Support NeoGAF

[Wilsongt]

Is it really smart for Bernie to say he's going to kick someone out of a job? It doesn't do anything but further fan the the flames or hate his supporters have for the "establishment".

 

[excelsiorlef]

Is it really smart for Bernie to say he's going to kick someone out of a job? It doesn't do anything but further fan the the flames or hate his supporters have for the "establishment".

Bluntly speaking nothing Sanders is doing right now is "smart' in the sense of working towards defeating Trump, though it is "smart" in the sense of keeping him "relevant".

 

[mo60]

He's estimated to get 60% of them. If he gets 60% and Hofer gets 40% it's like 50.0 to 50.0.

...I have money on Hofer and I don't care about immigrants in Austria because I live here in the good ol' USofA, so definitely don't share the same hope as you do.

I live in Canada. I just hate to see a country elect a party on the far right that is anti-immigration/nationalist. At least the good thing is the position is only ceremonial.

 

[Wilsongt]

Looks like Lindsay Graham has picked up his purse and will start to help Trump.

 

[Maledict]

Looks like Lindsay Graham has picked up his purse and will start to help Trump.

The thing that makes this even worse is that we know Graham actually likes Clinton. Same as McCain, they got on well in the senate, got drunk together on foreign trips and had a decent working relationship. He knows full well that Clitnin would be a better President and that Trump is toxic for his party.

The sheer cowardice of the republican establishment from challenging their own party is depressing. When Romney and the Bushes are your moral centre something had gone very wrong.

 

[Terrordactyl]

Wait, does John Oliver specifically name Bernie?

If so I guess John must be a shill

No more than he said the names Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

 

[Gotchaye]

But whatever evil corporate empire they're working for made a product or service that people wanted. It was bankrolled by people or other companies seeing value and growth potential. They may have suboptimal productivity.

But publicly funded Etsy-for-no one junk is a different scenario.

And we're not in some post-scarcity robot paradise yet. Besides they'll rise up and kill us anyway.

I think the counterargument to this is that Daniel B is weird. Like, lots of workers are not actually working in order to not starve. For whatever reason they get paid double the median wage to do a 40-50 hour per week job, and yet they don't live on 40k a year while saving up enough to semi-retire at 40. So why would we expect that large numbers of people who currently make only the median wage would be much less productive if choosing between working a regular job supplemented by a basic income and semi-retiring on the basic income?

I expect that lots of what's happening is that there's a huge income range where people don't actually see much increase in disposable income because they end up paying more for things that they don't see as luxuries, like a house in a good school district, such that people find it very hard to imagine living on much less money than they're currently making. So incentive to work doesn't really go down as wages go up. People imagine all that they could do with an extra $20k per year but can't imagine having to live on $10k less, for a very wide range of incomes. I expect that mostly this would stay true for plausible levels of basic income that we might pass in the next 20 years.

That said, this is also basically why I'm not as optimistic as pigeon about this leading to socialist utopia. Rather than everyone working 20 hours a week I bet we end up working just about as hard, mostly for companies owned by other people, while engaging in status competition with money or buying more useless junk that doesn't really make our lives qualitatively better. Don't get me wrong - I like my useless junk! - but this looks to me like somewhat more comfortable market capitalism rather than a very different model of society. I feel like to really change this up we'd have to do something so that people won't just pour arbitrary amounts of money into living in safer and more desirable areas with better schools and fewer minorities while saving up for more expensive colleges for their kids and making more sure that they don't have to worry about anything in retirement and are safe from health crises.

 

[thebloo]

That title.

 

[Wilsongt]

That title.

Look at her not caring about the men she killed in Ben G. hazi and not caring about her indictment. Sad!

#BirdieorBust2016

 

[mo60]

Looks like Lindsay Graham has picked up his purse and will start to help Trump.

At least the bushes and romney aren't falling in line yet.It's kinda funny watching all the republicans that hated trump fall in line now to support him.

 

[sc0la]

that title change tho

Hillary lied, data visualization died

;_;

 

[Clefargle]

Yo is it too late to start #bidenorbust?

 

[ampere]

Venn diagrams called out for help, but Hillary did not reply

Then it was too late, the interns could not be stopped

#vennghazi

 

[thebloo]

In my country, people are going to go to Parliament to attempt to change the wording of the Constitution to define marriage as "between a man and a woman". The current wording is gender neutral and apparently that's a threat to our values. Fucking Eastern Europe...

 

[PBY]

Yo is it too late to start #bidenorbust?

