Why would you think I support genocide? And I’m much more of a leftist than a centrist. Democrats def not ‘my party’. But of the two options that have a chance, clearly the democrats were/are a way better choice than the repubs. Not choosing the better of two options is just stupid.
So you think trump is better on Israel/gaza policy?
No. Ideally you should win a vote by presenting a good platform and showing the candidate to be a good leader - specifically by not dividing people and talking about enemies within the country. Talk about perspectives and differences in platforms and leadership track records. Being ‘the most important’ election is a good reason to tell people to really pay attention to the options and actually get out and vote. If Americans are too stupid to understand that, they deserve the orange moron they got and the long term damage it is doing to the country.
So you figure trump is better?
How would that have made her win? Her policy, and the history of the Democratic Party in contrast to the republicans is that she would be better for the people. Better is better. It doesn’t matter how much really. If people wanted better, they would already vote for her.
It seems like you are projecting this ‘open contempt’. In an ideal democracy, a politician should state their platform and people should select the best one and vote.
She was clearly a better candidate with better policy than trump - and if people saw that they should have voted for her. Saying ‘she didn’t pander to me enough’, or ‘wasn’t perfectly aligned with my ideals’ is stupid in the face of trump as the other option.
Yes, she could have said a bunch of pings - she could have lied and attempted to get votes through a populist approach, and maybe that’s what the democrats need to do, as sad as it is. But that’s only because too many Americans are stupid and won’t vote for the obviously better candidate for … reasons.
Why should she have to play games ‘motivating’ people who could see she was significantly better than trump? People didn’t bother to vote against trump - so they got trump. They have no one to blame but themselves.
So she couldn’t have won no matter what. You’re saying she wasn’t a bad candidate, I guess.
So she should have shifter further right to try to capture the votes in those specific swing states?
Sure. You realize how bad trump is, way worse than even Hillary. But it’s Americans that voted for trump over Hillary. It’s the stupidity of Americans that you should be blaming.
It’s so funny how far people go to try to absolve themselves of responsibility.
he yearns
I wish. But no, they’ll support Trump Jr for King.
No - literally rivers were on fire.
And gay bashing was mainstream, fully tolerated, very common. Lakes were turning clear like swimming pools due to acid rain - kinda pretty, but totally dead.
That larger feedback loop is bad yes, but it’s mostly independent of the resources and services that people need and provide as part of normal life. Yes rich people also use more non-luxury items, but the working class also buy some luxury items, which I suspect more than offsets that since there are so many more of the working class.
I’m not sure what commodities you are talking about that get destroyed. I know some agriculture gets wasted and I understand that to be mostly a shipping issue and because of huge mostly automated farming systems, or artificial government investment for the sake of job creation. I’d be curious to know what percent of the overall economy this destruction that you mention is. Empty homes is a big problem resulting from people gaming the system for monitory profit instead of real productivity - and that’s where we need more government regulation - which is actually happening now in a number of North American cities.
Look, I’m not saying capitalism is so great. But just that the billionaires raking in more and more isn’t inherently a problem - unless they also controll the government so that there can’t be meaningful regulations. Of course, that’s about where we are now in the U.S., and as soon as we are no longer effectively a democracy and the government no longer adjusts rules to ensure the working class gets enough benefits of the productivity, then it will all fall apart and those billionaires and politicians will end up with their heads on pikes, and rightly so.
Luxury spending is less than 1% of spending in the U.S.
To understand how it’s mostly a zero sum game, you’ve got to ignore numerical money metrics and look at real resources used by, and provided by people.
But those billionaires only can eat so much food. They may pay $300 a plate for caviar, but it’s just a bit of food. They have super fancy cars and houses, but there aren’t enough of them to ‘use up’ significant resources for those things. The money/capital they own isn’t very relevant to the zero sum system of production and consumption. Sure it’s super unfair and more so when international politics allows even more abuse. The problem with somewhere like Congo is that the government is dysfunctional and corrupt - they should be taxing the fuck out of all
Yes but that model ignores that there are a given amount of tangible value (food, shelter, products) items created and pretty much the same amount of such items are consumed. So the pool of workers (almost the entire population) is effectively working to support itself. On paper, there’s money and ownership being siphoned off more and more to a small group. But that group doesn’t use up much more proportionally of the tangible products when looked at as a percentage of the system. So the rich get richer, but that’s just a number. The reason that people don’t have enough to eat and the sir quality of life is dropping as because the system is failing to be productive enough. And that’s because the goal of making money by the billionaires is being gamed as opposed to actually promoting tangible growth. And that’s why we need further regulation - to plug the holes in the system that encourage practices that are bad for workers. Capitalism can only work if the government is still generally for the people - and that’s where we’ve run off the rails.
Says ‘you’re not even trying’ then just copies from Wikipedia.
Maybe try thinking for yourself?
Capitalism is a form of trading. It is providing a service / lending resources, for a fee. It’s part of the notion that we use money to buy and sell anything and the economy works because everyone tries to make a buck and implicitly drive efficiency for society. It certainly has got out of whack now and needs some serious regulatory fixes. But for most people, they work to get money to buy what they need and as a result, they provide services, products, etc for others to buy what they need. It goes in a circle, and we end up helping each other. Yes, the rich siphon money off the top, but they don’t really affect the use or need of resources significantly. Their billions are just a number on a computer in a bank somewhere.
It’s nothing to do with it. It’s not about opposing Israel’s actions being wrong. It’s that both parties support Isreal blindly. And the gop, specifically trump, are significantly worse. So when voting, it makes no logical sense for that issue to factor against choosing democrats vs republicans.
Yes, this is in the past, but there are (hopefully) more elections in the future. It’s very important that people get out and vote for the only viable alternative to the horrors that are the gop these days. People who didn’t vote for democrats last cycle need to wake the fuck up, recognize that they are responsible for the current disaster, feel the guilt for what they did, and change.
It seems that you agree on that, since you voted dem last time, but you still are throwing shots about how democrats shouldn’t be elected. And that’s pragmatically dangerous.