Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher | 18 | 1.46% | |
Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer | 665 | 54.11% | |
Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker | 319 | 25.96% | |
Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord | 26 | 2.12% | |
Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe | 5 | 0.41% | |
Julian Castro, the Twin | 5 | 0.41% | |
Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer | 5 | 0.41% | |
Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath | 17 | 1.38% | |
Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino | 3 | 0.24% | |
Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist | 8 | 0.65% | |
Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen | 86 | 7.00% | |
Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater | 23 | 1.87% | |
Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool | 32 | 2.60% | |
Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy | 2 | 0.16% | |
Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast | 1 | 0.08% | |
Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated | 4 | 0.33% | |
Tim Ryan, the Dope Face | 3 | 0.24% | |
John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran | 7 | 0.57% | |
Total: | 1229 votes |
|
TrixR4kids posted:I've seen boomers on facebook argue this or a slight variation asking Bernie to pay off their mortgage. Even though we know full well that they either inherited the property, or bought it when houses cost far less and the property appreciated in value ten fold even with the financial crisis. If you're just entertaining yourself by arguing on facebook, it's real fun to remind them that the mortgage interest deduction means they're living in government subsidized housing. Also, if people are calling free college a pipe dream, you can present them with two quotes. The first is from Bernie's plan: quote:This legislation would provide $47 billion per year to states to eliminate undergraduate tuition and fees at public colleges and universities. quote:The twelfth-largest tax expenditure is the exclusion of the first $250,000 of gains ($500,000 for joint filers) on sales of a principal residence ($36.3 billion). Homeowners also benefit from the home mortgage interest deduction ($33.9 billion in 2019).
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:35 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 03:38 |
|
https://twitter.com/MikeGravel/status/1149381689141059589 I doubt the guy is going to make the debates even if he technically qualifies but at least the small donations they got are going toward something useful.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:35 |
|
BrandorKP posted:No, I'm not. Autonomy of the individual, ie. freedom, is essential to voting. There's no contradiction there; the base definition of liberalism is vague enough that it can be interpreted in any number of ways, and in practice it includes a number of anti-democratic elements that socialism aims to address (like the "right to own property/means or production" or allowing businesses to be undemocratic, but it's mainly the former that is directly a right supported by liberalism that has the effect of reducing peoples' freedom in practice).
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:38 |
|
Marxalot posted:That's kind of shocking. Aren't those the pod save america weirds? It's almost like they and their listeners don't consider Bernie and the rest of the party to be locked in mortal combat for the soul of America, and that's just something you guys do. There are people who support Bernie and when you ask them why they'll say "he's the most liberal". I would guess a majority of his backers don't even believe in the abolition of free markets!
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:39 |
|
Majorian posted:I don't often declare myself the winner of a debate, but... it wasn't a debate. i said a true thing, and you said some dead dumb idiot has puppetmastered an incredibly broad ideological term for over 300 years after he died, which i laughed at reading or not reading a book isn't going to magically make humanity an innately good creature that needs protection by the enlightened masters of logic
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:39 |
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I think part of the problem is that people in general, and Brandor in particular, are projecting modern interpretations of terms backward onto their prior or original forms (and in Brandor's case once again trying to shoehorn universalist definitions into places they don't belong). I'm not projecting modern terms, I'm just in a different line of thought. And *sniff * it's properly Hegelian to interpret them backwards in that way, anyway.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:43 |
|
eviltastic posted:The tax breaks we give to people who can afford to own houses could cover all undergraduate tuition at public colleges. And that's after the tax cuts and jobs act reduced the impact of the mortgage interest deduction. By the by, if you wanna get really pissed off at our priorities, the federal government spent 60.4 billion last year on SNAP benefits. We try harder to subsidize home owners than we do to feed people.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:44 |
|
Why hasn't anyone posted the ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPFNgzF32Ug
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:45 |
|
mormonpartyboat posted:it wasn't a debate. i said a true thing, and you said some dead dumb idiot has puppetmastered an incredibly broad ideological term for over 300 years after he died, which i laughed at That's actually not at all what I said. What I did say is that the designers of liberalism never actually intended to protect the rights and liberties of more than a select few, and you think I'm wrong because....reasons, I guess?
