Biden for President?

[Cain]

Aw, c'mon. "Mom and daughter." Mom and her daughter. I'm not suggesting that the woman had more than one daughter working in a senator's office. I apologize for my lack of precision.

I see.

A bunch of Libertarians raised their hands to say they'd help their grandmas, so that's how you fund grandmas. Because that's how people behave. There's no peer pressure, virtue signaling, bandwagoning. Man, Libertarians have it all figured out.

 

[Suddenly]

And, today Biden said the next round of stimulus needs to be a "hell of a lot bigger than 2 trillion dollars".

Never mind what I said earlier. I'll still vote for him, assuming he gets the nomination and is running against Trump, but would it be too much to ask to have a politician who is under 70, and who won't promise everyone anything they want.

As least Vermin Supreme only promised a pony.

If there ever is a time for the Federal government to just make it rain it is right now. Where exactly it should go is a reasonable debate, but when the economy is grinding to a halt, massive infrastructure investment is needed to help business adapt to new realities. and people are willing to pay the government to hold their money, well, it isn't the time for worry about the deficit.

 

[Meadmaker]

If there ever is a time for the Federal government to just make it rain it is right now. Where exactly it should go is a reasonable debate, but when the economy is grinding to a halt, massive infrastructure investment is needed to help business adapt to new realities. and people are willing to pay the government to hold their money, well, it isn't the time for worry about the deficit.

It really isn't. There's no monetary reason the economy is grinding to a halt. The reason the economy is grinding to a halt is because we are all holed up inside our homes, not working, for fear of a disease. No amount of stimulus spending will change that.

The people who are locked in their homes not working need assistance so they can still buy food, assuming there is food.



This is an old hammer and nail problem. If your only tool is a hammer, every job looks like a nail. In this case, the only tool normally used to fight a recession is stimulus, either Keynesian style or supply-side style, but this particular recession isn't an ordinary recession. It isn't a nail.


Over in a different thread I said that the federal government ought to hire people to deliver groceries. That would actually address the problem. I don't see any move to do that. Pity. Or, maybe it isn't deliver groceries. Maybe its clean meat packing plants. Or....is there something else that could be done to lower the infection rate and keep them open? I really don't know, but I'm guessing that process engineers in the meat packing industry could come up with something.

In other words, use the money to address the actual problem, instead of pretending that this problem is just like all the other recessions that have occurred in the last 100 years.

ETA: I may have been too hasty above. We may be saying something similar. I didn't grasp exactly what you meant by "help business to adapt to new realities". You may be saying the same thing I'm saying, or just a variation on it. I just took it as infrastructure spending as an economic stimulus, Keynes-style.

 

[shemp]

If there ever is a time for the Federal government to just make it rain it is right now. Where exactly it should go is a reasonable debate, but when the economy is grinding to a halt, massive infrastructure investment is needed to help business adapt to new realities. and people are willing to pay the government to hold their money, well, it isn't the time for worry about the deficit.

I agree, but I think I will be able to make pink unicorns fly from my butt before that ever happens. Instead, the government will just keep shoveling money to big business, and they'll keep handing out huge executive bonuses.

 

[theprestige]

The Republicans have successfully convinced people that socialism means USSR.

So what does socialism mean to you?

Because to me, "capitalism with some percentage of profit skimmed off the top to pay for a social safety net" just sounds like capitalism to me.

To me, the basis for public policy is a dipole. One pole is, "the government should control everything, with some exceptions." The other pole is, "the government should control nothing, with some exceptions."

The way I see it, socialism/communism is the implementation of the first dipole - the government should control everything - as a combined political-economic system.

Capitalism is essentially the ownership of private property, and the owner's entitlement to the profits from the use of that property. It arises from the second dipole - the government should control nothing.

I'm a big fan of the second dipole. As a starting point for deciding public policy, I think it's more natural, more humane, and more productive. I think we're better off when we start by assuming the government should control nothing, and make exceptions according to need on a case by case basis.

If Bernie is a big fan of the first dipole, and wants to start by assuming the government should control everything, then he's... Well, "socialist" seems to be too confusing a term these days. How about a totalitarian statist?

I guess that would make me an anarcho-libertarian, at least in principle. In practice, of course, neither Bernie nor I are such extremists. Mostly we're just arguing about what exceptions to make to which principle, and why.

