Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Hank Scorpio 17723]

She's like a modern day Puerto Rican (NOT AMERICAN) Hitler. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

25 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

Doesn't the IRS penalize you if you don't buy insurance right now?  Why is the ER so expensive in the first place?  It's a systemic issue that I highlighted already (overcharging, ineffecient bureaucratic issues...etc.) 

 

Trump just axed the penalty. So young/healthy people will now be dropping out of the market in droves, driving premiums and deductibles even higher. Trump's plan is to make it so expensive that consumers will lose their sympathy for those with pre-existing conditions, and ACA will be axed completely. 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5783]

6 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Trump just axed the penalty. So young/healthy people will now be dropping out of the market in droves, driving premiums and deductibles even higher. Trump's plan is to make it so expensive that consumers will lose their sympathy for those with pre-existing conditions, and ACA will be axed completely. 

 

[Fozzz 152]

Quote

But then Ocasio-Cortez spoke, followed by Bush, and I saw something truly terrifying. I saw just how easy it would be, were I less involved and less certain of our nation’s founding and its history, to fall for the populist lines they were shouting from that stage.

• I saw how easy it would be, as a parent, to accept the idea that my children deserve healthcare and education.
• I saw how easy it would be, as someone who has struggled to make ends meet, to accept the idea that a “living wage” was a human right.
• Above all, I saw how easy it would be to accept the notion that it was the government’s job to make sure that those things were provided.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/23/conservative-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-rally/

hahaha

[woohorn 1131]

I just can't wait to hear drumpf's nickname for her.

[EuroHorn 3204]

10 minutes ago, woohorn said:

I just can't wait to hear drumpf's nickname for her.

 

Edited July 23, 2018 by EuroHorn

[WhatTheBuck 28710]

2 hours ago, deadshank said:

PR is a US territory.  Not a state, can’t vote in our Fed elections.  Kind of in no man’s land with some US benefits but lacking others.  

She states she is PR.   But she’s born in NYC.  So.....that makes her an American.   

Where am I wrong?

Holy shit. You weren't joking. 

[David Dennison 18655]

Puerto Ricans are American citizens. 

They are Americans.

[SubliminalHorn 6674]

2 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

I somewhat agree with you.  If someone's parents were born in Guam while they were born in Texas, would they identify as Guamese or Texan? 

However, people from every other Latino country/territory/place uses their ancestral country/territory name as a pseudo-ethnic identifier, so I don't see why its bad for Puerto Ricans to do so too.  Plenty of Texans who have been in Texas for generations and speak no Spanish identify as Mexican as well.

FYI those from Guam are called Chamorros

themoreyouknow.gif

[EastTexan 662]

23 hours ago, XR4ticlone said:

😂😂😂

Vilify???  

Oh hell no!  I'd like to see her as the FACE of the DNC!!! 

Sure Bernie is good...and GrandmaKankles is awesome...but they're not going to live forever. 😥

With She Guevara, we've got potentially 50 years of dipshittery to look forward to!   She's perfect...she's the poster child for how even elite colleges don't make you smart.  With a $280,000 Boston University education in economics, She Guevara has the same economic knowledge as my yellow lab.  Having an economics degree and embracing socialism is like having a medical degree and embracing blood letting as your go to cure-all.  

The more she speaks the dumber she sounds.  Lucky for us the leftist & their minions in the MSM painted her as a Presidential candidate after winning a leftist stronghold with 14,000 votes.  😂🤣😂

Sadly, the GOP 'elite' will probably fuck this up yet.

 

 

 

Could not have stated it better. So this is what the left wants?

[David Dennison 18655]

6 minutes ago, EastTexan said:

 

Could not have stated it better. So this is what the left wants?

Absolutely. So do more and more Americans. The ones who don't are dying. The left is the future of politics in the United States. 

[XR4ticlone 122]

33 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely. So do more and more Americans. The ones who don't are dying. The left is the future of politics in the United States. 

Don't worry...Socialism kills shit loads of people...all statism or communism or whatever you want.  It's all leftist crap.

[EastTexan 662]

30 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely. So do more and more Americans. The ones who don't are dying. The left is the future of politics in the United States. 

Only read 1st page. Did Fondren and bt make up?  They must have gotten different talking points from the socialist party.

 Run with it, team left.

