TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#112051: Feb 15th 2016 at 7:21:43 AM

In India, there is a north south divide much like in the US. Most desi people that are well known in the US are from or descended from the north, even though there are as many people from down south doing just as well. About the only southern descended guy anyone knows in the US is Shyamalan and...he's a bit of an embarrassment...

So, speaking as a southern-descended American desi dude, I'd be happy to see one of us be a justice.

EDIT-

[up]Desi means countryman. Term most south asians in the US refer to themselves as.

edited 15th Feb '16 7:22:57 AM by FFShinra

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#112052: Feb 15th 2016 at 7:23:08 AM

What the everloving fuck does being liberal have to do with religious discrimination? Oh, wait, I forgot, it's only discrimination when it means Christians can't rule over other religions.

This quote from Kickassia roughly explains the American understanding of equality.

"We will have a round table so that everyone will look each other in the eye as equals. And I will float above you in a rocket chair, so that I might look down and see just how equal we are!"

Republicans get antsy when they hear murmurs of taking away the rocket chair.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#112053: Feb 15th 2016 at 7:35:20 AM

[up][up] Wait, CNN wants Obama to nominate a Southerner to the court? That's their brilliant plan to sneak him past Republicans?

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
tricksterson Never Trust from Behind you with an icepick Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Never Trust
#112054: Feb 15th 2016 at 7:39:15 AM

[up][up]Well let's be honest, who wouldn't want a rocket chair?

Trump delenda est
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#112056: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:09:06 AM

Video of Hillary Clinton blaming homeowners for the Financial Crisis of 2008.
Oh cool, Clinton actually knows what caused the housing bubble (read: pretty much everyone, but by sheer numbers mostly home owners) and is not totally deluded like a significant portion of the rest of the country. That's bad for populist rhetoric, but good for sanity.

Wait what? Well never mind then, a blogger disagrees with her and thinks all the blame falls on the people who let homeowners take out loans they couldn't afford while assuming the price of real estate would keep rising forever, rather than the homeowners themselves who are clearly children that can never be held responsible for their actions. We better hang the bitch!

edited 15th Feb '16 8:15:30 AM by Nihlus1

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#112057: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:12:19 AM

[up]Without knowing which part and how much of that to take seriously, I should probably note this goes back to our multiple sources thing from earlier. If only because it's better to say it and not have to than vice versa.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#112058: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:20:58 AM

Sometimes I wonder if people who cannot pay a house wholesale would be better off with renting it instead, financially speaking. Wasn't such homeowning debt a major trigger in the last crisis?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#112059: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:21:35 AM

Going back to that mention of Srinivasan — as an Indian American, it would be really great if there were more high-profile Indian Americans in government that actually were representative of our demographic. I'd rather not have people think of Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley when we come to mind, and Srinivasan is a stellar candidate anyway.

"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#112060: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:24:34 AM

[up][up]

RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#112061: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:28:46 AM

@Nihlus1: I am still having trouble pinning down your economic and political leanings. You claim not to be a radical conservative, but you've just trotted out one of the key canards of the right with respect to the housing crisis. Consumer behavior is driven by the availability of credit. The credit that fueled the housing bubble was enabled by shadow banking and direct, proven collusion between mortgage issuers and their underwriters.

If Joe Smith wants to apply for a loan that he can't afford, it's the bank's duty to turn him down. That's how our system works. The banks failed in that basic duty through intentional criminal malfeasance. It is difficult to find any interpretation of this that supports the idea that a primary, or even significant portion of the blame lies on consumers for believing in the reality that was laid out before them by marketers.

edited 15th Feb '16 8:33:18 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#112062: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:31:06 AM

But it worked so well for Jim Carrey to say yes to everything!

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#112063: Feb 15th 2016 at 8:58:41 AM

@ SeptimusHeap: Combine the two ideas with a rent-to-buy scheme perhaps?

