Red Mosquito

Orpheus wrote:I think its a little cruel to phrase it as "asking for handouts" when entire industries were wiped out overnight. People want to survive, yeah. The fact that the GOP playbook has stayed the same when many people's choice is basically work and risk spreading disease or get thrown out on the street is absolutely absurd.

Mickey wrote:In other words, a response to a pandemic that doesn't involve shutdown orders (which would require significantly greater displays of personal responsibility on the part of the American populace) would still have to grapple with the fact that the kind of limited in-person interaction necessary to slow the spread will induce a reduction of job growth in the service industries, and a number of other sectors as well. Calling for greater direct payments in this context isn't evidence of a philosophical belief in government assistance INSTEAD of employment overall.

Okay, I agree with both of you here. Even if no bailout is ideal in normal circumstances, this is the emergency button when a bailout is needed. I agree. Got it. No argument here.

Now imagine the $600 (or even $2000) sum that's going to individuals currently unemployed for reasons beyond their control going to beefier payroll protection programs instead. Programs that would enable these individuals to social distance, reduce hours, or stay at home without losing their jobs. It may sound a bit like six in one hand, half a dozen in the other, except that when we all come out on the other side of this thing, people still have their jobs.

The service industry, in particular, would benefit from this. Imagine a bar, totally shuttered due to the pandemic, with employees not furloughed. These employees could work in shifts at the bar weekly, keeping it clean, tending to all the little things that fall through the cracks during a busy business week, brainstorming marketing ideas for when things reopen, growing as a staff by keeping the thing going. Imagine how much of a leg up that business would have upon reopening and herd immunity or whatever may come. All while their employees kept food on their own table because they earned money.

Something along these lines would be a true conservative stimulus response I would think.

tragabigzanda wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Orpheus wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Orpheus wrote:I don't think that anyone has adequately answered this in the last four years, but: how are conservative voters more aggrieved than anyone else? No one has any money, everyone is suffering. Income inequality affects us all, lack of infrastructure affects us all. How is this one group supposedly suffering more than anyone else? A lot of immigrants essentially experience taxation without representation, but they're not storming the capitol.

Why are we supposed to feel especially sorry for these people when everyone is struggling?

Are you talking to me?

Everyone.

All I'm saying is that conservative people don't control any of the major institutions of power except the church.And no one on the left or establishment GOP represents their interests.

Everyone else can argue over who's more oppressed if they want.

Oh my gosh Burt

You're gonna have to back up and read all the materials to get this.

Do the work!

They don't hate immigrants enough to count as conservative

I was going to mention the whole "having lots of money" thing, seems kind of relevant in our lil capitalist sitch we have happening.

tragabigzanda wrote:Burt I’m not sure how your defining “institutions,” but I guess you’re not counting any of the Fortune 500 companies or Dow Industrial giants?

Do you think those companies represent the interests of the typical conservative voter (particularly the populist variety)?

Or do they do this

(This doesn't mean I think they are leftist.)

all Trump needs to do is tweet out that he 'missed the mark' and everything would be OK

but he can't tweet any more

BurtReynolds wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:Burt I’m not sure how your defining “institutions,” but I guess you’re not counting any of the Fortune 500 companies or Dow Industrial giants?

Do you think those companies represent the interests of the typical conservative voter (particularly the populist variety)?

Or do they do this

if I had to pick one industry that represents 'conservatives' in the USA it would be oil companies

yes they stand for rule of law

the law of capitalism

and toppling 3rd world regimes for not having democracies

or having ones that we don't like and replacing them with something that let's us drill there

burt does this quote capture what you're trying to say?

Both parties have shifted well to the right, the Republicans almost off the spectrum. Respected conservative commentator Norman Ornstein described them, plausible, as a ‘radical insurgency’ that has largely abandoned parliamentary politics. Democrats now are mostly what used to be called ‘moderate Republicans.’ There’s ample evidence that most of the population, at the lower end of the income spectrum, is effectively disenfranchised – their representatives pay no attention to their opinions. Moving up the income ladder, influence increases slowly, but it’s only at the very top that it has real impact. Plutocracy masquerading as formal democracy.

Look at that Koch guy. He was supporting republicans, but only to prop up his own interests, not conservative voters.

When they demanded what their agenda come first and rejected his guys, he ran away.

do you agree with the above quote?

96583UP wrote:burt does this quote capture what you're trying to say?

Both parties have shifted well to the right, the Republicans almost off the spectrum. Respected conservative commentator Norman Ornstein described them, plausible, as a ‘radical insurgency’ that has largely abandoned parliamentary politics. Democrats now are mostly what used to be called ‘moderate Republicans.’ There’s ample evidence that most of the population, at the lower end of the income spectrum, is effectively disenfranchised – their representatives pay no attention to their opinions. Moving up the income ladder, influence increases slowly, but it’s only at the very top that it has real impact. Plutocracy masquerading as formal democracy.

Yeah basically. I don't care which party these groups are donating to, they aren't doing any of it for any of our interests or agendas or goals. If you want to call that "right wing," go ahead I guess, but they aren't representing the populist right.

the quote is from Noam Chomsky

Spoiler: show

Nooooooooo

You walked right into that burt and we all tried to warn you

i just assumed he was taking so long to respond because he was googling the quote

i'm sorry burt

on the plus side, try anarcho-syndicalism you might like it

What corporations are pushing for less immigration, or tweeting "all lives matter"? It's completely non-existent.

"But Burt, you raging MAGAtard, that's just because it's more profitable."

Yeah and?