|
Paper Kaiju posted:Shouldn't Florida have a large amount of out-of-state cash constantly flowing into it's state economy from tourism and northern retirees? Tourism, like every other service sector, provides very little in terms of value added. Which means that even if a large amount of money flows into Florida because of tourism, a large amount of that money will also flow out. So, say, Disney World may be raking in a ton of money. But the majority of the employees there make something between 9 and 14 dollars an hour. So a lot of that money is flowing out either in expenses (buses, parts, machinery, etc) or in dividends.
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
I am a college professor and at one point in my career I taught at a university with a relatively big, but not huge, football program (i.e., a school that will frequently compete for the division, sometimes the conference, but never for the national title). One semester I taught a M-W-F class that met for 50 or 55 minutes per session. One of my students was a football player (freshman, back up, absolutely no shot at the pros), and I got a notice from the athletic department that the student would be 15 minutes late for all my classes, and that I should excuse him because he had team meetings to attend. Did I mention this was the spring semester?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:It's not too terribly uncommon to get a bat in your house. Whoosh. It was a vampire joke.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
When I first came to the US as an exchange student, my American history class was taught by the football coach. The basic stuff we did in class was finding out which was the most advanced weapon each side used in a war, diagrams of battles and battle fronts, and so on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
The pattern of privatizations is pretty much standard across industries and the world: - Government starts providing a very popular service that isn't necessarily profitable - Privatization advocates start underfunding said service - Significant campaign against that publicly provided service because it either can't keep up with demand or is "losing" tax payer money. - Gets privatized and stops doing the unprofitable parts of the deal - But the unprofitable part is the popular part, so now the government starts subsidizing that part of things - Losses get socialized and profits privatized, and the private profit is used as evidence of the success of privatization, even though the public is now paying more and getting less. It's been like that for charter schools (public schools get saddled with all the unfunded mandates while losing funding or providing stuff for free for charters), and will likely be like that whenever they privatize USPS (because once they privatize it they will realize that daily delivery and post offices in rural areas and charging the same price to deliver to US bases abroad are very popular).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
The amazing thing to me is the teflon around charter schools. Kevin Johnson and Michelle Rhee are neck deep in corruption charges and other shady deals and they somehow are still taken seriously by policy makers. Like, this is only part of the stuff that they are involved in: http://thebaffler.com/salvos/sacramento-shakedown Stuff that has been known since 08: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article38991375.html We are talking about their charter school stuff misusing half a million dollars among other things. Their charter schools are involved in a bunch of scams that have been extensively documented. And yet Rhee and her foundations still get called by people like Scott Walker and Rick Scott to handle their education policies, and Kevin Johnson was a rising star of the democratic party until sexual molestation charges appeared last year. The fact that the tests that Rhee claims to show the vast improvement under her policies have disappeared, or that they had to return $400,000 because their charter school misused the money, etc. never gained any traction. St Hope still gets a boatload of public money despite a long history of mismanagement and fraud.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Liberals still do love their charter schools. At least those who say they are. Obama was featured in the segment for example. All the factors tilt the scale heavily to one side: - Lobbying money overwhelmingly in favor of charters, with very, very few localized exceptions - Ease of messaging ("giving parents choice" for charter schools, "parents most of the time are morons who know nothing of education and are prone to be fooled by scammers" against). - Allows democrats to look "serious" and moderate, brave enough to stand up to teacher unions. joepinetree fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I realize this, but it's getting things started on the wrong foot. I'm tired of seeing 'the opposition' tire themselves out on something that has no hope of succeeding, then letting apathy set in. Ah, yes. If there was one thing that we learned this election, is that trying to get stuff with no hope of succeeding is futile, what with all the very realistic and achievable goals Trump set up and the heavy price that republicans paid for their obstructionism trying to get impossible things. BIG HEADLINE posted:Abolishing the EC and moving to a popular vote-based system would be a nightmare. As romantic as it sounds to 'make every vote count,' such a system invites multiple recounts in multiple states if the results are within 0.1-5%, as they are now. Seriously now, this is incredibly stupid. You got it precisely backwards. EC makes it so that recounts in states are important. Without an electoral college, a particular state or two being within a few thousand votes is irrelevant.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:That twitter guy is kinda dumb if only because you can exist in opposition and build a powerbase without being a worthless obstructionist tantrum thrower. Every single person appointed or in consideration for appointment in his government is either a typical conservative or alt-righter. But I am sure that pivot is coming any day now...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:My man I believe if you look at the list of things I suggested are on the table are things a cabinet has nothing to do with, and nobody should've expected a loving single surprise on cabinet appointments. Ah, yes. Advisors, people on health and human services, the people he picks to be his liaisons to congress have nothing to do with implementing UHC, higher minimum wage, and maternity leave. Trump is essentially going to bypass Priebus and Bannon on negotiating with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell for these things, and the names fluctuated for Health and Human Services (Jindal, Tom Price, Rich Bagger) will all go "yeah, maternity leave and universal healthcare, Im all in." Bannon will be all "hey, Ive run story after story attacking minimum wage increases, but, you, Donald J Trump, are so strong willed and care so much about policy that I will totally help you with this."