|
Will Perez force the dems left? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
33 | 6.38% |
| No |
|
343 | 66.34% |
| Keith Ellison |
|
54 | 10.44% |
| Pete Buttigieg |
|
71 | 13.73% |
| Jehmu Green |
|
16 | 3.09% |
| Total: | 416 votes | ||
|
A cool trend in this thread: *Post about a topic or implication that keeps coming up* *Post insisting that no one actually believes the thing being responded to* *Post providing receipts* *Post insisting on an extremely generous reinterpretation of those receipts* It's almost as if people are deliberately trying to prevent any kind of conversation from happening, though I doubt that such is occurring.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Majorian posted:I can only speak for my own views, but I also know a blatant strawman when I see one. There's no strawman, but you can go ahead and talk about your jobs proposal if you like. I'm making popcorn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It's almost as if people are deliberately trying to prevent any kind of conversation from happening, though I doubt that such is occurring. Jesus loving Christ you're the worst poster and any time you show up in a thread you derail the conversation and then you have the loving gall to post poo poo like this? Get some loving self awareness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjyzn0SYu8w
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Jesus loving Christ you're the worst poster and any time you show up in a thread you derail the conversation and then you have the loving gall to post poo poo like this? Well, WampaLord, it could be that I posted that in order to get you all to stop doing it and yet you're so obsessed with me (thank loving god I have pepper spray and a nightstick) that you're unwilling to consider whether it's a truthful statement or not. I guess you're engaging in repeated self-ownage for no humanly fathomable reason beyond a mindless bloodlust. What a shame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Counter: Jimmy Dore is a moron who no one should listen to, ever. Brainiac Five posted:There's no strawman, but you can go ahead and talk about your jobs proposal if you like. I'm making popcorn. Jobs proposals meaning what, adequately financing trade adjustment programs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Well, WampaLord, it could be that I posted that in order to get you all to stop doing it and yet you're so obsessed with me (thank loving god I have pepper spray and a nightstick) that you're unwilling to consider whether it's a truthful statement or not. I guess you're engaging in repeated self-ownage for no humanly fathomable reason beyond a mindless bloodlust. What a shame. Motherfucker, I have no idea who you are besides an avatar and a username. Stop being paranoid that we're all out to "get" you. You are just a Bad Poster. Like, really bad, worse than fishmech bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Counter: Jimmy Dore is a moron who no one should listen to, ever. Well that and his voice makes ones ears bleed. Oh hey look at how a so called democrat litterally just broker her campaign promise today. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/politics/bs-md-ci-pugh-minimum-wage-20170324-story.html Don't promise 15 $ minimum wage and then not keep that promise. Wonder what the neoliberals will say to breaking campaign promises.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
For context on Jimmy Dore, listen to him debating with Sam Seder on the Majority Report.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Counter: Jimmy Dore is a moron who no one should listen to, ever. So, retraining? Retraining really hasn't shown effectiveness at allowing people to retain their standard of living. Maybe we could assume that if we just threw money at the problem, we'd be able to turn middle-aged line workers into engineers and marketers that people would want to hire. I don't think we should, but we could. WampaLord posted:Motherfucker, I have no idea who you are besides an avatar and a username. Stop being paranoid that we're all out to "get" you. Oh, now I remember you, you're a politoons wacko.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Well that and his voice makes ones ears bleed. every time i see this it pisses me off. and then she makes noise about how the state will do it anyway, so no worries
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So, retraining? Retraining really hasn't shown effectiveness at allowing people to retain their standard of living. Maybe we could assume that if we just threw money at the problem, we'd be able to turn middle-aged line workers into engineers and marketers that people would want to hire. I don't think we should, but we could. The Department of Labor's Trade Adjustment Assistance Program has failed precisely because it has been perennially underfunded. The notion that we'd "just be throwing money at the problem" is absurd; we haven't thrown more than a pittance at it in its history. The Obama Administration tried to implement a more robust version of this, and the Democrats should continue to push for programs like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The Department of Labor's Trade Adjustment Assistance Program has failed precisely because it has been perennially underfunded. The notion that we'd "just be throwing money at the problem" is