It is currently Fri May 24, 2019 5:12 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 205 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 11043
Kodiak wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
[
Several things:


Let's talk single payer, as an example (and extend to energy, nearly 30% of the economy).
- The govt dictate what services you provide, how you will provide them, whom you provide them too, and how much you'll be paid.


But in your world, that's not socialism.....because the govt isn't actually running your company?!?


The Tennessee Valley Authority is straight up socialism.

I will concede that single payer is a socialist mechanism for social welfare. However, it is also supposed to be, and let's try not to burst into laughter here, not for profit. Single payer as envisioned by many liberals is not a money making enterprise, but a social service. It would not be designed to be for profit. It is envisioned as along the same lines as social security. That's the point of Medicare for all. Do you think Police Departments and Public Schools are socialist?

As for the dumb Green New Deal, yes, that is straight up socialism presented by...self-titled Democratic Socialists.

But to say the Green New Deal is embraced by a majority of liberals is like saying banning Muslims from the United States is embraced by all conservatives. And the overwhelming majority of liberals favor private enterprise. Nothing is simply black and white, here.

Finally, about this: But in your world, that's not socialism.....because the govt isn't actually running your company?!? I'm glad you brought that up again.

All governments that are more than governments in name only (i.e., not failed states) to some extent regulate and control their economies.
Surely you are not saying governmental oversight of the economy is socialism. Because if that is true, then all governments are socialist.
A good definition does not let in spurious instances nor leave out genuine cases. If your definition of socialism is regulation of business, then you seem to think all governments are socialist. But you do not. So you had better explain yourself. You have not been clear.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1394
Still Lit wrote:
Kodiak wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
[
Several things:


Let's talk single payer, as an example (and extend to energy, nearly 30% of the economy).
- The govt dictate what services you provide, how you will provide them, whom you provide them too, and how much you'll be paid.


But in your world, that's not socialism.....because the govt isn't actually running your company?!?


The Tennessee Valley Authority is straight up socialism.

I will concede that single payer is a socialist mechanism for social welfare. However, it is also supposed to be, and let's try not to burst into laughter here, not for profit. Single payer as envisioned by many liberals is not a money making enterprise, but a social service. It would not be designed to be for profit. It is envisioned as along the same lines as social security. That's the point of Medicare for all. Do you think Police Departments and Public Schools are socialist?

As for the dumb Green New Deal, yes, that is straight up socialism presented by...self-titled Democratic Socialists.

But to say the Green New Deal is embraced by a majority of liberals is like saying banning Muslims from the United States is embraced by all conservatives. And the overwhelming majority of liberals favor private enterprise. Nothing is simply black and white, here.

Finally, about this: But in your world, that's not socialism.....because the govt isn't actually running your company?!? I'm glad you brought that up again.

All governments that are more than governments in name only (i.e., not failed states) to some extent regulate and control their economies.
Surely you are not saying governmental oversight of the economy is socialism. Because if that is true, then all governments are socialist.
A good definition does not let in spurious instances nor leave out genuine cases. If your definition of socialism is regulation of business, then you seem to think all governments are socialist. But you do not. So you had better explain yourself. You have not been clear.

I hope you aren’t truly expecting a legitimate well reasoned response. Shall I speed this up for you? It doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict this one.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 11043
SteelPro wrote:
I hope you aren’t truly expecting a legitimate well reasoned response. Shall I speed this up for you? It doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict this one.


I do think we'll get down to brass tax , now, if he really wishes to. The argument is pretty obvious, here. It's a valid modus tollens and using Kodiak's premise, we can generate the following:

All governments regulate (control) business.

If regulation of business is socialism, then all governments are socialist.
All governments are not socialist.
Therefore regulation of business is not socialism.

If p, then q.
Not q.
Therefore not p.

Easy peasy.

Kodiak needs to explain more unless he's really going to affirm that all regulation of business is socialist. It will be interesting to see what the threshold of regulation is for crossing over into socialism and what standard is used to establish that threshold.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2428
Still Lit wrote:
SteelPro wrote:
I hope you aren’t truly expecting a legitimate well reasoned response. Shall I speed this up for you? It doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict this one.


I do think we'll get down to brass tax , now, if he really wishes to. The argument is pretty obvious, here. It's a valid modus tollens and using Kodiak's premise, we can generate the following:

All governments regulate (control) business.

