The Working Families Party

VictoryGin

hippiemom wrote:

Oh my god, the horror! :eek:

it makes no sense to me. but it's a nice reminder as to why i don't frequent here much anymore.

mammasan

There are Working Family Party candidates in NJ, unfortunetly none are running for Senate or in my Congressional district.

know1

hippiemom wrote:

Oh my god, the horror! :eek:

Well, that was in answer to the question about handouts, and I stand by what I said.

I've gotten all of those things mentioned on my own, so why do they need a political party to demand that other people hand them those things?

hippiemom

know1 wrote:

Well, that was in answer to the question about handouts, and I stand by what I said.

I've gotten all of those things mentioned on my own, so why do they need a political party to demand that other people hand them those things?

If you think that you got all those things entirely on your own ... that public policy had nothing to do with any of it ... nothing to do with the cost, or the availability of those things, nothing to do with how easy or difficult they were to obtain ... well, you just go right on thinking that.

Jeanwah

know1 wrote:

Well, that was in answer to the question about handouts, and I stand by what I said.

I've gotten all of those things mentioned on my own, so why do they need a political party to demand that other people hand them those things?

Keep on talking, your ignorance shines through with flying colors. Not to mention that this is also coming from someone who refuses to vote. Your opinion means nothing.

cincybearcat

Jeanwah wrote:

Keep on talking, your ignorance shines through with flying colors. Not to mention that this is also coming from someone who refuses to vote. Your opinion means nothing.

Man, you are on a role with simply insulting people here. Nice work. And you speak of ignorance. Fuck that.

kenny olav

In Massachusetts, we have the option tomorrow of voting for an iniative that would create the same fusion-voting system that New York has. I'm not going to vote for it. I think instant runoff voting would be a better system, and if we were to establish fusion-voting, it would make it more difficult to get to IRV. I also don't think making it easier for a bunch of single-issue parties to crop up makes for a better democracy. It would make it more interesting, but that's it. I'd rather see the elimination of parties, and have all candidates run as individuals.

Jeanwah

cincybearcat wrote:

Man, you are on a role with simply insulting people here. Nice work. And you speak of ignorance. Fuck that.

The reason I don't frequent the board much anymore is because people like you don't give anything a chance. Actually reading up on the WFP? Who's going to do that when they can just throw out some crap just for the sake of argument? What happened to intelligent conversation and ideas? What happened to the idea of another political party, that so many want, but instead, it gets nothing but a few harsh remarks? With all due respect there bearcat, you were being a smart-ass. I'm just sick to death of people around here thinking that they know what it's "all about" without reading into anything further.

Purple Hawk

Jeanwah wrote:

The reason I don't frequent the board much anymore is because people like you don't give anything a chance. Actually reading up on the WFP? Who's going to do that when they can just throw out some crap just for the sake of argument? What happened to intelligent conversation and ideas? What happened to the idea of another political party, that so many want, but instead, it gets nothing but a few harsh remarks? With all due respect there bearcat, you were being a smart-ass. I'm just sick to death of people around here thinking that they know what it's "all about" without reading into anything further.

maybe you don't frequent the board anymore b/c you don't like answering direct questions. know1 asked who's going to pay for it? all he's gotten in return are "if you want to believe that, keep on believing it." and a bunch of people who throw their hands up in the air. In other words, how dare anyone challenge your positions.

If you were to actually interested in intelligent conversation and ideas, you would have answered the question "who's going to pay for it?"

Jeanwah

Purple Hawk wrote:

maybe you don't frequent the board anymore b/c you don't like answering direct questions...
If you were to actually interested in intelligent conversation and ideas, you would have answered the question "who's going to pay for it?"

Part of the WFP's mission is to articulate and broadcast a different set of principles and policy ideas than those we usually hear. Instead of predictable sound bites from dueling conservatives and liberals, we'd like to see a genuine conversation about our society and economy. We think that the real divide is not left-right but top-bottom.

There are plenty of organizations doing good research and advocacy work. But we think a couple of big ideas are getting left out. One is the right of working people to control their own lives - in their neighborhoods, their governments and their workplaces. The WFP is a labor-supported party, and proud to be. But for us, the importance of organized labor goes beyond wages and benefits, important though those are, to extending democracy to the workplace - the least democratic part of American society.

Second, we think there's a need for a principled defense of the public sphere. Contrary to twenty years of conventional wisdom, we don't think that "government is the problem." A vigorous, effective public sector is a vital part of a good society, providing many goods and services that would be far more costly - or out of reach entirely - to working people without it. More broadly, we want to reinvigorate "the commons" all those public spaces and institutions that people maintain and use collectively. In a society devoted with increasing single-mindedness to the pursuit of profit, we think there's a place for a party that stands up for the public good.

Hope&Anger

Purple Hawk wrote:

know1 asked who's going to pay for it? . . . If you were to actually interested in intelligent conversation and ideas, you would have answered the question "who's going to pay for it?"

Let's see, who's going to pay for --

1) well-paying jobs -- the employers who do the hiring. Perhaps executives will be willing to take a pay cut and only earn 200 times what average worker makes instead of the current 434 times as much. Utility executives in my state, about to get windfalls of millions of dollars, were complaining that they only make 170 times what an average worker makes. And why are they getting that windfall? Because they're smarter or harder working or they take risks? Nope, they're getting that windfall because they happen to be in charge when the rates go up, thereby earning the utilities a lot of money. (Where can I go to get that job?)

2) affordable housing -- we stop giving huge tax breaks to developers who make miles and miles of those godawful McMansions and we give tax breaks to people who make affordable, multi-use housing for lots of different income levels. You see, we use the money we save by ending corporate welfare for fancy real estate developers.

3) accessible health care -- this one's easy. We toss that dumbass Medicare prescription drug benefit / bailout for the pharmaceutical industry. And we give the working poor access to health insurance by adding them to the insurance rolls of states. And if we get the HMOs to engage in enough preventive care, we'd actually wind up saving some money.

4) better public schools and more investment in public services -- yep, this one is going to come out of taxpayer pockets. But we ought to be happy to do it because a quality public education system is a mark of a great society. And taxes are the price we pay for being privileged to live in that society.

And let me echo something hippiemom said. Many of us enjoy the privileges we do because we got tax breaks for paying a mortgage or we took out low-interest student loans to finance our education, which helped us get a decent job that gives us health insurance. We have this idea that we got here by the sweat of our own brow, but we often fail to recognize that we are standing on someone else's shoulders.

cincybearcat

Jeanwah wrote:

The reason I don't frequent the board much anymore is because people like you don't give anything a chance. Actually reading up on the WFP? Who's going to do that when they can just throw out some crap just for the sake of argument? What happened to intelligent conversation and ideas? What happened to the idea of another political party, that so many want, but instead, it gets nothing but a few harsh remarks? With all due respect there bearcat, you were being a smart-ass. I'm just sick to death of people around here thinking that they know what it's "all about" without reading into anything further.

Screw your 'all due respect'...

My comment was based on the name...'Working Families'...no shit every party out there is composed of working families...I just thought it was a silly name.

The Juggler

...how's this working out so far?

Jeanwah

The Jeagler wrote:

...how's this working out so far?

Feel the need to search out 3 year old threads?

The Juggler

Jeanwah wrote:

The Jeagler wrote:

...how's this working out so far?

Feel the need to search out 3 year old threads?

that's what i do. i see they endorsed obama last year?

know1

Are there families that don't work?

And what is this middle class I keep hearing about. Anyone got a definition?

The Juggler

know1 wrote:

Are there families that don't work?

And what is this middle class I keep hearing about. Anyone got a definition?

i dont know. i'm trying to find out more info about this party...

Cosmo

The Jeagler wrote:

know1 wrote:

Are there families that don't work?

And what is this middle class I keep hearing about. Anyone got a definition?

i dont know. i'm trying to find out more info about this party...

...
Have you tried, 'Google'?

Pepe Silvia

Cosmo wrote:

The Jeagler wrote:

know1 wrote:

Are there families that don't work?

And what is this middle class I keep hearing about. Anyone got a definition?

i dont know. i'm trying to find out more info about this party...

...
Have you tried, 'Google'?

the very first result for 'middle class'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class

The middle class are any class in the middle of a social schema. In Weberian socio-economic terms they are the broad group of people in contemporary society who fall socioeconomically between the working class and upper class. In Marxist terms, middle class commonly refers to either the bourgeoisie before or during capitalism, or some emergent new class within capitalism. In common parlance middle class refers to a set of culturally distinct contemporary Western cultures that emphasise sedentary consumerism and petty property ownership within capitalism.

Cosmo

Pepe Silvia wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

The Jeagler wrote:

i dont know. i'm trying to find out more info about this party...

...
Have you tried, 'Google'?

the very first result for 'middle class'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class

The middle class are any class in the middle of a social schema. In Weberian socio-economic terms they are the broad group of people in contemporary society who fall socioeconomically between the working class and upper class. In Marxist terms, middle class commonly refers to either the bourgeoisie before or during capitalism, or some emergent new class within capitalism. In common parlance middle class refers to a set of culturally distinct contemporary Western cultures that emphasise sedentary consumerism and petty property ownership within capitalism.

...
I think Jeagler was wanting information on the 'Working Families Party'. I got over 50 pages from Google.
...
I don't know, it seems like it would be a lot easier to use Google for information... than a 3 year old post on a Pearl Jam message board. I could be wrong, you know.