Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Newsweek)   The six big policies the Democratic Party should adopt right now, but won't   ( newsweek.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, unprecedented economic imbalance, first-class technical training, award-winning documentary Inequality, Free public universities, James Weldon Johnson, American Prospect magazine, New York City, successful Democrats  
•       •       •

3098 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Sep 2017 at 3:01 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



161 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-09-02 11:27:41 PM  
I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.
 
2017-09-02 11:33:59 PM  

SoupGuru: I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.


University instruction materials and medicine can be delivered to rural areas via a giant floating stone Hitler head, which ought to make some inroads to the angry white guy demographic.
 
2017-09-02 11:45:47 PM  
7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".
 
2017-09-02 11:56:03 PM  

fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".


This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes me insane about Democrats.  Your main three or four policy proposals need to be interesting and exciting.  Yes, there's all these 5000 other things that need to be done.  Yes, we probably need to improve our diplomatic relationship with Puntland but seriously, nobody cares.

Free college?  Sure thing.  Doesn't appeal to anyone.  Anyone who has gone to college recently needs student loan forgiveness first.  Anyone not already going to college or already gone to college isn't going to come out to the polls to vote for this.

I like fusillade762's financial transaction tax.  Easy to implement, raise tons of money, but, again, it might not get people to the polls.

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know.

1. Medicare for all.  Everyone in, nobody out.  Forget the "public option" and "single payer" statements.  Nobody knows what you mean by that and you sound like a wonk.  Just say "Medicare for all".  Everyone gets that and everyone liked Medicare.  Just prove that you can save people money with it and book it, done.

2.  Legal weed.  Enough people in this country are casual smokers that this will appeal to the Libertarian-mindset.

I don't really have a third or a fourth.  But those are good for starters.
 
2017-09-03 12:35:32 AM  
How about some policies from the 1940s?
img.fark.net
The six in TFA fit nicely with these.
 
2017-09-03 12:37:49 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking:

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know


Easy to say, but how do we do it?

First and most immediately, require full disclosure of all original sources of campaign money - so the public knows who's giving what to whom, and can hold politicians accountable if they do favors for contributors while neglecting their responsibilities to all of us.

If Congress won't enact a law requiring such full disclosure, the Federal Election Commission has the power to do it on its own and the SEC can do it for public corporations - which, by the way, are major campaign spenders.

Meanwhile, the President should issue an executive order requiring all federal contractors to fully disclose their political contributions. There's a growing movement to encourage him to do just that.

Next, our government should provide matching funds for small-donor contributions - say $3 in public dollars for every $1 dollar from a small donor. Those public dollars could come from a check-off on your income tax return indicating you want, say, $15 of your taxes devoted to public financing of elections.

Third and most importantly, we must reverse the Supreme Court's 5-4 First Amendment decisions holding that money is speech and corporations have the political rights of people - and that therefore no laws can be enacted limiting the amount of money wealthy individuals or big corporations can spend on elections.

We have to work hard for a constitutional amendment to overturn "Citizen's United" - with the understanding that we'll either succeed in amending our Constitution, or we'll build a social movement powerful enough to influence the Supreme Court, just like the movement that led to the historic "Brown v. the Board of Education" decision.

Ultimately we need Supreme Court justices who understand that the freedom of speech of most Americans is drowned out when big money can spend as much as it wants, to be as loud as it needs to be.


Obviously that was written before last November.
 
2017-09-03 01:32:41 AM  
The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.
 
2017-09-03 03:06:07 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.


This one can be a real winner if you frame it in enough stigginit.
 
2017-09-03 03:09:09 AM  

Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.


That's the point of of the sixth policy he suggested. And the truth is that this one is the most important. As long as bribery is legal it won't matter how well-intentioned the policies are, they will be corrupted by the rich and powerful. Weak campaign finance regulation is the root of most of your political woes.
 
2017-09-03 03:09:35 AM  

shpritz: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This one can be a real winner if you frame it in enough stigginit.