absurd; we haven't thrown more than a pittance at it in its history. The Obama Administration tried to implement a more robust version of this, and the Democrats should continue to push for programs like it. How much money do you think it would take, in the form of direct retraining costs, relocation costs, and subsidies and tax breaks, to convince companies to preferentially hire a retrained 40-something line worker who's now an engineer over a 24-year-old fresh graduate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Well, WampaLord, it could be that I posted that in order to get you all to stop doing it and yet you're so obsessed with me (thank loving god I have pepper spray and a nightstick) that you're unwilling to consider whether it's a truthful statement or not. I guess you're engaging in repeated self-ownage for no humanly fathomable reason beyond a mindless bloodlust. What a shame. I wonder why everyone hates centrists
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:I wonder why everyone hates centrists Hiya "centrists", I'm dad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Oh, now I remember you, you're a politoons wacko. The gently caress does this mean? I posted in the political cartoon thread, therefore I am a wacko?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:How much money do you think it would take, in the form of direct retraining costs, relocation costs, and subsidies and tax breaks, to convince companies to preferentially hire a retrained 40-something line worker who's now an engineer over a 24-year-old fresh graduate? Well, if you read the Obama proposal, you'll see that the proposed budget set aside $50 million to start up retraining centers. You can extrapolate from there. It's costly, but it's a very sound investment. I'm not sure why you're assuming that such a program would be retraining 40-something line workers as engineers; that's hardly the only career they could be retrained for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Don't feed the weaboo plzCondiv posted:every time i see this it pisses me off. and then she makes noise about how the state will do it anyway, so no worries Dead party
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Don't feed the weaboo plz Too late! Muahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, if you read the Obama proposal, you'll see that the proposed budget set aside $50 million to start up retraining centers. I'm not sure why you're assuming that such a program would be retraining 40-something line workers as engineers; that's hardly the only career they could be retrained for. You didn't answer my question. So let me lay it out for you, in a mean, nasty way. The people who were displaced from jobs in the 1990s were displaced at least 18 years ago. If they were fired at the age of 22, they would be 40 by now. If they were 40 when they were fired, they'd be 58. So people displaced by NAFTA are in this range from 40-58. People who were displaced by the Great Recession that were 20 then are 28-29 now. People who were displaced by the Great Recession that were 40 then are 48-49 now. That is, the people who have been hurt by deindustrialization in the time spans you are considering are in their late twenties at the very youngest. Most of them will be anywhere from 30 to 60. Please keep that in mind. The kinds of jobs that we are talking about are well-paying jobs. Entry-level jobs that paid 50-60k a year, and then you would have increases with seniority and so on. These were also jobs with extensive benefits, like high-quality healthcare plans and vacation time and so on. People who lost those jobs want jobs like the ones they lost. If they were satisfied with the kinds of jobs that are available they wouldn't be suffering, by definition. The kinds of jobs that pay that kind of money and offer that kind of benefits package are mostly professional white-collar jobs. So, we have people that are middle-aged or older, who are competing, at the end of their retraining program, with people who are fresh out of college, and who will settle for smaller salaries and worse benefits and will live in loving flophouses. They are also people who are settled and relocating them would be a major hassle beyond the monetary cost, and mass relocation would exacerbate the housing crisis. So why would any company hire them without 1) a major shortage of qualified workers and/or 2) a shitload of bribe money?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
An addendum: you might consider: why not skilled trades? After all, skilled tradespeople can make that kind of money, right? Unfortunately, skilled trades base pay on seniority. In order to get that kind of pay you need to work lots of overtime, competing with younger people, and spend the rest of your life before retirement working your way back up. So it's also not a solution before you look at how much skilled tradespeople end up working irregularly or as contractors without access to high-quality benefits. Frijolero posted:Don't feed the weaboo plz Aren't you the guy who spent three pages of the feminism thread unable to figure out what the word "ally" meant?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:
I don't post often, so I doubt it. Aren't you the insufferable dipshit who fantasizes about Bernie Sanders putting you in concentration camps? V I don't even know anymore  V
