Support NeoGAF

[jack_package_200]

Good. Dems need to run on this. Let this be a big part of their message.

For fuck's sake don't turn this into a Dems vs Bernie Sanders thread.

Party of the rich.

Okay Jan

 

[The Albatross]

The beer thing is weird and seems like they're targeting it out of principal if anything. Telecoms make perfect sense since they're so vital to how people work and live that monopolies or duopolies could be a significant burden on the average consumer. But with beer, even the InBev/SABMiller and MillerCoors/MolsonCoors stuff, what exactly do you accomplish by breaking that stuff up? Bud and Miller are already separate, breaking things up further isn't likely going to bring in a third major player. It'll still be the big two, the midrange beers, and then all those microbrews fighting things out. Same goes for like Pepsi and Coke, not every industry necessarily needs the same level of competition.

Agreed... I think this is a holdover from 5+ years ago. I remember when the beer industry used to be thrown around in these conversations, especially when InBev bought AB, which had recently combined with Miller (correct me if I have that timeline off), and a lot of watchdogs worried that this was indicative of a pending monopoly... but they were kinda unable to see the forest from the trees in terms of the craft market, which was booming, but hadn't taken over as the dominant growth in beer yet.

 

[Plasmid]

Why didn't they do this when we had obama? I'm glad we're doing it now but it's more words than action, it'll never pass through this republican controlled congress.

 

[theWB27]

Why didn't they do this when we had obama? I'm glad we're doing it now but it's more words than action, it'll never pass through this republican controlled congress.

So you tell the Democrats to keep running on it. As a means to get people to care. If they keep their word when in power...then they keep doing stuff like this to keep it.

 

[Autodidact]

Why didn't they do this when we had obama? I'm glad we're doing it now but it's more words than action, it'll never pass through this republican controlled congress.

Well, duh.

They're running on these policies and messages in next year's midterms.

Instead of saying preemptively, "They'll never be able to do it" why don't y'all vote for Democrats, put them in power, and THEN criticize them if they fail to keep their promises?

 

[Quixzlizx]

Well, I get a few feeds on my FB in the case of Bernie Sanders (or rather his staff) he's been very active in getting out various messages on why he's opposing some bill or other and what the heck is going on in there. Most people are familiar with voter outreach during campaigns, but there's something to be said for constituent outreach. Bernie's not wasting time drafting bills that won't get passed; he's keeping people informed on what's going on.

Isn't he the one pushing for a Medicare for All bill while the GOP controls Congress?

jlawok.gif

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Party of the rich.

What does this even mean in a thread about Democrats trying to break up monopolies...?

Are you just spamming or something? A bot?

 

[Vital Tundra]

They gotta do a lot of this to get it in the publics mind that they are the party that will help them.

 

[dragonchild]

Instead of saying preemptively, "They'll never be able to do it" why don't y'all vote for Democrats, put them in power, and THEN criticize them if they fail to keep their promises?

Not sure what one has to do with the other. This is a false choice fallacy.

I'm really not sure what the GOP is for, beyond irrational destruction. They don't really seem to be for anything except to erase liberalism from existence; they're targeting policies that poll in the 70-80% range which limits the supporters to only special interests. Either they must have this gerrymandering thing really sorted out, or they figure Trump's going to drag them down so might as well get the looting started early. (Maybe both?)

That said, it's not hypocritical to be pro-Democrat, even if only to stop the current madness, while also pointing out that this proposal, at this time of all times, after eight years of Obama, is pure posturing.

 

[ViviOggi]

Muh free market

 

[Piecake]

This is a very good move and they should put this front and center for the 2018 and 2020 campaign.

Everyone has experience getting fucked over by these companies and everyone knows that there is little competition in these sectors, especially telecom. Tying that to corporate greed, making things more competitive (and thus capitalistic), and reducing costs for average Americans is something that basically everyone can get behind.

Healthcare is harder because some dumb-fucks don't think they need it. This will be a whole lot easier because everyone is paying out the ass for their cell, internet, and cable bill. And it is a lot easier to picture saving money on that than it is on other things.

 

[Autodidact]

Not sure what one has to do with the other. This is a false choice fallacy.

I'm really not sure what the GOP is for, beyond irrational destruction. They don't really seem to be for anything except to erase liberalism from existence; they're targeting policies that poll in the 70-80% range which limits the supporters to only special interests. Either they must have this gerrymandering thing really sorted out, or they figure Trump's going to drag them down so might as well get the looting started early. (Maybe both?)

