Political Discussion

ayayrawn said:


View attachment 88822
Click to expand...


I certainly won't defend the immigration stuff (the US is bass-ackwards on immigration and it's terrible) as rule enforcement is certainly something in his purview. I feel like the min wage and Raytheon deals* before other priorities probably have nuance to where Biden can do some things unilaterally and can't do some things unilaterally. Saying that the $15 min wage probably won't happen is less about Joe Biden (unless one thinks an EO on this would stand up) and more about Joe Manchin or other cold-footed Senators (given it'd probably be part of the COVID bill), likewise most of the intiiatives in the Raytheon tweet are also likely tied up in a COVID bill. There's valid reason to not wanting to do all of this via EO strategically and legally. The eviction moratorium has been extended already as a stopgap.

With that said, the sooner we can get COVID relief, any possible min wage increase, etc. out the better - it's just not a snap of the fingers.

*As an aside, I'd be...careful about quoting the Jackson Hinkle stuff in general. I've seen precious little sourcing for his allegations (often linking himself) and some of his most recent items are things like interviewing Tara Reade (?), criticizing Biden over his tweeting response to Texas (?!), a criticism on the "Squad's" lack of feedback on Assange (?!?) and others read a lot like the efforts on the far-left (and I'm ideologically not far from that) to do the "both sides suck" narrative that is often not based in truth or what Russian propagandists will do when posing as a far-left critical of Democrats. I don't think he's a Russian propagandist, just far-left, but I also don't trust his reporting. I know this was just an image/compilation but there's a ton of disinfo on Twitter from the far-left (if not nearly as much or as prominent as the far-right). The main, sourced, news stories I've found re : Biden and Raytheon was Raytheon saying they think he'll nix some large deals they had and a halting of a deal to the Saudis as a response to his change in government policy on Yemen.
 
Biden very much is showing any intent to go big.

If this is a preview of his presidency. He is all about mediocre bills to get more support. But still will not have any senate support from the right and they will continue to ask for cuts.
 
While not mentioned in the tweet above and I don't know the state laws are like in Texas, but in many states if the above essential workers were sent home early from their shift there is no legal requirement for Dominos to pay them for their full shift, but rather just the hours worked.

In MA, if they ask you voluntarily to go home they don't have to pay you. So if they ask if you want to go home early and you accept, you don't get paid. But if no, and they tell you you have to go home, they have to pay you.

When working retail management 10 years ago, we as managers were often tasks with asking people to go home early if we were slow, or if a shipment didn't come in to save money on payroll.
 
wokeupnew said:
Is the United States still a First World country? Because it's starting to feel like it isn't anymore
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, when I looked this up, these definitions are largely antiquated since the first world is defined as countries that aligned with the US during the Cold War. Countries that embraced democracy and capitalism were considered first world. Countries that embraced communism were considered second world, and developing countries were considered third world.

If we look at economic wealth, our capacity for industry is closer to an emerging nation since we shipped all the factory jobs overseas where human rights can be violated far away from here (if we don't see it, it must not exist). Inequality is worse now than it's been since they started calculating this metric in the 1980's. I read a compelling article that argued that our current situation looks a lot more like a South American banana republic, where the government is put into place by the wealthy at the expense of the people. It seems completely accurate.

ayayrawn said:


View attachment 88822
Click to expand...

Biden told us that he would return to "business as usual". At least he's sticking to his word.
 
nolalady said:
Interestingly enough, when I looked this up, these definitions are largely antiquated since the first world is defined as countries that aligned with the US during the Cold War. Countries that embraced democracy and capitalism were considered first world. Countries that embraced communism were considered second world, and developing countries were considered third world.

If we look at economic wealth, our capacity for industry is closer to an emerging nation since we shipped all the factory jobs overseas where human rights can be violated far away from here (if we don't see it, it must not exist). Inequality is worse now than it's been since they started calculating this metric in the 1980's. I read a compelling article that argued that our current situation looks a lot more like a South American banana republic, where the government is put into place by the wealthy at the expense of the people. It seems completely accurate.


Biden told us that he would return to "business as usual". At least he's sticking to his word.
Click to expand...

Interesting. In middle school 20+ years ago we were taught that the United States was a second world country.

The first world countries were the European powers that who control territories and much of the world.

Second world countries, like the United States were territories of the first world counties at one point in time or still (like Canada) who now have living conditions and economics equal too first world countries.

Third world countries are the developing countries.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Interesting. In middle school 20+ years ago we were taught that the United States was a second world country.

The first world countries were the European powers that who control territories and much of the world.

Second world countries, like the United States were territories of the first world counties at one point in time or still (like Canada) who now have living conditions and economics equal too first world countries.

Third world countries are the developing countries.
Click to expand...
It's become synonymous with developed countries, but the actual origin is a political one, not an economic principle. Hey, I learned something new too!

