Support NeoGAF

[NYCmetsfan]

I don't really have a problem with that then, unless someone can explain to me why it's a bad thing? I don't think it's right that unions should get a cut of people's paychecks if someone chooses not to join. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

The union and business enter into a contract that says all employees must pay dues (due to free rider problem, because unions are forced to negotiate for even non-union benefits). Right to work throws away those legal contracts and in essence those "taxes" on workplaces the unions cover. No one is more free. It just disallows unions for collected needed money to function, and prevents certain types of contracts from being enforced.

Its like you moving to California and saying you don't want to pay the taxes because you didn't vote on them and think they aren't necessary. If everybody could do that California would have no tax funds

 

[pigeon]

The power of Occupy Wall Street, in one chart:

 

[Aaron Strife]

The power of Occupy Wall Street, in one chart:

Yeah, but what do they really want?

I mean if they're not a sockpuppet group representing one of the major political parties (e.g. tea party) then I just can't figure it out.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The power of Occupy Wall Street, in one chart:

that's occupy? 1% above what it was before occupy?/ 4 years after occupy?

Seems like its the decline of "real america"/ protestant whites

there's stuff to credit occupy with but the fact that people believe in redistribution? I don't see it. Obama got flack for that in 08.

Thats like saying the Tea Party is to blame for the no-tax pledge

 

[Diablos]

So, is "thug" really the new n-word now?

 

[Plinko]

The power of Occupy Wall Street, in one chart:

This probably has nothing to do with Occupy Wall Street and everything to do with the rampant increase in accumulation of total wealth by the rich over the last 10-15 years.

 

[Poodlestrike]

The power of Occupy Wall Street, in one chart:

I'd be curious to see how that chart would look if you extended it back pre-war. I imagine that if you included the Great Depression, the dataset would look pretty different.

So, is "thug" really the new n-word now?

Considering that of the two words you just posted, you had to euphemize one of them, gonna have to go with "no."

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

The non-union employees benefit from the union's negotiations as well. If the union's employees gain a benefit, like dental, then the non-union employees also gain that benefit as well just by virtue of being part of the same company. So they benefit from the union's negotiations but they don't put anything in so the union's power weakens due to the fact that people think they don't need to be part of the union to gain the benefits and can make slightly more as non-union. Eventually it reaches the point where there aren't enough members, the union collapses and everyone suffers.

The law is designed to destroy unions already in place by slowly weakening them over time.



It's also a little more complicated than I made it sound.

The union and business enter into a contract that says all employees must pay dues (due to free rider problem, because unions are forced to negotiate for even non-union benefits). Right to work throws away those legal contracts and in essence those "taxes" on workplaces the unions cover. No one is more free. It just disallows unions for collected needed money to function, and prevents certain types of contracts from being enforced.

Its like you moving to California and saying you don't want to pay the taxes because you didn't vote on them and think they aren't necessary. If everybody could do that California would have no tax funds

Ah I see. That makes more sense now.

 

[Coriolanus]

It is also a bit more insidious than that. By allowing workers, especially already cash-strapped low wage workers to opt out you make it far harder for them to form or join an union, because hey, if you get paid nearly nothing, every single dollar counts. This reduces union power even further, also reducing worker bargaining power, which facilitates keeping wages low.

It's dirty from top to bottom.

 

[sc0la]

If I head to Costco to pick up some crow now, will it still be good when I prepare to serve it after Bernie destroys Hillary in the first debate?

That is, when do the debates start?

Hate buying crow at Costco. Who the fuck needs a 50 pack of crow?

 

[Poodlestrike]

Hate buying crow at Costco. Who the fuck needs a 50 pack of crow?

It generally comes in useful around E3 for TLG predictions.

 

[perfectchaos007]

I don't get it. I mean, I understand the David and Goliath reference, because he's going up against a big opponent, but I'm sure there's more to it than that

 

[Macho Madness]

Huckabee is in.

 

[perfectchaos007]

Huckabee is in.

will chuck campaign with him again?

 

[Ecotic]

Bill Clinton has made $100 million since leaving the White House. $400,000 is indeed barely anything.

The real lede here is how incompetent do you have to be to make that little in capital gains off of a $100+ million fortune in the biggest bull market in years. Bill said he's made next to nothing in capital gains in 15 years. What do they keep their money in, a bank CD? That doesn't inspire confidence that the management of the Clinton Foundation will hold up to scrutiny.

 

[Trouble]

will chuck campaign with him again?

I feel like Chuck will be a Cruz man this time 'round.

