American Politics IV: 1400 Reasons Why(A Stimulus Serial)

[San Lumen]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/539614-ocasio-cortez-calls-for-full-investigation-of-cuomos-handling-of-coronavirus

Ocasio-Cortez calls for full investigation of Cuomo's handling of coronavirus in nursing homes

Based.

I think others will call for it too. One assmblymember has already called for him to resign and claims their is bipartisan support for starting the impeachment process. There is a decent possibility he does not make it to 2022.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/539614-ocasio-cortez-calls-for-full-investigation-of-cuomos-handling-of-coronavirus

Ocasio-Cortez calls for full investigation of Cuomo's handling of coronavirus in nursing homes

Not a bad move at all.

[Diarcesia]

Based.

I think others will call for it too. One assmblymember has already called for him to resign and claims their is bipartisan support for starting the impeachment process. There is a decent possibility he does not make it to to 2022.

At least AOC is trying to not appear like a partisan hack.

[San Lumen]

I think others will call for it too. One assmblymember has already called for him to resign and claims their is bipartisan support for starting the impeachment process. There is a decent possibility he does not make it to to 2022.

At least AOC is trying to not appear like a partisan hack.

its the right thing to do. What he did is completely unacceptable.

[Rusozak]

I think others will call for it too. One assmblymember has already called for him to resign and claims their is bipartisan support for starting the impeachment process. There is a decent possibility he does not make it to to 2022.

At least AOC is trying to not appear like a partisan hack.

Now let's see if the Republicans that have been treating her like a communist sleeper agent of Satan can return the favor or suddenly reconsider their stance on Cuomo now that she's against him.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

He's already said he's going to try to push for UBI...though I don't know how well it can be implemented on a municipal level, even in a city as big as New York.

It's never going to happen. UBI is both economically illiterate and in general an awful idea. It's a complete surrender of the future to the rich and nobody else, it's just blatantly a way to keep the masses busy trying to survive with the bare minimum while the rich keep exploiting everything. It's cool Yang is forward thinking I guess but his ideas aren't very great for the average person.

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

[Punished UMN]

It's never going to happen. UBI is both economically illiterate and in general an awful idea. It's a complete surrender of the future to the rich and nobody else, it's just blatantly a way to keep the masses busy trying to survive with the bare minimum while the rich keep exploiting everything. It's cool Yang is forward thinking I guess but his ideas aren't very great for the average person.

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

I don't know enough about the economic practicality of it, but in terms of political economy, UBI would undermine the philosophical underpinnings of democratic governance.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

I don't know enough about the economic practicality of it, but in terms of political economy, UBI would undermine the philosophical underpinnings of democratic governance.

How so?

[Punished UMN]

I don't know enough about the economic practicality of it, but in terms of political economy, UBI would undermine the philosophical underpinnings of democratic governance.

How so?

Because it potentially runs into the same issues as rentier states, that is, that if the populace is dependent on the state for its income, then this gives the state a legal and philosophical justification for political dominance over such citizens. This effect is observed in Gulf States, where the state generates income from natural resources on state-owned property, giving it a massive income which is not dependent upon taxation of its citizens, and then it uses UBI-like programs and investment into development to give its citizens some of its economic resources. It is a reversal of the Western social-contract upon which democracy is based. To put it in terms Americans would be more familiar with: No representation without taxation.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's never going to happen. UBI is both economically illiterate and in general an awful idea. It's a complete surrender of the future to the rich and nobody else, it's just blatantly a way to keep the masses busy trying to survive with the bare minimum while the rich keep exploiting everything. It's cool Yang is forward thinking I guess but his ideas aren't very great for the average person.

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

Afaik the data is either inconclusive or fairly against UBI as a concept. Finland is the big example and the only thing the data shows there is that people are happier with it, which, no shit, you're giving them, free money despite the Finnish government hoping to use it to motivate people to enter the workforce more and things of that nature. That's where my objections come in. UBI is the perfect way for the rich to pacify the masses even as automation gets worse and worse and more people go without jobs. It's essentially just tossing table scraps at the bulk of the population and saying "go spend it on entertainment and stay distracted" while the rich continue to gain more and more wealth and power.

[Major-Tom]

It's never going to happen. UBI is both economically illiterate and in general an awful idea. It's a complete surrender of the future to the rich and nobody else, it's just blatantly a way to keep the masses busy trying to survive with the bare minimum while the rich keep exploiting everything. It's cool Yang is forward thinking I guess but his ideas aren't very great for the average person.

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

Either you have UBI or you have a welfare state, you can't really have it both ways. Some countries have experimented with small-scale, minimal UBIs, but they don't compare to what Yang or similar figures have proposed for the states.

Either way, my biggest concern w UBI is the ability to jack up costs across the board. If you're a landlord, and you now know that everyone is getting an extra $1,000 a month, what's stopping you from raising rent by $500? If you sell consumer electronics, what's stopping you from raising the price of a device from $249 to $349 because you know people can cough up the cash?

It's not a bogus system, but the implementation would certainly be very flawed in the US. Especially the proposals where everybody gets one. Mr. McMansion would need a basic income a lot less than, say, a poor family of four.

[The Black Forrest]

It’s weirdly fascinating to watch Texas turn into a third world nation.

No water, no power, food running out. Sewage in the water ways. Apartments burning down because the firemen can’t get water to fight the blaze. People freezing to death on the streets and in their homes. State leadership castigating the people or leaving the state for vacation(Did see a few references to “Ted fled” and “Fled Cruz”).

Fracking nightmare.

[Diarcesia]

It’s weirdly fascinating to watch Texas turn into a third world nation.

No water, no power, food running out. Sewage in the water ways. Apartments burning down because the firemen can’t get water to fight the blaze. People freezing to death on the streets and in their homes. State leadership castigating the people or leaving the state for vacation(Did see a few references to “Ted fled” and “Fled Cruz”).

Fracking nightmare.

I'm sure this is intentional, isn't it?

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

Afaik the data is either inconclusive or fairly against UBI as a concept. Finland is the big example and the only thing the data shows there is that people are happier with it, which, no shit, you're giving them, free money despite the Finnish government hoping to use it to motivate people to enter the workforce more and things of that nature. That's where my objections come in. UBI is the perfect way for the rich to pacify the masses even as automation gets worse and worse and more people go without jobs. It's essentially just tossing table scraps at the bulk of the population and saying "go spend it on entertainment and stay distracted" while the rich continue to gain more and more wealth and power.

I'm really not seeing the connection between rich folks getting more money and power (which is always happening and has always been happening) and people getting paid by the state.

How so?

Because it potentially runs into the same issues as rentier states, that is, that if the populace is dependent on the state for its income, then this gives the state a legal and philosophical justification for political dominance over such citizens. This effect is observed in Gulf States, where the state generates income from natural resources on state-owned property, giving it a massive income which is not dependent upon taxation of its citizens, and then it uses UBI-like programs and investment into development to give its citizens some of its economic resources. It is a reversal of the Western social-contract upon which democracy is based. To put it in terms Americans would be more familiar with: No representation without taxation.

I'm not really seeing the connection here either. Gulf States are a rather poor example since they survive off a finite resource and thus they're in a temporary, non-sustainable situation. I really don't see how UBI conflicts with the principles of democracy.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I'd like to hear more about this. I didn't even know about UBI until Yang brought it up in 2016, after which I looked it up because I was skeptical. I never found anything that suggested it wouldn't work; quite the opposite, actually. From what I saw it would pay for itself after a year or two. I heard it worked well everywhere it had been tried, to boot.

Admittedly this was 4 years ago so maybe I'm out-of-touch on the issue.

Either you have UBI or you have a welfare state, you can't really have it both ways. Some countries have experimented with small-scale, minimal UBIs, but they don't compare to what Yang or similar figures have proposed for the states.

Either way, my biggest concern w UBI is the ability to jack up costs across the board. If you're a landlord, and you now know that everyone is getting an extra $1,000 a month, what's stopping you from raising rent by $500? If you sell consumer electronics, what's stopping you from raising the price of a device from $249 to $349 because you know people can cough up the cash?

It's not a bogus system, but the implementation would certainly be very flawed in the US. Especially the proposals where everybody gets one. Mr. McMansion would need a basic income a lot less than, say, a poor family of four.

Now this I do see as a problem. One that could be tackled with the right legislation in place, IMO.

[Punished UMN]

Afaik the data is either inconclusive or fairly against UBI as a concept. Finland is the big example and the only thing the data shows there is that people are happier with it, which, no shit, you're giving them, free money despite the Finnish government hoping to use it to motivate people to enter the workforce more and things of that nature. That's where my objections come in. UBI is the perfect way for the rich to pacify the masses even as automation gets worse and worse and more people go without jobs. It's essentially just tossing table scraps at the bulk of the population and saying "go spend it on entertainment and stay distracted" while the rich continue to gain more and more wealth and power.

I'm really not seeing the connection between rich folks getting more money and power (which is always happening and has always been happening) and people getting paid by the state.

Because it potentially runs into the same issues as rentier states, that is, that if the populace is dependent on the state for its income, then this gives the state a legal and philosophical justification for political dominance over such citizens. This effect is observed in Gulf States, where the state generates income from natural resources on state-owned property, giving it a massive income which is not dependent upon taxation of its citizens, and then it uses UBI-like programs and investment into development to give its citizens some of its economic resources. It is a reversal of the Western social-contract upon which democracy is based. To put it in terms Americans would be more familiar with: No representation without taxation.

I'm not really seeing the connection here either. Gulf States are a rather poor example since they survive off a finite resource and thus they're in a temporary, non-sustainable situation. I really don't see how UBI conflicts with the principles of democracy.

The connection is that the people (or at least some of the people) become more reliant on the state to survive than the state is on them to survive, and that this gives the state more power to oppress people. If you live off of me paying you to survive, but you do very little for me, then you are subservient for me, it is not a co-equal relationship, and if this were to become the predominant political-economy, such an ideology would take route here as well.

[Major-Tom]

Either you have UBI or you have a welfare state, you can't really have it both ways. Some countries have experimented with small-scale, minimal UBIs, but they don't compare to what Yang or similar figures have proposed for the states.

Either way, my biggest concern w UBI is the ability to jack up costs across the board. If you're a landlord, and you now know that everyone is getting an extra $1,000 a month, what's stopping you from raising rent by $500? If you sell consumer electronics, what's stopping you from raising the price of a device from $249 to $349 because you know people can cough up the cash?

It's not a bogus system, but the implementation would certainly be very flawed in the US. Especially the proposals where everybody gets one. Mr. McMansion would need a basic income a lot less than, say, a poor family of four.

Now this I do see as a problem. One that could be tackled with the right legislation in place, IMO.

Perhaps. But that gets into the murky question of whether or not it's viable to implement strict rent controls in the first place, or the even murkier question of price controls, which rarely, rarely plays over well.

I think I'm content with the welfare state provided we can expand eligibility and ensure that the poor get a fairer shake here in the US. If that doesn't work and automation really does come to kick our ass in 20 odd years, maybe the UBI discussion would once again be productive.

[Fartsniffage]

It’s weirdly fascinating to watch Texas turn into a third world nation.

No water, no power, food running out. Sewage in the water ways. Apartments burning down because the firemen can’t get water to fight the blaze. People freezing to death on the streets and in their homes. State leadership castigating the people or leaving the state for vacation(Did see a few references to “Ted fled” and “Fled Cruz”).

Fracking nightmare.

It could be worse. The could be living in a Democrat controlled state. shudders

[Washington Resistance Army]

Afaik the data is either inconclusive or fairly against UBI as a concept. Finland is the big example and the only thing the data shows there is that people are happier with it, which, no shit, you're giving them, free money despite the Finnish government hoping to use it to motivate people to enter the workforce more and things of that nature. That's where my objections come in. UBI is the perfect way for the rich to pacify the masses even as automation gets worse and worse and more people go without jobs. It's essentially just tossing table scraps at the bulk of the population and saying "go spend it on entertainment and stay distracted" while the rich continue to gain more and more wealth and power.

I'm really not seeing the connection between rich folks getting more money and power (which is always happening and has always been happening) and people getting paid by the state.

Automation functionally only helps the people who already have wealth and the means to capitalize on it so it stands to reason that as automation continues it will disenfranchise the many in favor of the few but the few can and likely will use things like UBI to try and keep the many passive and in favor of the system despite it not working in their favor. It's functionally just becoming an unthinking servant or a peon, you get your handouts to stay alive and little more. That's not an ideal or even a good future, that's a dystopia.

[Cannot think of a name]

The Texas lt governor was on the talkie box. Takeaways were this:

- “We totally thought they were upgrading the grid and we didn’t check...”
- California’s power issues are the Democrats fault, (actually, true...poor regulation and oversight of PG&E meant that we had outdated power lines that become fire hazards in the fall) but the failure to secure the grid in Texas despite warnings and apparently forwarding the recommendations, it’s important not to point fingers (but it’s definitely either the power distribution or creation, not the regulatory body...) Except in a specific period where Democrats had some say, then it’s totally their fault again.
- Despite the fact that renewables continue to work in places that experience harsh winter conditions every year, Texas’ failure to winterize is proof that renewables don’t work.

[The Black Forrest]

The Texas lt governor was on the talkie box. Takeaways were this:

- “We totally thought they were upgrading the grid and we didn’t check...”
- California’s power issues are the Democrats fault, (actually, true...poor regulation and oversight of PG&E meant that we had outdated power lines that become fire hazards in the fall) but the failure to secure the grid in Texas despite warnings and apparently forwarding the recommendations, it’s important not to point fingers (but it’s definitely either the power distribution or creation, not the regulatory body...) Except in a specific period where Democrats had some say, then it’s totally their fault again.
- Despite the fact that renewables continue to work in places that experience harsh winter conditions every year, Texas’ failure to winterize is proof that renewables don’t work.

The sad thing? Many will believe that.

[Kowani]

Welp, First Biden nominee is probably doomed: The perennially unpopular Neera Tanden, who Biden has nominated for the OMB, will not be getting a vote from Joe Manchin

[Diarcesia]

I have some choice words for Ted Cruz recently, though I might be bonked for political nicknaming if I utter them here

[Galloism]

Welp, First Biden nominee is probably doomed: The perennially unpopular Neera Tanden, who Biden has nominated for the OMB, will not be getting a vote from Joe Manchin

Wiki sayeth:

On November 30, 2020, President-elect Joe Biden announced that Tanden would be his nominee for Director of the Office of Management and Budget.[39] Immediately following the announcement, Tanden deleted over 1,000 of her previous tweets,[40] and changed her Twitter bio from "progressive" to "liberal."[41] During the confirmation hearing, Tanden apologized for several of her tweets attacking Republican senators, including tweets calling Susan Collins "the worst", comparing Ted Cruz to vampires and Lord Voldemort, and using the nickname "Moscow Mitch" for Mitch McConnell.[42] Senator John Cornyn described Tanden as "radioactive" in contrast to other Biden nominees he felt were more acceptable,[43] while Senator John Kennedy stated that she "called Senator Sanders everything but an ignorant slut."[44][45] NPR described her as "Biden's most controversial Cabinet pick."[46]

Many members of the 2016 and 2020 Bernie Sanders presidential campaigns, such as Briahna Joy Gray, strongly dislike Tanden and have drawn an explicit distinction between "progressives and Neera Tanden"; Politico described her nomination as "the equivalent of rubbing salt in the wound."[47]

While some of that is concerning...... you know, some is damn hilarious.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Isn't that another reason to be in favor of UBI, though?

No, it's a reason to tear down capitalism entirely.

Automation would most likely happen regardless of whether capitalism existed or not. Humans have always sought to make our lives and work easier, quicker and safer and automation is simply a modern form of that particular trait.