SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Coronavirus thread tangent
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 19:26:40 GMT -5
Question. Since it's established that I'm a Trump supporter and therefore a racist. Who's going to tell my brown wife and tan children ? The news is going to be devastating to them. Solid defense. Question: what makes one a racist? Do you have to hurl slurs, burn crosses etc? Maybe so. But then we need a term for people who are untroubled by policies that target minorities.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 19:28:19 GMT -5
Question. I'm pro-life and view abortion as infanticide. What do you think I think about the morals of those that are pro-death ?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 19:30:39 GMT -5
Question. Since it's established that I'm a Trump supporter and therefore a racist. Who's going to tell my brown wife and tan children ? The news is going to be devastating to them. Solid defense. Question: what makes one a racist? Do you have to hurl slurs, burn crosses etc? Maybe so. But then we need a term for people who are untroubled by policies that target minorities. I have no need for a defense. Just pointing out why the right finds the left offensive.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 9, 2020 19:34:07 GMT -5
"You're gonna call me a racist regardless of what I do? Well I might as well be a racist then." This is such perverse logic. I realize you're explicitly not defending this, so I'm not directing it at you. But it goes to something I was saying above, about how conservative psychology seems so dominated by the feelings of others. Like, who cares what liberals think or say about you? Do what's right. What if minorities in this country - blacks or hispanics or gays or muslims - responded to the decades (or centuries) of abuse and oppression they've lived under by saying "Well if they're gonna say mean things about me I might as well have no personal moral standards whatsoever." It is perverse logic when you put it that way but it’s not how the situation is in reality. They don’t care about what liberals think but they tune them out. If someone starts criticizing you and assigning a negative motivation to your position on a particular issue then you tune them out and you tune out the criticism they have of others and legitimate claims get lost in the noise. Like the boy who cried wolf. And to say Republicans have no moral standards is the exact kind of thing that reinforces the above. I'm not saying Republicans have no moral standards. I was just following your own logic - you said the reason they end up supporting someone like Trump who is incapable of human decency is because they've been accused of lacking human deceency in the past, therefore they stop caring about their leaders having human decency. That's perverse to me.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 19:34:54 GMT -5
Question. I'm pro-life and view abortion as infanticide. What do you think I think about the morals of those that are pro-death ? Would you vote for a pro-choice candidate? I assume no. Are you against the death penalty? Would you vote for someone who was for it? Why?
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 19:38:16 GMT -5
Solid defense. Question: what makes one a racist? Do you have to hurl slurs, burn crosses etc? Maybe so. But then we need a term for people who are untroubled by policies that target minorities. I have no need for a defense. Just pointing out why the right finds the left offensive. Well, I’d say I find supporting racist policy more offensive than having my feelings hurt by name calling. I don’t like name calling (what difference does it make), but I am happy to discuss policy. And I am happy to call policies racist. If people get offended when one points out how policies disproportionately hurt certain communities, that seems odd to me.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 19:48:08 GMT -5
Question. I'm pro-life and view abortion as infanticide. What do you think I think about the morals of those that are pro-death ? Would you vote for a pro-choice candidate? I assume no. Are you against the death penalty? Would you vote for someone who was for it? Why? I said earlier, my number 1 criteria for voting for a President at this point is what that President would select as a replacement for the two aging Supreme Court Justices. Everything else takes a distant second place. thinkprogress.org/half-of-the-supreme-courts-liberal-members-are-over-80-years-old-aed109428a13/I am pro death penalty for egregious crimes against the general public but not for crimes of passion. I believe it's a deterrent. There's no reason the Boston Bomber should be wasting air right now. That too is a distant second place.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 19:59:14 GMT -5
