Everyone has a different definition of Utopia.

One person's paradise is another person's hell. Democracy requires compromise. Moving toward 'utopia' can be slow, especially when you have two sides that are VERY different.

The question becomes what are you willing to tolerate to achieve that utopia, and can you play the long game?

I strongly support Elizabeth Warren for 2020. And I hope that Biden supporters will hop on if she wins. But in turn, they hope that if their guy wins, that I hop on their train. There's a lot I dislike about Biden. But there's no realistic alternative if he's the candidate. It's a major fault of our two party system. No room for compromise between parties, so instead compromise must come from within the party. Which is what makes putting representatives in congress that are progressive (like AOC) more important than the debate between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. (Or Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden).

(June 24, 2019 at 5:15 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Then why do we want democracy, over something else, if it isn't improving the odds of good decisions, and ensuring good governance? I know a lot of people get cynical and jaded as they get older, but we're still supposed to work our hardest towards utopia. Instead of just not being as bad as we could have been.

Because democracy makes it slightly more likely we will avert really bad governance.   If you think chasing after hypothetical good governance is more important than averting bad governance, go live for a while where governance is bad, or just come after a few years should trump win another term.


But the hypothesis that democracy does have that one redeeming feature of averting bad governance is being sourly tested now, and the theory of what you should do in a democracy that you just propounded just weaken my hopes even more that the hypothesis will survive the test.

Compromise is fine, when both sides do it. Unfortunately republicans don't compromise. They insert their pet project into every legislation they can, and shut down the government, rather than concede, which is why the democrats of today resemble moderate republicans of yesterday.

I usually vote third party. Last November I voted straight blue. 2020 I will vote for the Democratic candidate. I have never considered my third party vote wasted but Cheeto Von Tweeto has driven me to this. That fuckhead has to go!

(June 24, 2019 at 5:46 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Compromise is fine, when both sides do it. Unfortunately republicans don't compromise. They insert their pet project into every legislation they can, and shut down the  government, rather than concede, which is why the democrats of today resemble moderate republicans of yesterday.

It’s because when republicans started doing this, dreamers still thinks stopping and marginalizing such a Republican Party and the forces that animated it is less important than  cherry picking from this Democrat or that looking for one that is seem somewhat close to their dream.

(June 23, 2019 at 4:35 pm)Chad32 Wrote: My opinion is far from professional. I just don't think we'd be getting anywhere good if we took the woman who ran on status quo as her goal. Of course now one of the biggest dem contenders in Biden, who is running on more or less the same thing. The bar that Trump set is so low, you could be a lot better than him, rather than a little, and still be really bad for the country. I remember being afraid that if we got Hillary for president, we'd be going into WW 3 over Syria. Now Trump wants war with Iran, and Venezuela, and has a hard on for Kimmy in North Korea, but I don't think we're on the verge of WW3

Since the Clinton isn't in office, your suppositions are meaningless. I'd be willing to bet that the Clinton wouldn't have done 1% of the stupid shit that the tweeto has done. Who are you voting for in 2020? Against the possible Vs the probable  (oh, wait, proven!) stupidity? WW3 is far less likely under the Clinton, and if you don't get that then I don't know what to say.

I'm going Sanders. And I hope they're not stupid enough to screw him again after Hillary, but they probably will. Tulsi Gabbard sounds good too. I'm kind of meh on Elizabeth, but I like her better than Biden.

(June 21, 2019 at 9:27 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: I can think of compelling arguments both for and against American socialism. CTTOI, I can think of compelling arguments for and against Trump when the alternative is socialism.

Here are the reasons why I would seriously consider voting for Trump if the dems choose Saunders as their candidate.
1. The US is a capitalist republic, just as the USSR was a socialist republic. If we become a socialist republic with our national debt where it is, we will be in the same position Russia was when it fell.
2. Socialism will mean a significant drop in American consumerism. This is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, we won’t be using so much of the earth’s resources and will contribute less to global warming. OTOH. China’s economy if dependent on us buying goods made in china. If we stop, china will have no recourse but to demand that we repay the money we owe them. ATVL. China will stop giving us money and we will go belly up.
3. Welfare is a good mini example of what American socialism will look like. To each according to his need. From each according to his ability. Honestly folks, do you want the government to decide what you do and don’t need. Do you want to hide your television in the closet because the social worker doesn’t one to make sure you have everything you need but to make sure you don’t have anything they think you don’t need? Do you  want the Needs and Abilities Coordination Bureau deciding what you do with your abilities?

 

Wow logic and reason with historical references properly applied and you tie it all together with modern fail examples of current working social programs!

You are 100% right on the money here.