 

[theprestige]

Over in a different thread I said that the federal government ought to hire people to deliver groceries. That would actually address the problem. I don't see any move to do that. Pity. Or, maybe it isn't deliver groceries. Maybe its clean meat packing plants. Or....is there something else that could be done to lower the infection rate and keep them open? I really don't know, but I'm guessing that process engineers in the meat packing industry could come up with something.

I'm pretty sure process engineers everywhere are looking for ways to adjust their process so that they can start doing business again.

We're seeing a lot of that in microcosm around here: Restaurants with inadequate processes closing for a few weeks, until their owners can come up with a process that allows them to re-open.

And I think process adjustment, not quarantine, is the only viable long-term solution.

 

[Meadmaker]

And I think process adjustment, not quarantine, is the only viable long-term solution.

Indeed.

And, for purposes of this thread, what I wish is that the two most probably candidates for president would address that. Instead, there's the Trump approach, which is to demand an end to the quarantine, until informed by his advisers that that won't work, and there's the Biden approach, which seems to be give a hell of a lot more than 2 trillion dollars to people who are affected by the quarantine.

 

[applecorped]

Yay, we're going to spend our way out of a virus!?

 

[Lurch]

So what does socialism mean to you?

Because to me, "capitalism with some percentage of profit skimmed off the top to pay for a social safety net" just sounds like capitalism to me.

To me, the basis for public policy is a dipole. One pole is, "the government should control everything, with some exceptions." The other pole is, "the government should control nothing, with some exceptions."

The way I see it, socialism/communism is the implementation of the first dipole - the government should control everything - as a combined political-economic system.

Capitalism is essentially the ownership of private property, and the owner's entitlement to the profits from the use of that property. It arises from the second dipole - the government should control nothing.

I'm a big fan of the second dipole. As a starting point for deciding public policy, I think it's more natural, more humane, and more productive. I think we're better off when we start by assuming the government should control nothing, and make exceptions according to need on a case by case basis.

If Bernie is a big fan of the first dipole, and wants to start by assuming the government should control everything, then he's... Well, "socialist" seems to be too confusing a term these days. How about a totalitarian statist?

I guess that would make me an anarcho-libertarian, at least in principle. In practice, of course, neither Bernie nor I are such extremists. Mostly we're just arguing about what exceptions to make to which principle, and why.

What is "Government?"

The capitalist/libertarian sees it as though a system imposed by some third party, divorced from human affairs. A nefarious entity of suspect, liberty-crushing motives.

Well, being comprised of fallible humans, government is subject to the same human vices. And can be moved by the same virtues. These people are our neighbors.

It is said that a People gets the government it deserves. Elect and hire so that governance is nearer to your stated ideal, "of, for and by." Then you shouldn't have to be fearing the extremes. Unless you think most people are either anarchists or whimps.

 

[Suddenly]

ETA: I may have been too hasty above. We may be saying something similar. I didn't grasp exactly what you meant by "help business to adapt to new realities". You may be saying the same thing I'm saying, or just a variation on it. I just took it as infrastructure spending as an economic stimulus, Keynes-style.

The lack of spending now is fear and the fact that a lot of things people used to spend money on aren't an option. Giving people money helps with the former and accelerates the latter. Other than that, sure.

I think in this case that handing out checks to people is essential to bring about business adaptation based, maybe ironically, on free market principles. They will start spending money in ways that address their needs and wants.

Better to err on the side of bailing out people and then let them bail out the businesses they need and want. I'm sure all the people who claim to be rich because they are smart will all turn out OK once it shakes out.

Most of the things on the social democrat wish list are probably now public health necessities, and now would be the time for that. The core issue of people going to work or sending their kids to school/daycare despite illness has to be addressed, and that would require a lot of change. Not only on the employment side, but to address that economies of scale in education and daycare are backfiring.

...or we can just do what we usually do and lump all these costs on working people and the rich can just try harder to live in a way that distances themselves from the unclean and use state sanctioned force to make sure they avoid as many consequences as possible.

 

[Meadmaker]

The lack of spending now is fear and the fact that a lot of things people used to spend money on aren't an option. Giving people money helps with the former and accelerates the latter. Other than that, sure.

I think in this case that handing out checks to people is essential to bring about business adaptation based, maybe ironically, on free market principles. They will start spending money in ways that address their needs and wants.

Ok, so we are not saying the same thing. I have just as much money as I had too months ago, but I'm spending a lot less because I can't travel, I can't go to restaurants, I already had Netflix so I can't spend on entertainment. I don't need more money. Thanks for the 1200 bucks, but what did I do with it? Paid down debt. What else would I do with it? Outback Steakhouse isn't open. I don't even need gas money because I haven't needed to fill my tank for the last six weeks. I didn't need the money and it didn't do any good.

For people who are unemployed, they need money. If I lose my job, which will happen if this lockout goes on much longer, I'll need money. For now, the rest of us, those with jobs, don't need money and it was foolish to throw that money around all over the place. And (steering back toward the topic) Joe Biden thinks we should spend "a hell of a lot more" money on...…..I'm not sure if he has given any specifics.

 

[pgwenthold]

Our local Outback Steakhouse is open for takeout. We don't go there and prefer to frequent local places, but it's still an option.

I agree that $$$ is not the rate-limiting factor on whether to buy stuff, but for some people, it matters. Millions are now unemployed, and unemployment insurance only goes so far.

BTW, did anyone see that the LA Lakers got government money for "small business" help? Sure, they may be a "small business" by looking at employees, but I have to say, spirit of the law, etc (and, to be fair, they gave it back; but the fact that it had to be pointed out in the first place? Come on)

 

[Mader Levap]

And they don't care that the current Russia helped get Trump elected and continues to interfere in the election.

Well, to be fair, USSR was communist bleephole and current Russia is crony capitalism with rampant corruption and el presidento that likes to shoot opposition figures in back.

In other words, final state of country desired by rethuglicans. No wonder they are so chummy with Putin.

 

[Meadmaker]

I agree that $$$ is not the rate-limiting factor on whether to buy stuff, but for some people, it matters. Millions are now unemployed, and unemployment insurance only goes so far.

I agree. I got some unemployment insurance for the first time in my life last summer. (It was really tempting not to take it. I had savings, and I could have taken that much money out. However, pride gave way to cash, and I took it.) Unemployment insurance is not enough. Fine, increase unemployment insurance, and cut out at least some of the "you have to be looking for work" requirements.

But giving me money did absolutely nothing for the unemployed, except to take some money out of the government's hands that might have been spent more productively.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

This Tara Reade thing is getting worse for Biden every day.

Now Reade's neighbor is claiming that Reade described being sexually assaulted by Biden at the time in the 90's. The neighbor's account is quite clear that Reade claims sexual assault, in detail. This is in addition to the footage from Larry King Live in which the anonymous caller is claimed to be Reade's mother discussing her daughter being assaulted by an unnamed Senator.

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-neighbor-corroborates-joe-bidens-accuser-2020-4

It's becoming clear that these allegations are not likely going to be so easily dismissed. What is the correct call for the party at this point? Joe is only the presumptive candidate, it's not too late for him to drop out.

 

[theprestige]

What is "Government?"

The capitalist/libertarian sees it as though a system imposed by some third party, divorced from human affairs. A nefarious entity of suspect, liberty-crushing motives.

Wrong. Start over. Don't tell me what I think. Don't tell me what unnamed other people allegedly think. Address my arguments as they actually are.

 

[Meadmaker]

This Tara Reade thing is getting worse for Biden every day.

Now Reade's neighbor is claiming that Reade described being sexually assaulted by Biden at the time in the 90's. The neighbor's account is quite clear that Reade claims sexual assault, in detail. This is in addition to the footage from Larry King Live in which the anonymous caller is claimed to be Reade's mother discussing her daughter being assaulted by an unnamed Senator.

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-neighbor-corroborates-joe-bidens-accuser-2020-4

It's becoming clear that these allegations are not likely going to be so easily dismissed. What is the correct call for the party at this point? Joe is only the presumptive candidate, it's not too late for him to drop out.

It seems to me there are two possibilities. Either she made them up at the time, which people have been known to do, or it actually happened.

On the subject of Larry King and the phone call, you don't even need some expert voice matcher. Lot's of people knew the woman's mother, and lots of people can recognize voices. Proving it was her mother, or disproving it, is very, very, easy. I'm pretty sure it was her mother.

