Submarine Sandpaper posted:

christ you need to read, that's when he affirmed economics => 0 racism.

Condiv posted:

because he actually thinks his policies can pass congress? especially if those policies are pushed seriously by the dem party instead of hiding from them?

btw JC, do you actually support reparations?

JeffersonClay posted:

I support reparations and a UBI and single payer, but I think they're all unlikely to pass congress and vulnerable to Republicans weaponizing white resentment.

parallelodad posted:

All of that was in Sanders platform as well and he spoke about it in literally every speech after he messed up at NetRoots and immediately course corrected.

JeffersonClay posted:

I support reparations and a UBI and single payer, but I think they're all unlikely to pass congress and vulnerable to Republicans weaponizing white resentment.

parallelodad posted:

I personally support some form of reparations but I don't know what would be most effective. Give any native American or person descended from slaves two votes every election for a period of the number of years that they couldn't vote (including Jim Crow laws if in a Jim Crow state)? I don't know. I don't know anything about policy. There should be reparations but I don't know what.

quote:

Scholars have long discussed methods by which America might make reparations to those on whose labor and exclusion the country was built. In the 1970s, the Yale Law professor Boris Bittker argued in The Case for Black Reparations that a rough price tag for reparations could be determined by multiplying the number of African Americans in the population by the difference in white and black per capita income. That number—$34 billion in 1973, when Bittker wrote his book—could be added to a reparations program each year for a decade or two.

WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

like it's important for the next Bernie to do so! both in order to actually win the primary, and also because it's the right thing to do!

parallelodad posted:

I personally support some form of reparations but I don't know what would be most effective. Give any native American or person descended from slaves two votes every election for a period of the number of years that they couldn't vote (including Jim Crow laws if in a Jim Crow state)? I don't know. I don't know anything about policy. There should be reparations but I don't know what.

Majorian posted:

It seems extremely unlikely to me that pushing for single payer will lead to Republicans weaponizing white resentment very effectively.

Condiv posted:

so you don't actually support reparations, cause i know you don't support single payer. you came in this thread to cheer dem surrogates helping sink singlepayer in colorado

JeffersonClay posted:

Depends on the implementation. But more to the point, I think there are more important conclusions to reach from prop 69 failing by a 4-to-1 margin than socialism can only be failed.

Condiv posted:

i do not support reparations in the current day cause the way our economy is set up will ensure that reparations money would exit the hands of PoC as fast as possible for as little gain as possible. we need to do stuff like end the war on drugs and civil forfeiture first so that police can't just steal reparations money from PoC

JeffersonClay posted:

Why not? They did it with Obamacare.

JeffersonClay posted:

JeffersonClay posted:

Considering the bill was opposed by majorities of democratic voters and politicians in CO, perhaps we should change the thread title to Will the democrats change and stop representing their membership?

Majorian posted:

Eh, yeah, but that doesn't mean it's something that progressives shouldn't be pushing for anyway. Since it's not going to pass through Congress anytime soon, leftists should normalize the idea by advocating it loudly. Saying, "We can't do it because bad people will steal it back" isn't really a good reason not to support reparations; that's like saying, "We can't raise the minimum wage because the capitalists will just steal it back."

Condiv posted:

yes, we should definitely be pushing for it, cause there's a lot of ground to cover there, and we also would need to actually start calculating how much reparations should be. but as far as implementing it goes, there are major issues with the way america treats PoC that need to be dismantled first before they serve their typical function and plunder the reparations.

El Pollo Blanco posted:

I don't recall this being part of the Feel the Bern policy platform

frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:

Hey dumbfuck you're the one who made the argument that his disapproval with reparations was evidence he doesn't care about racial justice.

You also made the argument that minimum wage increase didn't matter because it didn't completely solve racial inequality despite helping

Don't blame me your poo poo is loving idiotic

Majorian posted:

We just need to make sure we're making promises that resonate with, and energize, every part of our coalition.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the Democrats come up with in 2018 and 2020. They have a huge opportunity in front of them. Who knows, it might be too great of an opportunity for even them to bungle!

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

The woman who [...] voted for a wall in the southern border to keep illegals out

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

bolded is false

Condiv posted:

you think PoC being way poorer on average than white people isn't a form of racial inequality? do you think it's just a coincidence that PoC have little to no wealth?

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

bolded is false

Condiv posted:

and hillary didn't support reparations cause????

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

Reparations
There's no such thing as "progress" unless it assists those who need it the most, else you're just reaffirming existing power structure.

Majorian posted:

You're going to have to explain what you mean by this, please.

Not a Step posted:

It is continually baffling how incredibly privileged wokes are about making progress. They are perfectly willing to let the perfect be the enemy of the good and leave people in crushing poverty because the wrong sort might benefit. Its not enough just to help people and make their lives better, because actual breathing humans were never the point. It always comes down to some variant of 'my people have suffered for a long time, and can keep suffering until we have a perfect solution'.

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

lol that you think this is an argument in your favor.

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

The assumption that such a broad economic policy would raise PoC out of the ashes of poverty is detrimental to actually helping.

quote:

It's better to ignore them and tell them that eventually the playing field will even out while promising policies that will help further the divided huh?

Condiv posted:

this is you responding to someone complaining that dems and dem consultants worked hard to torpedo singlepayer in CO. what kind of singlepayer supporter cheers it being shot down by his own party?

Condiv posted:

if you concede that PoC are much poorer than white people, why are you against raising the minimum wage? a higher minimum wage would help boost the wealth of PoC compared to white people

Fiction posted:

Remember when a woman told Hillary she was disappointed with elements of her campaign on race and Clinton told her why don't you run for something then?

JeffersonClay posted:

You can simultaneously believe that single payer is good policy and that voters don't necessarily like it. Prop 69 in particular had some significant problems, like NARAL didn't support it because they believed it would be restricted from covering abortion services due to existing CO law.

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

It's better to ignore them and tell them that eventually the playing field will even out while promising policies that will help further the divided huh?

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

bolded is false

JeffersonClay posted:

You can simultaneously believe that single payer is good policy and that voters don't necessarily like it.

quote:

Prop 69 in particular had some significant problems, like NARAL didn't support it because they believed it would be restricted from covering abortion services due to existing CO law.

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

Whether 15 or 8 as the min wage, a wage increase will not result in AAs not over-representing the bottom 20% of poverty. Saying a min wage increase will help AAs out is a red herring for those issues.
I'm not going to repeat super Tuesday arguments. The older AA community as a whole is rather centrist due to being hosed over so many times in the past, something Sanders should not have been blind to, which could have been avoided if he would have had the desire to surround himself with a diverse staffing and not make such cringe worthy comments about them as a bloc. Meanwhile the Clintons are quite notable for having a very good relationship with the AA community despite not even campaigning directly to them in '91 and '95.
The assumption there was political will from sanders to do the latter is ridiculous. I do not care that he was arrested once, this thread shows that "the left" is more concerned with "economic anxiety"

Majorian posted:

You're going to have to explain what you mean by this, please.

Majorian posted:

Who has claimed that raising the minimum wage would "raise PoC out of the ashes of poverty"? I don't think anyone here is treating it as a silver bullet.


This is also not something that anybody here is advocating.

Not a Step posted:

No you incredibly insane person. Its better to give them fair wages, rebuild their cities, fund their schools and give them a chance at the future. Why do you keep looking at the scoreboard and complaining about quintiles when the only measure worth caring about is improving quality of life? You would seriously throw the poorest and most vulnerable under a loving bus if it got you more Harvard educated one-percenter black CEOs, because that would even out the scoreboard.