|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 09 2019 01:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: In other words Trump and Republicans are ready to take you on the same ride Maddow took Dems.
Not at all. There's a fundamental difference between making allegations of wrongdoing based upon anonymous sources quoted in substantially bogus reporting (what Maddow did) and making allegations of wrongdoing based upon testimony and legitimate documentary evidence (what Trump and the GOP will be doing). However, I will say this. I'm not really interested in additional congressional or senate hearings. The only things that I want to see at this point are indictments and the zealous pursuit of criminal process against the various bad actors. While Nunes' criminal referrals to Barr are certainly a step in the right direction, they are not the same things as actual indictments. And I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't somewhat worried about the possibility of Barr sweeping all of this under the rug. What gives me solace, however, are Trump's repeated statements that he fully intends to see this stuff through.
|
On April 09 2019 02:21 Plansix wrote:In other news, Steven Miller and other immigration hard liners want to oust more of the leadership in Homeland Security, from CNNs reports. And it seems that the information is coming directly from the White House, not from anonymous White House sources or the like. Not an encouraging sign, since we are moving from a national security agency that was lead by a senate confirmed leader to Miller and whoever does what Miller and Trump say. From all the reporting, the rift seems to be between those who want to obey the laws and order from the court and Trump, who does not. This is concerning because there isn't a lot beyond the courts that can stop ICE and the border patrol from doing whatever they want to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. And its not like they were well known for obeying local laws to begin with. SourceShow nested quote +White House senior adviser Stephen Miller wants to make sure that outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is only the first of a string of senior officials headed out the door.
Trump administration officials say that Miller, who played key a role in Nielsen's ouster, also wants the President to dismiss the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Lee Cissna, and the department's general counsel, John Mitnick.
A senior administration official also said that under the law, DHS Under Secretary of Management Claire Grady, the current acting deputy secretary, is next in line of succession to be acting secretary. That means there are questions as to whether she will need to be fired as well in order to make Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan the acting DHS secretary, as Trump tweeted Sunday night.
Miller's heightened influence within the West Wing has been aided by the President, who recently told aides in an Oval Office meeting that Miller was in charge of all immigration and border related issues in the White House, according to a person familiar with the meeting.
It's amazing to me how Nielsen was deemed as too soft, when her only red line was breaking the law on Trumps orders. Makes for a eerie 'what's next'...
People can talk about Trump being an empty ideologue but for self interest, but the fact that Stephen Miller is still on the ship and rising in rank, should be very telling on where Trumps preferred ideology resides.
|
On April 09 2019 02:51 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2019 01:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: In other words Trump and Republicans are ready to take you on the same ride Maddow took Dems. Not at all. There's a fundamental difference between making allegations of wrongdoing based upon anonymous sources quoted in substantially bogus reporting (what Maddow did) and making allegations of wrongdoing based upon testimony and legitimate documentary evidence (what Trump and the GOP will be doing). However, I will say this. I'm not really interested in additional congressional or senate hearings. The only things that I want to see at this point are indictments and the zealous pursuit of criminal process against the various bad actors. While Nunes' criminal referrals to Barr are certainly a step in the right direction, they are not the same things as actual indictments. And I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't somewhat worried about the possibility of Barr sweeping all of this under the rug. What gives me solace, however, are Trump's repeated statements that he fully intends to see this stuff through.
I didn't mean to say that it's exactly the same. But rather they are going to give you whatever it takes to keep you interested as long as they can drag it out without delivering on the outcome your hoping for ultimately circling back to another "extremely careless" and maybe a lackey or few if you're lucky.
But the important part of that post was the line just above the one you selected.