Frijolero fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:I don't post often, so I doubt it. Well, on the one hand, it's good you feel shame, but it's bad you're not willing to own up to your failures, and I feel sorry for the people around you you annoy and frustrate with your inability to take responsibility.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:I don't post often, so I doubt it. Holy lol, you were way worse. Frijolero posted:
Hey dames, what feminism is?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Buen post! Those were questions in good faith and I got bullied out of the thread by minion av. I'm glad they were resurrected for the Democratic Party thread!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Holy lol, you were way worse. I do love how the neoliberals here seriously attack people trying to advance equality for all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
This is not to say that there's no hope at all. After all, companies would hire 40-year-old retrained programmers if there weren't enough young programmers. So, for example, bringing the USA in line with most of the developed countries in mandating minimum vacation time and sick leave, strengthening long-term medical and family leave, and so on, would require companies to add redundant people in to cover for people falling sick or taking vacation, increasing the demand for workers. Not by much for what we're talking about, since white-collar people generally do have at least some vacation and sick leave already, but it's a start. We could go more radical, and reduce the workweek down to 35 hours or 32 hours (or even just mandate a maximum of 40 hours with certain exceptions) and thus force more redundancy to be added in, though not a whole lot given that we'd be losing a day a week or so from existing workers. We could go fully radical and reduce the working day down to 6 hours, or 4 hours. This latter would more or less double labor demands, naively, and would still significantly boost demand for workers and thus reduce unemployment significantly while also increasing quality of life. That being said, these would not be practical without mandating a minimum wage that was genuinely livable on a single full-time job. EDIT: And this would by necessity force decredentialization since there wouldn't be the time necessary to train up more engineers and doctors afresh. This would be good in some respects but bad in others. And then there's the question of why we're demanding that these people work, when it's not really necessary that they do so- the world is getting fine without their labor. Why not support them for the rest of their lives instead? We certainly have the resources to do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Buen post!  I'm glad you're also here to post such good things as........ Meanwhile, Brainiac Five posted:You didn't answer my question. So let me lay it out for you, in a mean, nasty way. Along these lines, would your plan @Majorian also include some sort of incentivization to big corporations through tax breaks or what? Why should we give companies who are responsible for the global supply chain shift rewards for taking back the people whose lives they've destroyed a boon, and why don't you support a GMI or a UBI instead? e: I mean, is this enough to really ensure people have the mobility and freedom necessary to move out of their dying homes? Just $1250 in relocation funds and up to 300 dollars a week? I mean I don't think even this revised version is robust enough, surely! quote:Support to pursue training or look for work: To ensure that workers have the support they need while pursuing training, the program would provide a weekly stipend for childcare, transportation and other expenses of $150, ranging up to $300 for low-income workers, for up to 78 weeks, in addition to 26 weeks of UI benefits, . To assist with relocating for job opportunities in other cities and states, and to supplement their job-search, the program would provide workers job search and relocation allowances of up to $1,250 each. stone cold fucked around with this message at 05:13 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Wait so suggesting that strides for equality matter alot more when everyone is benefiting rather then some window dressings in movies or boardrooms is really just a huge sexist? You're antiabortion so your opinions on feminism have net negative value.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Wait so suggesting that strides for equality matter alot more when everyone is benefiting rather then some window dressings in movies or boardrooms is really just a huge sexist? Hey, nazi-beak, coming into the feminism thread all Kramer like expecting all the dumb broads to explain what feminism is to you is sexist, especially when you condescendingly say "gee can't you dumb broads do more, here's my ideas that I'm sure your broad brains haven't come up with and agitated for, also having any approach with multiple parts is dumb." And by the way, people who kvetch about seeing women in media tend to be gamergators so that's just adorable. But I'm glad you'll lead us to the promised land with your ideas that none of us dumb women have ever thought of like e:typo
