You also have people who just don't work, because why bother when the government gives out so much welfare? [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/world/europe/danes-rethink-a-welfare-state-ample-to-a-fault.html?_r=0]
[url] A study in 2013 found that only 3 of Denmark's 98 municipalities could say that a majority of their residents would have jobs.[/url]
Yes that's good although the study/article is also essentially a filthy lie (or highly misleading) which you'd know if you read it.
That was 3 of 98 had a majority of residents working...of any age. Yes, if you include children and the elderly, less than half the population had a job.
If you included only those age 15 to 64, it was 73% had a job. For comparison, in the US it was only 65% of those in that age bracket. (Yes, many of those in denmark work shorter hours but good for them, basically).
So rather than saying "Look how many of them are unemployed" you should be saying "Wow, more of them are employed than us!"
Which is the key problem: socialism doesn't work. The obvious problems of rampant expansion of government should be obvious to anyone on a purely conceptual level, but then see country after country in Europe mired in difficulty and so we see the failure of socialism in practice. Countries throughout Europe are recognizing they need to make overhauls to their economic systems. Hell, over one-sixth of all countries in the European Union have gone bankrupt. Where is this great success of socialism we're supposed to be seeing?
Well that would be sweden and norway. And Australia, I guess. And Germany, and the UK and...well you get the idea.
Communism doesn't work. Socialism does. The EU doesn't work, either. It's not because of socialism but because of the stupidity of thinking that Greece and Germany could ever exist with one currency; Greece (and other countries) need the balancing factor of being able to set their own monetary policy to make their exports more attractive, rather than being stuck with one of the strongest currencies in the world.
And honestly, I would have to disagree with your statement. We have seen recently that Bernie is polling better than Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire, all "closet Bernie supporters" aside. This can be directly attributed to Sanders' heavy campaigning in those areas. We see an increase in support in these areas because people who were unaware of him before are now, and genuinely prefer him over Hillary. I will go so far as to say that in an ideal world, where everyone knew Bernie as much as Hillary, and everyone voted honestly, Bernie would win, hands down.
Clearly you missed my point...I said he is up in Iowa and New Hampshire, not nationally. Secondly, I acknowledged that Hillary is above Bernie nationally, and maybe if you had read the second part of my paragraph you would have seen that I said, given these circumstances (i.e. the same name recognition as hillary, heavier campaigning in other states, and that "closet Bernie supporters" would actually vote for him) that he would win. I said nothing about him winning nationally currently.
So who is watching the debate tonight? What are you looking for?
I'm excited to see how Bernie will be received once Americans hear his message. It will be interesting how the candidates will try to differentiate from one another, especially since Hillary has been swinging to the left in recent weeks to attempt to stop the bleeding from Sanders. I think her shifting policies will hurt more than help and if she bombs expect Biden to announce real quick.
So who is watching the debate tonight? What are you looking for?
I'm excited to see how Bernie will be received once Americans hear his message. It will be interesting how the candidates will try to differentiate from one another, especially since Hillary has been swinging to the left in recent weeks to attempt to stop the bleeding from Sanders. I think her shifting policies will hurt more than help and if she bombs expect Biden to announce real quick.
So Bernie looked preeeeettttyy good. It was a nice night for him. Hillary was polished. Those other three might as well just pack up and go home now, Biden too. Let's just cut to the chase in the next debate and have Bernie and Hillary go at it.
O'Mally looked like he is running for VP and knows it. Few soft knocks to both Hill and Bern but also plenty of compliments.
Bernie's only fumble was due to a follow up question on Syria/Russia after Webb, I don't think he was really listening to what Webb was saying (he wasn't the only one) but then Cooper threw him the curve ball follow up. His answer was Putin, is, in, trouble. Yeah, not untrue but really sloppy answer. Overall it was good for Bernie I think once people get past the "S" word they will be open to his message. The question is how long will that take?
