So the next Democrat nominee should be like JFK except for JFK's policies? We shouldn't even discuss policies when it comes to who we elect?
Hello, @Derideo_Te and others on the Left. I assume that you were describing Andrew Yang? There are so many Democrat hopefuls, with at least one more very prominent one due to make an announcement before the end of this week -- Joe Biden. With a field of no fewer than 20 Democrats running for the nomination, it is hard to make any objective decisions at this point, but, yes, I could still be hopeful that the Democrat Party might be able to find someone in its ranks that would be a worthy successor to John F. Kennedy. Please give me some time to analyze the field in detail after Joe does, indeed, come forth.
Those 5 kids should be able to go to college. As I said earlier, I support the idea of making this possible for them. I simply do not support the idea of the federal government taxing us for it and providing the funding. Typically, a state college is funded in part by state taxes and in part by tuition payments made by students and/or their parents. So you see, the infrastructure and process of funding is already in place in virtually every state that runs a state college system. All that is lacking is sufficient funding that would free those students and parents from paying tuition costs. The citizens of our individual states may pay for that tuition if they choose to and if they can be convinced to sacrifice a bit for our young people - the young people who are our future. And I honestly believe the states can do it for less. Well, not entirely. UBI is one issue, but it is not the only issue. I gave you a short list of other issues mentioned on his website that I have concerns about. Some of them are clearly partisan in my opinion. I think your typical single mother of 2 is already receiving more than $1000/month of welfare benefits. I've seen where they live. They live in two bedroom duplexes or apartments. These units rent for at least $1000/month where I live. They also receive food assistance, utility bill assistance, and a little cash assistance. So if people like these are already receiving more than $1000/month in assistance, they would not be eligible for UBI, and so UBI wouldn't help them a bit. Also, I think of my mother and father-in-law. They are in their 80's, still live in their own home, are completely dependent on Social Security, and they scrimp and do without just to make ends meet every month. But they, too, would not be eligible for UBI even though they could really use it. So it wouldn't help them a bit either. And there's me. I don't need UBI, but I would be eligible for it because my wife and I are not on any welfare or Social Security (yet). We are upper middle class income earners. So, if I understand this correctly, the single mother of 2 who is receiving welfare and my in-laws who can barely make ends meet on Social Security would not qualify for UBI, but I, who does not need it, would qualify for it. Do you see a problem here? A big problem with AI that I see is this: If we lay off millions of workers - replacing them with machines - how are these products going to get sold? To survive, people need food, shelter, and clothing. Everything else is just gravy. And so if corporations deprive us of our jobs by getting a machine to do it, how are they going to sell anything other than those bare necessities? If robots and AI can do everything, but no one has any money, doesn't AI defeat itself? A corporation with the best, most advanced robotics and AI cannot survive if no one can buy their products.
I see the problem that you are outlining and I see the solution that UBI will provide. The father of those 2 children now has $1000 a month in order to provide their mother for child support. You and your spouse now have $2000 a month to help your in-laws make ends meet each month. People in your position who don't need the money will find ways to put it to good use because that is the kind of people that you are. The majority of people just like you in this regard. That additional money will end up helping America get back on it's feet again. You are correct that the Achilles heel of AI and robotics is that it destroys the ability of consumers to purchase the products and services that AI and robotics provide. This is why the problem needs to be addressed. @Meta777 has done some threads on this topic that are well worth reading IMO. Unfortunately we going to end up with this problem because of short term GREED ignoring the long term impact on the consumer market. UBI is a way to enable us to work through the transition period and find the appropriate long term solutions. There is no one better qualified to address these challenges than Yang IMO.
The next JFK is currently serving as President. Democrats have gone so far left they think Bernie Sanders is their savior.
Yah I read Yang's book and it was very interesting. I don't think that if Yang was President that he would harm the country so I would not be apposed to his candidacy. But I am hesitant of increasing the federal governments size and interference in society. But I am open to being convinced.
Personally I think that Yang is the LEAST egotistical person running for President in 2020. He genuinely seems to be interested in doing what is best for the nation as a whole.
OK, this morning, Joe announced that he's running. We'll find out what actually means over the coming few weeks, I suppose. Meanwhile, Andrew Yang is more and more interesting to me, in theory. I will get and read his book, "Smart People Should Build Things", but my first reaction to his advocacy for universal handout income (welfare) for people who don't DO anything of any value, and, the "Medicare For All" trope ranges between despair to nausea. At first blush, it looks like Yang advocates the formal installation of a permanent, parasitic "Prole" class of people (right out of Orwell's masterpiece, "1984"). But, I'm willing to suppress my gag-reflex for a while and probe deeper into what Yang might really do as president. My first reaction is that even though I'm completely allergic to 'socialized-medicine' in any of its manifestations, and the whole "something-for-nothing" paradigm, Yang may be more acceptable than many of the rest of the Democrat nominees, like "Dizzy Lizzy" Warren, "Spartacus" Booker, Kamalah Harris, "Beto" O'Rourke, and several others....
