|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Condiv posted:well, bernie's officially helping quist out: http://robquist.org/bernie-sanders-backs-rob-quist-will-campaign-montana-next-month/ You can tell somebody's progressive when they choose to surround themselves with literal supervillains, just the worst scum walking the earth atm.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:There are plenty of people who would call Bernie a traitorous Trot who merely upholds a corrupt system. The hard left, so far left that even Bernie is to their right, has gotten increasingly unreasonable. Citation fuckin needed. Who are these people. What offices are they running for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Citation fuckin needed. the tankies on twitter said it!!! i saw it with my own eyes!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Citation fuckin needed. Sadly, only evidence I have is anecdotal, but they do exist. I could post Facebook screenshots but it's not like there's studies on this
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Sadly, only evidence I have is anecdotal, but they do exist. I could post Facebook screenshots but it's not like there's studies on this They exist, but they are an insignificant fringe and have no desire to be involved in the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Sadly, only evidence I have is anecdotal, but they do exist. I could post Facebook screenshots but it's not like there's studies on this They were probably Russian bots, designed to trick fool hillary supporters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
Yeah I'm pretty sure 90% of the people who think Bernie's a traitor who traveled back in time to personally murder Rosa Luxembourg feel that way on the basis of him having any involvement in 'bourgeoise politics' whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
axeil posted:Some people are better than others. Ideally that is borne out through talent although in the current system, starting conditions matter far too much. We should work to achieve a system where all who have talent are able to rise to the top, regardless of where they start. So gently caress all people without "talent?" You're literally advocating for a haves and have nots society, which I guess makes sense given your love for banks and finance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:So gently caress all people without "talent?" If you have no skills or abilities you should be taken care and shouldn't be allowed to starve but that's it. A base level of being taken care of, not luxury. You should not have the same standard of living as people who provide value to society. The good news is that most everyone has a comparative advantage at something and most people want to be productive members of society. If we work to eliminate how crucial your parents' starting wealth/race is more people will find success in areas they are good at. I will never endorse a system that provides the same standard of living to every single person, regardless of talent or ability. Or put more simply, I will never endorse a communist system because it misunderstands basic human nature. There will always be haves and have nots, the goal is to not have the "have nots" be "starve to death" and the "haves" be "own your own private army".
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Or, maybe... they're humans and deserving of living an existence worth living?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
axeil posted:If you have no skills or abilities you should be taken care and shouldn't be allowed to starve but that's it. A base level of being taken care of, not luxury. You should not have the same standard of living as people who provide value to society. what about the handicapped? do they deserve a base standard of living? will you be repealing the ADA so we can stop burdening society with the needs of less-useful people? how many bowls of gruel does a handicapped person get a day?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
axeil posted:If you have no skills or abilities you should be taken care and shouldn't be allowed to starve but that's it. A base level of being taken care of, not luxury. You should not have the same standard of living as people who provide value to society. Oh how nice of you to move one step away from Ayn Rand and provide for the poor. Why is it always finance fucks who talk about contributing "value" to society when the finance industry is a net negative on human society?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
Wasn't expecting to read modern pseudo intellectual "plebs shouldn't have nice things" this morning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Itt rentiers (by participation) ranting about welfare queens and moochers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:Or, maybe... they're humans and deserving of living an existence worth living? I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for. Being provided for means being reasonably comfortable and not worrying about immediately dying. It means having adequate shelter, food and healthcare. It does not mean a nice house, nice car, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
At least it's a centrist explaining why they'd support a candidate like Clinton. They have no soul or heart.axeil posted:I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for. Lol you are so loving gross dude
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
"Immediately dying" oh how thoughtful of you, we will provide ER style treatment only to the plebs , no cancer treatments or preventative care for them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
It's okay if those people die, we need to make room for Taylor, Spencer, and our .5 of a child to be named later (we are leaning towards Hunter) that will surely follow us in our footsteps as bankers to contribute huge value to society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
axeil posted:I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for. It doesn't mean letting them reproduce, have access to education, entertainment, information, but hey they have saltines and a space in the shed. gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
KillerQueen posted:It doesn't mean letting them reproduce, have access to education, entertainment, information, but hey they have saltines and a space in the shed. (Corporate) Service Guarantees Citizenship Would you like to know more?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
very rich coming from posters itt that refuse to see suffering as anything that isn't Midwestern white.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
axeil posted:I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for. what qualifies as adequate to you? what qualifies as reasonably comfortable? is it 3 bowls of gruel a day and a room in the american equivalent of a japanese capsule motel reasonably comfortable for the great unwashed have-nots?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Why are you so bad at politics? Since he started regurgitating Syria war propaganda I've become like like 90% sure he's a Correct the Record style paid internet troll. axeil posted:If you have no skills or abilities you should be taken care and shouldn't be allowed to starve but that's it. A base level of being taken care of, not luxury. You should not have the same standard of living as people who provide value to society. I THINK what your advocating for is a system that goes from "nice" to "really nice" and just communicating it poorly. That said your idea is still incredibly problematic since it will inevitably lead to abuse of the "talentless" by the "talented" (whom will likely just be wealthier and more well connected rather than actually smarter). Plus judging societal worth is harder than you'd think. Do we go by lives saved? Money made? Number of paintings created? How do we quantify people in a way that isn't biased or just based on what benefits the elites the most? readingatwork fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
