What is the point about the poor being overweight?
through most of mankind's history to be poor was to be malnourished, starving to death was a real threat even in the west, only the rich were fat, in fact to be fat was a sign of wealth and security through almost all of mankind's history
through most of mankind's history to be poor was to be malnourished, starving to death was a real threat even in the west, only the rich were fat, in fact to be fat was a sign of wealth and security through almost all of mankind's history
Which is just the opposite now. The poor live on cheap junk food and soda and it contributes to obesity levels never dreamed of in the past. The poor are fat because they can't afford good food and the food they can afford is full of sugars and chemicals that just make them pack on the pounds. It is an interesting contrast.
It's becoming more and more apparent that Bloomberg's campaign is more about tax avoidance than actually trying to run the country. Under his own proposed tax plan vs. Sanders and Warren's, Bloomberg would save roughly $3.5Billion. So we know now about how much money Bloomberg is willing to spend to prevent either of those two from becoming the nominee.
If that's what he cared about, wouldn't he just support Trump?
Wealth taxes are another one of those nice ideas, but don't generate nearly as much revenue as planned, have negative effects, would be expensive to maintain and may not even be legal.
It's incredibly hilarious to me that multiple middle aged Canadians are arguing against changes that would emulate sacred cows in Canadian society. Namely public medicine, progressive taxation, politics largely devoid of big money influence, and low cost higher education.
Last I heard Sanders wasn't advocating for a nationalization of industry for the proletariat, yet here we are making nonsensical analogies and pearl clutching against the red dawn.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
Bloomberg is doing a great job of making the point that money still isn't everything in politics.
It's funny, I have heard Bloomberg is spending a tonne of money in Virginia, but I see barely any evidence of it. He certainly hasn't found a way into my browser ads or streaming tv ads. I've seen exactly one lawn sign. I don't watch much traditional TV, but a lot of people don't either. I wonder if he's gone way too old school in his spending and is missing a big chunk of his target demos.
If that's what he cared about, wouldn't he just support Trump?
Wealth taxes are another one of those nice ideas, but don't generate nearly as much revenue as planned, have negative effects, would be expensive to maintain and may not even be legal.
There are rich who would like to stay rich but still don't agree with Trump. Also wealth taxes have been the rich's boogie man all over the world, with the GOP (especially with the whole Bush era "death tax" push), in Europe, everywhere.
It would make sense to lobby any way you can to say yourself that money. And a wealth tax is like any tax, details on how it's levied, structured and collected will determine whether they are effective and generate enough revenue. Wapo piece on this https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...5dd_story.html
It's incredibly hilarious to me that multiple middle aged Canadians are arguing against changes that would emulate sacred cows in Canadian society. Namely public medicine, progressive taxation, politics largely devoid of big money influence, and low cost higher education.
Last I heard Sanders wasn't advocating for a nationalization of industry for the proletariat, yet here we are making nonsensical analogies and pearl clutching against the red dawn.
Canada doesn't have free college or wealth taxes.
Personally, I'm not against universal healthcare. I just think it is a losing platform to run on right now.
Which is just the opposite now. The poor live on cheap junk food and soda and it contributes to obesity levels never dreamed of in the past. The poor are fat because they can't afford good food and the food they can afford is full of sugars and chemicals that just make them pack on the pounds. It is an interesting contrast.
Not really, they're attracted to the convenience more than the cost, you can easily afford a healthy diet for the cost of feeding an obese person. Have you checked a produce isle lately? It's cheap stuff and not much of it is local in the winter months.
The poor being fat is a result of a much higher standard of living in the past, where the poor can afford to be fat now and the rich have access to knowledge and leisure time that they invest in fitness.
Personally, I'm not against universal healthcare. I just think it is a losing platform to run on right now.
I'd argue now is the best time to do it. You have a historically unpopular President... and it will be very hard to get people so united against the President for a long time. Assuming that Democracy survives in the US longer term.
Plus Sanders can push the policy all he likes, changes will be made in the Senate and House before any of the policies come to pass.
If Obama with 60 senate votes couldn't even get a public option, single payer is DOA and spending the political capital to even try to get it done is not worth it. Also, Trump is primarily unpopular due to himself, all those NeverTrump Republicans actually love most of his policies, just not him. If Pence was passing them he'd be considered at the Reagan level by them.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
It's incredibly hilarious to me that multiple middle aged Canadians are arguing against changes that would emulate sacred cows in Canadian society. Namely public medicine, progressive taxation, politics largely devoid of big money influence, and low cost higher education.
Last I heard Sanders wasn't advocating for a nationalization of industry for the proletariat, yet here we are making nonsensical analogies and pearl clutching against the red dawn.
I would like nothing better than for the U.S. to adopt all those policies. But it won't. Not in 2020 with the voters of 2020 and the electoral college of 2020. A candidate who runs on a platform of trying to turn the U.S. into Canada will fail. And the world will get another four years of Trump.
A moderate Democratic president even is she were to govern substantially to the right of my own personal political preferences would be far preferable to another four years of Trump and the Republicans. And people who don't see a difference between those two options are useless ideologues of the sort described in the Guardian article I posted.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
So it's leftist revolution or bust. And the people who want revolution are concentrated in like-minded social circles, so they dramatically over-estimate how widespread their outlook is.
Your reading comprehension is lacking again, Cliff. We have populism on both sides of the spectrum as a direct result of 50+ years of neoliberalism dominating the political and economic discourse. Voters clearly rejected centrism the last go around and it's being rejected all over Europe, with right and left populist parties popping up to take its place.
Quote:
Again, anyone who doesn't see the parallel with Corbynism and the UK election is being wilfully blind.
It's weird that this keeps getting brought up, but not the fact Corbyn garnered more votes for Labour in his first election than they had received in each of the previous elections, and only 0.7% less than Blair received when he was first re-elected.
It's pretty obvious to most people that there were more issues at play in the last British election than just Corbyn's political stances, but I suppose that doesn't fit the neat little narrative that centrists have crafted for themselves.
If the centrist mindset of its better to try nothing and succeed in failing than to try for change and fail isn’t the perfect example of why the DNC and party are a tire fire nothing is.
“Oh well we lost. At least we didn’t try to do anything. Alas, mayhaps next time shall be our time.”
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
