2020 Democratic Nominee

[bad_teammate 13524]

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Are you operating under the assumption that automation isn't affecting and never will affect jobs in construction?

wut?

No, I'm  operating under the assumption that we cannot predict the future and we cannot simply say with certainty what will happen. We have been dreaming of fanciful futures of technological utopia for centuries and it never actually happens anywhere near the way we think.

Quote

Out of your list, only homecare workers really have a current shortage. The rest are underpaid, but shortages only exist in locales that will require a "shitty location" stipend to fully staff.

They're still shortages. There are varying reasons for job shortages, of course, and that should be the area of focus.

Quote

Also, it takes a certain type of person to be a homecare worker or pre-K teacher Most people don't have the temperament or desire to do it even if they were high wage positions.

Absolute nonsense.

Human beings have been caring for children and helping the elderly since human beings have been a thing. You're so isolated from reality by profit-capital thinking you don't even think of human beings as human beings, merely work inputs. It is our capitalist wage system that isolates us from these basic human connections and makes us helpless, addicted, and miserable.

Quote

For example, I think you are a bright guy. However, I wouldn't want you taking care of my pre schooler or my grandmother. 

My mother and father both died in my house and were cared for by me and my wife for their final 2 decades. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote

You also don't understand the basic premise. UBI isn't about freeing up people to start traditional small businesses, although that will occur. Its about freeing up people to pursue their interests which may or may not become profitable.  And Yang misunderstands it slightly as well. 1k a month isn't enough. It needs to provide full coverage of necessities. 

Both the Jetsons and the Flintstones covered this years ago. The computer doesn't really need George to press a button to produce a sprocket. The dinosaur doesn't really need Fred to move rocks. 

Stop watching cartoons.

 

Edited March 6, 2019 by bad_teammate

[David Dennison 19542]

10 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Both the Jetsons and the Flintstones covered this years ago. The computer doesn't really need George to press a button to produce a sprocket. The dinosaur doesn't really need Fred to move rocks. The next step is to continue paying them but to let them do something else with their time. 

Which brings us to the unpleasant reality that work is really about social control.

[SKJ 1320]

56 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Is there a video/link to Yang and his ideas that isn't Joe Rogan?

There's a shitload on YouTube.

Just Google his name.

Here's a good one... It's from last year though. His newer stuff is out there too

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

15 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

wut?

No, I'm  operating under the assumption that we cannot predict the future and we cannot simply say with certainty what will happen. We have been dreaming of fanciful futures of technological utopia for centuries and it never actually happens anywhere near the way we think.

They're still shortages. There are varying reasons for job shortages, of course, and that should be the area of focus.

Absolute nonsense.

Human beings have been caring for children and helping the elderly since human beings have been a thing. You're so isolated from reality by profit-capital thinking you don't even think of human beings as human beings, merely work inputs. It is our capitalist wage system that isolates us from these basic human connections and makes us helpless, addicted, and miserable.

My mother and father both died in my house and were cared for by me and my wife for their final 2 decades. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Stop watching cartoons.

 

Yes. Human beings have been caring for other human beings since the beginning of time. You took care of your parents in their last days. That is commendable, but they are your parents.  The people who raised you from infancy. You don't exhibit the type of personality to provide personal care for those you didn't grow up with, and you probably wouldn't qualify for a job in the field no matter the pay. And that is okay.  Even though I have raised children through pre-K age, I also have neither the desire or temperament to teach pre-K for any amount of money. 

And who is isolated?  You don't volunteer for the needy and you purposefully isolated yourself in a community where they don't exist. 

And location is very important when it comes to labor shortages. Right now, you could go try to fill a care or teacher shortage somewhere in rural America. You don't.  Who exactly do you think is going to do it?  And there are actual qualified teachers doing other work while waiting for spots in the NYC school district. Even they aren't willing to go to some hardscrabble upstate town to teach. There are unemployed factory workers already in that town. They don't want to do it either. Like you, they are all about "somebody else needs to do it."  You need to realize that you aren't uncommon and nobody else wants to make that personal sacrifice either. 

[SKJ 1320]

Here's his most recent email.

February was the best month ever for our campaign—we received donations from 34,025 different people for a total of $570,954.82!  The average donation was $16.78.  That’s incredible.  THANK YOU for making it happen.  We raised as much as many other major candidates for the month.  

