Politics Thread

[xudash]

I like how you phrased this and I think it gets at something I've been saying to the point where family tells me to shut up. All of this polarity, Trump, Bernie, AOC, all of it is a result of '08, the bailouts, and the Fed's quantitative easing propping up asset prices. People love to talk about the perils of socialism versus capitalism and I am totally a believer in capitalism. But we don't have capitalism. I'm stealing this quote from someone, but capitalism without default/bankruptcy is like Catholicism without hell.

Take your line about "individuals have an unalienable right to act in their own interest" and consider that millions of Americans bailed out banks and propped up asset prices of others. The promise of that freedom you mention was broken then, and you can't just patch it back up. The economy is supposedly great, the longest bull market ever, and yet millions have not experienced any growth. They don't care about these principles because when the going got tough the government bailed on them and bailed out banks and investors.

Very fair observations.

"Too big to fail" Sure, okay (sarcasm). People should have burned in prison at the very least for that debacle.

Among other things:

1. Term limits for all these assholes.

2. Elimination of their specialized programs (i.e. eliminate their exemptions from programs other Americans must choke on) and have them realigned to the rest of us, including their ridiculous retirement program and exemptions from certain crimes.

3. Burn down K Street, etc.

4. Jail time - hard, merciless jail time - for any Wall Street asswipe who securitizes us into synthetic securities oblivion again.

Love the bolded quote.

[paulxu]

The question stands.

Dash, fair question. Short answer is of course I don't believe in "socialism."

Here's a much longer answer.
I went the other night to hear Kamala Harris at a town hall here in Spartanburg. Outside there were 10 or so college kids protesting her appearance.
Each had a different sign.
As we had over an hour to wait in line, I went up to chat with these young people.
I had the good fortune to run for federal office a couple of times here in South Carolina, as a Democrat.
For about 45 minutes we had our own town hall, where I asked each of them to describe what their sign meant, and what they were trying to communicate.
Wonderful discusions; kids were well meaning, passionate, engaged in the political process, etc. Did my old heart good when I think about the future of the country.

One young man had a sign that said "Socialism" with a big red line through it. I asked him to elaborate. After a while I asked him what socialism was.
He couldn't really answer...none of them could. It was the fear of government, driven home by the media, distrust/anger at immigrants, and lots of other stuff...but not socialism.

You and I know socialism is a system whereby the government controls the means of production.
I don't know of any democrat that believes we should have that.

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that we might call "social" programs that benefit "society" as a whole.
The fire department, the police department, social security insurance, etc.
They are forms of social compacts that society has made with itself to benefit the greater good of all.

This "socialism" rant that I'll have to listen to until November of next year is just a way to create negative emotion against the democrats.
It has no real basis in fact. But, I'll grant that it is incredibly effective...as evidenced by the young people I spoke with a few days ago.

[GoMuskies]

I don't think what you've described is socialism. I think that's communism.

We need some socialism in government. That's what our tax dollars pay for. We need to provide for the general welfare of the country. The question is how much socialism. I think we're in for a tweak here and there in our current system, but we certainly should not be aiming for European style socialism IMO.

[OH.X.MI]

You and I know socialism is a system whereby the government controls the means of production.
I don't know of any democrat that believes we should have that.

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that we might call "social" programs that benefit "society" as a whole.
The fire department, the police department, social security insurance, etc.
They are forms of social compacts that society has made with itself to benefit the greater good of all.

Control the means of production. Hmmmm. Couldn't be anything like this proposal from good ole' Kamala Harris:

- "Companies will be required to obtain an “Equal Pay Certification” and prove they’re not paying women less than men for work of equal value.
- "Companies will be fined 1% of their profits for every 1% wage gap they allow to persist for work of equal value."
- "Companies will be required to disclose whether they are “Equal Pay Certified” on the homepage of their websites."
- "HARRIS WON’T WAIT FOR CONGRESS TO ACT, SHE’LL TAKE EXECUTIVE ACTION HERSELF"

https://kamalaharris.org/equalpay/?mod=article_inline

That is controlling the means of production. That is controlling the means of commerce. That is controlling free enterprise. That is socialism.

