Jump to content

Elizabeth Warren 2020


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

No browns. She's clearly racist and part of the problem. I think the guy in the right photo is Indian, and we only count them as minorities when it is self-serving because they do so well on tests and economically they fuck up our outrage.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2019 at 5:37 PM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Didn't we do that already back in the early 80's?  Not saying it shouldn't be done again (it should), but it's proof at how ineffective everything is.

They were a telco in the 80's, now they own too many media companies and are using that leverage to fuck over customers and other companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Kyle said:

No browns. She's clearly racist and part of the problem. I think the guy in the right photo is Indian, and we only count them as minorities when it is self-serving because they do so well on tests and economically they fuck up our outrage.

this is a bit, right?  i mean, it kinda has to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, kevwun said:

They were a telco in the 80's, now they own too many media companies and are using that leverage to fuck over customers and other companies.

The AT&T circle of life had a confusing ending. Southwestern Bell ended eating up all of the other baby bells and finally finished with consuming Ma Bell but then it ceased to exist and took on the persona of AT&T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

So she just lost Texas.....and Louisiana.

Oooh no, how will a Democrat ever win a national election without those 2 states! 

Also, might earn her a few votes in Florida. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

 

2017-2018 Democrats: We have to run on ideas! 

2019 Democrats: BUT ELIZABETH DOESN'T MAKE ME FEELINGS TINGLE SHE'S SO BORING AND FULL OF POLICY IDEAS

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

It's going to be impossibly tough to decide between her and Bernie. It probably won't matter by the time Georgia has its primary, but I'd be so happy if either of them got the nomination.

I'm going to go with whichever one has the most delegates by the time the Texas primary rolls around.

I absolutely love her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happyfunball said:

 

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?

If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.

 

I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Laxtonto said:

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?

If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.

I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.

I agree with this, but it's a good starting point to push her left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.

How much more difficult is it to tackle that problem though? I'd see it as a hell of a lot more, something that no one policy plan could easily fix whereas debt cancellation is a lot easier for voters to wrap their minds around. I'm about to pay off my undergrad loans (graduated in 2009) and have zero problem if I don't get any help out of this because I understand my privilege in making a ton more money (and a lot of it arguably undeserved because I work in the booming tech industry) than those who graduated even with STEM degrees at the same time as me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

How much more difficult is it to tackle that problem though? I'd see it as a hell of a lot more, something that no one policy plan could easily fix whereas debt cancellation is a lot easier for voters to wrap their minds around. I'm about to pay off my undergrad loans (graduated in 2009) and have zero problem if I don't get any help out of this because I understand my privilege in making a ton more money (and a lot of it arguably undeserved because I work in the booming tech industry) than those who graduated even with STEM degrees at the same time as me.

So your view is let’s just do this now as a promise in an election year and never provide or even articulate a way to solve this mess and then what do you do in 4 years or 8 years when the same issue comes to a head again?

Now you have rewarded a vast majority of people to get degrees that aren’t rewarded in the marketplace and instead of making education a legitimate value proposition you are rewarding what exactly?

 

You want to fix higher education, give tuition waivers for anything that qualifies to the very broad STEM definition (which would also include degrees that feed the tech realm if structured properly) and then kill or at least do not governmental secure student loans.

 

If you want a degree that is tied to STEM, great we will pay for it. If not, you pay your own way or get scholarships or what not. 

 

Part of the issue is that we have subsidized career training for degrees there are not jobs. Fix the long term job propositions and tie fundings to career paths instead of providing the path to subsidized degrees with no true outlet.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Laxtonto said:

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?

If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.

 

I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

So your view is let’s just do this now as a promise in an election year and never provide or even articulate a way to solve this mess and then what do you do in 4 years or 8 years when the same issue comes to a head again?

Now you have rewarded a vast majority of people to get degrees that aren’t rewarded in the marketplace and instead of making education a legitimate value proposition you are rewarding what exactly?

 

You want to fix higher education, give tuition waivers for anything that qualifies to the very broad STEM definition (which would also include degrees that feed the tech realm if structured properly) and then kill or at least do not governmental secure student loans.

 

If you want a degree that is tied to STEM, great we will pay for it. If not, you pay your own way or get scholarships or what not. 

 

Part of the issue is that we have subsidized career training for degrees there are not jobs. Fix the long term job propositions and tie fundings to career paths instead of providing the path to subsidized degrees with no true outlet.

Where on earth are you getting that I'm thinking this is a one-time simple fix for this problem? I'm simply addressing that a candidate is going to probably get more reception if he or she offers a simple policy idea instead of creating a 20-minute Ross Perot educational video of what the actual underlying problem is.

As for the rest of your post, the idea that college == job training is quite literally not what a holistic university education was meant to be. That may be what it has become, but arbitrarily deciding what degrees are worth more than others is gross to me, it reeks of elitism.

