2020 Political Chatter

[vertical_doug]

Also-if the GOP is in fact going through a divorce-does that mean Blue gets the next 12 years or so until they figure it out?

I don't think having 3 large parties is bad. I can see a centrist republican gaining some centrist democrats. So you have a left, right and center. (although center would be right of center) and in fact the center party would be the corporate interests so it'd be strongly funded from day one. I tend to think of myself as socially liberal , but fiscally conservative (in a true sense, not the stupid supply side idiocy)

Pro Choice, Pro Climate, Pro Environment, for a simpler tax form but focus on fairness, I can see parts for less regulation, etc etc. . .

I think a lot of americans fall in this camp.

[AngryScientist]

Trump will not be president at noon on the 20th. His Presidency ends at 11:59:59. There is no way around that. And if he won't leave, they'll escort his fat ass out swiftly.

I heard he's working on finding another amendment

[suspectdevice]

I don’t see any difficulties for republicans to maintain control of statehouses across the country for another couple generations.

Gerrymandered district maps and our broken educational system pretty much assures us that any state without a primarily urban population base will continue to be dominated by christofascists, and will be enabled by the SCOTUS and a complicit media that prioritizes salaciousness over newsworthiness.

American politics is 100 percent cynicism at this point, and will be until a point where “representative democracy” is replaced by democracy or theocracy.
The anti-democratic urges of the modern republican party are widespread- look to Cruz’s belief(shared among many Republican “lawyers”) that state legislatures should go back to selecting Senators.

Because republican policy is so incredibly unpopular on a national level, they are already a minority party, and they will continue to try to force minority rule even if they somehow don’t win both GA races tomorrow.

[echappist]

I don't think having 3 large parties is bad. I can see a centrist republican gaining some centrist democrats. So you have a left, right and center. (although center would be right of center) and in fact the center party would be the corporate interests so it'd be strongly funded from day one. I tend to think of myself as socially liberal , but fiscally conservative (in a true sense, not the stupid supply side idiocy)

Pro Choice, Pro Climate, Pro Environment, for a simpler tax form but focus on fairness, I can see parts for less regulation, etc etc. . .

I think a lot of americans fall in this camp.

You have more faith in your fellow citizens than I do. There's the part that at least a substantial subset of those who lean Pro Climate and Pro Choice hankers for unrealistic social programs (e.g. free college), and for whom part of the justification for funding such a policy would be, well we've already spent however many times more on giveaways to the rich, we could certainly spend this much on social programs of our own choosing. On the other end of this proposed coalition, you would have people who would pay lip service to Pro Climate and Pro Environment policies but who would balk at the idea of an overall 2% increase in taxes/fees in order to fund or enact such policies. Hell, they'd balk if the current gasoline subsidies were to disappear (so that we would be paying rates that people are paying in the EU, which is to say ~2-2.5x as much).

Such a coalition would require the left end thereof to accept a realistic view of society (specifically, that there is a limit to just how much could be funded communally) and the right end thereof to place the interest of society at large over selfish interests (specifically, money where the mouth is). Maybe at one time, there could have been enough people to support the political position you mentioned, but I don't see it.

[zachateseverything]

I don't think having 3 large parties is bad. I can see a centrist republican gaining some centrist democrats. So you have a left, right and center. (although center would be right of center) and in fact the center party would be the corporate interests so it'd be strongly funded from day one. I tend to think of myself as socially liberal , but fiscally conservative (in a true sense, not the stupid supply side idiocy)

Pro Choice, Pro Climate, Pro Environment, for a simpler tax form but focus on fairness, I can see parts for less regulation, etc etc. . .

I think a lot of americans fall in this camp.

A third party will never be a thing in the US without a major reform to how we choose the winner of elections and how we distribute seats in Congress. Let's say we had three parties, one center left. one center. and one far right. Let's also say the center left and center parties really only have minor disagreements about how far to go with social programs. Like one wants free college the other wants means tested super cheap community and state college to be available to everyone. Let's also say the far right party wants to force all non-whites into labor camps and kick all women out of the workforce, something no one in the other parties can get behind at all.

