|
DEMOCRATS. BAD.
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yes there is a big distinction between "markets" and "capital markets," most people don't assume you only mean "capital markets" when you say "markets."
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:DEMOCRATS. they are 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Okay, but that's definitely what Elizabeth Warren is talking about up above, which is what started this discussion. Ah okay, I think I get where the confusion came from now. I mean, presumably you could have workers elect executives of the company they work for, but it's true that the concept of publicly traded companies wouldn't exist in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:This is exactly the disconnect. I think we agree. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Warren is indeed a capitalist, but not in the sense that we have grown used to the term. People seem to forget that it's much more about who profits from those markets and not about the markets themselves. Warren just wants to put the focus back on that aspect, and not argue pointlessly over whether socialism or democratic socialism is a better term for her end goals. To put things back on topic: no way there is room for this sort of thing in the Democratic party in a world where Hillary Clinton is the POTUS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 06:00
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Yeah. So, to get back to the discussion: While I agree that most capitalists would abhor her ideas, she very much still identifies as one. Is a system where workers control 40% of the means of production, would that still be capitalism? I honestly don't know. 100% agreed that there is no room for that kind of thinking in the democratic party of Hillary Clinton. Hopefully we've moved on from that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 06:59
|
|
|
It's capitalism because the workers don't own the means of production.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 07:03
|
|
|
I think leftists are skeptical of that kind of thing because it's clear that as long as billionaires are allowed to exist they'll bribe politicials to roll all that poo poo back at the first opportunity and use the media they own to smear all policies that aren't worship of the wealthy as evil genocidal badness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 07:07
|
|
|
It strikes me effectively as basically a social democrat that recognizes social democracy ultimately was undone the last time around and searching for a more robust social democracy that maybe won't be undone (it would though.) It still doesn't protect from say... the shareholders all getting together and voting among themselves first and the presenting a united front in the official vote, so it'd still probably be questionably helpful 9 times out of 10.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 10:36
|
|
|
If we've learned anything from the True Scotsmen of this thread, it's that Elizabeth Warren should declare a worker's paradise and an end to private property. It's the only way she can be taken seriously by the average voter and have an impact on policy. you useless loving posturing morons
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 11:26
|
|
|
Did Biden really wait until the Cuomo/Weinstein bribe story broke before endorsing him?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 13:05
|
|
|
Radish posted:Did Biden really wait until the Cuomo/Weinstein bribe story broke before endorsing him? yea he's super smart/cool! Crazy uncle joe am I right folks?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Pudding Space posted:If we've learned anything from the True Scotsmen of this thread, it's that Elizabeth Warren should declare a worker's paradise and an end to private property. It's the only way she can be taken seriously by the average voter and have an impact on policy. I'm not sure why you find a pretty benign discussion about what constitutes private/personal property and how that relates to Warren's idea so offensive. This whole conservation has been pretty peaceful and inoffensive as far as these things tend to go.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 16:56
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I'm not sure why you find a pretty benign discussion about what constitutes private/personal property and how that relates to Warren's idea so offensive. This whole conservation has been pretty peaceful and inoffensive as far as these things tend to go. Everyone also seems to be mostly pro-Warren. I certainly intended my post as such. I was just elucidating the philosophical difference(s) between her ethos and Bernie's.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Warren should be head of the banking committee and Sanders can be head of the "get rid of banking" committee.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I think leftists are skeptical of that kind of thing because it's clear that as long as billionaires are allowed to exist they'll bribe politicials to roll all that poo poo back at the first opportunity and use the media they own to smear all policies that aren't worship of the wealthy as evil genocidal badness. Pretty much. I think how you feel about Warren on the left spectrum largely depends on weather or not you believe that capitalism is something that can be negotiated with. If you think we can increment our way back to a New Deal status quo with capitalism as a willing partner, then you probably feel pretty good about Warren. If you view the New Deal being nearly completely rolled back over a century as capital has accumulated more wealth and power than it's had since the Gilded Age as the planet burns to death and concluded that saving capitalism from itself was a mistake, then you probably don't feel all that great about Warren.