Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The New Democrat Party?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The New Democrat Party?

    I am a rational person. I have low tolerance for BS and even lower tolerance for injustice. I therefore do not rationally believe democrats are this stupid.

    From the National Review, the current darling of the "new left," Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:

    When asked how she intends to pay for her plan for "medicare for all" and "free college tuition for all," she stated:

    If people pay their fair share, if corporations and the ultra wealthy, for example as Warren Buffet likes to say, if he paid as much as his secretary pays, if he paid a fifteen percent tax rate, Ocasio-Cortez explained. If we reversed the tax bill but raised our corporate rate to 28 percent. If we do those two things and also close some of those loopholes thats $2 trillion right there.

    Now, if we implement a carbon tax so that we can financially incentivize people away from fossil fuels, thats an additional amount, of a large amount, of additional revenue that we can have, she added.

    The political novice, who upset six-term incumbent Joe Crowley (D., N.Y.) in a primary last month, went on to explain how a reprioritization of spending could aid her political project. Specifically, she referenced cutting military spending, arguing that the omnibus spending bill passed last year allocated more money to the Pentagon than was requested.

    The last key, which is extremely, extremely important, is reprioritization, she said. Just last year we gave the military a $700 billion budget increase, which they didnt even ask for. They were like, We dont want another fighter jet, dont give us another nuclear bomb. They didnt ask for it and we gave it to them, she said.
    Are you democraps in New York really this stupid? That you even nominated her is an indication you're voting with something other than your brain (or your heart). She is not even an intelligent liberal, as oxymoronic as THAT phrase is. She's just an idiot ... an uneducated, "I can't believe I made it this far" not-even-useful idiot.

    and don't even get me started on the likes of warts on the congressional butt like Waters, Pelosi, or Schumer.

    Is this really the new, alt-left democrat party?




  • #2
    Sure, like almost every rookie politician (left or right), she comes up with some real unicorn 'n rainbows ideas that won't look anything like her idea. ...If the idea ever becomes law in the first place, that is.

    OTOH, here's an idea I like, and it wasn't just a proposal by Ocasio-Cortez:
    The victory of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in one of the biggest primary upsets this cycle brings renewed attention to one of her campaign pledges to support a jobs-guarantee program.
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oc...dea-2018-06-27

    ...Nor is this such a new idea. Something similar was proposed by your favorite lefty president, FDR (just kidding). Supposing a decent guaranteed job policy were put into effect, neither "medicare for all" nor "free college for all" would need to be free. Every "free" program could then charge "earnest money" that would ensure people don't register for classes because they thought it would be cool or something. "Cool or something" becomes less cool if it costs a working class person $50 per semester, just to keep things a little more serious. Medicare needs to look out for hypochondriacs, among other conditions that place a burden on medical care delivery. We could apply their $5 copay to the first visit to a psychologist. Sure, it still takes some time out of the general practitioner's day, but at least the special needs person will from now on get treatment from the proper specialist, and only bug the physician when the psychologist (better yet, intake nurse) agrees with his patient that he is -indeed- physically ill.