Aside from the raw numbers, which are staggering, here’s another reason I am excited.  I received this message hundreds of times via social media: 

“You are the first political candidate I have ever donated to.”  

This message is important.  It’s become a constant drumbeat.  And it means that we are poised to do great things.

(He's the first I ever donated to as well)

I would post the rest of the email but I can't spoiler

[bad_teammate 13524]

It would be cool if you knew how to think about and discuss this stuff without being consumed by fantasy thinking about cartoons and personal bitterness towards Internet people you don't like.

3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

You don't exhibit the type of personality to provide personal care for those you didn't grow up with, and you probably wouldn't qualify for a job in the field no matter the pay.

"You weren't nice to me on the Internet, therefore you're anti-social and bad with people" cry more

Quote

And who is isolated?  You don't volunteer for the needy and you purposefully isolated yourself in a community where they don't exist. 

cry more

Quote

And location is very important when it comes to labor shortages. Right now, you could go try to fill a care or teacher shortage somewhere in rural America. You don't.  Who exactly do you think is going to do it? 

Do you think it is possible for you to have a lens into any of these issues that do not centralize on how mad you are at me about arguments we've had in the past? Are all of your beliefs and policy positions based on how you personally feel about the people you're talking to? Feel free to keep attacking me personally, of course, it just makes you look dumb and it makes your arguments worse. However, you might want to think about how to address issues and questions without being completely consumed by bitter enmity.

Location matters a great deal with regard to job shortages, and we need to think about why certain locations are unattractive to workers. Why are they? Why don't you or I go do these jobs? What would have to change in those locations to begin (1) retaining their own young people and (2) attracting new people?

Social investment. Better infrastructure, better schools, and better opportunities. Kevin D. Williamson and JD Vance think they should pack up the UHaul and drive away from these "failed" towns and cities and follow the whims of capital like leaves on the wind. However, that doesn't actually build communities. It isolates and disjoints communities.

Quote

And there are actual qualified teachers doing other work while waiting for spots in the NYC school district. Even they aren't willing to go to some hardscrabble upstate town to teach. There are unemployed factory workers already in that town. They don't want to do it either. Like you, they are all about "somebody else needs to do it."  You need to realize that you aren't uncommon and nobody else wants to make that personal sacrifice either. 

Then we need to change the factors that make it a sacrifice.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

It would be cool if you knew how to think about and discuss this stuff without being consumed by fantasy thinking about cartoons and personal bitterness towards Internet people you don't like.

"You weren't nice to me on the Internet, therefore you're anti-social and bad with people" cry more

cry more

Do you think it is possible for you to have a lens into any of these issues that do not centralize on how mad you are at me about arguments we've had in the past? Are all of your beliefs and policy positions based on how you personally feel about the people you're talking to? Feel free to keep attacking me personally, of course, it just makes you look dumb and it makes your arguments worse. However, you might want to think about how to address issues and questions without being completely consumed by bitter enmity.

Location matters a great deal with regard to job shortages, and we need to think about why certain locations are unattractive to workers. Why are they? Why don't you or I go do these jobs? What would have to change in those locations to begin (1) retaining their own young people and (2) attracting new people?

Social investment. Better infrastructure, better schools, and better opportunities. Kevin D. Williamson and JD Vance think they should pack up the UHaul and drive away from these "failed" towns and cities and follow the whims of capital like leaves on the wind. However, that doesn't actually build communities. It isolates and disjoints communities.

Then we need to change the factors that make it a sacrifice.

How are you gonna change it?  Those places are never going to be desiriable or dynamic. We need to stop pretending that they are fixable. Urbanization isn't going to reverse nor should it.  There are 2 options. Forcibly move people from those towns to more desirable locations. Or forcibly move caregivers to those towns. Neither of those options are reasonable. China can't even keep rural people from moving to cities, and they both care for people in rural areas and forbid that movement. 

[bad_teammate 13524]

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

Those places are never going to be desiriable or dynamic.

There will always be movement, but plenty of people prefer small/mid-size towns. Some prefer to live out in the woods. Our social and financial capital should be dedicated to serving the needs of the people and not pretending that concepts like "desirable" are universal or "dynamic" is actually meaningful and not just a buzzword intended to reflect only the speaker's desires and values.

Quote

There are 2 options. Forcibly move people from those towns to more desirable locations. Or forcibly move caregivers to those towns. Neither of those options are reasonable.

