556
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
556 points (95.9% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2028 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If by "left" you mean democrats then they will not do this because it is not what their views are. They are ideologically as neoliberal as Reagan and Thatcher. This is part of why they don't do as good of a job opposing the far right as they could, because they only exist as long as their only opposition is unhinged far right politicians.
And I would say that's fairly representative of the views most voters have. The left needs to win the argument with voters before they can complain about the politicians.
I mean the opinions of the voting public are nearly always more complex than either Republican or Democratic party dogma. The problem is that there is no substantial way of politically engaging besides voting. I would argue actually that generally the public is way more left wing than it is given credit for, but a lot of people have no accessible ways to transform these ideas into action. And for this I don't have an easy answer. Disclaimer, am a leftist so I would obviously think this, but I do still think that we would see more diverse political ideas if our political systems were made to be more open.
I fuckin wish the Dems were reliably neoliberal, in the vein of Clinton(s).
Neoliberalism is dope as fuck. Free trade and open borders let's gooooo
End occupational licensing, end single family zoning, cut corporate taxes, encourage freer trade and common markets. Raise taxes on non-poor people to pay for social programs. These are core neoliberal tenets.
Why do you want to make being poor even harder? These are evidenced-based methods of helping poor people.
I find the "raise taxes to pay for social programs" and "cut corporate taxes" to be somewhat contradictory. Reagan and Thatcher were textbook neoliberals if you need any examples, and they destroyed social programs and labor unions rather than supporting them.
In the 80s people also smoked indoors everywhere. Lots of dumb shit happened in the 80s. Then, over 40 years, people got smarter.
Individual taxes need to go up. Corporate taxes do not
I fail to see why you think helping corporations earning money will help individuals, especially with raising taxes on them. Corporations' interests are lower wages and higher prices, worker's interests are higher wages and lower prices. The only way to then increase wages is to force companies to do so, either through job disloyalty, strikes, regulations, or etc. Don't see how lower taxes will make them pay more.
Lowering corporate taxes helps people because corporate taxes are across the entire sector and thus are more easily priced in (because your competition is also likely to do so). Consumers pay for the majority of every corporate tax increase.
Wages can be increased through encouraging unionization, passing single-payer health care, etc.
Lowering corporate taxes may have some slight impact on merit pay and even wages as a whole, but it would almost certainly be focused on white collar jobs. I'm not opposed to that, but it isn't a primary concern
Also you could get student loans discharged in bankruptcy and Iraq was a functional country.
You neoliberals fixed that.
Lmao yeah you're right, something 75% and 90% of Congress voted for, respectively, is the fault of... Neoliberals.
As are hurricanes and earthquakes.
Your policy was passed and you refuse to own it.
It's bizarre you think "fruitless war" is some sort of neoliberal ideal lol
Every NeoLiberal site I have read supported the Iraq War and still considers Tony Blair to be a good guy and Hillary Clinton's decision to vote for it wise.
It is odd how little you know about the label you have adopted.
Tony Blair is definitely a good guy. I still don't support the Iraq war.
It's a big tent.
He is a war criminal who should be executed for his crimes against humanity.
Lol you're a psychopath
My body count is 0, your Bff has one of 800,000 by some estimates.
I protested that war. What did you do?
No you didn't lol. You cannot convince me you were even approaching adulthood at the time. You have no concept of America at the time. You just stated the war was unpopular in '03 which no one who was conscious at the time would have claimed.
I literally did protest that war tho. You're a liar, and I'm not. It's that simple.
Also your weird fixation on body count is dumb. People do in fact die in wars.
Boring. The protest against the Iraq war was the single biggest one in US history. Every city had one. I didn't make the big one in Washington DC I made a few smaller ones in my area.
I don't believe you protested it. You were probably rambling stuff about the Dixie Chicks and yellow cake uranium and how waterboarding wasn't torture. Sorry Cheney lied to you.
Mention the student loan thing.