    There are so many benefits that would follow from a guaranteed jobs policy, not least among them a real (not projected) decrease in the federal budget. That's right, neo-socialists could hit the target that has eluded so-called conservatives forever. How can this be done? First, a caveat: Ocasio-Cortez and others can't get there from where they are now. This won't be done from the current model that lefties believe in the US: "Uncle Sam is the best (and usually only) source for the poor". Nope, that ain't gonna do it. The private sector needs to pitch in, actually do most of the hiring most of the time, for a functional jobs program. To get there, we'll also need to educate righties, not just lefties.
    -First, everyone needs to realize that the "private sector" includes collectives, cooperatives and other forms of non-profit organizations. Yes, I know ...stuff that makes communists lose sleep, and confuses so many "pro-business" Republicans. How can a cooperative be part of a "free market"??? What irony: Commies and GOP folks with the same worried look on their faces.
    -Next, a conference between All Employers. Representatives from for-profit, non-profit, public and private sectors. Throw in some folks with a proven track record of helping entrepreneurs start their own business. They take their time, because while the objective is so simple to state ("all able-bodied people can have a job"), the details will involve a lot of complicated moves.
    -During and after rollout of full employment, Deconstruct the federal government. Can private orgs build shelters for the working poor? Yes, they already do. They employ people while doing so. What they might need from the gummint are connections to other resources (job training, health care, education), but not much from the taxpayer's pocket. What taxpayers will need to pay is an audit system on the non-profit sector, so any subsidies are spent correctly, and to control people trying to "game the system". Control over the "full employment" system should be mostly at the local level, but a minimal donation from the federal gov't. will allow the audit to follow interstate issues that impede the objective of full employment. Should be mostly a positive resource, but also in place to send a few parasites up the river now and then.
    -Objective: Cut budgets by 10% or more for HUD, Education, etc., since many of their functions are administered by local, non-profit organizations. The tax base to fund locally are mostly collected locally, via sales tax (no avoidance possible). Extend the audit procedures to Defense Dept. contracts (no, seriously), now politically viable, since the lefties are sending housing service parasites up the river, largely due to audit procedures. Local service for the job guarantee programs means better response and better fit for each community. Should also mean the "minimum wage" laws fade away over time. At full employment, demand for a given job will depend more on an honest exchange between employer and employee, rather than a tendency to drive down wages when there is an excess labor supply. Constant supply of paid work, along with very low cost training (degrees, certificates) assures a good supply for employers.

    ?


    • #3
      Originally posted by radcentr View Post
      Sure, like almost every rookie politician (left or right), she comes up with some real unicorn 'n rainbows ideas that won't look anything like her idea. ...If the idea ever becomes law in the first place, that is.

      OTOH, here's an idea I like, and it wasn't just a proposal by Ocasio-Cortez:
      https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oc...dea-2018-06-27

      ...Nor is this such a new idea. Something similar was proposed by your favorite lefty president, FDR (just kidding). Supposing a decent guaranteed job policy were put into effect, neither "medicare for all" nor "free college for all" would need to be free. Every "free" program could then charge "earnest money" that would ensure people don't register for classes because they thought it would be cool or something. "Cool or something" becomes less cool if it costs a working class person $50 per semester, just to keep things a little more serious. Medicare needs to look out for hypochondriacs, among other conditions that place a burden on medical care delivery. We could apply their $5 copay to the first visit to a psychologist. Sure, it still takes some time out of the general practitioner's day, but at least the special needs person will from now on get treatment from the proper specialist, and only bug the physician when the psychologist (better yet, intake nurse) agrees with his patient that he is -indeed- physically ill.

