POLL: Who do you expect will win? (NOT who do you want to win)

[Webhead123 | 679]

12 minutes ago, Californication said:

Like I said, Freedman's ideas have been disproven many, many times. And if you want to look at Kansas were, Brownback, went full blown Friedman, he destroyed the economy. And. Friedmanites using the same logic, the Chicago Boys, went down to South America to marketize/privatize things and they caused hyper-inflation. 

To explore another road, should you care to do so:

Party ideologies aside, what would you like to see for the future direction of the country? What makes the most sense in your eyes of the direction the U.S. needs to take from where it stands today?

This is not judgement. I'm just curious to know what other people see as the path to better this nation.

[phart010 | 1,707]

59 minutes ago, Californication said:

This pandemic needed a big govt. response mask manufacturing, health guidelines, contract tracing, federal guidelines, and people should have been protected financially (which would have allowed more parties of the economy to continue). 

Did it really? We seem to have had the worst infection rates out of every country in the entire world with our big government. Even Sweden, who did absolutely nothing in the way of changing their lifestyles to respond to the pandemic has better infection rates than us.

[Californication | 1,477]

51 minutes ago, Webhead123 said:

To explore another road, should you care to do so:

Party ideologies aside, what would you like to see for the future direction of the country? What makes the most sense in your eyes of the direction the U.S. needs to take from where it stands today?

This is not judgement. I'm just curious to know what other people see as the path to better this nation.

The reason Friedman wants to privatize everything is because he want businesses to be able to come in and fill the gap for essential services. For example: public education, health care, utilities, post office, fire men, prison system. These are just some of the things a society needs. They are very inelastic meaning no matter how much it costs we will need it. A govt. can do these things efficiently the way they provide Medicare and the post office efficiently. But a business knows they will have customers and can control the price if they can get their hands on these types of industries (and others). 

The problem with inserting a private company is that they need to earn a profit. Private companys will pull out money and find ways to reduce costs by reducing the quality of services. Then those costs are passed on to us the consumer of the services or the worker at the company. 

The u.s. is a consumption driven economy. The solution is to provide resources such as an education and healthcare to the population and in return the people will grow up and contribute to the society by working or building businesses etc. The reason this is not done is because corporations insert themselves were they don't need to be so they can make their short term profits. This is unsustainable in the long run because if you take away half the country's disposable income there is no one to buy anything. The products being sold will end up being focused on a smaller part of the population and unrest builds in the society. And then because the corporations co trol the media the source of information for people they adjust their messages to make people fight amongst themselves without attacking the real cause of their anger.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Californication

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

2 minutes ago, phart010 said:

Did it really? We seem to have had the worst infection rates out of every country in the entire world with our big government. Even Sweden, who did absolutely nothing in the way of changing their lifestyles to respond to the pandemic has better infection rates than us.

You should read up on the Sweden thing, in more detail. I know it is a popular talking point, but they had a pretty rough outcome as things go, and I thought their "success" without a lockdown was largely debunked (i.e. they ended up with comparable economic damage from rational behavior from the public avoiding the same things that would have been shut down anyway)

[phart010 | 1,707]

1 hour ago, Tulpa said:

Let's start with the corporations.

Let’s tax the wealthy, but not the corporations. Corporations are not people. They aren’t hoarding wealth. They pay the profits out to investors every quarter as dividends.

If you tax corporations, you are taking money away from every investor at an equal rate. Some of those investors own millions of dollars in shares. But some of them are our grandparents surviving on a meager fixed income 401k that’s shrinking every year and they’re barely getting by.
 

If you tax the corporate profits, grandma is paying the same tax rate as investment bankers. You should tax the money after it gets paid out to the investors as income. Then you can say the millionaires have to pay this higher rate and the everyday 401k investors pay that lower rate.

[Californication | 1,477]

11 minutes ago, phart010 said:

Did it really? We seem to have had the worst infection rates out of every country in the entire world with our big government. Even Sweden, who did absolutely nothing in the way of changing their lifestyles to respond to the pandemic has better infection rates than us.

  We didn't have a big government response. The federal government did nothing as far as I can tell. (Except maybe ofder money to drug companys) What part of the U.S. govt. response to covid was a big govt. actions as far as you can tell?

[phart010 | 1,707]

6 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said:

You should read up on the Sweden thing, in more detail. I know it is a popular talking point, but they had a pretty rough outcome as things go, and I thought their "success" without a lockdown was largely debunked (i.e. they ended up with comparable economic damage from rational behavior from the public avoiding the same things that would have been shut down anyway)

I didn’t call it a success story. It’s definitely bad. Just pointing out that the USA with all the crap we were doing still ended failing worse than Sweden.

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

Just now, phart010 said:

I didn’t call it a success story. It’s definitely bad. Just pointing out that the USA with all the crap we were doing still ended failing worse than Sweden.

Just imagine how much worse it would have been if we'd done nothing at all.

And, arguably, how much better it could have been if it was handled better nationally and the president didn't use his influence to convince his followers that it wasn't a big deal.