 

[RadioHammer500]

i have a question has anyone ever seen this movie

Fritz the Cat..i heard its a satire of left and right politics

is it worth a watch? or is it forgettable?

 

[thefro]

Huckabee is in.

Gonna be interesting to see the logistics of how you have a debate with 16-18 people.

 

[AntoneM]

Fuck scott walker, screw right-to-work the most misnamed thing in the world.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2...whats-left-american-unions-elected-president/



We should get out of things but stick big governments nose right up the ass of the ability of employees to dictates how their workplaces are run.

It's always "STATES RIGHTS!" ... unless giving up autonomy to the federal government disproportionately affects black people.

 

[jamesinclair]

I don't get it. I mean, I understand the David and Goliath reference, because he's going up against a big opponent, but I'm sure there's more to it than that

Well, David won...

 

[Yellowtail]

The DNC has comissioned six debates starting this fall:

Hillary has responded on Twitter:

Hillary Clinton @HillaryClinton
While GOP debates the same failed policies, Democrats will debate how to help families get ahead. Looking forward to a real conversation. –H

 

[AndyD]

Gonna be interesting to see the logistics of how you have a debate with 16-18 people.

This is going to be a very interesting thing to see. Will it be 12 seconds for everyone, so its all slogans, no substance, or a six hour endurance race where taking a sip of water at the wrong time will cost you the whole thing.

 

[Tamanon]

This is going to be a very interesting thing to see. Will it be 12 seconds for everyone, so its all slogans, no substance, or a six hour endurance race where taking a sip of water at the wrong time will cost you the whole thing.

I think they'll allow bigger candidates to monopolize time like the later GOP debates last election.

 

[Coriolanus]

Huh.

Jacobin running on article on Sanders on why he can't be a real alternative to Hillster.

You'd think that it would go the usual way, but then...

But if Sanders really wanted to participate in mobilizing millions to resist the status quo in US politics, he had options other than launching himself into the circus of a Democratic presidential campaign as the designated marginal renegade. And he rejected them.

For one, he could have set a very different example, with a far greater chance of success, if he ran for governor in Vermont against the Democratic Party’s incumbent, Peter Shumlin, who has betrayed promises to implement a single-payer health care system; create green, union jobs; and much more.

Faced with a budget crisis, Shumlin and the state’s Democrats refused to raise taxes on the rich to fulfill their promises. Instead, they imposed cuts in social services, education, and environmental programs, and laid off scores of state workers. Shumlin even went so far as to call for the banning of teachers’s right to strike.

Sanders is Vermont’s most popular politician. With the backing of the Progressive Party, he could have run for governor as an independent and easily defeated both the Democratic and Republican nominees, and never faced the accusation of being a spoiler that is inevitably thrown at any third-party challenger.

Hillary Clinton certainly doesn’t regard Sanders as a threat. She knows that the national election business follows the golden rule: whoever has more gold, wins. Clinton is expected to amass a war chest of more than $1 billion, mostly from Wall Street and corporate America, to pay for advertising, an army of paid staff, and Astroturf support. This will overwhelm Sanders’s fundraising goal of $50 million and his underdeveloped volunteer infrastructure.

In fact, Clinton regards Sanders as an asset to her campaign. He will bring enthusiasm and attention to Democratic primaries that promised to be lackluster at best. He will also help her frame the election on populist terms that have widespread support. That benefits the Democrats and undermines the Republicans, who have little to say about inequality, except that they like it.

As liberal writer Paul Waldman wrote in the Washington Post:

Bernie Sanders isn’t going to pull her to the left because she was already moving that way. She’s talking about issues like inequality and criminal justice reform in terms that she might not have used 10 or 20 years ago. . . . Talking about them in more liberal terms isn’t just good for her in the primaries, it’s good for her in the general elections.

Mind you, it eventually evolves into a journey down history lane, and the picture it paints for the Democratic party and Sanders's political carreer ain't rosy.

 

[HylianTom]

Gonna be interesting to see the logistics of how you have a debate with 16-18 people.

 

[WayneMorse]

i have a question has anyone ever seen this movie

Fritz the Cat..i heard its a satire of left and right politics

is it worth a watch? or is it forgettable?

It's pretty hit or miss with the comedy to be honest.

It's a good cultural relic from the waning days of the counterculture movement so if you're interested in that it's worth a watch.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Huh.

Jacobin running on article on Sanders on why he can't be a real alternative to Hillster.

You'd think that it would go the usual way, but then...
Mind you, it eventually evolves into a journey down history lane, and the picture it paints for the Democratic party and Sanders's political carreer ain't rosy.