It will probably get people to the polls if they actually believe the person saying it will actually work for it.
 
2017-09-03 03:11:32 AM  
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;

NO!  A new single-payer system that is efficient and avoids the problems with Medicare.
 
2017-09-03 03:34:04 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes me insane about Democrats.  Your main three or four policy proposals need to be interesting and exciting.  Yes, there's all these 5000 other things that need to be done.  Yes, we probably need to improve our diplomatic relationship with Puntland but seriously, nobody cares.

Free college?  Sure thing.  Doesn't appeal to anyone.  Anyone who has gone to college recently needs student loan forgiveness first.  Anyone not already going to college or already gone to college isn't going to come out to the polls to vote for this.

I like fusillade762's financial transaction tax.  Easy to implement, raise tons of money, but, again, it might not get people to the polls.

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know.

1. Medicare for all.  Everyone in, nobody out.  Forget the "public option" and "single payer" statements.  Nobody knows what you mean by that and you sound like a wonk.  Just say "Medicare for all".  Everyone gets ...


- Public investment in schools attracts parents, like me, whose kids go to schools where within a month you come to realize that the kids have more common sense and intelligence than those teaching them.
- "Free" public universities attract the 18-24 age demographic that traditionally skews more liberal yet stays away from the polls in droves.  And the promise of an education without a debt that'll financially cripple them for decades is a pretty good draw.  And their parents, who have all that college debt, will appreciate it as well.
- Higher taxes on the wealthy would get to the polls if it were pitched right.  Democrats need to put it out there simply by taking a page from Willie Stark and saying "We're gonna tax the shiat out of the rich, and we're going to spread it out thin among us all."
 
2017-09-03 03:34:51 AM  

Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.


Democrats fought against poisonous campaign financing legislation, but said: If we lose this battle we must play by the new rules just to stay in the game.
 When they win, Dems move us incrementally toward goal. It's the winning that's the problem -- that takes more than Hail Mary passes.
 
2017-09-03 03:41:02 AM  

Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.


Both sides are bad, so vote Republican, I always say.
 
2017-09-03 03:41:22 AM  
Speaking as a working-class white male, I agree with every one of those positions, when presented with a reasonable, viable method of execution.
 
2017-09-03 03:42:39 AM  

vrax: 3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;

NO!  A new single-payer system that is efficient and avoids the problems with Medicare.


I will admit that I am not a scholar of the program but it is my understanding that Medicare is generally considered one of the more efficient government programs mostly due to it's ability to set prices because of its leverage.

I mean I am sure there are problems that could be corrected, but it seems to me it is a better starting point than something completely new and untested.

Set the minimum age to "born" and increase taxes to pay for it.
 
2017-09-03 03:48:11 AM  

SoupGuru: I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.


No, we don't need to select them out and ask if they specifically like an idea. However, health care for all is good for all Americans. All Americans should be in favor of universal healthcare. Simple.
 
2017-09-03 03:55:26 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.


Promise jobs driving heavy equipment wearing John Deer or Caterpillar hats. It will sell.
 
2017-09-03 03:57:07 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes me insane about Democrats.  Your main three or four policy proposals need to be interesting and exciting.  Yes, there's all these 5000 other things that need to be done.  Yes, we probably need to improve our diplomatic relationship with Puntland but seriously, nobody cares.

Free college?  Sure thing.  Doesn't appeal to anyone.  Anyone who has gone to college recently needs student loan forgiveness first.  Anyone not already going to college or already gone to college isn't going to come out to the polls to vote for this.

I like fusillade762's financial transaction tax.  Easy to implement, raise tons of money, but, again, it might not get people to the polls.

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know.

1. Medicare for all.  Everyone in, nobody out.  Forget the "public option" and "single payer" statements.  Nobody knows what you mean by that and you sound like a wonk.  Just say "Medicare for all".  Everyone gets ...


If we had actual leaders who would explain issues and policies that solve them, those issues would be more important and get people to the polls.

