Bernie’s plan would explode the deficit, probably to the point where it would cause a problem. I’m a big believer in Bernie’s way and I know he can’t do all of those things.
One problem the Dems have is people don’t believe Republicans explode the deficit, and they believe current levels of deficit are a problem (worst case right now it would lead to slight inflation in the long-term)
One thing I think the Dems have to campaign on is that government spending is investment in society- and that good investments raise the standards for everyone. Not all spending is bad, even if some edge cases exist.
Then again I believe in the UBI solution, even if that will massively screw over some people- because it’s the best for the most.
This. Unfortunately, American voters are idiots and I hold no hope whatsoever that it’ll be possible to overcome the raging national hardon for believing that government is huge and bad. Because…uh, liberty? I’ve never really understood it.
The function of the government is a fundamental disagreement between Republicans and Democrats, at least on paper. If you get to the nitty gritty small government kind of dies when it comes to church and other claims
But just because you believe in a large government and the role of the government being supportive for those most disadvantaged doesn’t mean you want to issue the government a blank check. You should be able to question costs and benefits without being demonized or told get over the line and join the GOP.
At this point we might as well get something out of it since we’re spending the money anyway. I’d rather see it go to regular folks who put it back in the economy than the stock options of some dude with 3-5 homes that will never spend it.
I wonder though, if you wouldnt be affected more than most with universal health? I assume you would be out of a job, since I believe you do billing in the health care field.
I guess I would feel similar if we did universal retirement pensions.
Healthcare is always experiencing changes. Hell a shift in Medicare, which is bound to happen, or Medicaid can do a lot too. The system I work on today replaced a bunch of old systems. The people who maintained that system lost their jobs and either retired or moved onto something else. It’s the nature of the business. That’s not my driving factor. It’s more of the we expect you to come up with between 1 to 2k a month, and if you say hey I think that’s unreasonable here’s the door mentality that I think won’t do the Democrats any favors. It’s not like Bernie won. It wasn’t really even close.
If the Democrats don’t have room for the social liberals who are fiscal conservatives, I think they will lose more than they are counting on. The fact of the matter is, still, the 20 year olds largely don’t vote. They just don’t. The working middle class and upper class, we do. I think Trump has a bigger chance at two terms than I initially thought, assuming he’s not convicted of anything before then.
And to add to that, because my occupation, and the shifting we’re seeing at some of the larger clinics but not necessarily giant healthcare systems… it kind of seems like they’re preparing to shift the poor an under-insured to the nurses and other practitioners, not the MD because they won’t be able to staff the MDs at the level to see that many people.
Personally, I think a lot of healthcare could go to other less expensive medical practitioners and shift the burden off the MDs. There are some things a nurse can do just as well as a physician, for example… but if we’re going to do that, it shouldn’t be just for the poor.
This thread is a mess, but this quote makes me extra-uncomfortable.
Left-wing fascism has brought us millions of dead bodies and zero good governments. Left-wing fascism both benefits from and encourages right-wing fascism because left-wing fascism is right-wing fascism. It’s not like fascists with power won’t be tempted to abuse their power the same way other people do, only they’ll have death camps. Venezuela is not a state to be envied.
The modern Democratic party is built around consensus politics not because it is weak but because it is a big tent. Being a big tent has a lot of virtues. I believe it is good that the party strives for justice and equality for all Americans, wants to enable all citizens to fully exercise their right to vote, and supports providing most immigrants with a path to citizenship.
But I don’t want the tent to be big enough for the fascists.
It’s because democracy and consensus building and playing by the rules of the free society that millions have died to build and maintain isn’t going to solve anything, maaaaan. Instead, we must all join together, buy matching tunics, and make California Über Alles by Dead Kennedys into, like, totally a real thing.
End of the day, my belief is that modern progressives are too weak to do what is necessary to defeat true Evil (that is, Republicanism). Some will need to step up and adopt the tactics of the enemy to have any hope of stopping them. I don’t think it’s a pretty solution, nor honorable, nor desirable. Just necessary.
Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before it spread to other European countries. Opposed to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.
Of course people often generalize it to “anyone being mean in government” in which case you tag anyone with it you like, but that’s not the usual definition.
But please feel free to provide a definition that distinguishes fascism as a specific political movement – the movement of Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler – and that puts it on the left.
The strategy seems to be stick your head in the sand and hope the electoral cycle evens things out for you.
That way you get to indulge in the national pastime of being outraged on twitter, and celebrate your eventual glorious victory.
In many ways it is politics as usual, but geeze the phenomenon of instantaneous media has really set back capability for productive political discourse.
It will probably take some years for people to realise the total absence of unifying discourse is a political dead end.
No one really expects the alt right to be a long term political movement for those reasons, but the twitter left (what the hell is the name for these guys anyway?) are oblivious to the clear and present danger of them sharing the same fate.
After the shellacking that Clinton received at the hands of the deplorables, I think the decision is clear that they won’t adapt, and have decided that the way people vote is the problem. Ultimately I think they will come to regret that, and will be consigned to the dustbin of history.