There are far more than those two options. You're being intensely melodramatic.

Quote

China can't even keep rural people from moving to cities, and they both care for people in rural areas and forbid that movement. 

Why do you say "China can't even" as if China is some kind of model nation to emulate or take these lessons from?

The goal is not to limit mobility, but to serve communities. If, even while being adequately served, people want to move then there's no reason to stop them.

It's very rich for people like you to tell others to just let their dumb little town die.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Some new polling on thoughts voters have on candidate qualities/identifies/personal traits. Not tied to a named candidate.

THE MOST POPULAR (AND UNPOPULAR) PRESIDENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS

The NBC/WSJ poll also tested 11 different presidential characteristics.

The most popular: An African American (a combined 87 percent of all voters say they are “enthusiastic” or “comfortable” with that characteristic), a white man (86 percent), a woman (84 percent), and someone who is gay or lesbian (68 percent — up from 43 percent in 2006).

The least popular: A Muslim (49 percent are enthusiastic or comfortable — up from 32 percent in 2015), someone over the age of75 (37 percent) and a socialist (25 percent).

And regarding socialism, just 18 percent of all Americans say they view the term positively, versus 50 percent who see it in a negative light.

The numbers for capitalism are almost the exact opposite: 50 percent positive, 19 percent negative.

DEMOCRATIC VOTERS PICK BOLDNESS OVER PRAGMATISM

With the first Democratic presidential contests taking place a year from now, 55 percent of Democratic primary voters say they prefer a nominee who proposes policies that could bring major change (despite their cost and difficulty passing into law), as opposed to 42 percent who say they would rather support someone whose policies might bring less change (but cost less and might be easier to pass).

What’s more, 56 percent of Democratic primary voters say they want a candidate whose issue positions conform to their views, while 40 percent say they prefer someone who gives the party the best chance to defeat Trump in 2020.

“I think we’re getting early signals from Democratic primary voters that they are looking for bigger change and someone who agrees with them on policy,” said McInturff, the Republican pollster.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Sorry double post

 

Shit’s borked

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 Good thing there aren’t any old Muslim socialists running, they’d be doomed.

[bad_teammate 13524]

Obama can't win. He's a young black man named Hussein! You really think he can get Indiana?!

Right now, people are looking at a menu of identity choices. Once the individual people roll out it's a different story. Candidates are not merely (or even primarily) the sum of their identity markers.

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

36 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There will always be movement, but plenty of people prefer small/mid-size towns. Some prefer to live out in the woods. Our social and financial capital should be dedicated to serving the needs of the people and not pretending that concepts like "desirable" are universal or "dynamic" is actually meaningful and not just a buzzword intended to reflect only the speaker's desires and values.

There are far more than those two options. You're being intensely melodramatic.

Why do you say "China can't even" as if China is some kind of model nation to emulate or take these lessons from?

The goal is not to limit mobility, but to serve communities. If, even while being adequately served, people want to move then there's no reason to stop them.

It's very rich for people like you to tell others to just let their dumb little town die.

People like me?  Oh, you mean people who volunteer for the needy in their community?  At least I'm a realist.  What is more rich is that you sit in your ivory tower begging other people to go do something in some place where you don't want to go yourself.

You know that actual people have to serve those communities.  You talk about bettering schools as if the buildings are what matter when the teachers do.  Teachers simply don't want to move to those places.  They don't want to now and they won't want to in your future.  How do you envision adequate service in one of these communities when even you don't want to go there?  I know there is always a mythical "somebody else" in your mind, but in reality, there is nobody else.  If you want something to happen, and you seem to, then you need to be one of the "somebodies." Get off your ass.  For many of these communities, the jobs are already there waiting for you to take.

Yes, some people prefer rural lifestyles, but there aren't enough to provide the needed services.  Plus, even those people have to want to be teachers or caregivers. 

China is an important reference because people in small towns have employment for life and cradle to grave care.  Yet most of them still choose to go live in an urban slum and try to make it rather than stick it out in a farming town.

[Anastasis 23720]

Lol at independent @60. This two party system got people gassed up.  

[HRSchenker 2341]

Is there at least one Dem candidate not willing to jump on the M4A bandwagon?

[Hank Kingsley 21785]

 

[Celery Man 21098]

I think Klobuchar was resistant to it in the CNN town hall.

 

Oh fwiw and specifically since I expressed skepticism of the criticisms/attacks on Klobuchar - I talked to someone who was on her staff and asked about it, was relayed a story as an example that sounded bitchy and overly demanding.  My takeaway is that she's probably a shitty boss.

[bad_teammate 13524]

13 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

People like me?  Oh, you mean people who volunteer for the needy in their community?  At least I'm a realist.  What is more rich is that you sit in your ivory tower begging other people to go do something in some place where you don't want to go yourself.

"People like you" as in, "people who don't live there". It is rich for people who do not live in these places to say that those places just need to die. That should be up to those people, properly supported.

Quote

How do you envision adequate service in one of these communities when even you don't want to go there?

Why would my own values and desires be the standard on which to base the values and desires of others? You aren't even making any sense, you're just desperately looking for a way to personally attack someone who finds you boring. I don't know if you ever had anything worthwhile to say, but you're completely deranged at this point; you've turned yourself into a furious National Review columnist.

Quote

I know there is always a mythical "somebody else" in your mind, but in reality, there is nobody else.  If you want something to happen, and you seem to, then you need to be one of the "somebodies." Get off your ass.  For many of these communities, the jobs are already there waiting for you to take.

The "somebody else" is the people already living there, empowered by public investment.

Quote

Yes, some people prefer rural lifestyles, but there aren't enough to provide the needed services.  Plus, even those people have to want to be teachers or caregivers. 

Why do you say things like this as if they are obvious, established facts when they are actually not? Do you think simply stating things confidently makes them true?

Quote

China is an important reference because people in small towns have employment for life and cradle to grave care.  Yet most of them still choose to go live in an urban slum and try to make it rather than stick it out in a farming town.

OK... what's your actual point, though?

As I said, some movement will happen. If the small towns die then they die, but that shouldn't happen for lack of public investment. They shouldn't die because the government abandons them, it should be the free choice of the people there not manipulated by capital concerns, job flight, or economic stagnation.

[bad_teammate 13524]

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

Just tell them to let their pathetic, worthless histories, traditions, and cultures die and move to the big city, DUH!

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[bad_teammate 13524]

Was that even being considered!?

"The chickens have ruled out letting the foxes watch over them as they sleep."

[Js1 87183]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Was that even being considered!?

"The chickens have ruled out letting the foxes watch over them as they sleep."

There was one scheduled in 2016 that got cancelled.

And they did host a forum in Detroit, I think.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"People like you" as in, "people who don't live there". It is rich for people who do not live in these places to say that those places just need to die. That should be up to those people, properly supported.

Why would my own values and desires be the standard on which to base the values and desires of others? You aren't even making any sense, you're just desperately looking for a way to personally attack someone who finds you boring. I don't know if you ever had anything worthwhile to say, but you're completely deranged at this point; you've turned yourself into a furious National Review columnist.

The "somebody else" is the people already living there, empowered by public investment.

Why do you say things like this as if they are obvious, established facts when they are actually not? Do you think simply stating things confidently makes them true?

OK... what's your actual point, though?

As I said, some movement will happen. If the small towns die then they die, but that shouldn't happen for lack of public investment. They shouldn't die because the government abandons them, it should be the free choice of the people there not manipulated by capital concerns, job flight, or economic stagnation.

Ah, so its up to the people who need home caregivers and elementary education to provide that care and education to themselves.  We just throw money at them and they'll figure it out.  Got it.  It is pretty clear you've never set foot in one of these towns.  Myself, I was born in one.  Everyone who can get out, does.  My parents did.  So did most of their siblings and friends.  And the town where I was born has teacher positions open right now, ready to pay a wage that is pretty damn good given the cost of living.  The money is already there.  The people aren't.  You know who doesn't want to take those teaching jobs?  The kids who grow up going to that school.  Instead, they gtfo as quickly as they can unless unforeseen circumstances stick them there.

The government didn't abandon these towns.  Industry and people did.  The gov't is still there and the gov't is often the only employer in the town that pays a living wage.

My point is that its time to incentivize movement away from dying towns for the people that are stuck in them and want out.  The rest will take care of itself.  The only reason those towns exist in the first place is because their ancestors moved their for work.  Well, the work moved away, so people need to move with it.  And the "fix" is to help them do so.  UBI does that.  And UBI also lets the people who actually want to stay in a town stay there. Getting proper healthcare workers and educators to go live there is always going to be a problem, but that can be solved by traveling doctors and remote teaching.