Would you vote for a pro-choice candidate? I assume no. Are you against the death penalty? Would you vote for someone who was for it? Why? I said earlier, my number 1 criteria for voting for a President at this point is what that President would select as a replacement for the two aging Supreme Court Justices. Everything else takes a distant second place. thinkprogress.org/half-of-the-supreme-courts-liberal-members-are-over-80-years-old-aed109428a13/I am pro death penalty for egregious crimes against the general public but not for crimes of passion. I believe it's a deterrent. There's no reason the Boston Bomber should be wasting air right now. Then it seems a bit strong to call others “pro-death,” when you are pro-death in some instances. I have no beef, actually, with prioritizing Justices. But it is a practical, not a moral position. At that point, we should agree “morals” are off the table. You are willing to vote for a terrible person who will do terrible other things if you get the main thing you want. In fact, I bet if we all get honest, that describes almost everyone. The only question is what falls in the “must have” and “don’t care” columns. I do have beef with using language like calling someone “pro-death” for supporting a woman’s Constitutional right to her own body, an obvious moral judgment, but also being an amoral voter. Can’t have it both ways. And that, I think, is what drives people crazy about rightwingers. Seeing alleged Christians shaking Trump’s hand? That is hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 20:15:44 GMT -5
I said earlier, my number 1 criteria for voting for a President at this point is what that President would select as a replacement for the two aging Supreme Court Justices. Everything else takes a distant second place. thinkprogress.org/half-of-the-supreme-courts-liberal-members-are-over-80-years-old-aed109428a13/I am pro death penalty for egregious crimes against the general public but not for crimes of passion. I believe it's a deterrent. There's no reason the Boston Bomber should be wasting air right now. Then it seems a bit strong to call others “pro-death,” when you are pro-death in some instances. I have no beef, actually, with prioritizing Justices. But it is a practical, not a moral position. At that point, we should agree “morals” are off the table. You are willing to vote for a terrible person who will do terrible other things if you get the main thing you want. In fact, I bet if we all get honest, that describes almost everyone. The only question is what falls in the “must have” and “don’t care” columns. I do have beef with using language like calling someone “pro-death” for supporting a woman’s Constitutional right to her own body, an obvious moral judgment, but also being an amoral voter. Can’t have it both ways. And that, I think, is what drives people crazy about rightwingers. Seeing alleged Christians shaking Trump’s hand? That is hypocrisy. It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 20:49:55 GMT -5
Then it seems a bit strong to call others “pro-death,” when you are pro-death in some instances. I have no beef, actually, with prioritizing Justices. But it is a practical, not a moral position. At that point, we should agree “morals” are off the table. You are willing to vote for a terrible person who will do terrible other things if you get the main thing you want. In fact, I bet if we all get honest, that describes almost everyone. The only question is what falls in the “must have” and “don’t care” columns. I do have beef with using language like calling someone “pro-death” for supporting a woman’s Constitutional right to her own body, an obvious moral judgment, but also being an amoral voter. Can’t have it both ways. And that, I think, is what drives people crazy about rightwingers. Seeing alleged Christians shaking Trump’s hand? That is hypocrisy. It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either. How are the employment numbers now?
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 9, 2020 20:51:02 GMT -5
It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either. Economic success/failure don't start and stop after inaugurations, as I am sure you know. the low unemployment numbers (overall, or within a subset) are a continuation of the economic tailwinds of the 2nd Obama Administration. If you want to parse the numbers, history has shown that economies under Democratic Administrations have done better. Plus unemployment and stock markets aren't really indicators of economic health. The disparate income level in this country has gotten progressively worse under both parties. If you ask me that is the sad story of the USA, the decline of the middle class. IMO, you can thank the Republicans systematic destruction of collective bargaining powers for workers. www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/#4185a6926786
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 21:20:17 GMT -5
It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either. How are the employment numbers now? Can you think of a dumber question to ask ?.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 21:32:21 GMT -5
How are the employment numbers now? Can you think of a dumber question to ask ?. If Trump gets credit for good things he didn’t have anything to do with, why not blame? And, even his own people are saying the stimulus is off to a bad start... which exacerbates the ill-effects of Coronavirus. And... curious... who is faring disproportionately badly? African-Americans. So again, if Trump gets credit for low unemployment, why not point out that those jobs were also disproportionately insecure? Edit: Coronavirus or no, going into November with double-digit unemployment, no significant foreign policy victories, a few miles of wall, etc etc. is not a good look.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 21:44:53 GMT -5