If regulation of business is socialism, then all governments are socialist.
All governments are not socialist.
Therefore regulation of business is not socialism.

If p, then q.
Not q.
Therefore not p.

Easy peasy.

Kodiak needs to explain more unless he's really going to affirm that all regulation of business is socialist. It will be interesting to see what the threshold of regulation is for crossing over into socialism and what standard is used to establish that threshold.


Isn't the issue more or less socialism?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 11043
Hey Zeke,

The issue is what socialism is in the first place. I said that a socialist regime must own the means of production. I was then labelled with various sobriquets for sticking to that.

My next attempt was to point out that liberal policy is not necessarily socialist. I did this by pointing out that that things like social security, medicare are social welfare programs supported by tax dollars generated from private enterprise.

Kodiak's retort is that there are ways to control how businesses are run without controlling operations and the means of production, for example, taxes, regulations, etc.

That brings us to my present line of inquiry: we can't be saying that regulation and oversight of business is socialism since that would include every viable regime on the planet. It is too broad a definition accurately to capture what socialism is if it is anything.

We need a definition that does not let in spurious cases and does not exclude genuine cases. But it may be that socialism is not really a natural kind and does not admit of a coherent definition.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2428
Still Lit wrote:
Hey Zeke,

The issue is what socialism is in the first place. I said that a socialist regime must own the means of production. I was then labelled with various sobriquets for sticking to that.

My next attempt was to point out that liberal policy is not necessarily socialist. I did this by pointing out that that things like social security, medicare are social welfare programs supported by tax dollars generated from private enterprise.

Kodiak's retort is that there are ways to control how businesses are run without controlling operations and the means of production, for example, taxes, regulations, etc.

That brings us to my present line of inquiry: we can't be saying that regulation and oversight of business is socialism since that would include every viable regime on the planet. It is too broad a definition accurately to capture what socialism is if it is anything.

We need a definition that does not let in spurious cases and does not exclude genuine cases. But it may be that socialism is not really a natural kind and does not admit of a coherent definition.


I don't think there is a textbook definition of socailism that is appropriate in practice. Or stated differently, the real question is what does "ownership" mean? One can imagine where sufficient regulation is imposed on property that heavily curtails usage and onerous taxes such that the benefit from owning the property is largely expropriated that in practice the nominal owner is not the actual owner of the property.

I'd agree with you then that it is possible to argue that any regulation or any tax is socialist, as it is socializing the ownership of the good (to a point).

However, similar to our discussion of good and bad, I think socialism is meant to convey a situation where there is significant and material socialized ownership of the means of production. Thus, while I can't tell you the dividing line between why, e.g., a 10% tax on capital is not socialist but a 90% tax is, I think everyone has the same intuition that there is a categorical difference betwixt the two. Hate to fall back on Potter's aphorism of "I know it when I see it," but fee things in life are Platonic forms.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 13186
Still Lit wrote:
My next attempt was to point out that liberal policy is not necessarily socialist.


It is absolutely socialist. Granted, there are degrees of socialism, but we do not actually live under free market capitalism. Indeed, several so-called "socialist" society rank higher for economic freedom.

And I'm not saying that any and all socialism is bad....just pointing out that what most people are advocating is more socialism....and that is associated, usually, with higher unemployment, much higher taxes, and lower growth. That may very well be what society wants, although I cannot imagine why.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 13186
Still Lit wrote:
Kodiak needs to explain more unless he's really going to affirm that all regulation of business is socialist


In practice, YES. That's not passing judgement on good or bad, but merely stating fact. I also never said regulation is socialism, but rather that regulation means classical social ownership is not necessary. Surely someone so specific with their words would have understood that, but then you're not being intellectually honest in this debate, are you professor?

I will not continue splitting hairs over language with someone who either doesn't understand or refuses to acknowledge fundamental economic principles. This is not a debate about semantics - if you want to debate economic theory you have a lot of reading to do.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 13186
SteelPro wrote:
I hope you aren’t truly expecting a legitimate well reasoned response. Shall I speed this up for you? It doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict this one.


LOL. From someone clearly lacking the education and experience to reason.....

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 11043
Kodiak wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Kodiak needs to explain more unless he's really going to affirm that all regulation of business is socialist


In practice, YES. That's not passing judgement on good or bad, but merely stating fact. I also never said regulation is socialism, but rather that regulation means classical social ownership is not necessary. Surely someone so specific with their words would have understood that, but then you're not being intellectually honest in this debate, are you professor?

