|
Stereotype posted:Someone should post that “Biden been creepy video” once a day in the presidential primary thread where all mentions of him should also go. Was he the basis for Oscar and Buster doing that sort of thing on Arrested Development?
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 10:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Are they doing the supermajority thing too? Like I said I assumed it, but I haven't read a confirmation of it or anything. If so then LOL we're hosed. A Democratic House that does that poo poo might pass some unworkable symbolic poo poo over the next two years (though I doubt they'll do even that), but there is no way they'd do the same with the Senate and the Presidency, if they have it in two years. I'm looking at this as less of a "well what can they technically still do" thing and more about where is the center of gravity of the Democratic caucus in the House: what lessons have they learned over the last two years and from this recent election. If they're doing PAYGO and a supermajority for tax increases, then the answer that is looking to be much more like "gently caress all, except maybe say some progressive-sounding poo poo every once in a while, just enough to fool people like karthun without actually doing anything." No, the supermajority thing died and there is no major legislation passing for the next two years so we might as well gently caress the rich. pseudanonymous posted:The problem is a bill might incidentally raise taxes in a very minor way on the bottom 80%, or function like a tax. There is no situation where taxes need to be made more regressive, ie raised on everyone, when they instead could be made more progressive, ie raised on the rich. That is unless you think that we have hit the Laffer Curve and if so I need your work on a napkin. Unoriginal Name posted:Why not attach a RICH-FIRST rule, that requires taxes to come from the rich first if that is your priority? How exactly do you attach a RICH-FIRST rule? What would your RICH-FIRST rule look like and how would that be better the just raising taxes on the rich and the additional money that would be raised on everyone else also on the rich because the the rich. 
karthun fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Jan 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 10:47
|
|
|
Pay your taxes! https://twitter.com/JocAPhotography/status/1080217540264116224
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:A lot of the "decorum centrists" aren't even into decorum at all. What they really want is a return to the old status quo so that they can go back to ignoring politics entirely. It's this in a huge way, as well as the fact that as the prevalent message moves further and further away from one of idealized bipartisanship and fanciful Good Republicans reaching across the aisle to their respected Democratic colleagues and towards one of "the Republicans are bigot scum enabling a fresh wave of white nationalism and homegrown nazi-wannabes, also the environment is turbofucked, our healthcare sucks, and bipartisanship is a sham, give us universal health care, a better living wage, and start addressing climate issues or go gently caress yourself," the decorous centrists are increasingly getting lumped into the "if you aren't part of the solution then you're part of the problem" category. They don't just want to be able to ignore politics, they want to comfortably remain assured that they aren't bad people even as they just sort of shrug their shoulders and vote for someone who won't rock the boat too much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 10:54
|
|
|
karthun posted:No, the supermajority thing died and there is no major legislation passing for the next two years so we might as well gently caress the rich.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:Buying into the whole "taxes are bad" thing is buying into Republican bullshit framing of reality. Taxes pay for needed goods and services. Yes, the rich should pay their fair share, i.e. far more than they do now, but it might also be necessary to raise taxes on everyone. No. Absolutely not. There is no reason or circumstance wherein taxes need to be raised “on everyone” if we start in our current position. All of the wealth resides with a very small number of people. The bottom half in the United States control less than 5% of the wealth. What shortfall could conceivably be made up by increasing taxes for the people with no money? What would cause a situation where it would be reasonable to say, “We just can’t squeeze the money out of this 95%, but maybe we can find it down here in this 5%?”