Right now, we have servants to monied interests using polling and now, social media, to rile voters up over divisive (non) issues. The do not identify the problems Reich is speaking about, and they don't explain how policies, laws, and constitutional amendments could work together to drastically improve the quality of life for everyone.

We should have a Democratic Party telling people this:

We theorized that lowering taxes on the rich would spur investment in the US, create more good-paying jobs, and increase the buying power of the working and middle class.

After thirty years of testing, we see that has failed, horribly. The result of that approach has been the decay of our education system, skyrocketing medical costs, overwhelming personal debt, and citizens only able to afford goods that are produced with near-slave labor in Asia. Nobody's quality of life has increased except for those who received the tax cuts.

They should be hammering that message over and over, but they won't -- because that would mean the Clintons and their political progeny were wrong, the Democratic Party was led astray, and they'd have to sever ties with that select group of industries that have paid their way for the last 25 years.
 
2017-09-03 04:02:44 AM  

wademh: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Promise jobs driving heavy equipment wearing John Deer or Caterpillar hats. It will sell.


God I hate large swaths of this country.  How in the fark with the internet in 2017 can people be so goddamn ignorant.  I know I know I know what the answer is, but it just boggles the mind.
 
2017-09-03 04:05:24 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes me insane about Democrats.  Your main three or four policy proposals need to be interesting and exciting.  Yes, there's all these 5000 other things that need to be done.  Yes, we probably need to improve our diplomatic relationship with Puntland but seriously, nobody cares.

Free college?  Sure thing.  Doesn't appeal to anyone.  Anyone who has gone to college recently needs student loan forgiveness first.  Anyone not already going to college or already gone to college isn't going to come out to the polls to vote for this.

I like fusillade762's financial transaction tax.  Easy to implement, raise tons of money, but, again, it might not get people to the polls.

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know.

1. Medicare for all.  Everyone in, nobody out.  Forget the "public option" and "single payer" statements.  Nobody knows what you mean by that and you sound like a wonk.  Just say "Medi ...


Oh, I know.

*sigh*

The problem with exercises like this is that it always boils down to:  not enough people agree with you.

To which I (or the other lucky farker involved in the discussion) invariably say that people are idiots.

And we leave it there.

I mean, how does Reich expect to "get big money out of politics"?  This was the guy who was Secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton, FFS.
 
2017-09-03 04:09:50 AM  
The cruelty, ignorance, venality and vulgarity of the Republican Party is not surpassed by the cowardice, insipidity, tediousness and amorality of the Democratic Party.  Obviously the Republican Party is worse (significantly) than the Democratic Party.

But goddamn, you farking pathetic motherfarkers.
 
2017-09-03 04:20:40 AM  
Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking:
I mean, how does Reich expect to "get big money out of politics"?  This was the guy who was Secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton, FFS.

Reich was Sec. of Labor.

Getting money out of politics first entails changing the Constitution to give congress the power to do so. The SCOTUS has said that big money is free speech as it stands. We need a fully funded FEC, laws that limit contributions, and ideally, publicly funded campaigns.
 
2017-09-03 04:25:49 AM  

fusillade762: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking:

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know

Easy to say, but how do we do it?

First and most immediately, require full disclosure of all original sources of campaign money - so the public knows who's giving what to whom, and can hold politicians accountable if they do favors for contributors while neglecting their responsibilities to all of us.

If Congress won't enact a law requiring such full disclosure, the Federal Election Commission has the power to do it on its own and the SEC can do it for public corporations - which, by the way, are major campaign spenders.

Meanwhile, the President should issue an executive order requiring all federal contractors to fully disclose their political contributions. There's a growing movement to encourage him to do just that.

Next, our government should provide matching funds for small-donor contributions - say $3 in public dollars for every $1 dollar from a small donor. Those public dollars could come from a check-off on your income tax return indicating you want, say, $15 of your taxes devoted to public financing of elections.

Third and most importantly, we must reverse the Supreme Court's 5-4 First Amendment decisions holding that money is speech and corporations have the political rights of people - and that therefore no laws can be enacted limiting the amount of money wealthy individuals or big corporations can spend on elections.

