Support NeoGAF

[Abinash117]

I don't think so? That there are hierarchies doesn't necessarily lend itself to "let's put one asshole in charge and his kids too because why not."

Anyway, I'm not sure there's a difference between "things people always do when presented with a universal set of conditions" and "things that are an inescapable part of human nature." It's not just substinence goods, though it might be if you were to broaden the definition of "substinence." Complex tasks encourage specialties, specialties are of unequal value under changing sets of circumstances, unequally valued skillsets leads to hierarchy, ergo, complex tasks leads to hierarchy. Our challenges going forward are going to require more complexity, not less, so here we sit.

Socialism is saying "lets get rid of hierarchies." I think this is admirable, but not actually doable. Capitalism is "here's how things have arranged themselves." This isn't admirable, but it is what's happened, so trying to fix it makes more sense to me than trying to switch gears to a thing that doesn't look to me like it would even work out.

Why can't capitalist societies reform it's judicial systems to heavy penalizes people in position of power?(Question not directed to you exactly). It just seems like that regardless of socialism or capitalism people will defend their own.

The judicial systems can be more independent and strong enough to do something like that.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Oh hey I missed this.

Not all centre parties are created equal;
The Swedish one has taken a liberal turn and is less focused on agrarian issues. It's essentially our Liberal party (not to be confused with the actual Liberal party which is more conservative). Very pro-EU
The Finnish one is a bit weird since they aren't as focused on an economic model as other parties, but they do support a market based economy. They are more socially conservative compared to the Swedish and Norwegian one.
The Norwegian one... idk man, they've said some nationalist things lately, they are anti-EU, but they still work with the Left wing coalition.

What they have in common is an emphasis on decentralisation and environmental issues.
(and also a spotty history when it comes to WWII and whether or not they viewed Hitler as bad)

Christian Democrats are probably in more trouble, unless I'm off with where the outstanding vote is (and I very well could be). Still not sure if it's enough for either to drop under 4%.

Thanks, always happy to learn more!

 

[Poodlestrike]

Why can't capitalist societies reform it's judicial systems to heavy penalizes people in position of power?(Question not directed to you exactly). It just seems like that regardless of socialism or capitalism people will defend their own.

The judicial systems can be more independent and strong enough to do something like that.

The actual economics term for this is regulatory capture and it's a biiiiiiitch.

(Strong judicial system comes with its own set of headaches, tbh, but class-blindness would be a wonderful trait for any legal system to have. Damn hard to do tho).

 

[chadskin]

Monday's the day, people.

Hey it's Monday, don't Rick Wilson us

 

[BlastProcessing]

Hey it's Monday, don't Rick Wilson us

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I still can't believe they got Bill Murray to do Garfield.

 

[The Technomancer]

I still can't believe they got Bill Murray to do Garfield.

didyouknowcoenbrothersmistakeetc

 

[Aaron Strife]

didyouknowcoenbrothersmistakeetc

didyouknowbillmurraygotlorenzomusicfiredetc

 

[Deleted member 231381]

didyouknowbillmurraygotlorenzomusicfiredetc

ydychchi'ngwybodsudisiaradcymraegetc

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Friendship ended with Brown, now Merkley is my best friend

 

[hawk2025]

One thing that annoys me about the narrative surrounding electric cars and solar energy lately is that it was unavoidable, inevitable, and this is evidenced by the fact that new policies haven't slowed down growth in the sector.

No, it wasn't unavoidable. For years, we smartly subsidized and incentivized these types of products, to the point where we fast-tracked the achievement of the scale necessary to take off.

Green energy should NOT be an argument in favor of "the market will sort it out" -- it should be the exact opposite!

 

[whyamihere]

Friendship ended with Brown, now Merkley is my best friend

omg he updated his prof pic on wikipedia to be presidential af

vs

 

[adg1034]

ydychchi'ngwybodsudisiaradcymraegetc

Ph'ngluimglw'nafhCthulhuR'lyehwgah'naglfhtagn

 

[Abinash117]

The actual economics term for this is regulatory capture and it's a biiiiiiitch.

(Strong judicial system comes with its own set of headaches, tbh, but class-blindness would be a wonderful trait for any legal system to have. Damn hard to do tho).

Which is harder transforming our current system to a socialist one or insuring our legal system can properly deal with those in power?