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 11:49
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:No. Absolutely not. There is no reason or circumstance wherein taxes need to be raised “on everyone” if we start in our current position. All of the wealth resides with a very small number of people. The bottom half in the United States control less than 5% of the wealth. What shortfall could conceivably be made up by increasing taxes for the people with no money? What would cause a situation where it would be reasonable to say, “We just can’t squeeze the money out of this 95%, but maybe we can find it down here in this 5%?” I agree, but saying "no, I wouldn't mind if my taxes were a bit higher, provided taxes on the wealthy were way higher," is a useful rhetorical device for shutting down idiots who open every conversation on the topic with "but your taxes will go up too! Checkmate!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 11:53
|
|
|
Translation: My father chose to vote for people who opposed ending segregation, ignored the AIDS crisis because to them homosexuals needed to be punished, deficit-spent while cutting revenue generation, started endless wars in the Middle-East, and created a giant security theater that strips our liberty, but Trump is a bridge too far. Democrats in 2020 better take note of what people like him want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 12:26
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:No. Absolutely not. There is no reason or circumstance wherein taxes need to be raised “on everyone” if we start in our current position. All of the wealth resides with a very small number of people. The bottom half in the United States control less than 5% of the wealth. What shortfall could conceivably be made up by increasing taxes for the people with no money? What would cause a situation where it would be reasonable to say, “We just can’t squeeze the money out of this 95%, but maybe we can find it down here in this 5%?” Certainly, it's not ideal, but if its a tax increase of 1$ per 1000 you make per year for Medicare for everyone, I'd take it. Is that perfect policy? No, of course not, the rich should pay their fair share. But the Democrats handcuffing themselves before the session even begins is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 12:54
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:They’re all so old. Schiff is only like 58, man. He's not even retirement age yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 12:58
|
|
|
logger posted:Translation: My father chose to vote for people who opposed ending segregation, ignored the AIDS crisis because to them homosexuals needed to be punished, deficit-spent while cutting revenue generation, started endless wars in the Middle-East, and created a giant security theater that strips our liberty, but Trump is a bridge too far. Democrats in 2020 better take note of what people like him want. Alternate translation: I was sitting in a hipster coffee shop and I overheard my uncle who works for Nintendo say,
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 12:58
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:who would even vote for a proven loser in the primary though Nixon was a super loser (lost a POTUS election and California governor) before he won two terms as President, y'all too tied up in this media horse race poo poo or I'm being wooshed
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:02
|
|
|
So what about this Inslee guy who just announced for 2020? On the one hand he has a focus on global warming, which is good, but his solutions appear to be the usual corporatist garbage. Any other opinions worth knowing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:02
|
|
|
karthun posted:How exactly do you attach a RICH-FIRST rule? What would your RICH-FIRST rule look like and how would that be better the just raising taxes on the rich and the additional money that would be raised on everyone else also on the rich because the the rich.] How about a CAPITAL-GO rule where every program budgeted with income tax must also come with an equivalent percentage from capital gains? Why not a HEALTH-NEEDS program that requires that any spending reduction comes with an equivalent increase in Medicare coverage until every American is covered? If you are going to create stupid loving rules, why predicate them on Republican ideals Unoriginal Name fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Jan 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:03
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:So what about this Inslee guy who just announced for 2020? On the one hand he has a focus on global warming, which is good, but his solutions appear to be the usual corporatist garbage. Any other opinions worth knowing? Jay Inslee announced? When did he do that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:06
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:So what about this Inslee guy who just announced for 2020? On the one hand he has a focus on global warming, which is good, but his solutions appear to be the usual corporatist garbage. Any other opinions worth knowing? As a Washingtonian I have very little opinion of him. He seems like he's done mostly good things, but he's not a huge firebrand or anything. He was aggressive in suing over the travel ban, but it's hard to know if that was genuine or calculated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:10
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:So what about this Inslee guy who just announced for 2020? On the one hand he has a focus on global warming, which is good, but his solutions appear to be the usual corporatist garbage. Any other opinions worth knowing? I'm going to save you some time here. Step 1) Is he for destroying capitalism root and branch? If no, then about 40% of the thread hates him. Step 2) Does his last name rhyme with "Ganders?" If no, then another 30% or so of the thread hates him. So about 70% of the responses you're gonna get to just about, well, anyone is going to be a torrent of hatred.  As for Inslee specifically I can't say I'm particularly thrilled with him. It's good that people are running who are focusing on the climate, but his solutions are nothing remarkable, and he ran pretty much dead even with Hillary in '16 and a few points behind Obama in '12 in Washington so he's not even really super great at winning voters. He's probably not gonna go anywhere, but hey, in a year like this, every 50 and 60-some governor and senator's probably thinking it's their best shot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:11
