EPTThey’ll get back pay whenever the government reopens.
US Politics Mega-Blog - Page 153
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
They’ll get back pay whenever the government reopens. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
Do you know where these anti- Maduro protests have been happening in Venezuela? Do you have any idea about the demographics, particularly along lines of class or how popular the opposition actually is? I'm taking this as a no from everyone that wanted to comment on Venezuela. Do I need to explain why this is a big deal or is it self-evident? On January 25 2019 05:05 Danglars wrote: Well, the second attempt to give federal workers their first paycheck of the new year went down to defeat. The Republicans in the minority of the House got 6 Democrats last run, and this most recent had 10 Democrats switching sides. They’ll get back pay whenever the government reopens. Here's the kicker for that. The federal employees that will get paid overwhelmingly support Democrats. However over the last 20+ shutdowns the contractors and sub-contractors that have far more Republicans, never get back pay, yet they keep supporting shutdowns. I'm not sure who is a worse campaigner so far, Harris or Warren | ||
|
Dromar
United States2145 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
On January 25 2019 07:57 Dromar wrote: What the fuck did I just watch? I guess she doesn't want people to take her seriously? Or maybe she's not taking the whole "running for president" thing seriously herself? She launched her campaign site without any policy section but with plenty of merch so I'm thinking the field is just full of grifters. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
There's a reason that when that was a thing all those Wakanda Forever videos were always rooms/theatres/whatever of black people looking really happy and celebrating. The tone deafness... god, I think I'm losing my own hearing just thinking about it. Also, topical, given what I said last page about images and their meaning being larger than context. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28478 Posts
On January 24 2019 08:05 xDaunt wrote: Foreign policy is a very different animal from domestic governance. I fully support the US fucking with other countries to the extent that it benefits Americans. This is a completely immoral position. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 25 2019 08:31 Liquid`Drone wrote: This is a completely immoral position. Technically it is amoral. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
I prefer morally bankrupt | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2019 04:13 IgnE wrote: yes, his rant about populism and families and how the main conservative emphasis on markets is simply not cutting it Romney and Bain Capital: I'm not familiar enough with the operation of his private equity firm to give a full answer on Tucker's accusations. He strawmans the Health of a Nation. I don't think too many reduce it to GDP growth and cheap consumer goods. Like, I consider the opioid addiction crisis and policies like fucking middle class health insurance to bury the true cost of community rating-guaranteed issue to be detrimental to the health of the nation. I do know a couple guys that look at growth rates and consumer price index to say not only the economy is doing good but also "American families are doing good." Maybe Tucker's beltway friends regionally incorporate that attitude way too much, I don't really know. He's close with the criticism of the elites. They have "no skin in this game." The Washington DC economy is roaring off government money (a teeny bit restrained at the moment.) There is no downturn. It's disconnected from middle America. They write health care laws that apply to other people. I do think it leads to more moralizing and utopian thought than had the capital been located in Iowa or Missouri or wherever. Elite paths involve currying favor, gaining power, gaining prestige/reputation, then cashing out for a cushy lifestyle. A part time legislature where they'd have to work ordinary jobs for a quarter to half the year would be alright. Limited government with limited ability of constituents to reward their voters with pork would also be an improvement. He goes way too general on market & family, and too much in the populist vein of societal critique than I can agree with. Local politics and state politics should involve reducing regulations for new buildings to meet housing demand. Affordable housing policies should start there. The market responds to building restrictions, historical districts, NIMBY policy by making housing unaffordable. I don't put the market to blame in family formation or other family ills that social conservatives and traditional conservatives talk about often, but that puts me crossways to Tucker. He says, "The idea that families are being crushed by market forces seems never to occur to them. They refuse to consider it. Questioning markets feels like apostasy." That's not markets (and he doesn't develop the point and instead launches into more traditionally social conservative critique of society). He tries to connect markets with wage stagnation and female wage competition, and that's maybe a minor factor, but not one I want government in there fixing. Tons of manufacturing and industry went overseas, and that's going to cause issues with family and communities built around steel mills, coal mines, and manufacturing industry. Even if I got my favored policies reducing corporate welfare, tax policy increasing entrepreneurship, and stricter immigration policy and border security, it's clear to me that some communities won't adapt to foreign competition. I don't want to raise tariffs to "compete" or pretend a 55-year-old ironworker will go into the health industry or computer programming. He does a lot of mainstream social conservative societal criticism, and putting that on investment banking and corporations is hogwash, but it's pretty rote. Marriage isn't advocated enough, but most of that is private. Marijuana use on developing brains and its impact on drive is real (the classic pothead stereotype). He's spending a lot of times saying it's the market's responsibility for societal ills and I don't agree with almost all of it. Yes, he makes good points about disconnected elites that care very little for their constituents unless it's right near an election. Yes, the general points on social malaise point to real problems generally, but ones with additional causes he doesn't go into and untried solutions he doesn't call attention to. He even starts with a legitimate critique of Romney (he should put Syria in context of America's interests ... like it is in our interest to preserve our Kurdish allies in the reason and oppose Iranian and Russian intrusions so as to protect our ally Israel's security) and then launches into anti-tax cut and anti-corporate trends. I'm not a populist of that stripe. Trump also doesn't convince me that it's the only way forward (I'll be honest though if it strangely brings China to heel or about-faces to incorporate entitlement reform in a populist "do it for the kids!" drive) | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