[David Dennison 18655]

1 hour ago, XR4ticlone said:

Don't worry...Socialism kills shit loads of people...all statism or communism or whatever you want.  It's all leftist crap.

Capitalism has an impressive body count.

[RandomIdoit 655]

I can't wait for burger flippers and busboys make $15 an hour and then won't even be able to afford to eat at the places they work. Then people will still be crying that $15 per hour is not a living wage because everything is more expensive.

[EMAWesome 101]

3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely. So do more and more Americans. The ones who don't are dying. The left is the future of politics in the United States. 

If the stuff you spew here are legitimately your genuine feelings come November you are in for a more rude awakening than Jake "The Snake"Roberts wife.

[bad_teammate 13132]

12 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

I can't wait for burger flippers and busboys make $15 an hour and then won't even be able to afford to eat at the places they work. Then people will still be crying that $15 per hour is not a living wage because everything is more expensive.

This is always the right-wing argument against the minimum wage and the data doesn't bear it out. But keep fucking that chicken.

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

This is always the right-wing argument against the minimum wage and the data doesn't bear it out. But keep fucking that chicken.

Explain to me how costs do not go up in this situation. Do the companies just take the losses and not pass them on to the consumers?

[bad_teammate 13132]

Just now, RandomIdoit said:

Explain to me how costs do not go up in this situation. Do the companies just take the losses and not pass them on to the consumers?

There's only so much they can pass on to consumers and remain competitive/stay in business.

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

There's only so much they can pass on to consumers and remain competitive/stay in business.

That would be true if they were the only place that would have rising costs, but everyone would have to increase their employees wages. 

[EuroHorn 3204]

4 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Explain to me how costs do not go up in this situation. Do the companies just take the losses and not pass them on to the consumers?

Groverat understands business. Lol.  They only pass some of the costs to consumers. The rest just magically disappears

[bad_teammate 13132]

Just now, RandomIdoit said:

That would be true if they were the only place that would have rising costs, but everyone would have to increase their employees wages. 

We have heard this same god damned argument since the first minimum wage in the 1930s. I don't know why you're acting like we don't have a century of data on this. It doesn't happen.

Businesses have many ways to reduce/shift costs. The competition they face in the market puts many different pressures on costs. It's not as simple as, "If I have to pay my workers $200 more this week, I will charge my customers $200 more."

[RandomIdoit 655]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We have heard this same god damned argument since the first minimum wage in the 1930s. I don't know why you're acting like we don't have a century of data on this. It doesn't happen.

Can you tell me a when the last time the minimum wage doubled like people are proposing we do now?

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Businesses have many ways to reduce/shift costs. The competition they face in the market puts many different pressures on costs. It's not as simple as, "If I have to pay my workers $200 more this week, I will charge my customers $200 more."

So they know how to reduce costs but they are not already doing that? They are saving these cost saving measures just in case the minimum wage goes up? 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

6 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Neoliberal dream future is means-testing, drug-testing, and work-requiring all social welfare programs.

Also the Republican dream future, but the neolib version is nicer about it with more tech-forward solutioneering.

See man. Here again, you're to the right of me. I support basic income.  It takes care of everything, and we wouldn't have to worry about the minutiae. 

But, I also support having a bed and meals for every homeless person, and I also know that NYC already mandates it. O-C is apparently clueless. We arent Texas. While she and the DSA were volunteering for Bernie and other political causes, real people like me have actually spent a good deal of our time volunteering at homeless shelters, so we actually know what our city provides already.  And we know that municipal law already requires a bed for every homeless person who wants and qualifies for one. The people she sees on the street are mentally ill, intoxicated, or simply want to be there. Intoxicated people are not allowed in shelters because they increase the likelihood of altercations. Unintoxicated mothers will stay outside with young children in tourist areas because they can make 2 to 300 dollars per day tax free doing so. Theres a reason that perceived homelessness is higher in the summer and then suddenly becomes only a problem for the mentally ill in the winter. Personal choice. At the end of the day, the only real "lost" people are the mentally ill, and until we are able to forcibly instutionalize them, there is little we can do. As it is, NYC shelters are currently available for anyone who wants one, but they do have to want it and get there themselves. She should know that, but clearly she doesnt. Vacancies in luxury Brooklyn apartments dont matter. In the summer, every shelter of every type is about half full because they are scaled for winter when people choose to use them.  