Yeah more or less.

If Bernie Sanders can make the Democratic primaries interesting and excite the progressive base, then he's done his job. He will end up endorsing Hillary. He's going to prove to be an asset rather than a threat to Hil Dawg.

 

[Teggy]

i have a question has anyone ever seen this movie

Fritz the Cat..i heard its a satire of left and right politics

is it worth a watch? or is it forgettable?

Be aware that it has cat boobies.

 

[ivysaur12]

Huh.

Jacobin running on article on Sanders on why he can't be a real alternative to Hillster.

You'd think that it would go the usual way, but then...







Mind you, it eventually evolves into a journey down history lane, and the picture it paints for the Democratic party and Sanders's political carreer ain't rosy.

I would love it in Sanders ran for Shumlin's seat, but he has no interest.

 

[Angry Fork]

Huh.

Jacobin running on article on Sanders on why he can't be a real alternative to Hillster.

You'd think that it would go the usual way, but then...
Mind you, it eventually evolves into a journey down history lane, and the picture it paints for the Democratic party and Sanders's political carreer ain't rosy.

Jacobin's founder/editor has endorsed Sanders, this is just a less enthusiastic, alternative look at him.

But most people in this thread moderates/centrists who like capitalism and the dem party so they're unlikely to be interested in Jacobin despite them being right on most things.

Yeah more or less.

If Bernie Sanders can make the Democratic primaries interesting and excite the progressive base, then he's done his job. He will end up endorsing Hillary. He's going to prove to be an asset rather than a threat to Hil Dawg.

I'm assuming you mean excite the progressive base so that Hilary does nothing they were excited about.

 

[ivysaur12]

I doubt it. Bush isn't really actively campaigning either.

Of course he is?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Of course he is?

He's raising money and talking to forums. Eh...

 

[B-Dubs]

He's raising money and talking to forums. Eh...

Everyone knows he's running and is treating him like he is, it's all but official.

 

[Yellowtail]

I was surprised to find out Bernie Sanders accepted $10,000 from Hillary Clinton's PAC back in 2006 when he ran for the Senate.

Might prove awkward if he tries to hit her on accepting big money in the debates.

 

[ivysaur12]

He's raising money and talking to forums. Eh...

Biden has made one trip to Iowa. In February.

 

[Angry Fork]

I was surprised to find out Bernie Sanders accepted $10,000 from Hillary Clinton's PAC back in 2006 when he ran for the Senate.

Might prove awkward if he tries to hit her on accepting big money in the debates.

10k isn't "big money"

 

[Treechopper]

Why is the University of California on that list? What do they gain from spending so much money on her (or any politician)?

 

[Yellowtail]

10k isn't "big money"

How convenient that that image is being shared around with the annotation right underneath cropped out:

The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families.

The donations Hillary received in her senate races and 2008 presidential campaign were almost entirely from individuals (who worked in her state), each capped at $2300 at the time. Most of Sanders' money came from PACs.

$10,000 is more than anything any individual donated there. And it certainly counts as big money to everyday people.

Why is the University of California on that list? What do they gain from spending so much money on her (or any politician)?

It's the collected sum of donations given by individuals of the university. It's a very (intentionally) misleading graphic.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Why is the University of California on that list? What do they gain from spending so much money on her (or any politician)?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/behind-the-scenes-of-hillary-clintons-300000-speech-at-ucla/

 

[Angry Fork]

How convenient that that image is being shared around with the annotation right underneath cropped out:

The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families.

The donations Hillary received in her senate races and 2008 presidential campaign were almost entirely from individuals (who worked in her state), each capped at $2300 at the time. Most of Sanders' money came from PACs.

$10,000 is more than anything any individual donated there. And it certainly counts as big money to everyday people.

Completely irrelevant distinction. I know it's hard for moderates to keep finding new ways to defend bankers + their candidates but you don't have to. You can be a real liberal if you really wanted to.

 

[ivysaur12]

On my phone, but PPP just put out new Senate polls for McCain. For an incumbent, he can barely crack the low 40s.

EDIT:

@ppppolls: Arizona Senate race reminiscent of Indiana 2012- McCain prob fine if he survives primary but struggles with conservatives put that up in air

@ppppolls: Dems deceptively close to McCain in general election match ups- almost all undecideds are stubborn conservatives: http://t.co/gdlM1AV7Ub

 

[WayneMorse]

New WSJ/NBC poll has Obama's approval rating 48-47 first time above water since around his second inauguration I think.

