The General 'Murican Politics Thread

[KHCast]

It’s so empowering to see all these kids marching out, and scaring the GOP and republican base. Seriously, even teachers are trying to silence students and say them speaking is not a peaceful protest. Lol get the fuck outta here. The pushback to their freedom of expression  is just amazing.

We finally see a generation of children going out and working for a change, and they’re met with criticism and bullying by those that used their tragedies as a way to silence. Suddenly when you can’t use them as a shield and pull the “thoughts and prayers” shit, the next tactic is to decred them I guess because of nervousness. Like, there’s disagreeing with what they want okay, but when you actively try to silence them, threaten, attack, decred their voices, etc. that shit don’t fly.

Edit: for reference about the teachers thing 

 

[Tani Coyote]

3 hours ago, KHCast said:

The pushback to their freedom of expression  is just amazing.

Not really, I'd say.

The GOP establishment have a nasty tendency to only like free speech when it's dominant groups (and their minority allies) that are using it.

Black Lives Matter disrupting traffic. Transgender people making a strong stand on pronoun usage. Antifa showing up to counterprotest white nationalist rallies. Women's Marches to call for closure of the wage gap and stronger investigation of sex crime.

What a surprise it is the conservative outlets that are the first to deem all these "overreacting" or "unnecessary" or "violent" or "disruptive" or something else, but when Richard Spencer or NRA people or the Klan meet, it's "the beauty of American democracy."

[KHCast]

True. Speaking of the protest, what’re your guys thoughts on the counter movement being proposed by adults “Walk Up Not Out”? For those not aware, it’s a proposal in which students would instead bully less and befriend loner kids more often if they I guess don’t want these school shootings to happen, instead of marching and protesting for gun control and more focus on these issues.

[Dizcrybe]

2 hours ago, KHCast said:

Speaking of the protest, what’re your guys thoughts on the counter movement being proposed by adults “Walk Up Not Out”? For those not aware, it’s a proposal in which students would instead bully less and befriend loner kids more often if they I guess don’t want these school shootings to happen, instead of marching and protesting for gun control and more focus on these issues.

¿Por qué no los dos? We can curb bullying and call for tighter gun control. I don't know why conservatives seem to think we can only do one thing at a time.

Also if you're so concerned about bullying how about you do something about those people that sent death threats to the Parkland survivors?

[KHCast]

My main beef with this is it’s almost blatantly victim blaming(ignoring that adults bully too hey what do ya know), and ignores that the killer in question WASNT bullied but the bully. There’s no evidence to suggest the former but plenty to support he was a bigoted asshole that beated women and wanted minorities killed. as well as this, it also singles out those loner children or kids feeling like they don’t fit in, and makes them feel only approached out of fear that they’ll become killers and not approached because of themselves being who they are.

 

edit: woooooow fuck this guy

 

Edit 2: a good read on why Walk Up is a shitty answer that only is meant to sympathize white racist men

 

[Candescence]

On 15/03/2018 at 7:18 AM, TailsTellsTales said:

I hope Trump does more tariffs, and anything to stop good paying jobs being replaced with starvation wage jobs. Though I wish it was Sanders who was doing the tariffs since he would do them safely and not recklessly. Thank you @Dark Qiviut for the sources. I was too lazy to go through all that.

I literally just said that tariffs won't work on the last page, though - companies that need shit made will just shop around to the lowest bidder.

Manufacturing jobs coming back to the US is a pipe dream. The only way to be competitive is to literally pay below the minimum wage, and I doubt that's acceptable to any US worker these days. And either way, tariffs will just raise prices at least in the short term, because companies will just do that to compensate for the cost of doing business - and that just means less people buying stuff, and thus damaging the economy anyway. Jobs, proper living wage, or low prices everyone is already used to - you can't have all three.

There are better ways to mitigate the problems of free trade. The ship has already sailed, there's nothing anyone can do about that. The only thing to do is to stop whinging about jobs moving overseas and to look for alternative solutions to the problems caused by free trade. Like, I dunno, redistribution of wealth from the rich to the less wealthy, particularly those in poverty?

[TailsTellsTales]

55 minutes ago, Candescence said:

I literally just said that tariffs won't work on the last page, though - companies that need shit made will just shop around to the lowest bidder.

Manufacturing jobs coming back to the US is a pipe dream. The only way to be competitive is to literally pay below the minimum wage, and I doubt that's acceptable to any US worker these days. And either way, tariffs will just raise prices at least in the short term, because companies will just do that to compensate for the cost of doing business - and that just means less people buying stuff, and thus damaging the economy anyway. Jobs, proper living wage, or low prices everyone is already used to - you can't have all three.

