Your view of the political leanings of the PSF (1 Viewer)

[Philo Beddoe]

If you think it’s ok for men to compete against woman in high school and college sports, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe non-college educated working people should pay off the student loan debt of those who had the privilege of attending college, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe economic migration is a valid asylum claim, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe men can get pregnant and refer to woman as birthing people, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think six year olds should be able to choose their gender, have access to “transition closets” and pornographic books like “gender queer” in our public school system, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think it is a good idea to separate our kids in school by race and teach them that white people are oppressors and children of color are oppressed, you may be a left wing radical.

If you are ok harming working people to promote green energy, you may be a left wing radical. 

If you support defunding then police and thought the BLM riots were mostly peaceful, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe the right are fascist yet want to repeal the 2nd amendment, you may be a left wing radical.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I voted 10-50-20-20

After I voted, I am not sure about the breakdown.  Maybe it's just who I interact with and see posts from, but overall I went in with the opinion that there are more liberals than conservatives, and that there are more on the far right than there are on the far left floating around. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

If you think it’s ok for men to compete against woman in high school and college sports, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe non-college educated working people should pay off the student loan debt of those who had the privilege of attending college, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe economic migration is a valid asylum claim, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe men can get pregnant and refer to woman as birthing people, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think six year olds should be able to choose their gender, have access to “transition closets” and pornographic books like “gender queer” in our public school system, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think it is a good idea to separate our kids in school by race and teach them that white people are oppressors and children of color are oppressed, you may be a left wing radical.

If you are ok harming working people to promote green energy, you may be a left wing radical. 

If you support defunding then police and thought the BLM riots were mostly peaceful, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe the right are fascist yet want to repeal the 2nd amendment, you may be a left wing radical.

Not a bad list, and it verified my post above.  I can't think of more than a couple posters in here who would agree to any of those on the list. 7 is a bit general for my liking and 2 and 3 were the ones that I thought a couple might agree with.  

 

[GoBirds]

I'm a little surprised at people who thing the board is 40% (or more) conservative. My theory is that A) everyone is using their own definitions and B) there are a lot of left leaning people who consider themselves centrists.

You know how it is, when a place is predominantly an echo chamber/far end of one side of the spectrum they want to think it’s not that and it’s balanced and normal etc. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think very few posters here are radical on either end of the spectrum.

but, I think there’s a huge range between moderate conservative and radical conservative. Same for the liberal side.

I think a lot of posters on both sides are a ways away from being moderate, but don’t quite meet the criteria for radical.

I guess maybe I'm defining radical differently.  I am thinking of it as extreme right/left, and am thinking posters that either have extreme views or post as though the other side is bad/evil/stupid.   To me that description fits more than just a very few posters, and that is what I was thinking when I said 10% left 20% right.  

Also interesting that the very posters I thought of in those terms are posting that there are 0% radicals on the board, so there is a disconnect somewhere for sure.  

 

[(HULK)]

If you think it’s ok for men to compete against woman in high school and college sports, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe non-college educated working people should pay off the student loan debt of those who had the privilege of attending college, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe economic migration is a valid asylum claim, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe men can get pregnant and refer to woman as birthing people, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think six year olds should be able to choose their gender, have access to “transition closets” and pornographic books like “gender queer” in our public school system, you may be a left wing radical.

If you think it is a good idea to separate our kids in school by race and teach them that white people are oppressors and children of color are oppressed, you may be a left wing radical.

If you are ok harming working people to promote green energy, you may be a left wing radical. 

If you support defunding then police and thought the BLM riots were mostly peaceful, you may be a left wing radical.

If you believe the right are fascist yet want to repeal the 2nd amendment, you may be a left wing radical.

If you use the Jeff Foxworthy redneck joke format to make political arguments, you might be a ________?

 

[Philo Beddoe]

If you use the Jeff Foxworthy redneck joke format to make political arguments, you might be a ________?

Genius?

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Not a bad list, and it verified my post above.  I can't think of more than a couple posters in here who would agree to any of those on the list. 7 is a bit general for my liking and 2 and 3 were the ones that I thought a couple might agree with.  