Now the election comes around. The center left, and center parties each gets 30% of the vote. The far right party gets 40% of the vote and wins control of the government. Yeah, 60% of the people voted against that platform but they're still stuck with the results. The two losing parties largely merge after this election and we're back to two.

That's what happens in first past the post. You get two major parties that are loose coalitions of people with different interests. For the GOP that's social conservatives, evangelicals, people that only care about their tax rate, anti-environmentalists, and bigots. Notice the prevalence of single issue voters? That makes it easy for them to get voters out to the polls even in off years. For the Democrats that's young people, progressives, minorities, etc. which tend to be much more fickle and willing to abstain from the process if their candidate doesn't meet their purity tests.

What will still happen in first past the post is something similar to the alliance building we see in parliamentary systems it just happens off the books (sometimes you'll see stuff like the Freedom Caucus or Tea Party that's a bit more formalized). Both parties are playing a game. They're trying to finagle their policy positions and personalities such that they can build a solid enough coalition to win elections and enact policy. The problem at the core is how do you keep a group together that's membership sometimes has opposing goals. The former members of the GOP that voted for Biden for example are not going to easily agree with many of the longterm policy goals of the Democrats as a whole.

[suspectdevice]

The belief that their is a “limit” to how much money the federal government can spend, and the attached myth that deficits are “bad” has been proven wrong time and time again by non-heterodox economic theory.

IF you subscribe to outdated and discredited economic theories that created the mess that this country is in(I’m looking at you, Chicago School), yes, some kind of boogeyman will “drag down the rich” if we confiscate and redistribute their wealth- but lets be REAL here for a second- the actual heart of this country is not millionaires and billionaires, and fuvk rich people, if they have to suffer a little bit so the rest of us don’t live in squalor and fear, let the bleeding begin. The stock market isn’t the economy, and gambling isn’t work.

FFS, just look at this year, i dont know of a single small business owner that took the first round of PPP and didn’t end up having the best overall years of their business- my dad(owns a small-business focused accounting firm) has collected the wildest stories from all manner of small business owners trying to figure out what to do with all that extra money. IF someone had a connected banker, the outgoing year of misery didn’t happen- because of moderate direct investment from the government.

The government can just print all the dang money they want- if they give it directly to citizens it does nothing except enhance consumption of goods and services (aka the REAL economy) and helps just a scooch with the abject fear the majority in this country that live paycheck to paycheck feel.

[Sino]

The government can just print all the dang money they want- if they give it directly to citizens it does nothing except enhance consumption of goods and services (aka the REAL economy) and helps just a scooch with the abject fear the majority in this country that live paycheck to paycheck feel.

Maybe I'm not understanding you, but it's not a closed system. Our currency has to play nicely with others, debtors, etc., doesn't it? Either way, has kill the rich ever worked in history? It seems like you generally just end up with more poor people.

[Colinmclelland]

The belief that their is a “limit” to how much money the federal government can spend, and the attached myth that deficits are “bad” has been proven wrong time and time again by non-heterodox economic theory....

The government can just print all the dang money they want- if they give it directly to citizens it does nothing except enhance consumption of goods and services (aka the REAL economy) and helps just a scooch with the abject fear the majority in this country that live paycheck to paycheck feel.

Currency wise, it seems to be a global race to the bottom. Australia is certainly trying to catch up to the US. I don't know what non-heteredox economic theory is. I compare countries to my situation. The US has a mortgage on its house for more than the house is worth, and spends more in day to day living than it earns. If I was the US, I would have been declared bankrupt by now. The US can just print more money, so that doesn't matter. But it doesn't make the house worth anymore, so why would I put the same value on the money that I used to? In my view, it's not that it doesn't matter, it's just that it doesn't matter yet.

None of it matters until it matters very suddenly and a lot IMHO.

[vertical_doug]

Currency wise, it seems to be a global race to the bottom. Australia is certainly trying to catch up to the US. I don't know what non-heteredox economic theory is. I compare countries to my situation. The US has a mortgage on its house for more than the house is worth, and spends more in day to day living than it earns. If I was the US, I would have been declared bankrupt by now. The US can just print more money, so that doesn't matter. But it doesn't make the house worth anymore, so why would I put the same value on the money that I used to? In my view, it's not that it doesn't matter, it's just that it doesn't matter yet.

None of it matters until it matters very suddenly and a lot IMHO.

Heterodox Economic theories are outside the mainstream. Non-heterodox therefore, are mainstream neoclassical models. (The stuff you were probably taught in Macro/microeconomics.)

The big Heterodox Economic theory du jour is MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). For countries with complete control over their currency (USD, JPY, YUAN, Eur) you do not need to think of government spending like a household budget. You can create money on the fly so to speak to pay your bills. In 2020, ECB , FED and BOJ effectively expanded their balance sheets by $8trn roughly. It works when you have insufficient demand, but eventually you get inflation. (but the eventually can be a long way off particularly, when TAX policy penalizes income and rewards capital. You get over investment and insufficient consumption)

That's why I think any long term solution for the US needs to tackle inequality and fairness of the tax code. Stop penalizing income and start penalizing capital. Or at a minimum. tax at the same rate.



You can to the other way of Heterodox Econ like Judy Shelton where economic theory is just a convenience function for politics. When Obama is President you need tight fiscal policy, when Trump is President, you need lose fiscal policy. Crazy shit like this.

[Colinmclelland]

I think MMT is one of the few things that makes buying bikes seem relatively sensible!

[sine]

I think MMT is one of the few things that makes buying bikes seem relatively sensible!

MMT would ultimately lead to a a Huffy built with seamed tubing, rattle can paint job and potmetal parts that would cost US$10,000 in today's money.

[bironi]

Those two Senate re-run races in Georgia.
Why is it that the NYT online is reporting results with 31%,
but the local Atlanta tv news is reporting results with 6%?

[vertical_doug]

Those two Senate re-run races in Georgia.
Why is it that the NYT online is reporting results with 31%,
but the local Atlanta tv news is reporting results with 6%?

You'd have to ask the news organizations where they get the data and how often they update the results. Simple explanation it is a timing of updates issue since alot of this will be manual.

More importantly, the only number that does count is the final one. If the election is close, Georgia allows a recount. The polls are closed and the reporting cannot affect the results.

[jclay]

My message to Nancy Pelosi this morning; I hope others will do the same:

It is your responsibility to deny seating to every GOP Representative who refuses to accept the Electoral College results. They are committing acts of sedition and it's time that you had the backbone to deliver severe consequences. The Republicans aren't messing around; it's time the Democrats weren't. Do it.

[jclay]

MMT would ultimately lead to a a Huffy built with seamed tubing, rattle can paint job and potmetal parts that would cost US$10,000 in today's money.

Few (including me) know enough about MMT to comment but history is pretty clear on this: If wealth concentration is allowed to continue as it has been of late, then this nation will, sooner or later, fracture in a very ugly fashion.

Where well paying jobs were once relatively plentiful to those with little education the flight to lower opportunity cost producers offshore as well as domestic consolidation and automation have caused their loss, here. Ironically it is capitalism's pursuit of maximum ROI (or more likely CEO pursuit of extreme wealth and golden parachutes) worshipped by those most adversely affected that is at the root of the problem. Failure to address that successfully will bring very bad news to the USA and we'll join the long list of once self-proclaimed "exceptional", "indispensable" and "greatest nation on Earth" to have been whittled down to size by that problem.

Like a dysfunctional family, we aren't able to even mention that reality, volleying wedge issues and religious, faux idealogical BS back and forth, instead, else be branded a commie. It's pathetic, particularly for "the greatest nation on Earth".

[vertical_doug]

My message to Nancy Pelosi this morning; I hope others will do the same:

It is your responsibility to deny seating to every GOP Representative who refuses to accept the Electoral College results. They are committing acts of sedition and it's time that you had the backbone to deliver severe consequences. The Republicans aren't messing around; it's time the Democrats weren't. Do it.

It doesn't work that way. Ultimately, she needs a 2/3 majority to expel the member.

[vertical_doug]

Few (including me) know enough about MMT to comment but history is pretty clear on this: If wealth concentration is allowed to continue as it has been of late, then this nation will, sooner or later, fracture in a very ugly fashion.

Where well paying jobs were once relatively plentiful to those with little education the flight to lower opportunity cost producers offshore as well as domestic consolidation and automation have caused their loss, here. Ironically it is capitalism's pursuit of maximum ROI (or more likely CEO pursuit of extreme wealth and golden parachutes) worshipped by those most adversely affected that is at the root of the problem. Failure to address that successfully will bring very bad news to the USA and we'll join the long list of once self-proclaimed "exceptional", "indispensable" and "greatest nation on Earth" to have been whittled down to size by that problem.

Like a dysfunctional family, we aren't able to even mention that reality, volleying wedge issues and religious, faux idealogical BS back and forth, instead, else be branded a commie. It's pathetic, particularly for "the greatest nation on Earth".

Sorry to be Dougie Downer here but

Unfortunately, it doesn't change until you decide to fracture and have revolution. If anything, COVID showed a lot of people can be treated as expendable and the economy will run for a period of time. The top can take an even larger percentage of the spoils.. Like many things, COVID has just accelerated this trend too.

[gregl]

Unfortunately, it doesn't change until you decide to fracture and have revolution. If anything, COVID showed a lot of people can be treated as expendable and the economy will run for a period of time. The top can take an even larger percentage of the spoils.. Like many things, COVID has just accelerated this trend too.

True, but COVID also showed us that to make the "new" economy work, you need lots of blue collar workers. Instead of putting together cars in Detroit, they're delivering Amazon packages and Grubhub meals. Imagine if the Amazon employees collectively stopped working. History shows how labor's power transitions to different industries and locations over time. The work force just needs to adjust to the transition. The power (and associated spoils) of the people at the top depends on their ability to run their businesses. If the businesses can't run, their power ceases to exist.

Greg

[thollandpe]

Quoted from the Georgia runoff thread:

The US like many countries has a mixed economy. Capitalism that includes some elements of socialism. Some countries more than others and individuals/parties in the us want to expand social programs further. Where does it end?

Where does what end, the slippery slope to socialism? I can think of a few objectives straight away, and probably a few more that would be worth committing to as a nation. Here are three to start:

• There are no veterans of the US armed forces sleeping on the streets
• We don’t have to keep schools open during a pandemic in order to give kids their one or two square meals a day
• A cancer diagnosis does not mean financial bankruptcy

[vertical_doug]

True, but COVID also showed us that to make the "new" economy work, you need lots of blue collar workers. Instead of putting together cars in Detroit, they're delivering Amazon packages and Grubhub meals. Imagine if the Amazon employees collectively stopped working. History shows how labor's power transitions to different industries and locations over time. The work force just needs to adjust to the transition. The power (and associated spoils) of the people at the top depends on their ability to run their businesses. If the businesses can't run, their power ceases to exist.

Greg

Yes, you need Amazon warehouse to form a union, or uber/lyft/dash/grub instead of being a gig-worker. They are independent contractors shielding tech firms from labor laws, and other litigation.

That's why Amazon , Uber are so hostile to any unionization discussions among employees. More militant unions would be a nice start for the fracture.