Which means that this UBI goes to who needs it the least
"deserving" never has come into play and should not unless you're especially selfish and believe in a twisted meritocracy that is just social darwinism in disguise
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
"deserving" never has come into play and should not unless you're especially selfish and believe in a twisted meritocracy that is just social darwinism in disguise
Does not matter. This isn't a zero sum matter. The proper comparison is the current status quo to that.
I will say that a UBI will help out the homeless. Though I guess the current status quo is better because the people who need it the least don't get anything.
Its not about deserving, its about everyone having the same safety net Ubi is supposed to replace most of the benefits by making them irrelevant. Think about it like a wage increase If you suddenly had a 12000 dls wage increase in your job you would be kicked out of most benefits programs because you would it would be deemed that you no longer need them.
Or the people who need it but the system has decided that no they don't, or the people who need it for something not offered by benefit programs such as a car to go to work. They can all go to hell because they don't need help the most.
Last edited:
A racist Pumpkin is the current president. The only thing I can learn from this shitty situation is that now I believe anything is possible.
Turns out those hasty comparisons between Bernie's vs Kamala's rallies in Charleston weren't all that accurate.
Like-for-like comparisons when both candidates were speaking showed similar demographics and standing room only for Bernie's rally. Can't say I'm surprised.
Here are the rallies if you want to compare them yourself:
Kamala's rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgOVE5Zyo3I (wrong link, sorry)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umjYvy68SI0&t=4s
Bernie's rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiSE5J20dLw
Like-for-like comparisons when both candidates were speaking showed similar demographics and standing room only for Bernie's rally. Can't say I'm surprised.
Here are the rallies if you want to compare them yourself:
Kamala's rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umjYvy68SI0&t=4s
Bernie's rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiSE5J20dLw
Last edited:
Don't confuse what Trump is doing that everyone can do it, most Republicans can't do what he's doing. Dems never had a chance at that type of stuff, because we have morals and standards and we like having a functioning government.
Yeah, the ACA was 'easy' when Obama spoke about it, but was also easy for opposition to break down once it was time to implement. Don't forget 'Obamacare' was a slur sold alongside the poison pills Fox news dug from the convoluted proposal. The fact that your using the term shows how successful they were (don't feel bad, I've caught myself using it as well)
"Medicare for all" will be 'easy' the whole time through because for your average Joe, no further explanation is required. We are all familiar with the terms 'medicare' and 'all', there's little room for misinterpretation, thus it's harder to twist.
Yang's biggest barrier is lack of recognition. I don't think one year of campaigning will be enough to push him past more established contenders. He's in the same boat Bernie was in 2016. I'm just hoping he changes the overall discussion as much as Bernie was able to.
I do think he would have much better results in the general than in the primary, though. He's not on the right, but he's not what the left is currently clamoring for, either. He is taking Obama's approach to "identity politics" (I hate this term), i.e. putting them in the back seat. That worked great for Obama, but a lot has changed... It's the right approach for the general, but I don't know about the primary. Bernie has changed his strategy a bit in this regard
Yang is in no way alt-right. He's very focused on diverse groups and calls out institutional racism in a number of policies. He has explicitly denounced their support. The alt-right are picking out his comments on white issues specifically, which is fine, considering he is legitimately trying to solve those problems as well, but it's aggravating when they try to paint him as being against 'diversity'. I mean, he's the only candidate that not only wants to add Puerto Rico as a state, but also wants to give each Puerto Rican $1000 bucks a month. I sometimes wonder if the alt-right are just trying to tank him, since he's drawing disappointed Trumpers to the Dems
My ideal situation is a Sanders/Yang ticket, where we can combine Bernie's experience and record with Yang's data driven approach and youth
Yang has been up front that his policies are designed to be scalable, a data driven, engineered approach that I find compelling.
$1000/month and 10% VAT are easy, catchy numbers. They are also low enough to get something passed without too many people raising eyebrows. Yang has already discussed scaling these numbers in the future if they prove successful (campaign for re-election would be $2000/month)
Either each value could scale up together, or as automation displaces more work and increases productivity, UBI could scale independent of VAT. Also, other programs or taxes could be absorbed into either number in future iterations. This would all be well past first term, though
Last edited:
I just meant to say that nothing can surprise me anymore.
SNL should have Amy pull the mask off to reveal Putin underneath in a skit.
Yang is on the same place as Bernie true but no candidate feels as Initially strong as hillary was. In 2016 hillary at first felt like the only possible candidate there are many more options this time around.
I don't know if a Sanders/Yang ticket is possible it feels like they fundamentally disagree in quite a few things.
I imagine that his Freedom dividend is scalable my question is how is he going to guarantee that happens after his term is done. What if a republican president follows him and sabotages it.
yup, no guarantee
Basically, he'll have 4/8 years to prove it's worth keeping/expanding
the American way :)
Speaking of accuracy.
You posted a Kamala Harris rally that was at a different venue and city to the Bernie rally.
Intentionally misleading? Having trouble accepting reality?
This is the Kamala event at the same venue in Charleston and is much more filled.
And I feel like if it gets introduced too soon some right wing politian will convince some of the public how It is somehow bad for you (ACA style) which will prompt them to vote against it and be distrustful of it which will lead to The US being the last one to adopt the policy once when it really becomes a nesesity (The American Way)
Anyway, is not likely he'll win this time but at least he'll start the conversation and I think that a green new deal if it includes a job guarantee if it pays at least 15 dls an hour is a more effective solution for the current american situation and the current American mindset.
I copy and pasted both links that were provided in the comments from the respective rallies. I should have checked the accuracy on those links, but the comparison itself is from the exact same venue, where it is clear that Kamala's event is filled with people sitting in seats (which take up space) and Bernie's event is filled with people standing. More importantly, the crowd is mostly white at both events.
