Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
@Ambar Spare me the whining.
First off, it's not not an article with Chomsky. This is some fringe leftist article from someone else that is referencing some ideas by Chomsky and putting their own spin on it. I don't really know what Chomsky thinks of that.
The point of it is was my demonstration of how they think the US operates and I didn't actually say I agree, now did I? You can also reference someone and not agree with everything they say. Amazing, right?
And I'm not equating Japan with anything. It's just intellectually dishonest to cut out words from a quote to make it look better whether I agree or disagree with it.
It's not like I disagree with what you're saying but you are jumping to conclusions of whatever my thoughts may be and trying to score easy points by building up arguments I wasn't making to score easy points.
edited 5th Apr '17 10:14:57 AM by MadSkillz
No. When people share horseshit that defends dictatorships with millions of dead on their ledgers I will raise every objection that I can. Because that is an utterly revolting thing to do, and it cannot be brushed off with cries of "But America!"
As for whether you yourself agree with what you're sharing, if you don't, you'd best tell everyone. Especially when you are sharing it as part of a conversation in which you have been agreeing with the people you quote.
Bullshit. People who do not fall into the category of "white straight men" are notably more likely to find themselves disadvantaged. This is a statistical reality.
edited 5th Apr '17 10:14:41 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Where was the defense of Imperial Japan's dictatorship? Please point that out to me.
And I never said I agreed with the people who wrote the article. You're jumping from a to d here without getting to b and c first.
edited 5th Apr '17 10:23:05 AM by MadSkillz
Lmfao. I'd rather be poor and white, than poor and black ANY fucking day of the week.
New Survey coming this weekend!I was under the impression that everyone here acknowledges that the ACA had flaws, and required substantive improvement. Was I wrong? One major problem with it was the gap between
being poor enough to qualify for medicaid subsidies on the one hand, and working for a company large enough to provide an employer-funded healthcare benefit plan on the other. According to the Kaiser Foundation report I just linked to, there were 15 million of these people as recently as last year. That 15 million figure does not include people who were eligible for benefits but didn't apply for them (there were 11 million of them).
As for globalization, plenty of studies
show that the US middle class were disadvantaged relative to the rich or the poor of developing nations. "...The “winners” were the middle and upper classes of the relatively poor Asian countries and the global top 1%. The (relative) “losers” were the people in the lower and middle parts of rich countries’ income distributions, according to detailed household surveys data from more than 100 countries between 1988 and 2008." Here's another source
.
The effect of Democratic Part platforms on the US Middle Class is more subjective and harder to reduce to a number, but there is a widespread perception
, even on the left, that they have done more harm than good: "..Democrats simply don't consistently support concrete policies that help the broad working and middle classes. Half of them voted for the bankruptcy bill of 2005. They've done virtually nothing to stem the growth of monopolies and next to nothing to improve consumer protection in visible ways. They don't do anything for labor. They're soft on protecting Social Security. They bailed out the banks but refused to bail out underwater homeowners. Hell, they can't even agree to kill the carried interest loophole, a populist favorite if ever there was one." Here's another source
.
Of course, intelligent people can disagree over the facts, or the interpretation of these facts. You may think that everything I just referenced is flat out wrong. Which is fine- but the real point is that there is an argument about it even on the left, so what should conservative middle class voters think? The main point that I am making is that people who might believe these things are not crazy, evil or hopelessly ignorant- they are just people who believe certain things. If you think those things are wrong, then present your argument. Calling it "lies" or "stupidity" is extremely unlikely to change their minds.
And I will repeat this point until I die- we can't win an election without recruiting at least some of them. The numbers just wont work for us. So it's far better, for our own interests, to continue to search for convincing arguments, in a language that the lower to middle class white conservative voters would understand.
I know it's hard, saving the world was never going to be easy.
edited 5th Apr '17 10:38:53 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
Right, so give me a plan on how to cut through this
.
You and the other "leftists" insist that it's possible to penetrate their bubble.
Except there's an AI on their side that's designed specifically to keep it that way and expand it, and you don't. I even have doubts about some of your allies' ability to pass a Turing test.
Give me a plan that consists of more than "economic populism polled well with these guys!"
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotWhy are waiting for someone else to come up with a plan? Why don't you start yourself? And you can begin by taking a deep breath, straightening your back, and allowing yourself to believe that it's possible.
And by the way, there is research
on this.
edited 5th Apr '17 10:50:10 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.I actually made a list of how the Dems can connect better with the AMC (anxious middle class, what the so called WWC actually is) without selling out their principles, everyone ignored it in favour of yelling at Capsase.
It's a few pages back but I'll go grab it again for you guys.
Edit: Found it.
- A candidate that hasn't been subject to a forty year smear campaign.
- A charismatic candidate.
- A man.
- Rural spending.
- Jobs (no need to get specific, just say we will get them jobs)
- Not being the party in power.
- Someone who comes across as an outsider (they don't have to actually be one.)
- Infrastructure spending.
- Union rights.
- An end to wasteful spending on oversees wars like [insert war Trump starts here].
- Elderly care and other social services.
- The return of rural services cut by Trump.
- A candidate that won't waste their money on things like trips to his golf course and security for his tower.
- The kind of messaging that you use to help a domestic violence victim see the light.
- Talking about two of three big mistakes the Republicans have made.
- Change.
Now a ton of that is superficial, some of it is vague, but that's okay. Sure each of the things I listed will only win over a few people, but we don't need that many people, one of thouse things might have been enough to win in November, all of thouse things could bring about a solid win.
edited 5th Apr '17 11:01:21 AM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

My own view of inequality is that I've never really minded the idea that people earn more in and of itself - but the people at the absolute bottom shouldn't live in such extreme poverty that they don't have access to basic things like health care, sanitation, food, and just a good chance to move up and make their lives better regardless of their gender, sexuality, and race.