So the restoration of faith in this case (the prosecution [edit or even convictions] of the people you'd like) isn't equivalent to that faith being warranted imo.
|
On April 09 2019 02:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Mike Gravel is giving Bernie a run for his money on my favorite candidate, but only one of them can win. His announcement video (teaser) + Show Spoiler +His platform was being actively edited last I looked lol
"We're gravelers"
My fucking lungs
Also, I feel like it's a terrible idea to crowdsource something like this through twitter, but I hope it goes well.
|
Gravel is mostly trolling with his campaign anyway, kind of like Sanders did when he started in 2016 he's just hoping to push the other candidates to the left. He has two students running his Twitter account and they're having the best time.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
I was curious so I went and read the link. Most of the Gravel 2020 Platform reads reasonable and simply good ideas to me. Overton Window indeed.
|
On April 09 2019 02:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2019 02:21 Plansix wrote:In other news, Steven Miller and other immigration hard liners want to oust more of the leadership in Homeland Security, from CNNs reports. And it seems that the information is coming directly from the White House, not from anonymous White House sources or the like. Not an encouraging sign, since we are moving from a national security agency that was lead by a senate confirmed leader to Miller and whoever does what Miller and Trump say. From all the reporting, the rift seems to be between those who want to obey the laws and order from the court and Trump, who does not. This is concerning because there isn't a lot beyond the courts that can stop ICE and the border patrol from doing whatever they want to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. And its not like they were well known for obeying local laws to begin with. SourceWhite House senior adviser Stephen Miller wants to make sure that outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is only the first of a string of senior officials headed out the door.
Trump administration officials say that Miller, who played key a role in Nielsen's ouster, also wants the President to dismiss the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Lee Cissna, and the department's general counsel, John Mitnick.
A senior administration official also said that under the law, DHS Under Secretary of Management Claire Grady, the current acting deputy secretary, is next in line of succession to be acting secretary. That means there are questions as to whether she will need to be fired as well in order to make Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan the acting DHS secretary, as Trump tweeted Sunday night.
Miller's heightened influence within the West Wing has been aided by the President, who recently told aides in an Oval Office meeting that Miller was in charge of all immigration and border related issues in the White House, according to a person familiar with the meeting. You can tell they definitely have something in mind similar to the gestapo, but not quite as bad. They want to be able to move swiftly, without worrying about demographic motivations and without much oversight. They want to "clean up" the country in a way we haven't before.
I am concerned we will have a second go at Operation Wetback where illegal immigrants and due process part ways. And of course, they will deny everything as it is happening, just like family separation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback
|
On April 09 2019 02:21 Plansix wrote:In other news, Steven Miller and other immigration hard liners want to oust more of the leadership in Homeland Security, from CNNs reports. And it seems that the information is coming directly from the White House, not from anonymous White House sources or the like. Not an encouraging sign, since we are moving from a national security agency that was lead by a senate confirmed leader to Miller and whoever does what Miller and Trump say. From all the reporting, the rift seems to be between those who want to obey the laws and order from the court and Trump, who does not. This is concerning because there isn't a lot beyond the courts that can stop ICE and the border patrol from doing whatever they want to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. And its not like they were well known for obeying local laws to begin with. SourceShow nested quote +White House senior adviser Stephen Miller wants to make sure that outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is only the first of a string of senior officials headed out the door.
Trump administration officials say that Miller, who played key a role in Nielsen's ouster, also wants the President to dismiss the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Lee Cissna, and the department's general counsel, John Mitnick.
A senior administration official also said that under the law, DHS Under Secretary of Management Claire Grady, the current acting deputy secretary, is next in line of succession to be acting secretary. That means there are questions as to whether she will need to be fired as well in order to make Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan the acting DHS secretary, as Trump tweeted Sunday night.
Miller's heightened influence within the West Wing has been aided by the President, who recently told aides in an Oval Office meeting that Miller was in charge of all immigration and border related issues in the White House, according to a person familiar with the meeting.