The Kamala rally you posted was from Columbia and the Bernie one was from Charleston. Different cities would draw a different crowds.
It's more accurate to compare rallies held in the same city at the same venue.
a green new deal is great in theory, but this could mean anything. Ultimately, such a proposal needs to be broken down into policies and properly financed, and the one that was in the news recently was not that robust. It's hard to take a stand on such a thing without specifics, beyond agreeing that something needs to be done about climate change. I look forward to each candidate contextualizing their approach, as I don't think any Democratic candidate will be able to ignore this issue
jobs guarantee programs, however, can be problematic
With such programs, people are forced into jobs they are not passionate about, or perhaps even have difficulty performing. It's hard for those with disabilities to participate. It's hard for people to manage. It would also be a bloated, administrative nightmare. Imagine all the fighting over which jobs *need* doing. Then trying to funnel the right people to each of them.
I like UBI because it is much easier to implement. Much less bureaucracy means much fewer variables. Much fewer variables means much less for the opposition to attack. People get money, the money is in the market, the market can cater to the people.
In theory, a perfectly run jobs guarantee program would work better than UBI, as the right work would be prioritized instead of the market targeting interests. However, you were discussing how opposition parties could stamp out UBI. There's just so much more opportunity to muck up a jobs guarantee program. Every aspect of it, from the type of work prioritized, to the type of people hired, to the comparisons of compensation for each would be scrutinized to death. It's an unfortunate reality, given right wing media's influence today
however, I'd certainly take a jobs guarantee program over what we currently have
Last edited:
I'm not talking about the youtube links. I talking about the comparison on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersFor...amala_harris_vs_bernie_sanders_charleston_sc/
It's the same event. Same camera angle too.
That was what I originally posted. I added the youtube links later, and apparently the person I copied the youtube links from had the wrong Kamala rally, but the reddit comparison is accurate.
Thanks for the clarification and correcting the video. The still comparison is a bit misleading as it doesn't capture the entire venue.
The videos provide a better sweeping view and allow for a better comparison.
You're not going to get perfect comparisons because the footage was taken by different photographers and equipment, but we can deduce a few things based on the available evidence; you can fit more people in a room without seats than with them, and the area behind the podium at Bernie's rally is filled with people (all the way up to the stage with curtains) and that same area at Kamala's rally was not. Looking at the rally footage from both you can see that the people fill the space all the way to the back of the room in both events, so using basic physics, arithmetic and deductive logic it's pretty clear to me which rally held more people.
The layout is different and he does have people on the stage behind him. The footprint of their stages and cordoned areas look about the same.
The big difference seems to be the second level which looks much deeper in people at Kamala's rally. A quick comparison between the videos paused at the 12 second mark for Harris's and 43:48 for Bernie's shows this.
Last edited:
Again, the crowd is more densely packed at the Bernie rally on the main level since there are no chairs taking up space. I imagine that resulted in less people needing to fill the balcony level at Bernie's rally. For Kamala's rally, less space on the main level (due to the seats) meant more people needed to find space elsewhere, like on the balcony level.
Fuck if he had an Era account he'd probably be some lame fuck with like some obscene post count of say 31,473.
Please keep going for another 10 pages.
It's possible they both reached capacity for the venue and there couldn't be anymore on the balcony at the Bernie rally due to them being on the floor.
Possible. At any rate, that's a hell of a difference compared to the narrative that was being put forth when Bernie's rally was underway.
Unironically squabbling about rally sizes is some desperate Trumpite shit.
Don't be like that.
Don't be like that.
Off topic, but I checked Yang's page for "LGBTQ rights", and he never specifically mentions reversing or opposing the trans military ban. In fact, no letter is ever specified in the policies.
Like that would be an easy opportunity for bonus points and he just doesn't go for it at all.
I know that is the least of Yang's problems, but it rubbed me the wrong way.
(Side note, I am trying to figure out what the policies to not just LGBTQ people but trans people specifically are from Democrats in this election cycle, so if anyone has any links to candidate's platforms that would be helpful)
Pointing out that providing two different videos for making a comparison between rallies isn't squabbling. And this is a discussion being had. Perhaps you could provide better discussion instead.
Jobs guarantee will most likely mean forcing people into jobs they're not passionate about but it really feels to me like it would be a way to justify an unlimited unemployment protection and if it starts at at least 15 dollars an hour it would have the added benefit of forcing employers to offer a higher wage and benefits than what the government guarantees if they wish to stay competitive. It would be a way to raise the minimum wage without having to actually go to the process of raising it.
It would be an easier pill to swallow for those who still are afraid of the stigma of being a leech to the goverment or a seeker of handouts if people have to do a task, any task to receive the assistance and ultimately I would be less worried about the opposition stamping out the program in 8 years time as it feels to me like a stopgap solution in the way of true UBI.
At least thats how I feel.
Y'all are a mess, lol
Now this is interesting!
I wanna see the donor breakdown though.
Now this is interesting!
I wanna see the donor breakdown though.
But...Bernie became a celebrity because of his policy substance.
Sure his policies are not on his website but at this point who doesn't know what he stands for.
No wonder he didn't tell anyone until Monday, he didn't want it to get lost in the weekend news cycle.
The people bragging about the crowd size at Bernie's campaign launch rally were definitely engaging in desperate Trumpite shit, right?
Oh was that the first time anyone has ever brought up crowd sizes?
I think this is going to galvanize both Beto and Bernie fans to give even more, which is going to bode well for both of their campaigns.
I thought Beto wasn't releasing those numbers because they were so disappointing?
Nicely done.
Beto is on track to do incredibly well.
no kidding.
- Status