|
Accretionist posted:That's an issue of necessity versus sufficiency. I don't know what that first part means. That implies that the party representatives actually represent the majority opinion in their parties, I don't know that that's true. SubponticatePoster posted:How many of that 90% voted? Well if its 90% of the population, that means only 10% of the population at large disagrees. That in turn means if >20% of the population votes then a majority of the voting population agrees.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
I know Bill's said a lot of astoundingly classist poo poo over the years. Has Hillary?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
I feel the same way about voting a lot of the time telling myself "These candidates are all poo poo, Democrats have to run people I agree with and feel represent me if they want my vote!" and then swear I'm just not going to vote. But when it comes down to election day I have to acknowledge to myself voting is still the most positive thing I can do. If both parties were at acting in good faith or had policies that while flawed at least did some good I might change my mind but you have to understand just how bad Republicans are, they are white supremacist theocratic fascists full stop. Voting against them should be considered a moral responsibility. I voted Obama in 2008 because I bought into the idea he was going to be a truly progressive president who would repair the damage of the Bush years. His first 4 years destroyed that naivety and I voted Stein in 2012, though I live in a solidly blue state and If I lived in a swing state I would have voted Obama again. Also Hillary is poo poo, Democrats like her don't give the slightest gently caress about gay rights. Marriage equality to a lot of third way Democrats is just a super useful tool to differentiate themselves from the economically similar Republicans now that it's gained widespread support, the best part of it is that it doesn't hurt any of her corporate sponsor's bottom line. You should still hold your nose and vote for her in a swing state though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Magres posted:Do you mean AND instead of OR? Cause I'm pretty confident a sweep of public works projects making a bunch of jobs that literally did not exist before would lower unemployment. Look at it this way: labor costs are low; borrowing costs are low; material costs are somewhat low. If not now, then when will we ever have a better chance to build some cool poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Amergin posted:If you get deficit reductions OR lower unemployment I think it would be more palatable. As it is most conservatives still think we're in a shithole economically and that now isn't the time to spend money on aliens. Aren't large scale public works projects guaranteed to lower unemployment?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Cantor's campaign manager complains that the Cooter conspiracy cost Cantor his congressional seat http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/209241-cantor-campaign-manager-blames-dems-for-loss#.U5ob667Tc6g.twitter quote:Outgoing House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-Va.) campaign manager is pinning the blame on Democrats for his shocking loss. theblackw0lf fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Jun 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Aren't large scale public works projects guaranteed to lower unemployment? Man if only we had some history of doing this kind of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Aren't large scale public works projects guaranteed to lower unemployment? What Amergin meant is that to sell this to the public, you have to get a lower deficit/unemployment first and THEN you can sell this to them, not that the program has to result in those for it to be sellable. He phrased it a little ambiguously is all
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
^^^^^That's absurd. Things need to get better before we can do a thing that will make things better. I hope no one thinks that.Zeitgueist posted:Man if only we had some history of doing this kind of thing. Yea, I was being polite, but the entire New Deal was predicated on that basic understanding. That's why FDR was so beloved.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Obama introduced like 5 bills in the last few years to ramp up projects like this and couldn't get one republican vote. Well called for, and had Dems present but yeah. Of course those were band aids on our infrastructure. Latest one was 302 billion in road repairs. Really repairing/replacing/overhauling Americas infrastructure is estimated at more than 2.2 Trillion by ASCE. To put it in perspective, federal state and local infrastructures are currently 91 billion a year. To keep things at their current level and keep them from getting worse we should be spending 170 billion a year. And that's just roads, not the electrical grid, water system, communications grid, rail, ATC, and harbors. This stuff was all originally designed and built with a 50 year lifespan, with a complete overhaul every 20 years. We did the build up and big spending in the 40s. Then we spent big on upkeep in the 60s. Then in the 80s we pushed it off because tax cuts. Them in the 90s hey it looks fine who cares, Clinton got a blowjob. Then in the 00s it started falling apart. The stimulus bought us some time but really just need to bite the bullet and build a first world infrastructure again. It would cost us about as much as we spent on Middle East adventures though, and upset some established interests, and just general knee jerk reflexive NO! so it won't happen though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
I am legitimately curious as to why election days were never made some sort of national holiday. I mean shouldnt we want to celebrate land of the free/democracy? How unlikely is such a thing to happen/to what degree would it be political suicide to introduce such an idea?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Well called for, and had Dems present but yeah. This will never happen sorry enjoy your crumbling highways, people. exmorte posted:I am legitimately curious as to why election days were never made some sort of national holiday. I mean shouldnt we want to celebrate land of the free/democracy? Poors would be able to get off work. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
