The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[W. Niederhut]

4 hours ago, John Cotter said:

William,

Why are you asking a question which I’ve answered many times before?

My “notion” that the Democrats have betrayed the working class is based on the following facts.

Like every other pseudo left-wing/centre political party in every other pseudo democracy, the Democrats have never advocated economic equality. They have never even advocated placing an upper limit on the wealth of individuals or families.

I use the term pseudo democracy, because the fundamental principle of democracy is equality, and economic equality is the most important form of political equality.

Instead, they advocate the big lie of equal opportunity. It’s a big lie because, as everybody knows, the poor and the children of the poor especially don’t have the same opportunities as the rich.

John,

      I agree that the Democrat Party in the U.S. has not done enough for the poor, but the Republicans have done nothing.  Their policies have consistently focused on enriching the rich.

      Recall that our Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt raised the top income tax rate dramatically during the Great Depression, (to 90%) while establishing our Social Security retirement system.   It is true that JFK, a Democrat, lowered the top tax rate (from 90% to 70%) in the early 60s, but Reagan and the Republicans have lowered it far more dramatically during the past 40 years.  (See the graph below.)

     Also, the Democrats established Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which have greatly benefited the poor.

     Republicans opposed all three healthcare initiatives.

    

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

I'm growing tired of countering Russian misinformation and propaganda on this forum.

There was no "Russia hoax".

Paul Manafort was Trumps Presidential campaign manager.

Manafort shared Trump polling data with a Russia spy to assist the Russians in their cyber campaign to influence American voters.

Not a hoax.

Treason? IMO, definitely.

 

According to Mueller, Manafort met with Kilimnik in New York on Aug. 2, 2016 and “months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-has-new-intel-manafort-friend-kilimnik-gave-trump-n1264371

Matt: Private-sector campaign polling data (much of which has turned out to be worthless in recent years) is lot different from state secrets. 

How is giving campaign polling data to anybody a form of treason?  

Manafort was properly prosecuted for tax fraud, lying on loan and not registering a foreign agent (the last charges resulted in a wave of people in DC registering, btw). If I remember correctly, Manafort lied constantly, and charged with obstruction of justice also. 

Manafort was also arrested in a pre-dawn raid, at gunpoint. Guns was drawn and pointed at his wife also. 

Manafort was never even charged, let along convicted, or treason, spying other similar charges, despite the federal panopticon. 

A man is innocent until proven guilt in a court of law. Manafort is guilty of what he was convicted of in an open court of law---but no more than that.

The Russian bots hoax is a separate canard. Russian influence in the 2016 election was the figment of someone's imagination. 

BTW, Michael Bloomberg spent $1 billion trying to influence the 2020 election---get himself elected---and totally flopped. 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 1/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Koch said:

Conservative usually refers to if you are for putting the government in debt for a program or if you believe in God or the Founding Fathers and their constitution and bill of rights. And as we are now seeing with left policies like Defund the Police and teaching common core math and lowering standards because certain minorities can't meet them has only been disastrous to the country. The left has turned anti christian and anti family pro illegal immigration and anti white people. Cant run a country when half of it is saying the other half is Fascist and the left has fallen prey to this globalist brain washing. 

 

I'm sure there is a coherent thought process running through there somewhere. In the meantime I'll rebut some individual comments.

I watch MSNBC for political news and world and national events. As far as I can tell, those on the left are proud of our founding fathers and the constitution. Recall, it was Trump, his administration, and many Republicans who think it was okay for Trump to overthrow a constitutionally-protected election.

Defund the Police is a radical idea that is primarily supported by minorities. Most people reject it and my news source, MSNBC, rarely mentions it.

If you have a problem with your kids' math curriculum being pulled down because of minorities, talk to your school board about it. It's a states' issue, not Federal.

 

And finally, you are wrong about the left turning anti-Christian and anti-family. For god's sake Matthew, liberals and progressive have families too!

Regarding religion of the two parties:

A 2020 PRRI American Values Survey found that of Democrat voters, 42% were Protestant while 23% identified as Catholic. The same survey found that of Republican voters, 54% were Protestant while 18% were Catholic.

So, (42 + 23) = 65% of Democratic voters were Christians, and (54 + 18) = 72% of Republican voters where Christian.

That's not a big difference Matthew.

The chart below shows that there are a lot of non- Christians in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Do you have a problem with non-Christians living or voting in America?

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

      I agree that the Democrat Party in the U.S. has not done enough for the poor, but the Republicans have done nothing.  Their policies have consistently focused on enriching the rich.

      Recall that our Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt raised the top income tax rate dramatically during the Great Depression, (to 90%) while establishing our Social Security retirement system.   It is true that JFK, a Democrat, lowered the top tax rate (from 90% to 70%) in the early 60s, but Reagan and the Republicans have lowered it far more dramatically during the past 40 years.  (See the graph below.)

