US politics general thread

[cerebus]

Lol, how to trigger socialist snowflakes.... Venezuela.
How do socialists defend socialism? By ignoring the regular failures of socialism i.e. ignoring reality, and then cherry picking a few Scandanavian countries that actaully have strong market economies to support their small doses of socialism e.g. socialized healthcare.

No you're right, much better to keep giving deep tax cuts to the rich

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/us/politics/trump-tax-cuts-rich.html

 

[Techne]

No you're right, much better to keep giving deep tax cuts to the rich

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/us/politics/trump-tax-cuts-rich.html

Ah yes, the other form of denying reality and the disastrous outcomes of socialism... But but but but what about those evil tax cuts or the evils of capitalism or some other poppycock Tu Quoque fallacy.

And there is no need to lecture people about the failures of increased or decreased taxes when it is blindingly obvious that the current monetary system will make sure debt will increase either way.

 

[rietrot]

No you're right, much better to keep giving deep tax cuts to the rich

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/us/politics/trump-tax-cuts-rich.html

Great initiative from Trump. The less they stop penalising the rich the more the rich can use their money to do stuff and we'll see that filter down as employment opportunities.

 

[cerebus]

Rudy Giuiliani's latest round of interviews have been hilarious to watch. He's doing more to hurt Trump than the whole allied Democratic party combined.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/what-is-rudy-giuliani-talking-about

“Four months, they’re not going to be colluding with Russia, which, I don’t even know if that’s a crime, colluding about Russians. You start analyzing the crime—the hacking is the crime. The President didn’t hack.”

“Cohen always goes too far, and when you’re lying there’s always a trap for you”
“He said there was a one-on-one meeting, that Donald, Jr., came in and told him”—meaning Trump, Sr.—“the meeting was about to take place.”
“Donald [Jr.] denies, the President denies, there is no corroboration.”
“Donald, Jr., Jared, Manafort, and two others: Gates”—Rick Gates, Manafort’s deputy—“and one more person,”
“That’s a real meeting on another provable subject, in which he”—Cohen—“did not participate.”

“There are two different meetings, one of which has leaked out, and the other of which has been given to three reporters, and Jay Sekulow and I have been successful, I think, in beating it back,”

“We checked with their lawyers—the ones we could check with, four of the six. That meeting never, ever took place. It didn’t happen. It’s a figment of his imagination, or he’s lying. The only meeting they find for that day that including any of these people was a meeting about the Hispanic judge that the President had criticized back around that time. So that hopefully sets the record straight.”

:wtf:

 

[Techne]

Great initiative from Trump. The less they stop penalising the rich the more the rich can use their money to do stuff and we'll see that filter down as employment opportunities.

Decreased personal taxes lead to increased personal income availability and then hopefully increased spending by individuals which will be taxed somewhere else.
Decreased corporate taxes will also result in increased income for the company and that usually results in the company either hiring more people to expand or increased dividends to their shareholders. Wage increase is rarely an outcome of decreased corporate taxes.

Bottom line is either increased or decreased taxes will result in increased debt with the current monetary system.

 

[C4Cat]

Great initiative from Trump. The less they stop penalising the rich the more the rich can use their money to do stuff and we'll see that filter down as employment opportunities.

You think tax is a form of punishment? So, in your view, you think they should stop penalising the rich but it's OK to punish everyone else...

Oh wait, my bad, you said the less they stop penalising the rich, so you want them to stop less often, meaning penalise more. You're so confusing rietrot

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

You think tax is a form of punishment? So, in your view, you think they should stop penalising the rich but it's OK to punish everyone else...

Oh wait, my bad, you said the less they stop penalising the rich, so you want them to stop less often, meaning penalise more. You're so confusing rietrot

He's about as clear as Giuliani.

I think we've come to the beginning of that point in time where all the enablers of the big orange liar start gabbling nonsense as their pitifully constructed illusion falls apart around them.

 

[konfab]

Lol you watch the view. /hands woman card

Anyone knows with a brain that socialism worked in the Scandinavian countries and several other countries.

But the numb nuts in the video couldn’t even begin to say how to pay for it.

1) They don't practice anything close to socialism
2) South Africa has all the types of policies that the Scandinavian countries have, and has had them for 24 years, completely unopposed by any nasty Republicans . High taxation, high government spending, single payer healthcare, a public education system. Why isn't South Africa the Democrat paradise yet? Or better yet, why isn't Venezuela or Cuba?

 

[cerebus]

1) They don't practice anything close to socialism

Correct, they practice democratic socialism - the same kind espoused by the likes of Sanders. As you say, it's not even close to the kinds of socialism you see in Venezuela.

2) South Africa has all the types of policies that the Scandinavian countries have, and has had them for 24 years, completely unopposed by any nasty Republicans . High taxation, high government spending, single payer healthcare, a public education system. Why isn't South Africa the Democrat paradise yet? Or better yet, why isn't Venezuela or Cuba?

It's not magic, it does still help if the government isn't a total kleptocracy and the economy is healthy.

 

[rietrot]

You think tax is a form of punishment? So, in your view, you think they should stop penalising the rich but it's OK to punish everyone else...

Oh wait, my bad, you said the less they stop penalising the rich, so you want them to stop less often, meaning penalise more. You're so confusing rietrot

You got it the first time. We should stop penalising everyone. Governments is inefficient we don't need them and taxes are theft to pay for that inefficiency.