exmorte posted:I am legitimately curious as to why election days were never made some sort of national holiday. I mean shouldnt we want to celebrate land of the free/democracy? The people who can't get out of work to vote aren't the people you want voting for you, if your goal is making their bosses happy. quote:How unlikely is such a thing to happen/to what degree would it be political suicide to introduce such an idea? It's about as likely as Bernie winning the presidency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:This will never happen sorry enjoy your crumbling highways, people. And collapsing bridges. I'm astounded they still haven't set aside money for infrastructure issues when bridges have literally just fallen down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
exmorte posted:I am legitimately curious as to why election days were never made some sort of national holiday. I mean shouldnt we want to celebrate land of the free/democracy? Republicans won't go for it. Notice how they always want to make it more difficult to vote? Why do you suppose that is?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:I don't know what that first part means. It's something that came in my science-major lab sections. Simple example: You have a surface-protein that you think helps a bacteria stick to surfaces but you don't actually know. If you want to find out, you need to test along two lines: Necessity and Sufficiency. Necessity -- Eliminate the protein. Does the bacteria still stick to surfaces? Whether it does or not answers whether or not the protein is necessary for said sticking. Sufficiency -- Add the protein to a bacteria which doesn't stick. Does it stick now? Whether it does or not answers whether or not the protein is itself sufficient for said sticking. There's bunches of reasons why [something] could be sufficient but not necessary, or necessary but not sufficient, for [something else] so it's useful to figure out both. And this is just a general analysis thing that's perfectly reasonable to keep in mind for political science. And I mentioned it because I figured high voter turn out is necessary but not sufficient. High voter turnout doesn't solve everything but we can't solve everything without high voter turnout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:It would cost us about as much as we spent on Middle East adventures though We could have rebuilt this entire country's infrastructure and instead we went to the far side of the planet to go blow other people's infrastructure up. I will never not wish the most loving awful, agonizing things on the members of the Bush administration that perpetrated those wars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Magres posted:What Amergin meant is that to sell this to the public, you have to get a lower deficit/unemployment first and THEN you can sell this to them, not that the program has to result in those for it to be sellable. He phrased it a little ambiguously is all
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Magres posted:I will never not wish the most loving awful, agonizing things on the members of the Bush administration that perpetrated those wars. That the Democrats heavily supported.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:Casting a vote every 2 years doesn't make one "politically active". Its more active than the current congress
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Magres posted:What Amergin meant is that to sell this to the public, you have to get a lower deficit/unemployment first and THEN you can sell this to them, not that the program has to result in those for it to be sellable. He phrased it a little ambiguously is all Actually the public largely supported the public works projects that were proposed. It's not public resistance that's preventing these from being implemented.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:And collapsing bridges. I'm astounded they still haven't set aside money for infrastructure issues when bridges have literally just fallen down. Anything that makes Obama look good or makes it look like he's accomplished anything is a no-no. Thank Americans for being so loving stupid in 2010.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:It's something that came in my science-major lab sections. Ahh ok thank you for explaining. I don't think solving the big issues is going to happen through the ballot box regardless of turnout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:^^^^^That's absurd. Things need to get better before we can do a thing that will make things better. I hope no one thinks that. People do exactly think that. If the media is constantly giving people the impression that "well the economy isn't doing too bad but it isn't good enough to withstand a harsh winter and jobs numbers and GDP are kinda sorta doing well" then how are you going to sell a big expensive project to them? Big expensive projects are for when you have money to spend and to most people, a tepid economy is not one in which you start a spending spree, regardless of the long-term benefits in infrastructure or the short-term benefits in employment. How do you help sell a big project? Convince people the economy is booming. One of the indicators people like to see in a booming economy is low unemployment, thus you need to fix the problem before you fix the problem. Now drink.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:That the Democrats heavily supported.  SubponticatePoster posted:You advertise it as jobs going to good, hardworking Americans, since people working directly for the federal government will not be undocumented aliens. None of this "contract it out to private enterprise" poo poo. That would help with the xenophobic crowd, anyway. Yeah, I do government work right now and everyone has to provide proof of legal residence before we can start work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Republicans won't go for it. Notice how they always want to make it more difficult to vote? Why do you suppose that is? I know that republicans actively discourage voting b/c it makes it easier for republocans to get elected. I just wondered why a democratically controlled house or congress hasn't trirf such a thing as a nice gently caress you to the right. I mean even if it failed you could slam the opposition with rhetoric along the lines of "so and so doesn't want to make election day a holiday because they hate democracy"