Honestly Bernie lost a few points with me last night, mostly on the Sandra Bland thing and BLM. I actually really liked Webb last night, especially his more moderate stance on gun control.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Honestly Bernie lost a few points with me last night, mostly on the Sandra Bland thing and BLM. I actually really liked Webb last night, especially his more moderate stance on gun control.
Curious to why talking about Sandra Bland in his Black Lives Matter answer lost him points?
Also how is Bernie any less moderate than Webb on gun control? Both are realistic in their approach.
I strongly dislike the BLM movement and firmly believe that Sandra Bland commited suicide (the fact that they named a street after her is ridiculous).
As far as gun control goes, Bernie is for the assault weapons ban, pro banning magazines that carry more than 10 rounds, and against CCL being universally reciprocated state to state like driver's licensees are. Yes, in 93 he opposed the Brady bill, and in both 03 and 05 he promoted legislation protecting gun manufacturers, but most of his stances when it comes to guns make him far more anti-gun than Jim Webb. Webb wants to actually sit and talk with the gun lobby. I agree that background checks are more needed, but other key points about gun control that I oppose, like the UN attempting a small arms ban, Jim Webb also opposes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Webb is running in the wrong primary. His answer to the "enemy you're most proud of" question sounded like he was trying to impress a bunch of school boys, rather than convince people that he is qualified for the highest office in the nation. Second most cringe-worthy moment of the night after Chafee.
Webb is running in the wrong primary. His answer to the "enemy you're most proud of" question sounded like he was trying to impress a bunch of school boys, rather than convince people that he is qualified for the highest office in the nation. Second most cringe-worthy moment of the night after Chafee.
That was a very rough answer, but I hadn't been taking him very seriously as a candidate up to that point anyway. What was worse for me to hear was Clinton's answer to the same question, in which she stated that she was proud of the enemies she made among Republicans. Politics leads to making enemies, inevitably, but shouldn't we at least try to cooperate across the isle? Its certainly something the POTUS needs to be able to do. Sanders seems much more reasonable.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
I think the most cringe worthy moment honestly was when Clinton was asked how her presidency wouldn't just be a third Obama term and she said “I think being the first woman president would be quite a change.” She didn't give much information on how her policies would be different, and I honestly doubt they would be much different, she just chalked it up to the fact she's a woman.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
I think the most cringe worthy moment honestly was when Clinton was asked how her presidency wouldn't just be a third Obama term and she said “I think being the first woman president would be quite a change.” She didn't give much information on how her policies would be different, and I honestly doubt they would be much different, she just chalked it up to the fact she's a woman.
No argument from me, that was definitely a poor answer IMHO despite the huge applause it got.
I think the most cringe worthy moment honestly was when Clinton was asked how her presidency wouldn't just be a third Obama term and she said “I think being the first woman president would be quite a change.” She didn't give much information on how her policies would be different, and I honestly doubt they would be much different, she just chalked it up to the fact she's a woman.
No argument from me, that was definitely a poor answer IMHO despite the huge applause it got.
Yeah, seriously.
I'll begrudgingly vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination and is facing down somebody like Trump, but she's not impressing me nearly as much as Bernie is, and her being a woman isn't especially relevant. She's been around Washington for decades; she's as much of an insider old white man as the rest of them. The fact that she's packing different equipment below the belt won't change her policies.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
Biden decided not to run. Great news for Hilary. For Sanders it's a mixed bag. On the one hand, Sanders is now pretty much the only contender against Hilary. On the other hand, Sanders is now pretty much the only contender against Hilary.
People looking for an alternative to Hilary would flock to Biden. The same will most likely not be said of Sanders.
Biden decided not to run. Great news for Hilary. For Sanders it's a mixed bag. On the one hand, Sanders is now pretty much the only contender against Hilary. On the other hand, Sanders is now pretty much the only contender against Hilary.
People looking for an alternative to Hilary would flock to Biden. The same will most likely not be said of Sanders.