[down] Or just the supply of houses to begin with?

edited 15th Feb '16 9:04:17 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#112064: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:01:49 AM

I think creating an expectation of owning a house is a problem. People who don't have the financial means to do so will just land in debt.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#112065: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:03:10 AM

I am still having trouble pinning down your economic and political leanings.

Why would this matter?

Schild und Schwert der Partei
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#112066: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:08:24 AM

[up]Tactical approach to discussion. Having a reasonable understanding of someone's politics helps when forming conversational approaches. For instance, I wouldn't try to use a metaphor that frames the death penalty in a positive light when discussing a point with you, specifically, because I know from past experience that you're not a fan.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#112067: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:13:36 AM

I am still having trouble pinning down your economic and political leanings. You claim not to be a radical conservative, but you've just trotted out one of the key canards of the right with respect to the housing crisis.
I lean towards what I see as the truth. If this involves supporting left-leaning stances, like lax immigration policy, free trade, and UHC, so be it. If it involves apparently right-leaning stances, like thinking Joe Average holds responsibility for his own actions, then again, so be it. No one saw the bubble coming, the Fed even wrote an article about how the housing market wasn't in a bubble due to low monthly mortgage payments, which was in turn due to the Fed's accommodative policy at the time. Joe wrecking the economy unintentionally doesn't mean he didn't wreck the economy, as no one wanted to wreck it. It was just gross negligence and complacency at every level.

If Joe Smith wants to apply for a loan that he can't afford, it's the bank's duty to turn him down. That's how our system works. The banks failed in that basic duty through intentional criminal malfeasance.
No. Practically, that's true; as the results show, Smith should not have been trusted, and lending standards/interest rates should've been stricter (in contrast to what Sanders wants). But it's still Joe Smith's fault for taking out the loan and failing to pay it back. The idea that someone taking out a loan they know they can't afford to pay back involves no wrongdoing on their part- when they were likely getting it by lying about their income to boot- is just totally blame-shifting and delusional. No one wants to take responsibility for their actions and would rather blame everything on the banks (who did not profit off of those loans being defaulted on), which is an extremely harmful attitude and might lead to another credit crisis on the future (it definitely will if Sanders is elected, as he fully buys into this delusion).

Speculation on part of the investors did not cause the bubble. The mortgages were viewed as very safe investments with a stable, mediocre return. The institutions that bought them were places like pension and mutual funds seeking a long term investment with a steady return. The speculators who caused the crisis were at the consumer level, who wanted in on all the real estate money despite (or perhaps because of) the economy and average living standards being higher than ever. Everyone who bought a house thinking it would go up in price was a speculator.

It is difficult to find any interpretation of this that supports the idea that a primary, or even significant portion of the blame lies on consumers for believing in the reality that was laid out before them by marketers.
On the contrary, it's outright impossible to find any interpretation that doesn't put most of the blame on the consumers for believing the price of real estate would rise forever and putting that belief into practice by borrowing money they couldn't pay back.

edited 15th Feb '16 9:23:49 AM by Nihlus1

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#112068: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:23:32 AM

Wow, Scalia really is dead.

And here I thought I had drank too much this weekend partying and dreamt it up.

Oh really when?
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#112069: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:24:46 AM

@Septimus: As Aszur memed but didn't explain, the problem is that you gotta live somewhere, and rents in the US are way too high.

@Nihlus: Actually, no. I see where you're coming from on moral responsibility, but you're not seeing the whole story here. The homeowners bought homes they couldn't afford, but they weren't the ones driving the financial bubble. What drove the bubble was the side bets on the loans that turned the debt market into a casino - stuff like credit-default swaps being bought and sold by hedge funds, and everyone playing hot potato to avoid being stuck with junk debt. The ostensible irresponsibility of homeowners had nothing to do with that.

The Big Short (Michael Lewis' book, not the film) has more of the story.

edited 15th Feb '16 9:26:04 AM by Ramidel

Karkadinn Karkadinn from New Orleans, Louisiana Since: Jul, 2009
Karkadinn
#112070: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:25:12 AM

It seems to me that if you face societal pressure to compartmentalize yourself into one married couple with two kids and a dog for each nice home as per the American Dream, and simultaneously are in an economy that isn't going to pay you enough to afford that dream, unsustainable loaning practices become inevitable. That gives us two levers to pull - so would we rather pay people more, or adjust our ideas of what a 'home' is supposed to be?