 

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

As a side note, I noticed that my neighbors have their Trump flag at half-mast.  It is hilarious.

[RegularGuyGamer | 2,013]

2 hours ago, Californication said:

Republican ideals are failures. The conservatives want smaller govt. when it doesn't suits them and they want big govt. when it does. 

That isn't accurate. Conservatives want more power to state and local governments over downsizing the federal government.

2 hours ago, Californication said:

This pandemic needed a big govt. response mask manufacturing, health guidelines, contract tracing, federal guidelines, and people should have been protected financially (which would have allowed more parties of the economy to continue). 

So you're saying you wanted Trump to use his executive power to give top down mandates? Look, I wouldn't have minded that but cmon. How many people would've cried facism LOUDER than ever if he did that? Be honest. You wanted Trump to seize more executive power in a crisis?

[phart010 | 1,707]

2 hours ago, Webhead123 said:

As long as that "big govt." stayed/stays confined to the crisis-intervention, that's proper use of reach and funding, in my opinion.

As I said, I'm a Friedman-ist. I'm sure we'll never get there but I can dream of a day when we return to the fundamentals.

Part of Friedman’s ideals assumed that people would spend charitably out of their own personal wealth.
 

An essential for this to work would be maintaining the family unit as the baseline  of society. 

If people are having hard times, they can rely on their family or extended family to help them out. Unfortunately today every family member wants to live in a different state and have their own life in isolation. Some people have no family and I get that they legitimately need help, but I think there are plenty of people that could actually reach out to their family or extended family for help. But for whatever reason, pride, family feud, maintaining social image or whatever it may be, they choose not to and instead want social services which places a bigger burden on the rest of society than it needs to.

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

18 minutes ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

Conservatives want more power to state and local governments over downsizing the federal government.

Are you talking about conservatives from 50 years ago, or conservatives from 2020? Because that doesn't seem accurate in real time. They only want that when it is convenient for them.

19 minutes ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

You wanted Trump to seize more executive power in a crisis?

I mean, we wanted him to, ya know, do something, instead of downplaying the thing for months. 

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

5 minutes ago, phart010 said:

If people are having hard times, they can rely on their family or extended family to help them out.

This is a nice idea but it simply doesn't translate to real life. 

[RegularGuyGamer | 2,013]

10 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Are you talking about conservatives from 50 years ago, or conservatives from 2020? Because that doesn't seem accurate in real time. They only want that when it is convenient for them.

Bold goes for both sides. It's the problem when ppl treat politics like football. The same can be said about liberals. Are we talking about Clinton era liberals or liberals who believe in exclusively in internationality.

 

11 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

I mean, we wanted him to, ya know, do something, instead of downplaying the thing for months. 

Yes, me too. I'm actually glad by state had a D in the governor's office and kept the 6th largest population #13 on the total case list.

But to expect someone who said they'll be the most conservative president of our time to do something extremely liberal is not realistic.

That's my biggest issue with politics today. People are unable to predict reasonable outcomes. They're unable to sift their expectations of what they want from the reality of what they'll get. 

I'm never expecting Trump to take top down control unless a bomb goes off over NYC or something horrible, which thankfully didn't happen. 

But to say we WANTED him to seize more executive is not the truth. You think if fucked up by doing nothing, imagine the fallout of doing something which would've been leaning on his conservative views and probably would've fail somehow even more. 

I don't think anyone, even his hardcore case, would say they wanted him to have more control dying a crisis. And I think for someone to expect that from him given his track record and rhetoric means they either don't follow politics at all or they're delusional (not you specifically, obviously)

[phart010 | 1,707]

3 minutes ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

Bold goes for both sides. It's the problem when ppl treat politics like football. The same can be said about liberals. Are we talking about Clinton era liberals or liberals who believe in exclusively in internationality.

 

Tulsi Gabbard talked about this football mentality in detail on the Joe Rogan show. I’d highly recommend watching it if you haven’t already:

it’s pretty disgusting how the two parties are willing to let the people suffer and let the problems go unresolved because they don’t want the other side to gain any points.

[Webhead123 | 679]

17 minutes ago, phart010 said:

An essential for this to work would be maintaining the family unit as the baseline  of society...

...But for whatever reason, pride, family feud, maintaining social image or whatever it may be, they choose not to and instead want social services which places a bigger burden on the rest of society than it needs to.

Exactly right. With Johnson and the "War on Poverty"/rise of the welfare state, we've now diminished the value of the family unit for multiple generations and replaced it with the sense that the "government will take care of them". This (and other factors, certainly) have ushered us into a society with rampant issues of fractured households and statistics show that this cycle is self-perpetuating.

[Californication | 1,477]

15 minutes ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

Bold goes for both sides. It's the problem when ppl treat politics like football. The same can be said about liberals. Are we talking about Clinton era liberals or liberals who believe in exclusively in internationality.

 

Yes, me too. I'm actually glad by state had a D in the governor's office and kept the 6th largest population #13 on the total case list.

But to expect someone who said they'll be the most conservative president of our time to do something extremely liberal is not realistic.

