Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby careinke » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 02:20:34

lpetrich wrote:
Cog wrote:Sad to see the historic racism of the Democrat party continues 154 years after the end of the Civil War.

What racism? The racist part of the Democratic Party left the party and became Republicans.

If the Democrats are such belligerent white supremacists, then why do they have many more blacks and Hispanics than the Republicans?


Really??? In the entire 20th century only three Senators and 13 Representatives switched over to Republican.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Representatives_who_switched_parties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Senators_who_switched_parties

Maybe you should research before parroting the Democratic Plantation lies.
Cliff (Start a rEVOLution, grow a garden)
User avatar
careinke
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon 01 Jan 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 03:23:12

I see Democrats that want to eliminate both ICE (immigration, customs enforcement) and ICEs (internal combustion engines). They want to eliminate ICE to open the border to a flood of potential Dem voters and welfare dependents and though they dance around the specifics they want to eliminate ICEs through the "New Green Deal" with carbon taxes etc. to fight climate change. here is a quote from an WP article discussing the issue.
Even without a detailed plan, Ocasio-Cortez has established a far-left baseline of what a Green New Deal might look like and shifted the conversation for presidential hopefuls who saw the enthusiasm her initial efforts generated, particularly among young voters. Like Harris, those hopefuls are being asked about the idea and discussing it.

“The debate we’re starting to see is between ideas on the left and ideas on the further left,” said Carlock, who said he believes that dialogue could pull Republicans to more centrist ideas such as money for research and development or a carbon tax.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... e22f1cf229
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 04:13:08

This business with Governor Northam's yearbook photo raises a couple of questions.
One are we to the point now where only those who have never once done something politically incorrect can run for and hold office? If so the candidate pool just got very small indeed.
Second if letting a picture of yourself being a" Good old boy" southerner get published is enough to get you thrown out of office what is the penalty for falsely claiming minority status on a job application get you. After all nobody lost anything from that pictures existence until now and some deserving minority was deigned a position at Harvard because Warren stole it.
The Dems thought this was all fun and games when they were picking through Justice Kavanaugh's past but now might be seeing they have opened a pandoria's box with a lot of Democrats in it.
Let us open up the records of that slush fund the Congress used to have to pay off sexual harassment claims against members. If a yearbook picture gets you out of office every one of those payouts should come with a resignation. R or D.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 08:04:04

An interesting article from the Cato Insitutute. Yes, I know, Cato. I read this not as a political statement but as a gage of how polarized we have become.

In short, thellinflg Democrats that Trump supports something causes a strong drop in support.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/deroy-m ... mp-to-fail
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13305
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 08:43:56

Newfie wrote:An interesting article from the Cato Insitutute. Yes, I know, Cato. I read this not as a political statement but as a gage of how polarized we have become.

In short, thellinflg Democrats that Trump supports something causes a strong drop in support.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/deroy-m ... mp-to-fail

Yes their polls tell them bashing all things Trump is a winning strategy for 2020.
I think the polls are right for a change.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby evilgenius » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 10:39:34

Cog wrote:@evilgenius

The old school Democrats seem to me to be about to fade out of existence. I would put a Joe Biden or a Chuck Schumer in the old school category. Professional politicians that have been around DC for a long time. Given what the younger Democrat candidates are talking about, I don't see old white guys getting the nod. With the exception of Bernie who was able to engage the younger and more left crowd.

The conversation now is more free stuff, raising taxes, diversity, and easing immigration policies, and other sort of left things. There is tons of passion on the left in the Democrat party. They can mobilize crowds and enthusiasm. I happen to believe that the majority of white and blue collars Democrats aren't quite that far left yet. But the more radical left is growing in power. When I looked at the House especially. The new members are sort of out there.

I chalk their being "out there" up to being young. I used to believe that a more centralized approach to money could work too. Moral hazard is real, in that people do need incentives to cooperate and help each other. Not everybody needs an incentive, but how many Mother Theresa types do you see every day? Even in the best version of our society, where every parent knew how to raise their kids and the kids were encouraged to experiment and fail as many times as necessary to find their passion - so that the majority wound up doing it for a living, there wouldn't be an overwhelming number of people who would be good to a stranger without incentive. Businesses are good to their customers every day. They have the incentive of retaining them to think about. Employees, strictly, not so much. It takes the right kind of management to get an employee on a business's side. Money, alone, isn't enough. These new Democrats need to understand what it is like to be an employee in today's workforce. They need to empower employees to have the kind of standing where proper management, when it works outside of money, can actually speak to them. The money part is great too, for helping people make it, but there is more to it than that. You can't ask a business to enjoin in guaranteed failure because of overly high wages, but you can ask them to change their philosophy when it comes to management, when they have a business large enough to employ over a certain number of people. It means a lot to know that you are able to stay home when you are sick, or that you can take a vacation once a year. Those are standard things that the gig economy threatens. You could say that many large corporations operating within the gig economy actually owe some of their success to their "employees" because it was those employees who took on the risk of being in that business, operating as independent contractors, and not the businesses themselves. Tax rates are sometimes off topic when it comes to worker's rights.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2695
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby lpetrich » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 16:41:05

careinke wrote:Really??? In the entire 20th century only three Senators and 13 Representatives switched over to Republican.