I will not continue splitting hairs over language with someone who either doesn't understand or refuses to acknowledge fundamental economic principles. This is not a debate about semantics - if you want to debate economic theory you have a lot of reading to do.


Oh no, friend, that is not what happened.

You said that socialism does not require ownership of means of production bc business could be controlled by other means.

The implication (implication is necessary bc you have not been clear) is that control of business is socialism.

I responded that all govt controls business to some extent so all govt must be socialist on your view.

Now you return to insults. Come now.

Instead, just tell us what kind of control and how much of it warrants the name socialism. Indeed, I feel like i’m about to learn something, so do us a kindness a say a bit more.

The idea that I would need to do a lot reading in order for you to explain your own claims is silly. If you know what you’re talking about, you’ll be able to do so easily.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3542
Kodiak wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Kodiak needs to explain more unless he's really going to affirm that all regulation of business is socialist


In practice, YES. That's not passing judgement on good or bad, but merely stating fact. I also never said regulation is socialism, but rather that regulation means classical social ownership is not necessary. Surely someone so specific with their words would have understood that, but then you're not being intellectually honest in this debate, are you professor?

I will not continue splitting hairs over language with someone who either doesn't understand or refuses to acknowledge fundamental economic principles. This is not a debate about semantics - if you want to debate economic theory you have a lot of reading to do.


i must agree with Lit here. Are you saying that any regulation of businesses is socialism because that is what it seems. Regulations by a government are put in place to benefit society.

I guess you could reach for that if the basis is pure capitalism. Any regulation of pure capitalism could be considered socialist if you squint at it ( a lot). I prefer things like child labor laws and various safety regulations over pure capitalism. You can argue how much regulation is needed but to equate regulation to the standard definition of socialism i.e. control of production is a bit of a reach.

_________________
"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
--Doris Egan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 5003
Quote:
Regulations by a government are put in place to benefit society.


Sometimes.

And sometimes they are put in place to benefit the politician or party pushing the reg.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 13186
jebrick wrote:
i must agree with Lit here. Are you saying that any regulation of businesses is socialism because that is what it seems.


No, I thought I was clear.

Regulation is not socialism, but it is a MEANS to socialism. You seem to be just blindly assuming that every regulation is for the public good....I'm here to tell you it's not.

Any regulation is inherently anti-free markets. That doesn't make it bad. But as it relates to this discussion, it's corrupt.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 13186
955876 wrote:
Quote:
Regulations by a government are put in place to benefit society.


Sometimes.

And sometimes they are put in place to benefit the politician or party pushing the reg.


This is the big disconnect in this thread. The "my government is my God"....Always good for a chuckle when an atheist realizes who he worships....

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 11043
Kodiak wrote:
jebrick wrote:
i must agree with Lit here. Are you saying that any regulation of businesses is socialism because that is what it seems.


No, I thought I was clear.

Regulation is not socialism, but it is a MEANS to socialism. You seem to be just blindly assuming that every regulation is for the public good....I'm here to tell you it's not.

Any regulation is inherently anti-free markets. That doesn't make it bad. But as it relates to this discussion, it's corrupt.


I can agree that any reg by definition restricts freedom. Although Plato has some things to say in book 8 of the Republic that puts pressure on that intuitive position.

Now, you say regulation is means to (for?) socialism. Y being a means or road to X does not make Y an instance of X. Also, regulation is a means for several kinds of regimes and not only socialism (do I equivocate here and confuse political with economic systems?—is there only capitalism and socialism as economic models?).

So what the fuck is socialism if it is not regulation per se?

Then we can see whether all liberal policy tends toward socialism.

Not trying to be a dick. I hope that’s clear.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 7:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1394
955876 wrote:
Quote:
Regulations by a government are put in place to benefit society.


Sometimes.

And sometimes they are put in place to benefit the politician or party pushing the reg.


I think for the most part regulations are well meaning. The problem is the unintended consequences often create more problems than what the regulation was intended to fix. Perhaps the biggest reason Trump is president is the poorly estimated impact of Obama era regulations on business, energy, and the environment. When your regulations cripple entire industries in swing states a political price is going to be paid.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3542
SteelPro wrote:
955876 wrote:
Quote:
Regulations by a government are put in place to benefit society.


