|
Popular Thug Drink posted:job loss due to automatization, globalization, and general increases in efficiency such as the paperless office will inevitably lead to job loss no matter what. picking out free trade agreements to rail against on behalf of some abstract working class is a reactionary argument that does very little to deal with the reality of the modern labor market. really it's just a trojan horse that delivers the payload of "i want to bitch about multinational corporations" This is dead on. I've noticed that a few of the posters making this argument have also used the argument that the wealthy are why we can't have better safety nets or other leftist policies, when the reality is that there's a ton of opposition to welfare from the people who will benefit from it the most. I'm fairly pessimistic about the economy on a 20-30 year horizon, but a lot of my pessimism is borne from the fact that I think economically vital welfare policies will never have the level of popular support that they actually need. Unsurprisingly, a lot of this opposition comes from the same people who are being told that their jobs are going away because of trade policy.
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
Periodiko posted:Yes, and you can make it better or worse, and critics of NAFTA accuse it of being "worse". It's a pretty straight-forward argument, and you're ducking having to make any hard choices about who wins and who loses, about how much protectionism there will be and who will be protected by just throwing up your hands and saying "well it would have happened anyway." Of course it would have, and the question is what we did about it and can do in the future. Critics of NAFTA are criticizing it on the grounds that it was a bad response that made things worse than it had to be. They're not denying the very existence of international trade. Hell, even you've indirectly criticized it in this thread by noting that programs like this need to be combined with ambitious social programs to cope with the restructuring of the economy. NAFTA wasn't. Again, Clinton negotiated NAFTA and slashed welfare. Hunky-dory it ain't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/761319109690810368 Everything Matters
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It could be argued that Mondale's crushing loss had a psychological effect on Democrats that caused them to undermine their own philosophy. I hope something like that happens. But on the other hand, Goldwater begat Nixon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:@seiferguy it increases legitimacy and drives down-ballot voting SedanChair posted:It could be argued that Mondale's crushing loss had a psychological effect on Democrats that caused them to undermine their own philosophy. I hope something like that happens. Makes sense. If it turns Republicans into paste and tilts the house and senate towards Democrats, then it's 100% viable. straight up brolic posted:the left wing comedy people have been spectacularly bad and condescending this election Samantha Bee has been on point the entire time. John Oliver has been, to an extent, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/richardpbacon/status/761316332424065029 haha holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:the left wing comedy people have been spectacularly bad and condescending this election Sam Bee and John Oliver have been consistently good. They're the ones that seem to be carrying on the Jon Stewart legacy of witty righteous indignation. Trevor Noah is intermittently decent, but seems like he really need a few more years in the role before he's good at it. Larry Wilmore is not bad although his comedic delivery is so-so and he's also fallen into the trap of repeating poorly-researched right-wing talking points.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:This is dead on. The basic problem is that the wealthy are opposed to social safety nets out of short sighted greed and classism, but the working class in most of the Western World are against them because of short sighted spite and racism. White working class people won't support social systems that benefit non-white working class people, and until we work out some solution to that problem, it's going to be hard to move forward. (See: Brexit)
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:No, critics of NAFTA accuse it of being "the cause", straight up. That's not true. If you have to assume the weakest version of a particular argument, you aren't arguing in good faith, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Holy actual gently caress Hillary Clinton's Twitter intern should get a Cabinet position. Make Tweeting a Cabinet position, and give that person the job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:That's not true. If you have to assume the weakest version of a particular argument, you aren't arguing in good faith, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:https://twitter.com/richardpbacon/status/761316332424065029
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
illcendiary posted:Trump's campaign being a WCW storyline makes way too much sense. Like I'm having nWo red/white doublecross clusterfuck flashbacks when I look at the current state of the GOP. Trump's about to swear in... And then the mic gets cut off. BAH GAWD WHOSE MUSIC IS THAT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNgxyL5zEAk Not WCW technically but that is the only good wrestle joke I can think of
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:While that's pretty goddamn funny, it probably doesn't occur to them that Trump is the inevitable result of "conservative principles." FYGM, otherization, ignorance of facts in favor of gut feelings. You fuckers got exactly what you deserved. Yeah, they're so close to getting it but you know they're going to go right back to being dickish after this is all over. Like, there's a point where they say "We would be thrown back into a recession". But they would probably not agree that Obama has gotten us out of the recession, or that the recovery is real.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:While that's pretty goddamn funny, it probably doesn't occur to them that Trump is the inevitable result of "conservative principles." FYGM, otherization, ignorance of facts in favor of gut feelings. You fuckers got exactly what you deserved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:While that's pretty goddamn funny, it probably doesn't occur to them that Trump is the inevitable result of "conservative principles." FYGM, otherization, ignorance of facts in favor of gut feelings. You fuckers got exactly what you deserved. Republicans distancing themselves from Trump while yelling "not my Republican party!" bother me on a really base level. Like, gently caress you, assholes. You created this monster, and a ton of you are going to walk away from this disaster unscathed because there are plenty of voters who don't want to believe that this is their fault.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:Sam Bee and John Oliver have been consistently good. They're the ones that seem to be carrying on the Jon Stewart legacy of witty righteous indignation. Trevor Noah is intermittently decent, but seems like he really need a few more years in the role before he's good at it. Larry Wilmore is not bad although his comedic delivery is so-so and he's also fallen into the trap of repeating poorly-researched right-wing talking points. Wilmore seems like a Bernout. Just the other day he gave an easy mode interview with the Libertarian nom Johnson. Also I hate their youngest staff member. "Man I love weeeeeddddd so much. Welp Bernie lost and both sides suck. Might as well not vote and get high as gently caress in Nov. LOL I was going to do that any way."
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Republicans distancing themselves from Trump while yelling "not my Republican party!" bother me on a really base level. Like, gently caress you, assholes. You created this monster, and a ton of you are going to walk away from this disaster unscathed because there are plenty of voters who don't want to believe that this is their fault.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:"Man I love weeeeeddddd so much. Welp Bernie lost and both sides suck. Might as well not vote and get high as gently caress in Nov. LOL I was going to do that any way." This seems like a pretty decent option given recent polls
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
This is a really good reference but I'm afraid that not enough people will get it
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
TVarmy posted:There has to be some kind of limit in polls-only and polls-plus forecasts on FiveThirtyEight, right? Because this far out, there's still a big number of unknowns and possibilities. Like those charts on weather that shows a cone of where a hurricane could go, and a dark red cone of where it's most likely to go. Has Nate Silver ever said if there's a floor for this? Because as much as I'd bet for Clinton at this point, I admit there's still strange-rear end futures where she could lose. Keep in mind that the model doesn't have a Dumb Candidate variable. It's just saying, "candidates polling at +X in August win the election Y% of the time", it doesn't know that Trump will assuredly blow any opportunity that comes his way, except to the extent you can attribute historical polling to the respective candidates. 538 is always going to overestimate Trump according to however much candidate quality is a factor in elections (however much or little that may actually be).
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:This is dead on. The massive differentials between people's opinions on "welfare" versus "assistance to the poor" strongly suggests that this is a product of political propaganda and ideology. A huge majority of the public supports "increased assistance to the poor", while only a small minority supports increasing "welfare" (http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/why-do-most-americans-support-assistance-poor-oppose-welfare). Also, support for welfare programs negatively correlates with income - you seem to be almost implying the opposite is true. Even if the public are opposed to "welfare", the wealthy are more opposed than the poor, so it's bizarre to blame the latter, especially when they have far, far less political influence and representation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Holy actual gently caress Hillary Clinton's Twitter intern should get a Cabinet position. Make Tweeting a Cabinet position, and give that person the job. Secretary of Shade
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:This is a really good reference but I'm afraid that not enough people will get it it's okay, im sure vox explainer will step up to the plate
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:This is a really good reference but I'm afraid that not enough people will get it Are you talking about in this thread, or among people who follow Hillary Clinton on twitter, because I would bet that the overwhelming majority of people who were even semi-conscious in 2012 understand that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:https://twitter.com/richardpbacon/status/761316332424065029 Especially bad since they endorsed George HW Bush and he went to Yale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
 ? In my defence, I'm not american so I probably lack the context.It's Romney, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:This is a really good reference but I'm afraid that not enough people will get it Don't be an rear end. Anyone who bothers to read politician tweets knows the reference.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Mitt Romney said he had binders full of women, when Obummer asked him about women he would appoint to the cabinet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
GoneWithTheTornado posted:Can someone explain Mitt Romney proved he wasn't sexist by claiming he had quote "a binder full of women" he interviewed for a job
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
GoneWithTheTornado posted:Can someone explain 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:The massive differentials between people's opinions on "welfare" versus "assistance to the poor" strongly suggests that this is a product of political propaganda and ideology. A huge majority of the public supports "increased assistance to the poor", while only a small minority supports increasing "welfare" (http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/why-do-most-americans-support-assistance-poor-oppose-welfare). Also, support for welfare programs negatively correlates with income - you seem to be almost implying the opposite is true. Even if the public are opposed to "welfare", the wealthy are more opposed than the poor, so it's bizarre to blame the latter, especially when they have far, far less political influence and representation. and opposition to "job killing trade policies" as opposed to "freedom of trade" couldn't also be a product of political propaganda and ideology, could it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:literally people in this thread, on the previous page, and notable "intellectuals" are saying "NAFTA caused the loss of 700,000 jobs" Okay? If you're trying to measuring the effect of a thing, that's going to potentially produce an estimated number.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:and opposition to "job killing trade policies" as opposed to "freedom of trade" couldn't also be a product of political propaganda and ideology, could it? From who?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Has anyone posted a thing that said "No jobs were lost because of NAFTA." I'm sure there's one in the wall street journal somewhere. Edit - actually I just looked not even wsj will claim that there were no job losses because of NAFTA. Also I find it ironic that the every life is a sacred little angel people are arguing that its ok if a few people lost their jobs because of trade deals. lol gently caress poor people or farmers in mexico or whatever. Doorknob Slobber fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Bless you. I was going to request someone post this since I'm at work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
zoux posted:Posting this knowing fully well yall are going to take the wrong lesson from this and freak out about it. DWS got demoted to the head of Hillary's 50-state operations. This is all a clever ploy by the Trump campaign to make DWS relevant again so they can harp on the emails some more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:From who? you know, from the people who create political propaganda, based on ideology i mean if the masses can be swayed against their best interest on welfare policy i'm sure they can be equally agitated on trade policy
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Mitt Romney proved he wasn't sexist by claiming he had quote "a binder full of women" he interviewed for a job You guys are forgetting that it became an issue because of certain Mormon practices, i.e. "joy books".
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 23:34
|
|