EDIT: This one? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
socialism is exactly what we’re going to get, and very soon | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
On January 25 2019 13:33 Doodsmack wrote: Trump's only path to victory in the shutdown situation is to declare an emergency. As it stands, the public is clearly blaming him for it, and his approvals are tanking. It's clearly his shutdown, and it can't continue that way forever. The one thing I'm confident about is that both of them are going to take a fat shit on the border and march around the country like they just cured cancer. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
I announce the initiative of the government of Mexico and Uruguay to promote dialogue, I think that is the way, I agree! I am ready for agreement, for understanding! " -Nicolás Maduro This Wednesday, Mexico and Uruguay, through a communiqué , called on all parties involved inside and outside Venezuela to reduce tensions and prevent an escalation of violence that could aggravate the situation. "In accordance with the principles of international law, Mexico and Uruguay urge all actors to find a peaceful and democratic solution in the face of the complex panorama facing Venezuela." To achieve this goal, both countries propose a new process of inclusive and credible negotiation, with full respect for the rule of law and human rights, "they said. One day after the opposition leader, Juan Guaidó, proclaimed himself the legitimate president of Venezuela, President Nicolás Maduro affirmed before the Supreme Court of Justice that he "will never resign" and reiterated the denunciation that a coup d'état is under way. www.huffingtonpost.com.mx EDIT: So it's looking like a(nother) rather unsuccessful US backed coup at the moment. Seems kinda awkward for those who already proclaimed that other tool was going to be in charge? EDIT2: Figured I'd put up a list of the countries. Interestingly, further escalation by the US and allies in an attempt to support the coup puts them in direct opposition to Russia. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
This really is the stuff that makes people nod along when Putin says the West is shit and has no place judging his country. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
On January 25 2019 20:02 iamthedave wrote: Russia! Defenders of Democracy! This really is the stuff that makes people nod along when Putin says the West is shit and has no place judging his country. Amazing isn't it? It's like people are waking up today barely acknowledging if at all that in inexplicable unison there was a "popular" uprising, some nobody that happened to be super US and neoliberal capitalism friendly appointed himself president and without a moment of hesitation or the slightest questioning by any corporate media a near complete bipartisan wave jumped in line behind Trump and his proclamation that there was a new leader of Venezuela and would no longer recognize the democratically elected leader who was experiencing a coup for "democracy". Like holy shit people. Is everyone really going to pretend that's not easily the biggest scandal of the Trump era? If the coup hadn't evaporated and there being a pile of shit to keep Trump busy he easily could have started a major war in Latin America (not that were out of the woods yet). | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9084 Posts
On January 25 2019 20:09 GreenHorizons wrote: Amazing isn't it? It's like people are waking up today barely acknowledging if at all that in inexplicable unison there was a "popular" uprising, some nobody that happened to be super US and neoliberal capitalism friendly appointed himself president and without a moment of hesitation or the slightest questioning by any corporate media a near complete bipartisan wave jumped in line behind Trump and his proclamation that there was a new leader of Venezuela and would no longer recognize the democratically elected leader who was experiencing a coup for "democracy". Like holy shit people. Is everyone really going to pretend that's not easily the biggest scandal of the Trump era? Isn't this like exactly what happened with the failed Chavez coup, except he was also arrested? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
On January 25 2019 20:12 Jockmcplop wrote: Isn't this like exactly what happened with the failed Chavez coup, except he was also arrested? Yeah the US sponsored coup attempt against the previously democratically elected leader (Chavez) was actually moderately more successful. The opposition party in Venezuela just got duped by Trump and because Maduro isn't a bloodthirsty dictator like many US allies, he's unlikely to have them all killed for treason. Oh and Bush wasn't considered a complete dipshit at that point vs Trump who's already floating around 36% approval. Plus after 9/11 it wasn't so ridiculous for people to jump behind Bush vs behind Trump potentially starting a war in Latin America. People really need to slow down, take a breath, and really let it soak in what it means that they so easily jumped behind (or turned a largely blind eye to) Trump and the CIA orchestrating (in the haphazardly shitty way you have to expect from Trump) the replacement of a democratically elected leader and the media's unquestioning stenography of propaganda. I hear the UK is having some leadership issues, maybe Trump and the CIA can help name a new leader for you guys too. | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On January 25 2019 20:17 GreenHorizons wrote: Yeah the US sponsored coup attempt against the previously democratically elected leader (Chavez) was actually moderately more successful. The opposition party in Venezuela just got duped by Trump and because Maduro isn't a bloodthirsty dictator like many US allies, he's unlikely to have them all killed for treason. Oh and Bush wasn't considered a complete dipshit at that point vs Trump who's already floating around 36% approval. Plus after 9/11 it wasn't so ridiculous for people to jump behind Bush vs behind Trump potentially starting a war in Latin America. People really need to slow down, take a breath, and really let it soak in what it means that they so easily jumped behind (or turned a largely blind eye to) Trump and the CIA orchestrating (in the haphazardly shitty way you have to expect from Trump) the replacement of a democratically elected leader and the media's unquestioning stenography of propaganda. I hear the UK is having some leadership issues, maybe Trump and the CIA can help name a new leader for you guys too. When the army is killing workers, does it still count as a proletariat revolution? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22322 Posts
On January 25 2019 21:15 GoTuNk! wrote: When the army is killing workers, does it still count as a proletariat revolution? Remember you're talking to a Black guy in the US. If BLM killed as many people /cops/soldiers as the protesters in Venezuela the FBI would have kicked down my door and dragged me out a long time ago and I'm not even part of BLM. | ||
| ||