Perhaps she also doesn't know that NY has mandated paid family leave, or that NYC is already phasing in 15 dollar minimum wage, or that we have already backstopped the ACA in expectation of Trump, and are one of the few states that actually makes sure everyone is covered.  And we have also initiated a free college program.  We also have universal pre-K and free breakfast and lunch for every NYC child provided at school during the school year and in parks during the summer. 

So it does appear that she doesnt know what the fuck is actually happening in NYC while more-or-less wanting to provide NYC to the nation at large.  She should focus on the Kansas homeless while shes over there because, for sure, they have nowhere to go even if they wanted to. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

Can you tell me a when the last time the minimum wage doubled like people are proposing we do now?

There was an infinite increase with the first minimum wage. But beyond that, the minimum wage as it is right now is almost 1/3rd of what it should be based on worker productivity. Even ignoring increased worker productivity, simply keeping up with inflation would have it at $12 right now. Including worker productivity improvements, it should be close to $20.

Quote

So they know how to reduce costs but they are not already doing that? They are saving these cost saving measures just in case the minimum wage goes up? 

When many of those extravagant costs directly benefit the managerial and capital class in control of the business, fucking yes. Of course. Duh. Private jets, stock buybacks, golden parachutes, huge bonuses, profits in general, etc...

[David Dennison 18655]

25 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

If the stuff you spew here are legitimately your genuine feelings come November you are in for a more rude awakening than Jake "The Snake"Roberts wife.

I'll be happy if the House flips, which I fully expect to happen. Not only do the Democrats have history on their side, but the numbers do not look good for the GOP.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

See man. Here again, you're to the right of me. I support basic income.  It takes care of everything, and we wouldn't have to worry about the minutiae. 

I don't?

Quote

We arent Texas.

Congratulations! You did it! You successfully chose to live in a place that is already full of people who agree with your worldview. How did you get so brave?

Quote

The people she sees on the street are mentally ill, intoxicated, or simply want to be there. 

And the existence of these 3 categories of people is not an indictment?

The existence of empty luxury apartments alongside a large homeless population is an indictment of neoliberal capitalism.

Quote

So it does appear that she doesnt know what the fuck is actually happening in NYC while more-or-less wanting to provide NYC to the nation at large.

Buddy, why the hell do you think she's in Kansas and Denton?

(You have no basis for arguing she doesn't know about NYC's policies other than this grand fantasy world you seem to live in which everyone who isn't you is dumb.)

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

There was an infinite increase with the first minimum wage. But beyond that, the minimum wage as it is right now is almost 1/3rd of what it should be based on worker productivity. Even ignoring increased worker productivity, simply keeping up with inflation would have it at $12 right now. Including worker productivity improvements, it should be close to $20.

Sweet. I will gladly take triple my salary also then.

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

When many of those extravagant costs directly benefit the managerial and capital class in control of the business, fucking yes. Of course. Duh. Private jets, stock buybacks, golden parachutes, huge bonuses, profits in general, etc...

If you think companies will do this instead of passing it on to the consumer, you are in denial. In fact, they might even take a slight pay cut and invest that money into automation so that they will save themselves even more money in the long run.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Just now, RandomIdoit said:

If you think companies will do this instead of passing it on to the consumer, you are in denial.

This is part of what happens, absolutely. You act like "passing it on to the consumer" is just something all companies can do indefinitely. It's amazing how little capitalism apologists understand about how competitive markets work.

Yes, they will pass along as many costs to customers as possible. Here's the thing: They already do this BEFORE minimum wage increases. They can only get away increasing costs if it doesn't hurt them competitively.

I'm BurgerShopA, you're BurgerShop B. You and I already manage the efficiencies of our businesses to increase profits. Uh oh, the COMMUNISTS have raised the minimum wage. Now my personnel costs have increased. I "pass it on to my customers" and now my burger costs $7 when it used to cost $5. You raise your burger price to $6 and cut your spending in other areas (like the ones outlined above).

Which one of us will succeed?

 

[RomaVicta 29781]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Capitalism has an impressive body count.

Trump said so himself. We're no better than Putin and the Russians.

[EMAWesome 101]

35 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We have heard this same god damned argument since the first minimum wage in the 1930s. I don't know why you're acting like we don't have a century of data on this. It doesn't happen.