How do we combat climate change without hurting working people? It will literally raise the price of all basic necessities and consumable commodities. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

How do we combat climate change without hurting working people? It will literally raise the price of all basic necessities and consumable commodities. 

Gotcha, so you are saying that if you want to combat it you are a left wing radical by these definitions.  Noted.  

 

[(HULK)]

Genius?

Probably not the direction I'd go.

Also, it seems that you've really lowered the bar for "radical" IMO.

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Gotcha, so you are saying that if you want to combat it you are a left wing radical by these definitions.  Noted.  

Yeah not what I said. If you are OK with the ramifications of it. There’s ways to combat it without massive impacts on working people. Let’s start with fast tracking some nuclear and desalinization plants. Just raising costs on everything without doing anything while China and India pollute the globe is a radical position. 

 

[The Dude]

How do we combat climate change without hurting working people? It will literally raise the price of all basic necessities and consumable commodities. 

So what's your proposal?  Do nothing so working people can eat at the cost of our environment?

Changes like this always brings ingenuity and ingenuity brings more effective prices.

 

[Rich Conway]

Yeah not what I said. If you are OK with the ramifications of it. There’s ways to combat it without massive impacts on working people. Let’s start with fast tracking some nuclear and desalinization plants. Just raising costs on everything without doing anything while China and India pollute the globe is a radical position. 

Fast tracking nuclear and desalination requires government spending.  That requires either taxation or deficit spending.  Will either of those hurt working class people?

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Probably not the direction I'd go.

Also, it seems that you've really lowered the bar for "radical" IMO.

So you disagree with my list? Which positions aren’t radical by any indicative national polling?

“To combat climate change, 57 percent of Americans are willing to pay a $1 monthly fee; 23 percent are willing to pay a monthly fee of $40.  Party identification and acceptance of climate change are the main determining factors of whether or not people are willing to pay, with Democrats being consistently more inclined to pay a fee.”

AP

Maybe look in the mirror. 

 

[Philo Beddoe]

So what's your proposal?  Do nothing so working people can eat at the cost of our environment?

Changes like this always brings ingenuity and ingenuity brings more effective prices.

What’s your proposal? Cause more economic hardship and death to the working class so you can virtue signal?

“There were over 48,000 suicides in the USA in 2018, demonstrating an upward trend since 2000 [1]. The literature has established a link between economic conditions and deteriorating mental health [2–5]. Suicides are generally associated with recessions and higher unemployment rates [6–12] as well as fiscal austerity [13, 14]. The effect often appears to be stronger for males than females [15, 16].”

NIH

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Fast tracking nuclear and desalination requires government spending.  That requires either taxation or deficit spending.  Will either of those hurt working class people?

we just gave 60 billion to Ukraine and spent close to 7 trillion on the federal budget in 2021. They can find 100 billion somewhere without impacting everyday goods that working people consume but you know this already. 

 

[roadkill1292]

@timschochetis an establishment guy.  To suggest that is radical is ...

Lol, Tim is a two-party establishment supporter and opposed to multi-party democracy. If it wasn't for his stance on immigration, he'd be a conservative.

 

[massraider]

Probably not the direction I'd go.

Also, it seems that you've really lowered the bar for "radical" IMO.

You don't need to know the meaning of words like radical, Marxist, Socialist, in order to use them. You can just say them, over and over and over. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Lol, Tim is a two-party establishment supporter and opposed to multi-party democracy. If it wasn't for his stance on immigration, he'd be a conservative.

??

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Lol, Tim is a two-party establishment supporter and opposed to multi-party democracy. If it wasn't for his stance on immigration, he'd be a conservative.

Tim is in favor of working class taxpayers footing the bill for the college educated, teaching CRT to 8 year olds and imposing huge fees on the working class to combat climate change. If the weight balance of one issue makes him conservative then some of the folks here are left of Stalin. 

 

[timschochet]

Tim is in favor of working class taxpayers footing the bill for the college educated, teaching CRT to 8 year olds and imposing huge fees on the working class to combat climate change. If the weight balance of one issue makes him conservative then some of the folks here are left of Stalin. 