 

[Coriolanus]

Jacobin's founder/editor has endorsed Sanders, this is just a less enthusiastic, alternative look at him.

But most people in this thread moderates/centrists who like capitalism and the dem party so they're unlikely to be interested in Jacobin despite them being right on most things.

We're in agreement, Forkz. It's just that the article seemed to so perfectly condense so much of the discussion around Sanders and overal Dem behaviour that it warranted a link.

Plus that governor/vermont bit had me going "sheeeeeit, ether'd".

But yes, of course they'd support Sanders over hilldawg. Same way they'd supported Chui over Emmanuel, while all the time saying "yeah, dont expect much, Chui is just the moderately less terrible choice". Quite surprised with how often Jacobin retains an eye on the bigger leftist picture.

 

[PhoenixDark]

New WSJ/NBC poll has Obama's approval rating 48-47 first time above water since around his second inauguration I think.

I'd imagine he'll be underwater next year, assuming the economy begins to slow down, plus whatever foreign policy issue that will inevitably arise/be mishandled. Right now Hillary seems to be running close to Obama's record but I'd expect that to change soon.

I wonder how Obama's camp feels about Hillary's campaign message basically being "Obama did his best but people are still fucked, so I'm running for president."

 

[Angry Fork]

We're in agreement, Forkz. It's just that the article seemed to so perfectly condense so much of the discussion around Sanders and overal Dem behaviour that it warranted a link.

Plus that governor/vermont bit had me going "sheeeeeit, ether'd".

Yea I agree. I think it's a good idea to try for local socialist based anti-establishment stuff (like kshama sawant), and maybe Bernie could've done it as a governor, but I'm not sure how that's supposed to translate to national elections.

Even though I hate the dem party I don't think it was wrong for Bernie to run as a dem, assuming he really does want to try to be president and not just be a boost to Hilary. I don't like that he isn't aggressive towards her but there's still a long time to go so we'll see.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Jacobin's founder/editor has endorsed Sanders, this is just a less enthusiastic, alternative look at him.

But most people in this thread moderates/centrists who like capitalism and the dem party so they're unlikely to be interested in Jacobin despite them being right on most things.



I'm assuming you mean excite the progressive base so that Hilary does nothing they were excited about.

I forget. Am I a good or bad progressive if I think Bernie getting in the primaries is a good thing, but also accept that Hillary is much, much, much, more likelier to win, and actually have governable majorities, and thus, be able to get anything done, or does accepting getting only 40% of what I want done instead of 0% done once Jeb Bush beats Bernie Sanders make me a class traitor?

 

[Fenderputty]

I'd imagine he'll be underwater next year, assuming the economy begins to slow down, plus whatever foreign policy issue that will inevitably arise/be mishandled. Right now Hillary seems to be running close to Obama's record but I'd expect that to change soon.

I wonder how Obama's camp feels about Hillary's campaign message basically being "Obama did his best but people are still fucked, so I'm running for president."

Lol @ the certainty with which you make your claims.

 

[ivysaur12]

I'd imagine he'll be underwater next year, assuming the economy begins to slow down, plus whatever foreign policy issue that will inevitably arise/be mishandled.

Okay.

 

[B-Dubs]

I'd imagine he'll be underwater next year, assuming the economy begins to slow down, plus whatever foreign policy issue that will inevitably arise/be mishandled. Right now Hillary seems to be running close to Obama's record but I'd expect that to change soon.

I wonder how Obama's camp feels about Hillary's campaign message basically being "Obama did his best but people are still fucked, so I'm running for president."

Did you steal The Onion's time machine or something?

 

[pigeon]

I'm assuming you mean excite the progressive base so that Hilary does nothing they were excited about.

It matters a lot if Sanders can get Hillary to commit to progressive policies, because contrary to established wisdom, politicians mostly try to fulfill their campaign promises.

In an article for the January-February issue of the Washington Monthly, political scientist Jonathan Bernstein argues that the evidence on this point is clear: “Presidents usually try to enact the policies they advocate during the campaign..."

Bernstein relies on two studies from the 1980s to make his point. In 1984, Michael Krukones published “Promises and Performance: Presidential Campaigns as Policy Predictors” and found that “about 75 percent of the promises made by presidents from Woodrow Wilson through Jimmy Carter were kept.” In 1985, Jeff Fishel published “Presidents and Promises: From Campaign Pledge to Presidential Performance,” which argues “that presidents invariably attempt to carry out their promises; the main reason some pledges are not redeemed is congressional opposition, not presidential flip-flopping.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...ign-promises/2012/01/19/gIQAAgq6BQ_story.html