Regardless of which system you adopt the willingness to confront hierarchy to all that matters in the end( I guess the argument can be that socialism is more willing to confront it) . Socialism might have to require a strong central government, would at that point create a new breed of hierarchy, the government instead? Well only if; however I again, never know the process to go from a capitalist system to a socialist one. To destroy the hierarchy someone has to do it; the government shouldn't, so then the people instead. What would then prevent the select people to not form a new hierarchy like the other times it has in the past?

 

[sc0la]

This is hella racist btw.

Edit:
Garfield is an orange white supremacist, who does that remind me of... 🤔

 

[Poodlestrike]

One thing that annoys me about the narrative surrounding electric cars and solar energy lately is that it was unavoidable, inevitable, and this is evidenced by the fact that new policies haven't slowed down growth in the sector.

No, it wasn't unavoidable. For years, we smartly subsidized and incentivized these types of products, to the point where we fast-tracked the achievement of the scale necessary to take off.

Green energy should NOT be an argument in favor of "the market will sort it out" -- it should be the exact opposite!

It's a mixed case. You're completely right that the market was incredibly slow to get rolling and outside intervention was absolutely required, but it's looking like now that the right incentives (and disincentives) have been applied, things are taking off to an extent that wouldn't be possible without market forces.

I tend to think of the free market as a steam turbine. Massive power output, but without proper monitoring and regulation it has a tendency to explode and kill everyone in the vicinity.

Which is harder transforming our current system to a socialist one or insuring our legal system can properly deal with those in power?
Regardless of which system you adopt the willingness to confront hierarchy to all that matters in the end( I guess the argument can be that socialism is more willing to confront it) . Socialism might have to require a strong central government, would at that point create a new breed of hierarchy, the government instead? Well only if; however I again, never know the process to go from a capitalist system to a socialist one. To destroy the hierarchy someone has to if the government shouldn't, then the people. What would then prevent the select people to not form a new hierarchy like other times?

Well, that's the 10 trillion dollar question, isn't it? If socialism can indeed be achieved as envisioned, then obviously the long-term gains justify nearly any transition. If it can't, then why bother? I don't KNOW that it can't, but it looks to be really damn hard to try, and I dunno if the cost is worth an uncertain outcome.

As to the last bit, the problems I'm envisioning only become problems at all with scale, as you introduce people you'd rather not. Makes testing difficult.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Friendship ended with Brown, now Merkley is my best friend

Can't Shirk the Merk!

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

the 46th president of the United States and Joe Biden

 

[berzeli]

Christian Democrats at 4,2%
Venstre (Liberal) at 4,3%

with 94,3% reporting

The dream is dead Jacobin writer who whyamihere quoted earlier.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Ph'ngluimglw'nafhCthulhuR'lyehwgah'naglfhtagn

Pretty sure that was the name of the villain in the new Phoenix Wright game.

Merkley would be interesting, though I kind of think of him as a bootleg Brown.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The great thing about Sanders' bill is that it's acting as giant bat-signal for those with presidential ambitions as they come to bend the knee. Sanders may have lost the primary, but he won the party.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The great thing about Sanders' bill is that it's acting as giant bat-signal for those with presidential ambitions as they come to bend the knee. Sanders may have lost the primary, but he won the party.

Yeah but now voters might expect the Democrats to pass legislation they like and will be disappointed if they don't.

What then, lefties?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Yeah but now voters might expect the Democrats to pass legislation they like and will be disappointed if they don't.

What then, lefties?

Fully automated luxury gay space communism, of course.

 

[Plinko]

I think this should be a bigger concern than Graham/Cassidy (but I'm still keeping an eye on Graham/Cassidy.)

The same Graham/Cassidy bill that Hatch just said won't even get a floor vote due to lack of support?

 

[Teggy]

This is fucking surreal

Now Israel has its own version of the ‘alt-right'

Netanyahu posted the cartoon Friday with the caption ”food chain." It pairs the Jewish billionaire and philanthropist George Soros — who the alt-right regularly portrays as a leftist ”puppet master" — with at least two other figures associated with the far right and conspiracy theorists, a robed ”Illuminati" figure and a lizard creature. All three in turn are seen as manipulating former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and other prominent critics of Benjamin Netanyahu.

Jewish leaders in Israel and the United States rushed to rap Netanyahu over the post. ”The cartoon that Yair Netanyahu posted contains blatantly anti-Semitic elements," the Anti-Defamation League's Israel office tweeted Sunday in Hebrew. ”The dangers inherent in anti-Semitic discourse should not be taken lightly."

Meanwhile, leading white supremacists, including former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke and those behind the U.S. neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, purported to embrace Netanyahu as one of their own.

”Welcome to the club, Yair – absolutely amazing, wow, just wow," Duke tweeted Sunday, along with media reports about Netanyahu's post.

 

[gaugebozo]

You have to be careful with Mondays. Garfield is weak against them. https://youtu.be/yELOiYgR2aI

 

[Y2Kev]

Hillary should run for president again

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Hillary should run for president again

I didn't realise you disliked her quite that much!

 

[pigeon]

Yeah but now voters might expect the Democrats to pass legislation they like and will be disappointed if they don't.

What then, lefties?

This seems a little unfair. Single payer is actually difficult to pass!

 

[whyamihere]

Christian Democrats at 4,2%
Venstre (Liberal) at 4,3%

with 94,3% reporting

The dream is dead Jacobin writer who whyamihere quoted earlier.

Christian Democrats could tick down to 4.1, but yeah.

 

[The Technomancer]

I want to see what is in the damn bill

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

This seems a little unfair. Single payer is actually difficult to pass!

Even harder when both major political parties are opposed to it.

Looks like Sanders made it a lot easier!

 

[Aaron Strife]

I want to see what is in the damn bill

Bernie's rolling it out on Wednesday. Patience, friend.

 

[Holmes]

Friendship ended with Brown, now Merkley is my best friend

Betrayal noted

 

[BlastProcessing]

This is hella racist btw.

Edit:
Garfield is an orange white supremacist, who does that remind me of... 🤔

 

[Deuce Deuce]

I want to see what is in the damn bill

Don't worry it'll be pure fire. Bank on it.

 

[pigeon]

Even harder when both major political parties are opposed to it.

Looks like Sanders made it a lot easier!

This is true but doesn't really address the critique being made.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

This is true but doesn't really address the critique being made.

I think the argument that promising to pass laws that your base will like to win votes is bad because not passing those laws will disappoint your base is backwards. Why should your base vote for you if you aren't going to pass laws they'll like?

 

[kirblar]

I think the argument that promising to pass laws that your base will like to win votes is bad because not passing those laws will disappoint your base is backwards. Why should your base vote for you if you aren't going to pass laws they'll like?

Because running on laws that your base likes but that you know are trash is how you turn into the GOP.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I think the argument that promising to pass laws that your base will like to win votes is bad because not passing those laws will disappoint your base is backwards. Why should your base vote for you if you aren't going to pass laws they'll like?

I think the argument is that you need a bill that passes the sniff test for the public. If the bill released on Wednesday can't manage a good CBO score, then its approval rating is separate from the approval rating from the thing it intends to do.

There's never been a bill to actually point to, just a concept. And that bill has to itself be popular (tax increases and all).

 

[Stinkles]

Hey it's Monday, don't Rick Wilson us

I've heard nothing. I'm concerned they got him. And by they I mean Supercuts. This is another reason I'm getting out of my brief foray into the tick tick business.

 

[pigeon]

I think the argument that promising to pass laws that your base will like to win votes is bad because not passing those laws will disappoint your base is backwards. Why should your base vote for you if you aren't going to pass laws they'll like?

The argument is that promising to pass laws that you reasonably believe you can't pass is bad, because it's lying.

We should totally promise to pass all kinds of laws that we can probably pass when we take office! But we should not promise to, for example, ban cars, because the political will isn't there, and we know that. We should instead agitate publicly for the banning of cars to help generate that political will.

It's possible that Bernie reasonably believes we can pass single payer, I guess, but it strikes me as quite challenging given that no state has successfully navigated the economic question.

The question is, what happens when President Harris passes the public option and lowers the Medicare age to 40 after campaigning on single-payer? Do progressives celebrate a huge victory, or do we end up with another bunch of dumb NeoGAF posts about how Harris campaigned on great healthcare and then just handed out a sop to insurance companies?

 

[Blader]

I am confused when I read things like, "What does the Democratic Party stand for other being against Trump? What do Democrats believe in on Issues X, Y, and Z?" Because I feel like I understand exactly what the party stands for. Healthcare? A right, not a privilege. Climate change? It's real, we need to take action now vis-a-vis renewables, cutting CO2 emissions, etc. Planned Parenthood? Keep funding it. Citizens United? Poisoning our democracy. Minimum wage? Raise it right now.

I get that there's debate within these debates (single-payer vs. public option, $12 minimum wage vs. $15, etc.) but the framing around this narrative always seems to be that there's no message to the Democratic Party on anything, which, unless I'm imagining everything I wrote above, just seems really untrue.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

lbut it strikes me as quite challenging given that no state has successfully navigated the economic question.

To be specific here, CA (our best state economically) had to sideline their bill because they couldn't pay for it in a way that people would like.

I hope the bill on Wednesday is good, but it needs to be a real bill and not just a piece of paper that says "single payer" on it. I'm a technocrat, I want the details.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

You have to be careful with Mondays. Garfield is weak against them. https://youtu.be/yELOiYgR2aI

Never fails to make me laugh

 

[pigeon]

I am confused when I read things like, "What does the Democratic Party stand for other being against Trump? What do Democrats believe in on Issues X, Y, and Z?" Because I feel like I understand exactly what the party stands for. Healthcare? A right, not a privilege. Climate change? It's real, we need to take action now vis-a-vis renewables, cutting CO2 emissions, etc. Planned Parenthood? Keep funding it. Citizens United? Poisoning our democracy. Minimum wage? Raise it right now.

I get that there's debate within these debates (single-payer vs. public option, $12 minimum wage vs. $15, etc.) but the framing around this narrative always seems to be that there's no message to the Democratic Party on anything, which, unless I'm imagining everything I wrote above, just seems really untrue.

That's because the people who say that are West Wingers.

Spoiler

I'm going to make fetch happen

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

tfw you're going to sign a M4A bill and become the most popular president in all of history

The argument is that promising to pass laws that you reasonably believe you can't pass is bad, because it's lying.

We should totally promise to pass all kinds of laws that we can probably pass when we take office! But we should not promise to, for example, ban cars, because the political will isn't there, and we know that. We should instead agitate publicly for the banning of cars to help generate that political will.

It's possible that Bernie reasonably believes we can pass single payer, I guess, but it strikes me as quite challenging given that no state has successfully navigated the economic question.

I mean, banning cars is a great and desirable policy outcome but it lacks the necessary political will because it would be unpopular. Single payer would be very popular with people who vote Democrat already and potentially appealing to people who don't vote because it would make their lives noticeably better. It lacks the political will because Democratic politicians don't want to pass it for other reasons (like, for instance, the personal wealth they can generate from being cozy with people benefiting from our terrible healthcare system).

To be honest I have a hard time taking the "single payer is impossible" argument all that seriously when serious and knowledgeable Democrats who aren't worried about electoral politics anymore just say it's the better option. I mean, Max fucking Baucus just said Democrats should do single payer.

I also find comparisons between state governments and the federal government here pretty disingenuous, which is surprising coming from you. States can't print their own money and have much more to feat from capital flight!

 

[Aaron Strife]

That's because the people who say that are West Wingers.

Spoiler

I'm going to make fetch happen

Are West Wingers people who espouse dumb conventional wisdom without any thought behind it so they feel they can contribute to the conversation?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

That's because the people who say that are West Wingers.

Spoiler

I'm going to make fetch happen

That's the opposite of the West Wing! West Wing is all about the fetishes for legal process, technocratic expertise, and bipartisan centrism!

 

[kirblar]

I am confused when I read things like, "What does the Democratic Party stand for other being against Trump? What do Democrats believe in on Issues X, Y, and Z?" Because I feel like I understand exactly what the party stands for. Healthcare? A right, not a privilege. Climate change? It's real, we need to take action now vis-a-vis renewables, cutting CO2 emissions, etc. Planned Parenthood? Keep funding it. Citizens United? Poisoning our democracy. Minimum wage? Raise it right now.

I get that there's debate within these debates (single-payer vs. public option, $12 minimum wage vs. $15, etc.) but the framing around this narrative always seems to be that there's no message to the Democratic Party on anything, which, unless I'm imagining everything I wrote above, just seems really untrue.

Because many people hear one thing specifically targeting benefits to a minority group and it drowns out everything else.