For clarification: 

1. I’m not in favor of increasing taxes in order to pay for student loans. I’m in favor of expanding the deficit to pay off student loans, mostly because I believe it will create such prosperity that it will pay for itself. 

2. I’m in favor of teaching critical race theory as a part of high school curriculum. What third graders are taught should be up to the educators. But this entire issue is silly IMO because 95% of students don’t retain anything they learned in history anyhow. 

3. I want to combat climate change. I don’t want any huge fees on the working class, or ANY fees on any class, to do it. I want a huge government investment into new technology to replace fossil fuels, including nuclear, No new taxes or restrictions.

If these issues make me radical leftist, so be it. 

 

[jm192]

I guess maybe I'm defining radical differently.  I am thinking of it as extreme right/left, and am thinking posters that either have extreme views or post as though the other side is bad/evil/stupid.   To me that description fits more than just a very few posters, and that is what I was thinking when I said 10% left 20% right.  

Also interesting that the very posters I thought of in those terms are posting that there are 0% radicals on the board, so there is a disconnect somewhere for sure.  

Definitions definitely matter.  

I think a lot of people on each side think the other side are stupid.  So I struggle with that part.  If we use the people that think "you're side is stupid" it's a lot more.  

I would agree with the bad/evil part.  When I think of "radical" liberals, I think of the people that are looting/rioting/destroying things when policy doesn't go their way.  Not the peaceful protestors--but the one's actually doing the damage.  I think of the people you see on Twitter bragging about punching a guy in a Trump hat "because he must be a nazi and screw Nazi's." 

When I think of radical conservativism--I think of the Alt-right, White Supremacisits and Fascism.  The crazy, off the rails, hardcore "always gonna love Trump no matter what" supporters come to mind.  

I guess to include politicians:  I think someone that wants to change the form of government comes to mind as radical.  I think Bernie and AOC would love for America to be a socialist country.  I would consider them radical liberals in some ways.

I think Donald Trump would like to be President for several more terms and give himself more and more power.  I would say he's pretty radical right.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Definitions definitely matter.  

I think a lot of people on each side think the other side are stupid.  So I struggle with that part.  If we use the people that think "you're side is stupid" it's a lot more.  

I would agree with the bad/evil part.  When I think of "radical" liberals, I think of the people that are looting/rioting/destroying things when policy doesn't go their way.  Not the peaceful protestors--but the one's actually doing the damage.  I think of the people you see on Twitter bragging about punching a guy in a Trump hat "because he must be a nazi and screw Nazi's." 

When I think of radical conservativism--I think of the Alt-right, White Supremacisits and Fascism.  The crazy, off the rails, hardcore "always gonna love Trump no matter what" supporters come to mind.  

I guess to include politicians:  I think someone that wants to change the form of government comes to mind as radical.  I think Bernie and AOC would love for America to be a socialist country.  I would consider them radical liberals in some ways.

I think Donald Trump would like to be President for several more terms and give himself more and more power.  I would say he's pretty radical right.

I see, so using your definitions I would change to 0% radical left, 10% radical right around here.  

 

[jm192]

For clarification: 

1. I’m not in favor of increasing taxes in order to pay for student loans. I’m in favor of expanding the deficit to pay off student loans, mostly because I believe it will create such prosperity that it will pay for itself. 

2. I’m in favor of teaching critical race theory as a part of high school curriculum. What third graders are taught should be up to the educators. But this entire issue is silly IMO because 95% of students don’t retain anything they learned in history anyhow. 

3. I want to combat climate change. I don’t want any huge fees on the working class, or ANY fees on any class, to do it. I want a huge government investment into new technology to replace fossil fuels, including nuclear, No new taxes or restrictions.

If these issues make me radical leftist, so be it. 

You're a great example of the flaw within the poll.  I don't find you to be radical left.  But you're also not "moderate left" in my opinion.  And I don't mean that in a mean way or as an insult.  

 

[The Dude]

What’s your proposal? Cause more economic hardship and death to the working class so you can virtue signal?

“There were over 48,000 suicides in the USA in 2018, demonstrating an upward trend since 2000 [1]. The literature has established a link between economic conditions and deteriorating mental health [2–5]. Suicides are generally associated with recessions and higher unemployment rates [6–12] as well as fiscal austerity [13, 14]. The effect often appears to be stronger for males than females [15, 16].”

