2016 US Presidential Election Thread

[Psyche]

So monkey, we should keep the government programs that allow poor people to borrow huge amounts of money they might never be able to pay back in order to go to college, but cut the programs that feed them until they're old enough to have a legal income?

I think you need less generalities and more specifics.

I'm not an economist. All I know is we need to spend less.

you see, this just isn't true
it's more important that we

make more

not just by raising taxes, but by investing in our citizens so that they have more income that can be taxed at current rates
your whole position only makes sense when you assume that providing our people things like health care, education, safety nets, and so forth don't actually improve the economic welfare of our citizenry
even if you ignore the fact that depriving people of things like health care, food and good education is just morally wrong and keeps people from flourishing, liberal economics is good economics and that is why liberal presidents tend to perform better on the economy than conservative ones

but man
where's your compassion?

[hiplop]

^ more people with spending power = strong economy

liberal policies also tend to keep economies stable (I,e, Canada was basically left untouched during the 2008 recession because of our "Socialist" banking system)

[sthar8]

I am of the opinion that socialized education and healthcare could be made to pay for themselves, or even generate an income.

Also, y'know... basic income.

[Yosarian2]

I'm not sure I entirely get why his appeal is lacking with women/minorities/poor people

Like legitimately if anyone knows this please enlighten me

I think it's more that Clinton has a lot of support from those groups.

African Americans in general really liked Bill Clinton, even more so then the rest of the country. Also, on average, African American democrats tend to be somewhat less liberal then white democrats on social and economic issues.

In terms of Hispanics, Hillary actually has a better record then Sanders on immigration issues; back in 2007, while in the Senate, Hillary voted for comprehensive immigration reform, and Sanders voted against that bill. Although at least Sanders does say he supports comprehensive immigration reform now.

[Yosarian2]

It's not so much that poor people couldn't do the same things rich people could, or are less deserving of wealth, but a lot of poor people get trapped in a cycle of dependancy, where they feel like they don't have a say in their success.

I don't think that's true.

Cash welfare is almost non-existent in the US these days. TANF is still around, but you can only get it for a limited time, and it's almost impossible to get on the program (the number of people receiving aid under the program didn't even increase when the Great Recession hit, which just shows how limited it is). And those on the program are required to look for work. For the most part, cash welfare in this country died in the 1990's.

I really don't think that the kind of govenrment assistance we provide now creates a "cycle of dependency". The problem is that there are a number of basic poverty traps, where the more poor you are the harder it is to get ahead. Things like food stamps and rent support actually make it a (little) easier to climb out of poverty, because they make it possible to work hard and save a little bit of money, and maybe go back to school or something.

Anyway, most people who get public assistance right now actually are working. The idea that somehow people are "just leeching of the government" or "trapped in a cycle of dependency" or whatever simply isn't true; statistically, it never was true, really, and it certanly isn't possible today.

[Sudo_Nym]

So monkey, we should keep the government programs that allow poor people to borrow huge amounts of money they might never be able to pay back in order to go to college, but cut the programs that feed them until they're old enough to have a legal income?

I think you need less generalities and more specifics.

I'm not an economist. All I know is we need to spend less.

If you're not an economist, how do you know that we need to spend less?

[inte]

See: What I said about Welfare Queens

these programs require you to at least be actively looking for employment... else you get kicked off.

[T S O]

They all vote Democrat,

I don't vote.

Please don't class yourself with people like these; you're better than that.

[T S O]

In fairness, this forum houses some of the most bizarre life-views I've ever seen, from people like TSQ/Bro, but I have to admit I admired how SK repeatedly insulted me and still seemed to believe he held the high moral ground. Do you get away with that because you're black, or are white people like me allowed to do it too?

[Cephrir]

Did you honestly think that post was a good idea

[Mina]

Do you get away with that because you're black, or are white people like me allowed to do it too?

I'll resist the urge to be snarky and tell you SleepyKrew is not black. I'm not touching the rest of this with a ten-foot pole, because there's no point.

[T S O]

You can be snarky if you want - I wouldn't post extremely controversial things on Internet forums if I felt worried people might actually attack me for saying them.

[Mina]

I mean, it would have been something lame like "NOT EVERYONE WITH MORE MELANIN THAN YOU IS BLACK" or [insert mockery of how wrong you are]. But there's no point in trying to persuade you when you won't change your mind and everyone already disagrees with you, unless it's to come across as intellectual and compassionate.

[chamber]

In fairness, this forum houses some of the most bizarre life-views I've ever seen, from people like TSQ/Bro, but I have to admit I admired how SK repeatedly insulted me and still seemed to believe he held the high moral ground. Do you get away with that because you're black, or are white people like me allowed to do it too?

I find when both people yell at each other like this its because they are arguing at too high a level. They think the other is an idiot because their policy direction is nonsense towards achieving goals the other things of as self evident. What do you think government should be doing at an ideological level TSO?