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Iron Twinkie posted:Pretty much. I think how you feel about Warren on the left spectrum largely depends on weather or not you believe that capitalism is something that can be negotiated with. If you think we can increment our way back to a New Deal status quo with capitalism as a willing partner, then you probably feel pretty good about Warren. If you view the New Deal being nearly completely rolled back over a century as capital has accumulated more wealth and power than it's had since the Gilded Age as the planet burns to death and concluded that saving capitalism from itself was a mistake, then you probably don't feel all that great about Warren. Granted, part of it is just a natural and I think warrented suspecion of American politics where everything pulls to the economic right at all times. It that enviroment it makes sense to point as far left as you can because you are probably still going to end up right of center policy wise. If Warren got her ideas through congress, great, but honestly I prefer a more brass-tacks canidate so to speak. The war of arrition for health care is the main fight at this point, not that other fronts are aren't important but maybe health-care is winnable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
One could argue pretty persuasively that nothing from Sanders has indicated he is any less willing to preserve capitalism than Warren, though I get the (admittedly largely subjective*) impression that he would be willing to go further if the things he's currently advocating for became mainstream. Like, Sanders argues for things that are fundamentally just social democratic reforms to capitalism, but I also haven't seen anything indicating he would be opposed to actual socialism once those bandaids were applied (though I also wouldn't necessarily bet a lot of money that he would support it). * Though I think that his consistency over the decades makes it more likely he would adjust and push further
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
i do think there is probably something to the fact that sanders calls himself a socialist and warren calls herself a capitalist, and those labels do reflect their worldviews in ways that might not always show up in senate votes or even proposed policy. but i might be wrong
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
I sort of respect Warren in a professional sense that she’s clearly very smart even if I don’t agree with her core values/goals, but she strikes me as someone who is really strong Cabinet material, given that she has a somewhat narrow, but deep, field of expertise but isn’t exactly the type of person who would lead a populist revolt. I could see her being a really effective Treasury Secretary, for example, or the head of... the bank regulation agency that I forget the name of that Trump is trying to kill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:No, I'm not. I know the difference between owning a toothbrush and owning a mill. So you are saying that a factory in a communist society will no longer need to secure materials? That there will be no need to move intermediary products between separate production units? That there will be no dilemma related to providing scarce services to various subjects? Some of this can be attributed to logistics, but logistics are a function of markets, and they still operate with value and capital exchange / redistribution as core principles. Might as well say planned economies had no markets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Yeah. So, to get back to the discussion: That sounds very much like the German system of having "worker counsels" with representation on the board of directors. <scarcasm> This is why Germany is an economic basket case. </scarcasm>
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So you are saying that a factory in a communist society will no longer need to secure materials? That there will be no need to move intermediary products between separate production units? That there will be no dilemma related to providing scarce services to various subjects? Some of this can be attributed to logistics, but logistics are a function of markets, and they still operate with value and capital exchange / redistribution as core principles. Might as well say planned economies had no markets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:I'm saying that capital markets as we currently think of them can't, basically by definition, exist under a communist regime where private property has been abolished. If you want to argue the efficacy of various alternatives to that, go ahead, but that's not what the discussion was originally about. This would be accurate, yeah. The stock market, for example, would not exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
Can I mail in my 2020 vote for trump yet
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:yea he's super smart/cool! Crazy uncle joe am I right folks? Guys he’d totally beat Trump and that’s all that matters. Also he and Cory Booker were charming on Parks and Rec am I right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Guys he’d totally beat Trump and that’s all that matters. Also he and Cory Booker were charming on Parks and Rec am I right? He'd totally beat trump in 2016. In 2020? Nope.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 08:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CharlesPPierce/status/1036392223598960646 These guys are going to get owned next year hard when the candidates start ignoring them and going directly to where voters actually watch/listen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://twitter.com/CharlesPPierce/status/1036392223598960646 charles pierce turning into just another resistance lib has been so disappointing to watch
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:charles pierce turning into just another resistance lib has been so disappointing to watch I used to read his articles religiously. It is pretty drat sad to see him all brain-wormed, and I can only assume it's a function of getting old + Trump derangement syndrome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 08:42
|
|
|
America deserved 9/11. If you can't accept this fact and keep it in focus you stop being a living human being and become something else.