NIH

So you are linking climate change initiatives to suicide counts?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

How do we combat climate change without hurting working people? It will literally raise the price of all basic necessities and consumable commodities. 

How do we do nothing and not hurt working people?

 

[(HULK)]

For clarification: 

1. I’m not in favor of increasing taxes in order to pay for student loans. I’m in favor of expanding the deficit to pay off student loans, mostly because I believe it will create such prosperity that it will pay for itself. 

2. I’m in favor of teaching critical race theory as a part of high school curriculum. What third graders are taught should be up to the educators. But this entire issue is silly IMO because 95% of students don’t retain anything they learned in history anyhow. 

3. I want to combat climate change. I don’t want any huge fees on the working class, or ANY fees on any class, to do it. I want a huge government investment into new technology to replace fossil fuels, including nuclear, No new taxes or restrictions.

If these issues make me radical leftist, so be it. 

Why would you want to teach CRT in high school? It's a graduate level concept for law students.

 

[(HULK)]

So you are linking climate change initiatives to suicide counts?

I haven't seen pictures of all of these suicide letters saying that they couldn't take anymore climate change initiatives.

 

[timschochet]

Why would you want to teach CRT in high school? It's a graduate level concept for law students.

CRT has become a catch all phrase on the right for teaching what I regard as an accurate narrative of the black historical experience in this country. That’s what I want taught. 

 

[(HULK)]

CRT has become a catch all phrase on the right for teaching what I regard as an accurate narrative of the black historical experience in this country. That’s what I want taught. 

Then don't call it CRT. The water is muddy enough already.

I want an accurate narrative of the black historical experience taught at all grade levels, not just high school. Just need to approach it from an age appropriate direction at the lower levels.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

CRT has become a catch all phrase on the right for teaching what I regard as an accurate narrative of the black historical experience in this country. That’s what I want taught. 

What does this mean, in practical terms?  Here's what I see as a fairly mainstream take on how one might approach "the black historical experience" in the US:

• Slavery was a state-sanctioned institution in much of the US from the colonial era through the civil war.  
  
• Slavery was a cruel institution.  We don't need to expose young children to lynching, castration, and so on, but we shouldn't shy away from slavery being evil.  Little kids can understand that breaking up families, for example, would have really sucked.  
  
• Slavery was baked into the constitution as a compromise between the north and south.  That was a serious failure on the part of the US to live up to it's self-stated ideals.
  
• A massive amount US politics up until 1860 involved slavery one way or another.
  
• A massive amount of racism continued to be alive and well after the civil war.  See reconstruction, the KKK, Jim Crow, etc.  I know this part of US history isn't taught so much because the post-CW era doesn't seem to have a clear narrative the same way that the pre-CW era does.  That's okay.  
  

There's probably more that I could write up, but this is basically US history as I learned it.  And this narrative seems to avoid white-washing history just fine.  I'm wondering what the material you view as CRT would change here.

(Edit: That's just history.  I think English classes should include books by black authors about their experience in America.  I'm a big fan of Invisible Man in particular, but there are other good options too.  I don't know if anybody reads Uncle Tom's Cabin anymore, but that would be a perfectly fine book for high schoolers both because of its content and its standing in the genre of political advocacy.  The role of black Americans in building what we think of as "American culture" should show up in schools too -- I feel like I would have benefitted from a better understanding of what a "multicultural" society really is when I was younger, instead of having to figure it as an adult.)  

 

[The Commish]

CRT has become a catch all phrase on the right for teaching what I regard as an accurate narrative of the black historical experience in this country. That’s what I want taught. 

I'm not sure this is true.  History seems to be the least of their concerns.  They are definitely more concerned with teachings around the systemic parts (which I understand includes history) and how they currently still exist today (or at minimum we are still feeling the effects of today).  

IK gives a good list of what I assume he believes is appropriate for K-5 and I agree.  Problem then becomes the legislation written to "ban" some of the stuff based on "comfort levels" of the children.  So while IK's list seems perfectly reasonable to me, NONE of it is rubber stamped by states with these laws as "ok".  If any aspect of it makes a kid feel uncomfortable, it's a potential lawsuit.  All those laws are written under the guise of "banning CRT" and that is where the conflation comes.