[xudash]

Dash, fair question. Short answer is of course I don't believe in "socialism."

Here's a much longer answer.
I went the other night to hear Kamala Harris at a town hall here in Spartanburg. Outside there were 10 or so college kids protesting her appearance.
Each had a different sign.
As we had over an hour to wait in line, I went up to chat with these young people.
I had the good fortune to run for federal office a couple of times here in South Carolina, as a Democrat.
For about 45 minutes we had our own town hall, where I asked each of them to describe what their sign meant, and what they were trying to communicate.
Wonderful discusions; kids were well meaning, passionate, engaged in the political process, etc. Did my old heart good when I think about the future of the country.

One young man had a sign that said "Socialism" with a big red line through it. I asked him to elaborate. After a while I asked him what socialism was.
He couldn't really answer...none of them could. It was the fear of government, driven home by the media, distrust/anger at immigrants, and lots of other stuff...but not socialism.

You and I know socialism is a system whereby the government controls the means of production.
I don't know of any democrat that believes we should have that.

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that we might call "social" programs that benefit "society" as a whole.
The fire department, the police department, social security insurance, etc.
They are forms of social compacts that society has made with itself to benefit the greater good of all.

This "socialism" rant that I'll have to listen to until November of next year is just a way to create negative emotion against the democrats.
It has no real basis in fact. But, I'll grant that it is incredibly effective...as evidenced by the young people I spoke with a few days ago.

Thanks for the post Paul.

Since I know you a little, my original question wasn't even directed at you. I know you would never espouse SOCIALISM in place of even whatever it is that we have now.

Otherwise, I guess I had better start paying a little more attention to what Bernie, Pocahontas and a few of the candidates are actually saying. Frankly, the Far Left base/establishment of the Democratic Party APPEAR to be about far left solutions, and they're unwilling or incapable of demonstrating real leadership by helping to tackle the immigration issue, as a key example of an issue that should have American interests prioritized over any other interests involved.

[GoMuskies]

Control the means of production. Hmmmm. Couldn't be anything like this proposal from good ole' Kamala Harris:

- "Companies will be required to obtain an “Equal Pay Certification” and prove they’re not paying women less than men for work of equal value.
- "Companies will be fined 1% of their profits for every 1% wage gap they allow to persist for work of equal value."
- "Companies will be required to disclose whether they are “Equal Pay Certified” on the homepage of their websites."
- "HARRIS WON’T WAIT FOR CONGRESS TO ACT, SHE’LL TAKE EXECUTIVE ACTION HERSELF"

https://kamalaharris.org/equalpay/?mod=article_inline

That is controlling the means of production. That is controlling the means of commerce. That is controlling free enterprise. That is socialism.

This is a really fucking terrible idea. The real gender wage gap is tiny.

[OH.X.MI]

This is a really fucking terrible idea. The real gender wage gap is tiny.

It's almost like what PaulXU said above: "It has no real basis in fact. But, I'll grant that it is incredibly effective...as evidenced by the young people I spoke with a few days ago."

[paulxu]

That is controlling the means of production. That is controlling the means of commerce. That is controlling free enterprise. That is socialism.

Possibly. Or, it could be this also.

[GoMuskies]

Possibly. Or, it could be this also.

No, it's not that. We've already got laws in place to protect that.

[Juice]

Control the means of production. Hmmmm. Couldn't be anything like this proposal from good ole' Kamala Harris:

- "Companies will be required to obtain an “Equal Pay Certification” and prove they’re not paying women less than men for work of equal value.
- "Companies will be fined 1% of their profits for every 1% wage gap they allow to persist for work of equal value."
- "Companies will be required to disclose whether they are “Equal Pay Certified” on the homepage of their websites."
- "HARRIS WON’T WAIT FOR CONGRESS TO ACT, SHE’LL TAKE EXECUTIVE ACTION HERSELF"

https://kamalaharris.org/equalpay/?mod=article_inline

That is controlling the means of production. That is controlling the means of commerce. That is controlling free enterprise. That is socialism.

The funny part is that Kamala doesn't even pay the women who work on her campaign staff the same as men.