 

[rietrot]

Correct, they practice democratic socialism - the same kind espoused by the likes of Sanders. As you say, it's not even close to the kinds of socialism you see in Venezuela.

Prefixing socialism with democratic doesn't change it. It is still the same thing that will make millions of people die of hunger, whether you vote for it or not. We've also known for some time that Democracies is flawed (mob rule). That's why the US is a Republic and not a democracy, that's also why we created a Republic when we tried to restart stuff correctly.
Democracy is socialism, democratic socialism is still socialism. And the recent Scandinavian socialist experiments will fail just like it always fails when people start voting for too much free shît.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

It's not magic, it does still help if the government isn't a total kleptocracy and the economy is healthy

Socialism breeds kleptocracy and destroys the economy, as sure as the sun rises in the morning. You can't have one without the other.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Even Libertarians Admit Medicare for All Would Save Trillions

Firstly, the Mercatus Center is market orientated, not specifically libertarian, there's a difference.

Second, that article even points out the fact that the claimed money saving is BS, but frames it such to pretend it is not:

But the real game here for Mercatus is to bury the money-saving finding in the report’s tables while headlining the incomprehensibly large $32.6 trillion number in order to trick dim reporters into splashing that number everywhere and freaking out. This is a strategy that already appears to be working, as the Associated Press headline reads: “Study: ‘Medicare for all’ projected to cost $32.6 trillion.”

 

[The_Assimilator]

Socialism breeds kleptocracy and destroys the economy, as sure as the sun rises in the morning. You can't have one without the other.

Democratic socialism. Remember when we had the discussion about not wasting time debating with people who are wilfully dishonest? Yeah, that's you. Stop doing that.

Firstly, the Mercatus Center is market orientated, not specifically libertarian, there's a difference.

Second, that article even points out the fact that the claimed money saving is BS, but frames it such to pretend it is not:

Did you fail basic math as well as basic comprehension?

Projected current healthcare total cost: $34 trillion
Projected "Medicare for all" total cost: $32 trillion
Saving: $2 trillion

 

[rietrot]

Democratic socialism. Remember when we had the discussion about not wasting time debating with people who are wilfully dishonest? Yeah, that's you. Stop doing that.



Did you fail basic math as well as basic comprehension?

Projected current healthcare total cost: $34 trillion
Projected "Medicare for all" total cost: $32 trillion
Saving: $2 trillion

Honest question. What makes democratic socialism different then failed socialism?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Democratic socialism. Remember when we had the discussion about not wasting time debating with people who are wilfully dishonest? Yeah, that's you. Stop doing that.

There is no difference, just because you like to be suckered by a pathetic rebrand doesn't mean the rest of us have to follow suit. Someone certainly is being dishonest here ...
Socialism = socialism
democratic socialism = socialism

Did you fail basic math as well as basic comprehension?
Projected current healthcare total cost: $34 trillion
Projected "Medicare for all" total cost: $32 trillion
Saving: $2 trillion

Get back to me when you've actually read the paper, it is clear that you have not.

 

[cerebus]

Honest question.

:crylaugh:

What makes democratic socialism different then failed socialism?

Actually there is no one 'true' socialism, and nearly all governments have elements of socialism to one degree or another, including the United States. Medicaid, welfare, social security - and in a sense, the police force and army - are socialized institutions. In the US the public welfare elements of those public provisions have been eroded and defunded, and attempts to restore them are labeled as socialist. The kind of socialism promulgated by dem socialists are actually fairly centrist by the standards of most countries.

The kind of socialism you're obviously talking about is the Venezuelan model, which is completely unique to the economy and leadership history of that country. Chavez was a populist strongman like Trump, Maduro is economically inept, and the country's facade of democracy is a sham.

http://thehill.com/opinion/internat...n-venezuela-demonstrates-failure-of-socialism

While Chávez and Maduro cannot escape the lion’s share of the blame for today’s nightmare in Venezuela, they are reaping the bitter fruit planted by Venezuela’s democratic leaders. By robbing the voters of meaningful choice, by substituting buying votes for earning them, and by persuading voters that their fate is not in their hands, the leaders of the AD and COPEI committed an act of abdication that led, as such abdications invariably lead, to corruption, then chaos and evaporation of confidence in democracy, followed by dictatorship and tragedy.

 

[konfab]

As noted earlier, the federal cost of enacting the M4A Act would be such that doubling all federal individual and corporate income taxes going forward would be insufficient to fully finance the plan, even under the assumption that provider payment rates are reduced by over 40 percent for treatment of patients now covered by private insurance.

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/blahous-costs-medicare-mercatus-working-paper-v1_1.pdf

Why am I not surprised that the communists at the Jacobian didn't pick this one up?

 

[Hamish McPanji]

:crylaugh:



Actually there is no one 'true' socialism, and nearly all governments have elements of socialism to one degree or another, including the United States. Medicaid, welfare, social security - and in a sense, the police force and army - are socialized institutions. In the US the public welfare elements of those public provisions have been eroded and defunded, and attempts to restore them are labeled as socialist. The kind of socialism promulgated by dem socialists are actually fairly centrist by the standards of most countries.

The kind of socialism you're obviously talking about is the Venezuelan model, which is completely unique to the economy and leadership history of that country. Chavez was a populist strongman like Trump, Maduro is economically inept, and the country's facade of democracy is a sham.

http://thehill.com/opinion/internat...n-venezuela-demonstrates-failure-of-socialism

So basically the United Socialist States of America?

 

[cerebus]

So basically the United Socialist States of America?

Eh?