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
@terlwyth
Reagan cited Mondale as saying this because he wanted to portray Mondale as a hypocrite. Back in 1984 the Democrats were the Deficit Hawks. Largely because that was the only issue the Dems had against Reagan.
In 1988, the Dems still hadn't really dropped the deficit issue.
Sorta. The Republicans used the Deficit issue against FDR during the 1930s.
edited 21st Feb '13 9:40:08 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Technically, the Witch-King is from Angmar
.
Anyway, Fighteer, that attitude isn't going to win anybody over. And, frankly, it's going to start freaking out the wealthy people in the Democratic Party too. The Democrats aren't exactly a pure force for labor and the lower class themselves, you know.
Which is probably a good thing. When you make politics exclusively about class, you sow the seeds for civil war.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.The rich people will only fall for that because the Republicans and their plutocrat backers have turned the upper-middle class, the small business owners, into the inmates running the prison. If you pay the lion's share of the country's taxes and yet still think the multibillionaires who pay less taxes than your employees are standing with you, you've been sold a load of bunkum.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.I think that on some level, it is a defense mechanism. No one wants to be told the way they make their money is bad or immoral–hell, if someone one told me that, say, making money via software engineering is bad or immoral, I'd probably get pretty defensive too.
I also think there's an issue of people just not grasping what it's like to not be rich. Cracked actually has a very good article on this subject that just came out today (yesterday?)
They fail to understand how hard it is to get rich, or that not everyone understands the nuances of complicated financial products like they do (again, using myself as a comparison, I often find myself forgetting that not everyone understands, say, how a CPU works or what a "thread" is).
Donald Trump: Twitter account was hacked
Virginia House OKs voter ID bill
Governor Rick Perry seeks to convince maker of high-capacity ammo magazines to move to Texas
Don't get me wrong, I greatly respect how a lot of executives and such pull 60+ hour weeks to keep things afloat, or know their field inside and out. I'm willing to call business executives a lot of things, but lazy or stupid are rarely among them.
I just wish it wasn't a field that rewarded cutthroat ruthlessness, sociopathy, and litigating anyone you don't like into submission with impunity because nobody else can afford legal fees to fight back.
edited 21st Feb '13 10:04:26 PM by Pykrete
This is a glimpse of why
I could not support McCain back at 2008.
The only thing worse is how the crowd supported his bullshit tough guy attitude.
edited 21st Feb '13 10:33:53 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.Hey, I was on the "I dislike Mc Cain" train all the way back in 2006, when he officially derailed the Straight Talk Express!
I remember being supportive of Mc Cain in 2000 over Bush and Gore, but I remember thinking that he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell in 2008.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!This is an article about the consequences of the things Republicans have said and done and convinced their constituents of.
@Fighteer: Intentionally attacking the power and wealth of the rich is a good way to make people not want to be rich. And people wanting to be rich, and having available avenues for pursuing same, is by and large a good thing for society. Furthermore, it's ingrained into the American Dream; Americans don't, by and large, want to pull down the titans of the economy, they want the right to pull themselves up to that level by cleverness, sweat and luck. Suggesting the destruction of the capitalist class is not going to fly for that reason.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very much in favor of taxing the rich, but at a 50-70% marginal rate that will help rebuild our middle class, not an 80-90% one for slaughtering the capitalist pigs.
Ramidel, saying it is a "good way" to stop people from wanting to be rich is an empirical statement. Do you have any evidence to back up said statement?
It strikes me as absurd to think that people aren't going to try and optimize their intakes because they're afraid they'll be called names for doing so.
@ultra mentioning Mitt Romney to be a "morally upstanding man":
Um. No.
There are many cases against that claim, but this one takes the cake.
Not only that, but his cut throat business tactics clearly show what Mitt truly is; a bully.
@ignorance of the rich: That definitely doesn't excuse them from scrutiny. The rich have absolutely no reason to be ignorant; they have more resources than many of us will ever have. Thus, they have the capacity to become open minded and to understand others... but many don't.
It's just a pattern I've noticed among the Conservative Rich. They just can't understand anyone. Not only does that have a negative impact via their influence, it's also fucking horrible when they're politicians. If you can't understand the people of the country you're supposed to serve, what right do you have to even represent them?
It isn't some stereotype when time after time I've witnessed in, not only my own community, but around the country. Hell, my own grandparents are exactly like this.
@UY: My rhetoric is largely irrelevant; it's not like any rich folks are going to read this forum and get their feelings hurt. And I have never called all rich people sociopaths, so I don't see how you can possibly construe it as such.
The unmistakable fact is that we are in a class war and have been since the early 1900's, when the robber baron era of capitalism caused wealth inequality to skyrocket and triggered the organized labor movement. The war has been ebbing and flowing ever since, but right now, the wealthy are unmistakably ascendant, and are doing their best to continue hoarding as much wealth as possible for themselves.
The tide might be turning, slowly and grudgingly, but right now the battle seems to be waged along the lines of whether we continue stripping the poor and middle class to the bone, or leave them to languish in their present doldrums. There is no major party right now that is truly representing the majority of the U.S. population.
If you really think that some guy who is hell-bent on amassing his millions is going to give up and go home because he isn't getting sufficient worship from the unwashed masses, then I have some bridges to sell you.
edited 22nd Feb '13 6:49:53 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"@Greenmantle: You're stretching my words. I have no problem with wealth in and of itself, nor capitalism. A capitalist system needs people with capital to invest in major projects. We need to head off wealth hoarding (example: Apple sitting on more cash than many countries' GDP), as well as anti-competitive practices.
What I want is to return to the taxation policies of the mid-20th century, when:
- The top marginal rates were in the 70 percent range.
- Capital gains and other forms of non-wage income were not treated specially.
To that I would add some additional policies:
- Inheritance taxes are 90 percent (or even higher) past a certain threshold — say, $5 million.
- The purpose of this is to ensure that families can't hoard wealth, so the scions of rich folks actually have to work for a living.
- Total executive compensation in excess of a certain ratio (say, 50:1) to the compensation of the lowest paid employee (including subcontractors) is no longer deducted from corporate taxable income.
- Incentivize corporations to pay their workers a decent salary if they want their executives to earn millions. Also, massively discourage offshoring.
- The minimum wage is indexed to the living wage. No full-time job can pay less than a living wage.
- Income supports guarantee anyone who is unemployed or underemployed income equivalent to a living wage.
- The combination of the two above policies would mean that employers would have to offer competitive wages if they want any workers, period.
- Healthcare is a universal, national system like in Europe and/or Canada, with no direct employer component.
edited 22nd Feb '13 7:12:05 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"* Sigh *
Well, in British terms, if you add in re-Nationalisation, that's similar to the BNP's Economic Policies...
Yep, in Europe, those are the Economic Policies of the Far Right and the Far Left. In other words, the European "Angry Old Man" demographic.
edited 22nd Feb '13 7:18:12 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On

The anti-deficit meme actually started as a response to Reagan cutting taxes and increasing defense spending, which naturally caused the deficit (and debt) to skyrocket. I remember the debt clock first getting started under Reagan; it's one of my earliest political memories.
Of course, in that case, it was a valid concern: Reagan was engaging in anti-Keynesianism or pure supply-side voodoo: running deficits during a time of prosperity was exactly the wrong thing to do. It's too bad that the term "voodoo economics" is no longer popular, because the Republicans have inherited that mantle in full.
@UY: "By their deeds shall ye know them." Whether capitalists are sociopaths or not (and most aren't; they exhibit the ability to care for those around them, just not those they trample on to get to the top), their actions frequently have the effect of being profoundly damaging to society. Then you get the ones who actively attempt to trample and disenfranchise those with less than themselves like the Kochs.
You can't change these folks; that's absolutely correct. You can, however instill taxation and regulatory policies that drain away their wealth until, like the Ringwraiths of Mordor, they are left as fleeting, powerless shadows of malice in the world.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"