     Also, the Democrats established Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which have greatly benefited the poor.

     Republicans opposed all three healthcare initiatives.

    

W-

You are roughy right about lower tax rates on the rich. Although collecting corporate or personal income taxes, in the globalized era, is very very difficult. 

I favor higher property taxes, and fuel taxes and tariffs.  Much harder to dodge. Fuel taxes for green reasons. 

In addition, corporate profits have exploded in recent decades, both absolutely and as a fraction of GDP. 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CP

And military outlays (DoD, VA, black budget, pro-rated interest on national debt now run about $17,000 for typical family of four. 

The 'Phants have been establishment pigs, but the new populist wing of the party is interesting, although deeply flawed. 

The Donks...sadly have disappeared. Big Pharma, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, entertainment, the military-industrial complex, intel-state chumminess,  globalism, anti-labor (think railroad unions). Open borders for illegal cheap labor.  

Has Biden even once said, "Wages and working hours are central to the health of the middle class. That is Job One."? 

The nexus of Donks and the intel state is worrisome. The ID politics is divisive (intentionally so?). 

Is there a difference between Liz Cheney and HRC? 

 

 

 

[John Cotter]

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

      I agree that the Democrat Party in the U.S. has not done enough for the poor, but the Republicans have done nothing.  Their policies have consistently focused on enriching the rich.

      Recall that our Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt raised the top income tax rate dramatically during the Great Depression, (to 90%) while establishing our Social Security retirement system.   It is true that JFK, a Democrat, lowered the top tax rate (from 90% to 70%) in the early 60s, but Reagan and the Republicans have lowered it far more dramatically during the past 40 years.  (See the graph below.)

     Also, the Democrats established Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which have greatly benefited the poor.

     Republicans opposed all three healthcare initiatives.

    

Thank you William. The problem I've been talking about may be insoluble, given the apparent intrinsic hierarchical nature of the human condition.

I once saw a video of an interesting interview with Jordan Peterson which touched on this problem.

Peterson spoke about an attempt some decades ago by the US military to increase recruitment by lowering the minimum IQ requirement. They found that once people's IQ was less than a certain level (80% or thereabouts I think) they were incapable of doing productive work. 

As Peterson said, this raises the moral and political question of how how society should treat people who are incapable of prductive work through no fault of their own. Should they be condemned to live in poverty with all the stigma, deprivation, misery and damage to health and wellbeing thus entailed?

Or should Karl Marx's dictum (echoing Aquinas and other church fathers), "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs", be put into effect?

Edited January 31, 2023 by John Cotter

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Russian influence in the 2016 election was the figment of someone's imagination.

 

Not according to the Mueller Investigation. The following is from the Wikipedia article on the Mueller Report:
 

Russian interference

Further information: Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

The Mueller report found that the Russian government "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" and "violated U.S. criminal law".

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

21 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

Or should Karl Marx's dictum (echoing Aquinas and other church fathers), "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs", be put into effect?

John, I'll give you my idea.

Yes ideally, but even that has it's limitations. By the  same token, society can't hope to make some people have a life that would be normal to the majority of us. Or a life experience, for example, they probably won't be rich!

 

26 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

Should they be condemned to live in poverty with all the stigma, deprivation, misery and damage to health and wellbeing thus entailed?

No ones argues for living in poverty , stigma, deprivation, misery, ill health and well being. Here i assume you're talking about at least people who would not be smart or functional enough to be in the military, but of course that would extend to all the maimed , disabled, deformed, sick..

41 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

As Peterson said, this raises the moral and political question of how how society should treat people who are incapable of prductive work through no fault of their own.

Yes, and what did Peterson say?

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Not according to the Mueller Investigation. The following is from the Wikipedia article on the Mueller Report:
 

Russian interference

Further information: Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

The Mueller report found that the Russian government "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" and "violated U.S. criminal law".

 

Yes, but was that based upon the work of Hamilton 68 and others? Pseudo-science? 

Like I said, Michael Bloomberg spent $1 billion in 2020 trying to become US president. A smart guy, well-known, considered a successful businessman, probably hired the best experts.

Bloomberg might as well have made a billion-dollar bonfire out of $1 bills. 

And Russians did what? 

Was the Mueller report part of an effort to delegitimize the Trump Presidency? 

I think the question is worth following. Just IMHO.....

[Benjamin Cole]

Ooof.

WASHINGTON – A Hunter Biden email sent to an American aluminum company and promising information on Russian oligarchs is raising fresh concerns about the first son’s access to classified documents recently discovered in his father’s Wilmington, Del., home as lawmakers prepare to investigate allegations of influence peddling.