We have to work hard for a constitutional amendment to overturn "Citizen's United" - with the understanding that we'll either succeed in amending our Constitution, or we'll build a social movement powerful enough to influence the Supreme Court, just like the movement that led to the historic "Brown v. the Board of Education" decision.

Ultimately we need Supreme Court justices who understand that the freedom of speech of most Am ...


Good stuff here, man.
 
2017-09-03 04:48:33 AM  

SoupGuru: I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.


doesn't matter. fark told me those things are "too liberal" and any candidate who supports those things are unelectable.
 
2017-09-03 04:48:39 AM  
Lenny_da_Hog:
If we had actual leaders who would explain issues and policies that solve them, those issues would be more important and get people to the polls.

Nope. Sadly, you're wrong. There are individuals who are  reliable Democrats. Many of those are there because they have picked policies that matter to them. Same for the other side. Of course each "side" also has those who vote by familial loyalty. And then there are swing voters.

Many of the swing voters are quite fickle. They like a good slogan and respond to political waves. They won't read your position paper, they won't go to your website and read your white paper. They are unlikely to listen to your political ads unless they have a catchy jingle.  They can however swing an election. Winning them over is a cynical and calculated business. It doesn't involve smart policy and authentic enlightened self-interest.  However, enlightened self-interest does require that you win them over.
 
2017-09-03 04:50:58 AM  

wademh: Lenny_da_Hog:
If we had actual leaders who would explain issues and policies that solve them, those issues would be more important and get people to the polls.

Nope. Sadly, you're wrong. There are individuals who are  reliable Democrats. Many of those are there because they have picked policies that matter to them. Same for the other side. Of course each "side" also has those who vote by familial loyalty. And then there are swing voters.

Many of the swing voters are quite fickle. They like a good slogan and respond to political waves. They won't read your position paper, they won't go to your website and read your white paper. They are unlikely to listen to your political ads unless they have a catchy jingle.  They can however swing an election. Winning them over is a cynical and calculated business. It doesn't involve smart policy and authentic enlightened self-interest.  However, enlightened self-interest does require that you win them over.


And yet we had FDR getting the New Deal through by explaining it.

We went to the moon by JFK advocating it and explaining it.
 
2017-09-03 05:07:36 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: wademh: Lenny_da_Hog:
If we had actual leaders who would explain issues and policies that solve them, those issues would be more important and get people to the polls.

Nope. Sadly, you're wrong. There are individuals who are  reliable Democrats. Many of those are there because they have picked policies that matter to them. Same for the other side. Of course each "side" also has those who vote by familial loyalty. And then there are swing voters.

Many of the swing voters are quite fickle. They like a good slogan and respond to political waves. They won't read your position paper, they won't go to your website and read your white paper. They are unlikely to listen to your political ads unless they have a catchy jingle.  They can however swing an election. Winning them over is a cynical and calculated business. It doesn't involve smart policy and authentic enlightened self-interest.  However, enlightened self-interest does require that you win them over.

And yet we had FDR getting the New Deal through by explaining it.

We went to the moon by JFK advocating it and explaining it.


Careful what you wish for. We will have a state of the union wherein it is explained to us how you can split screen misogyny porn with a selfie to have a good wank. Sometimes it isn't the explaining, it truly is the message (and the messenger).
 
2017-09-03 05:09:19 AM  

ilambiquated: Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.

Both sides are bad, so vote Republican, I always say.


Have blind faith no matter the faults, nor how infrequently preaching is applied to practice. That's what I always say. Hold your leaders accountable.
 
2017-09-03 05:27:13 AM  

Cagey B: SoupGuru: I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.

University instruction materials and medicine can be delivered to rural areas via a giant floating stone Hitler head, which ought to make some inroads to the angry white guy demographic.


That's so crazy it just might work!
 
2017-09-03 05:41:53 AM  

SoupGuru: I don't know, guys.... do white working class males like those things too? I've been told I need to worry about what they think.