Sometimes.

And sometimes they are put in place to benefit the politician or party pushing the reg.


I think for the most part regulations are well meaning. The problem is the unintended consequences often create more problems than what the regulation was intended to fix. Perhaps the biggest reason Trump is president is the poorly estimated impact of Obama era regulations on business, energy, and the environment. When your regulations cripple entire industries in swing states a political price is going to be paid.


I would disagree in that Trump is President because a) HRC was a horrible candidate. B) The Dems, under Bill Clinton, abandoned the working class, which the GOP never supported. This led to no one making policies to help the working class and thus they ( as a disparate group) felt like no one was speaking for them. The Clinton/Obama wing is closer to the GOP in who they target as donors. Trump spoke to the working class to get elected. Bernie Sanders spoke ( and speaks) to them as well. IMHO, Bernie would have beaten Trump in the general election because Bernie would have taken voters from Trump.

But all of this comes around to none of the candidates on the Democratic side are proposing socialist ( based on the dictionary definition) policies. They are speaking of expanding the welfare state. They wish to expand the tax base ( read tax wealthier people) so they can spend the money in different places than the GOP.

_________________
"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
--Doris Egan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 9:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1394
jebrick wrote:

I would disagree in that Trump is President because a) HRC was a horrible candidate. B) The Dems, under Bill Clinton, abandoned the working class, which the GOP never supported. This led to no one making policies to help the working class and thus they ( as a disparate group) felt like no one was speaking for them. The Clinton/Obama wing is closer to the GOP in who they target as donors. Trump spoke to the working class to get elected. Bernie Sanders spoke ( and speaks) to them as well. IMHO, Bernie would have beaten Trump in the general election because Bernie would have taken voters from Trump.

But all of this comes around to none of the candidates on the Democratic side are proposing socialist ( based on the dictionary definition) policies. They are speaking of expanding the welfare state. They wish to expand the tax base ( read tax wealthier people) so they can spend the money in different places than the GOP.


From 2010 - 2016 these states had the following coal power station closures:

Pennsylvania 6
Ohio 10
Michigan 6

That impacted a lot of families. So someone coming in speaking of ending the "war on coal" was a huge reason those states turned red. Maybe Bernie steals some of the populist vote from Trump. There is a good argument to be made though that moderate Dems might have been scared aware from a socialist platform. And lets be frank here, Bernie goes beyond just expanding the welfare state. He is a self admitted socialist. I'm not so sure in a general election 2016 that would have worked. I do think now that the Trump hatred is so white hot moderate Dems will full on embrace the self admitted socialist be damned the consequences. However, if Bernie keeps trying to out crazy talk Trump by continuing to press for allowing incarcerated felons to vote... that stuff won't fly in midwest swing states.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 9:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3542
SteelPro wrote:
jebrick wrote:

I would disagree in that Trump is President because a) HRC was a horrible candidate. B) The Dems, under Bill Clinton, abandoned the working class, which the GOP never supported. This led to no one making policies to help the working class and thus they ( as a disparate group) felt like no one was speaking for them. The Clinton/Obama wing is closer to the GOP in who they target as donors. Trump spoke to the working class to get elected. Bernie Sanders spoke ( and speaks) to them as well. IMHO, Bernie would have beaten Trump in the general election because Bernie would have taken voters from Trump.

But all of this comes around to none of the candidates on the Democratic side are proposing socialist ( based on the dictionary definition) policies. They are speaking of expanding the welfare state. They wish to expand the tax base ( read tax wealthier people) so they can spend the money in different places than the GOP.


From 2010 - 2016 these states had the following coal power station closures:

Pennsylvania 6
Ohio 10
Michigan 6

That impacted a lot of families. So someone coming in speaking of ending the "war on coal" was a huge reason those states turned red. Maybe Bernie steals some of the populist vote from Trump. There is a good argument to be made though that moderate Dems might have been scared aware from a socialist platform. And lets be frank here, Bernie goes beyond just expanding the welfare state. He is a self admitted socialist. I'm not so sure in a general election 2016 that would have worked. I do think now that the Trump hatred is so white hot moderate Dems will full on embrace the self admitted socialist be damned the consequences. However, if Bernie keeps trying to out crazy talk Trump by continuing to press for allowing incarcerated felons to vote... that stuff won't fly in midwest swing states.