      There are so many benefits that would follow from a guaranteed jobs policy, not least among them a real (not projected) decrease in the federal budget. That's right, neo-socialists could hit the target that has eluded so-called conservatives forever. How can this be done? First, a caveat: Ocasio-Cortez and others can't get there from where they are now. This won't be done from the current model that lefties believe in the US: "Uncle Sam is the best (and usually only) source for the poor". Nope, that ain't gonna do it. The private sector needs to pitch in, actually do most of the hiring most of the time, for a functional jobs program. To get there, we'll also need to educate righties, not just lefties.
      -First, everyone needs to realize that the "private sector" includes collectives, cooperatives and other forms of non-profit organizations. Yes, I know ...stuff that makes communists lose sleep, and confuses so many "pro-business" Republicans. How can a cooperative be part of a "free market"??? What irony: Commies and GOP folks with the same worried look on their faces.
      -Next, a conference between All Employers. Representatives from for-profit, non-profit, public and private sectors. Throw in some folks with a proven track record of helping entrepreneurs start their own business. They take their time, because while the objective is so simple to state ("all able-bodied people can have a job"), the details will involve a lot of complicated moves.
      -During and after rollout of full employment, Deconstruct the federal government. Can private orgs build shelters for the working poor? Yes, they already do. They employ people while doing so. What they might need from the gummint are connections to other resources (job training, health care, education), but not much from the taxpayer's pocket. What taxpayers will need to pay is an audit system on the non-profit sector, so any subsidies are spent correctly, and to control people trying to "game the system". Control over the "full employment" system should be mostly at the local level, but a minimal donation from the federal gov't. will allow the audit to follow interstate issues that impede the objective of full employment. Should be mostly a positive resource, but also in place to send a few parasites up the river now and then.
      -Objective: Cut budgets by 10% or more for HUD, Education, etc., since many of their functions are administered by local, non-profit organizations. The tax base to fund locally are mostly collected locally, via sales tax (no avoidance possible). Extend the audit procedures to Defense Dept. contracts (no, seriously), now politically viable, since the lefties are sending housing service parasites up the river, largely due to audit procedures. Local service for the job guarantee programs means better response and better fit for each community. Should also mean the "minimum wage" laws fade away over time. At full employment, demand for a given job will depend more on an honest exchange between employer and employee, rather than a tendency to drive down wages when there is an excess labor supply. Constant supply of paid work, along with very low cost training (degrees, certificates) assures a good supply for employers.
      Fresh ideas are always a bonus but all I 'm only interested in candidates who will put a check on Kremlin Donald.

      ?


      • #4
        Originally posted by redrover View Post

        Fresh ideas are always a bonus but all I 'm only interested in candidates who will put a check on Kremlin Donald.
        Yes !

        Donald Putin and Vladimir Trump must be stopped !

        ?


        • #5
          Originally posted by radcentr View Post
          Sure, like almost every rookie politician (left or right), she comes up with some real unicorn 'n rainbows ideas that won't look anything like her idea. ...If the idea ever becomes law in the first place, that is.

          OTOH, here's an idea I like, and it wasn't just a proposal by Ocasio-Cortez:
          https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oc...dea-2018-06-27

          ...Nor is this such a new idea. Something similar was proposed by your favorite lefty president, FDR (just kidding). Supposing a decent guaranteed job policy ...
          Have we not seen enough government boondoggles and wasteful foolishness ?

          Or is some other entity going to create this great new 'policy' ?

          Guarantee everyone gets a job ??

          Really ?

          I admit, it sounds awesome. But I just don't see how it's even close to realistic.

          ?


          • #6
            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

            Have we not seen enough government boondoggles and wasteful foolishness ?

            Or is some other entity going to create this great new 'policy' ?

            Guarantee everyone gets a job ??

            Really ?

            I admit, it sounds awesome. But I just don't see how it's even close to realistic.
            Realistic, you say? Here is one doozey of a pipe dream. Link:
            Like many Republicans, Hunter supports auditing the Pentagon. But he wouldn’t support fencing off any of the new money for the Defense Department until it completes that audit. And until Congress introduces consequences for the Pentagon’s failure to complete an audit, it’s likely that lawmakers will find themselves in the same familiar position year after year: in favor of an audit but unable to get their hands on one.
            https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b075bff0f31280

            Let's apply that missing audit to all the other agencies in our federal gov't. Then, compare that to claims that members of Congress are interested in "lean" or "efficient" gov't. There you have it: Your pipe dream.

            That is one of the reasons a guaranteed work policy needs an audit feature from the beginning, along with an all-sector participation to develop the policy before launch. -To avoid pipe dreams.

            ?


            • #7
              Originally posted by radcentr View Post
              Realistic, you say? Here is one doozey of a pipe dream. Link:

              https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b075bff0f31280

              Let's apply that missing audit to all the other agencies in our federal gov't. Then, compare that to claims that members of Congress are interested in "lean" or "efficient" gov't. There you have it: Your pipe dream.

              That is one of the reasons a guaranteed work policy needs an audit feature from the beginning, along with an all-sector participation to develop the policy before launch. -To avoid pipe dreams.
              Not my pipe dream.