[inte]

Kmd - speaking as someone who seems to share similar views to you - you're completely wasting your time trying to make a point here. The people who post in this thread are ultra-liberal to a point. They all vote Democrat, and in fact they don't even like centrist democrats, as evidenced by the heavy Sanders support. They all believe that all minorities are being discriminated against systematically, especially black people, women and transgenders, and if you don't agree it's because of your white privilege. There should definitely have been an indictment in Ferguson, welfare state is great, defund the military, down with cops. And so forth.

I agree with what you're saying, but I'll probably be the only one.

b r u h

i voted gary johnson in 2012. leaning voting kasich in 2016, but he has voted against law protecting trans employment opportunities. my real only grief with him. prolly just going to go johnson again in 2016.

Please don't pretend the issue is terminology quadz

there is a disconnect. extremist-libs have a separate definition and are demanding what comes down to reparations for past injustices.

It's not so much that poor people couldn't do the same things rich people could, or are less deserving of wealth, but a lot of poor people get trapped in a cycle of dependancy, where they feel like they don't have a say in their success.

But many wealthy people in the United States are self made, so to speak, and deserve credit for the wealth they have built for themselves.

I feel for your situation, sthar8, but I disagree that most poor people don't have a chance to get out of being poor. Most employers will readily promote someone that works hard and shows dedication to their job and talent rather than someone that feels like they are there based on entitlement. Perhaps your own attitude is the reason for your lack of success, not the upper class pushing you down.

here is the fundamental disagreement with how cons and libs think. libs argue that the vast majority of wealthy did NOT come by riches without leaning on an already determined system.

we're talking about 6-7 figure yearly incomes, not working class 35k - 65k earners. bootstrapping is very much true for most of the middle class, yet not typical for the former mentioned.

[Psyche]

lol
we're not asking for reparations

[inte]

a wise person that i look up to once told me that most disagreements aren't due to morals or ideologies, but from the background facts that they are based off of.

e.g: the % of people on welfare abuse vs. don't abuse the system

people should stop making arguments on 'how it should be'

lol
we're not asking for reparations

then you're not liberal enough or have blinders on

[hiplop]

the issue is that people arent on an even playing field. people like the waltons start with 35 billion. You can't possibly defend that as @poor people can get their if they just try harder! they might get promoted!'.

When the lower class get promoted, they go from the 20k a year range to the 30k a year range tops. WIth only like EXTREMELY few exceptions does a poor person ever make it to the aforementioned level.

I don't understand how you can defend that when everything says differently? Yes, a lot of rich people have worked hard, but so have a lot of poor people. I know COUNTLESS moms who work like 4 different jobs in order to desperately feed their kids and not get evicted from their home. Thats not a fair system. Someone working full time shouldn't have to struggle to make ends meet..

and I think my biggest problem with conservative idealogy is the idea that you can 'just get a better job'(or one at all). There aren't many of these miracle jobs. You can be the smartest person on the planet and still not find a job. Its assuming that luck/success in your life is possible to be replicated. Hard work doesnt always reap rewards despite what conservatives try desperately to say

[MonkeyMan576]

The problem with the liberal ideology is that it assumes the upper class is out to get the lower class and that class warfare is inevitable. Stop worrying about what other people have and try to fix your own problems.

This isn't incompassionate, it's wanting more people to better themselves and not to be dependant on government.

[chamber]

The problem with the liberal ideology is that it assumes the upper class is out to get the lower class and that class warfare is inevitable.

A lot of them basically are. Not out of malice but out of self interest.

[MonkeyMan576]

There's nothing wrong with acting in self interest. This is basic capitalism vs. socialism thought. There needs to be some income reinbursement but it needs to be controlled.

[hiplop]

The problem with the liberal ideology is that it assumes the upper class is out to get the lower class and that class warfare is inevitable. Stop worrying about what other people have and try to fix your own problems.

This isn't incompassionate, it's wanting more people to better themselves and not to be dependant on government.

but you don't argue against any points just bring up generic one liners that are basically irrelevant?

[MonkeyMan576]

I have argued against points, look at my posting history.

Just because you disagree with my points doesn't make them irrelevent.

[hiplop]

The problem with the liberal ideology is that it assumes the upper class is out to get the lower class and that class warfare is inevitable. Stop worrying about what other people have and try to fix your own problems.

This isn't incompassionate, it's wanting more people to better themselves and not to be dependant on government.

this isn't even valid, though? When there are no jobs who else is there to rely on? Poor people aren't "worse selves" thats absolute bullshit. Sometimes there aren't jobs. Thats what conservatives miss. Good, capable, intelligent people sometimes can't find a job. No matter how "Good" they are.

[MonkeyMan576]

That's what unemployment is for. You should be able to find a job eventually. There's no excuse for not working, ever, if you are able bodied.