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Amergin posted:People do exactly think that. If the media is constantly giving people the impression that "well the economy isn't doing too bad but it isn't good enough to withstand a harsh winter and jobs numbers and GDP are kinda sorta doing well" then how are you going to sell a big expensive project to them? Ah, so the problem is that people are ignorant and stupid when it comes to the economy and government spending and deficits and debt. Gotcha.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Magres posted:We could have rebuilt this entire country's infrastructure and instead we went to the far side of the planet to go blow other people's infrastructure up. David Frum is calling for a re-invasion of Iraq on twitter 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:David Frum is calling for a re-invasion of Iraq on twitter Hey if he'll agree to be the first pair of boots on the ground, let's do it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Actually the public largely supported the public works projects that were proposed. It's not public resistance that's preventing these from being implemented. From what I remember of the polls the questions were worded in specific ways, such as a poll I saw on the Washington Post saying basically "SPECIFICALLY FOR JOBS do you think projects to improve our infrastructure would help or hurt?" Well of course everyone said "Help" because it creates jobs. That's not the same thing as asking "Would you want your government to spend X trillion dollars on infrastructure?" IIRC other polls showed folks had infrastructure low on the priority list, hence my earlier point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Amergin posted:People do exactly think that. If the media is constantly giving people the impression that "well the economy isn't doing too bad but it isn't good enough to withstand a harsh winter and jobs numbers and GDP are kinda sorta doing well" then how are you going to sell a big expensive project to them? Somehow we managed to pour money into public works in the Great Depression but today it's unfeasible? Not to mention that we don't have enough money to take care of our own loving country but we have enough to launch and maintain massive invasions. It can be sold to people if anyone cared to or was willing to challenge the bullshit right wing narratives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
exmorte posted:I know that republicans actively discourage voting b/c it makes it easier for republocans to get elected. I just wondered why a democratically controlled house or congress hasn't trirf such a thing as a nice gently caress you to the right. I mean even if it failed you could slam the opposition with rhetoric along the lines of "so and so doesn't want to make election day a holiday because they hate democracy" The Democrats are the right, they wouldn't want to propose something that would make the glorious job creators unhappy unless absolutely necessary. They are the party of the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:David Frum is calling for a re-invasion of Iraq on twitter  
ShutteredIn fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Jun 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
zoux posted:You don't know how politically active I am. Surprise us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Somehow we managed to pour money into public works in the Great Depression but today it's unfeasible? Not to mention that we don't have enough money to take care of our own loving country but we have enough to launch and maintain massive invasions. It can be sold to people if anyone cared to or was willing to challenge the bullshit right wing narratives. The Great Depression is a far cry from where we are now. We have news media that spins the news (or focuses on what the gently caress ever people are saying on Twitter) 24/7, an intense love of a handful of lovely numbers to say whether the economy is "good" or "bad", a populace that at worst hates or at best distrusts its government, and a post-Reagan love affair with bootstrap-pulling, to name a few differences.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:David Frum is calling for a re-invasion of Iraq on twitter https://twitter.com/davidfrum
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
I will never understand the people who on the one hand think America is exceptional and is the greatest richest country on earth but on the other hand we just don't have enough money to help people even if it helps EVERYONE. I have that argument much too often. "We couldn't do the thing you're proposing Relentless because we don't have the money" "Yes I do think we're the richest country on Earth" 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Surprise us. Yeah this will go well, if he gives too much info people will dig up what they can and poo poo on him, and if he tries to remain private he will be accused of slacktivism. And yet, none of this will actually address his point!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Amergin posted:People do exactly think that. If the media is constantly giving people the impression that "well the economy isn't doing too bad but it isn't good enough to withstand a harsh winter and jobs numbers and GDP are kinda sorta doing well" then how are you going to sell a big expensive project to them? Solution is to 9/11 another false flag and in the ensuing legislative fiat for Viceroy Obummer you wake up one day with high speed rail connecting every major metro region in the country and no one asks any questions because terrorists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Somehow we managed to pour money into public works in the Great Depression but today it's unfeasible? Not to mention that we don't have enough money to take care of our own loving country but we have enough to launch and maintain massive invasions. It can be sold to people if anyone cared to or was willing to challenge the bullshit right wing narratives. Socialism was gaining a lot of traction in the country at the time (guess why), and with the revolution in Russia still fresh in everyone's mind the rich people basically had to cave into pressure to help the working class, lest they risk their workforce going red.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:58
|
|