|
On Terra Firma posted:I would enjoy that. You should post it. Presumably Sanders would continue the weekly radio addresses resumed by Reagan and continued by all presidents since. And networks don't have to allow the president to preempt them (excepting EAS of course), and I'm sure he'd only get CSPAN if it was often.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 07:57 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 00:19 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:Presumably Sanders would continue the weekly radio addresses resumed by Reagan and continued by all presidents since. I feel like if you have people at the white house aggressively getting as much exposure as possible there could be more done. I think it would really gently caress with congress if he just kept going on about inequality year over year with facts and statistics to back things up. One or two people on the house floor going "Actually GOP you are saying bad dumb things and here is proof" doesn't mean poo poo compared to something with the full weight of the executive behind it just constantly pushing the same messaging.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:12 |
|
On Terra Firma posted:I feel like if you have people at the white house aggressively getting as much exposure as possible there could be more done. I think it would really gently caress with congress if he just kept going on about inequality year over year with facts and statistics to back things up. One or two people on the house floor going "Actually GOP you are saying bad dumb things and here is proof" doesn't mean poo poo compared to something with the full weight of the executive behind it just constantly pushing the same messaging. Hasn't really worked for gun control.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:16 |
|
Built 4 Cuban Linux posted:Whether or not he can get it through congress, there's a decent chance Bernie can get half the country to support his crazy ideas. If he added reparations to the list, there wouldn't even be a chance that he'd make it to the white house. Do you have anything to back up those two claims besides "common sense"?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:25 |
|
Forgive me for leaving the Bernie containment zone to talk about reparations chat again blue squares, but the idea remains dumb, divisive and unworkable. Who would be eligible for reparations? There was a family reunion many years ago where my grandmother was giddy to introduce a far flung black relation. Does that make me eligible under one drop laws? If I marry a black woman am I eligible? What about my half black half white kids? Can I submit a genetic test that shows I have black ancestry? Is Rachel Dolezal eligible? Who will pay for it? Everyone? The Hispanics and Asians might get mad. Whites only? Who counts as white? Do we institute the brown bag test? What about a tax on the wealthy? Would wealthy black people be excused? How will you pay it out? A cash payment is dumb for reasons discussed. A trust fund would have to have so many restrictions on access it would amount to a regular direct cash transfer, and it will attract financial predators like a sailor with his first check looking down the Mile of Cars. Targeted social programs? What would constitute a black neighborhood for investment? What percentage? You know once any black area was sufficiently rehabilitated it would be gentrified by young whites looking for cheap housing. The same would happen with schools systems. The more economically advantaged and mobile will always co-opt narrowly targeted social programs. Land? If its undeveloped federal land will they be expected to pay taxes? How will they develop it? If its developed land lol because that will start an actual civil war. Maybe a guarantee of free college for black students? This one has potential, but look at how many military veterans waste their GI Bill benefits on lovely for profit predatory colleges despite huge internal education programs desperately trying to warn them about how loving stupid for profit colleges are. Look, I agree this nation needs to own up to its racist past/present, but what would reparations even consist of? What, mechanically, would it even look like? Actually, realtalk for a second here mid rant, what if we spent a poo poo ton of money on busing and mass transit systems to provide more mobility to black students and workers? We could actually reverse de facto segregation and force more equitable school funding if we had a system that could distribute blacks equally around a city. School district lines are *the* organizing force for self selected segregation, so that alone would probably have a massive impact on urban and suburban areas. It would certainly be a better start than stupid trust funds. So what about that? Direct reparations are still dumb but what if we bought a poo poo ton of buses and started mandatory busing? You could then target entire predominantly black cities for extra social funding with less worry the white population will just slide in once things get nice. Uh, in closing, UHC good, vote Bernie 2016, stop complaining that he isn't socialist *enough* and realize UHC is better than anything Hillary is offering. Fake edit: Tulsa, OK is so racially segregated along school district lines that when I was doing a data project and assigning 'region' dummies to schools I picked racial make-up as the factor for where to determine one region ended and another began. Midway through I could guess exactly where a school was located on the city map by looking at just its racial make up with better than 75% accuracy. Housing prices will literally increase $50k for identical homes within one street if one is in a majority white school. gently caress everything about this stupid state.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:25 |
|
Not a Step posted:Forgive me for leaving the Bernie containment zone to talk about reparations chat again blue squares, but the idea remains dumb, divisive and unworkable. Just because it would be hard to own up to our past crimes doesn't mean we should. The fact that the magnitude of our crime is so vast that we're having trouble telling the victims shouldn't be a justification for doing nothing. Those are all valid points, and I imagine a tiny fraction of the parts of our government budget spent enriching rich white men could be spent studying said your questions in an a rigorous, culturally inclusive and scientific way.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:32 |
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Long posts are always welcome dude On Terra Firma posted:I would enjoy that. You should post it. Honestly, I think I started out strong on this and then got tired (and drunk - been sipping bourbon for a few hours now in the spirit of this thread) and it started to meander as my thoughts became scattered and I think I lost direction somewhere. I struggled through the last third of it, I'm not even sure I feel good about it, but it is just a rant so. Anyway, I'd appreciate any critiques of my understanding of this. quote:I’ve recently had discussions about the economic struggles that many in the Millennial generation face when it comes to school debt, the underlying skyrocketing cost of education, prospects in the labor market and what that means for their futures. Something I’ve noticed is a fundamental lack of understanding in otherwise politically disinterested older generation members as to how it could be so completely different from their own experience. However, I read an article about tax cuts today which touched a nerve and led me to effort-post my thoughts all over the place. Boon fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Jan 20, 2016 |
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:33 |
|
computer parts posted:This is an example of the strange idea that the President can pass whatever legislation he likes as long as he has sufficient will power to pass it. There's a huge difference between your strawman and actively gutting portions of the bill you campaigned on because you're getting a ton of money and playing twelve-dimensional-chess and are a brilliant poker player and MASSING POLITICAL CAPITAL and all the stupid poo poo people rationalized Obama's actions for. blackguy32 posted:It really wasn't just health insurance reform as it affected things done by hospitals as well. Also you are ignoring that it was Max Baucus who was the holdout over the public option, it was Joe Lieberman, and he wasn't going to run for reelection anyways. There was a rotating cast of Democratic party villains in the Senate who everyone took turns pointing the finger at. That we're arguing about which one it is shows how effective it was. Coates is just trolling people for page clicks, it's kind of sad how bad his argument is.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:49 |
|
Not a Step posted:Uh, in closing, UHC good One of the biggest reasons social services are so hard to fund and argue for (such as UHC) is because people are racist and don't like the idea of the wrong people getting benefits. You can't address the issues of the United States without addressing racism in some way which is why a shitload of the rhetoric coming from BLM isn't TEAR DOWN THE BIG BANKS but "Maybe make districts not insane prisons to keep black people as isolated as possible" and "help make local government better represent it's population". Arguing from the standpoint of "Who cares about race we have big business to take on!" is a losing proposition for the Democrats because the strength of the Democratic party is it has down well to bring minorities and other oppressed groups into it's tent. Similarly the Democrats have a lot of outspoken military people trying to reign in the MIC by pushing funding towards research and other non-idiot F35 poo poo that get pissed when people ignore foreign policy with the idea the world will just leave us alone if we don't bother it.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:50 |
|
Boon posted:Honestly, I think I started out strong on this and then got tired (and drunk - been sipping bourbon for a few hours now in the spirit of this thread) and it started to meander as my thoughts became scattered and I think I lost direction somewhere. I struggled through the last third of it, I'm not even sure I feel good about it, but it is just a rant so. Anyway, I'd appreciate any critiques of my understanding of this. I didnt see you make mention of this, but theres a study that suggests tax cuts in Oklahoma are costing the state $1 billion annually and the 2016 budget shortfall will be close to $1 billion dollars. The latest round of tax cuts went almost entirely to the wealthy. This state loving sucks and I can't wait to get out of it, and I weep for the children trapped here. http://okpolicy.org/the-cost-of-tax-cuts-in-oklahoma http://okpolicy.org/oklahomas-oncoming-budget-shortfall-worse-great-recession-capitol-updates http://okpolicy.org/what-you-can-do-with-your-tax-cut
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:53 |
|
Also, this was posted in the GOP zoo thread: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/o...collection&_r=0David Brooks posted:Members of the Republican governing class are like cowering freshmen at halftime of a high school football game. Some are part of the Surrender Caucus, sitting sullenly on their stools resigned to the likelihood that their team is going to get crushed. Some are thinking of jumping ship to the Trump campaign with an alacrity that would make rats admire and applaud. Rarely has a party so passively accepted its own self-destruction. Sure, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are now riding high in some meaningless head-to-head polls against Hillary Clinton, but the odds are the nomination of either would lead to a party-decimating general election. I wonder who gave them the idea that the government was incompetent or corrupt. Also, I assume liberal social values means equality for non-white, straight, men.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:54 |
|
All these tough questions about how to pull off reparations are difficult enough to require a study to even to contemplate how they might be answered. If I'm not mistaken, Ta-Nehisi Coates isn't asking for reparations to be made as-is-where-is, but for such a study to just be done to begin with.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:58 |
|
Boon posted:Also, this was posted in the GOP zoo thread: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/o...collection&_r=0 Article comments are usually terrible but I appreciated 95% of them basically saying "Conservatives spent 50 years making this monster, deal with it".