Actually starting to get shook about nov

 

[Wilsongt]

Should Robert Reich be lumped in with Seth and Hahaha at this point? I see him pop up super often on my feed via a Hardcore bernie supporter.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I think the counterargument to this is that Daniel B is weird. Like, lots of workers are not actually working in order to not starve. For whatever reason they get paid double the median wage to do a 40-50 hour per week job, and yet they don't live on 40k a year while saving up enough to semi-retire at 40. So why would we expect that large numbers of people who currently make only the median wage would be much less productive if choosing between working a regular job supplemented by a basic income and semi-retiring on the basic income?

I expect that lots of what's happening is that there's a huge income range where people don't actually see much increase in disposable income because they end up paying more for things that they don't see as luxuries, like a house in a good school district, such that people find it very hard to imagine living on much less money than they're currently making. So incentive to work doesn't really go down as wages go up. People imagine all that they could do with an extra $20k per year but can't imagine having to live on $10k less, for a very wide range of incomes. I expect that mostly this would stay true for plausible levels of basic income that we might pass in the next 20 years.

That said, this is also basically why I'm not as optimistic as pigeon about this leading to socialist utopia. Rather than everyone working 20 hours a week I bet we end up working just about as hard, mostly for companies owned by other people, while engaging in status competition with money or buying more useless junk that doesn't really make our lives qualitatively better. Don't get me wrong - I like my useless junk! - but this looks to me like somewhat more comfortable market capitalism rather than a very different model of society. I feel like to really change this up we'd have to do something so that people won't just pour arbitrary amounts of money into living in safer and more desirable areas with better schools and fewer minorities while saving up for more expensive colleges for their kids and making more sure that they don't have to worry about anything in retirement and are safe from health crises.

I'm not sure we're discussing the same thing on your first two paragraphs. Someone else seemed to be saying that guy working at Chilis, whatever that is, was not particularly good at his job and being particularly productive. I don't expect that person will necessarily be more or less productive. They could certainly be either. I'm not actually opposed to a basic income.

But I basically agree with your last paragraph. I don't expect it to lead to some sort of socialist utopia.

Because I like my things. You like your things. We all like our things.

And adding to that, I like certain things. You like certain things.

We aren't all going to go out and buy Joe Blow's custom GameBlow console instead of a PS4 or Xbox.

 

[hammysaurusrex]

Should Robert Reich be lumped in with Seth and Hahaha at this point? I see him pop up super often on my feed via a Hardcore bernie supporter.

I don't think so. Hasn't Reich explicitly said once the Bernie dream dies supporters need to back Hillary? I recall r/S4P calling him one of the "traitors" for that statement.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Right now we're fiending to know what they know. But it's probably some really gnarly shit. The type of shit that obama said. They have an alien body, or some technology that is not of earthly material and they cannot explain, stashed away in the bowels of some military base.
Read about the blue room at wright patterson, you unbelievers, or about the life of walter brazel. Or don't, so you can avoid being spooked and anxious for the foreseeable future

I swear he used to have a wikipedia page; the aliens must have got to it

I mean, do we really think we created the Internet on our own?

 

[Wilsongt]

Listening to Fox makes me hate myself more than I already do.

 

[shinra-bansho]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/o...upporters-favor-his-policies.html?ref=opinion

Exit polls conducted in two dozen primary and caucus states from early February through the end of April reveal only modest evidence of ideological structure in Democratic voting patterns, but ample evidence of the importance of group loyalties.

Mr. Sanders did just nine points better, on average, among liberals than he did among moderates. By comparison, he did 11 points worse among women than among men, 18 points worse among nonwhites than among whites and 28 points worse among those who identified as Democrats than among independents.

It is very hard to point to differences between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders’s proposed policies that could plausibly account for such substantial cleavages. They are reflections of social identities, symbolic commitments and partisan loyalties.

Yet commentators who have been ready and willing to attribute Donald Trump’s success to anger, authoritarianism, or racism rather than policy issues have taken little note of the extent to which Mr. Sanders’s support is concentrated not among liberal ideologues but among disaffected white men.

More detailed evidence casts further doubt on the notion that support for Mr. Sanders reflects a shift to the left in the policy preferences of Democrats. In a survey conducted for the American National Election Studies in late January, supporters of Mr. Sanders were more pessimistic than Mrs. Clinton’s supporters about “opportunity in America today for the average person to get ahead” and more likely to say that economic inequality had increased.

However, they were less likely than Mrs. Clinton’s supporters to favor concrete policies that Mr. Sanders has offered as remedies for these ills, including a higher minimum wage, increasing government spending on health care and an expansion of government services financed by higher taxes. It is quite a stretch to view these people as the vanguard of a new, social-democratic-trending Democratic Party.