Businesses have many ways to reduce/shift costs. The competition they face in the market puts many different pressures on costs. It's not as simple as, "If I have to pay my workers $200 more this week, I will charge my customers $200 more."

And one of those ways is to turn full time jobs into part time jobs  (i.e.  instead of hiring one person to work 40 hours a week you hire two people to work 20 hours a week each) which also decreases employee benefits.  Working 40 hours a week (plus getting time and a half for any overtime) at ten dollars an hour puts more money in your pockets than working 20 hours a week (while needing to work another twenty to get time and a half for any overtime) at fifteen dollars an hour does and your benefits are not getting slashed.

Edited July 24, 2018 by EMAWesome

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

This is part of what happens, absolutely. You act like "passing it on to the consumer" is just something all companies can do indefinitely. It's amazing how little capitalism apologists understand about how competitive markets work.

Yes, they will pass along as many costs to customers as possible. Here's the thing: They already do this BEFORE minimum wage increases. They can only get away increasing costs if it doesn't hurt them competitively.

I'm BurgerShopA, you're BurgerShop B. You and I already manage the efficiencies of our businesses to increase profits. Uh oh, the COMMUNISTS have raised the minimum wage. Now my personnel costs have increased. I "pass it on to my customers" and now my burger costs $7 when it used to cost $5. You raise your burger price to $6 and cut your spending in other areas (like the ones outlined above).

Which one of us will succeed?

 

BurgershopA is raising their price to $7 so BurgershopB will raise theirs to $7 also because they need to make as much money as possible. What's more likely, the fat cats at the top reduce their money, or they charge everyone $1 more because their competitors are doing it also and they can keep raking in profits?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

27 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't?

Congratulations! You did it! You successfully chose to live in a place that is already full of people who agree with your worldview. How did you get so brave?

And the existence of these 3 categories of people is not an indictment?

The existence of empty luxury apartments alongside a large homeless population is an indictment of neoliberal capitalism.

Buddy, why the hell do you think she's in Kansas and Denton?

(You have no basis for arguing she doesn't know about NYC's policies other than this grand fantasy world you seem to live in which everyone who isn't you is dumb.)

Indictment of what?  That we allow people to make choices? Now you're just being retarded. Offense intended. Right now, NYC shelters have more than enough vacancies to handle the entire perceived homeless population. I know this because I was volunteering at a family shelter 2 fucking days ago. But its 77 degrees outside right now so some would rather get drunk and pass out on the street. Others are out making more than your yearly salary while hustling money from tourists. And the only ones who arent actively choosing to live on the street are legitimately mentally ill.  And they need a hospital, not a Brooklyn luxury apartment. But we dont force them into hospitals because the last time we did that we never let them out.  But you dont give a shit about them. 

And I know for sure that she doesn't know about NYC policies because I actually know what our policies are, and I've heard her spout clueless nonsense about what we have here.

It's okay though. In the end, she is pushing for NYC policies to go nationwide even though she doesnt realize it.  I just want more federal tax money to go towards these policies rather than to war.

A Bronx mother already gets paid family leave. So does a Bronx father. I really dont think she knows that. She'll also be shocked at how the homeless population declines magically in the winter as shelter beds fill up while Brooklyn luxury apartments have the same vacancy rate. 

Also, dumbass, in spite of the fact that her base is mostly gentrifiers begging for cheaper rent, those gentrifiers can put down their PBRs and go into a shelter right now, get a bed, get fed, and get work placement. But hey, the shelter doesnt have a river view. And there are real poors there that might touch them.  We really just want to live in a luxury apartment with city views for 2k instead of 4k. We know we could already live in Marine Park or Floral Park for 800 a month. 

Edited July 24, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[bad_teammate 13132]

9 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

And one of those ways is to turn full time jobs into part time jobs  (i.e.  instead of hiring one person to work 40 hours a week you hire two people to work 20 hours a week each) which also decreases employee benefits.  Working 40 hours a week (plus getting time and a half for any overtime) at ten dollars an hour puts more money in your pockets than working 20 hours a week (while needing to work another twenty to get time and a half for any overtime) at fifteen dollars an hour does and your benefits are not getting slashed.

I don't see a problem with that as long as we don't tie working 40 hours/week to having healthcare and having enough money to afford the basics.

Given the huge gains in worker efficiency since the adoption of the 40-hour work week, I think a 20-hour work week with a UBI and universal healthcare would be an awesome outcome.

