|
If this thread turns into a USPMT 2.0, we will not hesitate to shut it down. Do not even bother posting if all you're going to do is shit on the Democratic candidates while adding nothing of value.
Rules:
- Don't post meaningless one-liners.
- Don't turn this into a X doesn't stand a chance against Trump debate.
- Sources MUST have a supporting comment that summarizes the source beforehand.
- Do NOT turn this thread into a Republicans vs. Democrats shit-storm.
This thread will be heavily moderated. Expect the same kind of strictness as the USPMT. |
|
|
On May 24 2019 03:52 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 01:59 Bourgeois wrote:On May 23 2019 12:33 JimmiC wrote:On May 23 2019 11:37 Bourgeois wrote:On May 22 2019 01:24 JimmiC wrote:
No I am not, because america does not each state does and some are better then others. Try harder please. So are you pro guns then? Because you say prohibition doesn't work. So are you happy for guns to be readily available as long as they're regulated? Because your original argument is banning stuff doesn't work. If you agree guns being available is fine, then we agree. I am pro regulation, I have no problem with hunting, sport shooting and so on. None of this is surprising. How about automatic weapons? Concealed carry? I am pro regulation on those as well? Are you asking for the exact regulation I am talking about? The easiest thing you could go is look at any number of countries that don't have any of the issues that the US has and start there.
Well going back to your original premise, you stated that banning stuff doesn't solve problems, and that they should be made legal and regulated. The thing is automatic weapons are legal in the US and school shootings happen. However, they are banned in other countries, where school shootings don't happen. So your original argument that banning things isn't the solution is in fact the solution for many items.
|
Poll: Who do you support in the first debate?Biden (2) 7% Booker (0) 0% Bullock (0) 0% Buttigieg (2) 7% Castro (0) 0% Delaney (0) 0% Gabbard (9) 32% Gillibrand (0) 0% Harris (0) 0% Hickenlooper (0) 0% Inslee (0) 0% Klobuchar (1) 4% O’Rourke (1) 4% Ryan (0) 0% Sanders (7) 25% Swalwell (0) 0% Warren (2) 7% Williamson (0) 0% Yang (4) 14% 28 total votes Your vote: Who do you support in the first debate? (Vote): Biden
(Vote): Booker
(Vote): Bullock
(Vote): Buttigieg
(Vote): Castro
(Vote): Delaney
(Vote): Gabbard
(Vote): Gillibrand
(Vote): Harris
(Vote): Hickenlooper
(Vote): Inslee
(Vote): Klobuchar
(Vote): O’Rourke
(Vote): Ryan
(Vote): Sanders
(Vote): Swalwell
(Vote): Warren
(Vote): Williamson
(Vote): Yang
|
On May 27 2019 19:14 Bourgeois wrote:Poll: Who do you support in the first debate?Biden (2) 7% Booker (0) 0% Bullock (0) 0% Buttigieg (2) 7% Castro (0) 0% Delaney (0) 0% Gabbard (9) 32% Gillibrand (0) 0% Harris (0) 0% Hickenlooper (0) 0% Inslee (0) 0% Klobuchar (1) 4% O’Rourke (1) 4% Ryan (0) 0% Sanders (7) 25% Swalwell (0) 0% Warren (2) 7% Williamson (0) 0% Yang (4) 14% 28 total votes Your vote: Who do you support in the first debate? (Vote): Biden
(Vote): Booker
(Vote): Bullock
(Vote): Buttigieg
(Vote): Castro
(Vote): Delaney
(Vote): Gabbard
(Vote): Gillibrand
(Vote): Harris
(Vote): Hickenlooper
(Vote): Inslee
(Vote): Klobuchar
(Vote): O’Rourke
(Vote): Ryan
(Vote): Sanders
(Vote): Swalwell
(Vote): Warren
(Vote): Williamson
(Vote): Yang
Gravel! Gravel! Gravel!, but I'm presuming he hasn't yet officially qualified, and might not?
|
|
|
On May 22 2019 07:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2019 07:20 Neneu wrote:On May 22 2019 05:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 22 2019 02:07 Neneu wrote:On May 21 2019 01:44 Bourgeois wrote:On May 17 2019 05:35 JimmiC wrote:On May 17 2019 05:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 16 2019 09:30 JimmiC wrote:
I think the work force will just transition to entertainment/service and arts related jobs. Or hell maybe even space travel or whatever, it is hard to know what will be available I'm sure pre 1970 or even 1990 nobody thought programmer and so so would be a viable job.
