| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only one that serves Wall Street is the Right wingers. The left has always been about the commoner, and common interests, like clean water, air, food that isn't genetically modified, laws and regulations to protect people from huge corporate businesses. (For the record the Right wing WANTS laise faire, caveat emptor, and Capitalism, the left wants a strong and fluid central government that can move and protect people as problems occur.)
And what does "Citizen" Highborn know about the commoners, eh?
[Gestures to contingent of Gray Gardeners]
Get him!
Vive le Galt!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, statements like "he's not up to the task" are not critisisms, its just an insult. Its non specific, non provable, non disprovable cutting remark that says.. absolutely nothing other than I don't like you. It completely evades facts, which the right already has a problem with.Not really... The Right especially their front end stooges at Fox seem especially adept at evading inconvenient facts.
What subset of facts is NOT inconvenient for the right?
Hung out with my comrades who had just gotten back from Left Forum, an annual leftie event, the same one, in fact, where Glen Ford gave the "Obama Is Evil" speech above.
Comrade Danny said the best lecture he attended was one by, IIRC, Brother Ford and our comrade, Eljeer, about the New Path for Black Liberation (or something) which, btw, is socialism.
Anyway, I went looking to see if it was on the internet yet, but I couldn't find it.
I did, however, find one of the latest pieces to run in Black Agenda Report: “The More Effective Evil” Curtain Call and the Prospect of Hilary 2016
Comrade Stefanie's favorite moment was getting a Cornel West-hug. Cornel West, of course, called Barack Obama "a global George Zimmerman" in an interview on Democracy Now! that I am going to link right here because I love to watch it over and over again.
It's a well known fact, Republicans have a phobia of facts. ^-^
And, since I'm already over at Democracy Now!, I might as well as link this interview with Anand Gopal on Obama winding down the wars for profit, kinda.
Obama Extends Nation’s Longest War to 2016, Leaving Afghan Civilians in U.S.-Taliban Crossfire
I had fallen off board with the James Risen story.
|
And, since I'm already over at Democracy Now!, I might as well as link this interview with Anand Gopal on Obama winding down the wars for profit, kinda.
Obama Extends Nation’s Longest War to 2016, Leaving Afghan Civilians in U.S.-Taliban Crossfire
I guess you're a Republican now. No one else can criticize Obama apparently.
All those facts!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What?!? "Most"?!?
Gimme one, just one, example of my criticism not being from the Left (and not a joke) and um, I'll, hmmm, oh I know!, I won't smoke pot today. You better hurry up, though.
[Puts down the grinder]
And also a racist, apparently.
Let's keep those broad brushes goin!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's true. I'm bigoted against humans.
Pinkskins out! Gobbos forever!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[Checks the time]
Sweet.
[bubble bubble bubble]
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead we've got libertarians, communists....
Btw, the last time we had this conversation with Comrade HD I said there were only two real leftists on these boards. It is with great joy, comrades, that I can hereby report that the Commonwealth Party of Galt (M-L) has met and exceeded all of its recruitment goals for the preceding period and grown exponentially!
[Applause]
Yes, yes, our tendency has seen remarkable growth, comrades, particularly in Sweden, and there are now, easily, two dozen* hardened communist cadre wandering the Paizo messageboards, spreading the word about international proletarian socialist revolution and goblin liberation.
[Sings The Internationale]
Vive le Galt!
---
*Communists notoriously inflate the number of their membership, according to Theodore Draper, author of The Roots of American Communism and American Communism and Soviet Russia, which I highly recommend, even if they are by an ex-Stalinist.
I guess you're a Republican now. No one else can criticize Obama apparently.And, since I'm already over at Democracy Now!, I might as well as link this interview with Anand Gopal on Obama winding down the wars for profit, kinda.
Obama Extends Nation’s Longest War to 2016, Leaving Afghan Civilians in U.S.-Taliban Crossfire
how do you self identify now, HD?
It's true. I'm bigoted against humans.
Pinkskins out! Gobbos forever!
Yeah humans stink. Catfolk and Gnolls 4 life.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
how do you self identify now, HD?I guess you're a Republican now. No one else can criticize Obama apparently.And, since I'm already over at Democracy Now!, I might as well as link this interview with Anand Gopal on Obama winding down the wars for profit, kinda.