We'll see. Either way we should at least get a much clearer picture now that all the polls should stop including Biden in them. The best news for Sanders is that it should mean he gets solid media exposure everywhere and a chance to really communicate his message.
Putting this here since this is the Bernie Sanders thread. This was his speech at Georgetown today on Democratic Socialism.
Personally I thought it was a great speech.
I hope Sanders gets elected, or at least listened to. He seems to be intelligent, honest and truly interested in improving society.
Anyone can seem to be intelligent, honest, and truly interested in improving society. The real question is will they improve society?
When someone has been in politics as long as some of the candidates (ie Bernie or Hillary) the question shouldn't be "will" they, it's "have" they. Past behaviour being the best predictor of future behaviour and all.
AS a singular Represntative or Senator can they do much individually though. Whilst they hold important positions they are still small cogs in a very large mechanism.
It doesn't really matter individually what they propose/vote for if they can't get a large enough group of people to vote with you nothing will happen.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
@Kahedron
Agree. It seems profoundly unfair to judge what someone will or can do only by what they have done. I would say, a far better guide is the way in which they have done them. Has Sanders improved society? I don't know, probably not to any significant degree. Has he approached each issue he faces with the attitude of improving society? It seems so, and that is why I think he seems like a good candidate.
Political rhetoric is political rhetoric, what politicians say they are going to do don't all that often truly represent what's actually going on. What I care more about is the mannerisms of the people and approaches to issues generally, as these seem to be more reliable indications of what they actually think. Sanders succeeds at this test.
AS someone who has lived in New Hampshire his whole life, I've been seriously tempted to slide on over to Vermont because quality of life just seems so much better there (excluding the nasty parts but every state has those). In NH we take the motto "Live free or Die" as a personal challenge. Sanders has tried his best to effect his surroundings to the benefit of those who need the help and that's all you can really ask for, and much more than you would get from the average politician.
As for Hillary, she is just a disgusting person. She deflects questions, has a "Holier than Thou" attitude, and plays the pity card saying, "I came from hard times too." The problem is that she is not now, nor has she been for many decades, "In the hard times." I believe fully that she wouldn't stay leftist or centrist. Remarks from her camp lately have all pegged her as "more aggressive than Obama on the middle east." Is that really what we need? To be more of the world police? When are the areas that surround it going to stand up? If we vote for her, guaranteed, we see war before the middle of her first term.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yes that's good although the study/article is also essentially a filthy lie (or highly misleading) which you'd know if you read it.
That was 3 of 98 had a majority of residents working...of any age. Yes, if you include children and the elderly, less than half the population had a job.
If you included only those age 15 to 64, it was 73% had a job. For comparison, in the US it was only 65% of those in that age bracket. (Yes, many of those in denmark work shorter hours but good for them, basically).
So rather than saying "Look how many of them are unemployed" you should be saying "Wow, more of them are employed than us!"
Well that would be sweden and norway. And Australia, I guess. And Germany, and the UK and...well you get the idea.
Communism doesn't work. Socialism does. The EU doesn't work, either. It's not because of socialism but because of the stupidity of thinking that Greece and Germany could ever exist with one currency; Greece (and other countries) need the balancing factor of being able to set their own monetary policy to make their exports more attractive, rather than being stuck with one of the strongest currencies in the world.
Clearly you missed my point...I said he is up in Iowa and New Hampshire, not nationally. Secondly, I acknowledged that Hillary is above Bernie nationally, and maybe if you had read the second part of my paragraph you would have seen that I said, given these circumstances (i.e. the same name recognition as hillary, heavier campaigning in other states, and that "closet Bernie supporters" would actually vote for him) that he would win. I said nothing about him winning nationally currently.
My deviantART; if you're interested in alters, PM me!
I'm excited to see how Bernie will be received once Americans hear his message. It will be interesting how the candidates will try to differentiate from one another, especially since Hillary has been swinging to the left in recent weeks to attempt to stop the bleeding from Sanders. I think her shifting policies will hurt more than help and if she bombs expect Biden to announce real quick.
Bernie's only fumble was due to a follow up question on Syria/Russia after Webb, I don't think he was really listening to what Webb was saying (he wasn't the only one) but then Cooper threw him the curve ball follow up. His answer was Putin, is, in, trouble. Yeah, not untrue but really sloppy answer. Overall it was good for Bernie I think once people get past the "S" word they will be open to his message. The question is how long will that take?
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Curious to why talking about Sandra Bland in his Black Lives Matter answer lost him points?
Also how is Bernie any less moderate than Webb on gun control? Both are realistic in their approach.
As far as gun control goes, Bernie is for the assault weapons ban, pro banning magazines that carry more than 10 rounds, and against CCL being universally reciprocated state to state like driver's licensees are. Yes, in 93 he opposed the Brady bill, and in both 03 and 05 he promoted legislation protecting gun manufacturers, but most of his stances when it comes to guns make him far more anti-gun than Jim Webb. Webb wants to actually sit and talk with the gun lobby. I agree that background checks are more needed, but other key points about gun control that I oppose, like the UN attempting a small arms ban, Jim Webb also opposes.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Webb is running in the wrong primary. His answer to the "enemy you're most proud of" question sounded like he was trying to impress a bunch of school boys, rather than convince people that he is qualified for the highest office in the nation. Second most cringe-worthy moment of the night after Chafee.
That was a very rough answer, but I hadn't been taking him very seriously as a candidate up to that point anyway. What was worse for me to hear was Clinton's answer to the same question, in which she stated that she was proud of the enemies she made among Republicans. Politics leads to making enemies, inevitably, but shouldn't we at least try to cooperate across the isle? Its certainly something the POTUS needs to be able to do. Sanders seems much more reasonable.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
No argument from me, that was definitely a poor answer IMHO despite the huge applause it got.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Yeah, seriously.
I'll begrudgingly vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination and is facing down somebody like Trump, but she's not impressing me nearly as much as Bernie is, and her being a woman isn't especially relevant. She's been around Washington for decades; she's as much of an insider old white man as the rest of them. The fact that she's packing different equipment below the belt won't change her policies.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/webb-dropping-out-214952
People looking for an alternative to Hilary would flock to Biden. The same will most likely not be said of Sanders.
We'll see. Either way we should at least get a much clearer picture now that all the polls should stop including Biden in them. The best news for Sanders is that it should mean he gets solid media exposure everywhere and a chance to really communicate his message.
And there we go, Lincoln Chafee now officially out.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/politics/lincoln-chafee-2016-election-dnc-meeting/index.html
Personally I thought it was a great speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slkQohGDQCI&feature=youtu.be&t=16m11s
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
It doesn't really matter individually what they propose/vote for if they can't get a large enough group of people to vote with you nothing will happen.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
Agree. It seems profoundly unfair to judge what someone will or can do only by what they have done. I would say, a far better guide is the way in which they have done them. Has Sanders improved society? I don't know, probably not to any significant degree. Has he approached each issue he faces with the attitude of improving society? It seems so, and that is why I think he seems like a good candidate.
Political rhetoric is political rhetoric, what politicians say they are going to do don't all that often truly represent what's actually going on. What I care more about is the mannerisms of the people and approaches to issues generally, as these seem to be more reliable indications of what they actually think. Sanders succeeds at this test.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
As for Hillary, she is just a disgusting person. She deflects questions, has a "Holier than Thou" attitude, and plays the pity card saying, "I came from hard times too." The problem is that she is not now, nor has she been for many decades, "In the hard times." I believe fully that she wouldn't stay leftist or centrist. Remarks from her camp lately have all pegged her as "more aggressive than Obama on the middle east." Is that really what we need? To be more of the world police? When are the areas that surround it going to stand up? If we vote for her, guaranteed, we see war before the middle of her first term.