It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either. Economic success/failure don't start and stop after inaugurations, as I am sure you know. the low unemployment numbers (overall, or within a subset) are a continuation of the economic tailwinds of the 2nd Obama Administration. If you want to parse the numbers, history has shown that economies under Democratic Administrations have done better. Plus unemployment and stock markets aren't really indicators of economic health. The disparate income level in this country has gotten progressively worse under both parties. If you ask me that is the sad story of the USA, the decline of the middle class. IMO, you can thank the Republicans systematic destruction of collective bargaining powers for workers. www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/#4185a6926786A 2016 article when pretty much everyone was predicting gloom and doom if Trump got elected. It didn't turn out that way now did it ? Also three plus years in is far different than a continuation. Look at how consistent GDP growth has been under Trump and how erratic under Obama (10 year chart). Another factor which pretty much doesn't get reported locally is dollar strength, something I see every month when I convert my social security check. In whole, dollar strength changes the flow of dollars around the world in trillions. That changes rapidly with changes in economic policies of the Fed. Under Obama, I was averaging about 41 pesos to the dollar. Under Trump, about 50.5. The Philippines has to pay about 25% more for a USA dollar. That's great for me personally but not so good for the countries around the world. It's an America first policy. I couldn't find a cut n paste chart to illustrate but there's an interactive chart that you can change the number of years graph interactively here: tradingeconomics.com/united-states/currency
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 22:03:38 GMT -5
Economic success/failure don't start and stop after inaugurations, as I am sure you know. the low unemployment numbers (overall, or within a subset) are a continuation of the economic tailwinds of the 2nd Obama Administration. If you want to parse the numbers, history has shown that economies under Democratic Administrations have done better. Plus unemployment and stock markets aren't really indicators of economic health. The disparate income level in this country has gotten progressively worse under both parties. If you ask me that is the sad story of the USA, the decline of the middle class. IMO, you can thank the Republicans systematic destruction of collective bargaining powers for workers. www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/#4185a6926786A 2016 article when pretty much everyone was predicting gloom and doom if Trump got elected. It didn't turn out that way now did it ? Also three plus years in is far different than a continuation. Look at how consistent GDP growth has been under Trump and how erratic under Obama (10 year chart). Another factor which pretty much doesn't get reported locally is dollar strength, something I see every month when I convert my social security check. In whole, dollar strength changes the flow of dollars around the world in trillions. That changes rapidly with changes in economic policies of the Fed. Under Obama, I was averaging about 41 pesos to the dollar. Under Trump, about 50.5. The Philippines has to pay about 25% more for a USA dollar. That's great for me personally but not so good for the countries around the world. It's an America first policy. I couldn't find a cut n paste chart to illustrate but there's an interactive chart that you can change the number of years graph interactively here: tradingeconomics.com/united-states/currencyThose numbers would have been good for him if the election were last November, eh? But since my retirement plan lost nearly 16% in the first quarter this year (which ended before things really hit the fan), I’d say Trump’s first term will not look so hot by its end.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 9, 2020 22:12:08 GMT -5
It's all pretty much terminology. Abortion and execution are pretty much synonymous, just different expressions of essentially the same action. I'm not 100% against abortions. Mother or baby's health, pregnancies by rape or incest, pregnancies of a minor are in most cases overriding factors. Oops is not an overriding factor. To someone that is pro-life, hearing about a woman's right to control her own body is tantamount to saying people should have the right to murder. I see no hypocrisy, that's in your eyes. In my eyes, he selected the most religious Vice President, Pence, as a mate, maybe in history. Under Trump, minorities have the lowest unemployment and more importantly, unemployment gap in history. Racism and anti-women policies are the sign of Democratic Presidencies, not Republican. The USA ranks 52 in the world in gender gap just behind the great women's rights country Bangladesh. This gap has existed for a very long time and didn't improve during the Obama years either. Economic success/failure don't start and stop after inaugurations, as I am sure you know. the low unemployment numbers (overall, or within a subset) are a continuation of the economic tailwinds of the 2nd Obama Administration. If you want to parse the numbers, history has shown that economies under Democratic Administrations have done better. Plus unemployment and stock markets aren't really indicators of economic health. The disparate income level in this country has gotten progressively worse under both parties. If you ask me that is the sad story of the USA, the decline of the middle class. IMO, you can thank the Republicans systematic destruction of collective bargaining powers for workers. www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/#4185a6926786I don't really know what to say. Umm so Republicans set up Democrats? Your article says it's basically luck, not policy based! Unemployment and stock market aren't indicators of economic health really? Explain that one to me, the article you posted listed just that to show a strong economy! Wow!