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Trump proved that was an actual useful strategy. So I don't see why not. Un-truth as a weapon. I don't see how you go from "these people decided to openly lie during the election" to "they secretly intend to push the most progressive agenda in the modern history of this country."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:Cabinet positions go to people who helped get him elected. It's why Obama had and has a bunch of garbage appointees too. There is a massive difference between "apocalyptic no win situation" and "Donald Trump is going to implement UHC, raise the minimum wage and create maternity leave despite what his cabinet and the leadership of both houses say." But at this point I can't tell if you are just trolling or if you are really this ignorant about how government and politics work. But sure, keep waiting for that pivot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:I love the idea of the fake Cowboy commercials, but was I the only one surprised when John said they'd be airing on Fox and CNN + MSNBC? I mean we know Trump gets his info from 24-hour cable news but I'm pretty sure he only watches one of those stations. He regularly watches Morning Joe, which is msnbc, and has tweeted about watching Chris Cuomo on CNN.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
The fact that there may be parties further to the right in Europe doesn't change the fact that the center in Europe is much further to the left than in the US. En Marche! is centrist by French standards and most of their policies (the few that have been announced) are pretty close to establishment democrats.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:I guess you could argue that there are caucuses within legislative bodies, and you can argue they may have different ideologies or focuses than the parties at-large and how much influence they have is up for debate. I don't know if the US system would automatically be better if we had to have coalition parties with Labor+Gay Rights+Universal Health Care versus Gun Nuts+Racists+Tax Breaks For the Rich. It seems like we'd likely still be in the same rut. It's not just multiparty systems that have more representation to the left in Europe. The UK has a two party system, for example. But regardless of that, the more left-wing democrats in power would at most be center left in Europe. Grijalva in the house and Warren in the senate are generally the ones with the most left wing voting records, and you won't see any of them touch the more left wing positions that exist at the left wing of center left coalitions in Europe, like nationalization of utilities.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
IRQ posted:[citation needed] You are aware that two party system does not mean that literally only two parties exist, right?? Here's some encyclopedia Britannica for you: https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom/Local-government#ref751592 Outside of the world war periods, the UK had a coalition government for 5 out of the last 160 years.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
2010 was the first time a coalition government was formed during peace time in over 150 years. Whatever you want to say about UK politics, the extremely rare formation of coalition governments is not the reason why the left is further to the left in the UK when compared to the US.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
IRQ posted:No of course not, the reason is that (many) americans are some combination of stupid, selfish, or assholes. I just said that the UK has a 2 party system. The reason it is not gridlocked like the US is not because one time in one election there were more than 2 competitive parties. The reason it is not gridlocked like the US is because by definition in a parliamentary system you are not going to have a divided government. The US, meanwhile, has had a divided government for the majority of the time since Nixon.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Yeah, there was the end of life counseling and some people discussed it in terms of it being potentially cost saving. I.e., maybe with end of life counseling a family will decide to put their 98 year old grandma with a brain tumor in hospice care instead of doing ridiculously expensive surgeries and chemo in the hope that she would live an extra 2 months with terrible quality of life. Which the republicans then claimed that it meant that your 98 grandma would have to go in front of a panel who would decide if she would live or die.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
I have donated money to actblue, attended democratic fundraisers and volunteered. So I am in no way a purist or someone who will sit on the sidelines because the dems aren't left enough. But if you think that the response to Trump's election is that the democrats will move left, you aren't paying attention. Even supposedly progressive forces and politicians are already trying hard to boost their centrist bonafides. Deray McKesson put out a newsletter boasting about being a ruthless school administrator when it came to firing teachers, and was tweeting about privatizing USPS. Brittany Packnett is a teach for america stooge. Mayor Garcetti went in front of a supposedly progressive crowd on a pod save America event and blamed increase in costs of high education on faculty salaries while adding that faculty salaries were like NBA salaries (which is the opposite of the actual data shows, which is that there is a near 1:1 relationship between cuts in public spending and tuition increase). So a supposedly progressive guy, in front of a supposedly progressive audience, with the facts and the data clearly showing that the cause was shrinking state support, decided to blame "superstar faculty" to thunderous applause. Tom Perez will dig a hole in the ground and hide the next time anyone asks him if he supports medicare for all. I am joining the DSA, and will continue to vote democratic if there are no realistic alternatives. But democrats have made it absurdly clear that their strategy to fight Trump is to double down on centrism (at least when it comes to education and healthcare).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 07:57
|
|