Add the Secret Service Director to the list. Trump gets "acting" officials when he fires, who he says are more beholden to him. There have been many reports that senior officials have simply Ignored requests from trump when it comes to national security, for example assassinating Assad. Now trump is making all these changes in security agencies. Hes unfit for national security authority.
|
On April 09 2019 03:45 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2019 02:21 Plansix wrote:In other news, Steven Miller and other immigration hard liners want to oust more of the leadership in Homeland Security, from CNNs reports. And it seems that the information is coming directly from the White House, not from anonymous White House sources or the like. Not an encouraging sign, since we are moving from a national security agency that was lead by a senate confirmed leader to Miller and whoever does what Miller and Trump say. From all the reporting, the rift seems to be between those who want to obey the laws and order from the court and Trump, who does not. This is concerning because there isn't a lot beyond the courts that can stop ICE and the border patrol from doing whatever they want to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. And its not like they were well known for obeying local laws to begin with. SourceWhite House senior adviser Stephen Miller wants to make sure that outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is only the first of a string of senior officials headed out the door.
Trump administration officials say that Miller, who played key a role in Nielsen's ouster, also wants the President to dismiss the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Lee Cissna, and the department's general counsel, John Mitnick.
A senior administration official also said that under the law, DHS Under Secretary of Management Claire Grady, the current acting deputy secretary, is next in line of succession to be acting secretary. That means there are questions as to whether she will need to be fired as well in order to make Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan the acting DHS secretary, as Trump tweeted Sunday night.
Miller's heightened influence within the West Wing has been aided by the President, who recently told aides in an Oval Office meeting that Miller was in charge of all immigration and border related issues in the White House, according to a person familiar with the meeting. Add the Secret Service Director to the list. Trump gets "acting" officials when he fires, who he says are more beholden to him. There have been many reports that senior officials have simply Ignored requests from trump when it comes to national security, for example assassinating Assad. Now trump is making all these changes in security agencies. Hes unfit for national security authority. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1115308969499746304
This isn’t disconcerting at all. Just the national security agency being run by a bunch of Trump loyalist. All while Trump completely ignores the nomination process and has not replaced his chief of staff. And likely never will, because he is running the White House without one. And once he gets all of these pesky people that care about the law out of the way, he will be able to do what he wants.
The worst part about this is that the Senate is so checked out when it comes to keeping an eye on the executive branch, we won’t find out how bad this gets until it has been bad for a while.
|
On April 08 2019 23:00 byte-Curious wrote:
If you take it a bit further, you'll get to Andrew Yang, who supports UBI and worker owned enterprise. Who also doesn't think it's a good idea to diminish anyone's economic suffering because they're white men, think truckers.
Unfortunately, the 'don't be racist towards whites' stance means the SJW wing of the democrats won't give him a fair shake, though.
That's what progressivism should be about, making sure Americans get a return on the tax dollars they invested into new technologies, and checking destructive corporate greed.
The thing is, most people want what Bernie and Warren want to give them, but a fair portion of them is alienated by left wing identity politics. Which is ironic, because right wing identity politics suited them just fine for decades.
I've been following Andrew Yang very closely, as I think he is by far the best candidate for 2020. I just want to clarify that he is NOT pushing worker owned enterprise in any way.
His main platform is a UBI to begin to address the impending loss of jobs due to AI and automation, paid for in part by a value-added tax (VAT) which is essentially a tax that can't be evaded by multi-billion dollar corporations. He's also very down-to-earth, and has solutions and policy rather than platitudes and identity politics.
@GH: welcome back. Have you heard of Andrew Yang, and if so, what do you think of his platform?
|
United States42009 Posts
VAT doesn’t tax profits, it taxes consumption. It’s a regressive tax. Poor people buy petrol, food, clothes. Rich people buy the means of production. What y’all want is called stamp duty or a higher tax on LTCG.
|
Vat/Consumer tax is the one thing people never will understand because they are retards.
It's the most unsocial, clear cut, tax on direct necessities. You buy something, you pay the tax. No one else does, NO ONE.
|
United States42009 Posts
On April 09 2019 07:33 Velr wrote:
Vat/Consumer tax is the one thing people never will understand because they are retards.
It's the most unsocial, clear cut, tax on direct necessities. You buy something, you pay the tax. No one else does, NO ONE.
The higher your discretionary income is the lower percent VAT you pay as a proportion of your income.
Taxing passive income is the way to go.