Big Hubris fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Sep 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 09:17
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://twitter.com/CharlesPPierce/status/1036392223598960646 None of them are bringing a hose. That would mean actually doing something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 13:38
|
|
|
Biden is their last best shot at “I told you so.”
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 13:42
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Biden is their last best shot at “I told you so.” Biden's endorsement of Cuomo is the last straw for me. I would never vote for him in a primary. https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/1036969763380125698 Even the heroes of the resistance unite when it comes time to secure a fascist seat on the SCOTUS. mcmagic fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Sep 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:That sounds very much like the German system of having "worker counsels" with representation on the board of directors. No it isnt and...it kinda is thou?having representatives from the workers council on their boards hasnt prevented german companies from loving over their workers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
EdithUpwards posted:America deserved 9/11. If you can't accept this fact and keep it in focus you stop being a living human being and become something else. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh3N63QdSw0
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
glowing-fish posted:Anyway...I don't know how to make it any more clear. I generally hold left-wing positions, but don't think every socioeconomic position I hold needs to be analyzed in this thread. It is pretty hard for me to believe that the repeated attempts to distort what I said are being done in good faith. I don't know what to do about that. I'm replying to this in here so as to keep fish's request of keeping the Russia thread on topic. You keep trying to have a discussion where you have a very clear point of view you want acknowledged (namely, things are mostly fine for most people) and then you freak out when people disagree with you and then go back to "this isn't on topic discussion for this thread, please go make another thread so I can ignore it and not have my views challenged in any way." It's transparently obvious. But have fun in the employment thread sucking the dick of everyone who makes a lot of money, maybe if you bootlick hard enough they'll throw you some scraps. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:you freak out when people disagree with you and then go back to "this isn't on topic discussion for this thread, please go make another thread so I can ignore it and not have my views challenged in any way." this is an incredibly charitable way to word "pitch a fit about how if inequality is a real issue over Russia, go make a thread for it and we'll see what people (affluent D&D posters) really care about  "
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:No it isnt and...it kinda is thou?having representatives from the workers council on their boards hasnt prevented german companies from loving over their workers. Uh, what part of the <scarcasm> tag did you miss? Germany is an economic powerhouse with a far higher 'true' standard of living and budget surpluses. The American media loves to lie about this fact. Worker Councils is one reason why VW has done a 180º and is investing billions into EV's as penance for the 'dieselgate' nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 01:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:this is an incredibly charitable way to word "pitch a fit about how if inequality is a real issue over Russia, go make a thread for it and we'll see what people (affluent D&D posters) really care about It basically brings to the surface what has always been incredibly obvious to me - the particular breed of "perpetually irritated with the left" liberal you see in D&D just doesn't really care that much about material inequality/poverty. They care about it in a sort of abstract way*, but it doesn't really matter to them on an emotional level. This isn't that surprising, given it's not relevant to them personally (because they're nearly always very well off themselves). They know it's something that it's "politically correct" to care about, so they'll try to frame their opinions in a way that maintains that facade, but it usually ends up falling off at some point. Deep down, their real opinion is something along the lines of "poverty/inequality is obviously not good, but it's not really an emergency and at the end of the day the pros of the status quo likely outweigh the cons to any radical change to the status quo." They realize that explicitly saying this would sound callous, so they instead either just avoid talking about those topics or focus on various "pragmatic" arguments centered around the idea that certain changes to the status quo might enable Republicans to win. * Kinda like how I'd probably admit I care about, say, rainforest deforestation. That's an issue that I acknowledge is important in the abstract, but if I'm being completely honest I don't feel a real strong emotional response regarding it (because it's completely disconnected from me). Heck, Trump-Russia might be another good example of something I acknowledge matters but don't feel emotionally invested in. This is basically how your average affluent D&D liberal feels about an issue like material inequality. Of course, the important difference here is that I don't whine about the people who are emotionally invested in rainforest deforestation!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 01:59
|
|