Talk is good. What has Trump and the GOP actually done to help the coal industry? It is like trying to help the charcoal burners union when coal production began to ramp up in the 1700's. The GOP has changed some regulations and perhaps created 100 jobs in coal mines because mines are mostly automated. How many new coal burning plants have even been proposed? I do know that Ohio is building a natural gas plant in the same county as their largest coal mine. That should tell you everything about this. The GOP has helped the coal mine OWNERS in allowing them to dump pensions.

Trumps policies have done almost nothing for the midwest except hurt farmers. Not saying Bernie would be better. I think their trade policies would be the same.

Bernie's only socialist platform is healthcare. And I think he has moderated even that but I do not follow him.

As I have said, I am willing to debate healthcare. I think we are at a point where it is not working for the vast majority of people and their is no silver bullet.

_________________
"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
--Doris Egan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1394
jebrick wrote:
SteelPro wrote:
jebrick wrote:

I would disagree in that Trump is President because a) HRC was a horrible candidate. B) The Dems, under Bill Clinton, abandoned the working class, which the GOP never supported. This led to no one making policies to help the working class and thus they ( as a disparate group) felt like no one was speaking for them. The Clinton/Obama wing is closer to the GOP in who they target as donors. Trump spoke to the working class to get elected. Bernie Sanders spoke ( and speaks) to them as well. IMHO, Bernie would have beaten Trump in the general election because Bernie would have taken voters from Trump.

But all of this comes around to none of the candidates on the Democratic side are proposing socialist ( based on the dictionary definition) policies. They are speaking of expanding the welfare state. They wish to expand the tax base ( read tax wealthier people) so they can spend the money in different places than the GOP.


From 2010 - 2016 these states had the following coal power station closures:

Pennsylvania 6
Ohio 10
Michigan 6

That impacted a lot of families. So someone coming in speaking of ending the "war on coal" was a huge reason those states turned red. Maybe Bernie steals some of the populist vote from Trump. There is a good argument to be made though that moderate Dems might have been scared aware from a socialist platform. And lets be frank here, Bernie goes beyond just expanding the welfare state. He is a self admitted socialist. I'm not so sure in a general election 2016 that would have worked. I do think now that the Trump hatred is so white hot moderate Dems will full on embrace the self admitted socialist be damned the consequences. However, if Bernie keeps trying to out crazy talk Trump by continuing to press for allowing incarcerated felons to vote... that stuff won't fly in midwest swing states.


Talk is good. What has Trump and the GOP actually done to help the coal industry? It is like trying to help the charcoal burners union when coal production began to ramp up in the 1700's. The GOP has changed some regulations and perhaps created 100 jobs in coal mines because mines are mostly automated. How many new coal burning plants have even been proposed? I do know that Ohio is building a natural gas plant in the same county as their largest coal mine. That should tell you everything about this. The GOP has helped the coal mine OWNERS in allowing them to dump pensions.

Trumps policies have done almost nothing for the midwest except hurt farmers. Not saying Bernie would be better. I think their trade policies would be the same.

Bernie's only socialist platform is healthcare. And I think he has moderated even that but I do not follow him.

As I have said, I am willing to debate healthcare. I think we are at a point where it is not working for the vast majority of people and their is no silver bullet.



I'm not saying Trump has done anything substantial for the coal power industry. And yes, coal power was/is a sinking ship. But Democratic policies have certainly hastened that demise. So just talking a good game was a big deal in those Swing States. As opposed the Hillary's comments... "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 3:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3542
SteelPro wrote:

I'm not saying Trump has done anything substantial for the coal power industry. And yes, coal power was/is a sinking ship. But Democratic policies have certainly hastened that demise. So just talking a good game was a big deal in those Swing States. As opposed the Hillary's comments... "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."


Thus point proving both my points A and B. I know a lot of midwest people who were looking at either Bernie or Trump. what both of them have in common is the populist message to the working man. The advantage Sanders has is he really believes what he says. It is part of his values.

_________________
"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
--Doris Egan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1394
jebrick wrote:
SteelPro wrote:

I'm not saying Trump has done anything substantial for the coal power industry. And yes, coal power was/is a sinking ship. But Democratic policies have certainly hastened that demise. So just talking a good game was a big deal in those Swing States. As opposed the Hillary's comments... "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."


Thus point proving both my points A and B. I know a lot of midwest people who were looking at either Bernie or Trump. what both of them have in common is the populist message to the working man. The advantage Sanders has is he really believes what he says. It is part of his values.

Bernie would have come under a lot more scrutiny had he won the nomination. He never had to really defend his stances on fossil fuel policies in Appalachia. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have fared better than Hillary. But it still would have been tough sledding for him in those States.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:55 pm
Posts: 5102
SteelPro wrote:
jebrick wrote:
SteelPro wrote:

I'm not saying Trump has done anything substantial for the coal power industry. And yes, coal power was/is a sinking ship. But Democratic policies have certainly hastened that demise. So just talking a good game was a big deal in those Swing States. As opposed the Hillary's comments... "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."


Thus point proving both my points A and B. I know a lot of midwest people who were looking at either Bernie or Trump. what both of them have in common is the populist message to the working man. The advantage Sanders has is he really believes what he says. It is part of his values.

Bernie would have come under a lot more scrutiny had he won the nomination. He never had to really defend his stances on fossil fuel policies in Appalachia. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have fared better than Hillary. But it still would have been tough sledding for him in those States.


Can't disagree with that take- he may have indeed been roasted when it came down to brass tacks.

But I think many people liked Bernie because he seemed more genuine than HRC or Trump (not a big hurdle to clear)
Don't underestimate likeability factor when it comes to being the POTUS. Reagan and Clinton both had it and are looked upon favorably

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3542
SteelPro wrote:
jebrick wrote:
SteelPro wrote:

I'm not saying Trump has done anything substantial for the coal power industry. And yes, coal power was/is a sinking ship. But Democratic policies have certainly hastened that demise. So just talking a good game was a big deal in those Swing States. As opposed the Hillary's comments... "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."


Thus point proving both my points A and B. I know a lot of midwest people who were looking at either Bernie or Trump. what both of them have in common is the populist message to the working man. The advantage Sanders has is he really believes what he says. It is part of his values.

Bernie would have come under a lot more scrutiny had he won the nomination. He never had to really defend his stances on fossil fuel policies in Appalachia. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have fared better than Hillary. But it still would have been tough sledding for him in those States.


Bernie's bullshit policies would come under more scrutiny but he would still be taking voters from Trump in the election. If he got all the the HRC votes plus ones he would get from Trump. Anyone who tells the true will have a hard time Appalachia so make up some BS about being for the working man and play on their fears.


That is neither here not there.

_________________
"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
--Doris Egan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jussie Smollett Charged with False Report
PostPosted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 11:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 12801
SteelPro wrote:
jebrick wrote:

I would disagree in that Trump is President because a) HRC was a horrible candidate. B) The Dems, under Bill Clinton, abandoned the working class, which the GOP never supported. This led to no one making policies to help the working class and thus they ( as a disparate group) felt like no one was speaking for them. The Clinton/Obama wing is closer to the GOP in who they target as donors. Trump spoke to the working class to get elected. Bernie Sanders spoke ( and speaks) to them as well. IMHO, Bernie would have beaten Trump in the general election because Bernie would have taken voters from Trump.

But all of this comes around to none of the candidates on the Democratic side are proposing socialist ( based on the dictionary definition) policies. They are speaking of expanding the welfare state. They wish to expand the tax base ( read tax wealthier people) so they can spend the money in different places than the GOP.


From 2010 - 2016 these states had the following coal power station closures:

Pennsylvania 6
Ohio 10
Michigan 6

That impacted a lot of families. So someone coming in speaking of ending the "war on coal" was a huge reason those states turned red. Maybe Bernie steals some of the populist vote from Trump. There is a good argument to be made though that moderate Dems might have been scared aware from a socialist platform. And lets be frank here, Bernie goes beyond just expanding the welfare state. He is a self admitted socialist. I'm not so sure in a general election 2016 that would have worked. I do think now that the Trump hatred is so white hot moderate Dems will full on embrace the self admitted socialist be damned the consequences. However, if Bernie keeps trying to out crazy talk Trump by continuing to press for allowing incarcerated felons to vote... that stuff won't fly in midwest swing states.


Once Trump learns how huge the Aryan Brotherhood population is in prison, he'll be all for inmates voting.

_________________
86n96 wrote:
I might've finally been right about something.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 205 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
cron
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group