My point about STEM degrees is that there are tons of people who graduate with a STEM degree and are often not paid that much higher (or at all) than those with all the degrees conservatives love to attack (feminist studies, etc.). How much more value was I providing to society working as a lab tech for a gross giant health corporation vs. a person who basically hands out pamphlets at a museum who studied maybe anthropology? My degree in biology was basically required at this toxicology lab for an entry level position but was not being used at all, all those chemistry lab courses using NMR and Mass Spectrometry probably prepared us to take more of an analyst or operator role yet those positions often required advanced degrees. I get tired of hearing people who graduated college decades ago act as if they have any idea what careers are out there for STEM degrees.

Edited by GSU&UT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?

If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.

 

I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.

the "free-college" initiatives have a similar starting point.  i think the qualifications for bernie's were households under $125k (though i could be mis-remembering).

i like how she's attacking it from the loan perspective, though.  will be interesting to see her and bernie battle on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.

It is pandering, as is promising to end offshore drilling on federal properties. But if she really wants to get new votes she needs to up her pandering game from not only appealing to the anti-oil crowd and the student-in-debt crowd, but also the huge, I-want-free-stuff crowd.

And here’s the way to do that: She should promise to immediately sell off all the strategic oil reserves. According to the GND, which Warren endorses, we will be off of oil by 2030. Just imagine how many votes she could get if she proposed to sell a soon-to-be-useless product—one that is currently valued at well over 35 billion dollars—and return the proceeds to the American people in the form of free stuff; maybe free iphones or free internet, for example, or even reparations.

She’s missing a real opportunity here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

Where on earth are you getting that I'm thinking this is a one-time simple fix for this problem? I'm simply addressing that a candidate is going to probably get more reception if he or she offers a simple policy idea instead of creating a 20-minute Ross Perot educational video of what the actual underlying problem is.

As for the rest of your post, the idea that college == job training is quite literally not what a holistic university education was meant to be. That may be what it has become, but arbitrarily deciding what degrees are worth more than others is gross to me, it reeks of elitism.

My point about STEM degrees is that there are tons of people who graduate with a STEM degree and are often not paid that much higher (or at all) than those with all the degrees conservatives love to attack (feminist studies, etc.). How much more value was I providing to society working as a lab tech for a gross giant health corporation vs. a person who basically hands out pamphlets at a museum who studied maybe anthropology? My degree in biology was basically required at this toxicology lab for an entry level position but was not being used at all, all those chemistry lab courses using NMR and Mass Spectrometry probably prepared us to take more of an analyst or operator role yet those positions often required advanced degrees. I get tired of hearing people who graduated college decades ago act as if they have any idea what careers are out there for STEM degrees.

Cancellation of debt is an inherently "one time" thing.  I mean, you can keep doing it every five or ten years or so, and that might be effective to kill off the student lending industry, which would be good.  Then there might be some downward pressure on tuition.

But he's right.  It's just nibbling at symptoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds more like a cheap trick to get the 18-28 year old vote. Heeeeey more free shit comin' your way.....  Change the system instead of giving away money that's not yours to give away in the first place.


vs the 65+ year old vote

Psh, about time a candidate addresses the issues of the current working age population
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?
If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.
 
I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.



She also wants to fix the underlying issue by having all state colleges be free.

Omg, it is like she has a comprehensive policy!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only would she be the best president, she would also piss of trump the most for losing to her.

While great in theory, number one I’m not sure she could win, and number two, if she did, trump would seek to go all African country dictator stolen election on us. Not saying he would succeed, but its a risk. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Not only would she be the best president, she would also piss of trump the most for losing to her.

While great in theory, number one I’m not sure she could win, and number two, if she did, trump would seek to go all African country dictator stolen election on us. Not saying he would succeed, but its a risk. 

He will do that on any candidate that wins over him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you majored in a degree program that actually makes money or if you are married and both make 50k, you get screwed on this?
If you are going to do debt forgiveness, do it across the board or not at all. This just looks like pandering to single millennials and two income families with degrees with limited income potential.
 
I disagree with student debt forgiveness for the same reasons I disagree with the idea of reparations. It tries to fix a symptom instead of fixing the underlying problem.


Student loan debt forgiveness and some of the farther left issues bother me too but I think I we do need to help borrowers. No reason student debt shouldn’t be super low rates and longer term pay backs. $1000 a month should be $300 a month. It’s already not dischargeable in bankruptcy so it’s a highly secure debt for lenders.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Enchubben said:

Awful policy. Just like every other socialist agenda; reward those who make bad decisions and are irresponsible. 

Fix the problem, don’t just throw money at it.

 

3 minutes ago, troph said:

 


Student loan debt forgiveness and some of the farther left issues bother me too but I think I we do need to help borrowers. No reason student debt shouldn’t be super low rates and longer term pay backs. $1000 a month should be $300 a month. It’s already not dischargeable in bankruptcy so it’s a highly secure debt for lenders.

 

Why does it bother you, seriously 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awful policy. Just like every other socialist agenda; reward those who make bad decisions and are irresponsible. 
Fix the problem, don’t just throw money at it.
How is taking a student loan a bad decision? It's one of the very few paths to upward social mobility for people who didn't grow up privileged and aren't a Wunderkind of some kind.

I'm not a big fan of this policy but your ability to be both wrong and an asshole about everything is astounding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...