|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Is there a decent article about what repealing NAFTA would even look like? Unfortunately no. The major issue is that it'll be a state-by-state problem. So the consequences will be felt differently state to state. Still, you can cobble the general idea: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-nafta-us-jobs-2016-11 quote:In fact, repealing NAFTA could raise costs, and therefore prices, for U.S. consumers, particularly in the automotive sector, Hufbauer said. And in general, producing consumer goods in the U.S. instead of abroad could mean higher prices for American shoppers on products like shoes, televisions, solar panels — and for other imported goods like iPhones. http://modernfarmer.com/2016/12/trumps-pledge-destroy-nafta-affect-agriculture/ quote:Pulling out of NAFTA entirely is an extreme reaction that would send the entire continent into chaos. Companies which exist in more than one country (which is many of them; in agriculture, for example, beef producers often raise cattle in Mexico and slaughter in the US) would be forced to pick up and move, at their own expense. That expense could well put them out of business. If companies decide to deal with the tariffs, they could pass those price hikes onto the consumer, raising prices on food in the US. I like this one a lot, despite that final sentence. Indeed if Trump did pull out of NAFTA, they why shouldn't other countries react and respond? If you got time for some "light reading", check this: https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/deliver...0022097&EXT=pdf quote:Supply chains will be disrupted and US workers may be laid off or could lose their jobs permanently. Restricting supply from the major source of softwood lumber imported into the United States, namely Canada, will increase margins charged by US softwood lumber producers but will hurt both the US construction industry and US home buyers. The application of statutory powers by the president to impose duties could be challenged by Congress and in the US courts. Trading partners of the United States will retaliate, either by invoking dispute settlement procedures under the WTO or under other trade agreements, or simply resorting to self-help by erecting trade barriers against US goods. Trade retaliation sanctioned through WTO dispute settlement procedures can be very costly. For example, in the United States – Tax Treatment This also has a whole section on withdrawing from NAFTA: https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/deliver...6125098&EXT=pdf The author helpfully summarizes it though: quote:Simply stated: the U.S. should not withdraw from NAFTA. He's a classical economist shitlord so take his conclusions with a grain of salt. Or ignore em entirely really Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Apr 30, 2017 |
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:56 |
|
|
Condiv posted:i didn't say i think trump's idea is a good plan for getting rid of nafta, but i'm not gonna cry any tears if it's gone. i think it should be phased out No. That changes nothing. What we need to do is bring back unions, offer protections for workers (basically the Nordic Model) and stimulate the economy (minimum wage increases, government spending, what have you). We also absolutely need to take care of tax dodgers and global warming, those directly relate to economic ills which will prob ease the hate NAFTA gets. Phasing it out will do nothing but cause retaliatory trade wars.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Can you explain why activists are pushing for $15/hr? It's okay to admit that you don't know, and to admit you were Effectronica, chill dude. He's right. The problem is twofold. The first is the Velocity of Money. That sucks in America . All economies depend on an economic cycle, you pay people to produce work, people use money to buy goods, producers of goods pay money to government and so on. It's called (in an ideal world) the Virtuous Cycle of Economics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT3cm2eTuSg. The issue is that this cycle has slowed down or stopped within the past decade alone. The 2008 crisis had us dedicate enormous bailouts for people who essentially mishandled the economy on a grossly negligent scale. This was a necessary evil (no matter what people in this thread say) and our economy has been back on track, but we don't have anything to stop it from happening again besides maybe Dodd-Frank. And that may soon be repealed so... Problem 2 is wage stagnation. The amount people earn has not risen with inflation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages Arguments against the $15 increase are frankly nonesense in that scheme of things. Out minimum wage does not allow for people to have a standard of living and we should not be basing economic policy based on that. Yet we do. That's bad. Increasing wages to $15 is a band-aid solution, but it will help the middle class while also stimulating the economy. VV Dude. Dude.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:11
|
|
both the first and second times, and admit that your life has about the value of a bag of Cheezits, though I won't hold my breath on the last two.