That said, it's not hypocritical to be pro-Democrat, even if only to stop the current madness, while also pointing out that this proposal, at this time of all times, after eight years of Obama, is pure posturing.

Two years of D/D/D control that saw health care and financial reform and is rated as one of the most effective Congresses of modern times.

Four years of D/R/D control in which progress was stymied by the House.

Two years of D/R/R control in which Republicans refused to budge an inch.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Well, I get a few feeds on my FB in the case of Bernie Sanders (or rather his staff) he's been very active in getting out various messages on why he's opposing some bill or other and what the heck is going on in there. Most people are familiar with voter outreach during campaigns, but there's something to be said for constituent outreach. Bernie's not wasting time drafting bills that won't get passed; he's keeping people informed on what's going on.


I'm not playing sides here; OP was an example from the Democrats. But if you insist, Obama's approval rating cratered when he shut everyone out of his health care reform process (later termed "Obamacare") and handed it to a committee. He never supported any variation of single payer when he had the largest Democratic congressional majority of the past two generations. He nerfed a chance at real reform in favor of incremental improvement. We may not see such an opportunity again in my lifetime. And that was supposed to be his signature legislation. Grassroots were screaming that the GOP was never going to accept him (and nine years later there's never been such overwhelming proof of a prediction), they were already sabotaging town halls so might as well push for all you can get, but he squandered most of the leverage the people gave him for some quixotic quest of. . . hell if I know. He didn't appear moderate; he looked naive.

Obama was dumb to try and court GOP votes, yes. I agree with that.

Important to note though he never once ran on single-payer, he ran on a plan very similar to ACA and won on that. I feel many people projected their beliefs onto Obama and felt "betrayed" when he acted on things he promised he'd do (see: war in Afghanistan).

ACA is still significant reform in its own right. Social Security started out as a fund for widows. Give it time.

 

[dragonchild]

Isn't he the one pushing for a Medicare for All bill while the GOP controls Congress?

He's been pushing for that for years, so in that sense he's been consistent. But I haven't heard anything about him trying to get a vote on it since the last election, because why bother.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Good move by the Dems. Good example of how being aggressive on fixing the issues of capitalism and social justice issues are an important pillar of their recovery.

 

[Quixzlizx]

He's been pushing for that for years, so in that sense he's been consistent. But I haven't heard anything about him trying to get a vote on it since the last election, because why bother.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/340419-sanders-medicare-for-all-proposal-coming-after-obamacare-debate

Sad!

 

[Slater]

He's been pushing for that for years, so in that sense he's been consistent. But I haven't heard anything about him trying to get a vote on it since the last election, because why bother.

So you don't pay enough attention to what he actually does then, then gets high and mighty about dems posturing. Lmao

 

[dragonchild]

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/340419-sanders-medicare-for-all-proposal-coming-after-obamacare-debate

Sad!

Well then.

 

[Atlagev]

Yess!

Include power companies as well. Competition drives innovation. Make it like Texas where you choose your services, it's not de facto

We had a bad experience with this in California, which is actually one of the reasons Arnold became governor:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

 

[NewFresh]

Party of the rich.

/s

 

[8byte]

I really doubt this will ever get passed into law.

 

[dragonchild]

So you don't pay enough attention to what he actually does then, then gets high and mighty about dems posturing. Lmao

OK, this here. I don't get this. This is weird.

From a personal pride point I'm happy to admit I was wrong about Bernie, though that doesn't say anything about my opinion. Posturing is still posturing. As far as I'm concerned, this means Bernie's also guilty of posturing, and I'm disappointed. To me at least, that's a bigger deal than me being Wrong on the Internet. Hell, I've been much wronger-er about other stuff.

But, "lmao"? Gloating? Why do people gloat about this stuff? We're presumably talking about politics, right? As in, stuff that might affect ALL of us, right? What's amusing about someone getting something wrong? You were arguably worse off, if imperceptibly so, when I was in need of correction. But instead of "well now you know and thank FSM for that", it's "lmao". You do realize I'm an American and vote, right? Is me getting corrected a good thing, if only because one idiot is one bit less wrong about something, or was it more important to see someone put in their place?

I gotta ask, are you literally laughing your ass off about this? Why are people like this?