Edit: posting to add to your post, not to contradict
|
On April 09 2019 07:22 KwarK wrote:
VAT doesn’t tax profits, it taxes consumption. It’s a regressive tax. Poor people buy petrol, food, clothes. Rich people buy the means of production. What y’all want is called stamp duty or a higher tax on LTCG.
I'm pretty sure you are educated about tax laws, so maybe you can enlighten me.
I understand that a VAT taxes consumption. Poor people buy gas, food, clothes, but is it not possible that those things could be exempt from the VAT? (pretty sure the answer is yes, just like we already have exemptions on sales tax for necessities).
I hear "it's a regressive tax" quite a bit. Does that have any real meaning, or is it mostly just used to paint VAT in a bad light? The notion that, theoretically, without seeing how it's implemented, it could tax poor people is what "regressive tax" means, right?
And when rich people buy the means of production, is that subject to a VAT? Again, I'm sure you're more educated on this than I am, but isn't VAT a tax on spending? Like, when <entity> spends money on any non-exempt good or service, they pay tax on it? Is there any reason to believe buying the means of production would be exempt from VAT?
In regards to stamp duty or higher tax on long term capital gain, I'm not super familiar with them, but what I actually want, to be honest, is UBI. Because there are way too many people who have no bargaining power at their work, no job security, and no future. I consider myself lucky with the position I'm in, but honestly I'm not much better off than they are.
Of course UBI costs money. And while a part of me feels like the government could/should be able to do this, the reality is the only way it's happening is if we bring in new money that isn't essentially "pre-allocated." In terms of taxation, what I want is a tax that gets more value from wealthy people and/or corporations. Our current tax code seems to fail, or at least have significant flaws, in that area.
But many businesses spend money in order to operate, and I'm pretty sure that spending would be subject to VAT. The fact is big businesses make more money than ever before while contributing less and less to communities and overall society. This is largely due to technology. And with AI and automation around the corner, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of human workers are going to be phased out with no backup plan and no prospects. This is in the next 5 to 15 years. Much of the technology is already here, it's just a matter of time until it's cheaper than equivalent employee wages.
edit:
I'll just pre-empt the inevitable response that businesses just pass their VAT costs on to consumers. I'm aware that (most, but not all, of the time) this is what will happen. But it doesn't change the fact that, for example, a UBI of $1000/month supported by VAT is money and (some degree of) financial security for Americans who spend less than $120k /yr on non-exempt goods and services. And that's the vast majority of Americans. Meanwhile wealthier people or entities that spend more than $120k /yr on non-exempt goods and services are, effectively, paying more taxes. That is exactly what I want.
So this seems pretty good and not at all "retarded" to me. But again, I don't know everything. I'd love to know if I'm misunderstanding something.
|
On April 09 2019 02:16 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2019 01:24 Doodsmack wrote:On April 09 2019 00:31 IgnE wrote:On April 09 2019 00:17 Plansix wrote:On April 09 2019 00:04 IyMoon wrote:On April 09 2019 00:02 xDaunt wrote:On April 08 2019 23:58 IyMoon wrote:On April 08 2019 23:52 xDaunt wrote:On April 08 2019 23:40 byte-Curious wrote:On April 08 2019 23:35 Wombat_NI wrote:
[quote]
Why people continually attempt to disarm Trump on the grounds that he’s strong, baffles me. Hah, that's precisely what I said when Sen. Warren started to get dragged into the mud with him on that stupid Pocahontas issue, which was a colossal fail for her. If she stuck to policies, she would rape him over the coals in the general election. Liawatha's problem isn't that she engaged with Trump in the mud. Her problem is that she was exposed for having embraced the worst form of liberal identity politics -- the "let's check the box" version -- and then demonstrated a tremendous lack of honesty about it. She not only exposed herself as a fraud, but she bungled her PR rehab efforts afterwards. At the very least, y'all have to admit that she has shown such levels of tone-deafness and political ineptitude that she has virtually disqualified herself from the presidency. As a Trump supporter... you're joking right? Like you honestly can't think people can be disqualified from being president anymore. You voted for a dude who sexually assaults people, who fucks porn stars after his wife give birth..... and you think being tone-deaf is disqualifying? Dude.... really? If you can't distinguish between the comparative levels of political acumen of Trump and Liawatha, I can't help you. If you can't realize that after trump, telling anyone on the left someone is disqualifying is a huge joke... I can't help you Trump’s amazing political skills to stumble into a win in 2016 by one of the closest margins in history, lose the popular vote and lead his party to a sound beating in 2018. A bottomless reservoir of skill. It’s a bit silly to mock Trump for his “amazing” political skills. It’s like you are mocking David for only just barely knocking out Goliath He doesn't have amazing political skills, so he should be mocked. He won by an accident. Stumbled across the finish line and got lucky against a historically bad candidate. David won by skill and precision. You make it sound like anybody could win a Presidential election. What would you call an electoral coup that wins key states by a combined margin of some thousands despite losing the popular vote by millions? Imprecise? I call it a well-slung stone.