Obama Extends Nation’s Longest War to 2016, Leaving Afghan Civilians in U.S.-Taliban Crossfire
As I have since I became politically aware. Rational anarchist and enemy of the corporate pawns in D.C. I'm not "liberal" or "conservative" in the American sense, since both words have been corrupted to mean "considerably more conservative than the classical liberal" and "reactionary religious nutjob" respectively.
I cannot be a "communist" since so many "communist" guns were turned on the people of my ilk, the Anarchists, who were doing most of the heavy lifting in Spain while the Stalinists were too busy killing Trotskyites and anyone who didn't toe the Soviet line (not to mention bleeding the Republic dry) to actually waste bullets on Franco's Fascists, and we still haven't gotten an apology. If I had to pick an American party that most represents me, I'd say I was somewhere between an economic Green (but less central government and more anarchist collectives, actual socialism, not European style capitalism erroneously labeled as "socialism") and a social libertarian (not with a capital "L", just individual rights in social issues outweigh societies "right" to dictate morals in areas involving consenting adults and what they do with each others and their own bodies).
I think lobbying is just legal bribery, and I think the revolving door between lobbying firms, corporations, and government posts should be removed. I think political donations should be outlawed all together, and any candidate that can get on a ballot should get exactly the same amount of money (tax payer money), air time, and debate time as any other candidate, regardless of their party. I think if we're going to call ourselves a "democracy" we need more referendums and less closed door policy making. I think the incestuous relationship between the main stream press and the current (and some past) administration has corrupted the "watchdog" function of a free and independent press (and the fact major corporations run most media outlets is a disgrace). I am tired of the government using scare tactics to erode the Bill of Rights, and I am tired of being told that we are in some "mortal danger" every five seconds to get the public scared so we can push through various agendas (follow the money, don't listen to the talking heads).
I don't believe capitalism is anything but how Marx described it (a collusion between business and government to screw the people), and I think both the Republicans and Democrats are capitalist parties. I think it is naive to believe any of them have our best interests at heart when all both sides do is try to vilify and dehumanize the other side. More scare tactics. Bill Maher did a segment where he ran two quotes (almost identical) and ascribed both to Paul Ryan. Both quotes were excoriated by the "liberal" panel, and Maher said something to the effect of "oops, the second quote was Michelle Obama. The panel IMMEDIATELY reversed themselves and said the SECOND quote was insightful and spot on (the quotes were nearly identical, mind you), and Maher called them out of their hypocrisy. That, to me, was a perfect example of modern politics. No one listens to the message, they only evaluate the "purity" of the messenger.
So, my stance? Our system is trash if you're not one of the lucky few to pull a nice paycheck, most people who make over a certain amount live in a bubble and have no clue what real poor and middle class people deal with or think, and everyone lives in a little echo chamber, shutting out anyone from the "other" side who might actually see an actual problem and want to fix it. The system is broken, the two party system is a failure, and I'm not playing their game any more. That's my stance.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, dude, if you had Facebook, you'd know where I stand on most issues. I think Doodlebug being on there is what elevated me from "citizen" to "Comrade", since I don't care here, I just argue to argue for the fun of it, but I have real people with non-fantasy names to deal with there (including more than a few relatively well known radicals and anti-Democrat leftists), so I keep it honest there.
And, sorry, I honestly do think Obama is a pawn of the system and a lying sack of manure, just like a majority of his predecessors.
|
The only one that serves Wall Street is the Right wingers. The left has always been about the commoner, and common interests, like clean water, air, food that isn't genetically modified, laws and regulations to protect people from huge corporate businesses. (For the record the Right wing WANTS laise faire, caveat emptor, and Capitalism, the left wants a strong and fluid central government that can move and protect people as problems occur.)