 

[Herb]

How do we combat climate change without hurting working people? It will literally raise the price of all basic necessities and consumable commodities. 

You (not sure how old you are, I'll assume 40-55) and your parents care way more about the economic ramifications of this than your children and grandchildren do. They are literally looking at a future where the planet's ability to sustain life will be greatly curtailed by the inaction of the last 30 years. They DGAF about your portfolio, investments or 401k. The obscene avarice practiced by boomers and to a lesser extent X-ers has made their futures look worse and worse. They think we suck.

I agree with them. 

 

[GordonGekko]

CRT has become a catch all phrase on the right for teaching what I regard as an accurate narrative of the black historical experience in this country. That’s what I want taught. 

Netflix cancels Ibram X. Kendi’s animated movie ‘Antiracist Baby’ May 20, 2022

In September 2020, he faced calls for his dismissal after suggesting that Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett was a “white colonizer” who uses her two adopted Haitian children as “props.”

https://nypost.com/2022/05/20/netflix-cancels-ibram-x-kendis-animated-movie-antiracist-baby/

******

CRT is formalizing and justifying what amounts to the most radical elements of Black America behaving as cultural terrorists and using leveraged extortion.

The mistake that radical leftists like you always make is the gross assumption that the "cancel culture" will only move in one direction and that's some absolute. It's not. The "cancel culture" can easily flip a 180 and you'll have to endure what the majority have endured for so long.

Tim, if I could package one concept to explain to you what's wrong, here it is - "Freedom as a principle is completely and totally wasted on someone like you"

#DaddyChill

 

[Mister CIA]

Genius?

 

[Philo Beddoe]

So you are linking climate change initiatives to suicide counts?

No I’m linking it to financial hardship but you know this.

 

[Juxtatarot]

The mistake that radical leftists like you always make is the gross assumption that the "cancel culture" will only move in one direction and that's some absolute. It's not. The "cancel culture" can easily flip a 180 and you'll have to endure what the majority have endured for so long.

According to the article, it was cancelled “as the streaming service has been forced to cut costs and lay off workers due to dwindling subscriber numbers.”

 

[Philo Beddoe]

You (not sure how old you are, I'll assume 40-55) and your parents care way more about the economic ramifications of this than your children and grandchildren do. They are literally looking at a future where the planet's ability to sustain life will be greatly curtailed by the inaction of the last 30 years. They DGAF about your portfolio, investments or 401k. The obscene avarice practiced by boomers and to a lesser extent X-ers has made their futures look worse and worse. They think we suck.

I agree with them. 

“Just 32% of those answering the poll, which has a margin of error of +/-2.5 percentage points, said they support Biden's climate change policy even if it means higher energy prices.”

“But a far larger majority of 57% answered in the negative. They either said they disagreed with his policies and want more and cheaper energy (41%), or don't think climate change should be a U.S. policy priority (10%), or don't even believe that the climate is changing (6%).”

This is a significant repudiation of the Biden administration's "Green Agenda," which is now being blamed by many for the recent surge in energy prices and inflation, not to mention a growing sense of insecurity in global food and oil markets.

“The split would be even wider if not for one group: Democrats. Just 30% say they disagree with Biden's climate change policies, while 58% say they agree.

But even among Democrats, 24% say they want more energy and cheaper prices, while 5% don't think climate change should be a policy focus and 2% aren't really sure the climate is changing. And 11% of Democrats said they aren't sure (numbers may not add perfectly to 100% due to rounding.)

That leaves substantial majorities of both Republicans (86%) and independents (66%) who reject Biden's green policies and higher energy prices, who agree climate shouldn't be a policy priority, or who don't believe climate change is real.”

https://tippinsights.com/i-i-tipp-poll-americans-want-their-old-fossil-fuel-economy-back/

Here’s the deal Herb. What you are saying about the future ramifications of climate change this century, we heard the same thing in the 70s, 80 and 90s. When I was in 2nd grade in 1980, they brought in Rosenschantz to sing Acid Rain and that our skin was going to burn off and all the hairspray girls were using was burning a permanent hole in the ozone layer.

Do I believe that pumping trillions of gallons of oil out of the earth and burning is bad for the globe? Of course I do but if you shut that down you literally start killing people at a scale that climate change will never reach. Moving too quickly from fossils to renewables will just shift the impact to another industry. We will still be stripping the earth of its core minerals and create waste. Big Electric will be the new Big Oil all at the the expense of the working class.

Which brings me back to my original point. If you support harming working people to address the climate, that makes you a radical leftist. The Republicans are currently building a multi-ethnic coalition of working class support at record place and the Dems have nobody to blame but themselves.

 

[The Dude]

No I’m linking it to financial hardship but you know this.

Let's be honest - you are linking climate change initiatives to financial hardship and financial hardship to suicides - which is a bit of a reach.

When a gunman kills people the gop links it to mental health.  When somebody kills themselves you link it to financial hardship.

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Let's be honest - you are linking climate change initiatives to financial hardship and financial hardship to suicides - which is a bit of a reach.

When a gunman kills people the gop links it to mental health.  When somebody kills themselves you link it to financial hardship.

If you can show me how we rapidly migrate to green energy without raising the costs of everything I’m all ears. 
 

Financial Stress Is a Leading Catalyst for Suicide—These Steps Can Help Save Lives

 

[The Dude]

If you can show me how we rapidly migrate to green energy without raising the costs of everything I’m all ears. 
 

Financial Stress Is a Leading Catalyst for Suicide—These Steps Can Help Save Lives

I won't even bother - that wasn't my statement - nor was it yours

 

[Philo Beddoe]

I won't even bother - that wasn't my statement - nor was it yours

Of course you won’t because you can’t. 

The Democrats’ green war on the working class The obsession with climate change is hammering the poor and driving voters to the right.

“Last week, a joint survey by the New York Times and Siena College found that the Democrats are in deep trouble with some crucial voting blocs that had once been their mainstays. For the first time, Democrats now have a larger share of support among white college graduates than among non-white voters.

As some of us have been pointing out ad nauseum, we don’t have a political, partisan divide in the US. We have a class divide that separates college-educated elites from the working class. And the left has become almost completely aligned with those college-educated elites.”

“The Democrats are no longer speaking to the multiracial working class, but to people with other concerns – such as climate change, gun control and abortion. The Dems’ new base is the work-from-home pyjama class, the people with the luxury of caring about climate change and ‘January 6’, while their neighbours wonder if they should put food on the table or gas in the car because there isn’t enough money for both.”

 

[Philo Beddoe]

Of course you won’t because you can’t. 

The Democrats’ green war on the working class The obsession with climate change is hammering the poor and driving voters to the right.

“Last week, a joint survey by the New York Times and Siena College found that the Democrats are in deep trouble with some crucial voting blocs that had once been their mainstays. For the first time, Democrats now have a larger share of support among white college graduates than among non-white voters.

As some of us have been pointing out ad nauseum, we don’t have a political, partisan divide in the US. We have a class divide that separates college-educated elites from the working class. And the left has become almost completely aligned with those college-educated elites.”

“The Democrats are no longer speaking to the multiracial working class, but to people with other concerns – such as climate change, gun control and abortion. The Dems’ new base is the work-from-home pyjama class, the people with the luxury of caring about climate change and ‘January 6’, while their neighbours wonder if they should put food on the table or gas in the car because there isn’t enough money for both.”

Absolutely nails it -

“The bigger issue here is that the interests of the laptop class aren’t just different from the interests of the working class – they are often in fundamental tension. Demands to defund the police, open the borders and lock down for Covid make affluent progressives feel good about themselves, while they act as a literal tax on the working classes, who have to pay for this moral vanity. The Democrats’ new base tends to misread its economic privilege as a sign not of good fortune but of higher moral purpose. And they then demand others foot the bill for it – those with far fewer means than they have.”

 

[KarmaPolice]

Absolutely nails it -

“The bigger issue here is that the interests of the laptop class aren’t just different from the interests of the working class – they are often in fundamental tension. Demands to defund the police, open the borders and lock down for Covid make affluent progressives feel good about themselves, while they act as a literal tax on the working classes, who have to pay for this moral vanity. The Democrats’ new base tends to misread its economic privilege as a sign not of good fortune but of higher moral purpose. And they then demand others foot the bill for it – those with far fewer means than they have.”

It half-way nails it.   The problem is, it's very one sided and people then seem to believe they are so much better when the other team is in charge.    To me the reality is that people in power find ways for the rest of us to pay for their pet projects, doesn't matter if it's D or R.  Working class suffers while their power and wealth increase.   

Also, in a general sense, these changes and improvements will probably require funding and therefore probably affect the working class on down more.   I think we are long past either party giving a crap about fiscal responsibility, so nothing is really cut in order to make those changes - they just pass the hot potato to the next administration and hope it's somebody else holding it when the timer goes off.  

 

[timschochet]

If you can show me how we rapidly migrate to green energy without raising the costs of everything I’m all ears. 
 

I wrote this before but the answer is to announce a space program like investment into green energy (including nuclear). We increase the national debt (already so high, what’s another few trillion?) but nothing else. No new taxes or restrictions. Once the technology has been developed that makes green energy as viable as fossil fuels, the market will take over. Nobody gets punished. 

 

[Philo Beddoe]

I wrote this before but the answer is to announce a space program like investment into green energy (including nuclear). We increase the national debt (already so high, what’s another few trillion?) but nothing else. No new taxes or restrictions. Once the technology has been developed that makes green energy as viable as fossil fuels, the market will take over. Nobody gets punished. 

And what do you do to address the high cost of energy over the next 10-15 years while these new renewable technologies are being developed? Working people are being punished now. I agree with your need for investment but it needs to be across the board. 

 

[Philo Beddoe]

It half-way nails it.   The problem is, it's very one sided and people then seem to believe they are so much better when the other team is in charge.    To me the reality is that people in power find ways for the rest of us to pay for their pet projects, doesn't matter if it's D or R.  Working class suffers while their power and wealth increase.   

Also, in a general sense, these changes and improvements will probably require funding and therefore probably affect the working class on down more.   I think we are long past either party giving a crap about fiscal responsibility, so nothing is really cut in order to make those changes - they just pass the hot potato to the next administration and hope it's somebody else holding it when the timer goes off.  

I’m not arguing the working class suffers regardless, we all know this already. The Republicans don’t hide their apathy for the working class. The Dems are supposed to be the working class party but they continue to pee down our backs and tell us it’s raining. 

 

[timschochet]

And what do you do to address the high cost of energy over the next 10-15 years while these new renewable technologies are being developed? Working people are being punished now. I agree with your need for investment but it needs to be across the board. 

To answer your question: we do exactly what Biden is doing: try to negotiate with the oil producing nations as best we can. That’s complicated and messy but it’s by far the best approach. What we do NOT do is invest any more in fossil fuels. That makes no sense. We MIGHT put some money into building new refineries if it could be shown to have a reasonably quick turnaround. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

I’m not arguing the working class suffers regardless, we all know this already. The Republicans don’t hide their apathy for the working class. The Dems are supposed to be the working class party but they continue to pee down our backs and tell us it’s raining. 

I don't even agree with that.  Feels to me both sides are claiming to be for the people while barely ever doing anything that benefits the people.   You don't think the last propped himself up as being for the working class and convinced a ton of people that he was working for them?    Same thing with each party, IMO.  The only difference is where the money goes, not whether it's going to be spent or not, or if the people in power will benefit the most. 

 

[Philo Beddoe]

I don't even agree with that.  Feels to me both sides are claiming to be for the people while barely ever doing anything that benefits the people.   You don't think the last propped himself up as being for the working class and convinced a ton of people that he was working for them?    Same thing with each party, IMO.  The only difference is where the money goes, not whether it's going to be spent or not, or if the people in power will benefit the most. 

Oh come on with that. Republican appeal to the working class is an entirely new phenomenon. My 95 year old grandfather was racist AF but still voted for Obama in 2008 because he was a lifelong union guy. The working class for the first time, perceived themselves to be better off under Trump which brings it back to my original point.