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Hey, nazi-beak, coming into the feminism thread all Kramer like expecting all the dumb broads to explain what feminism is to you is sexist, especially when you condescendingly say "gee can't you dumb broads do more, here's my ideas that I'm sure your broad brains haven't come up with and agitated for, also having any approach with multiple parts is dumb."  I like that you got all that from the 3 posts I made. Please continue. I'm sure the denizens of the Democratic Party thread would love to hear about how you can't get over a random dude's posts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You didn't answer my question. So let me lay it out for you, in a mean, nasty way. I have been keeping that in mind, yes. The fact that they're older hardly makes them unemployable though. The kinds of jobs that we are talking about are well-paying jobs. Entry-level jobs that paid 50-60k a year, and then you would have increases with seniority and so on. These were also jobs with extensive benefits, like high-quality healthcare plans and vacation time and so on. quote:People who lost those jobs want jobs like the ones they lost. If they were satisfied with the kinds of jobs that are available they wouldn't be suffering, by definition. Of course they'd like jobs like that, but they'll take steady employment at at a living wage, at this point. As I've said, these are people desperate for work that will reliably help them pay their medical bills and the rent. What jobs, exactly, do you think are available in these communities? quote:So, we have people that are middle-aged or older, who are competing, at the end of their retraining program, with people who are fresh out of college, and who will settle for smaller salaries and worse benefits and will live in loving flophouses. They are also people who are settled and relocating them would be a major hassle beyond the monetary cost, and mass relocation would exacerbate the housing crisis. You know, I don't know the answer to these questions, but what I do know is that a lot of other developed countries manage to do it, and it involves playing more than .13% of our GDP (down from .24% before the Great Recession).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You're antiabortion so your opinions on feminism have net negative value. I am but I don't attack people for wanting to spread feminism Especially if they ask a very good question about how does a symbolic victory mean anything if those who actually are the people your movement is supposedly fighting for are actually either being held in place or pushed back. It seems rather counterintutive to attack someone for asking that. I mean it could be that some people like stone cold don't actually want to solve any problems whatsoever. Because I dind''t get anything about friello calling anyone dumb from that post. But I know someone who likes to accuse others of all sorts of heinous poo poo to feed their persecution complex might do such a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:
 So any policy ideas or you just here to shitpost and meltdown, my dude? Majorian posted:I have been keeping that in mind, yes. The fact that they're older hardly makes them unemployable though. Did you read your quote? quote:A decade ago the United States had the lowest share of long-term unemployed workers among developed nations. But today U.S. long-term unemployment levels are nearly as high as those in Europe, despite stronger overall U.S. economic performance. In 2000, 11.4 percent of unemployed American workers had been out of work for more than six months, compared to 51.9 percent in the rest of the Group of Seven (G7) countries. Throughout the recession those numbers were converging. In 2013, 37.6 percent of unemployed workers in the United States had been out of work for more than six months; that rate was 53.8 percent in the rest of the G7. What that says is that we had been doing better than the rest of the G7 and not now. Doesn't that suggest a different cause then than a restructuring of the global supply chain? Moreover, I'm totally ok with slashing dod's defence and raising taxes but as your quote says, of these programs aren't efficacious, perhaps we should research other policy or begin thinking about restructuring along the lines of a gmi or ubi. E: a second thought occurs quote:Of course they'd like jobs like that, but they'll take steady employment at at a living wage, at this point. As I've said, these are people desperate for work that will reliably help them pay their medical bills and the rent. Doesn't the American marginalized displaced worker deserve better than steady employ with no benefits? I mean, if you're pro labor, don't you think the worker deserves benefits? Why should we funnel money into training them to lick corporate boot and work under significantly worse conditions, particularly if these training programs don't work, rather than invest in researching other policy avenues? stone cold fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I have been keeping that in mind, yes. The fact that they're older hardly makes them unemployable though. Your source is an article that explicitly points out that US long-term unemployment had reached the levels of most Western European countries, dude. You're actually supporting the notion I am putting forward that retraining is extremely limited in what it can do, and that is the sum total of your post that isn't inanities like "there are no jobs in Warren, Michigan" and "older people are not literally