axeil posted:I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for. World Famous W posted:Or, maybe... they're humans and deserving of living an existence worth living?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Since he started regurgitating Syria war propaganda I've become like like 90% sure he's a Correct the Record style paid internet troll. more posts = better value to society
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Castrate all inmates now! Seal off the mentally retarded and leave them a bottle of multivitamins! Stupid unreasonable commies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Lol you are so loving gross dude How is saying "people don't have a right to a luxurious existence with no work" causing everyone to fall into their fainting couch? This is not controversial. All I'm saying is that if people for whatever reason don't want to provide resources for society (in the form of labor, capital), they should not be fed to the metaphorical wolves. But this is a tiny fraction of humanity because most people like contributing things to their society. readingatwork posted:I THINK what your advocating for is a system that goes from "nice" to "really nice" and just communicating it poorly. This is correct.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:very rich coming from posters itt that refuse to see suffering as anything that isn't Midwestern white. Lol you're right. The suffering of ALL poor is the goal the democrats should be pursuing you unbelievable idiot axeil posted:How is saying "people don't have a right to a luxurious existence with no work" causing everyone to fall into their fainting couch? This is not controversial. Because "value" would be determined by you and your ilk, who provide none. Hail Mr. Satan! fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
axeil posted:If you have no skills or abilities you should be taken care and shouldn't be allowed to starve but that's it. A base level of being taken care of, not luxury. You should not have the same standard of living as people who provide value to society. Let's compromise and establish a system where the "haves" can have up to three times as much wealth as the "have nots". That seems like a good inequality ratio, and a hard cap really helps guide their activity towards behaviour that benefits society as a whole since their tide can only rise by actually lifting all boats. (also, it creates an extremely fertile environment for entrepreneurship while effectively destroying the damage that can be done by oligarchs) axeil posted:How is saying "people don't have a right to a luxurious existence with no work" causing everyone to fall into their fainting couch? This is not controversial. You know a great many people get paid for things that don't contribute to society and don't get paid for things that do, right? It's like standardized tests, people tend to be rewarded for things that are easy to measure than things that have actual worth but is difficult to turn into metrics. Also as a society we do a whole lot of rewarding one person for the work of many, that one is sort of like a fundamental feature of how things work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
axeil posted:blah blah blah people who provide value to society. So, a person is only valuable to society insofar as they're able to make money? The only "contribution" a person can possibly make to society is financial?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
axeil posted:
it can't possibly be correct cause you just got done saying the have-nots don't deserve nice things axeil posted:I agree! That's why I said they'd be provided for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
axeil posted:How is saying "people don't have a right to a luxurious existence with no work" causing everyone to fall into their fainting couch? This is not controversial. Axeil what if we implemented this system but finance people were part of the "basic" group because we figured out they don't provide resources for society? Still cool with it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
This is not my beautiful house! (Because I don't work for a corporation) This is not my beautiful wife! (No breeding privileges)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Lol you're right. The suffering of ALL poor is the goal the democrats should be pursuing you unbelievable idiot
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
jklfdsa posted:So, a person is only valuable to society insofar as they're able to make money? The only "contribution" a person can possibly make to society is financial? Of course, he works in finance. What do you think he values? Submarine Sandpaper posted:White people already have the system so heavily stacked in their favor that if they're unable to use the resources that have been explicitly given to them and withheld from others for relocation/retraining and a bias in the private sector charity, they can indeed go gently caress themselves. lol get some class consciousness you goofus
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:No, alleviating the suffering of PoC is what the democrats should be working towards. White people already have the system so heavily stacked in their favor that if they're unable to use the resources that have been explicitly given to them and withheld from others for relocation/retraining and a bias in the private sector charity, they can indeed go gently caress themselves. People ITT, for some stupid reason, think 15$ an hr will alleviate these problems without explicitly addressing them. It's OK that you are not altruistic but use it as a banner to feel smug, the complete and utter refusal to acknowledge that there is an "other" in this country is sickening and why the Bernout left will fail in the next 2-8 years. *sneaks up really close behind you, as quiet as a ninja* *leans reaaaaaaaally close to your ear* *screams ECONOMIC JUSTICE IS SOCIAL JUSTICE*
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Let's compromise and establish a system where the "haves" can have up to three times as much wealth as the "have nots". That seems like a good inequality ratio, and a hard cap really helps guide their activity towards behaviour that benefits society as a whole since their tide can only rise by actually lifting all boats. (also, it creates an extremely fertile environment for entrepreneurship while effectively destroying the damage that can be done by oligarchs) Sounds good to me! Although there can probably be some debate about what the optimal multiplier level is. The current system of 100x the "have nots" is clearly way too in favor of the haves but before settling on 3x it'd be nice to have some research backing that up. Maybe looking at Gini coefficients and overall happiness indexes? Ideally you also want to reinforce the safety net so when people go the entrepreneur route and fail they aren't completely wiped out for the rest of their lives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
axeil posted:The current system of 100x the "have nots" is clearly way too in favor of the haves but before settling on 3x it'd be nice to have some research backing that up 100x? that's adorable that you can work in the financial industry and believe that
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
I'm not sure how you can work in a large corporation and still think they do a good job at measuring employee performance. Like, you have to be a lanyard dick, work in finance, or be a child to think that accurately measuring human worth even in incredibly narrow confines like "does this person make me money" has proved to be anything but unreliable at best
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
call to action posted:I'm not sure how you can work in a large corporation and still think they do a good job at measuring employee performance. Like, you have to be a lanyard dick, work in finance, or be a child to think that accurately measuring human worth even in incredibly narrow confines like "does this person make me money" has proved to be anything but unreliable at best They don't even measure using that metric, that would at least make sense. It's "who plays golf' or "who do I like to hang out with" or "am I related to this person"
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 15:28
|
|