Edited March 6, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[bad_teammate 13524]

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

Ah, so its up to the people who need home caregivers and elementary education to provide that care and education to themselves.  We just throw money at them and they'll figure it out.  Got it.  It is pretty clear you've never set foot in one of these towns.  Myself, I was born in one.  Everyone who can get out, does.  My parents did.

I was born and raised in a small town. Then I went to UT-Austin. You're on a Longhorn message board. Do you honestly think being born in a small town and then leaving it for the big city is a unique story that you have?

Quote

 So did most of their siblings and friends.  And the town where I was born has teacher positions open right now, ready to pay a wage that is pretty damn good given the cost of living.  The money is already there.  The people aren't.  You know who doesn't want to take those teaching jobs?  The kids who grow up going to that school.  Instead, they gtfo as quickly as they can unless unforeseen circumstances stick them there.

Why do they do that? Why did we do that?

Quote

The government didn't abandon these towns.  Industry and people did.  The gov't is still there and the gov't is often the only employer in the town that pays a living wage.

Ah... and there we are. Almost accidentally you're starting to make an actual point.

Why did industry abandon these towns?

Do those industries exist in different towns now that those people can simply move to and re-engage with?

Quote

My point is that its time to incentivize movement away from dying towns for the people that are stuck in them and want out.

Tell me what that looks like.

[bad_teammate 13524]

*reads Hillbilly Elegy once*

[thrillhammer 686]

15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

i really don't see the relevancy in his grades.  i fail to see the issue here.   he is the first president in history to not release his tax returns.  that to me is a big deal.  especially when his own attorney has said under oath the trumpster has committed tax fraud.  trump said he would release them once he was president.  he lied.  then, he also claimed the only reason he didn't release them is he's under audit.  the irs has confirmed he is and never was under audit.  he lied again.   

[Fozzz 152]

Quote

Sanders, meanwhile, receives his strongest support support from those making less than $50,000 — a group that is, for the same reasons, much more diverse. The poll found that 30 percent of those with the lowest incomes backed Sanders.

Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., meanwhile, has half as much support, at 14 percent, among black voters as Sanders, according to supplementary polling data provided to The Intercept by Morning Consult. The findings are drawn from a sample of 2,587 black, likely Democratic primary voters.

https://theintercept.com/2019/03/06/bernie-sanders-black-voters-2020/

[FondrenRoad 4378]

19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I was born and raised in a small town. Then I went to UT-Austin. You're on a Longhorn message board. Do you honestly think being born in a small town and then leaving it for the big city is a unique story that you have?

Why do they do that? Why did we do that?

Ah... and there we are. Almost accidentally you're starting to make an actual point.

Why did industry abandon these towns?

Do those industries exist in different towns now that those people can simply move to and re-engage with?

Tell me what that looks like.

Do I think its unique?  Absolutely not.  You apparently do though.  What I know is that you don't want to go back to the small town you were born in.  I don't want to go back to the small town I was born in.  They could have the mill running at peak employment, and I sure as shit still wouldn't want to live there.  Really, you could be a teacher or caregiver in your small town right now.  Hell, you could even open a small business and probably do pretty well.  You aren't doing any of that.  You say they need teachers from there.  Well, if you don't want to live in the small town you grew up in, who does?  Nearly every kid growing up in a small town expects and wants to leave it.  Even small towns with decent economies.  This isn't 1905.  Kids know what the rest of the country and world has to offer, and the vast majority of them move for that lifestyle, just like you and I did.  And a lot of us move even though we could be a lot more financially comfortable in that small town than we are in the urban areas we move to.

Industry abandoned those towns because labor is consolidating elsewhere.  Industry moved to capture some of that labor.  There are absolutely equivalent jobs available in urban and suburban areas in America.  You could open a gov't factory in your small town, train up the workers you need, and still that town is going to have a massive brain drain.

I recall you saying it would be unacceptable for you to work at Walmart and live in Hazlehurst, MS making 5 times your rent which is well more than a living wage.  Well, guess what?  The people who grow up in Hazlehurst don't want to be there either even though the cost of living is low and wages are high enough to make do.  

 

 

Edited March 6, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[Biff Tannen 46168]

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

This guy.  I like this guy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Yes!  That will finally bring down Trump!  People will have their eyes opened to the idea that maybe he’s a bad guy after all if we can just distract them from focusing on how he puts children in camps, brags about sexual assault, is constantly racist, praises murderous dictators, is an outright thief and conman, and wipes his ass with the Constitution daily so they can instead fully realize he is RICH and probably was not a good student in high school!