 

[Beefy]

guess what? this might also break up amazon and walmart. THank fuck.

😂

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

Great to see this and long overdue but where the fuck was this proposal when they were in a position where they would have been capable of making something like this pass and get done?

 

[Quixzlizx]

OK, this here. I don't get this. This is weird.

From a personal pride point I'm happy to admit I was wrong about Bernie, though that doesn't say anything about my opinion. Posturing is still posturing. As far as I'm concerned, this means Bernie's also guilty of posturing, and I'm disappointed. To me at least, that's a bigger deal than me being Wrong on the Internet.

But, "lmao"? Gloating? Why do people gloat about this stuff? We're presumably talking about politics, right? As in, stuff that might affect ALL of us, right? What's amusing about someone getting something wrong? You were arguably worse off, if imperceptibly so, when I was in need of correction. But instead of "well now you know and thank FSM for that", it's "lmao". You do realize I'm an American and vote, right? Is me getting corrected a good thing, or was it more important to see someone put in their place?

I gotta ask, are you literally laughing your ass off about this? Why are people like this?

There's a difference between cynically posturing and lying, as in you have no intention of ever following through on your proposals, and are only proposing them for political points, and posturing to get your ideas into the public consciousness so that you can build support for them and implement them when you eventually have the opportunity to do so.

The 7000 House bills to repeal Obamacare from 2010-2016 were obviously the former. We should be hopeful that the proposals from the Democratic side are the latter.

 

[TyrantII]

woah does anyone know what the deal with this is?

Seeing some fucking oversight on airlines and cable/telecom would make my life much better, but i'm not going to hold my breath.

80% of beer is sold by two companies, and they're been buying up local Brewers as well since the push to craft beer.

 

[Piano]

Well, I get a few feeds on my FB in the case of Bernie Sanders (or rather his staff) he's been very active in getting out various messages on why he's opposing some bill or other and what the heck is going on in there. Most people are familiar with voter outreach during campaigns, but there's something to be said for constituent outreach. Bernie's not wasting time drafting bills that won't get passed; he's keeping people informed on what's going on.

This is the Democrats' message. Now that they have articulated it, they will spend between now and the 2018 midterms "getting it out". It's not different from what Bernie is doing, he just happens to still be running with the exact same message as last year, so he got a headstart.

The value of drafting bills that won't get passed is having things ready to go once you are back in control. Hopefully that means they'll operate more like the Dems in 2008-2010 and less like the current Republican Congress, who can't get anything done. As others mentioned, Bernie is also doing this.

And, I'd like to add, the Dem platform and Bernie's platform are extremely similar. If you support one 100%, I presume you'd support the other 95%.

 

[rjinaz]

Meh.

It's old hat for the minority party to propose stuff their constituents actually want when there's no chance of it actually happening. That way they can look like they're doing something, without actually doing something. Vote tallies are also extremely calculated; people like Joe Lieberman (retired now thank FSM) and Sue Collins have made long careers of being "moderates" without ever taking a courageous stand on anything (except when the party secretly wants something to die and they stand to politically benefit from "defecting").

It cuts both ways. Whatever you think of "Obamacare", the grassroots Republicans want it repealed, so the GOP passed repeals something like sixty times while Obama was in office, which of course got vetoed every time. Now that they actually own all three branches of government, interesting how they just can't seem to get the votes to make it happen. I also remember back in the "Dumbya" Bush years, he had all three branches of government and a commanding majority in both legislatures. If ever there was a time to pass a bill killing Roe vs. Wade (if you wanted it dead, anyway) it was then, when his approval was at 90% and the whole country was distracted by war. That was fifteen years ago.

So, wake me up when this proposal grows legs.

I mean you're not wrong, but I have doubts that Republicans put forward this proposal under Obama. Instead probably something about state rights in gay marriage.

 

[Piano]

Great to see this and long overdue but where the fuck was this proposal when they were in a position where they would have been capable of making something like this pass and get done?

Politics are a gradual, reactive process. The Democratic Party of 2008-2010 had different priorities based on what they felt were the headwinds of that time. That was almost 10 years ago. Should they have clairvoyantly discerned in 2008 what voters in 2016 would have wanted?

The American public has gradually liberalized in many ways over the past few decades. 2008's message wouldn't work as well in 2016 and vice versa.