              An impossible wish.

              "...a guaranteed work policy needs an audit feature from the beginning, along with an all-sector participation..."

              It won't happen.

              ?


              • #8
                Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                I am a rational person. I have low tolerance for BS and even lower tolerance for injustice. I therefore do not rationally believe democrats are this stupid.

                From the National Review, the current darling of the "new left," Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:

                When asked how she intends to pay for her plan for "medicare for all" and "free college tuition for all," she stated:



                Are you democraps in New York really this stupid? That you even nominated her is an indication you're voting with something other than your brain (or your heart). She is not even an intelligent liberal, as oxymoronic as THAT phrase is. She's just an idiot ... an uneducated, "I can't believe I made it this far" not-even-useful idiot.

                and don't even get me started on the likes of warts on the congressional butt like Waters, Pelosi, or Schumer.

                Is this really the new, alt-left democrat party?
                Another idiot selling socialism.

                That's all.

                History has shown us the evils of socialism, even fools can't ignore it's history... so what's her excuse ? She lusts after power over others.

                Fools want to take us down this miserable road again....

                Those who don't learn from history,,,

                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Socialism can't flourish without ignorance

                The capacity of human beings for making the same mistake again and again is exceeded only by the capacity of their governments to enshrine those mistakes in law.

                To err is human; to forgive, divine but what are we to do when a significant segment of our population has grown so enamored of an error that they lose the capability to recognize it as such? Indeed, they become violently defensive at the mere mention of reassessing their beliefs.

                A difficult situation is made untenable when the error involved has dangerous ramifications for everyone, not just those making the mistake.

                This is where 21st-century America finds itself today, relative to that perennial error known as socialism.

                The base of support for this long discredited ethos is multi-layered, with each layer supporting the error from a different foundation.

                The largest element stands on a foundation of ignorance they are simply unaware of the history and track record of collectivist schemes in general and socialism in particular.

                Absent a frame of reference, members of this group are vulnerable to the socialist's siren song and soon find themselves singing along about fairness, equality, and justice, not realizing that the composer of the song lacks the instruments necessary to play it, unless he first takes them from someone else.

                This group is the weakest, and a great many members can be peeled away from the collectivist concert by opening their eyes to the nuts and bolts of their newfound political plaything. Once realizing that the price of admission involves the surrender of personal choice, they either abandon the effort or graduate to the next group.

                The next echelon recognizes the shortcomings of socialism but is unwilling to accept these inevitable failures as fundamental flaws of the system itself, preferring to either ignore the murderous history of the creed entirely or blame the failures on interference by outside, nefarious influences. In their eyes, every stumble must've been the result of being tripped; every fall surely must have been preceded by a shove.

                These are the true believers, standing on a foundation of near religious fervor, willing to risk life and limb to prove to the world that socialism can work, if only operated by the right people, with the right funding and the support of right-minded people.

                It is a rare occasion that sees one of this crowd abandoning the "faith." I suggest not wasting the effort to turn them. Only abject, personal disaster can move them, as any outside attempt will be seen as validation of their paranoid worldview.

                The final level know full well the ramifications of the policies they are advocating. They know the history, they understand the fatal flaws and are fully prepared to sacrifice the lives and fortunes of as many people as necessary to gain and maintain power.

                These are standing atop a foundation of concupiscence, manipulating the worst elements of human nature, as would a tradesman with a tool. Undergirding their every decision is a longing for unfettered power and unaccountable control.

                These are the leaders who know the system well enough to have monetized it, operating it as a machine from which they draw wealth and power to themselves. They orchestrate the narrative by using the true believers to mobilize the first group, those ignorant of socialism and its hellish consequences, to fight the "other," whoever that might be at the time. This is the genesis of #Resist.

                To this nation's eternal credit, we shunned one such leader during the last presidential election. Now we must erode the influence of the leaders that took her place and the true believers who yet do her bidding by educating the first group, the ignorant and misinformed.

                We have a history of success on our side freedom blooms wherever planted, while socialism cannot boast of a single blossom, much less fruit. Most important of all, they cannot long deny the trail of bodies numbering in the hundreds of millions, all victims of their unforgivable error.

                So start talking. We have to shine the light in the darkest corners. There is an entire generation hanging in the balance.


                https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ignorance.html



                ?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  Sure, like almost every rookie politician (left or right), she comes up with some real unicorn 'n rainbows ideas that won't look anything like her idea. ...If the idea ever becomes law in the first place, that is.

                  OTOH, here's an idea I like, and it wasn't just a proposal by Ocasio-Cortez:
                  https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oc...dea-2018-06-27

                  ...Nor is this such a new idea. Something similar was proposed by your favorite lefty president, FDR (just kidding). Supposing a decent guaranteed job policy were put into effect, neither "medicare for all" nor "free college for all" would need to be free. Every "free" program could then charge "earnest money" that would ensure people don't register for classes because they thought it would be cool or something. "Cool or something" becomes less cool if it costs a working class person $50 per semester, just to keep things a little more serious. Medicare needs to look out for hypochondriacs, among other conditions that place a burden on medical care delivery. We could apply their $5 copay to the first visit to a psychologist. Sure, it still takes some time out of the general practitioner's day, but at least the special needs person will from now on get treatment from the proper specialist, and only bug the physician when the psychologist (better yet, intake nurse) agrees with his patient that he is -indeed- physically ill.

                  There are so many benefits that would follow from a guaranteed jobs policy, not least among them a real (not projected) decrease in the federal budget. That's right, neo-socialists could hit the target that has eluded so-called conservatives forever. How can this be done? First, a caveat: Ocasio-Cortez and others can't get there from where they are now. This won't be done from the current model that lefties believe in the US: "Uncle Sam is the best (and usually only) source for the poor". Nope, that ain't gonna do it. The private sector needs to pitch in, actually do most of the hiring most of the time, for a functional jobs program. To get there, we'll also need to educate righties, not just lefties.
                  -First, everyone needs to realize that the "private sector" includes collectives, cooperatives and other forms of non-profit organizations. Yes, I know ...stuff that makes communists lose sleep, and confuses so many "pro-business" Republicans. How can a cooperative be part of a "free market"??? What irony: Commies and GOP folks with the same worried look on their faces.
                  -Next, a conference between All Employers. Representatives from for-profit, non-profit, public and private sectors. Throw in some folks with a proven track record of helping entrepreneurs start their own business. They take their time, because while the objective is so simple to state ("all able-bodied people can have a job"), the details will involve a lot of complicated moves.
                  -During and after rollout of full employment, Deconstruct the federal government. Can private orgs build shelters for the working poor? Yes, they already do. They employ people while doing so. What they might need from the gummint are connections to other resources (job training, health care, education), but not much from the taxpayer's pocket. What taxpayers will need to pay is an audit system on the non-profit sector, so any subsidies are spent correctly, and to control people trying to "game the system". Control over the "full employment" system should be mostly at the local level, but a minimal donation from the federal gov't. will allow the audit to follow interstate issues that impede the objective of full employment. Should be mostly a positive resource, but also in place to send a few parasites up the river now and then.
                  -Objective: Cut budgets by 10% or more for HUD, Education, etc., since many of their functions are administered by local, non-profit organizations. The tax base to fund locally are mostly collected locally, via sales tax (no avoidance possible). Extend the audit procedures to Defense Dept. contracts (no, seriously), now politically viable, since the lefties are sending housing service parasites up the river, largely due to audit procedures. Local service for the job guarantee programs means better response and better fit for each community. Should also mean the "minimum wage" laws fade away over time. At full employment, demand for a given job will depend more on an honest exchange between employer and employee, rather than a tendency to drive down wages when there is an excess labor supply. Constant supply of paid work, along with very low cost training (degrees, certificates) assures a good supply for employers.
                  This plan sounds like a Conservative Republican plan. My favorite part of your plan is, "During and after rollout of full employment, Deconstruct the federal government".

                  I believe this plan is very plausible in a Conservative Constitutional Republican society. However with the Democrat policies currently in place that strangle the prosperity of small business and working citizens, and restrict the flexibility of large corporations, I don't see how this can be possible.

                  So much is at play surrounding unemployment like health insurance mandates and costs, the entire design of our education system, and most importantly the desire, drive, and financial calculation of people deciding whether they should participate in the job market opposed to sticking with the benefits they have from the government. Deciding whether or not to take the risk. It's not an easy thing to believe in something you've never known.

                  If you think about it, Obama did say that basically this is as good as it gets. Jobs won't be coming back and GDP will not be going up. The government has to provide health insurance and welfare benefits because if not, you won't have food, shelter, or medical care. That has got to scare the crap out of people. So if you were one of those people who had and perhaps still has faith in Obama and his party, why would you not believe the negativity and downplay of the GDP and increase in jobs? Why would you think the people you have had faith in are wrong, and take the risk at the unknown?

                  So here's my question, How do you get the able body unemployed to take the risk while believing that it is a reality that they can have a better life with a job? They after all are the key element in guaranteed employment.



                  Last edited by msc; 08-04-2018, 12:08 PM.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                    Not my pipe dream.

                    An impossible wish.

                    "...a guaranteed work policy needs an audit feature from the beginning, along with an all-sector participation..."

                    It won't happen.
                    Without an audit process, you are excusing "business as usual". There is no large business organization, public or private, that successfully reforms (increases efficiency) without an audit process. Your objection to "all sectors participating" arguable, but scoffing at audit process broadcasts your opinion: You have given up, and will accept one form of corruption or another.

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by msc View Post

                      This plan sounds like a Conservative Republican plan. My favorite part of your plan is, "During and after rollout of full employment, Deconstruct the federal government".

                      I believe this plan is very plausible in a Conservative Constitutional Republican society. However with the Democrat policies currently in place that strangle the prosperity of small business and working citizens, and restrict the flexibility of large corporations, I don't see how this can be possible.

                      So much is at play surrounding unemployment like health insurance mandates and costs, the entire design of our education system, and most importantly the desire, drive, and financial calculation of people deciding whether they should participate in the job market opposed to sticking with the benefits they have from the government. Deciding whether or not to take the risk. It's not an easy thing to believe in something you've never known.

                      If you think about it, Obama did say that basically this is as good as it gets. Jobs won't be coming back and GDP will not be going up. The government has to provide health insurance and welfare benefits because if not, you won't have food, shelter, or medical care. That has got to scare the crap out of people. So if you were one of those people who had and perhaps still has faith in Obama and his party, why would you not believe the negativity and downplay of the GDP and increase in jobs? Why would you think the people you have had faith in are wrong, and take the risk at the unknown?

                      So here's my question, How do you get the able body unemployed to take the risk while believing that it is a reality that they can have a better life with a job? They after all are the key element in guaranteed employment.


                      I know there are conservatives out there who like this idea. There will be one large obstacle -from the right- that won't allow this to happen. That is the same obstacle that will be thrown up from the old-school left wing:
                      -Local control of cooperatives and collectives, which will be the basis of employment, on equal footing with local small or medium sized employers in the private (for profit) sector.

                      The reasoning by old-school conservatives follows: If we allow interstate networks of cooperatives, that could open up too much competition with established, for-profit business. The legal restrictions in place against interstate credit unions/cooperatives is the most obvious example of this reasoning.
                      The reasoning by old-school (nation-oriented) liberals is more obvious: What is not directly controlled by the central gov't., diminishes the prestige of the liberal party, when it gains majority in Congressional & WH elections. To date, there is absolutely no proposal in place within the DNC, that encourages deconstruction at the federal level, even if it involves programs that back traditional leftist objectives like affordable housing, medical care, etc. for the working class.

