More crazy taxation ideas from the AOC types…

[temeculaguy]

took me 60 seconds to find multiple crazy assertions, in fact I struggled to find a sane assertion.

1) life expectancy declining while basic needs, such as clean air, clean water, healthy food, and adequate health care, housing, transportation, and education, are inaccessible to a significant portion of the United States population;

What is a significant portion of the population? Half? The only place is I know of without access to clean water is flint, Michigan. A Democrat stronghold of 100k people in a county of 350 million.

Declining life expectancy has nothing to do with climate change.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/09/us-life-expectancy-has-been-declining-heres-why.html

It’s attributed to suicide, drug overdose and liver disease. It’s also a slight decline after 80 years of increases and a decline also seen in the UK and tapering rises in western Europe.

I’m too tired to point out the other fallacies not based in reality, which is why a reasonable person would call that crazy. And I was shocked to see of the few who signed on included Levin from the North County.

Last point of lies just from that one paragraph, women make 80% of what men make. That stat ignores voluntary leave to raise children. My ex wife and I make the exact same amount now as we did 25 years ago (luckily for me I never had to pay alimony because of it). But we decided she would take a few years off when the kids were little. Our career totals are different but our hourly wage is identical today as it was before kids. One could say she’s done okay, advancing despite a multi year absence early on. But her lifetime earnings are less, oh the injustice! BS, we made a choice and i worked 60 hours a week in lieu of each of us working 40 because when you did the cost benefit analysis, it made sense and we shared the money so nobody won or lost. Her w-2 may have been less or zero during those years but we had the exact same amount of money. But AOC is slim and energetic, so she must be right.

[spdrun]

(1) Suicide, drug use, and alcoholism (liver disease) are symptoms of a sick society overwhelmed with busywork.

(2) No one should be expected by “sociiiiety” to work 60 hours a fucking week. The ideal would be more couples that work 30 hours a week each, so both have time for family. Sweden, Denmark, and Netherlands basically have it right.

(3) Basic needs:
Public education is either terrible or has been co-opted by religious nutters in much of the US. Some people view creationism as a real alternative and birth control as evil.

Food: sugar-loaded crap in most of the US, poor controls on pesticides, GMOs, and other toxic shit in food.

Water: it’s not only Flint. It’s Newark, NJ now, probably 50 other cities with heavy metal contamination problems yet to be discovered.

[FlyerInHi]

I watched Ian Bremmer’s interview of a former German defense minister on the rise of the right wing in the former East Germany. They actually swing between left and right.
The American right wing is very similar. They are less concerned about economic policy than nationalist identity. If a left wing Trump-like character rises and make promises to them, they will switch.

“Crazy” policies may not be so crazy when advanced by the right politician.

[PCinSD]

[quote=FlyerInHi]I watched Ian Bremmer’s interview of a former German defense minister on the rise of the right wing in the former East Germany. They actually swing between left and right.
The American right wing is very similar. They are less concerned about economic policy than nationalist identity. If a left wing Trump-like character rises and make promises to them, they will switch.

“Crazy” policies may not be so crazy when advanced by the right politician.[/quote]

Or in other words: “I trust slim, energetic swingers from former East Germany”.

[spdrun]

The German right-wing is a bunch of xenophobic asshats, but on economic issues, they tend to be to the left of US liberals. Proposing a US-style lightly-regulated health insurance system would likely be political suicide in most of Europe…

[The-Shoveler]

Looks like Bloomberg stepped in, maybe he can save the party, not sure really what his plan/vision is.

[spdrun]

Bloomberg is authoritarian human rubbish — under that fucking pig, marijuana arrests in NYC rose about 500%. Fuck him and his legacy.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=The-Shoveler]Looks like Bloomberg stepped in, maybe he can save the party, not sure really what his plan/vision is.[/quote]

Save which party? Michael Bloomberg is going to be the spoiler just like Ross Perot.
The Democratic Party is doing very well thank you. Democrats just took over Virginia. The states that are 21st century economy are democrats. We can leave the old economy of the red states to the Republicans. The future is the large metropolitan areas where opportunities and wealth creation will be.