My sister is all for sanders and she makes with her hub about 200K a year. she believes that she will free health care and free collage with no adverse change in life style or taxes. when in reality taxing the super rich will not be enough and year after year program after program the federal government will require more and more money because it is not just school and health care they are paying for. soon enough we all except below the poverty line poor will share this burden but not in our current comfort but as a collective lower middle class as we can expect to pay a 70 to 80% total tax bill. I've worked where our current welfare system is a way of life and I can say i do not want to live that way or just a step or two above just to bring people all on equal footing.

---

(June 21, 2019 at 12:18 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Perhaps I'm misinformed, but isn't the US already well on the way to being a socialist society?  As I understand it, you use tax revenues to:

-Educate children

-Provide medical care and housing for the indigent, the poor, and the elderly

-Guaranteed at least some income to the elderly

-Provide food for the poor

-Provide unemployment benefits

-Undertake infrastructure projects

-Subsidize farming, banking and other industries

-Regulate industries

-Maintain national parks and landmarks

ALL of these are the hallmarks of a socialist society.  I think a large part of the gut-wrench that a lot of Americans have when they hear the word 'socialism' is due to not really understanding what socialism is.

Boru

Wealth redistribution meaning the wealthy are to pay upto a 90% tax IF AOC has it her way anything earned over a cap salary is taken. meaning she says no one should make over 500K and if your company makes 10 million dollars a year all you get is the 500k

That no matter how you define socialism, is what is being sold to the american people as socalism. that is what is on the ballot. here it means a re distribution of wealth to pay for medical, collage, removing all cars and planes that burn fuel,rebuilding any structure older than 25 years ect, getting rid of all cows. and about 1/2 a dozen other nut bag things..

Oh no. How could anyone make ends meat with only $500k a year? What a travesty. Not that I think it's true, but it's funny to hear the phrase "only allowed to keep $500k" like that's not enough to live off of.

(June 24, 2019 at 5:29 pm)Cecelia Wrote: Everyone has a different definition of Utopia.

One person's paradise is another person's hell.  Democracy requires compromise.  Moving toward 'utopia' can be slow, especially when you have two sides that are VERY different.  

The question becomes what are you willing to tolerate to achieve that utopia, and can you play the long game?  

I strongly support Elizabeth Warren for 2020.  And I hope that Biden supporters will hop on if she wins.  But in turn, they hope that if their guy wins, that I hop on their train.  There's a lot I dislike about Biden.  But there's no realistic alternative if he's the candidate.  It's a major fault of our two party system.  No room for compromise between parties, so instead compromise must come from within the party.  Which is what makes putting representatives in congress that are progressive (like AOC) more important than the debate between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden.  (Or Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden).

pocahontas? you want a woman who coud not make it on the affirmative action provisions of just being a woman, she had to make up being an american indian?

And yes she made it up, IDK if you where bamboozled by the fake news or not buy in feb of this year she admits it all being a big fat lie. She admits there IS indeed a wide margin from family stories to tribe membership... Tribe membership is what she claimed from 1982 forward when ever asked. this advanced her in jobs and in position and propelled her all the way to the senate.

Being a legit mixed race (50% on and 50% another) makes me want to kick an old white lady in the teeth, as if white woman privilege is not enough/This wasn't enough to fuel her ambition, she had to steal from a minority to make her mark on the world because her wit, intellegence and or ablity was not enough on it's own to get her where she is... This is like the boss demoting you who has 25 years experience running a store just to give his 1/2 retarded son your job so he can be groomed to take over.

This woman is an example of shite floating to the surface not someone earning their way to the top..

---

(June 25, 2019 at 12:37 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Oh no. How could anyone make ends meat with only $500k a year? What a travesty. Not that I think it's true, but it's funny to hear the phrase "only allowed to keep $500k" like that's not enough to live off of.

how do you think one earns 10 million a year? if it is a good year the spend 7 million to earn back 10 with a 30% margin...

How can one earn 10 if AOC or some dumb ass like you who has never earn anything in his life takes everything but 500k?

---

better yet to earn a true 10 million you need invest 30 million and you will earn about 30% on your investment which before current taxes would be 10 million dollars.

right now almot 40% is taxed=4 million dollars which leaves 7 to reinvest.

Now why would anyone risk 30 million dollars to only earn 500k?

imagine wonder bread works these numbers and says it will produce bread from jan 1 to march 1 because that is all the profit the company can make. now imagine all bread companies doing the same... now that there is not bread most of the year bread becomes more and more expensive/supply and demand now wonder bread says they have to cut 6 weeks off of production because they cap out too fast.

This kinda thing plays out across the board in every business across the board when you cap people's money. then the governement is now having to subsudize that which now means more taxes...

Do you see the patern you create when you vote these people in, just so you can cop out of work?