|
Condiv posted:nope, sorry, nafta is lovely republican trade policy that only helps the rich. if you wanna renegotiate it into something that actually protects labor instead of something that destroys it, and all the other bullshit that's fine. but otherwise it's gotta go Sorry automotive workers, Condiv says it's your time. You had a good run, but welp. Sorry farmers, poo poo hasn't been swell for you due to corn subsidies, so this is really just the pragmatic approach if you think about it. Also dear Canada and Mexico, please don't fistfuck us. That article is wrong btw. It's slanted af and ignores or straight-up lies about facts. I am speaking only for the US. Mexico is a different story. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Apr 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Condiv posted:a lot of people are angry because the economy is not back on track. we got the gig-economy instead of a real one thanks to the idiots who hosed everything up getting the majority of stimulus spending. and i'm doubtful that bailing out wall street was ever the right move. especially since our political class is so beholden to wall street firms they refuse to break up too big to fail banks Okay Condiv let's do this poo poo. Let's play your scenario on what would happen if we didn't bail out the banks. I'm tired of this economc truthiness.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/17/the-miraculous-story-of-iceland/ Holy gently caress you are naive as all hell. Iceland's banks do not deal in the global currency nor are their trade contracts as closely tied to the rest of the world as the US is. Iceland also uses the Nordic Model for economics while the US does not. This is some Laissez-faire poo poo jfc.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i don't really buy the whole "NAFTA is necessary and phasing it out will doom us all" bs. I literally just posted two articles on why it will. And two scientific papers. Condiv posted:it's an opinion piece, of course it takes a side. also, provide examples of the straight-up lies? US and Canada have prospered greatly from NAFTA and it was ultimately a success. Mexico not so much, but that's a separate argument. The jobs won't come back if you repeal NAFTA, Condiv. Even discounting automation. Seriously dude this is loving fact. Ask anyone with an economics degree.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Condiv posted:the banks never deserved to be bailed out. if anyone did the people did. but since that was impossible, the banks who hosed everything up should've just collapsed. ... whoah buddy. uhh give me a second I need to process this cause wow dude. Wow.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Some rear end in a top hat bank, I think Bank of America, used customer deposits as leverage for their investment debt, because if the shareholders ate everyone's money it would be up to the government to restore it through the FDIC, and it was far more than the government could restore through those channels. The recession is now so long ago I don't remember which ratfuckers did this, but I think it was BofA covering their Meryll Lynch wounds. Steven Mnuchin: Hahahahah you are like a little baby! Watch this Craptacular! posted:The answer is not to destroy banks but to insist on a regulatory wall between investment banking and consumer banking, but third way Dems feel that's unnecessary and that with enough oversight this incestuous relationship can continue. Yes, that sounds about as successful as the IRS's inability to keep up with billionaires and their accountants on how to hide and swindle money out of the country's tax fund. You'll hear no argument from me, though to the Dems credit Dodd-Frank has helped a lot. If for no other reason then because banks need to leave a rainforest's worth of paper detailing their scams which did a lot to curtail the more egregious assholes. We need way, way more loving regulation though yes. Also Condiv, quote:Iceland's recovery has become a myth wrapped in a legend inside a legend. It let its banks fail, slashed household debt, let its currency collapse, put capital controls in place—and now it's doing better than those countries that did austerity! In reality, Iceland let its banks fail for foreigners, wrote down household debt only after their laws had made it worse, had no choice but to watch the krona plummet, but, at the same time, tried to keep it from plunging too far by limiting how much money people could take out of the country We absolutely cannot do this with US dollar. Like this is to economics what turning off gravity is to physics. That last line is an interesting idea though. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Apr 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:
Nobody is arguing that 15 bucks an hour is enough, but it's a start and opens the door to further reform.  What the gently caress is this silly-rear end book?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:Thread title subject matter: Nancy Pelosi reaffirmed today that the Democratic Party has no plans to pursue single-payer when asked. *cough* Oxxi don't ruin the surprise man, edit it out! I wanna hear Condiv and NFS get their hot takes in first. They still need to eat crow from the Montana bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:Oh, because this totally exempts those two posters from relentlessly defending Hillary's centrist policies and neoliberalism altogether, correct? I don't think you're arguing what you're trying to argue about with this post.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I have to say, the notion of a grifting group of white male educated podcasters that spend their time lambasting minority Democrats as being the same as the GOP while not having to worry about deportations or abortion rights is a pretty good summary of the leftist movement in the US right now. I like this guy
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 06:25
|
|
|
Majorian posted:He's making fun of you, dude. Like, you in particular. and your point is...? Oh poo poo it's you Maj. Jesus dude if you shoved some WELL MLK SAID into that post I wouldn't be able to tell you apart from Ze Pollack. Come on man. Just on this page we had some moron take a fake tweet about Pelosi at face value. "Bu-b-b-but CENTRISTS!!!" You know what? No. Horseshit. This isn't about criticism, this is you guys firmly convinced that democrats can do no right. And as such you all use any bullshit post-hoc rationalizations to do it. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 19:20 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Pelosi also says that single payer needs to happen on a state level first, which is understandable since loving look at Obamacare and people's reaction to it.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
That's a reasonable position. We should absolutely get Dems to push it in state level. It's a far cry from her saying "no I don't support single payer" Alienwarehouse posted:Thread title subject matter: Nancy Pelosi reaffirmed today that the Democratic Party has no plans to pursue single-payer when asked. like what this guy was trying to imply.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Condiv posted:too bad the DNC isn't more supportive of quist, cause he's real good They gave him 600k so far.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Grognan posted:Why the gently caress would anyone vote osoff other than the other white heap? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztJlZ3Ndbw4 Jon O is good and cool and also my friend
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
quote:71-year-old employment attorney Oh good a political neophyte and old as gently caress. Yeah I sure think he'll take Nancy loving Pelosi. uhhuh
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Majorian posted:If he has no chance, there's no harm in him trying to primary her. If he does have a chance, that suggests there's a real problem with Pelosi, as far as her (overwhelmingly Democratic) constituents are concerned. I'm not holding my breath. I was hoping he'd be a serious challenger so that Pelosi would be forced to move left, but it doesn't sound like it'll even be close.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Hey tv personality idpol argument megathread, we got news from Montana. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/...n-single-digits Noted X-man Hater Mike Pence is heading to Montana to stump for the GOP candidate
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Actually if you don't politically align with the daily show you are an irrelevant Democrat. Hell, you barely exist without a healthy does of the daily show Oh hey congrats on showing your face. I have some fresh crow for you to eat. Turns out you were wrong about Democrats learning nothing from Kansas.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:pretty sure I've said a whole lot of nothing to do with Kansas "You speak falsehoods, I do not crush my testicles with great force" *punches self in dick immediately after* Also, no you're loving wrong: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/dems-host-town-hall-meetings-health-care-gop-districts?cid=sm_fb_maddow
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:poorly executed joke involving sex organs and a rachel maddow link. yep, that's a liberal Thank you for calling me a liberal. Anyhow, dems making good on the adopt-a-district promise. Quoting for other people not clicking on Rachel Maddow: quote:On Monday afternoon, Democratic Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney listened to their concerns in his 18th Congressional District. Then, he listened to concerns from constituents in the 19th Congressional District Monday night.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
This Russia thing needs to become the new Benghazi. Regardless if it's true or not. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, I have good news for you - it's already bigger than Benghazi. I'm pretty certain there is something at the center of this. It probably isn't as sexy as Putin directly controlling Trump, but I think it's something along the lines of Trump having done business with the Russian mob that has caused him to become compromised. That may not sound like much, but as the hoary old maxim goes, the coverup is worse than the crime. It was the case with Watergate, and it is the case, and will continue to be the case going forward, with Trump. Yeah. Honestly, I will be VERY surprised if anyone goes to jail over this or suffers in any way, but it's a good way of casting a shadow over the GOP.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Kilroy stop. You're not making the point you want to make.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Obviously the correct answer is "seize the plantations immediately and give freedmen the land, with a free education", which worked where it was tried. Exactly. Everyone here is so adamant about proving JC wrong you're ignoring that while overt slavery stopped under emancipation, we still had poo poo like sharecroppers which was, for all intents and purposes, slavery. Okay we didn't lynch or beat African Americans as much, but they were let down by the American governemnt, and the rifts caused back then still haunt us today. quote:In discussing actual slaves being actually emancipated, yes, providing for their wellbeing after emancipation is critical. Have you ever heard of Reconstruction? 40 acres and a mule? The failure of the US government to provide for the welfare of the freedmen and the abandonment of reconstruction in the 1870's caused massive harm and suffering that was totally avoidable. Unless you think sharecropping was totally fine because plucky freedmen were just using their agency to make their own way. is on point. Nobody is arguing "oh so slavery WAS good" but we are arguing that worker protections are necessary and we saw very real consequences for when the government took drastic action and then went "eh, fukkit good enough" Mister Facetious posted:Didn't Malcolm X say something to the effect of, "If we don't take action ourselves (protest/riots/disobedience/etc.), the whites will just keep saying, 'Be patient, it takes time,' forever- and never actually do anything?" You're a day late and a dollar short. Ze Pollack already beat you to your shitpost, and lemme tell ya bud, you ain't topping him. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 03:01 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
How about y'all motherfuckers actually engage with his argument instead of trying to find who owns a plantation or a chinese sweatshop? Suppose we close down all sweatshops tomorrow. Now what? quote="Mister Facetious" post="472287493"] I'm being serious. Civil Rights never would have happened in the sixties without blacks stirring up poo poo and scaring Kennedy's Democrats, who weren't about to do gently caress all without outside intervention. That said, got a link/page number so I can read it? I'm sure I've read it, but I don't remember it. [/quote] Ze Pollack posted:"who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will." Malcom X also said this and Eleanor Roosevelt dedicated a letter to the same rhetoric.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 09:43
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:His "argument", such as it is, rests on the false assumption that improving worker's rights will necessarily translate to said workers losing their jobs. He uses this false assumption to shill for sweatshops. Hence there's nothing to engage with, and you're defending a modern day slavery apologist because you think that you two are somehow on the same team, hth. No that is not his argument. His argument is that even if you were to remove sweatshops, if you do not have proper worker protections in place, we're just gonna have sweatshop-esque facilities pop up right afterwards. And since people still need money and capital, they'll continue to be exploited. That was what happened with sharecropping and that's what will happen with sweatshops.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:56 |
|
|
Iron Twinkie posted:Sounds like we need trade deals that require participating countries guarantee a minimum level of work place protections and the right to unionize instead of ones that push worker's rights down to one notch above chattel slavery. Exactly. That's JC's point as well which everyone is trying very, very hard to miss.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 18:26
|
|