[spdrun]

Bloomberg is human filth. When he was dictator of NYC, he enabled the NY Pig Division (NYPD) far too much. Marijuana arrests increased about 500% under his dictatorship. Stop and frisk was a thing. Also, the guy bought himself a third term. DeBlasio is actually a major improvement over Bloomturd.

[FlyerInHi]

Spdrun, one big issue with big cities is that they attract bad immigrants from bad rural areas and third tier cities. Big cities should not bear the burden of being overrun by drug addicts and homeless who come from other parts of the country. We want people with degrees, jobs and money, not people who fall into drugs and homelessness.

Imagine wealthy foreign tourists who spend a lot of money, an unbelievable amount, coming to NYC and walking out of their luxury hotels to face NY urban grunge. That’s bad for the reputation and prestige of our financial capital. So a little toughness against the riffraff is not bad.

[spdrun]

^^^

Said the authoritarian apologist. Take that shit to Singapore, if they’ll have you. I’d rather have fewer tourists and more freedom. I really don’t give a shit that Russian oligarchs feel a bit triggered by the streets of NY. If they don’t like it, they’re free to stay where they came from.

[poorgradstudent]

Taxes on the rich are definitely too low right now.

Rolling back the Trump cuts would definitely fix a lot of the problem. But maybe we should go back to Reagan era tax codes with less loopholes.

[FlyerInHi]

Wow, a Democrat won the governor’s race in Kentucky against the Republican incumbent. Add that to the Democrats eviscerating Republicans in Virginia. Virginia is becoming another California. all that good jobs are in states held by Democrats. That is pretty good indication of the effectiveness of economic policies. Money talks.

[ucodegen]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Wow, a Democrat won the governor’s race in Kentucky against the Republican incumbent. Add that to the Democrats eviscerating Republicans in Virginia. Virginia is becoming another California. all that good jobs are in states held by Democrats. That is pretty good indication of the effectiveness of economic policies. Money talks.[/quote]
Riiiiggghhhtt… Try some history. It takes several years for the policies of a Governor or Legislative body to have an effect. The San Diego pension crisis has been building for years. How about Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago? What tends to happen is that there is an economic build-up AND THEN everybody feels so flush with cash thinking that any half brained spending idea is a good idea.. so the voters go for it, after all the state’s coffers are full – AND THEN….

Here are some interesting refs

How Decades Of Democratic Rule Ruined Some Of Our Finest Cities

Detroit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_Detroit#Non-Partisan_Elections
Look at the period from 1962 to current.

Flint, Michigan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_Flint,_Michigan#1974_Charter
Look at the period from 1975 to current.

Chicago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayor_of_Chicago#List_of_mayors
Look at 1931 to current.

Remember, California had Republican governors as well as Democrat governors.

[ucodegen]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Spdrun, one big issue with big cities is that they attract bad immigrants from bad rural areas and third tier cities. Big cities should not bear the burden of being overrun by drug addicts and homeless who come from other parts of the country. We want people with degrees, jobs and money, not people who fall into drugs and homelessness.[/quote]
Most of the big-city drug addicts are locally grown. You need free time, nothing to do, easy local support by begging to build an addict + parents not teaching their children responsibility(parents enabling). Supply of illicit drugs is also much greater in big city areas. Rural drug abuse is more along the lines of depression, poor local job prospects and — absentee parents.

The high cost of big city housing is also a contributing factor to homelessness. Rural houses are much cheaper.

Interesting stats on 2nd page https://www.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/teds-short-report043-urban-rural-admissions-2012.pdf

Look at age of onset of use, Employment (big city has larger number of ‘not-in-labor-force’), more big city types have ‘no primary income’. There is also a large race disparity on use between rural and urban – which tends to indicate that drug users are not migrating to the city else the race mix would be the same between rural and urban. Rural drug abuse also shows larger periods of non-use for at least a month.
[/quote]

[Author]

Posts