A condemnation of the Electoral College. No stones involved.
Adding to the metaphor of the moment; it's like Goliath just walked out and punched David unconscious, and literally everyone on all sides saw it, and then in the afternoon it was announced Goliath had actually died and he promptly had a heart attack out of shock.
|
Northern Ireland23916 Posts
As a UBI fan, I like the cut of this Yang fellow’s jib.
On the other hand, people lack any kind of imagination and UBI is just discounted out of hand as crazy Utopianism by most people. Wrongly IMO
So a candidate who has some ideas I like, an absolutely terrible candidate in terms of actually winning
Does VAT have a different usage in the States? It’s just sales tax, as Kwark says it disproportionately taxes the poor’s income. It does have some benefits because you can hike it on goods that cost the public purse, but that’s because we have nationalised healthcare.
Despite it being irksome as a smoker having to pay insane sales tax there, it does offset healthcare costs there.
Although being contrarian we are net NHS contributors because we die younger and there’s a big cost spike with later life care costs, especially dementia care.
|
Where has unconditional UBI worked?
|
On April 09 2019 08:14 xDaunt wrote:
Where has unconditional UBI worked?
Depends on your definition of unconditional.
Alaska's Oil Dividend is a form of UBI that has been around for decades. Finland is experimenting with it right now, and it (so far) is yielding positive results. Indian lawmakers are discussing it as well I've heard, though I haven't really looked in to that.
The UBI Yang is proposing isn't "undonditional" IMO though. It's for American citizens ages 18 to 65, and is an opt-in program. Citizens either get social welfare benefits they are currently receiving, or the dividend of $1000/month, not both. So effectively, anyone receiving a small amount of welfare would opt in and get $1000 (instead of whatever smaller amount through welfare). People who are receiving (or qualify to receive in the future) more than $1000/month of social welfare benefits would probably not opt in, and just keep what they're getting instead.
I think a UBI of $1000/month, for some Americans, would be a small bonus and not super life-changing, but for many it would be a literal life saver. It would be disproportionately helpful for rural areas of the US, some of which are extremely economically depressed right now. You know that midwestern town with no jobs? When the residents are all receiving $1000/month, businesses will pop up to give them a place to spend that money.
And the benefits of every day consumers having extra spending money would be enormous. Thinking of my hometown, what additional opportunities would there be with $50 million of additional consumer spending each month. More business, more job opportunities, much more benefit and less risk for new businesses to try to start up.
|
On April 09 2019 08:14 xDaunt wrote:
Where has unconditional UBI worked?
No place yet. But democracy failed a whole lot of places, so we can’t say it’s not worth trying to figure out.
Or is this not one of those rhetorical questions that is just a set up for your larger argument?
|
United States42009 Posts
On April 09 2019 08:14 xDaunt wrote:
Where has unconditional UBI worked?
Alaska is a classic example. The resource belongs to the people so they just give it out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2Ffb8IUYAcToP2.jpg:large)