What left are you talking about? Because it could not be american democrats, since they are in business nearly as much as republicans, have no shortage of wealthy men. They stand for a lot of laws and regulations that CONTROL the common man, treat them as children of "daddy government" that feels the need to tell them how to live. No thanks
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What left are you talking about? Because it could not be american democrats, since they are in business nearly as much as republicans, have no shortage of wealthy men. They stand for a lot of laws and regulations that CONTROL the common man, treat them as children of "daddy government" that feels the need to tell them how to live. No thanksThe only one that serves Wall Street is the Right wingers. The left has always been about the commoner, and common interests, like clean water, air, food that isn't genetically modified, laws and regulations to protect people from huge corporate businesses. (For the record the Right wing WANTS laise faire, caveat emptor, and Capitalism, the left wants a strong and fluid central government that can move and protect people as problems occur.)
Well, how about we have an economic policy left of the democrats, and a social policy drawn up by Ron Paul?
|
|
Well, how about we have an economic policy left of the democrats, and a social policy drawn up by Ron Paul?What left are you talking about? Because it could not be american democrats, since they are in business nearly as much as republicans, have no shortage of wealthy men. They stand for a lot of laws and regulations that CONTROL the common man, treat them as children of "daddy government" that feels the need to tell them how to live. No thanksThe only one that serves Wall Street is the Right wingers. The left has always been about the commoner, and common interests, like clean water, air, food that isn't genetically modified, laws and regulations to protect people from huge corporate businesses. (For the record the Right wing WANTS laise faire, caveat emptor, and Capitalism, the left wants a strong and fluid central government that can move and protect people as problems occur.)
You would have to define that more to get me to agree or run. i socially tend to agree with a lot of liberals. I think the government has not business in our private live. Economically too many leftists want to punish success and encourage being a taker
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...and a social policy drawn up by Ron Paul?
You mean like being OK with institutional racism, as long as it's on a state level instead of a federal level?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You would have to define that more to get me to agree or run. i socially tend to agree with a lot of liberals. I think the government has not business in our private live. Economically too many leftists want to punish success and encourage being a taker
This is too ideologically driven to conform to the worst democrats could be doing. Try thinking of i this way.
Government is expensive.
Why do you rob banks?
Because thats where the money is
Why do you want to tax the rich?
Because thats the ONLY place the money is right now.
No economic policy proposed by any democrat remotely reaches the levels of intentionally punishing success.
...and a social policy drawn up by Ron Paul?You mean like being OK with institutional racism, as long as it's on a state level instead of a federal level?
True, his ideas of "states rights" do need to be written out a bit...
|
|
You would have to define that more to get me to agree or run. i socially tend to agree with a lot of liberals. I think the government has not business in our private live. Economically too many leftists want to punish success and encourage being a takerThis is too ideologically driven to conform to the worst democrats could be doing. Try thinking of i this way.
Government is expensive.
Why do you rob banks?
Because thats where the money is
Why do you want to tax the rich?
Because thats the ONLY place the money is right now.
No economic policy proposed by any democrat remotely reaches the levels of intentionally punishing success.
Taxing the rich more to run proper gov. functions i get. Taking from them to give to others that refuse to work or make stupid choices i see as wrong. Hell im starting to feel like a sucker working around the welfare crowd and seeing how much they can afford to spend, what complete lack of consequences they have for what they do.
Taxing the rich more to run proper gov. functions i get. Taking from them to give to others that refuse to work or make stupid choices i see as wrong. Hell im starting to feel like a sucker working around the welfare crowd and seeing how much they can afford to spend, what complete lack of consequences they have for what they do.
Perhaps the solution there is to pay you more rather than to give them less.
|
|
Taxing the rich more to run proper gov. functions i get. Taking from them to give to others that refuse to work or make stupid choices i see as wrong. Hell im starting to feel like a sucker working around the welfare crowd and seeing how much they can afford to spend, what complete lack of consequences they have for what they do.Perhaps the solution there is to pay you more rather than to give them less.
Not likely to happen. If they raised the min. wage above what i make now the cost of living would go up and welfare would too. We need to break this idea of it being a lifestyle choice instead of the safety net it was meant to be. And we should not be taking from one to give to another. If this was about stopping people from starving it would be one thing, frankly i am now convinced that junkfood lobbyists are largely to blame for the (seemingly intentional) missuse
]Not likely to happen. If they raised the min. wage above what i make now the cost of living would go up and welfare would too.
And?
|
|
What?!? "Most"?!?
Gimme one, just one, example of my criticism not being from the Left (and not a joke) and um, I'll, hmmm, oh I know!, I won't smoke pot today. You better hurry up, though.