Weeners...of course.

Or we could, you know, stop giving a fark about what gender or race someone is and try to appeal to all Americans with sound economic policies such as these.  Based on Sanders near meteoric rise in short order advocating these very things it might just work.

But no, that's crazy talk.  Let's try Clinton again.
 
2017-09-03 06:01:57 AM  

Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.


Yep.  I lean far to the left.  I can't even pretend to feel represented by the Democratic establishment.  They're essentially being paid to lose... Why the fark would they want to win.
 
2017-09-03 06:05:06 AM  

mactheknife: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".

This.

Here's Reich's list:

1.Public investments in world-class schools and infrastructure for all .
2. Free public universities and first-class technical training for all ;
3. Single-payer Medicare-for-All;
4. Higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for this;
5. Using antitrust to break up powerful monopolies on Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture.
6. Getting big money out of our politics.

The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.

Neither is higher taxes on the wealthy.  Yes, it needs to be done.  But it isn't something that gets people to the polls.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes me insane about Democrats.  Your main three or four policy proposals need to be interesting and exciting.  Yes, there's all these 5000 other things that need to be done.  Yes, we probably need to improve our diplomatic relationship with Puntland but seriously, nobody cares.

Free college?  Sure thing.  Doesn't appeal to anyone.  Anyone who has gone to college recently needs student loan forgiveness first.  Anyone not already going to college or already gone to college isn't going to come out to the polls to vote for this.

I like fusillade762's financial transaction tax.  Easy to implement, raise tons of money, but, again, it might not get people to the polls.

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know.

1. Medicare for all.  Everyone in, nobody out.  Forget the "public option" and "single payer" statements.  Nobody knows what you mean by that and you sound like a wonk.  Just say "Medicare for all".  Everyone gets ...

- Public investment in schools attracts parents, like me, whose kids go to schools where within a month you come to realize that the kids have more common sense and intelligence than those teaching them.
- "Free" public universities attract the 18-24 age demographic that traditionally skews more liberal yet stays away from the polls in droves.  And the promise of an education without a debt that'll financially cripple them for decades is a pretty good draw.  And their parents, who have all that college debt, will appreciate it as well.
- Higher taxes on the wealthy would get to the polls if it were pitched right.  Democrats need to put it out there simply by taking a page from Willie Stark and saying "We're gonna tax the shiat out of the rich, and we're going to spread it out thin among us all."


You forgot to mention that if the US doesn't get competitive on education, we become China's biatch.  Can't help but be notice that the anti-education set in the GOP has a tremendous amount of Chinese influence in their camp(I'm talking about McConnell and his totally not a Chinese Intelligence Asset wife).
 
2017-09-03 06:05:15 AM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.

Yep.  I lean far to the left.  I can't even pretend to feel represented by the Democratic establishment.  They're essentially being paid to lose... Why the fark would they want to win.


you're seriously asking why the democrats would want a stable country and a vibrant economy and the ability to pick judges who would favor their policies in the courtroom?
 
2017-09-03 06:13:53 AM  
So, censorship and massive government takeovers of healthcare and education. And, magically, the rich will be able to pay for it all.

Gee, did you guys ever wonder why Europeans have such high taxation rates?
 
2017-09-03 06:17:09 AM  

State_College_Arsonist: So, censorship


lolwut?

State_College_Arsonist: and massive government takeovers of healthcare and education


expansion, not take over. It works around the globe. why not here?

State_College_Arsonist: And, magically, the rich will be able to pay for it all.


nothing magic about it. They can afford it and they haven't been paying their fair share for a long time now.

State_College_Arsonist: Gee, did you guys ever wonder why Europeans have such high taxation rates?


you ever wonder why they have a much higher quality of life than Americans do?
 
2017-09-03 06:20:23 AM  

fusillade762: 7) A financial transaction tax. It doesn't have to be very large to have a huge impact. Raises money and discourages speculation and "flash crashes".


Discourages high-frequency trading might be a better way to put it.  Speculation is okay, it's only when it's being done by computer in the form of thousands of trades per second where it gets dicey.
 
