Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

[abandonconflict]

very little substance to any of their arguments.

More projection. Even when I did start to throw in insults, I was still explicating your arguments and responding to every point you tried to make. You just kept repeating the same bullshit about how I stand for nothing because I don't support any candidates. Actually you stand for nothing. You support a candidate, but you never stand up to fascists and racists. I'm actually a very active member of Antifa who even travels to take part in activism.

This thread is a perfect example. You do nothing but insult. I argue clearly and then insult you back.

 

[Padawanbater2]

my point is there is no way of analytically knowing at the time of an election what the outcome of the choice will be.

There's no way for you to know Trump's tax plan will harm poor people?

 

[ttystikk]

There's no way for you to know Trump's tax plan will harm poor people?

He flat out fucking lied, got elected and now is doing everything he can to fuck over the lower middle class who turned out for him-

But all those Trump voters sure voted in their best interest!

Hey dog, a lil less fog might do you some good!

 

[_gresh_]

i actually did.. that was kind of a let down ill admit.

It was. Especially since he accused me of bias and hypocrisy. I haven't insulted him once, or called any names, but he still insists that I am a sycophant, a loser, unoriginal, a hypocrite, a bore and am only here to "fling poo". Then goes on to cry about this section needing better moderating because of all the insults. LOL

 

[ttystikk]

It was. Especially since he accused me of bias and hypocrisy. I haven't insulted him once, or called any names, but he still insists that I am a sycophant, a loser, unoriginal, a hypocrite, a bore and am only here to "fling poo". Then goes on to cry about this section needing better moderating because of all the insults. LOL

Hey Buck, why the sock?

 

[abandonconflict]

It was. Especially since he accused me of bias and hypocrisy. I haven't insulted him once, or called any names, but he still insists that I am a sycophant, a loser, unoriginal, a hypocrite, a bore and am only here to "fling poo". Then goes on to cry about this section needing better moderating because of all the insults. LOL

Exactly. God damn I thought I was the only one who noticed that. He doesn't even contribute anything interesting, just inane naked capitalism links and circle jerking with other bernie bros. He starts ridiculously braindead threads and spams them up with stupid fake news links and has a meltdown if anyone disagrees.

 

[_gresh_]

Hey Buck, why the sock?

I'll take that as a compliment. I knew you had it in you.

 

[Fogdog]

No it isn't dumb gringo. Racism is systematic oppression and discrimination.

Racism and suppression of women is also embedded in our economy. Yet "more jobs" will fix all that.

How would more jobs for these groups hurt their cause?

Look at the chart and tell me that malignant racism isn't a part of our economy.

Through good times and bad ones, wage disparity of black men, Hispanic men and women have remained about the same relative to white men. Yours is a riff on the old "rising tides lift all boats". Sure, wages might go up but white men will continue to rake in 20%-30% higher wages until something else changes.

Go through the Justice Democrats platform and tell me how much attention this issue gets. Practically none. One sentence about equal pay for women and a blurb about oppose bigotry which could have something to do with pay sort of maybe. It's not bad, just not complete and needs a second pass with a more diverse group writing it. Unless you don't care about inclusion.

You have trouble following threads. First, I was talking with AC about how racism and suppression of women is embedded in our economy. You asked how more jobs would hurt their cause, which isn't what I was talking with AC about, but OK, I answered in context of my discussion with AC. The point being there is very little that breaks the wage differential between white men and all other groups if the Democratic party adopts policies that only encourage jobs growth.

The last post of yours I present below as an emotional outcry from my making this point. The worst thing I said in the prior post to yours was I want the Democratic party to be great by including more diversity than represented in Sander's campaign and Justice Democrats. Which I'm sure you could agree with "unless you don't care about inclusion". Then you melt down:

Show me where I ever said racism isn't a big problem in our country.

Show me where I said that ignoring racial issues was a reason I supported the Sanders campaign.

You're barking up the wrong tree.

Mrs Clinton made racial issues worse with her support of the 1996 omnibus crime bill and she's on record as saying she'd continue with that. Is that your idea of a better alternative?

Sanders' campaign wasn't prefect. Unlike the rest of you, I'm not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Yes, the Justice Democrats platform could be better. Why not step up and help out?

Attempting to hold me accountable for people I can't control is ludicrous. Attempting to blame progressives for Trump is worse, because hiding behind such excuses absolves them of any responsibility to do better.

WTF are you hammering at me for, anyway? I'm a lot closer to your position than most here. Alienating me and like minded voters will only see us watching Trump get reelected. That's on YOU, not anyone else.

Why aren't you screaming about the obviously antidemocratic practice of super delegates?

It's too easy to pick on those who won't conform.

When will YOU take some responsibility?

 

[Padawanbater2]

The point being there is very little that breaks the wage differential between white men and all other groups if the Democratic party adopts policies that only encourage jobs growth.

What policies should the Democratic party adopt that will decrease the wage gap?

 

[Fogdog]

Why do you insist on filling my mouth with words I didn't say?

I'm on record here as saying that we NEED our brothers and sisters of all colors, creeds and backgrounds, because only with such diversity of perspective will we be able to find the solutions that work for everyone and not just the privileged few.

Again, you aren't following a thread very well and melting down over something that isn't part of the thread. I'll recap:

65% of the people who make up the Democratic party chose Hillary are still there. And you, sitting in your 35% minority that helped throw the election for Trump and rejoice about that,

As if the Democratic Party represents the interests of the diverse group they say they represent.

That's pointing fingers when your chosen party is just as guilty, if not worse.

Don't blame us for Trump; that's all on you.

Who is this "Democratic Party" that you refer to? I see it as about 41% nonwhite. That group is getting larger in this country and more of them see their political views best expressed in the Democratic party. Not YOUR Democratic faction which is much less diverse. And you are the one who says HE knows what's best for the darkies.

(figure omitted, see post for full content)


Your faction is good. I voted with them, what else could I say? I want a great party and that would be one that is more diverse.

What you haven't answered is Who is this Democratic party you refer to? It's made up of 40% nonwhite and it's not representative of it's members? Sander's faction is not diverse and is not representative of the Democratic party that is diverse. So, which party are you referring to when you say "As if the Democratic Party represents the interests of the diverse group they say the represent".

Dude the Democratic party is the full membership of the party. What is this "Democratic Party" you speak of?

And please keep the histrionics down.

Also this is the last time today I help you remember what was said. That takes too much time and isn't fun.

 

[Padawanbater2]

There's no way for you to know Trump's tax plan will harm poor people?

What policies should the Democratic party adopt that will decrease the wage gap?

@Fogdog

 

[jonsnow399]

It's been quite the dogpile for the past week, and with very little substance to any of their arguments.

Ignore solves the problem of having to listen to their blather.

The moderation in this section really sucks, if this is tolerated and allowed to continue on multiple threads. It just ruins the section for anyone who wants an honest debate.

Moderation? We don't need no stinkin' moderation!

 

[Fogdog]

There's no way for you to know Trump's tax plan will harm poor people?

Has that tax plan actually happened? What plan will happen as a result of his election? And for that particular voter will the tax plan hurt or help them? We still don't know what the outcome will be.

You are failing to distinguish a forecast of an outcome, which I think is what you are referring to, with what actually occurs and hasn't happened yet.

My guess is probably nothing will happen to poor people in federal taxes because low income people don't pay much if any in income tax. But that too is complicated and I hope we don't go down the rabbit hole of discussing tax policy.

 

[ttystikk]

Again, you aren't following a thread very well and melting down over something that isn't part of the thread. I'll recap:







What you haven't answered is Who is this Democratic party you refer to? It's made up of 40% nonwhite and it's not representative of it's members? Sander's faction is not diverse and is not representative of the Democratic party that is diverse. So, which party are you referring to when you say "As if the Democratic Party represents the interests of the diverse group they say the represent".

Dude the Democratic party is the full membership of the party. What is this "Democratic Party" you speak of?

And please keep the histrionics down.

Also this is the last time today I help you remember what was said. That takes too much time and isn't fun.

No, you just don't like what I have to say.

 

[Fogdog]

@Fogdog

Specific policy? Would a generality be OK.

 

[Fogdog]

No, you just don't like what I have to say.

Did you even read the post?

 

[Padawanbater2]

There's no way for you to know Trump's tax plan will harm poor people?

Has that tax plan actually happened? What plan will happen as a result of his election? And for that particular voter will the tax plan hurt or help them? We still don't know what the outcome will be.

You are failing to distinguish a forecast of an outcome, which I think is what you are referring to, with what actually occurs and hasn't happened yet.

My guess is probably nothing will happen to poor people in federal taxes because low income people don't pay much if any in income tax. But that too is complicated and I hope we don't go down the rabbit hole of discussing tax policy.

-Is there any way to know that Trump's tax plan, as proposed during the campaign, will harm poor people?

This is a 'yes' or 'no' question. You either believe that based on the implementation of past presidents tax plans, that lowering taxes across the board, like Trump proposed, harms poor people or it doesn't. We have evidence and historical data to pull from.

-Based on that evidence, will lowering taxes, like Trump plans to do, harm poor people or help them?

These are very straight forward questions.

 

[Fogdog]

He needs an echo chamber to function here. Can't stand the fact that some people disagree with his ideas. Slings insults and then cries when he is responded to in kind.

Near as I can tell, he doesn't want replies, just likes to expound principles to be accepted without review. As you say, dishes it out but can't take it.

I'm guessing only child of well off parents who they eventually kicked out of the home but now support from an arms length.

 

[abandonconflict]

-Is there any way to know that Trump's tax plan, as proposed during the campaign, will harm poor people?

This is a 'yes' or 'no' question. You either believe that based on the implementation of past presidents tax plans, that lowering taxes across the board, like Trump proposed, harms poor people or it doesn't. We have evidence and historical data to pull from.

-Based on that evidence, will lowering taxes, like Trump plans to do, harm poor people or help them?

These are very straight forward questions.

Speaking of straightforward questions, why do you believe more is expected of you just because you're a white guy?

 

[_gresh_]

Near as I can tell, he doesn't want replies, just likes to expound principles to be accepted without review. As you say, dishes it out but can't take it.

I'm guessing only child of well off parents who they eventually kicked out of the home but now support from an arms length.

That sure as shit is how it seems.