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 22:22:01 GMT -5
Economic success/failure don't start and stop after inaugurations, as I am sure you know. the low unemployment numbers (overall, or within a subset) are a continuation of the economic tailwinds of the 2nd Obama Administration. If you want to parse the numbers, history has shown that economies under Democratic Administrations have done better. Plus unemployment and stock markets aren't really indicators of economic health. The disparate income level in this country has gotten progressively worse under both parties. If you ask me that is the sad story of the USA, the decline of the middle class. IMO, you can thank the Republicans systematic destruction of collective bargaining powers for workers. www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/#4185a6926786I don't really know what to say. Umm so Republicans set up Democrats? Your article says it's basically luck, not policy based! Unemployment and stock market aren't indicators of economic health really? Explain that one to me, the article you posted listed just that to show a strong economy! Wow! Stock markets are often indicators of concentrated wealth, since only a small part of the citizenry invests. But let’s talk unemployment: current % of African-Americans who have lost their jobs, had hours cut, or been furloughed? 42%. % of those under age-45 in that same boat (ALL under-45, not just black): 52%. % of Americans who say their “stimulus money” won’t last past 2 weeks? 37%. % of Americans who say they cannot cover their costs in the next month? 42% These numbers show not just that the economy has absolutely collapsed, but also how flimsy it was to begin with. How can just under half of Americans have so little to fall back on? Have such insecure employment? This goes to Jerry’s point. There is a lot of wealth, but it is absurdly concentrated.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 22:36:32 GMT -5
I don't really know what to say. Umm so Republicans set up Democrats? Your article says it's basically luck, not policy based! Unemployment and stock market aren't indicators of economic health really? Explain that one to me, the article you posted listed just that to show a strong economy! Wow! Stock markets are often indicators of concentrated wealth, since only a small part of the citizenry invests. But let’s talk unemployment: current % of African-Americans who have lost their jobs, had hours cut, or been furloughed? 42%. % of those under age-45 in that same boat (ALL under-45, not just black): 52%. % of Americans who say their “stimulus money” won’t last past 2 weeks? 37%. % of Americans who say they cannot cover their costs in the next month? 42% These numbers show not just that the economy has absolutely collapsed, but also how flimsy it was to begin with. How can just under half of Americans have so little to fall back on? Have such insecure employment? This goes to Jerry’s point. There is a lot of wealth, but it is absurdly concentrated. This part I agree with but it's pretty much evolved over time, not just in the last three years and not even just in the Obama years. I know it's the basis logic of the socialist people but here's a list of successful socialist countries, which should we emulate ? List:
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 22:51:38 GMT -5
With regards to the "redistribution of wealth" concept, Warren was actually on the right track (in my opinion) but was too extreme about it which essentially made her unelectable. In a democracy, you can be the greatest politician in the world but that means squat if you can't get elected. Unless you have an enormously popular president, changes have to be baby steps.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 22:52:47 GMT -5
Stock markets are often indicators of concentrated wealth, since only a small part of the citizenry invests. But let’s talk unemployment: current % of African-Americans who have lost their jobs, had hours cut, or been furloughed? 42%. % of those under age-45 in that same boat (ALL under-45, not just black): 52%. % of Americans who say their “stimulus money” won’t last past 2 weeks? 37%. % of Americans who say they cannot cover their costs in the next month? 42% These numbers show not just that the economy has absolutely collapsed, but also how flimsy it was to begin with. How can just under half of Americans have so little to fall back on? Have such insecure employment? This goes to Jerry’s point. There is a lot of wealth, but it is absurdly concentrated. This part I agree with but it's pretty much evolved over time, not just in the last three years and not even just in the Obama years. I know it's the basis logic of the socialist people but here's a list of successful socialist countries, which should we emulate ? List: Well that is an AmeriCAN’t Attitude! First, when has an America Firster ever said because Cambodia can’t pull something off, we can’t either? Buck up! We are #1! Surely we can make a more equitable society if anyone can! As for your list, the funny thing is how sloppily people use “socialism.” Often the attacks conflate it with Soviet or Maoist communism, which is unfair. So... this would involve definitions. That said, by virtually any measure, life in northern European social democracies like Sweden is better than in the US.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 23:15:31 GMT -5
In the Philippines, we have an enormously popular President. (I know you guys don't like him and all of that crap has nothing to do with this post).