Documents dating back to 2011 on his notorious “laptop from hell” showed Hunter offered to sell intelligence on Russian oligarchs to the US aluminum firm Alcoa Inc. for $55,000, according to The Post’s exclusive October 2021 report.

As his father served as former President Barack Obama’s second-in-command, Hunter Biden offered to provide a “statistical analysis of political and corporate risks, elite networks associated with Oleg Deripaska, the Russian CEO of Basic Element company and United company RUSAL,” which had just signed a metal supply agreement with Alcoa.

Hunter Biden also offered the company a “list of elites of similar rank in Russia, map of [Deripaska’s] networks based on frequency of interaction with selected elites and countries.”

The deeply detailed proposal has come under sharp scrutiny given recent revelations that Hunter Biden had access to the Delaware lake-front home where secret papers from his father’s time as vice president were discovered in a garage, basement and library — combined with Republicans taking control of the House of Representatives.

---30---

You have money? You can buy DC. 

[John Cotter]

3 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

John, I'll give you my idea.

Yes ideally, but even that has it's limitations. By the  same token, society can't hope to make some people have a life that would be normal to the majority of us. Or a life experience, for example, they probably won't be rich!

 

No ones argues for living in poverty , stigma, deprivation, misery, ill health and well being. Here i assume you're talking about at least people who would not be smart or functional enough to be in the military, but of course that would extend to all the maimed , disabled, deformed, sick..

Yes, and what did Peterson say?

Kirk, 

Peterson didn't offer a solution. He said something to the effect that the downward redistribution of wealth is difficult.

I suppose one could interpret that as Peterson saying such a redistribution would be desirable - though, if I'm not mistaken, that would seem to contradict other things Peterson has said.

[Matthew Koch]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

I'm sure there is a coherent thought process running through there somewhere. In the meantime I'll rebut some individual comments.

I watch MSNBC for political news and world and national events. As far as I can tell, those on the left are proud of our founding fathers and the constitution. Recall, it was Trump, his administration, and many Republicans who think it was okay for Trump to overthrow a constitutionally-protected election.

Defund the Police is a radical idea that is primarily supported by minorities. Most people reject it and my news source, MSNBC, rarely mentions it.

If you have a problem with your kids' math curriculum being pulled down because of minorities, talk to your school board about it. It's a states' issue, not Federal.

 

And finally, you are wrong about the left turning anti-Christian and anti-family. For god's sake Matthew, liberals and progressive have families too!

Regarding religion of the two parties:

A 2020 PRRI American Values Survey found that of Democrat voters, 42% were Protestant while 23% identified as Catholic. The same survey found that of Republican voters, 54% were Protestant while 18% were Catholic.

So, (42 + 23) = 65% of Democratic voters were Christians, and (54 + 18) = 72% of Republican voters where Christian.

That's not a big difference Matthew.

The chart below shows that there are a lot of non- Christians in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Do you have a problem with non-Christians living or voting in America?

those on the left are proud of our founding fathers and the constitution. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/05/03/elie_mystal_founding_fathers_were_racist_misogynist_jerk_faces_who_didnt_believe_women_had_any_rights.html

Defund the Police 

kids' math curriculum being pulled down 

 

65% of Democratic voters were Christians, and (54 + 18) = 72% of Republican voters where Christian.

 

[W. Niederhut]

11 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

      I agree that the Democrat Party in the U.S. has not done enough for the poor, but the Republicans have done nothing.  Their policies have consistently focused on enriching the rich.

      Recall that our Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt raised the top income tax rate dramatically during the Great Depression, (to 90%) while establishing our Social Security retirement system.   It is true that JFK, a Democrat, lowered the top tax rate (from 90% to 70%) in the early 60s, but Reagan and the Republicans have lowered it far more dramatically during the past 40 years.  (See the graph below.)

     Also, the Democrats established Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which have greatly benefited the poor.

     Republicans opposed all three healthcare initiatives.

    

And, right on cue this morning, here's Robert Reich talking about FDR's 90% top tax rate and the Reaganomic tax cuts that created our national debt...

The biggest story you've never heard about today's federal debt (substack.com)

January 31, 2023

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

And, right on cue this morning, here's Robert Reich talking about FDR's 90% top tax rate and the Reaganomic tax cuts that created our national debt...

The biggest story you've never heard about today's federal debt (substack.com)

January 31, 2023

 

Hi William, I seem to have read somewhere that the last time the US was out of debt was during Andrew Jackson’s time, when he abolished a previous Federal Reserve type system. Is this incorrect? 

[Matthew Koch]

4 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Ooof.

WASHINGTON – A Hunter Biden email sent to an American aluminum company and promising information on Russian oligarchs is raising fresh concerns about the first son’s access to classified documents recently discovered in his father’s Wilmington, Del., home as lawmakers prepare to investigate allegations of influence peddling.