I think UBI is cool and would be a great addition but I don't think it fixes all or even most of the social problems, many of which are bad choices, often because of bad situation, bad parenting, whatever. For example if someone has a drug addiction or to be less dramatic shopping issue a check every month really isn't going to change much for them and almost nothing for their children.
I do think it would raise the floor of society which is a very good thing, and now we also need to lower the ceiling. It would be a pretty cool world where people could choose to be a struggling artist or musician or whatever and struggling meant they could comfortably raise a family of four with their kids having all the options of post secondary or whatever it was that they wanted. It would also super inject the economy, because the vast majority of that money (regardless of whether it is spent intelligently) would be spent in society, increasing circulation of money, and benefitting the economy. IMO the best way to get a bunch of money into the economy is stop prohibition of things. It is coming, gambling is getting legalized, pot. Other things will too. Prohibiting has not made it go away just made it untaxable and unsafe. I completely agree that guns should be freely available without prohibition and that people should not be going to jail for illegally owning firearms. And if you're going to argue that guns are already available in America and regulated, just like how drugs should be available and regulated, then let's say guns should be available in other countries as well, such as Norway and New Zealand, both countries that heavily restrict their availability to the point of almost impossibility to obtain. And if you say sure heavy restriction is the answer, then you should also believe that marijuana should be heavily restricted to the point of unobtanium. Norway has one of the highest guns per capita in the world. If anything, using Norway as an example completely disproves your point. I remember when we were kids we went to the shooting range with our high school, and that was completely normal. I could even take shooting as a subject at my high school if I wanted to. The only difference is that we actually think you should not give guns to people who are not fit mentally or has not undergone training with exam, and we have to keep our guns locked safely away from children by law. Norway has tons of guns and regulation does not make it hard to get one as a civilian. Unless ofc you should never be able to get one. Don't they make you do it on ski's though? Nah, just a regular shooting range in the woods. And if you take the subject you will get a hunting license that allows you to use a rifle, when you are done. even the idea of high school kids being given access to guns in the US could legitimately give people panic attacks
Wasn't that completely normal just a generation ago?
I think I heard about that during a Serial podcast, where high school pupils would drive to the school in their own pickup trucks with hunting rifles just strewn over the open back area (what's the word I'm looking for?) and nothing would happen and nobody would bat an eye.
|
Has Joe Biden come out with any actual ideas or substantive plans yet for his candidacy, or is he still just running under the "Trump bad, Obama good, and I'm Obama's buddy" banner?
Also, I'm glad to see Liz Warren is being recognized as a top tier Democratic candidate, because she's done far more research and planning and developing of actual policies that any other primary candidate in 2020. If you want substance and thoughtful, practical explanations on how to afford and push through progressive ideas, rather than only parroting sound bites, Warren is your candidate:
Elizabeth Warren Gains Ground in 2020 Field, One Plan at a Time
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-2020.html?fbclid=IwAR2bmocqOVV-BZsg2o3GJt8kUEXcX2ABeh7QTge-Yvw8h0kZlemXj1FSHAQ
|
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang
|
On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang
He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity.
Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general.
|
On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general.
In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't.
|
On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't.
A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says.
The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there.
|
On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there.
How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in.
|
On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in.
You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net.
|
On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net.
🤦
|
On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦
If you'd like a better reason why I as a radical anti-capitalist don't support Yang this part of his description of UBI is a deal killer.
fits so seamlessly into capitalism
and
UBI is necessary for the continuation of capitalism
|
On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦
I agree with GH here, fwiw. Having an opt-in UBI program that takes the place of certain social programs may allow for additional autonomy, but with the emphasis on capitalism rather than a social democracy I don't see Andrew Yang stopping any business from saying "Half the country makes an extra $1,000 per month to spend? Time to raise our prices accordingly so that people will be forced to keep spending their money with us instead of paying for the healthcare or other needs that they opted out of to receive UBI in the first place." (Or companies lowering their rate of pay raises, etc.) I think it sounds good in theory, especially since the lower ~80+% of Americans could use an additional $1,000 per month, assuming everything else is kept the same, to help out families and positively inject that money quickly back into the economy, but in practice I don't see his plan working out properly due to the concessions one must make to opt into the UBI plan.
