There are certainly things to try and correct for the future. The issue here is the manufactured immediate crisis that the Sanders revolution tried to sell. It just doesn't fit with reality. Most people are content.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Even if your last sentence is true, I think you're overselling it based on your own lens. There are certain pockets of society in which most are not content and economic opportunities are nill.

_________________

That has existed for all of history and will exist for all of history.

As I have said many times though, I'm not saying everything is perfect and nothing should ever change. There just doesn't need to be drastic sweeping change when most people are content with how things are going.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I disagree with that. There is a lot to be disenchanted with. Wages are stagnant and when you factor in real wages they have been on the decline for decades. Unemployment is much higher than 5% and unemployment among blacks is probably at an epidemic level. I just never got the feeling that Sanders was the guy to change that. If I am wrong I can live with myself. Hillary may not be the person either but the economy did better under Bill Clinton
than it did under both Bushes, Obama, and the great Ronald Reagan. I think that Hillary will attempt to make a return to that and if she fails she fails. Sanders platform was based on a lot of pie in the sky stuff which defied logic. Spend spend spend and we will figure it later wasn't going to work. The more that you heard the more you realize that he didn't have a clue as to how to fix things.

We didn't need another diagnoser in chief. If these are issues that he has thought about for 30 years then he should have a more concise policy from which to draw. He didn't.

_________________

Of course Nas, it's kind of my point. Global companies have structured their operations to reflect profits in overseas locations. There are three main reason U.S. companies pay 0% U.S. Federal Income tax:

1) They are losing money,
2) They lost money in the past and have loss carry-forwards to offset current income,
3) All of their profits are earned overseas and they did not repatriate those profits. This is the most common reason.

If the U.S. income tax rate was competitive, think Ireland, Canada, London, etc, then companies would have no problems recognizing income tax here. U.S. companies would be breaching their Fiduciary duty by not minimizing tax liability. They use transfer pricing and other technical methods to show profits outside the U.S. And the 39% income tax is not the worst of it. The shareholders of these companies pay taxes again on dividends, although those rates have been lowered to an extent that the net impact is that only half of corporate profits are remitted to the Federal Government.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Of course it has. The world needs ditch diggers, etc, etc. However, this is a Democracy, and it would bode well for all of us if the disenchanted don't become a majority. If they do, your and my property rights won't stop the mob.

Please know that I'm not referencing the spoiled suburban kids who woke from their 4-year college stupor and realized life's not fair. I'm speaking of people who actually work hard and have stagnant wages or no job but also have no means to further their education or increase their potential value.

_________________

Leash, what's your proposed solution?

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

I am not saying you personally but what do so many seem to ignore this? Everything is just fine and dandy.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

You are overlooking the fact that people can be personally "happy" while still being upset with the government, the state of the economy, racial inequality, or social conditions more broadly.

For example, roughly 65% of Americans think our country is headed in the wrong direction while approximately 75% of Americans rate economic conditions as fair or poor.

http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/national-conditions/economic-conditions/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html

These polls are just the tip of the iceberg. There is widespread discontent with many aspects of our society as it relates to the role and performance of government.

_________________

I think in the case of blacks there has been a reluctance on the part of black leadership to hold Obama accountable because of race. The threat of being called a sellout and an Uncle Tom looms large and thus they haven't really held his feet to the fire in the way that they would a white President. Some of the Usual suspects will come out of the woodwork shortly after the inauguration. It will occur whether there is a Democrat or Republican elected.


In terms of the overall employment rate I really cant answer. It should be a much larger issue. This has been a weak economy for a long time.

_________________

People have complained about politicians and the government my whole life. It's just what people do. It's even more pronounced with our modern media where we literally have cable networks designed to complain about the government.

When it comes down to people either wanting drastic changes or for things to roughly stay the same people will choose for things to stay roughly the same if they are relatively happy.

Of course some things may have progress like they have for decades but it will be incremental and logical rather than some wide ranging progressive revolution.

That is why I keep on asking what actually changes we are to expect and no one really seems to answer besides saying that they will try and get progressives elected at the local levels. It's because even though people complain about the government people aren't willing to take their chances on a whole bunch of new ideas when the current ones are doing good enough to not require a complete makeover but instead just require incremental improvements.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Drudge is good for two things:

1) Tempting headlines,
and
2) The best possible picture to go with those headlines.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

lady looks like the bizarro JDC

Her breasts are bigger than her head.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

If that's the most racially questionable thing he said this campaign season, I think it's safe to say he's one of the least racist people in America.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

i think her gut is bigger than both

I thought this thread was about the shits caused by KFC, too.

Turns out the LAKEFRONT MANSION was because Bernie's wife inherited a lakehouse in Maine and sold it to buy property in Vermont instead.



Looks like Wisconsin.

_________________

On the specific problems, I go back and forth, but - big picture - I certainly believe that reversing Citizens United, having a publically financed campaign system, and applying term limits would fix the majority of issues. I agree wholeheartedly with the guy (can't remember his name or location) who ran as a single issue candidate this year - fixing the campaign finance system would help to fix all other issues. In his mind, it is the single most important issue because it affects all other issues. I am inclined to agree with him.

_________________

_________________

Very fair responses Leash. Let me play devil's advocate on that stuff:

Term limits: We have term limits for the President. And yet we keep getting poor Presidents and bad choices. Also, you're admitting that citizens are too dumb to make choices, which then implies you don't believe in democracy. Voters can't be trusted.

Citizens United: So its' ok to prevent people and companies from spending money as they see fit. Thus, restricting their free speech rights.

Public campaign financing: We are already broke at many levels of government. Where would this money come from?

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Mr. Devil

If you capped senate at 12 years, couldn't you make the argument you may get better presidential candidates. Those career senators would be forced to decide to retire or move to another role in government.

Doesn't that imply we have good choices for senate. I would say most of those suck as well.

I think there need to be some controls on post public service employment as well.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Term limits: CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

I believe we primarily get poor presidential candidates because of a lack of true choices. This is tied to money, IMO. Term limits would only be effective if they were enacted in conjunction with public financing of campaigns. To your point about people, I agree people are dumb. However, we have to accept their stupidity because the alternative is centralizing power in the hands of the few (more than it already is).

Citizens United: We have already ruled as a society that there are limits to free speech, so the concept of unlimited free speech has already gone by the wayside. Frankly, I think someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is much less detrimental than allowing billionaires buy elections. Also, our electoral system already has some limits on spending. If we didn't want any limits, why don't we allow people to sell their votes to the highest bidder? Elections are unique parts of a Democracy, and the same rules that apply to our economy shouldn't apply to elections.

Public campaign financing: maybe one less billion dollar aircraft carrier per year?

_________________

Which was more reprehensible. Bill Clinton's South Carolina comment" Jesse Jackson won too" or Sanders and "distorted reality"?

_________________

Clinton's comment by a mile.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

I don't agree. Clinton's comment was factually correct while Sanders provided an opinion that may turn out to be false. I think the media played the race card on ol Bill with that. Sanders got a pass for repeatedly downplaying blowouts in primaries. He had no problem with touting Utah caucus wins however. They were evidence somehow of campaign "momentum". He got a pass for disregarding the black vote obtained by Hillary Clinton.

_________________

You're making the case that Bernie is delusional, which I won't argue. There's nothing even slightly racially charged about what Bernie said.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

What?

I'm curious as to why you say "black southern vote." Unless I'm missing it, he didn't mention voter skin color. What you are inferring is comical, and the hatred for Bernie is reaching hilarious levels.

_________________