2017-09-03 06:28:53 AM  

Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking: The problem is that "infrastructure" isn't a nice sell point.  Oh sure, it needs to be done, but it isn't a sexy campaign promise.  "Infrastructure" is not going to get people out to the polls.


Perhaps this could be marketed by leveraging the increase in nationalism we've been experiencing.  If people really want to Make America Great Again then showing them what modern cities look like in other countries might stir their competitive spirit.  Most US cities look like relics from the 50s with roads and bridges to match.
 
2017-09-03 06:32:54 AM  

log_jammin: lolwut?


Oh, I'm sorry, what's the Newspeak term for preventing the dissemination of speech by undesired parties?

log_jammin: expansion, not take over. It works around the globe. why not here?


For a given value of "work."  Other countries have plenty of issues with their systems.  There are going to be trade-offs no matter what.  Besides, we already have single-payer healthcare in the US, otherwise known as the VA.  I'm stoked, let me tell you.

log_jammin: nothing magic about it. They can afford it and they haven't been paying their fair share for a long time now.


The rich are the only ones who pay more into the system than they take out.  But they're not paying their fair share?  C'mon.

log_jammin: you ever wonder why they have a much higher quality of life than Americans do?


That's entirely subjective.  Somehow I doubt that Danish cultural mores (such as tolerating a 100% tax on automobiles) would easily transfer, for instance.
 
2017-09-03 06:33:46 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: wademh:  ... They are unlikely to listen to your political ads unless they have a catchy jingle.  They can however swing an election. Winning them over is a cynical and calculated business. It doesn't involve smart policy and authentic enlightened self-interest.  However, enlightened self-interest does require that you win them over.

And yet we had FDR getting the New Deal through by explaining it.

We went to the moon by JFK advocating it and explaining it.


Your suggestion that FDR won because of the policies he advocated is unproven. JFK was already president when he advocated the Moon mission. I'm not against a president explaining policy but, seriously, policy might help you win in the primaries (though I'm not sure about that, help maybe, ensure, no) but policy won't win over swing voters. The voters who care deeply about policy have already made up their minds. In the general you need to win over voters that flip on other things.
 
2017-09-03 06:54:18 AM  

State_College_Arsonist: Oh, I'm sorry, what's the Newspeak term for preventing the dissemination of speech by undesired parties?


seriously. where are you getting censorship from?

State_College_Arsonist: Other countries have plenty of issues with their systems


every country has issues with their systems. it just happens that we're one of the worst.

State_College_Arsonist: Besides, we already have single-payer healthcare in the US, otherwise known as the VA.


right. so we already have a partial "government take over of healthcare". why not let others have it as well? answer, the is no real reason not to.

State_College_Arsonist: The rich are the only ones who pay more into the system than they take out.  But they're not paying their fair share?  C'mon.


no.
Wealth Inequality in America
Youtube QPKKQnijnsM


they are not.

State_College_Arsonist: That's entirely subjective.  Somehow I doubt that Danish cultural mores (such as tolerating a 100% tax on automobiles) would easily transfer, for instance.


you're right. Americans would have to understand that you get what you pay for, and the sun doesn't rise and set based on your anger over paying taxes.
 
2017-09-03 06:54:54 AM  

shpritz: Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.

That's the point of of the sixth policy he suggested. And the truth is that this one is the most important. As long as bribery is legal it won't matter how well-intentioned the policies are, they will be corrupted by the rich and powerful. Weak campaign finance regulation is the root of most of your political woes.


Yeah. One through five aren't going to happen until we address six. And the problem is that Democratic politicians are just as addicted to the money as the Republicans are. I really don't see a way out of this situation short of revolution.
 
2017-09-03 06:55:22 AM  
Nice try, centrist quisling Nazi sympathizer.  You think the Dems are not gonna notice your lack of denouncing Nazis white supremacy fascism patriarchy?

Silence is violence.
 