You never answered why you want to tho
Cough.....student loan debt....cough
Imagine supporting an ideology that has been nothing but demonstrably harmful to most people except for a tiny handful.
They not only are against student loan forgiveness they also support Tony Blair. Yes that one, the war criminal who helped hand over prisoners to be waterboarded.
Don't believe me? Go visit any of the websites that they infest.
While I am by no means a Clinton fan, a huge part of the student loan hellscape is less Clinton active malice/stupidity and more Gingrich and company leverage - AKA the usual right-wing obstructionist bullshit that people gave them the numbers to force through. It wasn't helped by Clinton's need to cave due to getting sloppy toppies in the Oval Office and the huge stink Newt and Starr raised to get their way...or the Perot school of 'fuck you I got mine' Libertarians who apparently needed placating to keep the Dems in office.
Yes because they held a gun to his head and ordered him to not veto it.
Neoliberals don't like student loan forgiveness, they like Clinton who made it very hard to get it forgiven.
No gun is required when so-called self-interests are threatened. He shouldn't have caved, but then he also shouldn't have given credence to the welfare and social safety net talking points from the Reich wing. And the CBC damned well shouldn't have gone along with bullshit 'tough on crime' narratives.
He didn't veto it and no one forced him. There really is nothing else to say. The neoliberals knew full well the disaster that would follow but not only ignored it they also actively encouraged it.
Anyone with brains could see that if tuition is rising faster than income and you make student loans inescapable you would end up with mountains of debt. The only two options I can see
They couldn't see the obvious in which case they should have zero power.
They knew this would happen and wanted it.
I don't completely disagree, though the argument bears the advantage of hindsight. My suspicion is that the balance of the problem stemmed from the typical right wing obsession with the desire to obliterate the social safety net but the lack of pushback was due to an explicit underestimating of the scope of resulting fuckery - see also those black politicians who didn't push back on Tough on Crime bullshit. People made bad calls out of panic and circumstances, and fixing the problems are far simpler onbpaper than in application, particularly because of those who see the situation as a feature, not a bug.
Student loan debt balooning is caused by too easy access to loans coupled with too little state funding
And of course you are not supportive of forgiveness for it. Evidently you are going to continue to evade this issue.
I support forgiveness for student loans based roughly on income level, sure. I don't think we should be subsidizing wealthy kids more than we already do.
It should go, basically in order:
Then finally, mostly unforgiven
I'm very much in favor of progressive tax and social benefits.
I'm sorry, are you under the opinion that Democrats don't push for student loan forgiveness? Biden literally took it to the Supreme Court lmao.
Not a neoliberal if you support loan forgiveness. Which you only sorta do so guess you are only sorta one.
That is absolutely false lol
Brilliant rebuttal..sorry you don't know what your own movement believes.
Lol
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/#:~:text=Social%20entrepreneurs%20and%20those%20starting,to%20all%20federal%20loan%20borrowers.
Lol
https://awpc.cattcenter.iastate.edu/2017/03/09/hillary-clinton-iraq-war-vote-speech-oct-10-2002/
Did you like skip my earlier post or what's up
Admit that your bff voted for the Iraq war.
Sure. Who cares? Her constituents wanted it and I support doing what constituents want.
First off no. The war was massively unpopular and she was from blue state ny.
Secondly she knew it was all lies, illegal, a crime against humanity, and killed massive amounts of people.
Democracy is not an excuse for crimes against humanity.
Lol it's so cute to see people born after 9/11 try to talk about history I lived through.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/8038/seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-against-iraq.aspx
Wherever you get your info from is not base on reality. Dont be Trumpy. Live in the real world.
Agism? Real nice. But like most neoliberals what you say and what the truth is are fairly far apart. I was born before 9-11. I am old enough to remember it. I am old enough to have gone to protests against the Iraq War.
I am also old enough to know that the average of the entire US is not the average of NY state. Stick to lying about economics.
Lmao can't quite admit you're full of shit
Brilliant rebuttal. Very neoliberal