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:58 |
|
Not a Step posted:I didnt see you make mention of this, but theres a study that suggests tax cuts in Oklahoma are costing the state $1 billion annually and the 2016 budget shortfall will be close to $1 billion dollars. The latest round of tax cuts went almost entirely to the wealthy. This state loving sucks and I can't wait to get out of it, and I weep for the children trapped here. To compound this all, Kansas is literally next door and lots of their hardships made local news; Oklahoma decided it wanted a piece of that sweet failed state and slashed its taxes accordingly.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 08:59 |
|
Rand alPaul posted:There's a huge difference between your strawman and actively gutting portions of the bill you campaigned on because you're getting a ton of money and playing twelve-dimensional-chess and are a brilliant poker player and MASSING POLITICAL CAPITAL and all the stupid poo poo people rationalized Obama's actions for. Saying that Obama promised something he (or anyone else) couldn't deliver on is a criticism of him and society as a whole. Similarly when people say Bernie's promises and plans are unrealistic it's not saying Bernie is a shitlord or w/e it's saying that recognition of plausibility is important. There seems to be this fundamental misunderstanding that electing new people will magically fix everything when most big change these days is done via the Supreme Court supporting or knocking things down because our system is a gridlocked mess. Honestly if you want a cause that will enable some of the amazing stuff Sanders want then you need to take on gerrymandering. You can suck all the money out of politics you want but as long as people are divided to naturally give one party an advantage that party will do better.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:02 |
|
Venom Snake posted:One of the biggest reasons social services are so hard to fund and argue for (such as UHC) is because people are racist and don't like the idea of the wrong people getting benefits. You can't address the issues of the United States without addressing racism in some way which is why a shitload of the rhetoric coming from BLM isn't TEAR DOWN THE BIG BANKS but "Maybe make districts not insane prisons to keep black people as isolated as possible" and "help make local government better represent it's population". If HRC came out and said she was going to spend thirty billion dollars buying buses for a federal forced busing/desegregation program I would vote for her in a heartbeat. If she came out on a platform of expanding mass transit in every major American city and providing subsidies so no middle class worker had to pay a train/bus fare again I'd also vote for her. If anyone could promise federal judiciary oversight of redistricting with a straight face I'd probably also swing that way. My other hot button issue is whichever candidate offers the best benefits package for three year olds. Also 100% agree on letting the military finally kill the programs it hates and investing that money into education and research
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:02 |
|
Rand alPaul posted:To compound this all, Kansas is literally next door and lots of their hardships made local news; Oklahoma decided it wanted a piece of that sweet failed state and slashed its taxes accordingly. The Brownback containment zone has failed. The next step is for Trump to tap Brownback as VP so he can spread prosperity across the nation. Also the imminent collapse of the Oklahoman oil industry is going to leave such a massive crater in the white middle class that they might actually find some class solidarity with poor blacks. Well, probably not. But hey, at least we have this great fault in the earth's crust out of it! E: Im used to faster threads, sorry Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 09:07 on Jan 20, 2016 |
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:05 |
|
Not a Step posted:If HRC came out and said she was going to spend thirty billion dollars buying buses for a federal forced busing/desegregation program I would vote for her in a heartbeat. If she came out on a platform of expanding mass transit in every major American city and providing subsidies so no middle class worker had to pay a train/bus fare again I'd also vote for her. If anyone could promise federal judiciary oversight of redistricting with a straight face I'd probably also swing that way. My other hot button issue is whichever candidate offers the best benefits package for three year olds. I can say the last point is definitely a thing she supports and she has expressed in her infrastructure plans that we need more mass transit to stop the forced isolation felt in many communities in America but a legit criticism of both Bernie and Hillary is that these specific things will not be addressed until they are will into office with a team that can figure out how to do it. And hell her platform of automatic voter registration (as well as other strengthening of voters rights laws) would go a long way towards giving minority communities that aforementioned better representation that can meet their needs. As someone who does a lot of stuff with the Hillary campaign I can tell you stuff Bernie adopts and supports also has the effect of more than likely becoming part of HRC's platforms in the general (if she wins) so it can never hurt to support these things. My biggest endorsement of Bernie is he has done a good job of shifting the overton window and energizing the base.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:11 |
|
Not a Step posted:The Brownback containment zone has failed. The next step is for Trump to tap Brownback as VP so he can spread prosperity across the nation. Odds that this solidarity takes the form of burning black churches: 100%
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:12 |
|
Can we just plow over most of Oklahoma, plant weed, and export that, along with the Thunder, to Seattle?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:16 |
|
Epic High Five posted:Odds that this solidarity takes the form of burning black churches: 100% Well, Tulsa does have the distinction of aerial fire bombing one of the most affluent black communities in America. We have a street down town called Reconciliation Way and I guarantee 90% of Tulsans don't know the origin of the name