Thank you, Jen Rubin!  This is the path to victory in 2020.

Think you’re kind of missing the point which is to publicly embarrass and humiliate Trump over trivial shit because it’s something that really bothers him.

See also Barack Obama correspondents dinner.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Eh. Should have forced them to run the debates in their entirety without commentary. Instead, now there will only be commentary. 

[bad_teammate 13524]

Urbanization is real and the rural-urban shift continues and will continue, but that doesn't mean small town America is going to literally disappear. Those Americans exist today and will still exist 50 years from now, even if we continue with the unreformed, oppressive deprivation of modern capitalist pursuits. The people there will simply get poorer, more miserable, and sicker.

This is not just true of small towns, but mid-size and larger towns and small cities. Urbanization is something that is happening because of human forces, both purposeful and unconscious, but urbanization is not some larger moral good to be pursued artifically. There is no reason for government to actively incentivize the death of small-to-midsize America.

How is it that so many generations of rural kids have been running away to the big cities, yet the rural areas and small towns are still alive? They have more babies and they have them younger.

Of course, I'm talking to someone whose dialectic centers on personal grievances and Hanna-Barbera, so... kind of wasting my words here, I guess.

[bad_teammate 13524]

2 hours ago, HRSchenker said:

Is there at least one Dem candidate not willing to jump on the M4A bandwagon?

1) Even if a candidate says "Medicare For All" it doesn't mean universal coverage or single-payer. Some are selling "Medicare for All" to mean "an option to buy in to Medicare". Basically, the "public option" from the ACA negotiation days.

2) Joe Biden

[FondrenRoad 4378]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Urbanization is real and the rural-urban shift continues and will continue, but that doesn't mean small town America is going to literally disappear. Those Americans exist today and will still exist 50 years from now, even if we continue with the unreformed, oppressive deprivation of modern capitalist pursuits. The people there will simply get poorer, more miserable, and sicker.

This is not just true of small towns, but mid-size and larger towns and small cities. Urbanization is something that is happening because of human forces, both purposeful and unconscious, but urbanization is not some larger moral good to be pursued artifically. There is no reason for government to actively incentivize the death of small-to-midsize America.

How is it that so many generations of rural kids have been running away to the big cities, yet the rural areas and small towns are still alive? They have more babies and they have them younger.

Of course, I'm talking to someone whose dialectic centers on personal grievances and Hanna-Barbera, so... kind of wasting my words here, I guess.

I have no personal grievances. I do have real world experience. The difference between you and me is that I prefer to allow people the choice of movement as part of any welfare or support system.  You prefer to keep things static for those who need a helping hand. 

And the towns aren't really alive. They have been shrinking constantly for several generations. 

If you take one of those girls who got pregnant in high school and offer her a job, housing, day care, and higher education in either Houston or her home town, she is going to choose Houston. And she is going to do that because Houston has a lot more to offer her than the single job you provide. It has access to other jobs. It has access to social and career networks. You aren't helping her at all by keeping her stuck in the same town she already lives in.  You aren't helping her baby either.  

[bad_teammate 13524]

7 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

The difference between you and me is that I prefer to allow people the choice of movement as part of any welfare or support system.  You prefer to keep things static for those who need a helping hand. 

When did I oppose choice of movement? You're just lying at this point and it's pathetic.

[bad_teammate 13524]

Prominent Democratic super PAC says Ohio isn’t a top priority in 2020

I'm very, very nervous about how bad the Dems are. Very nervous. I get what the guy is saying, but I really hate the idea that Ohio is not one we try very hard to put in play.

ALL 50 STATES

BERNIE IN MISSISSIPPI

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Every single thing listed is a lie.

LIES!!!

[Eggo 4026]

I'm not your Friend, buddy.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

When did I oppose choice of movement? You're just lying at this point and it's pathetic.

You didn't specifically.  Instead, you posted stupid ideas which will reduce or eliminate choice of movement for the needy.

[Biff Tannen 46168]

31 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Every single thing listed is a lie.

LIES!!!

Is that real?

[David Dennison 19542]

33 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Every single thing listed is a lie.

LIES!!!

Look at that. Politics. Amazing.