The concept of First World originated during the Cold War and comprised countries that were aligned with NATO and the United States, and opposed the Soviet Union and/or communism during the Cold War. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the definition has instead largely shifted to any country with little political risk and a well functioning democracy, rule of law, capitalist economy, economic stability, and high standard of living. Various ways in which modern First World countries are often determined include GDP, GNP, literacy rates, life expectancy, and the Human Development Index.[1] In common usage, "first world" typically refers to "the highly developed industrialized nations often considered the westernized countries of the world".[2]
en.wikipedia.org

First World - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
RenegadeMonster said:
apple.news

She was arrested for leaving her kids while she worked. Sympathy followed. — The Washington Post

Shaina Bell’s story highlights structural problems that fail parents, advocates say.
apple.news apple.news

Another story on inequality and how fast we move to incarceration.
Click to expand...
Just another way that we keep incarcerating the poor for being poor. Oh and fun facts about foster care, 50% of all kids in foster care get abused in some way in foster care. If the child has a disability, this number goes up to 80%. There are multiple papers on the effects of trauma from foster care and what it does to kids life long. I have a lot of nasty things to say about the family court system, because I believe that it is a vehicle for harm much more than help.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Interesting. In middle school 20+ years ago we were taught that the United States was a second world country.

The first world countries were the European powers that who control territories and much of the world.

Second world countries, like the United States were territories of the first world counties at one point in time or still (like Canada) who now have living conditions and economics equal too first world countries.

Third world countries are the developing countries.
Click to expand...

Canada isn’t a UK territory! It’s a completely independent state like the USA. The Queen is thier head of state, the same as the UK and Oz and probably a few other places, but the uk has absolutely no power over or territorial claim on canada!
 
Last edited:
Georgia Republicans are not happy at all with the results of last years election and this years senate runoff.

A record number of people voted in Georgia, and the state turned blue in both the Presidential and Senate Run off elections.

Republican lawmakers in Georgia have introduce a bill with sweeping election reform.

Here are some of the things they are changing, which critics say disproportionally suppresses the black vote.
  • Repeal of no excuse absentee ballots
  • Tighter early voting windows and restrictions
    • The time period of when cities can sent out early voting ballots has been pushed up closer to the election date
    • Elimination of Sunday voting
  • Increase in poll monitors
  • Tighter Voter ID Requirements
  • No more automatic voter registration, such as when renewing your license.
These changes come in the name of combating "widespread voter fraud". At least that's how the republicans are billing it. But their motives are clear. They want to suppress votes and ensure they stay in power.

The republican party is also busy in some other states.

In Pennsylvania, Republicans are looking to repeal a no-excuse absentee voting law passed in 2019 through the state's GOP-led Legislature.
Click to expand...

And in Arizona, one GOP-sponsored bill would repeal the state's permanent early voting list, which allows a voter to automatically receive a ballot by mail for every election.
Click to expand...
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Georgia Republicans are not happy at all with the results of last years election and this years senate runoff.

A record number of people voted in Georgia, and the state turned blue in both the Presidential and Senate Run off elections.

Republican lawmakers in Georgia have introduce a bill with sweeping election reform.

Here are some of the things they are changing, which critics say disproportionally suppresses the black vote.
  • Repeal of no excuse absentee ballots
  • Tighter early voting windows and restrictions
    • The time period of when cities can sent out early voting ballots has been pushed up closer to the election date
    • Elimination of Sunday voting
  • Increase in poll monitors
  • Tighter Voter ID Requirements
  • No more automatic voter registration
These changes come in the name of combating "widespread voter fraud". At least that's how the republicans are billing it. But their motives are clear. They want to suppress votes and ensure they stay in power.

The republican party is also busy in some other states.
Click to expand...
Yeah, "widespread non proven made up voter fraud" It's very disappointing.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Georgia Republicans are not happy at all with the results of last years election and this years senate runoff.

A record number of people voted in Georgia, and the state turned blue in both the Presidential and Senate Run off elections.

Republican lawmakers in Georgia have introduce a bill with sweeping election reform.

Here are some of the things they are changing, which critics say disproportionally suppresses the black vote.
  • Repeal of no excuse absentee ballots
  • Tighter early voting windows and restrictions
    • The time period of when cities can sent out early voting ballots has been pushed up closer to the election date
    • Elimination of Sunday voting
  • Increase in poll monitors
  • Tighter Voter ID Requirements
  • No more automatic voter registration, such as when renewing your license.
These changes come in the name of combating "widespread voter fraud". At least that's how the republicans are billing it. But their motives are clear. They want to suppress votes and ensure they stay in power.

The republican party is also busy in some other states.
Click to expand...
These things always disappoint me, because these measures are obviously aimed at making it harder to vote leading to fewer voters. But common ground in a democracy whether you are conservative or liberal should be that we want the highest possible voter turnout. That is the legitimazition of the democratic system and call me naive but if you believe in a democracy you should fight for the possibility of every citizen to vote no matter whom or what they are voting for.
 