unemployable". I mean, Jesus Christ, I think that if you posted/talked like this to a Florentine gent of the 15th century you'd be instantly challenged to a duel to the death, and I doubt anyone would consider the gentleman hotheaded for so doing. Your post is that contemptibly disrespectful to anyone who has ever put effort into anything. Crowsbeak posted:I am but I don't attack people for wanting to spread feminism Especially if they ask a very good question about how does a symbolic victory mean anything if those who actually are the people your movement is supposedly fighting for are actually either being held in place or pushed back. It seems rather counterintutive to attack someone for asking that. I mean it could be that some people like stone cold don't actually want to solve any problems whatsoever. Because I dind''t get anything about friello calling anyone dumb from that post. But I know someone who likes to accuse others of all sorts of heinous poo poo to feed their persecution complex might do such a thing. This post is your usual gibberish, Gitlerite dog. Please learn how to organize your thoughts better if you want people to waste time on responding to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Along these lines, would your plan @Majorian also include some sort of incentivization to big corporations through tax breaks or what? Well, first of all, why would it need to be the same companies who destroyed these people's lives rehiring them? With enough government investment, there are a lot of green industries that could easily employ blue collar manufacturing workers, after some retraining. Secondly, I don't see a GMI or UBI as an "instead" sort of thing; I fully support mandating a living wage on a federal level. quote:e: I mean, is this enough to really ensure people have the mobility and freedom necessary to move out of their dying homes? Just $1250 in relocation funds and up to 300 dollars a week? I mean I don't think even this revised version is robust enough, surely! It's not, but the Obama proposal was a step up from where it was beforehand. It obviously needs to be funded much, much better than that for it to give people back a reasonable standard of living. But again, other developed countries manage to do it. The fact that we somehow assume that we can't is absurd - just as absurd as assuming that our government can't afford to cover the health needs of every American. quote:Doesn't the American marginalized displaced worker deserve better than steady employ with no benefits? I mean, if you're pro labor, don't you think the worker deserves benefits? Why should we funnel money into training them to lick corporate boot and work under significantly worse conditions, particularly if these training programs don't work, rather than invest in researching other policy avenues? Of course, and that's the endpoint I'm gunning for. I don't think that's politically feasible in the near future, but it's a good goal. Brainiac Five posted:Your source is an article that explicitly points out that US long-term unemployment had reached the levels of most Western European countries, dude. You do see how having inadequate trade adjustment programs could be a factor in that, right? quote:You're actually supporting the notion I am putting forward that retraining is extremely limited in what it can do When it is seriously underfunded, and the government does not invest in new industries, of course it's limited. That's like saying that public education is limited in what it can do. Well, no poo poo it is, when Republicans and deficit hawk Dems have been standing on its oxygen tube for decades. quote:I mean, Jesus Christ, I think that if you posted/talked like this to a Florentine gent of the 15th century you'd be instantly challenged to a duel to the death, Oh, quit whining, you big baby. You're the one who makes threats to people and calls them "motherfucker" routinely. 
Majorian fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
stone cold posted:
Oh snap, this is the policies thread? I got some great policy ideas: 1) Push constitutional amendment declaring healthcare a right. 2) Prosecute Bush and Obama for war crimes. 3) Investigate and prosecute wage thieves and white collar criminals. 4) Invest a trillion dollars on infrastructure and another trillion on green energy industry. 5) End financial support for Israel, end alliance with Saudi Arabia, lift sanctions on Iran. 7) Make Nov. 8 a federal holiday, name it "Bernie Would Have Won Day"
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Had Romney and McCain made the same overt appeals to racial resentment as Trump that argument would be a lot stronger. Every republican campaign in the last 40 years has made overt appeals to racial resentment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Oh snap, this is the policies thread? So spiteful whining, an inability to count, platitudes without any kind of enforcement... this one's got it all, baby!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Frijolero posted:Oh snap, this is the policies thread? 1. I mean I get what you're getting at but it be better to just pass medicare for all. 2. Easy for Bush harder for Obama. 3. Agreed. 4. Agreed on one, two should have to include building alot of thorium reactors/ 5. Agreed. 6. This should be a constitutional amendment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:44
|
|