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:20 |
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Can we just plow over most of Oklahoma, plant weed, and export that, along with the Thunder, to Seattle? Some of the fracking counties are basically in a nonstop state of earthquake now so it'll be tough to farm it there
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:22 |
|
Epic High Five posted:Some of the fracking counties are basically in a nonstop state of earthquake now so it'll be tough to farm it there Call it premium shake weed and sell it for 3x the price.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:23 |
|
Rand alPaul posted:There's a huge difference between your strawman and actively gutting portions of the bill you campaigned on because you're getting a ton of money and playing twelve-dimensional-chess and are a brilliant poker player and MASSING POLITICAL CAPITAL and all the stupid poo poo people rationalized Obama's actions for. I used to think like that, but then I realized that the Democratic party had built up a lot of support from heavily Republican areas of the country. Hell, I even think one Republican in the house voted in support of the bill in order to get it passed. Then the senate was full of people that really had no need to support the bill at all considering that they were voted out first chance they got. The ACA was a god drat miracle to be passed. I think it goes beyond the simplistic "rotating villains" act. As for Coates, do you really think he needs the page clicks, or is it simply an extension of his actual "Case for Reparations" article? He makes the case that we should heavily grapple with the legacy of racism that America is founded on. He also makes the case that black poverty is a special and different kind of poverty that demands different solutions since there are different circumstances that put us there in the first place.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 09:42 |
|
I am glad Bernie supporters are now clear-eyed pragmatists instead of revolutionaries. Strange how that happened.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 12:55 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I am glad Bernie supporters are now clear-eyed pragmatists instead of revolutionaries. Strange how that happened. "Why don't we have the same insurance standard as every first world country in the world" is definitely as revolutionary as "let's rewind history". I really have no idea what got into people's heads that they think reparations make any goddamn sense at all. How could it possibly work? Discriminating on the basis of race is beyond stupid, not in the least because race is a made-up social construct, and those facts don't go away just because you're trying to put them to use for social justice. Bernie wants to do away with institutional poverty, which would actually fix a lot of problems in the black community, and also it's completely possible to do. Get people out of poverty and they have the power to start businesses, advocate for themselves politically, strengthen their community bonds, etc. Demanding he discuss reparations as a solution is on par with demanding he discuss I Dream of Jeannie as a solution. Paper bag test for welfare? Writing checks to the immigrant son of a Nigerian banker while white kids in Appalachia starve? Taxing Mexicans-Americans to pay off African-Americans? Even if you think reparations make sense, they'll never happen unless you first transfer more power to the black communities through programs like Bernie's.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:19 |
|
PerniciousKnid posted:"Why don't we have the same insurance standard as every first world country in the world" is definitely as revolutionary as "let's rewind history". Remember when Hillary said Universal Coverage is a great goal we need to work to, but single-payer is politically unworkable and y'all lost your goddamn minds? Pepperidge farms does. It's almost as if the point of contention is that none of Bernie's plans are politically workable at face value and that his intrinsic value is that he is a radical candidate openly pushing for political revolution, except when it comes to things his white bread supporters might not exactly be all for -- like gun control. Kind of a big deal when the whole animus of your campaign is being a dude who is literally calling to remake our political system. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Jan 20, 2016 |
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:24 |
|
PerniciousKnid posted:"Why don't we have the same insurance standard as every first world country in the world" is definitely as revolutionary as "let's rewind history". So did Bernie say he thinks reparations are a bad idea like this post or did he say they'd be good but impossible. Or just punt the question?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:26 |
|
mlmp08 posted:So did Bernie say he thinks reparations are a bad idea like this post or did he say they'd be good but impossible. Or just punt the question? When asked directly by someone: quote:No, I don’t think so. First of all, its likelihood of getting through Congress is nil. Second of all, I think it would be very divisive. The real issue is when we look at the poverty rate among the African American community, when we look at the high unemployment rate within the African American community, we have a lot of work to do. But then, his campaign ghosted on TNC when given an opportunity to expand or elaborate on that conversation.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:29 |
|
LGD posted:He's a dude running for a political office with an agenda of economic and political reform based on what seem to be his personal convictions, not someone competing to have The Most Correct Opinions Ever. TNC has a point that it's much more politically acceptable to talk about radical economic reforms than it is something like reparations (which suggests an avenue of discussion for public discourse in the near future), but that doesn't change the fact that currently one of those things has broad public support and can potentially be turned into a winning issue and the other makes you a political leper. There are degrees of infeasibility, and something like "universal UHC" or "$15 minimum wage" is much, much lower on that scale than "Reparations" or "Full Communism Now!"