Under Duterte we have instituted:
Agrarian reform with free water, land grants and machinery coops for the small time farmers. We are now an exporter in several crops for the first time.
Free education with student stipends at all non-private colleges and Universities. All of them.
Universal health care although it's somewhat sticky in practice because those that can afford it are expected to pay their own way. It's an honor thing. Everyone gets a bill but not everyone pays.
Free wifi in all the major cities and eventually country wide. They are building some 250 new towers here.
Major infrastructure projects all over the place in the Build Build Build initiative.
Drug addiction and major crime rates have both dropped by 75% as reported by the government and conformed by WHO (drugs) and Pulse Asia (crime).
We are second only to China in the percentage of people brought out of the poverty level. Still not great but significantly better.
Major tax overhaul which shifted the tax burden from the lower and middle classes to the upper classes. (lol, he's not popular with the oligarchy)
Our economy has gone from 3rd world status to emerging nation status according to the bond ratings. We are now only $170 average annual income away from being classified as a middle class economy/
He's also brought in hundreds of billions of dollars investments from throughout the world. According to World News and Reports annual survey of 5000 world investment managers, the Philippines is the top country in the world to invest in.
Progress can be made but I don't see anybody on either side of the isle likely to accomplish it.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 23:32:12 GMT -5
This part I agree with but it's pretty much evolved over time, not just in the last three years and not even just in the Obama years. I know it's the basis logic of the socialist people but here's a list of successful socialist countries, which should we emulate ? List: Well that is an AmeriCAN’t Attitude! First, when has an America Firster ever said because Cambodia can’t pull something off, we can’t either? Buck up! We are #1! Surely we can make a more equitable society if anyone can! As for your list, the funny thing is how sloppily people use “socialism.” Often the attacks conflate it with Soviet or Maoist communism, which is unfair. So... this would involve definitions. That said, by virtually any measure, life in northern European social democracies like Sweden is better than in the US. For socialism I was basically talking Bernie and none of the Northern European countries are socialist. They are capitalists with social programs. That's not Bernie. As I said it doesn't mean squat if it isn't electable. A socialist platform is just not electable.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 23:41:56 GMT -5
Well that is an AmeriCAN’t Attitude! First, when has an America Firster ever said because Cambodia can’t pull something off, we can’t either? Buck up! We are #1! Surely we can make a more equitable society if anyone can! As for your list, the funny thing is how sloppily people use “socialism.” Often the attacks conflate it with Soviet or Maoist communism, which is unfair. So... this would involve definitions. That said, by virtually any measure, life in northern European social democracies like Sweden is better than in the US. For socialism I was basically talking Bernie and none of the Northern European countries are socialist. They are capitalists with social programs. That's not Bernie. As I said it doesn't mean squat if it isn't electable. A socialist platform is just not electable. Bernie is still capitalist. Would there remain individuals or corporations in charge of production with others laboring for them and producing surplus value? Yes. But I agree, actually. Americans seem uniquely immune to social programs. Obama was right when he said they cling to Bibles and guns. Too many have made a shibboleth of abstract freedoms and would rather a system that impoverishes them generationally as long as they maintain abstract freedoms they might not have the money or health to enjoy. I wish every American read Isaiah Berlin on the difference between negative and positive freedom. We protect our freedom not to be bothered at the expense of creating the freedom to reach our full potentials through education, universal health care, universal day care, shorter work weeks, better parental leave, higher wages and other “radical” socialist policies.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 9, 2020 23:42:15 GMT -5
Something I've always been curious about but have never seen a plausible explanation. Obama left 140 federal judges seats unfilled. Federal judges don't require Senate confirmation. I can't imagine a President not wanting to leave his viewpoint on the judiciary when presented with an opportunity to do so.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Apr 9, 2020 23:50:46 GMT -5
Something I've always been curious about but have never seen a plausible explanation. Obama left 140 federal judges seats unfilled. Federal judges don't require Senate confirmation. I can't imagine a President not wanting to leave his viewpoint on the judiciary when presented with an opportunity to do so. This is wrong, I believe. All Federal judges get confirmed by the Senate. What are you referring to? He was getting filibustered even when the Dems controlled the Senate, so Reid changed the rules to simple majority. Then McConnell hijacked the Constitution in what remains one of the most egregious moments in American government history. www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/about-federal-judges
|
|
|