There are better ways to mitigate the problems of free trade. The ship has already sailed, there's nothing anyone can do about that. The only thing to do is to stop whinging about jobs moving overseas and to look for alternative solutions to the problems caused by free trade. Like, I dunno, redistribution of wealth from the rich to the less wealthy, particularly those in poverty?

All you need is a new trade policy that punishes companies that ship jobs overseas. It's okay if they want to bring their business to other places, but not if it causes people to lose jobs and get replaced with poverty jobs. The U.S. is big! They don't need to depend much on others and can sustain itself. Even with price increases at least they know those products they are paying more for are going directly back to the people in the country if those products were made in the U.S. which creates a positive loop.

Also yes we need to reverse this redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich. How badly does income inequality have to be before it is taken seriously?

One thing I think everyone can agree on is that the current trade policy is not working for anybody except the extreme wealthy. Therefore not doing anything would be crazy. What would help is making public college free like regular school which will help get many people into skilled jobs that employers are struggling to fill.

[Dizcrybe]

2 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

Even with price increases at least they know those products they are paying more for are going directly back to the people in the country if those products were made in the U.S. which creates a positive loop.

You're assuming enough people would be able to afford said products now that they'd be much more expensive. Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the whole thing if no one can even buy your goods.

[TailsTellsTales]

2 hours ago, Dizcrybe said:

You're assuming enough people would be able to afford said products now that they'd be much more expensive. Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the whole thing if no one can even buy your goods.

Well how was everybody able to afford it back than when there was very limited "free trade" and the U.S. depended mostly on itself?

[Tornado]

14 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

All you need is a new trade policy that punishes companies that ship jobs overseas.

Quote

What would help is making public college free like regular school which will help get many people into skilled jobs that employers are struggling to fill.

Mandatory college education sure will be a boon for the isolationist polices creating so many skilled jobs of... uh... factory work.

 

10 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

Well how was everybody able to afford it back than when there was very limited "free trade" and the U.S. depended mostly on itself?

So when was "back then"?

[tailsBOOM!]

All we need is a new man in office... Just saying

[Dizcrybe]

In other news, Republicans in Tennessee can't even bring themselves to say "nazis are bad".

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/16/politics/house-key-races-pennsylvania-results-update/index.html

In the wake of the Pennsylvania upset, CNN has revised 17 House races towards the Democrats. Counting safe seats, likely Democrat, lean Democrat, and tossups, there are 222 seats that would go to the Democrats, when 218 is needed for a House majority.

Oh, but there's a fun detail not mentioned here: over 100 GOP-held House districts are bluer than the one Lamb just won. While these special elections are very low turnout affairs that make upsets more likely, that does signal the GOP's House majority is in serious danger.

Especially considering the strikes against them with gerrymandering rulings and the fact the tax bill is not generating the support they had hoped.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/nancy-pelosi-is-good-at-her-job-and-she-should-keep-it.html

Meanwhile, take any mainstream outlet of choice. They are all publishing pieces on how great Nancy Pelosi is and how she must be kept on as leader no matter what, because she did well for the Party in the past and she raises so much money. They handwave any baggage she has on this basis.

It's obvious what's going on here. Just as the media worked to cram Clinton down everyone's throats, now they're working to save Pelosi from being tossed overboard by a likely wave of anti-Pelosi Democrats in the mold of Lamb.

On 3/15/2018 at 6:41 PM, TailsTellsTales said:

All you need is a new trade policy that punishes companies that ship jobs overseas.

Just a note.

Other countries' companies won't be doing this. They will have a competitive edge. They will have cheaper products that can crush ours.

"Well raise tariffs then." They will do the same to us. We will not be able to export jack crap.

This is a LOT of work for something that social democratic policies could achieve with far less of a headache.

Quote

One thing I think everyone can agree on is that the current trade policy is not working for anybody except the extreme wealthy.

It really depends.

It sucks to be the guy laid off from the plush factory.

But it rocks to be the countless consumers who can now get a plush for very cheap.

This is why free trade is a net boon to the economy in nearly any case. Comparative advantage maximizes each person's buying power. You're seeing only the rich people collecting more surplus value, not the everyday consumers who benefit from the shift in production.

20 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

Well how was everybody able to afford it back than when there was very limited "free trade" and the U.S. depended mostly on itself?

High wages, which were the product of the technical labor and strong unions.

