Today's Birthdays
A Statesman, Stripey
Current Topics
Interesting read - maybe
by Mellowicious - 01/24/22 06:19 AM
The long and winding road to Dumbass
by pondering_it_all - 01/23/22 09:32 PM
Coronavirus: The Plague of The 21st Century?
by pondering_it_all - 01/23/22 09:21 PM
Don't look up
by Jeffery J. Haas - 01/23/22 03:23 AM
National Commission to Investigate the January 6
by pondering_it_all - 01/22/22 10:45 PM
XX or XY Genome
by Ken Condon - 01/22/22 07:01 PM
Round Table Winter 2021
by pdx rick - 01/22/22 04:46 PM
Winning
by perotista - 01/22/22 02:57 PM
Gerrymandering
by perotista - 01/21/22 06:34 PM
Texas hostages
by Mellowicious - 01/20/22 03:57 AM
Lindsey v. Mitch: Senate cage match
by logtroll - 01/15/22 05:11 AM
Complexity Science
by Jeffery J. Haas - 01/12/22 06:34 PM
What's for dinner?
by pondering_it_all - 01/02/22 09:37 PM
RoundTable For Fall 2021
by Mellowicious - 01/02/22 04:21 AM
Divorce: American Style
by pdx rick - 12/31/21 01:56 AM
Popular Topics(Views)
9,809,993 my own book page
4,872,347 We shall overcome
3,996,202 Campaign 2016
3,633,064 Trump's Trumpet
2,878,752 3 word story game
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 12 of 15 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 15
chunkstyle #309809 12/10/18 09:20 PM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 11,614
Likes: 83
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 11,614
Likes: 83
Interesting premise that the people's wishes should completely override the wisdom of the Party organization. That's pretty much what happened in the Republican primaries in 2016. If the Party hacks had been a little more aggressive, they would have knocked out Trump as unqualified. Instead the "wisdom of the people" prevailed and they elected that abomination.

Maybe pure democracy is not such a good thing when you have an "uneducated" bunch of voters. (Trump's favorites!)

Ironic too, that a socialist state would NEVER let the people elect a fascist. They might let them decide between some qualified candidates and positions, but a Donald Trump would be precluded by the Party out of hand.

chunkstyle #309810 12/10/18 09:29 PM
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
J
jgw Offline
old hand
Offline
old hand
J
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
I have said this before. There is simply no way to provide healthcare for everybody unless gov takes over the entire healthcare industry, lock, stock and barrel. Drug companies get seriously controlled, just like in the rest of the world. Healthcare device manufacturers get seriously controlled, just like the rest of the world. I can keep going with this but I think the message is clear. NO more insurance companies! NO more healthcare payed for by employers, etc. ALL healthcare covered by taxes, just like police, firemen, and libraries. This needs to be done so healthcare for profit doesn't bankrupt the country. This is why the United States, right now, as a nation, spends approximately twice as much on healthcare per capita than ANY OTHER NATION ON EARTH! We are spending over 1.5 TRILLION dollars MORE than any other nation that provides healthcare!

medicare for all is a bad dream. They tell you that it only covers 80% and its up to the sick to pay the rest. Two things wrong with that. The first is that it covers less than 80% and the second is the solution is medigap insurance and that is NOT cheap!

I think I posted something about how much it costs the VA to supply healthcare. Its substantially less than our for profit healthcare. If they were able to get more control over drug prices and devices it would cost even less! I am mentioning this because having Veterans Administration healthcare for all makes a LOT more sense (they, for instance, no only dicker with drug companies for better prices but also shop, worldwide for the best stuff for the best price). Jackass, however, is trying to privatize the VA which is causing the VA to have genuine messes not of their own making.

I apologize for this repeat but I think its important to at least talk about this stuff.

Last edited by jgw; 12/10/18 09:31 PM.
jgw #309811 12/10/18 10:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
C
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: jgw
I have no idea who the tall guy is but the other is Bloomberg. I think he is the one who switched from Republican to Democrat. If he is going to run as a Democrat then he had the decency, at least, to join the Democrats unlike some who want to run as a Democrat without actually joining the Democrats which I think is crazy.

Anyway, Bloomberg, this is the guy who just gave 1.5 billion to a school so that those who couldn't afford, without massive debt, still get educated in a university. You know, the guy who gives, literally, billions of dollars to good causes. He donated, literally, tens of millions, in the last elections to support Democratic candidates. I think what you are telling me, this time, is that anybody who has the big bucks is bad, bad definition of being rich. I wonder, is it your plan to ship all them rich folk to an island someplace (seems to me there was another fella that also had that thought. You know, it started something like; "there is a spectre hanging over Europe". That one is easy, I kinda like the guy in Mexico who started the American Worker's Party a bit better. No sense not going the whole way.