2017-09-03 07:04:02 AM  

mactheknife: Public investment in schools attracts parents, like me, whose kids go to schools where within a month you come to realize that the kids have more common sense and intelligence than those teaching them.


I would have a reply for this, but the irony of a parent complaining that teachers have no common sense is so thick that I think the entirety of space in earth's vicinity was just turned into an insulator by the physics-breaking lack of self-awareness.

I hope you're happy, now we're in a farking Saberhagen novel and it's all your fault.
 
2017-09-03 07:09:43 AM  

teto85: How about some policies from the 1940s?
[img.fark.net image 850x478]
The six in TFA fit nicely with these.


I've been hammering number 3 for years here, and people have laughed at me for it. They laughed at the guy who ran under "the rent is too damn high!". They laughed and laughed and now we have serious homelessness and everyone who isn't working for Amazon or other tech companies is being pushed out of Seattle (they already got pushed out of San Fransisco). Yet they still can't seem to get behind this. It's not even on Reich's radar.

Also, how about we deal with injustice? BLM is right, and now white people are starting to get "woke" after seeing a white woman shot and another brutally arrested. Police reform might actually work, though most of that must be done on a state level. Ironically, going after it can be seen as working against big government and black helicopters, so it might even be a crossover hit if done correctly.

I don't know. A part of me thinks all of this is too little, too late. Maybe our political system is not fixable. Maybe it's done. I feel like most people have been manipulated badly by politicians - heck, Hillary won the nomination, which she shouldn't have been able to even WITH whatever manipulation DWS and so on did. She won because lots of people just don't get it. And we have the orange cheeto, who won somehow... Perhaps people are just that disgusting. Maybe America just isn't that great in the first place, maybe we aren't getting better. I don't know what to say anymore, I see it every day and it makes me sick.
 
2017-09-03 07:17:06 AM  

shpritz: Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.

That's the point of of the sixth policy he suggested. And the truth is that this one is the most important. As long as bribery is legal it won't matter how well-intentioned the policies are, they will be corrupted by the rich and powerful. Weak campaign finance regulation is the root of most of your political woes.


This. None of Reich's list will happen until number 6 happens. The only way I see making any progress on this is to vote out about 530 of the 535 "representatives" that we currently have. That would be all R's, and most of the D's. Unfortunately, Americans are too stupid/lazy to grasp this.
 
2017-09-03 07:17:12 AM  

log_jammin: State_College_Arsonist: Oh, I'm sorry, what's the Newspeak term for preventing the dissemination of speech by undesired parties?

seriously. where are you getting censorship from?


He's implying that the system of legalized bribery you guys call campaign finance is just free speech. The ole "money is speech and corporations are people" canard.
 
kb5
2017-09-03 07:17:53 AM  

fusillade762: Rand Paul's Anus is Leaking:

"Getting big money out of our politics."  Great.  More pablum.  What the hell does that even mean?  What policy is being proposed here?  I don't know.  Reich probably doesn't know

Easy to say, but how do we do it?


Why not just disallow campaign spending at all? We have radio, tv, and internet platforms now that can provide basic communications channels for all candidates on a ballot. They are only allowed to use the equal time set aside for them on C-SPAN, NPR, and a new Election Facebook and Election YouTube, and all messages must be delivered directly by the candidate. No other advertising, polling, or campaign spending allowed.
 
2017-09-03 07:22:31 AM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: Notabunny: The Democrats, like the Republicans, will do what their major donors want them to do.

Yep.  I lean far to the left.  I can't even pretend to feel represented by the Democratic establishment.  They're essentially being paid to lose... Why the fark would they want to win.


What the fark is wrong with you
 
2017-09-03 07:24:16 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Right now, we have servants to monied interests using polling and now, social media, to rile voters up over divisive (non) issues. The do not identify the problems Reich is speaking about, and they don't explain how policies, laws, and constitutional amendments could work together to drastically improve the quality of life for everyone.


img.fark.net

/ sorry if this triggers anyone's epilepsy
 
Displayed 50 of 161 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report