Or we could just berate people for not living within their means while simultaneously looking down on them for having non-standard living arrangements, in between wondering why they aren't spending more to stimulate the economy.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#112071: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:35:04 AM

Actually, no. I see where you're coming from on moral responsibility, but you're not seeing the whole story here. The homeowners bought homes they couldn't afford, but they weren't the ones driving the financial bubble.
Yes they were. The bubble was driven almost entirely by them borrowing money they couldn't pay back. All the banks did is treat them like adults by assuming they could repay loans they took out and wouldn't lie about their income. This turned out to be incorrect.

What drove the bubble was the side bets on the loans that turned the debt market into a casino - stuff like credit-default swaps being bought and sold by hedge funds, and everyone playing hot potato to avoid being stuck with junk debt.
False. Hedgefunds are a huge scapegoat to distract from the responsibility of the consumers. How does betting against financial institutions that own mortgages help drive a speculative bubble? How did investing in non-cyclical assets like healthcare or consumer staples contribute towards the housing crisis?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the primary investors were pension and mutual funds. Hedge funds generally takes more risks for higher return, and mortgages were viewed as a safe and steady instrument with poor to mediocre yield. I'm sure you can find some funds that did invest in the housing market, but those would've been more conservative funds seeking a safe investment, not speculative funds seeking growth.

The bubble happened because consumers thought prices would keep going up forever, resulting in them being unable to pay their loans. All the talk about banks and hedge funds is blatant scapegoating.

It seems to me that if you face societal pressure to compartmentalize yourself into one married couple with two kids and a dog for each nice home as per the American Dream, and simultaneously are in an economy that isn't going to pay you enough to afford that dream, unsustainable loaning practices become inevitable. That gives us two levers to pull - so would we rather pay people more, or adjust our ideas of what a 'home' is supposed to be?
It had little to do with that and a lot to do with the housing market being seen as profitable. But regardless, if you can't afford the house, don't buy the house. Americans have three times the living space of someone in Britain, does everyone really think that's necessary and everyone in the USA should be entitled to it?

Or we could just berate people for not living within their means while simultaneously looking down on them for having non-standard living arrangements, in between wondering why they aren't spending more to stimulate the economy.
Taking out loans that can't be paid back doesn't stimulate the economy.

edited 15th Feb '16 9:40:28 AM by Nihlus1

Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#112072: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:40:20 AM

A popping bubble shouldn't bring the whole system tumbling down, however. That's where the banks are negligent.

Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#112073: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:41:35 AM

Sure. But the consumers were just as negligent and did more to create the bubble in the first place (by their sheer number if nothing else) by assuming the price of real estate would rise forever. Blaming everything on the banks just contributes to this country's collective delusion and will probably contribute to a similar crisis in the future.

I applaud Clinton for pointing this out- it would've been so easy for her to fall back on populist rhetoric rather than stating the truth.

edited 15th Feb '16 9:43:07 AM by Nihlus1

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#112074: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:42:13 AM

Consumers weren't the ones paying underwriters to approve knowingly fraudulent applications and firing the ones who objected.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#112075: Feb 15th 2016 at 9:43:12 AM

Might sound like that sorta bullshit golden means crap I hate but...

How much is it to blame on both the banks and the people if

  • a) The banks did not seem to do well enough of a checking on people's capacity to pay back
  • b) Unexpected life stuff happened to people (You suddenly get fired, you are not going to have a nice time paying your home, there is also medical stuff which has higher priority than a home, and the U.S medical system is set to make people fail)
  • c) big money interests can shirk from their payment through bullshit stuff (See: Trump)

I mean all in all, again sounding like an awful golden means fallacy person here, it seems like it may have been way too many things that would allow it to blame it solely on one thing

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes

Total posts: 417,856
Top