Perhaps the oligarchs shouldn't take so much so that we can properly fund public services and public space. The philanthropy scam has come under some good scrutiny lately, JGW, and I would suggest having a read or two on what the whole 'benevolence' giving is all about.
We have a system that is designed to funnel money from the poor to the rich while having the poor and middle class pay for that system. That's bad JGW. Hence the rise of authoritarianism.

There is little else in your post that I would disagree with and actually support.

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
C
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
Interesting premise that the people's wishes should completely override the wisdom of the Party organization. That's pretty much what happened in the Republican primaries in 2016. If the Party hacks had been a little more aggressive, they would have knocked out Trump as unqualified. Instead the "wisdom of the people" prevailed and they elected that abomination.

Maybe pure democracy is not such a good thing when you have an "uneducated" bunch of voters. (Trump's favorites!)

Ironic too, that a socialist state would NEVER let the people elect a fascist. They might let them decide between some qualified candidates and positions, but a Donald Trump would be precluded by the Party out of hand.


Neoliberal fascism anyone?

chunkstyle #309816 12/11/18 06:42 PM
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
J
jgw Offline
old hand
Offline
old hand
J
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
Chunk;
I surrender! I just wished I could have figured out just what you are, other than a cipher that is really great at labels!

chunkstyle #309818 12/11/18 07:23 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
C
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
JGW, surrender what?
Your entitled to your political position, I'm just making the point that the current makeup of the democratic party power structure is anything but 'Left' in an historical or contemporary sense.
Cipher? No. I'm left. Not the 'socially liberal, fiscally conservative' centrist claptrap but left. Pro union, pro public, pro democracy, anti imperialist, anti war, anti racist, etc... Unlike the current configuration of the democratic party.
I've never hid my politics JGW. I thought I'd explained my positions clearly and made my argument clear as well. It's more than possible that i haven't but who really does with posting online? 90% of the time it's comparing posting styles.

chunkstyle #309819 12/11/18 07:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,655
Likes: 27
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,655
Likes: 27
I think, chunk, what he is saying is that he's giving up on convincing you of anything. You have a position, no information that contradicts that position is of any use in persuading you.

What I find frustrating, and I think is reflected by others, is that from a policy perspective we agree with you. What we find disagreeable is the insistence that your views on political perspectives is the only one. The response, inevitably, is to attach labels. Most of those labels are inaccurate, in my view. From your perspective, correct me if I am wrong, there is no room for compromise, and any hint of centrist thought is deemed "neoliberal" (I'm not sure you are using the term correctly - but then, neither do "neoliberals"), or fascist, or right-wing, etc., etc., etc. I, personally, find it irritating and counterproductive to discussion of substance.

Last edited by NW Ponderer; 12/11/18 08:05 PM. Reason: extending remarks
chunkstyle #309827 12/12/18 01:07 AM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
C
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
It's s'all good and I accept that JGW and I may be talking past each other.
It was only an argument to say that there is no left of any significance in the Democratic Party by design. Heretical for some, others not so much.
My view is not the only immaculate view on politics. Just an opinion I'm bothering to argue and defend.

Y'all see that first ever teacher strike at a Charter School this past week?
Errr.... Wat a minute. Are you for Charter Scools or the teachers?

Just kidding!

chunkstyle #309832 12/12/18 10:38 AM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
C
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 1
Two major resolutions coming from the 2017 AFL-CIO Convention:

(1) “whether candidates are elected from the Republican or Democratic Party, the interests of Wall Street have been protected and advanced, while the interests of labor and working people have generally been set back,” and (2) “the time has passed when we can passively settle for the lesser of two evils politics.”

I think the largest labor organization in the United States is done with labels as well. Perhaps the day has finally come for the Democratic Party to be rid of that old idea of unions.

chunkstyle #309834 12/12/18 07:07 PM
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
J
jgw Offline
old hand
Offline
old hand
J
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,435
Likes: 14
I surrender insofar as even trying to figure out where you are, exactly, insofar as politics is concerned. You do not like the Democratic party, you really don't like the Republicans. You claim to be " Pro union, pro public, pro democracy, anti imperialist, anti war, anti racist, etc.." Then you start up with the labelling. When its all said and done I have absolutely no idea about where you actually stand. I suspect you think that you have explained it all - you have not. What you have done is, basically, leave me with the impression that you don't vote for either side and are expecting some kind of new political party that will save us all.

You have done an absolutely great job of confusion. I, on the other hand, simply give up trying to figure it all out. Seems a bit to confusing to make any sense to me. I am probably just to old to deal with the confusion.

Page 12 of 15 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 15

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 33 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
SuZQ2, KevFilthyANML, Risky, Gladys G. Jackson, Beach Baby
6,297 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums61
Topics17,276
Posts313,991
Members6,297
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.27 Page Time: 0.018s Queries: 36 (0.006s) Memory: 3.0397 MB (Peak: 3.2529 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2022-01-24 07:34:01 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS