The Democratic Candidates
Comments
-
I didn't think so. Then can you set up a soft hockey league for them?mcgruff10 said:
I'm not a miracle worker.Meltdown99 said:
If you buy Sweden can you toughen up their hockey players? Asking for a friend.mcgruff10 said:
Maybe we should set up a go fund me page to help offset the costs of buying Sweden.Lerxst1992 said:Spiritual_Chaos said:
And 20 years later the US would be so inspired by the Nazis you guys started napalming children and kept your medieval ideals.mrussel1 said:
And Sweden assisted them. Again, a strange analogySpiritual_Chaos said:
That post of yours come off as pretty dumb.mrussel1 said:
And strangely you rely on us for your technology advances. How does one square such a hyperbolic statement like yours?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You being roughly fourteen million (14.000.000) years behind the rest of the developed world tell another story.mrussel1 said:
They're possible, and the moderates/ centrists carry those ideas. Amazing how that worked out.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Nazi Germany was also highly technically advanced.
While Sweden vocally opposed your actions in Vietnam and propelled society forward for its people. Like most of the rest of the developed world also did.
Mrussel invaded vietnam??
Looking to close down another topic Chaos? We are now comparing moderate Democrats to Nazis?
Maybe trump can buy Sweden after Greenland. Then you'll have what you deserve :-)Give Peas A Chance…0 -
Need another debate. But the Dems need to pick Mayor Pete.Kat said:TOPIC:The Democratic Candidates
Give Peas A Chance…0 -
What's the downside of Steyer?
I'd like to see Pete get aggressive and debate with passion and fury. That will be necessary in the general.0 -
Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?
0 -
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?0 -
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?
0 -
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?0 -
mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
0 -
fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.0 -
A more recent poll which includes the 1000 ubi moves the needle down.Lerxst1992 said:fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/435278-poll-most-voters-oppose-a-universal-basic-income-programs?amp
0 -
mrussel1 said:
A more recent poll which includes the 1000 ubi moves the needle down.Lerxst1992 said:fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/435278-poll-most-voters-oppose-a-universal-basic-income-programs?amp
That looks like 57% oppose. My best guess is it would be at least 60/40 against during a general election when we would have trump and the GOP screaming "See we told you they are Socialists!"
The progressive wing of the Dem party is having a difficult time understanding how US politics works.
Leftist policies that change the fabric of America need at least a vocal 60% of everyone to get going.
Bernie and Liz have support of maybe 35% of dems and a lower % of independents. That is nowhere close to the support needed to make it happen.
Its shocking that Bernie and Liz are mostly to blame for this lack of understanding0 -
UBI is too radical for america. think of the ideals that country holds so dear. given it a generation or two and that may change, depending on how politics goes. but right now, not a chance.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
Lerxst1992 said:fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.my question is this. if you do believe that AI and automation is going to cause a major shift in employment with less people working, how to you solve this problem? cause if you don't you may end up with a trump also.I would be interested to see how the idea of UBI played out in the battle states as compared to national.0 -
UBI was tried on a very limited scale in Ontario and Finland...both jurisdictions ended the program early. They were not seeing the results they had hoped for. I in no way support a UBI. And the only way I'd get behind a UBI is if it replaced all the other social programs that people depend on...welfare, unemployment insurance, pension...etc. I could get behind one or the other but not all because all those other departments will need to be eliminated in order to even attempt such a move.Give Peas A Chance…0
-
fife said:Lerxst1992 said:fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.my question is this. if you do believe that AI and automation is going to cause a major shift in employment with less people working, how to you solve this problem? cause if you don't you may end up with a trump also.I would be interested to see how the idea of UBI played out in the battle states as compared to national.
I think you are onto something- that UBI might be a reasonable solution to automation- but the US is one of the more conservative nations around.
AI was a bigger problem than immigrants stealing jobs IMO and it was barely discussed the last election.
We are now 5 years into the Trump revolution and I think he has cemented opinion for many in swing states blaming immigrants for this employment issue.
0 -
Ontario didn't stop it because they were not seeing results - the change in government stopped it. They did not run it long enough to get valid data.Meltdown99 said:UBI was tried on a very limited scale in Ontario and Finland...both jurisdictions ended the program early. They were not seeing the results they had hoped for. I in no way support a UBI. And the only way I'd get behind a UBI is if it replaced all the other social programs that people depend on...welfare, unemployment insurance, pension...etc. I could get behind one or the other but not all because all those other departments will need to be eliminated in order to even attempt such a move.my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
I live in the region that has the highest child poverty rate in Ontario ... and no one from here her got included... It was a BS program, to begin with. The results were never going to be there. Some people got UBI who owned business.s...what results were they expecting? If you are running a UBI program, may I suggest fist helping those most in need...not people already employed or those who own a business?oftenreading said:
Ontario didn't stop it because they were not seeing results - the change in government stopped it. They did not run it long enough to get valid data.Meltdown99 said:UBI was tried on a very limited scale in Ontario and Finland...both jurisdictions ended the program early. They were not seeing the results they had hoped for. I in no way support a UBI. And the only way I'd get behind a UBI is if it replaced all the other social programs that people depend on...welfare, unemployment insurance, pension...etc. I could get behind one or the other but not all because all those other departments will need to be eliminated in order to even attempt such a move.Give Peas A Chance…0 -
Meltdown99 said:
I live in the region that has the highest child poverty rate in Ontario ... and no one from here her got included... It was a BS program, to begin with. The results were never going to be there. Some people got UBI who owned business.s...what results were they expecting? If you are running a UBI program, may I suggest fist helping those most in need...not people already employed or those who own a business?oftenreading said:
Ontario didn't stop it because they were not seeing results - the change in government stopped it. They did not run it long enough to get valid data.Meltdown99 said:UBI was tried on a very limited scale in Ontario and Finland...both jurisdictions ended the program early. They were not seeing the results they had hoped for. I in no way support a UBI. And the only way I'd get behind a UBI is if it replaced all the other social programs that people depend on...welfare, unemployment insurance, pension...etc. I could get behind one or the other but not all because all those other departments will need to be eliminated in order to even attempt such a move.
It was a pilot project than ran in three locations. If you don't live in one of those three locations, then not surprising that no one from your area got included. If you do, then again, it was a pilot project, never meant to include everyone.
"Some people got UBI who owned businesses" - the eligibility criteria included those who were employed but earned income below the defined basic income level. Many people who own small businesses don't earn enough to survive on, at least initially, but the goal was to help people get there. People were encouraged to go back to school or work while in the program, since that only benefits them and society as a whole. Employment income would be clawed back at 50%, so there was still incentive to work.
"Help people most in need" - inclusion criteria were different than basic social assistance, since this is a different program.
The program was cancelled by the new Ford government after only one year of a three year project, and thus no usable data was achieved. You have no idea whether "the results were never going to be there"; that's just your opinion of it, based on no data.my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
For the record, Yang's proposal is not about helping people in need. Every citizen would receive the amount regardless of income. It's intentionally creating a welfare state. No thanks.0
-
I suspect on the unskilled or manual labour side, AI will actually affect more locals than immigrants. Immigrants come with a hell of a work ethic and will often do the same work for less, meaning the upside potential of automating predominantly immigrant-occupied jobs might not be as great as their local counterparts. I'm guessing if this turns out to be true, it will be misrepresented as "another case of immigrants taking our jobs" or something like that.Lerxst1992 said:fife said:Lerxst1992 said:fife said:mrussel1 said:
Considering the split in the party on M4A, I think it's reasonable to assume that rank and file Democrats aren't going to support 1k monthly to every American just for waking up in the morning. I don't want to pay the taxes to support that, to say nothing about the inflationary concerns.fife said:
who do you think its not palatable to? I understand that the media plays up the UBI alot but i do look at reason why he brings up the UBI and i tend to agree with it.mrussel1 said:
UBI is not palatable and that's his "differentiator" from what I can tell.fife said:Just a question, I am trying to get more information on some the candidates and I have a friend who is a big fan of Andrew Yang. Seems very smart but not getting alot of traction. just trying to understand why?saw this article in another tread here.
It's an interesting idea but how to pay for it is huge. If there were a way to come up with an "automation tax" (for example employers that replace employees with AI developed from govt resources) you MIGHT be able to convince the electorate.
But right now, the poll you cited gets trump 4 mo years:
"46% say they would be willing to pay higher personal taxes to fund the program and 54% say they would not be."
And if we dig deeper, those who oppose UBI (older ppl) are more likely to vote than those who support the idea.my question is this. if you do believe that AI and automation is going to cause a major shift in employment with less people working, how to you solve this problem? cause if you don't you may end up with a trump also.I would be interested to see how the idea of UBI played out in the battle states as compared to national.
I think you are onto something- that UBI might be a reasonable solution to automation- but the US is one of the more conservative nations around.
AI was a bigger problem than immigrants stealing jobs IMO and it was barely discussed the last election.
We are now 5 years into the Trump revolution and I think he has cemented opinion for many in swing states blaming immigrants for this employment issue.
One thing that's preventing automation of manual labourers for now is probably the steep cost of robotics automations compared to software automations, and also the fact that if you're to replace an entire role with automatons, that's typically a decent number of tasks all of which would have to be automated (or distributed to remaining employees) at a cost. I think these two realities might buy us a few years more during which we can continue to ignore the warning signs of impending economic havoc (alongside the impending climate catastrophe and nuclear conflict).
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help