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:33 |
|
So he said first of all it would not get through congress and second of all it'd be "divisive." And third, he doesn't like reparations and thinks they would be a dumb use of money. Seems like a pretty straight forward answer, whether one agrees or not.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:40 |
|
pangstrom posted:Yeah, I understand why TNC latched onto Sanders saying "getting through Congress" as the feasibility thing, but Sanders basically doesn't agree with reparations and/or thinks it's unfeasible in the getting popular support/elected sense, which it is. It's not steely eyed realism it just is what it is. People may not like it but they shouldn't be surprised. Guess what else literally isn't going to happen? The whole of Sanders platform. But they're populist winners with white people, so they're cool. mlmp08 posted:So he said first of all it would not get through congress and second of all it'd be "divisive." And third, he doesn't like reparations and thinks they would be a dumb use of money. The inherent problem isn't really his calculation -- it's almost certainly right. It's that when you apply that test to virtually anything else he proposes, it also fails. So it seems strange that he applies to some things, but not others and that two really notable things he's applied it to happen to be big issues for minority communities, and big no-no's for whites. And it's not really "degrees of failure" here either. Single-payer (UHC and single-payer aren't the same thing, kiddies), free tuition -- those things aren't happening and in the ears of minorities sound like big giveways for white people, while they still live in impoverished communities that are dangerous. And yes -- I am well aware of what his point is about his economic "revolution" benefiting them too, but you have to realize that when an old white dude from Vermont explicitly engages in pragmatism over black issue, and then turns around and pie-in-the-sky on white-centric issue, that it does come off as only a bit strange. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Jan 20, 2016 |
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:41 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Guess what else literally isn't going to happen? The whole of Sanders platform. But they're populist winners with white people, so they're cool.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:50 |
|
pangstrom posted:If you think it's Bernie's job to get into the political deep water on every issue I think you have been and will be disappointed quite often. Then he's just any other candidate and calling Hillary a pragmatist -- as if it were a dirty word -- when it suits him is borderline hypocrisy. Can't have the cake and it too, I am afraid.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:52 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Then he's just any other candidate and calling Hillary a pragmatist -- as if it were a dirty word -- when it suits him is borderline hypocrisy. Can't have the cake and it too, I am afraid.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:04 |
|
pangstrom posted:Look, I would like pedophiles to have some kind of public-supported avenue that helps them not act out their affliction. I don't expect a politician will engage that issue, yet alone slot it into their platform, any time soon, because I am not a moron. I know why TNC is framing it the way he is, it makes sense for him to do that, AND it makes sense for Bernie to just hope it goes away. What I don't understand is why people are taking the TNC framing as gospel. Because Bernie has framed his entire campaign around a narrative of revolutionary change? Like he's called Hillary an apostate for using the same exact language he did, so it rings a little hollow.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:13 |
|
pangstrom posted:Look, I would like pedophiles to have some kind of public-supported avenue that helps them not act out their affliction. I don't expect a politician will engage that issue, yet alone slot it into their platform, any time soon, because I am not a moron. I know why TNC is framing it the way he is, it makes sense for him to do that, AND it makes sense for Bernie to just hope it goes away. What I don't understand is why people are taking the TNC framing as gospel. Comparing descendants of slaves to pedophiles. Problematic. I mean of the nigh-endless groups or interests you could have compared them to... mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 14:31 on Jan 20, 2016 |
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:19 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Because Bernie has framed his entire campaign around a narrative of revolutionary change? Like he's called Hillary an apostate for using the same exact language he did, so it rings a little hollow.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:37 |
|
pangstrom posted:This is TNC's frame, but it's just a convenient metabolism of rhetoric. If you think of Bernie as a largely populist politician the rhetoric makes sense and keeping reparations at an arms length makes sense, I don't know what else to tell you. Weird how all those populist things he's for are white-centric programs.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:39 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 00:19 |
|
mlmp08 posted:Comparing descendants of slaves to pedophiles. Problematic.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:40 |