[Js1 87183]

Republican 2020 Platform

-30% Corporate Tax Rate - we give them money!
100 foot high wall around the entire country + another wall around Hawaii
Forced pregnancy for everyone
Every gun gets a gun to protect itself
No healthcare.  Bootstraps!!!!!!!
Full-blown fascism

 

See I can do it too.

[bad_teammate 13524]

7 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

You didn't specifically.  Instead, you posted stupid ideas which will reduce or eliminate choice of movement for the needy.

Like what? Be specific.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[babysdaddy 2731]

23 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Is that real?

I'd like to know if it's real as well.  It's not a tweet from hugo so it is suspect.  feels like propaganda, one way or another.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Like what? Be specific.

"The "somebody else" is the people already living there, empowered by public investment."

Tell me.  What if that "somebody else" in town 1 wants to take advantage of your public investment in a town that isn't theirs?  Do you open up a job for them in town 2 or do they have to wait in line behind town 2 residents for a potential job?  What if everyone in town 1 wants to move to town 2?  Do you close down your operations in town 1 and move them all to town 2?

And also keep in mind that the specific jobs you mentioned are already available to any takers in many small towns.  So again, how can you hire more teachers when the teacher jobs you already have are sitting there vacant?  Now maybe you can train that single mom with a drug problem to fill that teaching vacancy.  But you know what you need for that?  You need a teacher from SOMEWHERE ELSE to choose to move to that town in order to teach her.  And we've already discussed how neither you and I want to be in that town.  And neither does that single mom really.

And it isn't unique to your public employment ideas.  You've also posted housing ideas where you provide housing for the existing poor in a municipality so that they don't get pushed out by gentrification.  What that does is completely shut out poor non-residents from entry.  You constantly fail to understand the fact that people actually want to be able to move.

Instead, we can give people basic income and in doing so, we give them mobility rather than the dead end housing and employment handcuffs you want to give them.  For whatever reason, you prefer to keep crappy towns afloat instead.  With basic income, if a few people want to live in a small town, they still can, and we don't need to try to force people from elsewhere to move there to train them for jobs we don't need.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

9 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I'd like to know if it's real as well.  It's not a tweet from hugo so it is suspect.  feels like propaganda, one way or another.  

It’s like no one watched CPAC.  Of course it’s real and it’s propaganda. 

There’s a way to find out if it’s real but I don’t feel like signing up for Trump campaign emails. 

Anyone want to volunteer? 

[ChiTownDoc 21345]

6 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

"The "somebody else" is the people already living there, empowered by public investment."

Tell me.  What if that "somebody else" in town 1 wants to take advantage of your public investment in a town that isn't theirs?  Do you open up a job for them in town 2 or do they have to wait in line behind town 2 residents for a potential job?  What if everyone in town 1 wants to move to town 2?  Do you close down your operations in town 1 and move them all to town 2?

And also keep in mind that the specific jobs you mentioned are already available to any takers in many small towns.  So again, how can you hire more teachers when the teacher jobs you already have are sitting there vacant?  Now maybe you can train that single mom with a drug problem to fill that teaching vacancy.  But you know what you need for that?  You need a teacher from SOMEWHERE ELSE to choose to move to that town in order to teach her.  And we've already discussed how neither you and I want to be in that town.  And neither does that single mom really.

And it isn't unique to your public employment ideas.  You've also posted housing ideas where you provide housing for the existing poor in a municipality so that they don't get pushed out by gentrification.  What that does is completely shut out poor non-residents from entry.  You constantly fail to understand the fact that people actually want to be able to move.

Instead, we can give people basic income and in doing so, we give them mobility rather than the dead end housing and employment handcuffs you want to give them.  For whatever reason, you prefer to keep crappy towns afloat instead.  With basic income, if a few people want to live in a small town, they still can, and we don't need to try to force people from elsewhere to move there to train them for jobs we don't need.

Why do you engage this guy?  He has zero idea how anything regarding capitalism works including rural to urban migration.  I don't have a big problem with it because he's all about eliminating the haves and giving to the have nots...a noble cause that will, literally, never work.  But to engage him in this manner just makes you look foolish too. 

Edited March 6, 2019 by ChiTownDoc
referencing BT

[babysdaddy 2731]

well no shit I didn't watch CPAC.  I'm not a psycho.  

So is it real or not? You say of course it is and then suggest to sign up for emails to find out.  Where did you get it?