I know people don't particularly care for her in the Republican and Progressive spectrum (my opinion is not very strong), but if you're wondering why the Dems have a majority but are going to have a hard time making anything but incremental change, well

www.cnn.com

Manchin says he'll vote against Biden OMB nominee Neera Tanden

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin announced Friday he will vote against Neera Tanden, President Joe Biden's nominee for the director of the Office of Management and Budget, making her confirmation unlikely given Republican resistance to her nomination.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

A Senator has, of course, the right to break from party on their votes and I don't even think the rationale in a vacuum is terrible. But Joe Manchin also voted for cabinet posts for such luminaries like Scott Pruitt, Jeff Sessions, Mike Pompeo, William Barr, and a lifetime Supreme Court post for Brett Kavanaugh - none of whom were sufficiently "toxic" or "partisan" for his tastes (all of whom were also men but that's probably a step too far as of right now).

Edit: A tiny part of me wonders if another Democrat or Independent: maybe a Sanders (who was pointedly critical of her) type asked him to do a solid or told him s/he was going to vote against Tanden as well. Joe Manchin is uniquely positioned to vote this way and actually gain credibility: I hope so because of this is a vote of conscience it's an effing terrible time to find it.
 
Last edited:
waruv said:
I know people don't particularly care for her in the Republican and Progressive spectrum (my opinion is not very strong), but if you're wondering why the Dems have a majority but are going to have a hard time making anything but incremental change, well

www.cnn.com

Manchin says he'll vote against Biden OMB nominee Neera Tanden

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin announced Friday he will vote against Neera Tanden, President Joe Biden's nominee for the director of the Office of Management and Budget, making her confirmation unlikely given Republican resistance to her nomination.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

A Senator has, of course, the right to break from party on their votes and I don't even think the rationale in a vacuum is terrible. But Joe Manchin also voted for cabinet posts for such luminaries like Scott Pruitt, Jeff Sessions, Mike Pompeo, William Barr, and a lifetime Supreme Court post for Brett Kavanaugh - none of whom were sufficiently "toxic" or "partisan" for his tastes (all of whom were also men but that's probably a step too far as of right now).

Edit: A tiny part of me wonders if another Democrat or Independent: maybe a Sanders (who was pointedly critical of her) type asked him to do a solid or told him s/he was going to vote against Tanden as well. Joe Manchin is uniquely positioned to vote this way and actually gain credibility: I hope so because of this is a vote of conscience it's an effing terrible time to find it.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I'm not a big fan of Neera Tanden and I don't think she should be on the cabinet either, but because she is largely against progressive policies. She's in the pocket of big banks, and she's supposed to be in charge of the Office of Management and Budget?

Sanders also expressed concern over millions of dollars of corporate donations CAP received during her tenure, citing a report that the organization received at least $33 million from corporate companies like Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Google since 2014.

“So before I vote on your nomination, it is important for me and members of this committee to know that those donations that you have secured at CAP will not influence your decision making at the OMB," Sanders said.

Tanden pledged that those relationships would have "zero impact" on her decision-making as budget chief.

The pair have had strained relations since Sanders ran against Tanden's former boss, Hillary Clinton, during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary election. In 2019, Sanders wrote a scathing letter to CAP and the CAP Action Fund accusing the organization of “bad faith smears” and criticizing Tanden for calling “for unity while simultaneously maligning my staff and supporters and belittling progressive ideas."
sports.yahoo.com

Bernie Sanders presses budget pick Neera Tanden on Twitter attacks against him and others

Tensions between Sen. Bernie Sanders and Neera Tanden were on full display as Tanden faced a second day of questions over her barbed Twitter comments.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
 
Republicans have dubbed the next stimulus bill as "Payoff to Progressives Act".

An email was sent around to senate republicans calling the bill as such and urging all to vote no.
 
Colonel_Angus said:
Bruh, we live in Florida.
Click to expand...
Florida gonna Florida, ain't no fixin' it, just like there's no fixing any of the southern bible belt states. Like, Georgia went blue....this once....based on one woman's frankly Herculean effort. I will bet you 1 shiny nickel that it goes deep, deep red at the midterms.

ayayron said:
Absolutely miss me with this shit. 4 million+ people did not vote for Cruz,
Click to expand...

Tyr said:
Hmmm. This comment seems....less than compassionate.

I am becoming more and more a fan of Beto as I continue to learn about him.
Click to expand...

You are correct, it is unkind and I regret that -- not like, a whole lot, you understand -- the majority of voters that voted cast for Cruz, and thus they get Cruz*. It is unfortunate for the sensible voters that don't want hyper conservative policies that harm the poor, the needy and just Texans in general. But the lesson of Georgia is not "hey these redneck assholes really don't dominate the state!" but instead "if you put in the effort, you can vote for a voice you want!" and there just aren't enough blue voices in Texas putting in the effort. I don't know if that falls on local politics or the DNC or what, but if GA can go blue once, so can TX. But it hasn't. There just aren't enough non-Cruz voters; or at least, there weren't when he ran last time.

It sucks that the few that need the most help will get hurt the most because of bullshit politics.

I don't really see a way of fixing it (in any of the red states, not just texas or florida) -- metro hubs lean blue, but literally everywhere else goes red. Move if you can, and just get crushed if you can't, because obviously no one running the government gives a shit about it.

* just like Florida totally gets the shitbags we deserve. We voted for Governor Voldemort (now Senator Voldemort) and now Gov DeathSantis.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top