|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
the wishful thinking line was in acknowledgement of kiwizach's post.
ah ok then, I was out last night and when I posted I woke up for like the first time. so lost my trail of thoughts a bit.
yeah true, I worked with platitudes at best.
what I meant to build was with the example of slavery, that both are necessary and fought for the abolishment (on the union side). idealists actually wanted to free slaves, realists found it ok to do so because it helped them in their cause of winning a war. funny enough it was republicans back then who were the "progressives"(at least the people around Lincoln, not so funny is that apparently some people(reps?) had a problem with that and it showed in Lincoln's untimely demise).
trying to transfer that kind of similar situation - apart from the ~150 year divide and all that comes with it - just like bernie and hillary, they were somewhat on the same page,same side, wanted to defeat a common enemy.
now it's big money, and the people that are associated with it.(for the sake of argument go with that, it's of course more complicated and hillary is as big money as it gets). and probably stupid preconceived notions on economic policy. difference is, bernie is for giant leaps. hillary for incremental change. and she is the "safe bet".
over time - can't stress time enough - idealists won. just like they will hopefully do so again. accepting african americans, them having basic equality and acknowledging their intelligence and worth is for the most part a given today. even if it is not fully lived by all people, which is sad, but it's law that they have the same rights. and in the end if most people agree, the rule of law will prevail.
all imho of course. I would beg to forgive if some things are not clear, my language skills have not caught up yet with the complexities I am trying to get across. that too, is a work in progress :p
|
United States44372 Posts
On February 06 2016 23:35 DanceSC wrote:
People need to wake up.
"Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don't have a clue as to political reality. What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions. Put a little fear here and there and you can get people to vote any way you want.
The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn't have a clue than there were Republicans.
Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you're smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That's why I'm a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to."
Yours is a very stupid post. Hard workers should support redistributive systems because hard work will earn you a permanent place in the American underclass without those redistributive systems. America is broken but a full revolution isn't going to happen, the best we can collectively hope for is to try and patch it as we go with piecemeal solutions.
Furthermore it is the Republicans who are running primarily on a platform of fear. Fear that foreigners are going to take the jobs, this ludicrous notion of a war on Christianity, fear that people who don't look or think like you might gain access to the political monopoly held by white Christian men, fear of change. The policies proposed by the Republicans benefit a tiny fraction of the American people but the voting public are routinely convinced that the reason they don't have any money is because taxes are too high, even when they pay an effective tax rate of 0%, and not because they only keep a tiny fraction of the fruits of their labour. The reason the working poor are fucked is not because the big government is coming in and taking 0% of their income to spend on foreign aid and Obamaphones, it's because real wages are a fraction of what they used to be.
An immigrant, a worker and a banker are sitting at the table with 10 cookies. The banker takes 9 and then tells the worker "watch out, the immigrant is going to steal your cookie".
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending
|
On February 06 2016 23:35 DanceSC wrote:
People need to wake up.
"Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don't have a clue as to political reality. What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions. Put a little fear here and there and you can get people to vote any way you want.
The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn't have a clue than there were Republicans.
Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you're smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That's why I'm a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to."
Sweet quote daddio. Too bad TL doesn't preserve the formatting from that chain email you snagged it out of. The 60 point red font would have made the message so much sicker.
|
Canada11607 Posts
On February 06 2016 23:35 DanceSC wrote:
People need to wake up.
"Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don't have a clue as to political reality. What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions. Put a little fear here and there and you can get people to vote any way you want.
The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn't have a clue than there were Republicans.
Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you're smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That's why I'm a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to."
Wake up in what way? To the knowledge that one is continuing to propagate an unsourced quote that was shared endlessly on the internet? We don't live in the Information Age; truly we live in the Misinformation Age.
|
No you don't get it, truth is relative. If enough people believe that that quote exists, then it happened. It says so right there in the quote!
|
Well it definitively exists, and even moreso, it even is a real quote the second someone except for the person writing it repeats it.
|
On February 07 2016 00:50 oneofthem wrote:
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending
That's not how analogies work. The analogy is fine you just don't want to free the slaves.
Bernie is the guy saying give each slave a mule and 40 acres. You think it's too expensive.
People can say they don't like Bernie's policies. My point is that it's idiotic to say, Bernie has some great ideas but he won't "get shit done" like Hillary will so I'm voting for Hillary.
|
On February 07 2016 05:12 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 00:50 oneofthem wrote:
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending That's not how analogies work. The analogy is fine you just don't want to free the slaves. Bernie is the guy saying give each slave a mule and 40 acres. You think it's too expensive. People can say they don't like Bernie's policies. My point is that it's idiotic to say, Bernie has some great ideas but he won't "get shit done" like Hillary will so I'm voting for Hillary.
Uhh,,, Bernie has great ideas, which from a policy standpoint are not realistic. No one is going to sit here and say they are against free healthcare or getting rid of money from politics. But you cannot convert these into policy just because Bernie and millennials like them. Application even in the presence of political will is unlikely. But yeah go for it.
Also that analog7 is terrible and strongly undermines the impact of slavery. Coherent enough for you ?
|
Progress and freedom has historically been achieved by liberals, not by conservatives or moderates. If conservatives had their way, we would probably still have Jim crow laws in the South. This is from the big shot conservative newspaper National Review in 1957. Conservatives are always behind in policies until people are put to the breaking point. This is the mantra of the status quo and Hillary Clinton is on the same vein today. You don't "wait" for policies if you believe there are things to change in your society. "Idealism" and "realism" are trite words used when you don't have an argument.
National Review not only advocated states' rights, but specifically and repeatedly defended legal segregation that defined the Jim Crow regime.
The best-known instance came in 1957, when William F. Buckley Jr., the late conservative icon who founded the magazine, explained National Review's support for southern segregationist policies, calling whites "the advanced race."
The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists.
National Review believes that the South's premises are correct. . . . It is more important for the community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/national-review-john-fund-jim-crow
|
On February 07 2016 05:38 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 05:12 IgnE wrote:On February 07 2016 00:50 oneofthem wrote:
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending That's not how analogies work. The analogy is fine you just don't want to free the slaves. Bernie is the guy saying give each slave a mule and 40 acres. You think it's too expensive. People can say they don't like Bernie's policies. My point is that it's idiotic to say, Bernie has some great ideas but he won't "get shit done" like Hillary will so I'm voting for Hillary. Uhh,,, Bernie has great ideas, which from a policy standpoint are not realistic. No one is going to sit here and say they are against free healthcare or getting rid of money from politics. But you cannot convert these into policy just because Bernie and millennials like them. Application even in the presence of political will is unlikely. But yeah go for it. Also that analog7 is terrible and strongly undermines the impact of slavery. Coherent enough for you ?
Have you heard of wage slavery?
|
On February 07 2016 05:42 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 05:38 Rebs wrote:On February 07 2016 05:12 IgnE wrote:On February 07 2016 00:50 oneofthem wrote:
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending That's not how analogies work. The analogy is fine you just don't want to free the slaves. Bernie is the guy saying give each slave a mule and 40 acres. You think it's too expensive. People can say they don't like Bernie's policies. My point is that it's idiotic to say, Bernie has some great ideas but he won't "get shit done" like Hillary will so I'm voting for Hillary. Uhh,,, Bernie has great ideas, which from a policy standpoint are not realistic. No one is going to sit here and say they are against free healthcare or getting rid of money from politics. But you cannot convert these into policy just because Bernie and millennials like them. Application even in the presence of political will is unlikely. But yeah go for it. Also that analog7 is terrible and strongly undermines the impact of slavery. Coherent enough for you ? Have you heard of wage slavery?
Dude, im from Pakistan. I find it amazing that you can ask me that question. You havent seen wage slavery.
|
On the healthcare bit, Bernie's plan doesn't work.