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:45 |
|
Shear Modulus posted:the west wing and hazy half-remembered recollections of jfk also being youngish and saying that americans should do things for their country People who believe only a midwestern white man with a covert edge of racism can win but who aren't willing to go full Tim Ryan.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:48 |
|
Majorian posted:What I did say is that the designers of liberalism never actually intended to protect the rights and liberties of more than a select few, and you think I'm wrong because....reasons, I guess? what i said was that it was not a unique mechanism within liberalism that does that, but rather it's just a property inherent to any political philosophy that presumes innate goodness in human beings you read that as "it doesnt happen", and followed up with the incredible self-own of "im usually wrong about everything i post, but this one time!!!! "
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:49 |
|
cripes
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:50 |
|
Mellow Seas posted:It's almost like they and their listeners don't consider Bernie and the rest of the party to be locked in mortal combat for the soul of America, and that's just something you guys do. i support bernie going to the hague and being prosecuted for war crimes
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:51 |
|
mormonpartyboat posted:what i said was that it was not a unique mechanism within liberalism that does that, but rather it's just a property inherent to any political philosophy that presumes innate goodness in human beings Right, and what I said was that you're giving the designers of liberalism too much credit by assuming that they gave a poo poo about anyone except for the narrow group of people that would benefit from their system. And then you started having a really weird meltdown.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:53 |
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Why hasn't anyone posted the ad?
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:53 |
|
Majorian posted:Right, and what I said was that you're giving the designers of liberalism too much credit by assuming that they gave a poo poo about anyone except for the narrow group of people that would benefit from their system. which is not a thing i either assumed or posted
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:55 |
|
mormonpartyboat posted:which is not a thing i either assumed or posted It's what BrandorKP, I, and others were discussing, before you started taking really weird umbrage with me saying that the framers of liberalism didn't give a poo poo about the freedoms and liberties of anyone outside of a narrow group.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:56 |
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Why hasn't anyone posted the ad? I like that the “joke” candidates , Gravel and Williamson, are 1000x better than anything Biden could ever be. What a country
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:57 |
|
Punk da Bundo posted:I like that the “joke” candidates , Gravel and Williamson, are 1000x better than anything Biden could ever be. What a country Well yeah, of course they're the joke candidates. They don't even believe in reaching across the aisle to the fascists to do THE PEOPLE'S WORK of funding concentration camps.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 19:58 |
|
Ytlaya posted:There's no contradiction there; Correct. I specifically said it wasn't a contradiction. It's a conflict between different interpretations.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:02 |
|
Majorian posted:It's what BrandorKP, I, and others were discussing right, which is when i stepped in with a different post that had a different take on the same content Majorian posted:before you started taking really weird umbrage with me saying that the framers of liberalism didn't give a poo poo about the freedoms and liberties of anyone outside of a narrow group. the obvious takeaway from the thing i posted is that the reason they felt free (and continue to feel free) to only care about the narrow group of people within their system was because the mechanism i described lets them feel like they're magnanimous. systems need inherent appeals to be maintained over generations, and that mechanism provides a nice source of warm fuzzies biden is a perfect example - he legitimately believes that the system is more important than the vast majority of individuals within it, because that system will (eventually) lift those individuals up on its own. that the important thing is not the end, but the means. that's what he says to himself to feel righteous while he - like the framers of liberalism - does not give a poo poo about the freedoms and liberties of anyone outside of a narrow group. those people's problems will work themselves out on their own as long as you maintain the , so why worry about them? in fact, direct and immediate action might erode the power structures he and his kind have worked for generations to build, the same power structures that he believes are going to fix everything, so he sees discouraging people to improve their lot now as actually beneficial for them in the long run the only really weird umbrage is that you said the what, i agreed and said the why, and you decided it was not only a debate but that you're winning and i'm melting down and whatever other dope twitter memes you want to post at me
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:07 |
|
mormonpartyboat posted:the obvious takeaway from the thing i posted is that the reason they felt free (and continue to feel free) to only care about the narrow group of people within their system was because the mechanism i described lets them feel like they're magnanimous. systems need inherent appeals to be maintained over generations, and that mechanism provides a nice source of warm fuzzies And I'm saying you're projecting, because it's what you want to believe of the founders of liberalism. The more likely answer is that they just didn't care.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:10 |