Now, another witness corroborates that she told the story back then.

So, one thing that has been known to occur is that someone isn't doing a great job and is either thrown out or decides to leave and instead of telling family and friends, "I'm doing a lousy job at work. I need to get out before they fire me." she says, "I was assaulted", or "It was racism" or "My boss was abusive" or....fill in the blank with something that doesn't make it your fault. I haven't followed the story so I don't even know if it's a possibility.

Another option is that it actually happened.

An awful lot of people are going to believe the latter, even if it can't be proven.

For my part, I will still vote for him, and I don't even particularly care if it's true. Trump has done just as bad. I generally like Biden's politics. And, I really don't like going into 30 year old personal stories. I said that about Kavanaugh. I'll say it about Biden. At some point, I'm ok with an informal "statute of limitations" on personal conduct. Maybe that makes me a bad person. However, I would be more comfortable with a different candidate, for this and other reasons.

 

[shemp]

Well, with Trump's record with women, it's not going to be so easy for them to go after him on this. However, unlike the Republiscum who will vote for the man who claims he will give them everything they want regardless of his conduct, some Democrats do care about these kinds of allegations.

Frankly, unless the Dems can slam-dunk this one right into the toilet, I'd feel more comfortable if they'd draft Michelle Obama.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It seems to me there are two possibilities. Either she made them up at the time, which people have been known to do, or it actually happened.

On the subject of Larry King and the phone call, you don't even need some expert voice matcher. Lot's of people knew the woman's mother, and lots of people can recognize voices. Proving it was her mother, or disproving it, is very, very, easy. I'm pretty sure it was her mother.

Now, another witness corroborates that she told the story back then.

So, one thing that has been known to occur is that someone isn't doing a great job and is either thrown out or decides to leave and instead of telling family and friends, "I'm doing a lousy job at work. I need to get out before they fire me." she says, "I was assaulted", or "It was racism" or "My boss was abusive" or....fill in the blank with something that doesn't make it your fault. I haven't followed the story so I don't even know if it's a possibility.

Another option is that it actually happened.

An awful lot of people are going to believe the latter, even if it can't be proven.

For my part, I will still vote for him, and I don't even particularly care if it's true. Trump has done just as bad. I generally like Biden's politics. And, I really don't like going into 30 year old personal stories. I said that about Kavanaugh. I'll say it about Biden. At some point, I'm ok with an informal "statute of limitations" on personal conduct. Maybe that makes me a bad person. However, I would be more comfortable with a different candidate, for this and other reasons.

I don't really see a good way for Democrats to squirm out of this unless they find some really exonerating evidence that demonstrates that Reade is lying.

The party has embraced metoo. Many of these stories are decades old and follow similar patterns. Women are assaulted by powerful men and keep their mouths shut because they knew they wouldn't get justice. Now the tide is turned, and it's fair game to hold these creeps accountable.

I just can't see how the same Democrats who cried foul about Kavanaugh can now reverse themselves on Biden. We are hearing many of the same defenses that Republicans made now from the mouths of dems. The alleged crime is very old, evidence is long gone, memories are faulty, timing and motivations are questionable, etc etc etc.

There's really no way for Biden to positively clear himself, innocent or guilty, the same way there was no way for Kavanaugh.

 

[theprestige]

I'd feel more comfortable if they'd draft Michelle Obama.

I don't get this Michelle Obama obsession.

She's not stupid. She can see the situation as well as you can. It's pretty obvious that she's looked at the situation and decided to nope out.

I can't imagine any way to draft her against her obvious desire to avoid the job, that wouldn't be extremely uncomfortable for her and for the people doing the drafting.

How would the drafting even work? Browbeat her into embracing a "for the good of the nation!" argument she clearly doesn't agree with? Threaten her children if she doesn't take the job? Ridiculous amounts of bribery? Kidnap her and start cutting off toes until she agrees to announce her candidacy, and all the rest of it?

Michelle Obama isn't a character in a new season of The West Wing. She's a human being with strengths and weaknesses, enthusiasms and fears, priorities and limitations. She deserves better treatment from her fans, than to be idolized as a savior in some fantasy version of reality.