 

[RMI]

There has been an onslaught of the microbrewery industry because big beer companies can't stand the fact that people are more likely to buy beer from local places because godless costal hipsters don't want their big brand piss water

gotcha. that makes more sense now.

 

[curiouscharles]

This is the Democrats' message. Now that they have articulated it, they will spend between now and the 2018 midterms "getting it out". It's not different from what Bernie is doing, he just happens to still be running with the exact same message as last year, so he got a headstart.

The value of drafting bills that won't get passed is having things ready to go once you are back in control. Hopefully that means they'll operate more like the Dems in 2008-2010 and less like the current Republican Congress, who can't get anything done. As others mentioned, Bernie is also doing this.

And, I'd like to add, the Dem platform and Bernie's platform are extremely similar. If you support one 100%, I presume you'd support the other 95%.

thank you for pointing this out.

very true.

also keep in mind the Dem's platform shifted quite a bit thanks to Bernie's "success" in the primaries.

so "posturing" as is being discussed in this thread's context, can very well be a good thing as [just like others have said] it brings potential issues / ammendments into the public consciousness - giving them the chance to build support for when they do eventually get back into power [the Dems, that is].

 

[Not]

Oh fucking please PLEASE happen

Imagine if Comcast was forced to having do something to try and attract customers again

Utopia

 

[Xe4]

Good. It's clear a bunch of monopolies have gotten pretty out of control, particularly those around telecom companies, but a bunch of companies in general.

I think democrats 2018 and 2020 strategies should be to spend a lot of time trying to focus on healthcare and business reform, because it's clear that's where republicans are not popular. Not that they can't focus on other things, but just as a main driving message.

I mean, nobody likes Comcast. Fucking seriously.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Democrats were talking about this at the Ideas conference earlier this year.

They also want to completely remake our electrical grid for the 21st century. They've been talking about that for a while though.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2009/02/23/5553/wired-for-progress/

 

[Belfast]

woah does anyone know what the deal with this is?

Seeing some fucking oversight on airlines and cable/telecom would make my life much better, but i'm not going to hold my breath.

Even up here in beer country (PNW), you'd be surprised how many former micro or regional brewers are now owned by the big boys.

 

[ISOM]

Some of the posts in this thread...

No wonder why Democrats keep losing elections when people keep coming with the, this sounds good but...

 

[whyamihere]

"#bothsides are corrupt. My European friends who know nothing about American politics say we have two right-wing parties. Democrats are bought and sold by corporations, too."

Democrats propose legislation intended to break monopolies and enforce anti-trust laws: "They're just pandering to get votes. They'll never get it done. #bothsides do it."

If they promise to do it, they're lying; if they actually do it, they didn't do enough; if they did enough, they didn't do it fast enough. Repeat ad nauseam. And if they get voted out because of the good they did, they're losers who can't win elections.

Democrats have the misfortune of being the targets of far-left and far-right hatred.

Boom.

 

[MartyStu]

I mean, I am happy that this is happening, and I fully support it, but I am not nearly naive enough to think anything will come of it. Nor do I think Democrats think so either.

 

[Xe4]

Alternatively, the Democrats have contributed to the passage of laws and the spread of ideology that actively harms the American people as we speak.

Folks can continue to stomp their feet and jump around pretending the Democrats are losers because of "the good they did" but holding such a position is too difficult to maintain. Step into reality and realize that the criticisms that the opposition is leveling at the Democrats has merit. That's one of the keys to sustained control over your country's future moving forward.

What ideology? I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Suikoguy]

Not a bad list, really good to see eyeglasses on that list, as it's been largely ignored.

However, several of these have natural significant barriers to entry. Namely,

Airlines: Have fairly extensive initial costs, and also need access to hubs. Even with those barriers, there is no huge company calling the shots due to having a majority of the market-share, so this results in needing regulatory adjustments more than split companies.

Cable and Telecoms: Absolutely insane setup costs due to infrastructure requirements. Splitting them up likely won't solve the problem. It's going to take a different approach that lowers the barrier to entry. For example, change to a license model for the infrastructure (I expect power infrastructure to possibly go this route as solar becomes more popular). But this has a host of issues, as many of the lines have capacity limitations. Media ownership has far lower barriers to entry, and having a single company own, for example, the vast majority of local news outlets, is a problem.

Beer, Food and Eyeglasses can certainly be looked at from the "split them up" mentality. The barriers to entry largely exist due to the companies having such a large market-share in the first place.