If we bring factory jobs back to the USA, they will be minimum wage hellholes in all likelihood.

Again, socialism is superior. Raise the minimum wage. Expand the social safety net. Fund retraining programs. We don't need to try and engineer the economy.

Also, how far is this going to go? Are you going to ban automation to preserve jobs? Because manufacturing is steadily going that direction; in China, they have facilities called "dark factories" because the lights are never on, because the machines handle pretty much everything.

Instead of slowing economic development for the sake of protecting someone with an obsolete position, give them a new position.

7 hours ago, Dizcrybe said:

In other news, Republicans in Tennessee can't even bring themselves to say "nazis are bad".

Really hoping Phil Bredessen is able to take that Senate seat this November, good Lord.

[SSF1991]

1 hour ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Oh, but there's a fun detail not mentioned here: over 100 GOP-held House districts are bluer than the one Lamb just won. While these special elections are very low turnout affairs that make upsets more likely, that does signal the GOP's House majority is in serious danger.

It's worth noting that, so far, turnout in these special elections have been pretty much normal. I think the PA special election only saw roughly 10-20k less votes than in 2016. Lamb even got less of a Dem turnout than other special elections and still won.

[Tani Coyote]

2 minutes ago, SSF1991 said:

It's worth noting that, so far, turnout in these special elections have been pretty much normal. I think the PA special election only saw roughly 10-20k less votes than in 2016. Lamb even got less of a Dem turnout than other special elections and still won.

Well... that certainly bodes extra bad for the GOP, then.

Although it's possible the generals might see more engaged Republicans that keep the blue wave from being a tsunami, as much as I'd love to see Democrats gobble up 100 seats.

The real worst part in all this is even with a sweep of the House, all it's doing is just meaning nothing really bad happens, because the Senate and Trump will no doubt keep being buddy buddy on court and Cabinet appointments.

[TailsTellsTales]

1 hour ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Just a note.

Other countries' companies won't be doing this. They will have a competitive edge. They will have cheaper products that can crush ours.

"Well raise tariffs then." They will do the same to us. We will not be able to export jack crap.

This is a LOT of work for something that social democratic policies could achieve with far less of a headache.

Of course the other countries won't be doing that, they are probably my guess owned by large corporations. What is with this idea that corporations should be allowed to exploit the cheapest labor around the world just so somebody else can pay something for less? Have we really become as a society to let large corporations from around the world exploit the poorest in the world with little labor laws just so we can have cheaper products?

1 hour ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

It really depends.

It sucks to be the guy laid off from the plush factory.

But it rocks to be the countless consumers who can now get a plush for very cheap.

This is why free trade is a net boon to the economy in nearly any case. Comparative advantage maximizes each person's buying power. You're seeing only the rich people collecting more surplus value, not the everyday consumers who benefit fro the shift in production.

What about the workers who made that product? How much did they sacrifice to make that product? Was the working conditions fair? The point is these corporations who ship jobs overseas tend to build shop in places with very little labor laws meaning they are paid very little and are severely exploited. Cheaper things are nice but not if it is done by cruel measures. Free trade has benefited enormously the world's 1%. There needs to be international free trade laws to make sure working conditions around the world are safe and fair, and that the benefits of trade goes to everybody, and large corporations being severely punished if they break the law.

2 hours ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

High wages, which were the product of the technical labor and strong unions.

If we bring factory jobs back to the USA, they will be minimum wage hellholes in all likelihood.

Again, socialism is superior. Raise the minimum wage. Expand the social safety net. Fund retraining programs. We don't need to try and engineer the economy.

Also, how far is this going to go? Are you going to ban automation to preserve jobs? Because manufacturing is steadily going that direction; in China, they have facilities called "dark factories" because the lights are never on, because the machines handle pretty much everything.

Instead of slowing economic development for the sake of protecting someone with an obsolete position, give them a new position.

You are right about that if manufacturing jobs come back to the U.S. being very low paying jobs since unions are much harder to make than it was long ago. I do agree with the raising the minimum wage, strengthening safety net, and retraining. There is no reason to ban automation. If Wendy's wants to replace workers with machines, then go right ahead. Yes I strongly agree give those workers in poverty jobs some job training for a new job. Until that happens though we need to make sure to protect workers by keeping jobs in the U.S. and not having this situation where only people with college degrees can get a maybe decent job.

[Tani Coyote]

http://www.wtae.com/article/pennsylvania-gop-calls-for-state-to-investigate-alleged-irregularities-in-special-election-tuesday/19465089

As expected, the GOP is working to contest the Pennsylvania results. They are reporting irregularities like voting machines choosing the Democrat when someone voted for a Republican, or people being told they were in the wrong district.