[Puts down the grinder]
Good lord! There's no need for such a drastic step! Pick that bowl back up!
...wait a second...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What left are you talking about? Because it could not be american democrats, since they are in business nearly as much as republicans, have no shortage of wealthy men. They stand for a lot of laws and regulations that CONTROL the common man, treat them as children of "daddy government" that feels the need to tell them how to live. No thanks
Do you honestly feel that anyone - anyone - in this thread except yourself buys into the narrative that Republicans aren't interested in controlling or manipulating the common man?
I'd really love an answer to this. You uncritically parroting Republican talking points about being controlled by politicians is like a freight train carrying fifty cars' worth of purest Alabama irony.
|
|
What left are you talking about? Because it could not be american democrats, since they are in business nearly as much as republicans, have no shortage of wealthy men. They stand for a lot of laws and regulations that CONTROL the common man, treat them as children of "daddy government" that feels the need to tell them how to live. No thanksDo you honestly feel that anyone - anyone - in this thread except yourself buys into the narrative that Republicans aren't interested in controlling or manipulating the common man?
I'd really love an answer to this. You uncritically parroting Republican talking points about being controlled by politicians is like a freight train carrying fifty cars' worth of purest Alabama irony.
I might be the only one not deluded enough to think either party is about anything but power money and control. Most non-party politicians too i wager
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the Anarchists, who were doing most of the heavy lifting in Spain while the Stalinists were too busy killing Trotskyites and anyone who didn't toe the Soviet line
And what was that Soviet line that they killed so relentlessly to toe?
Collaboration with the "progressive" wing of the Spanish bourgeoisie rather than international proletarian socialist revolution.
Break with the Democrats!
Down with Obama!
For workers revolution!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are both parties way, way too beholden to special interests? Hell yes. Are they therefore identical? No.
Get $$ out of politics. Period. The problem is easy to solve, but the people in power have no incentive to solve it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Communism communism, communism communism communism. Communism? Communism, communism? Comm, unisom.
Communism!
here's where your comparison fails. when workers transit from low wage to a higher wage the total translates to more consumer spending as opposed to higher WIC checks. More consumer spending means more manufacturing and more jobs. which feeds into higher growth.
Of course, it would seem that those two arguments would cancel out to a certain extent. If the minimum wage goes up, then the low wage workers will get less benefits, but their actual total income (wages+benefits) won't go up as much, thus there will be less economic stimulus.
Not if the difference in wages was being made up by the WIC checks. If it was, then consumer spending doesn't grow.
Spending of welfare money is still spending, just like spending of wage income.
Now, for those making minimum wage, but not getting benefits or only benefits they don't lose with the increased wage, they'll actually have more money to spend.WIC spending is straight survival spending. And again people living on the WIC level are generally also forgoing a lot of basic necessities as well as what would be considered luxury items such as movie entertainment, recreation etc. If I'm making a few more bucks per hour, I might take a trip to the movies once every other week instead of four times a year or less. It's not only how much you buy, but what you buy that impacts the economy.
And having LIVED under an extreme low wage economy, I'd still rather have my working poor wage.
Youre not understanding. A wage boost will make them intelligible for WIC, they'll spend money from their raise on groceries that WIC used to cover, and hypothetically no net stimulus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd suggest raising the minimum wage to $15/hr, extending Medicare to all, and taking the millions of food stamp dollars that go to Donald Trump and the Walton heirs and set up free food distribution centers. For starters. If this rotten, racist American capitalist system can't afford decent lives for all, maybe we can't afford this rotten, racist capitalist system.
Com-mu-nism!
Anyway, I remember reading some article about some right-wing California proposition funder, I don't remember his name or nothin' an I don't want to go look it up, but anyway, he's in favor of raising the minimum because it would allow California to pay less in welfare.
F##@ that shiznit. Communism!
My comrade told me he watched a video of somewhere in the People's Republic of China where they used a giant 3-d printer to build a f@~+ing house.
Communism: This Time It'll Work, I Swear
Communism communism, communism communism communism. Communism? Communism, communism? Comm, unisom.
Communism!
Well here's the thing, instead of taking over the means of the production, why don't we skim off a little bit more of the results ?
Agreed.