anything progressive, even if it's actually her point of view.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
The poor kid, football player, that died was named "Expavious Tyrell Taylor". A name meant for greatness; a shame it had to be the name of a martyr. radical meme fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Oct 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
It's amazing how it's not enough for Hillary to be a sure thing, but Bernie must also be bad at everything
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Lessail posted:It's amazing how it's not enough for Hillary to be a sure thing, but Bernie must also be bad at everything What are you talking about? Want to quote someone? Or are you just mad that Clinton's liberal positions aren't really feathers in Sander's cap?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What are you talking about? Want to quote someone? Amazing. I'm glad Hillary is better than her supporters
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Oh boy is it time for the circular firing squad already? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Oh boy is it time for the circular firing squad already? No it is time for the Hillary circlejerk
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Lessail posted:Amazing. I'm glad Hillary is better than her supporters No seriously, I just don't get your point. No one in this thread has said a single negative thing about Sanders. Like when did someone say "he must be bad at everything"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Lessail posted:It's amazing how it's not enough for Hillary to be a sure thing, but Bernie must also be bad at everything Bernie is great on most topics and I'm voting for him in the primary. Who are you talking to?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Lessail posted:No it is time for the Hillary circlejerk Somehow you are failing at trolling D&D. That's impressive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:No seriously, I just don't get your point. No one in this thread has said a single negative thing about Sanders. There was that incredibly ironic time mcallister said bernie is content to let his faction do the shitflinging But that might be in the september thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Somehow you are failing at trolling D&D. That's impressive. I'm not trying to troll though?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Lessail posted:There was that incredibly ironic time mcallister said bernie is content to let his faction do the shitflinging lol, that's not evening saying Sanders is bad at something. That says he's good at something. good job being mad at someone complementing your candidate months ago
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Somehow you are failing at trolling D&D. That's impressive. Though thank you I can now troll and say that d&d labels bernie supporters as trolls
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Lessail posted:Though thank you I can now troll and say that d&d labels bernie supporters as trolls Buddy, I think its the fact you don't make any sense that people are calling you a troll. There are many many many Sanders supporters in this thread that don't get that label. Like, how is saying that Sanders lets his supports fling poo poo for him saying "he's bad at everything"? It doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:lol, that's not evening saying Sanders is bad at something. That says he's good at something. No it is him trying to build his narrative that bernie is a fake while Hillary has been the real leftist all along
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Lessail posted:No it is him trying to build his narrative that bernie is a fake while Hillary has been yhe real leftist all along except that's only what you heard. if you weren't trolling you might have tried to respond to that post, with a debate and discussion. Instead you bring it up, much later, as "proof" this thread is a circle jerk and is mean against Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:28 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:except that's only what you heard. I'm not trying to troll lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2015 19:31
|
|