9 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

BurgershopA is raising their price to $7 so BurgershopB will raise theirs to $7 also because they need to make as much money as possible. What's more likely, the fat cats at the top reduce their money, or they charge everyone $1 more because their competitors are doing it also and they can keep raking in profits?

Yes... yes... competing businesses do not try to undercut each other's prices in order to gain marketshare. You've figured it out. lol

5 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Indictment of what?  That we allow people to make choices?

Hell yeah, who doesn't grow up wanting the choice to live on the fucking street! WOO!

Quote

Right now, NYC shelters have more than enough vacancies to handle the entire perceived homeless population.

Then maybe building the shelters isn't the total solution?

Quote

But its 77 degrees outside right now so some would rather get drunk and pass out on the street.

And why is that?

"FUCKING LUMPENPROLES!!!!!!!!!"

Quote

And they need a hospital, not a Brooklyn luxury apartment.

And who said they should be put in a Brooklyn luxury apartment? It's hilarious that you see those two concepts put together and your brain automatically goes to, "Uh she must think we should put the homeless directly in those apartments." And with that astonishing assumption, you think SHE is the moron.

What are the economic and social conditions that led to the building of luxury apartments that could not be filled?

Quote

And I know for sure that she doesn't know about NYC policies because I actually know what our policies are, and I've heard her spout clueless nonsense about what we have here.

* citation needed

I used to like her, but I talk endless shit about her because I'm never nude, red, or mad.

[RandomIdoit 655]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes... yes... competing businesses do not try to undercut each other's prices in order to gain marketshare. You've figured it out. lol

They do, but not at the expense of the people at the top. It will be a race to see who can roll out the automation faster. Kiosks and apps to replace the workers and hiring only part time workers to avoid providing insurance for example.

[bad_teammate 13132]

2 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

They do, but not at the expense of the people at the top. It will be a race to see who can roll out the automation faster. Kiosks and apps to replace the workers and hiring only part time workers to avoid providing insurance for example.

If the goal is to increase marketshare and make up for premium pricing by volume... yes, yes they will. It's business.

[RandomIdoit 655]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

If the goal is to increase marketshare and make up for premium pricing by volume... yes, yes they will. It's business.

I think you underestimate their greed. Like I said earlier in this thread, I would love to see if this works the way you say it would, just not where I live unless my salary is going to increase too.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

14 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't see a problem with that as long as we don't tie working 40 hours/week to having healthcare and having enough money to afford the basics.

Given the huge gains in worker efficiency since the adoption of the 40-hour work week, I think a 20-hour work week with a UBI and universal healthcare would be an awesome outcome.

Yes... yes... competing businesses do not try to undercut each other's prices in order to gain marketshare. You've figured it out. lol

Hell yeah, who doesn't grow up wanting the choice to live on the fucking street! WOO!

Then maybe building the shelters isn't the total solution?

And why is that?

"FUCKING LUMPENPROLES!!!!!!!!!"

And who said they should be put in a Brooklyn luxury apartment? It's hilarious that you see those two concepts put together and your brain automatically goes to, "Uh she must think we should put the homeless directly in those apartments." And with that astonishing assumption, you think SHE is the moron.

What are the economic and social conditions that led to the building of luxury apartments that could not be filled?

* citation needed

I used to like her, but I talk endless shit about her because I'm never nude, red, or mad.

Now you're just being stupid. The point is that apartment vacancies and homelessness are unrelated. She mentioned the vacancies and the homelessness so she is actually clueless about that and she clearly hasn't even bothered to look at shelter occupancy. There is already a place for every homeless person to go. They just have to want to go there. There are people who are paid to go out and try to help them make the decision to do so. There are also people like me who volunteer and try to get people to go to shelters. However, I now only do street volunteering in the winter. In the summer, it's pointless because nobody wants to go. 

Meanwhile, the DSA volunteers to do political stuff. What do you do? And are you a socialist or a fascist?  Because us socialists understand that you can lead a horse to water, but you cant make him drink. And I'm really about just making sure he has water if he wants it. You fascists just want someone to shove poor people's heads in the water, I guess. 

You're all hat, no cattle. 

 

Edited July 24, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

I think you underestimate their greed.

It's what's been happening since... forever. It's how business works. If you have to take a temporary haircut to increase marketshare given new market forces, you do. 