I like what Yang has to say about automation; I think that's important. But with the exception of his ~2 families that he's personally giving money to as a UBI pilot program, I don't see his UBI arguments being particularly convincing. Actually, those 2 families didn't have to give up their social programs, right? So that's not even a proper parallel to what he's proposing. Those 2 families are happy, but Americans under his UBI plan wouldn't experience the same benefits as those 2 families. His Freedom Dividend is promoted as free money for everyone, but it's obviously at the expense of other things that cost money. Also, I cringe every time when his only example of UBI working is Alaska, because we all know that $1,000 a year is hardly the equivalent of a real UBI.
I think Yang is a cool guy and I'm really impressed that he's starting a national conversation about multiple things that need to be considered and discussed (automation, pros and cons of UBI, etc.) but I just don't agree with him on as many policies as I do Sanders or Warren. Also, from a practical perspective, he'll be lucky to make the top 6 or so in this primary. And, if by some miraculous stroke of luck, UBI starts to gain incredible traction in this country, any more popular candidate could just say that they're willing to consider elements of UBI and sit down and speak with the right people... and then Yang has no unique platform anymore. Even if he promoted it first, he'd be seen as redundant since his main policy proposal will have been absorbed by a bigger candidate.
|
On May 30 2019 16:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦 If you'd like a better reason why I as a radical anti-capitalist don't support Yang this part of his description of UBI is a deal killer. and
If you are anti-capitalism, what would you truly prefer?
|
On May 31 2019 01:42 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2019 16:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦 If you'd like a better reason why I as a radical anti-capitalist don't support Yang this part of his description of UBI is a deal killer. fits so seamlessly into capitalism and UBI is necessary for the continuation of capitalism If you are anti-capitalism, what would you truly prefer?
Socialism leading into communism.
|
On May 31 2019 01:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2019 01:42 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 13:11 Cricketer12 wrote:
To those supporting Sanders. Why aren't you supporting Yang He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity. Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦 If you'd like a better reason why I as a radical anti-capitalist don't support Yang this part of his description of UBI is a deal killer. fits so seamlessly into capitalism and UBI is necessary for the continuation of capitalism If you are anti-capitalism, what would you truly prefer? Socialism leading into communism.
If the word Communism doesn't disgust you as much as the word Nazi, you have been failed by the education system
|
On May 31 2019 01:55 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2019 01:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 31 2019 01:42 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 16:06 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 16:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 15:59 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2019 14:53 Cricketer12 wrote:On May 30 2019 13:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
He's a scam artist that's also (like the rest of the candidates, Bernie the least bad offender since Gravel isn't up there) not going to put us on a path to sustainability or equity.
Full disclosure, I'm probably not voting for either party in the general. In what way? Also I fail to see how Bernie, a man who refuses to abide by his principles and save every last cent from his tax returns as possible isn't. A variety but mostly that he's using "UBI" to undermine social programs. I also simply don't trust what he says. The tax thing doesn't compute for me so I can't help you there. How is it undermining social programs? You either take or you keep the welfare bonuses you are currently on. It's opt-in. You answered your own question. "opt-in" isn't a real UBI but it is really reducing the social safety net. 🤦 If you'd like a better reason why I as a radical anti-capitalist don't support Yang this part of his description of UBI is a deal killer. fits so seamlessly into capitalism and UBI is necessary for the continuation of capitalism If you are anti-capitalism, what would you truly prefer? Socialism leading into communism. If the word Communism doesn't disgust you as much as the word Nazi, you have been failed by the education system
I have like a 6 hour spiel with powerpoint, clips, texts, etc... to demonstrate you've got that bass aackwards if you really want to get into it?
The bottom line though is I'd say:
If the word Capitalism doesn't disgust you as much as the word Nazi, you have been failed by the education system
is more accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