Mr. Sanders has drawn enthusiastic support from young people, a common pattern for outsider candidates. But here, too, the impression of ideological commitment is mostly illusory. While young Democrats in the January survey were more likely than those over age 35 to call themselves liberals, their ideological self-designations seem to have been much more lightly held, varying significantly when they were reinterviewed.

Moreover, warm views of Mr. Sanders increased the liberalism of young Democrats by as much as 1.5 points on the seven-point ideological scale. For many of them, liberal ideology seems to have been a short-term byproduct of enthusiasm for Mr. Sanders rather than a stable political conviction.

Perhaps for that reason, the generational difference in ideology seems not to have translated into more liberal positions on concrete policy issues — even on the specific issues championed by Mr. Sanders. For example, young Democrats were less likely than older Democrats to support increased government funding of health care, substantially less likely to favor a higher minimum wage and less likely to support expanding government services. Their distinctive liberalism is mostly a matter of adopting campaign labels, not policy preferences.

Not sure if posted. Future of the party.

 

[kadotsu]

So it's the Ron Paul crowd.

 

[Wilsongt]

So it's the Ron Paul crowd.

A bunch of kids who know nothing about politica and only want to be a part of something?

Yep

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'd like to see the tables used. I'm not sure comparing young Democrats to older Democrats is that revealing, for example - party identification dropped sharply over the generations, and only people who identify with the current Democratic elite are likely to join. That means that data point excludes left-leaning independents who vote in the Democratic process but don't consider themselves Democrats, but, had they been born in prior generations when party membership was de rigeur, might have been.

 

[Plinko]

Yo is it too late to start #bidenorbust?

Hillary isn't getting indicted and I would still rather have this.

 

[Y2Kev]

I'd like to see the tables used. I'm not sure comparing young Democrats to older Democrats is that revealing, for example - party identification dropped sharply over the generations, and only people who identify with the current Democratic elite are likely to join. That means that data point excludes left-leaning independents who vote in the Democratic process but don't consider themselves Democrats, but, had they been born in prior generations when party membership was de rigeur, might have been.

Even so, why would younger democrats not favor expansion of government funding of health care? Young people joining the party now are those who should know only obamacare as the lay of the land. This does not fit for me.

I get your point and I agree, but it doesn't make sense that younger democrats don't support the party's core positions. People still identifying as democrats as party ID drops should be those that rigidly adhere to what the party has in its platform.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Also is there any evidence the party is shrinking overall relative to overall registered voters? (Serious question, I have no idea.)

Was it ever de rigeur for young voters to register with a party in the last 50 years or so?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Even so, why would younger democrats not favor expansion of government funding of health care? Young people joining the party now are those who should know only obamacare as the lay of the land. This does not fit for me.

I get your point and I agree, but it doesn't make sense that younger democrats don't support the party's core positions. People still identifying as democrats as party ID drops should be those that rigidly adhere to what the party has in its platform.

I agree, which is why I'd like to see the tables - that article's premises aren't very intuitive and it is disappointing that the data isn't there.

 

[Wilsongt]

Also is there any evidence the party is shrinking overall relative to overall registered voters? (Serious question, I have no idea.)

Was it ever de rigeur for young voters to register with a party in the last 50 years or so?

Both parties are most likely shrinking as voter apathy (and twitter, tumblr, snapchat, instagram, facebook, tindr use) increases.

Young people are getting dumber and fucked by policies set in place by old people, yet they are not getting excited to vote. When they do, they get involved with someone like Sanders who is doing more harm to the party than good.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Also is there any evidence the party is shrinking overall relative to overall registered voters? (Serious question, I have no idea.)

Was it ever de rigeur for young voters to register with a party in the last 50 years or so?

I mean, de rigeur is an exaggeration, but yes, party affiliation is at a 75-year low (eg: http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/), and the problem is even more acute among young voters, with less than half holding party affiliation.

 

[PBY]

Forreal tho I'm super shook rn Hillary pls

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Both parties are most likely shrinking as voter apathy (and twitter, tumblr, snapchat, instagram, facebook, tindr use) increases.

Young people are getting dumber and fucked by policies set in place by old people, yet they are not getting excited to vote. When they do, they get involved with someone like Sanders who is doing more harm to the party than good.

Decline in voter apathy started long before the internet was conceived; it's been a continuing trend since the late 1960s. Trying to pin that on modern young people just being stupid/uninterested is obviously wrong, given that they're typically educated to a higher degree than previous generations and consistently report a higher value on civic participation. They just don't feel like party participation is the most effective way of doing this, which is why you've seen interest group membership sky-rocket over the same period.

Socrates once said of the Athenian youth that they now love nothing but luxury; their manners have decayed and they show only contempt for authority and disrespect for elders. Complaining about Modern Youth™ is literally an argument as old as time and it has never been right.

 

[User1608]

Both parties are most likely shrinking as voter apathy (and twitter, tumblr, snapchat, instagram, facebook, tindr use) increases.

Young people are getting dumber and fucked by policies set in place by old people, yet they are not getting excited to vote. When they do, they get involved with someone like Sanders who is doing more harm to the party than good.

Quite frankly angers me many are so ignorant and apathetic.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Forreal tho I'm super shook rn Hillary pls

The election is half a year away. The primaries aren't even over for the Democrats, and the best Trump can poll at this point is a tie. At one of his most favorable points in the race, and he's only just managing to tie.

His demographics are also looking awful compared to Romney. Who lost his election.

 

[Iolo]

I see the agitators for title change finally defeated the hated DWS.

Spoiler

nice title

 

[Wilsongt]

The election is half a year away. The primaries aren't even over for the Democrats, and the best Trump can poll at this point is a tie. At one of his most favorable points in the race, and he's only just managing to tie.

His demographics are also looking awful compared to Romney. Who lost his election.

RAZOR THIN MARGINS DEAD HEAT STATISTICAL TIE!
Have heard that this morning on both the CBS and NBC morning news.

 

[Effect]

CNN ain't liberal. They're more like center right. Fuck The Americans for not tuning in to Aljazeera America. Channel probably would of had a chance if it had a different name.

I don't doubt people told them that as well. There was no way they didn't tell them that they needed to change that name. The talent was there but it was dead on arrival with the name.

 

[OmniOne]

Since Bernie is in until the last vote is cast, how strongly will he hold out until D.C. votes?

Or will he forget about it since it's in the south?

 

[Y2Kev]

I'm reading an equity research piece today by H. Goodman

Could it be

 

[Wilsongt]

I'm reading an equity research piece today by H. Goodman

Could it be

Lol. hahaha is saying Bernie is winning against trump by 10.8 points.

#BirdieorBustforthewin

 

[dramatis]

From the NYT Review of Weiner which might have spoilers? (Not that you can spoil anything else in Weiner's life)

This cringe-inducing portrait of an arrogant politician’s self-immolation, like the follies of Gary Hart, John Edwards, Bill Clinton and Eliot Spitzer, shows that even at the risk of career suicide, the penis will not be denied.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Btw, the far-right lost in Austria.

 

[AndyD]

Btw, the far-right lost in Austria.

Only by the slimmest of margins though.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Decline in voter apathy started long before the internet was conceived; it's been a continuing trend since the late 1960s. Trying to pin that on modern young people just being stupid/uninterested is obviously wrong, given that they're typically educated to a higher degree than previous generations and consistently report a higher value on civic participation. They just don't feel like party participation is the most effective way of doing this, which is why you've seen interest group membership sky-rocket over the same period.

Socrates once said of the Athenian youth that they now love nothing but luxury; their manners have decayed and they show only contempt for authority and disrespect for elders. Complaining about Modern Youth™ is literally an argument as old as time and it has never been right.

Socrates never said that. It's a misattribution. A character from Aristophanes' Clouds says similar, he is a parody of Socrates.

Spoiler

Either way, Fuck Socrates

 

[nature boy]

WTF at Trump's new ad.

 

[jack_package_200]

Only by the slimmest of margins though.

Eh I'll take it.

A win would have galvanized the far right.

 

[gcubed]

I mean, de rigeur is an exaggeration, but yes, party affiliation is at a 75-year low (eg: http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/), and the problem is even more acute among young voters, with less than half holding party affiliation.

saying you are an independent is a bullshit special flower scenario. Independents vote with a single party the majority of the time, so if you are an independent and always vote d or r, you are a d or r but like to feel special. I give no credence to the bullshit "I call myself an independent" status

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Fuck Baltimore. Cops need to be tried at the Federal level, not locally.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Socrates never said that. It's a misattribution. A character from Aristophanes' Clouds says similar, he is a parody of Socrates.

Spoiler

Either way, Fuck Socrates

Fair enough. Either way, it's sentiment as old as time and has been wrong throughout that time.

 

[Holmes]

Some of Sanders' older supporters having a march: