Schultz in 2020

[SpursforSix]

^ by a lot, I mean 4 or 5

[CosmicCowboy]

idk...I know a lot of people that voted for Trump that are ready for this storm to be over. They'd probably vote Dem if it wasn't someone from the far left.

Being far left seems to be the Democratic litmus test for 2020.

[spurraider21]

Being far left seems to be the Democratic litmus test for 2020.

i was told obama was a far left socialist tbh

[boutons_deux]

Never Trump Grifter Leaves MSNBC Gig to Advise Howard Schultz

Steve Schmidt, the Republican strategist turned Never Trumper TV pundit, has broken ties with MSNBC while he works on Dumb Starbucks Man Howard Schultz possible 2020 presidential bid.

Schmidt—whose whose vocal opposition to the current president will never erase the fact that

he foisted Sarah ing Palin onto an unsuspecting nation

—joins former Democratic consultant and former Obama White House official Bill Burton as advisers to Schultz,

who has spent the past few days getting brutally ratioed on Twitter

for his endless stream of soporific pla udes

in the place of any actual policy stances beyond

his assertion that having an ungodly amount of money is good, actually.

https://splinternews.com/never-trump...ign=2019-01-31

[benefactor]

If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?

[Th'Pusher]

I would vote for just about anyone that ran against Trump in the primary.

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.

[spurraider21]

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.

[boutons_deux]

i mean if trump is just going to disregard mexico's autonomy and sovereignty then there's really no justification to stop any immigration from mexico tbh

America respects no country's sovereign autonomy, if that country doesn't align with USA interests ($$$$)

[CosmicCowboy]

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

[midnightpulp]

You can overhaul and tinker with the immigration system all you like but until you put up a physical barrier there will always be incentive to cut the corners. You say process them quickly and painlessly but the reality is a lot of the economic migrants come here without any kind of do entation and can create a new iden y, so your backround check/criminal record is now obsolete. Let's say we issue work visas to 5,000 immigrants and only 1,000 show up to to renew their visas. What are you going to do about the other 4,000 that gamed the system and set up a new iden y? That's quite the burden you are giving to ICE to clean up your mess because of some silly poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty at Ellis Island.


If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?

And a needlessly complex immigration system also incentivizes a need to cut corners since the immigrants coming from ty situations can't afford to wait for the red tape to clear, which can take years. A barrier is only a stop gap that might cut illegal crossings down in that specific area, but the illegals will just find another soft spot through which to enter. Trump's re ed idea of some pseudo-Great Wall of China that spans the complete southern border is impossible. https://www.cato.org/publications/co...wall-wont-work

Furthermore, many immigrants and contraband are actually getting smuggled through legal ports of entry (I'm sure the cartels have many border agents on the payroll). Border Patrol just seized the largest shipment of Fentanyl in history at an official checkpoint.

Immigrants in the early 1900s also came without any sort of do entation. The Ellis Island model has nothing to do with the ideals in the Lazarus poem. We processed over 1 million immigrants in 1907 alone, with wait times only lasting a couple of hours on average. Why was it okay then but not now? I anticipate the crime, cartel, etc response, but Americans then feared the Irish and Italians just the same.

[midnightpulp]

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly iden y politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

[spurraider21]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly iden y politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

because votingrepublican.jpeg

just use scary buzzwords like "radical" and "socialist" to keep people from implementing policy so you can hold onto a little more money

[Th'Pusher]

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

You seem to be on board with Shultz and his “truth bombs”. Why not vote for him?

[DarrinS]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly iden y politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

You've just elevated a freshman rep. to the level of Bernie and Fauxcahauntas.

I'm not calling them socialists -- they can themselves that.

[midnightpulp]

You've just elevated a freshman rep. to the level of Bernie and Fauxcahauntas.

I'm not calling them socialists -- they can themselves that.

What's her inexperience have to do with anything? I'm asking why the likes of Hannity, Ingraham, and their legions of followers go ape at that trio's economic ideas when they're proposing what is essentially a return to a post-New Deal/pre-Reagan economic environment? , Cortez's 70% on income over 10 million is comparatively soft to the 70-90% on >250K we had back then (yes, I know "loopholes," but they still had efficacy in closing the wealth gap and strengthening the middle class to levels never before seen).

[Will Hunting]

What's her inexperience have to do with anything? I'm asking why the likes of Hannity, Ingraham, and their legions of followers go ape at that trio's economic ideas when they're proposing what is essentially a return to a post-New Deal/pre-Reagan economic environment? , Cortez's 70% on income over 10 million is comparatively soft to the 70-90% on >250K we had back then (yes, I know "loopholes," but they still had efficacy in closing the wealth gap and strengthening the middle class to levels never before seen).

The biggest “loophole” the rich used to avoid taxes in the 50s was making less money and paying employees more

[boutons_deux]

[FrostKing]

"The party of inclusion" ladies and gentlemen

But Oprah is qualified


Anyway, he put out that whole blacks wanna loiter in coffee shops fire successfully. You made an entire thread bout it

[midnightpulp]

The biggest “loophole” the rich used to avoid taxes in the 50s was making less money and paying employees more

I guess the only logical counterargument to not raising taxes on the rich to those levels is that perhaps labor in the US lost a great deal of leverage due to the rise of developing countries and their dirt cheap labor costs. But still, Amazon, Walmart etc can't outsource their fulfillment centers and "sales associates" to China. I also think we need to call out the automation bluff (i.e. every time something like min. wage rise is proposed, you have McDonalds execs and the like fear-mongering that they'll just automate more to offset the rising labor costs).

The lower-middle classes in those menial jobs are a huge consumer base, probably the biggest in the US, and if you replace their service jobs with automation, who the is going to buy the said automation produces? The Upper-Middle classes tend to be older and/or save more than spend. I think wholesale automation is a dead-end unless something like a universal basic income is implemented.

[baseline bum]

idk...I know a lot of people that voted for Trump that are ready for this storm to be over. They'd probably vote Dem if it wasn't someone from the far left.

Wow really? Every person I know who voted for Trump thinks he's amazing.

[Will Hunting]

I guess the only logical counterargument to not raising taxes on the rich to those levels is that perhaps labor in the US lost a great deal of leverage due to the rise of developing countries and their dirt cheap labor costs. But still, Amazon, Walmart etc can't outsource their fulfillment centers and "sales associates" to China. I also think we need to call out the automation bluff (i.e. every time something like min. wage rise is proposed, you have McDonalds execs and the like fear-mongering that they'll just automate more to offset the rising labor costs).

The lower-middle classes in those menial jobs are a huge consumer base, probably the biggest in the US, and if you replace their service jobs with automation, who the is going to buy the said automation produces? The Upper-Middle classes tend to be older and/or save more than spend. I think wholesale automation is a dead-end unless something like a universal basic income is implemented.

I think the answer to automation is shortening the work week. There’s no reason the standard work week needs to be 40 hours, if technology is advanced enough to where that much income is produced with automation then everyone can benefit from it by having more free time and the economy would be at full employment if the work week is shortened.

[baseline bum]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly iden y politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.

[midnightpulp]

I think the answer to automation is shortening the work week. There’s no reason the standard work week needs to be 40 hours, if technology is advanced enough to where that much income is produced with automation then everyone can benefit from it by having more free time and the economy would be at full employment if the work week is shortened.

Yeah, that's what happened during the first wave of automation/machine aided labor in the 1900s. Work days would be 12-16 hours long.

[midnightpulp]

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.

I've considered that, as well. Nixon opening trade with China obviously didn't help the cause, either.

[DarrinS]

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.

History fail