The politicians may not have switched, but the voters did. Consider Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy", and consider Trent Lott stating "The spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform." The Republican Party has very evidently become the party of Jefferson Davis. If Abraham Lincoln was alive today, he'd seem like a good Democrat. Maybe not a Bernie Sanders one, but still a Democrat.

Maybe you should research before parroting the Democratic Plantation lies.

Lies??? After reading List of African-American United States Representatives - Wikipedia and List of African-American United States Senators - Wikipedia -- looking at that, one might almost think that it is a plantation where its black members are wielding whips and saying "Get to work, honky boy! You've got cotton to pick!"
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 17:21:46

Because Democrats are obsessed with matters of race does not make them any less racist. Remember George Carlin's list of the 10 things you cannot talk about in America? Prominent among them was the remark that minorities are much bigger racists than white people. I have been observing the truth of this for decades.

The founder of the modern Democratic Party was Andrew Jackson, a man who owned hundreds of slaves on his plantation, and who made his fame by slaughtering Indians and forcibly relocating the survivors to reservations. By contrast, the Republicans have always been about business and defense.

The solid Democratic South of the USA was awash in racism from the reconstruction up until the Civil Rights era, and they never found a Republican under the white sheets of the KKK. The popular Republican President DD Eisenhower began the Civil Rights era by de-segregating the US Armed Forces.

Today the US Democratic party continues it's long tradition of oppressing minorities via legislation which results in poverty-stricken inner city areas, affirmative action admissions in higher education, and the support of open borders in this country.

Get a clue. Just because a politician says something, does not make it true. Learn to notice what they DO, not what they SAY, and then observe the actual RESULTS of what they do.

IMHO, the actions of the modern Democratic Party remain true to the ideals of Andrew Jackson.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby lpetrich » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 18:05:33

KaiserJeep wrote:Because Democrats are obsessed with matters of race ...

Evidence: {}
Remember George Carlin's list of the 10 things you cannot talk about in America? Prominent among them was the remark that minorities are much bigger racists than white people.

Citation needed.
The founder of the modern Democratic Party was Andrew Jackson, ...

A Southern white Democrat, the sort of Democrat who became a Republican over the last half-century or so.
The popular Republican President DD Eisenhower began the Civil Rights era by de-segregating the US Armed Forces.

Only for John Birchers to insinuate that he was a Communist.
... affirmative action admissions in higher education ...

How does that oppress minorities?
... and the support of open borders in this country.

"Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo. The Democrats want less government." That's what I think whenever I see something like this. Barack Obama got called by some immigration activists the "Deporter in Chief".
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Sun 03 Feb 2019, 22:51:48

You seem to be abysmally ignorant on matters relating to current events, defined as anything less than a century old. You are unlikely to fill that void if your only source of information is the Internet.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby lpetrich » Mon 04 Feb 2019, 02:31:27

KaiserJeep wrote:You seem to be abysmally ignorant on matters relating to current events, defined as anything less than a century old. You are unlikely to fill that void if your only source of information is the Internet.

What's the alternative? Fox News?

What would dead-tree resources tell us that the Internet wouldn't?
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 04 Feb 2019, 03:49:07

lpetrich wrote:
KaiserJeep wrote:You seem to be abysmally ignorant on matters relating to current events, defined as anything less than a century old. You are unlikely to fill that void if your only source of information is the Internet.

What's the alternative? Fox News?

What would dead-tree resources tell us that the Internet wouldn't?

A trip through the history and politics stacks at the local library or book store would give you a wealth of information that is much more reliable then the jumble of disinformation found daily on the internet.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby lpetrich » Mon 04 Feb 2019, 04:28:15

vtsnowedin wrote:
lpetrich wrote:What would dead-tree resources tell us that the Internet wouldn't?

A trip through the history and politics stacks at the local library or book store would give you a wealth of information that is much more reliable then the jumble of disinformation found daily on the internet.

Not a good answer.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia:
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
  • The original House version:
    • Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
    • Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
    • Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
    • Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
  • The Senate version:
    • Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
    • Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
    • Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
    • Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

The "bad" Democrats were almost all Southern ones. Southern Republicans were worse than Southern Democrats, and likewise for Northern ones. The Republicans look good only because there were not many Southern Republicans at the time.
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 04 Feb 2019, 06:05:45

Might I suggest to you that the Southern politicians of both parties voted against the civil rights act because voting for it in that year would end their political careers. The majority of voters in the south were white, still ticked off by the "War of Northern aggression" and wanted to keep Jim Crow segregation laws in place forever. Truth be told much of that sentiment still exists in the white population of the South even though expressing it has been harshly suppressed by political correctness.
If you had read a book or two you might know that.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby Cog » Mon 04 Feb 2019, 07:44:06

The civil rights act of 1964 would not have passed without support by Republicans.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12836
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 05 Feb 2019, 09:05:52

Going back to the idea of Medicare for all, or more generally Single Payer Health Insurance. I think the Democrats are onto something very good, but they are pushing it in a very ham fisted manner. One wonders if they really understand what they are about.