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

The point is that apartment vacancies and homelessness are unrelated.

They're not unrelated; they are both indictments of a broken economic system. And since she's a Democratic Socialist, it makes sense that she would want to make that point.

Quote

Meanwhile, the DSA volunteers to do political stuff. What do you do? And are you a socialist or a fascist?  Because us socialists understand that you can lead a horse to water, but you cant make him drink. And I'm really about just making sure he has water if he wants it. You fascists just want someone to shove poor people's heads in the water, I guess. 

I've been a DSA member for two years now (May 2016).

The bravest thing to do is move to a place where everyone thinks just like you and then be extremely sanctimonious towards people who are pushing the rock uphill. The truest courage possible. You should write an autobiography.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

It's what's been happening since... forever. It's how business works. If you have to take a temporary haircut to increase marketshare given new market forces, you do. 

They're not unrelated; they are both indictments of a broken economic system. And since she's a Democratic Socialist, it makes sense that she would want to make that point.

I've been a DSA member for two years now (May 2016).

The bravest thing to do is move to a place where everyone thinks just like you and then be extremely sanctimonious towards people who are pushing the rock uphill. The truest courage possible. You should write an autobiography.

Quit doubling down on stupidity. For the last time, there is a bed for every homeless person in NYC. All they have to do is walk in the door sober. You bolded socialist in democratic socialist, but remember what democratic means. If you want to sleep on the street, you can. If you want to hold up a sign and get 50 dollars an hour from tourists you can. If you want to down a bottle of vodka and pass out on the sidewalk, you can. That's a free country. A socialist country gives them a place to go when they want to go there. A fascist country, like the one you want, forces them to go whether they want to or not. 

While it's pretty stupid to stay in a place where you are unhappy, I wish you luck pushing your rock uphill. I really do. But this thread is about O-C who lives in my district. She isnt pushing your rock uphill. Shes pretending that her and my rock isnt already up the hill. 

And while you should keep trying to get better lawmakers there, that should occupy a minimal amount of your volunteer hours. Do something real to help people. Dont just protest. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

The other thing about the perceived homeless is that the NYPD isnt rounding them up when they arent committing bigger crimes anymore. 

I suppose its visually more noticeable, but the police work is entirely more liberal than it used to be. Which is good. 

Except when the pope was in town, then magically homelessness went away when choice went away. 

Edited July 24, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[bad_teammate 13132]

20 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

For the last time, there is a bed for every homeless person in NYC.

The existence of a palliative does not mean the disease has been cured.

Quote

All they have to do is walk in the door sober.

And why can't they do that?

Quote

A fascist country, like the one you want, forces them to go whether they want to or not. 

When did I make that argument? Are you even capable of discussion with any level of acrimony without relying fucking entirely on making up fantasy arguments to put in your opponent's mouth?

Quote

While it's pretty stupid to stay in a place where you are unhappy, I wish you luck pushing your rock uphill. I really do. But this thread is about O-C who lives in my district. She isnt pushing your rock uphill. Shes pretending that her and my rock isnt already up the hill. 

I don't like where I live? I need everyone around me to be a reflection of me in order to like them and the place itself? You are very good at taking your pathologies and projecting them onto who you are arguing with.

And yeah, she's going all across the country to help others push the rock. That's what you're so mad about. (One of the many things you're mad about.) Those of us in the undesirable lands appreciate it when glorious heroes from your liberal utopias deign to grace us with your presences in solidarity.

You need to print this out and present it for the group in a struggle session, because you're off your nut.

Edited July 24, 2018 by bad_teammate

[blackmarketbaby 118]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

This is part of what happens, absolutely. You act like "passing it on to the consumer" is just something all companies can do indefinitely. It's amazing how little capitalism apologists understand about how competitive markets work.

Yes, they will pass along as many costs to customers as possible. Here's the thing: They already do this BEFORE minimum wage increases. They can only get away increasing costs if it doesn't hurt them competitively.

I'm BurgerShopA, you're BurgerShop B. You and I already manage the efficiencies of our businesses to increase profits. Uh oh, the COMMUNISTS have raised the minimum wage. Now my personnel costs have increased. I "pass it on to my customers" and now my burger costs $7 when it used to cost $5. You raise your burger price to $6 and cut your spending in other areas (like the ones outlined above).

Which one of us will succeed?

 

You forgot the theater. Don't forget the drive in

[FondrenRoad 4378]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The existence of a palliative does not mean the disease has been cured.

And why can't they do that?

When did I make that argument? Are you even capable of discussion with any level of acrimony without relying fucking entirely on making up fantasy arguments to put in your opponent's mouth?

I don't like where I live? I need everyone around me to be a reflection of me in order to like them and the place itself? You are very good at taking your pathologies and projecting them onto who you are arguing with.

And yeah, she's going all across the country to help others push the rock. That's what you're so mad about. (One of the many things you're mad about.) Those of us in the undesirable lands appreciate it when glorious heroes from your liberal utopias deign to grace us with your presences in solidarity.

You need to print this out and present it for the group in a struggle session, because you're off your nut.

Why cant they walk in the door sober? Really? They can. Every fucking night. They cant walk in drunk because they are disruptive to people who are choosing to better themselves.  

As for their substance issues, they can choose to walk in the door of city funded rehab rather than a shelter. But again, choice. Do I also need to go through the hardships and repercussions of addiction with you? Of depression?  I know choice seems to be a hard thing for you to grasp. But since you seem to be a person who has never actually volunteered for the poor, I'll spell it out for you. The rehab or shelter is simply the first door. When people are so depressed and so down that they're drinking themselves into a stupor every night, it's very difficult for them to quit. For you or me, their path seems clear, but for them it seems arduous. They know what drinking gives them. But sobriety means they have to move forward. The rehab. The shelter. Work placement. Public housing. All these are socialist ideals and available to them in NYC, but you dont understand what it means to them because you protest for the poor rather than helping the poor. To them the end result seems pointless. Crushing depression, loneliness, a job that isn't really fulfilling, a house for them to wait to die in. It's all easier just to try to drink themselves to death on the street. So tell me, how do you craft your socialist utopia to help this person?

And I do like O-C.  Although shes out of touch with the poor and with current policies in her city, I do think shes bright enough to figure it all out. I'm not so sure about you though. 

So hotshot. What's your better idea?  You live in your socialist utopia. Nikolai, Boris, Melania, and Natasha all have govt funded apartments in the same building. They also have 3 meals provided to them. Melania has a kid and stays out in the tourist part of town with a sign and gets a lot of donations. She sleeps at home most nights though. Natasha also has a kid. She works a low paying job and is in community college. Nikolai drinks 2 bottles of vodka a day. He mostly sleeps on the street, but sometimes he goes home and makes noise all night which keeps Natasha's kid awake, and makes it hard for Natasha to study.  Boris has psychotic breaks. Sometimes he doesnt really know who he is but hes never violent. He also sleeps on the street and doesnt even know he has an apartment in the building to go to. Now fix it, b-t.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

7 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't see a problem with that as long as we don't tie working 40 hours/week to having healthcare and having enough money to afford the basics.

Given the huge gains in worker efficiency since the adoption of the 40-hour work week, I think a 20-hour work week with a UBI and universal healthcare would be an awesome outcome.

Yes... yes... competing businesses do not try to undercut each other's prices in order to gain marketshare. You've figured it out. lol

Hell yeah, who doesn't grow up wanting the choice to live on the fucking street! WOO!

Then maybe building the shelters isn't the total solution?

And why is that?

"FUCKING LUMPENPROLES!!!!!!!!!"

And who said they should be put in a Brooklyn luxury apartment? It's hilarious that you see those two concepts put together and your brain automatically goes to, "Uh she must think we should put the homeless directly in those apartments." And with that astonishing assumption, you think SHE is the moron.

What are the economic and social conditions that led to the building of luxury apartments that could not be filled?

* citation needed

I used to like her, but I talk endless shit about her because I'm never nude, red, or mad.

The phrase economic reality makes your head hurt doesn't it ?

[thrillhammer 683]

this thread was better when you two weren't bickering like schoolgirls.  oh, and when there were more pictures of ocasio-cortez being posted.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Js1 85104]

Oh my, I am so glad she survived a rally discussing education and healthcare for every child in America.

Wow, the horrors. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Wait, I saw that op-ed yesterday and thought it was a parody.  It wasn't? 

Edited July 24, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[FondrenRoad 4378]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Lol. How much more fucking ridiculous can Fox get?