That's my biggest issue with politics today. People are unable to predict reasonable outcomes. They're unable to sift their expectations of what they want from the reality of what they'll get. 

I'm never expecting Trump to take top down control unless a bomb goes off over NYC or something horrible, which thankfully didn't happen. 

But to say we WANTED him to seize more executive is not the truth. You think if fucked up by doing nothing, imagine the fallout of doing something which would've been leaning on his conservative views and probably would've fail somehow even more. 

I don't think anyone, even his hardcore case, would say they wanted him to have more control dying a crisis. And I think for someone to expect that from him given his track record and rhetoric means they either don't follow politics at all or they're delusional (not you specifically, obviously)

 

He would have been a hero if he did this right, but he was unable to see past the regular way he does business which is to fail and then lie about his successes.

We had pandemic response plans in place, Trump chose to ignore them. This didn't require him taking more power.

He took more power when he used the defense production act. He just refused to use it to create PPE, testing, or contract tracing.

He used his daily covid briefing to promote businesses and push for his re-election instead of keeping the U.S. calm and pushing mask use.

He pushed the Fed to give an endless stream of money to corporations. He could have pushed congress to give money to the people who could spend it at those same corporations instead. 

They used the U.S. military to collect PPE and then they gave it to corporations to sell instead of distributing it to hospitals. Some of the companys used the PPE to sell to foreign countrys instead of giving it to Americams because they paid more.

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Californication

[Tulpa | 3,514]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/postal-worker-fabricated-ballot-pennsylvania/2020/11/10/99269a7c-2364-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0dXsez3PCXHn8Sz9snhJdot-alfrDn_4SHpfqht4Dq8iDJQuW0dgla0vc

A Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims have been cited by top Republicans as potential evidence of widespread voting irregularities admitted to U.S. Postal Service investigators that he fabricated the allegations, according to three people briefed on the investigation and a statement from a House congressional committee.

 

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

6 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/postal-worker-fabricated-ballot-pennsylvania/2020/11/10/99269a7c-2364-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0dXsez3PCXHn8Sz9snhJdot-alfrDn_4SHpfqht4Dq8iDJQuW0dgla0vc

A Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims have been cited by top Republicans as potential evidence of widespread voting irregularities admitted to U.S. Postal Service investigators that he fabricated the allegations, according to three people briefed on the investigation and a statement from a House congressional committee.

 

https://fox2now.com/news/national/luzerne-county-resident-facing-voter-fraud-charges-after-accusations-of-submitting-absentee-ballot-application-for-deceased-mother/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co&utm_campaign=socialflow

Also, this... (trump supporter attempting to vote on behalf of his dead mother)

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

Crazy, it’s almost like all these allegations are false

[Reed Rothchild | 9,547]

4 hours ago, phart010 said:

Tulsi Gabbard talked about this football mentality in detail on the Joe Rogan show. I’d highly recommend watching it if you haven’t already:

it’s pretty disgusting how the two parties are willing to let the people suffer and let the problems go unresolved because they don’t want the other side to gain any points.

I'd say the analogy is totally accurate.  People hate my alma mater around here.  Treat each other like dirt, and hold lifelong grudges.  Over a damn football game.  That is now exactly how people treat the other side.

[Strange | 1,700]

This may have already been posted but... did anyone read the fine print on the donation link for the “legal fees?” 60% of the donation money will go toward paying off campaign debts. So... Trump’s campaign spent more money than they had on his re-election effort, is in the hole, and is now trying to get his supporters to foot the bill?

I’ve read some speculating that perhaps Trump knows there’s no voter fraud but is using this as a last ditch effort to squeeze money and pay off those debts. Not my opinion, but that’s what some have postulated.

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

6 minutes ago, The Strangest said:

I’ve read some speculating that perhaps Trump knows there’s no voter fraud but is using this as a last ditch effort to squeeze money and pay off those debts. Not my opinion, but that’s what some have postulated.

I think that is completely plausible and very "on brand" for Trump... but honestly, I think he is just desperate to not leave office this soon where he enjoys temporary immunity from prosecution, while on the outside a long list of court battles, both criminal and civil, wait for him.

[Quest4Nes | 376]

 

3 hours ago, Tulpa said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/postal-worker-fabricated-ballot-pennsylvania/2020/11/10/99269a7c-2364-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0dXsez3PCXHn8Sz9snhJdot-alfrDn_4SHpfqht4Dq8iDJQuW0dgla0vc

A Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims have been cited by top Republicans as potential evidence of widespread voting irregularities admitted to U.S. Postal Service investigators that he fabricated the allegations, according to three people briefed on the investigation and a statement from a House congressional committee.

 

That was a false story. Its actually a really weird crazy situation. Coming from his own mouth. He did not recant. So that report from the washington post is a complete lie. Media really trying to push a narrative before facts trickle out.

 

 

Edited November 11, 2020 by Quest4Nes

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

@Quest4Nes Serious question -- are you actually buying into Trump's narrative on this, and holding out hope that he hasn't actually lost?