"A fool and his money are soon parted." -- Thomas Tusser. Intelligent, inventive, industrious people almost always achieve success, if only because the lazy, and the stupid masses throw their money away on crap, 'fun', and toys. It has been this way since the dawn of civilization.... The great DANGER comes when you allow stupid, irresponsible people to control the direction and destiny of your nation. Nobody who takes any kind of 'welfare' or 'subsidies' from the government should be allowed to VOTE during the same year that they received the welfare or subsidy! Violate that principle, and it's just a matter of time before the whole country comes crashing down....
I can think of some defining ones that he doesn't and he wouldn't want to claim as they went "unreported" back then but what are the ones they are claiming?
You gotta shore your base before you go after the independents and that is the problem the Democrats are facing, their base is split in several directions.
And a good decision on his part. He's not turning over the reigns this time and expected to almost hand pick his successor. If he backs Biden and Biden loses then less credible his campaigning for the winner. Oh and Michele said she was going to hold back her endorsement too........................like who cares who she endorses?
Yes, correct. you need to do that immediately after the primaries. For Hillary and the Democrats, there an old political adage that you campaign left during the primaries, then towards the center for the general. Due to the jury rigging of the Democratic primaries by the DNC and Democratic state party leaders in Hillary's favor, that made a lot of Sanders supporters angry. Instead of moving towards the center during the general election campaign, Hillary stayed left trying to placate the angry Sanders supporters. It didn't work, she failed in placating them and failed to win the independents a campaign more towards the middle might have.
For me to vote dem i need the following. 1. Abortion is murder 2. Any further gun laws are unconstitutional 3. Slash taxes and spending 4. Minority rights are special rights. 5 no more government programs for anything 6 speak softly but carry a big stick 7. Business between people does not concern the government.
You could start with this link where Joe Rogan interviews Andrew Yang. It is a deep dive into Yang's ideas and Rogan does a good job asking the difficult questions such as your own above.
Wrong again! If we went back to tribalism we would have no poverty. Capitalism and ownership of property is the root cause of poverty.
So you are advocating that EVERYONE on Social Security and Medicare must LOSE their Constitutional right to vote? If working was what entitled people to vote then the slaves in the southern states would ALL have had the right to vote when our nation was founded. Then there is corporate welfare like Amazon where they paid NO TAXES at all. Does this mean that every employee of Amazon should lose their right to vote because they benefited from government welfare in the form NOT paying taxes on profits? Or would that only apply to the executives? Slippery slopes are called that for a reason.
And with the radical wings they have..........heck we may end up with Rep a Dem and a leftist/socialist "Ross Perot" all running.
I went to this site to see what Buttigieg's viewpoints are on some prominent issues: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...elieve-where-the-candidate-stands-on-7-issues Honestly, I did not see anything I flat-out disagree with, and I've frequently advocated 'single-payer' healthcare IF (and that's an enormous "if") it is done correctly and fairly, where all participants become PAYING members of a gigantic customer-base! I'm certain he's sincere about getting the hell OUT of Afghanistan, if only because he was sent there as a Navy intelligence officer and saw the whole miserable, unending mess in person! It bears repeating, though, that candidate Obama promised to get the U. S. totally OUT of both Iraq and Afghanistan -- but failed to get us out of either one of these shitholes. But then, Obama was never anything but a "community organizer", and he never served in the Armed Forces before being made "Commander-in-Chief".... And even though I've been a member of the NRA for many years, and am a rock-solid Conservative, I support Buttigieg's idea of thorough background checks for the purchase of firearms. I also support the concept of disarming those who I've termed, "Criminals and Crazies" -- BEFORE they have an opportunity to commit crimes (I get a lot of criticism for this from my fellow-Conservatives, but if done intelligently, it could significantly reduce these senseless, "mass-murder" crimes that we have way too often in this country. I don't know if Buttigieg's got the makings of another "JFK" or not -- but, so far (and only 'so far') he seems to show a hell of a lot more similiarity to him than the majority of Democrat candidates we've seen to this point.
I cant understand supporting a party that used their campaign,the government, the media and a phony dossier to explore ways to plot a coup to overthrow a duly elected president, it is as despicable and treasonous as it gets. The Democrats are the party that loves to play identity politics. They ignores blacks until it come time to look for votes. It's been 60 years since the War on poverty, but, we still have 40 million below the poverty line. All of a sudden Latinos are the darlings of the Democrat party even though they have done nothing to address the immigration laws and problems since Regan, a Republican, granted Amnesty to illegals over 45 years ago. Felons seem to be a favorite group this year. Let's give voting rights to felons in prison even if they are murderers, rapists and violent criminals. To hell with the victims of such crimes. Democrats; the party of woman's abortion rights over the sanctity of a child's rights or the fathers rights. The party of Socialism and communism over capitalism. The party that wishes to disarm all of America just like the Nazis of Germany did when they took over towns and cities they occupied. The party that wishes to criminalize dissenting speech that doesn't agree with the party thinking. The party that would like to eliminate parts of the Constitution that they disagree with. The party that believes in wealth distribution from the successful to give to the unproductive citizens and non citizens alike. The party that wishes to take away health care from155 million Americans who get their health care from their employer. The list go's on and on and on.