|
Majorian posted:And I'm saying you're projecting, because it's what you want to believe of the founders of liberalism. The more likely answer is that they just didn't care. "they didn't care" "yeah, i agree, and they didn't care because their system lets them and continues to let them not care. for example, joe biden, who definitely does not care" "but they didnt care" lmao
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:13 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Or... we own the means of production publicly and don't have credit.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:13 |
|
i cant believe john locke is going to win the democratic primary but it turns out hes polling better than gillibrand
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:14 |
|
Tibalt posted:Well until the glorious revolution occurs I'd like to stick with the system that doesn't indenture farmers to the only local bank like 1920s sharecroppers. Something like 12 American families can still be considered true “farmers” though, the rest of the farming is done by massive agricultural corporations.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:18 |
|
BrandorKP posted:Correct. I specifically said it wasn't a contradiction. It's a conflict between different interpretations. BrandorKP posted:That's the contradiction within liberalism. What it results in, is the negation of what it values and starts with. That is what breaks it and what the conservative elements in it push it towards (basically they try push it back to the feudalism it broke). If you look at his website Pete's thing is to try to reconcile that contradiction eg. "freedom means". I think this whole thing can pretty easily be summed up as liberalism just being kind of dumb and clearly an ideology designed under the assumption that people already have all/most of their material needs provided for. It makes sense for someone's primary concerns to be things like monarchy and government oppression if you're some rich European/American, since those are the only things that really threaten you personally. But it turns out that some forms of freedom that are important for your average "well-off European landowner" (like the freedom to own property) actually end up reducing freedom for most other people.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:24 |
|
Ytlaya posted:
And, of course, liberalism amply provides mechanisms for those wealthy, privileged few to protect their privileges from everyone else. See, for example, Locke's theory of property.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:29 |
|
Ruminahui posted:Something like 12 American families can still be considered true “farmers” though, the rest of the farming is done by massive agricultural corporations. I used to think this as well, however... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_farm#United_States wikipedia posted:In 2012, the United States had 2,039,093 family farms (as defined by USDA), accounting for 97 percent of all farms and 89 percent of census farm area in the United States. That whole section is interesting. Its mostly lots of small to medium-sized farms.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:41 |
|
Further in the post, "So there is a conflict (but not a contradiction) within socialism about democracy." Liberalism had the contradiction that it's about freedom, but it ends up taking freedom away and returning to fuedalism. The question is then: can socialism have democracy (which is liberal) with out that contradiction? Some of us think, yes it can (for diversity of reasons) and I think everybody discussing it at this moment does. But there are others who aren't posting right ag this moment but who do post in this thread, that think : no it can't. This is what I mean by a conflict.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:46 |
|
edit: definitely the wrong thread
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:46 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I used to think this as well, however... lol the usda only defines family farm as "any farm organized as a sole proprietorship, partnership, or family corporation" and size or revenue has no bearing on classification. one partnership could own every piece of farmland in iowa and it'd technically be a family farm farm operator households, where the owners and operators (operator meaning farm boss, not field hands) live together, make up less than 10% of family farms. farms where you have a humble country farmer living in a shack and personally plowing the land with the help of their family are almost certainly a small fraction of that number. also there's the whole debacle going on where rich people are declaring empty, unworked plots of lands 'farms' to create instant tax shelters, which almost certainly qualify as family farms, inflating all those numbers
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:48 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I used to think this as well, however... You're completely wrong, most "family farms" are large or medium sized: quote:Mid-size and larger family farms account for 60 percent of US farm production and dominate US production of cotton, cash grain and hogs And this is the confusing thing about the statistics, if you look at size of farm, you'll see by number of farms they're mostly small farms, but if you look at acres managed they're by far mostly massively large farms. There are 2 million farms in the US accounting for 900 million acres. There are only 85,127 farms larger than 2,000 acres, but they have 519 million acres. 4.2% of farms account for 57% of the acres. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_1_US/st99_1_0071_0071.pdf "Family farms" include of course the most powerful families in America. The Resnicks are family farmers but they're Rockefeller not Joad. (The 5% of farms own more than the bottom 50% of farmers! ) edit: this makes it clearer than what I said: quote:The census makes the following useful distinctions among these family farms, based initially on their gross annual sales: Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Jul 11, 2019 |