I will laugh so hard if it turns out most of the suppressed votes were actually Democrats, and Lamb's lead dramatically expands.

3 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

What is with this idea that corporations should be allowed to exploit the cheapest labor around the world just so somebody else can pay something for less? Have we really become as a society to let large corporations from around the world exploit the poorest in the world with little labor laws just so we can have cheaper products?

There's a reason we have the expression "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism." Someone, somewhere, is liable to lose due to someone else's gain.

It really would not be much better if it was moved here. Sure, conditions are probably better. Sure, pay is better. But the CEO is still walking home with a ton of the surplus value and everyone else is being forced to pay more for goods.

Let's also not overlook the importance of this money towards these other countries. Economic development closely correlates with democratization and establishment of human rights. China and India are outlying cases that do not undermine this trend. "Papa Xi" may be consolidating power now, but China's growing middle class means the door is always open towards democratic reform in the future.

3 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

Cheaper things are nice but not if it is done by cruel measures.

I'm worried about my college tuition, my healthcare, my rent, and scores of other crap.

Those cheaper things help me afford all those. The same goes for countless others.

I can't defend a program to help overseas workers when we can't even take care of people here. Am I a selfish bastard if I am down to one dollar and refuse to give it to a homeless person? It is rational to look after yourself first.

Particularly since expanding our social welfare system is kind of a must since all moving factories to America will do is incentivize automation efforts further.

3 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

There needs to be international free trade laws to make sure working conditions around the world are safe and fair, and that the benefits of trade goes to everybody, and large corporations being severely punished if they break the law.

Problem is China's a little too firmly entrenched at this point to really go about that. It's not a viable strategy.

China's not the only state this is a problem with but let's be real about who we're talking about here.

Political capital is better spent trying to expand our social safety net and, if the goal is to weaken the appeal of exploiting labor in other countries, trying to get more automated manufacturing established in the USA.

3 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

There is no reason to ban automation. If Wendy's wants to replace workers with machines, then go right ahead.

Do you not see how this is contradicting your idea that we need to protect American jobs?

[SenEDDtor Missile]

14 minutes ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

http://www.wtae.com/article/pennsylvania-gop-calls-for-state-to-investigate-alleged-irregularities-in-special-election-tuesday/19465089

As expected, the GOP is working to contest the Pennsylvania results. They are reporting irregularities like voting machines choosing the Democrat when someone voted for a Republican, or people being told they were in the wrong district.

I will laugh so hard if it turns out most of the suppressed votes were actually Democrats, and Lamb's lead dramatically expands.

There's a reason we have the expression "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism." Someone, somewhere, is liable to lose due to someone else's gain.

It really would not be much better if it was moved here. Sure, conditions are probably better. Sure, pay is better. But the CEO is still walking home with a ton of the surplus value and everyone else is being forced to pay more for goods.

Let's also not overlook the importance of this money towards these other countries. Economic development closely correlates with democratization and establishment of human rights. China and India are outlying cases that do not undermine this trend. "Papa Xi" may be consolidating power now, but China's growing middle class means the door is always open towards democratic reform in the future.

I'm worried about my college tuition, my healthcare, my rent, and scores of other crap.

Those cheaper things help me afford all those. The same goes for countless others.

I can't defend a program to help overseas workers when we can't even take care of people here. Am I a selfish bastard if I am down to one dollar and refuse to give it to a homeless person? It is rational to look after yourself first.

Particularly since expanding our social welfare system is kind of a must since all moving factories to America will do is incentivize automation efforts further.

Problem is China's a little too firmly entrenched at this point to really go about that. It's not a viable strategy.

China's not the only state this is a problem with but let's be real about who we're talking about here.

Political capital is better spent trying to expand our social safety net and, if the goal is to weaken the appeal of exploiting labor in other countries, trying to get more automated manufacturing established in the USA.

Do you not see how this is contradicting your idea that we need to protect American jobs?

To be honest his mindset regarding right wing and corporate ideology has always been weird. It's like a bastardization of pro-corporate shilling and confusing worker's right rhetoric that somehow co-exists despite them usually being stark opposites.

[Tornado]

11 hours ago, TailsTellsTales said:

Of course the other countries won't be doing that, they are probably my guess owned by large corporations. What is with this idea that corporations should be allowed to exploit the cheapest labor around the world just so somebody else can pay something for less? Have we really become as a society to let large corporations from around the world exploit the poorest in the world with little labor laws just so we can have cheaper products?