Documents dating back to 2011 on his notorious “laptop from hell” showed Hunter offered to sell intelligence on Russian oligarchs to the US aluminum firm Alcoa Inc. for $55,000, according to The Post’s exclusive October 2021 report.

As his father served as former President Barack Obama’s second-in-command, Hunter Biden offered to provide a “statistical analysis of political and corporate risks, elite networks associated with Oleg Deripaska, the Russian CEO of Basic Element company and United company RUSAL,” which had just signed a metal supply agreement with Alcoa.

Hunter Biden also offered the company a “list of elites of similar rank in Russia, map of [Deripaska’s] networks based on frequency of interaction with selected elites and countries.”

The deeply detailed proposal has come under sharp scrutiny given recent revelations that Hunter Biden had access to the Delaware lake-front home where secret papers from his father’s time as vice president were discovered in a garage, basement and library — combined with Republicans taking control of the House of Representatives.

---30---

You have money? You can buy DC. 

3min in goes into the same topic you shared.. Oof is right! 

 

[Joe Bauer]

On 1/30/2023 at 10:04 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

 

BTW, Michael Bloomberg spent $1 billion trying to influence the 2020 election---get himself elected---and totally flopped. 

I have posted a different agenda proposition regards Bloomberg and his 1 billion dollar 2020 presidential primary campaign effort.

I believe Bloomberg spent his all-time record presidential primary amount ( and for only a 1 and 1/2 to 2 month campaign! ) not to win the primary nomination at all.

Bloomberg knew he didn't have a chance in **** for that outcome.

In my common sense contemplation analysis Bloomberg's agenda was to make sure the surging vote count candidacy of Elizabeth Warren and the decent one of Bernie Sanders was curtailed and cut off up to and after Super Tuesday.

And that Joe Biden win the nomination.

Throughout the beginning months of the primary, Warren was doing well. She at one point was the highest vote getter! 

Biden was well behind her and was also well bested by both Warren and even Sanders in the debates up to that according to polls. Biden even lost support after each debate.

Warren and Sanders came across as more alert and vigorous in those debates imo. Biden looked tired, made some stumbling gaffes and really didn't have as clear of message regards his political agenda goals compared to Warren's and Sander's.

Bloomberg's biggest concern about the 2020 election was not Donald Trump.

It was a possible Democratic party candidacy of Bolshevists Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

He clearly stated this in a recorded talk he gave to a gathering of Goldman Sachs execs/investors before he announced his own very late entry into the primary campaign.

I don't have the quotes in front of me, however they were clear in the message that he ( Bloomberg) feared major social reform advocating Warren and Sanders as a more dangerous threat to America than Trump. Especially Wall Street America and the often referred to 1%.

It was right after Biden was seriously fading in the polls that Bloomberg launched his mind blowing massive financial campaign.

Within days even we were getting Blomberg campaign literature in our mail boxes.

He was also instantly running national TV and I believe even radio ads as well.

It was a blitzkrieg effort.

Bloomberg wasn't even counted in the first primary campaign months. After he entered, the highest he ever got in national polls was slightly more than 10%?

His entering the primary so late and with quite limited established national recognition support so seemed illogical in my political knowledge thinking.

I kept wondering why Bloomberg was doing this when it was obvious he didn't have a chance at the nomination. 

I believe he stated he entered to race because he didn't think "any" of the Democratic candidates would be able to beat Trump?

I thought that was a BS explanation. It didn't make sense. In making this claim he was including Biden?

Bloomberg's candidacy did draw down Warren and Sanders poll numbers. Biden's numbers began to increase.

By Super Tuesday Biden was surging ahead of Warren and Sanders.

In the weeks before Super Tuesday Biden's camp had made an all-out effort in bringing in black vote support for his campaign and away from Warren and Sanders who's political ideologies were clearly more beneficial to black American interests.

I believe deals were made with the highest Black political leaders and groups to sway their support toward Biden. It's only a speculative guess on my part but I believe Biden promised to name a black woman as his VP choice to seal the ultimate full out support deal.

Super Tuesday sealed the nomination for Biden with entire black voting blocks giving him states that should have gone to the more progressive Warren and Sanders.

Bloomberg's true "Save America" mission was accomplished.

His mind blowing, record setting BILLION DOLLAR, illogically brief 1 to two month long primary campaign run came to an immediate stop.

His most feared threat enemies Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders ( not Donald Trump ) were toast.

In this sense Michael Bloomberg actually WON.

Biden has always been much more corporate friendly than the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Delaware has been a tax haven for them for decades.

Curious though, was any of Bloomberg's 1 billion dollar campaign run monies expenditures tax deductible?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Joe Bauer