 

[Gallbaro]

The anti-monopoly laws are post facto, when companies have become too big to fail and have the power to influence politics. This would prevent it from happening to begin with.

Well here it seems like none of the stated reasons are for consumer protection (vague reference to quality...). Seems like some poor attempt at preventing worker productivity growth.

Aka redundancy layoffs.

 

[TyphoonStruggle]

Yess!

Include power companies as well. Competition drives innovation. Make it like Texas where you choose your services, it's not de facto

What is wrong with you?

Competition is fierce in the electric market. Price of electricity has been falling for like forever. The electric power industry operates as a mix of public and private organizations operating under various strata from producers, distributors, and ancillary services. I doubt there are, if any are left, much vertically integrated utilities anymore, and even then they're probably heavily regulated by state corporation commissions.

You can't just say regulate more or break them up when you don't have a clue at how complicated these systems are.

 

[Zubz]

This is the first bit of good legislation in what feels like years. This past half-year has really sucked politically.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

"#bothsides are corrupt. My European friends who know nothing about American politics say we have two right-wing parties. Democrats are bought and sold by corporations, too."

Democrats propose legislation intended to break monopolies and enforce anti-trust laws: "They're just pandering to get votes. They'll never get it done. #bothsides do it."

If they promise to do it, they're lying; if they actually do it, they didn't do enough; if they did enough, they didn't do it fast enough. Repeat ad nauseam. And if they get voted out because of the good they did, they're losers who can't win elections.

Democrats have the misfortune of being the targets of far-left and far-right hatred.

I mean Democrats are just as responsible for the current concentration of industry so it's good that they're doing this but it's cleaning up their own mess.

 

[NH Apache]

What is wrong with you?

Competition is fierce in the electric market. Price of electricity has been falling for like forever. The electric power industry operates as a mix of public and private organizations operating under various strata from producers, distributors, and ancillary services. I doubt there are, if any are left, much vertically integrated utilities anymore, and even then they're probably heavily regulated by state corporation commissions.

You can't just say regulate more or break them up when you don't have a clue at how complicated these systems are.

Nothing is wrong with me, as far as I know. I thought I made my post clear but let me put it another way, Mr. Hostile:

The energy company is a monopoly in my area. I have no other choice for power. In Houston, you can choose your power company based on pricing, power source, etc.

I want competition not necessarily breaking up the company.

 

[NandoGip]

I feel like selling the message of cheaper and better beer will convince many people to become democrats

 

[Suikoguy]

Nothing is wrong with me, as far as I know. I thought I made my post clear but let me put it another way, Mr. Hostile:

The energy company is a monopoly in my area. I have no other choice for power. In Houston, you can choose your power company based on pricing, power source, etc.

I want competition not necessarily breaking up the company.

Who maintains the power grid in Texas?
I ask since in the age of distributed power via Solar and Wind, shared grids are going to be a must.


Also, I just had a thought that if we had high speed rail cross country, airline service would improve.

 

[BobLoblaw]

This would be great for America, which is why it won't happen. Fuck me

 

[eBay Huckster]

This would be great for America, which is why it won't happen. Fuck me

correction: this would be great for america if implemented properly, which is why a bunch of white people will convince themselves that those rascally colored folks will benefit just in time to bravely vote against it

 

[Machina]

Meh.

It's old hat for the minority party to propose stuff their constituents actually want when there's no chance of it actually happening. That way they can look like they're doing something, without actually doing something. Vote tallies are also extremely calculated; people like Joe Lieberman (retired now thank FSM) and Sue Collins have made long careers of being "moderates" without ever taking a courageous stand on anything (except when the party secretly wants something to die and they stand to politically benefit from "defecting").

It cuts both ways. Whatever you think of "Obamacare", the grassroots Republicans want it repealed, so the GOP passed repeals something like sixty times while Obama was in office, which of course got vetoed every time. Now that they actually own all three branches of government, interesting how they just can't seem to get the votes to make it happen. I also remember back in the "Dumbya" Bush years, he had all three branches of government and a commanding majority in both legislatures. If ever there was a time to pass a bill killing Roe vs. Wade (if you wanted it dead, anyway) it was then, when his approval was at 90% and the whole country was distracted by war. That was fifteen years ago.

So, wake me up when this proposal grows legs.

Sounds to me like a completely broken, ineffectual form of governme-

Oh.