FIRST: We already have single payer health insurance, the Taxpayer. That seems prima facia obvious but it seems to illude most.

SECOND: Our current plan is he most expensive in the world, and the results are slightly below socialist Cuba let alone all those Socialist states in Western Europe. So let’s put the socialist thing behind us please.

THIRD: Because it is so expensive, and it costs more than we acknowledge, it should be able to structure something that is at least as effective but also costs less, a lot less.

FOURTH: You want to have some private extended coverage? FINE, go ahead, power to you. In fact I already have Medicare AND additional coverage.

FITH: It’s for CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants ONLY. Period.

I don’t know what the base “Medicare” package will look like.

The change over from our current “system” to something rational would take a lot of cooperation and planning.

Many folks now get insurance from their employer, that package is very important. Adding a government run base would remove a lot of those costs. The costs to employer should come down and benefit packages would need readjustment. But it also allows folks to move from job to job more fluidly. This should allow greater efficiency in the work marketplace and change company dynamics. I suspect it would put a few companies out of business because the only reason folks stay is because of the benefit package. But also it should make it easier to get rid of dead wool who hang on at any cost just for the medical. benefits. Overall it should be a boon for business.

It would put a large number of clerks and associated people out of work. They need some transitional training and support.

God knows how many insurance companies would go bankrupt, but there will be a loss of taxes. And something needs to be done about drug costs. Perhaps plannfunding of R&D?

Folks with insurance through their retirement would need some compensation. Perhaps a cash buyout. So if you are retired you get the projected cost of the plan for future years. If you are still working you get a prorated buyout.

This should be a boon for the states because it relieves them of a future burden. OTOH many states plans are inadequately funded, they will have to be forced to “borrow” money from the plan to make these payouts. This bit would be interesting. But it is just dealing with a mess now not later.

There needs to be some adjustment mechanism in the plan to adjust the benefits to the cost. As years and technology progress adjustments will be necessary.

I’d like to see this as some bipartisan proposal. It would likely take years to argue out and then once set it would need a few years to transition to or prepare for the change. A LOT of education would need to happen. Not easy.

We are in a mess, it will be messy to get out. But it’s doable.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13305
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 05 Feb 2019, 11:52:06

Sorry Newfie but this bit won't work.
FITH: It’s for CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants ONLY. Period.

We can't have uninsured Illegals turned away at the ER door and dying in the parking lot or delivering their babies on the sidewalk.
The rest of your proposal is pretty good. To clarify when a company stops providing health care to employees (or retirees for that matter) they need to increase their wages by the amount of the premiums previously paid, as the employees will need that extra income to pay either the federal plan premiums or medicare taxes or both , whichever it turns out to be. It certainly won't be free no matter what anyone says.
Those premiums and medicare taxes should all be tax deductible for everyone as should any drug or other out of pocket expense we encounter.
I think you meant that but my description is a bit clearer.
If you look at the Canadian or UK systems they are Free "at the point of use" that does not mean you and your employer are not paying for all of it through one tax or another. In fact the UK tax is about 70 percent of average premium plans here.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 05 Feb 2019, 11:54:49

And it's dead weight or dead wood not dead wool. :-D
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 05 Feb 2019, 16:21:56

There is a tremendous amount to work out in transition to a single payer, and its more difficult here in the USA because of the way it’s interwoven with employment.

OK, now to get kinky, here’s my fantasy. Trump is re-elected and he appoints Warren to a high level commission to come up with a single payer approach, to write the legislation. She might be capable of doing it, she’s wonky and smart enough.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13305
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 3

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 05 Feb 2019, 19:44:41

Newfie wrote:There is a tremendous amount to work out in transition to a single payer, and its more difficult here in the USA because of the way it’s interwoven with employment.

OK, now to get kinky, here’s my fantasy. Trump is re-elected and he appoints Warren to a high level commission to come up with a single payer approach, to write the legislation. She might be capable of doing it, she’s wonky and smart enough.

That has a pretty weird fantasy on two counts, one that Trump might appoint her to anything higher then a Trump resort chambermaid and two that she is smart enough to get the job done.
I don't see any of the power players today. Trump, Pelosie, Warren, Schumer, etc. being a bit useful in getting from where we are to a better system that provides care for all without destroying the system we have that despite all it's flaws and cost overruns is the system that advances the capabilities of the medical world better and faster then any other country in the world.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests