Discussion in 'General Offtopic' started by Tom Ganks, May 13, 2019.
Yang pretty much just hears a policy proposal and says "yea sure, let's do that"
I like UBI but it has to be part of an internally consistent political framework, which he doesn't have largely because he's running to raise his profile and not to actually win
Which of course means we'll be swearing him in in 2020
This would require that he actually poll better than like 2%
The man's a joke. But that is, of course, the point
This is flat out incorrect
The dems push out a broad array of candidates then they slowly cull them down funneling X and Y's supporters down to Z.
What happened with Bernie will happen to all these candidates when the DNC thinks they've found ((((THE ONE))) to overthrow orange man.
Beto being a small example of the DNC trimming the fat when it comes down to dem vs dem. They had his back up until the point he stopped being pitted against a republican.
Warren, easily, has presented the most comprehensive and concise set of policy proposals thus far. They make sense within her framework, they create a total package that can be treated as a complete political thought.
Same for Bernie (though his isn't as detailed) and even goofball bootyjudge has put out some comprehensive proposals
Yang has proposed alot of stuff. But it's pretty piecemeal. He treats his ubi as a panacea to fix all ills and doesn't have a complete outlook that makes sense as a whole. He seems to be arguing for a type of centrally planned capitalism? Wtf.
I really don't see how he envisions UBI working out.
"You cannot receive UBI if you're on any form of government assistance i.e Medicaid, Child's Health Insurance Programs & TANF."
Is this meant to help those in poverty? A 10% Tax increase helps virtually nobody and the ultimatum of $1000 or Government assistance definitely doesn't help anyone in Poverty. American health care would need to be overhauled so it would be realistic to pay for your own health care / prescriptions.
I think we might be talking about different things. So let me try to clear it up.
I’m looking at whether a set of proposals or policy stances is internally consistent. I don’t particularly agree with warren, for example, but if I accept her priors then her policy procedures make sense as a whole. I don’t really care whether she has a lot of them, but rather do they present a complete vision of America that makes sense when weighed against the rest of her proposals. They do. She’s detailed and exact. Her candidacy seems thought out and it makes sense.
Same with Mayor Pete (I will never try to spell his last name). He doesn’t have many proposals but his whole thing is “let’s get back to Obama era ‘normal’” and what little policy he has proposed makes sense within that framework. He’s a bit less detailed but he doesn’t need to be because his entire appeal is “hey, remember that friendly guy from 2008-2016? Let’s do that again”
Yang... doesn’t. He throws a lot of shit at the wall to see what sticks and none of it really works as a comprehensive, understandable whole. No rent control but you want to propose a UBI? An out of nowhere stance on circumcising kids? The only mention of union support is MMA fighters? Legal weed and prison reform but no discussion of reduced/commuted sentences for those already in jail for weed?
Like don’t get me wrong, there’s a ton of stuff. But a lot of it isn’t really concrete (take his border/immigration/citizenship stuff) and taken as a whole it’s disjointed. He hasn’t done a good job of explaining his overarching vision or how policy A might affect policy B.
He has 6 more Buzzwords to hit before he gets a free tshirt and a round 2 on Joe Rogans podcast
Like, how do you have a stance on “humanitarian capitalism” but don’t have a section of your website devoted to labor issues? It’s a BASIC part of the problem. You cannot discuss capitalism without discussing workers. But he sure does try.
Oh. Because hes a tech dork and thinks ubi alleviates the concerns of the working class, without addressing or even acknowledging the power disparities that lead to those problems in the first place.
I dont get why the US would want to try again with people who have no experience. This one isnt working out great. And the democrats are running far to many people many without a decent resumé, like people encouraging that Abrams girl to run. Like being almost governor is a good enough qualification. Since President Garfield (house member) who was the US president for a few months in 1881 there have been 6 jobs that have lead to the presidency.
1. Vice President
4. Secretary of Commerce
5. Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe
6. Reality TV-star.
Find the odd one out. Nah but seriously try to get back on track. Why would you want a president in their 30s. You need to have someone with a little bit of gravitas, someone who has been outside of your country or your just gonna keep getting railroaded.
I’m just gonna vote for Bob Avakian and call it good
American politics are a massive pissing match
There are still people unironically preaching the #NotMyPresident and #Resist garbage banking on Donald being exposed and impeached in his last month.
Andrew Yang: here's an extra $1000 a month! Spend it! Grow the economy!
Landlord: hey, unrelated, but your rent just went up $1000 a month.
Separate names with a comma.