1. Analysis by Kenneth Thorpe
2. Vox summary
3. Reddit post Part 1 Part 2
In brief: There is a really big hole in the budget, but it is supposed to be filled by savings and growth. If there's one thing we've learned, the government as a rule underbudgets projects-- maybe they come out ahead in some places, but for an endeavor as large as single payer healthcare expenses would be larger than any estimate. It's a concept rather similar to supply side economics, the big budget gap will be filled by more growth -> more taxes.
|
Occupy's problem, from what I remember of it, was in NOT being a political movement at all (not really voting for/against much of anyone), and also in not having any real idea of what they wanted (other than being angry); not just in a lack of detailed policy proposals way, but often even in a general policy way.
Republicans run more on fear than Democrats, iirc there's a growing body of research documenting a biological basis for some of the differentiation between them.
|
On February 07 2016 06:01 ticklishmusic wrote:On the healthcare bit, Bernie's plan doesn't work. 1. Analysis by Kenneth Thorpe2. Vox summary3. Reddit post Part 1 Part 2In brief: There is a really big hole in the budget, but it is supposed to be filled by savings and growth. If there's one thing we've learned, the government as a rule underbudgets projects-- maybe they come out ahead in some places, but for an endeavor as large as single payer healthcare expenses would be larger than any estimate. It's a concept rather similar to supply side economics, the big budget gap will be filled by more growth -> more taxes.
These are Bernie's real problems. He needs to overcome these criticisms somehow if he is supposed to run on a policy wish list campaign.
|
Those numbers do show that single payer is quite feasible, it's just that Bernie's costs are off.
The biggest way to save on healthcare costs in the US is to stop spending money on low effectiveness treatments.
Some simple QualY metrics would handle that fine.
|
On February 07 2016 06:32 zlefin wrote:
Those numbers do show that single payer is quite feasible, it's just that Bernie's costs are off.
The biggest way to save on healthcare costs in the US is to stop spending money on low effectiveness treatments.
Some simple QualY metrics would handle that fine.
What are you going to do about the 6 digits of people that work in the health insurance industry? Fire them all? Hire them into the government insurance agency? What happens to all the state level insurance regulations? The Democrats wisely chose not to blow up the American insurance system in 2009-2010. Bernie's plan will move that whole industry into the government.
|
Hey guys. I have a perfect analogy for Bernie v Hillary. Bernie is Jesus, and Hillary is the Romans, or the jews if that is your thing. Anyways, why do you guys want to murder Jesus?
|
On February 07 2016 05:12 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 00:50 oneofthem wrote:
problem with idealism in this instance is not the distance of the ideal but the effectivrnrss of policy and action the particular idealist support.
the free slaves analogy does not apply because freeing slaves is far better policy than three trillion unfunded spending That's not how analogies work. The analogy is fine you just don't want to free the slaves. Bernie is the guy saying give each slave a mule and 40 acres. You think it's too expensive. People can say they don't like Bernie's policies. My point is that it's idiotic to say, Bernie has some great ideas but he won't "get shit done" like Hillary will so I'm voting for Hillary.
if I were at home in the states (and not a job creator :p) that would be my position too. although to be fair, bernie _most likely_ won't get shit done. we are grasping for likelihoods based on imperfect assumptions at best here  .
at this point we don't even know if he cannot overtake her and win the primary. which is unlikely, but far from impossible. especially because the cards are getting stacked against him by tools like this wassermann-schultz person.
|
On February 07 2016 06:39 JW_DTLA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 06:32 zlefin wrote:
Those numbers do show that single payer is quite feasible, it's just that Bernie's costs are off.
The biggest way to save on healthcare costs in the US is to stop spending money on low effectiveness treatments.
Some simple QualY metrics would handle that fine. What are you going to do about the 6 digits of people that work in the health insurance industry? Fire them all? Hire them into the government insurance agency? What happens to all the state level insurance regulations? The Democrats wisely chose not to blow up the American insurance system in 2009-2010. Bernie's plan will move that whole industry into the government.
I'm not the one pushing Bernie's plan; I was commenting on some commentary on it. You'd have to ask Bernie what his plan are for those people. I suppose try to move them into productive jobs, as normally happens when industries change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