What about the workers who made that product? How much did they sacrifice to make that product? Was the working conditions fair? The point is these corporations who ship jobs overseas tend to build shop in places with very little labor laws meaning they are paid very little and are severely exploited. Cheaper things are nice but not if it is done by cruel measures. Free trade has benefited enormously the world's 1%. There needs to be international free trade laws to make sure working conditions around the world are safe and fair, and that the benefits of trade goes to everybody, and large corporations being severely punished if they break the law.

You are right about that if manufacturing jobs come back to the U.S. being very low paying jobs since unions are much harder to make than it was long ago. I do agree with the raising the minimum wage, strengthening safety net, and retraining. There is no reason to ban automation. If Wendy's wants to replace workers with machines, then go right ahead. Yes I strongly agree give those workers in poverty jobs some job training for a new job. Until that happens though we need to make sure to protect workers by keeping jobs in the U.S. and not having this situation where only people with college degrees can get a maybe decent job.

You really don't understand how diametrically opposed so many of the arguments in this post are with each other, do you?

[TailsTellsTales]

19 hours ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

It really would not be much better if it was moved here. Sure, conditions are probably better. Sure, pay is better. But the CEO is still walking home with a ton of the surplus value and everyone else is being forced to pay more for goods.

Let's also not overlook the importance of this money towards these other countries. Economic development closely correlates with democratization and establishment of human rights. China and India are outlying cases that do not undermine this trend. "Papa Xi" may be consolidating power now, but China's growing middle class means the door is always open towards democratic reform in the future.

Yeah the ceos making way too much while everyone else makes pennies is one of the main reasons I am against generous free trade. Make it "fair trade". I do like other countries being more helped out and more democratic.

19 hours ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

I can't defend a program to help overseas workers when we can't even take care of people here. Am I a selfish bastard if I am down to one dollar and refuse to give it to a homeless person? It is rational to look after yourself first.

Do you not see how this is contradicting your idea that we need to protect American jobs?

Aren't people against free trade simply looking out for themselves first? Also you keep saying things are cheaper and yet from what I hear it seems like prices keep going up. Probably inflation but wages have not kept up with that rate. I guess in that argument raising the wage would be needed for that. Also yes. I am okay with very low starvation wage jobs being replaced with automation. But shipping what few good paying non college degree required jobs that are left to other countries just to make some corporation who primarily benefits from it richer is not cool.

19 hours ago, SenEDDtor Missile said:

To be honest his mindset regarding right wing and corporate ideology has always been weird. It's like a bastardization of pro-corporate shilling and confusing worker's right rhetoric that somehow co-exists despite them usually being stark opposites.

I have no idea what you talking about, but that does make me think. The left used to be against or perhaps more cautious would be better term to free trade until Clinton came and Obama further killed that idea with his push for TPP, however Sanders came along and fought strongly against NAFTA, TPP, etc. Then you have Trump who was similar to Sanders trade views also considered free trade very bad which kind of shocking since the right was the ones who were intensely pro trade. I am not sure who is for what now anymore. But apparently there is a large population on both sides who feel free trade has really screwed them over.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

On 3/16/2018 at 1:16 PM, Dizcrybe said:

In other news, Republicans in Tennessee can't even bring themselves to say "nazis are bad".

One would figure having a goddamn world war against that kind of shit would make it easy for them...

[Patticus]

2 hours ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

One would figure having a goddamn world war against that kind of shit would make it easy for them...

That's the funny thing about time - once the generation that fought that war is largely gone, and especially afterwards, they aren't there to combat its rise in society any more. It won't be long before the holocaust itself becomes one of those Trump-esque "well maybe it happened maybe it didn't, there were good people on both sides, who knows what really happened in the fog of war" issues that the media suddenly has to treat as "controversy" whenever someone fights back against the deniers.

[tailsBOOM!]

Whatever happened to actual politicians being in office?

[Dizcrybe]

17 hours ago, tailsBOOM! said:

Whatever happened to actual politicians being in office?

There are still several hundred across the country.

I'm trying really hard not to be unnecessarily snarky.

[Patticus]

19 hours ago, tailsBOOM! said:

Whatever happened to actual politicians being in office?

They're still there, Trump didn't fire them, but sadly all too many have been corrupted by the private money flooding the political system. All political systems are going to have some amount of corruption though, that's never going to go away, which is why we have anti-corruption laws and watchdog groups, but I think the US is well past its corruption tolerance threshold.