                      The political obstacles are difficult, without a grass-roots movement that includes both left and right wing groups -somewhat resembling the Tea-Party & 99% movements after the 2008 collapse.

                      The personal obstacle is less difficult to plan for, IMO. Those people who calculate their gov't. benefits, along with "under-the-table pay" received for temporary or illicit work, will be subject to the "able-bodied" status that you mention. That is, no one qualifies for any form of welfare, without medical documentation that they are disabled, or raising children. Otherwise, they have a job. -Those are the principle 3 options, with one hybrid option to cover the last condition: One is completing education (university, tech school or certified apprenticeship), and working part time in a related field. The last condition might need a 1/2 ration of welfare benefits, but I would lean toward the student staying with a cooperative (low/no cost housing & food), if they aren't staying with relatives while completing their qualifications. Perhaps I've overlooked a condition, but I think that covers the bases. Welfare should be a near-exact science, rather than subject to the artful abuse it suffers now: by some who receive it, and (worse) those who create and administer the programs.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                        Without an audit process, you are excusing "business as usual". There is no large business organization, public or private, that successfully reforms (increases efficiency) without an audit process. Your objection to "all sectors participating" arguable, but scoffing at audit process broadcasts your opinion: You have given up, and will accept one form of corruption or another.
                        There will be corruption, an "audit process" will do little or nothing to rid us of it.... and may actually open up new opportunities for it !

                        I have not given up, but I am aware of what we're dealing with, people.

                        There will be corruption. I don't like it, I think it should be pointed out and fought. What I have noticed is that every time we think we're going to fix it, or make it impossible, we create more interesting and profitable ways for it to occur !! Strange isn't it ? Not really, when you understand what we're dealing with - PEOPLE.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                          There will be corruption, an "audit process" will do little or nothing to rid us of it.... and may actually open up new opportunities for it !

                          I have not given up, but I am aware of what we're dealing with, people.

                          There will be corruption. I don't like it, I think it should be pointed out and fought. What I have noticed is that every time we think we're going to fix it, or make it impossible, we create more interesting and profitable ways for it to occur !! Strange isn't it ? Not really, when you understand what we're dealing with - PEOPLE.
                          I think I have a less pessimistic outlook on people I like to think that most people are honest. It may be hard to believe that when a crook like Trump becomes president.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                            There will be corruption, an "audit process" will do little or nothing to rid us of it.... and may actually open up new opportunities for it !

                            I have not given up, but I am aware of what we're dealing with, people.

                            There will be corruption. I don't like it, I think it should be pointed out and fought. What I have noticed is that every time we think we're going to fix it, or make it impossible, we create more interesting and profitable ways for it to occur !! Strange isn't it ? Not really, when you understand what we're dealing with - PEOPLE.
                            When one excludes an audit process, one has given up, Yes, an audit can be corrupted like anything else done by humans. But no, organizational corruption won't be controlled without an audit as part of the process. There is no law enforcement or judicial action against organizational corruption, that does not include any kind of audit.

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by redrover View Post

                              I think I have a less pessimistic outlook on people I like to think that most people are honest. It may be hard to believe that when a crook like Trump becomes president.
                              When an especially corrupt executive gets into the hen house, he'll still need another fox or three to make a proper raid. The other thing to keep in mind is the level of corruption over time (not just personnel). fe, We have to deal with procedures that are basically corrupt, not just people that "pull a fast one" to make some money or curry favor. There are two major categories of audit; the one most people are familiar with is the financial audit -where does the money go, where is the inventory. The other type of audit -which might be more important for federal reform- is called the process audit. I have no doubt that there are countless federal employees that are basically honest people, but they are engaging in corruption due to inept or (purposefully) corrupt procedure.

                              The popular example for lefties is the infamous military contract process. Righties seem to prefer a welfare example, like public housing.

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X