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:What would cause a situation where it would be reasonable to say, “We just can’t squeeze the money out of this 95%, but maybe we can find it down here in this 5%?” Taxes as a deterant. You still should be funneling that money back to the poor though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:15
|
|
|
Hangover Day 2: I want to die. On the flipside. I have good feelings towards this new Hell Year. Fancy, Solaris, Axeii, and I did our part for the electoral bloodshed in November and indeed to continue said slaughter in DMV state politics this year. If you have a state or local election this year, consider volunteering to canvass, phone bank, or do GOTV. State Politics is supremely important to start combatting power companies that are going to kill us all with climate change. Also, you get your progressives into state office and they can fill our Space Commie bench in the future! Here is to 2019, you filthy animals! Love ya all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:29
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:A lot of the "decorum centrists" aren't even into decorum at all. What they really want is a return to the old status quo so that they can go back to ignoring politics entirely. They think politics is like sports or TV or books - a hobby that most people have only a cursory knowledge about and they get to feel superior to loser nerds who are way too into that kind of poo poo because they're so busy with real world problems like picking up little Bobby from karate practice. "Make government boring again" would be a disturbingly effective slogan against Trump. Hopefully we're largely past the point at which it would be an effective slogan in the Democratic primary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:Repeal the Trump tax cuts and you can pay for anything. Its still an asinine rule that puts Republican "Deficit spending is bad!!" messaging ahead of the content ahead of any bill Deficit spending in times of plenty is a pretty solid thing to be doing, especially if you ascribe to Keynesian Economic Thought. One thing that really needs to be done is to successfully and publicly call bullshit in the Republicans when they start predictably wailing about deficits again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:46
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:One thing that really needs to be done is to successfully and publicly call bullshit in the Republicans when they start predictably wailing about deficits again. I feel like this myth is another thing millennials will ruin considering many of us are drowning in debt. "Oh no, how can we spend any money when we're so deep in this hole? Welcome to my every waking moment motherfucker."
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1079544775370510337 Lol I loving love these women. Preach sista! https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1079855554477072384 friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 14:02 on Jan 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
AND WE'RE OFF! https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1080447092882112512
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:I feel like this myth is another thing millennials will ruin considering many of us are drowning in debt. It is something that appeals so strongly to the "Self-Made Successful Boomer" mentality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
Unless he's referring to Romney's 2012 bid (I can never tell), he's of course lying again...didn't Romney win the Senate race by, like, a lot?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:07
|
|
|
Honestly more restrained than I thought.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:07
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Honestly more restrained than I thought. What do you want to bet it's only the first of many, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/brookefoxnews/status/1080450273368334336?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:It is something that appeals so strongly to the "Self-Made Successful Boomer" mentality. And yet they squeal whenever Millennials don't take on 10x their income in mortgage debt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:RGB exercises more than most people ever have and lives on to spite the vile whites of this country. Some 87 Trump voting gently caress likely guzzles down deep fried swill from Bojangles/Country Kitchen, screams every day about how the liberals aren't angry enough/not happy about something Trump's doing and they're so dang mean about it, sitting on their rear end 24/7. I've never seen a more  pot/kettle post in my entire life. Frame it and hang it on the wall.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:18
|
|
|
You just KNOW this is because he wants to look big and strong and important and Not Mad. Also LOL if it's another one of those meetings that involves no Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:19
|
|
|
Whitlam posted:What do you want to bet it's only the first of many, though. He didn't even use the word loser
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:20
|
|
|
They need to determine wall funding with a magic the gathering tournament
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:20
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Honestly more restrained than I thought. ...for now. Will Romney kiss the ring again while flipping it’s bearer off?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They need to determine wall funding with a magic the gathering tournament I really wish I knew enough about Magic: The Gathering to make a joke here, but all I know is that everyone in my circle of friends and acquaintances who plays it is a loving weirdo about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
I voted for Jay Inslee for WA governor he's pretty bland but he supports the $15 min wage and radical climate change I guess. If he gets on board for AOC's Green New Deal and M4A I might vote for him again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They need to determine wall funding with a magic the gathering tournament There's no way Trump would be able to figure out even the most basic rules of how to play Magic, let alone anything even remotely complex.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:23
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:There's no way Trump would be able to figure out even the most basic rules of how to play Magic, let alone anything even remotely complex. Honestly, same, I have tried to play not a ton of times, but a few, and I still don't know how blocking works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
Nope. Nope nope nope. Not today thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2019 14:28
|
|