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:53 |
|
Forget about the farms, my point was that saying various banking and credit regulations wouldn't be necessary under communism isn't helpful when we're in a capitalist system for the foreseeable future.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 20:59 |
|
lots of "independent" family farms are under contract from an agribusiness company where they get seed or young animals from smithfield or tyson or whoever, then sell the product to the same company at a contract-specified price. just like any other "independent contracting" situation the company gets to dictate the terms of the contract because the farmer has no market power. in addition the farmer of course assumes the risk of the crop not producing due to poor weather, disease, etc. (they can of course buy insurance against that but that stuff is expensive)
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 21:03 |
|
Mellow Seas posted:It's almost like they and their listeners don't consider Bernie and the rest of the party to be locked in mortal combat for the soul of America, and that's just something you guys do. They're a bunch of former Obama staffers that are against the most basic center-left policies* so I was just surprised that their poll didn't look blatantly hosed up like the ones that had Biden showing a few points worth of lead with a bar graph twice the size of the person ranked below him. Not sure where you're getting this idea that the party isn't in the middle of an ideological fight though. We have a bunch of people who want to not run concentration camps and also see a doctor a time or two before they drop dead, and a bunch of disgustingly rich assholes who think that the only thing fundamentally wrong with republican policy is that they're willing to invite open white nationalists to the white house. If you want to sarcastically say that people wanting the Democratic party to stop supporting every single war ever or end the Obama era "maybe the Republicans will like me now?" mass deportation program is just some imaginary fight then go off I guess lmao. * remember when those fuckers were backing the United States of Care lmao https://twitter.com/jonfavs/status/960901341710139398 Marxalot fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Jul 11, 2019 |
# ? Jul 11, 2019 21:30 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:You're completely wrong, most "family farms" are large or medium sized: I was trying to actually figure out how much land was owned by each farm category. I guess the following stats are inaccurate then: quote:Small family farms are defined as those with annual gross cash farm income (GCFI) of less than $350,000; in 2011, these accounted for 90 percent of all US farms. Because low net farm incomes tend to predominate on such farms, most farm families on small family farms are extremely dependent on off-farm income. Small family farms in which the principal operator was mostly employed off-farm accounted for 42 percent of all farms and 15 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $788. Retirement family farms were small farms accounting for 16 percent of all farms and 7 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $5,002. Counting non-primary small + retirement family farms + low-sales small + moderate-sales small + mid-sized farms (in terms of land area): 15% + 7% + 18% + 13% + 22% = 75% (with large and very large being 16% of total farm area). Now, does "farm area" not refer to percentage of total farm acreage?
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 21:42 |
|
Calibanibal posted:Bernie's lack of interest in medical debt erasure is easily explainable -- this debt is primarily an issue for the elderly and women, who do not support Bernie. Contrast that with student debt erasure, which is mostly an issue for the youth. Bernie's positions dont come from a moral or ideological center --- they are simply cold, mercenary exchanges lmao, I love your gimmick man
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 21:51 |
|
https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1149423188545277952 https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/1149423491596378113 I think this one is the most interesting part, its a very good question and more polls should include it: Whether you'd favor a candidate that proposes large, sweeping changes that might have trouble passing or if you prefer a candidate that proposes less ambitious, but easier to pass proposals? https://twitter.com/aedwardslevy/status/1149424411612782594 The Glumslinger fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Jul 11, 2019 |
# ? Jul 11, 2019 22:08 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 03:38 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I was trying to actually figure out how much land was owned by each farm category. I guess the following stats are inaccurate then: This is a definitions issue of sorts. USDA ERS uses economic activity to determine size, while I was pulling from USDA Census of Agriculture by acreage. So under the ERS definition there are 27,828 "Low-sales small family farms" that are over 2,000+ acres because they gross less than $100,00 a year. That accounts for at least 6% of all ag land in the US and at least 34% of all "low-sales small family farm" land. Which is a vastly different kind of farm than the less than 50 acre farm that the majority of "low-sales small family farm" owns.
|
# ? Jul 11, 2019 22:13 |