@Boudicca90 why am I sure that I’d hear,
Someone’s somethingism will just make things worse as he will screw over the people at the bottom even more to make his buddies and donors more wealthy.
no matter who wins (including folks on your ‘side’)?
Because he will screw us over less than Trump. As I said, this is a unique election. It wasn’t liberal vs. conservative - it was centrist vs. fascist. And I supported Biden as a way to prevent Trump from damaging my civil rights even more than he already has.
Harm reduction was important to my personal safety, something I have tried to explain to other leftists when they said It was pointless for me to get involved in electoral politics in the first place. They usually had much less at stake than I do.
And even on our side, if a progressive starts supporting non-progressive issues and policies, we confront them about it.
It was sellable until the phrase “choose not to work” was printed. That didn’t make it into the final version, but it should never have reached the document at all. AOC tried to blame one of the consulting agencies, but that just told me she was relying on agencies who thought this was a good idea. AOC is overly popular; she is inexperienced yet she is being seen as a kind of authority, to the Republican Party’s benefit.
Man. America really is the greatest country in the world. I have never seen a people with more concern for their countrymen.
…
…
NOT!
The California Community College system was established in 1960 as a tuition-free system for CA residents ( out of state students are not included), but started charging low per unit fees due to budget pressures beginning in 1978. But it was really very cheap until the mid-2000’s, the cheapest in the country. It took a big jump in 2012 to $46/unit where it has remained, which is still cheaper than most or all alternatives in CA ( it’s less than a fifth of the per unit cost of CSU tuition, closer to one tenth of the UC system).
Newsom proposed paying for two years of CC for first time, full-time students in 2019. Despite the massive budget cuts to higher education, last I saw he was preserving that in his latest budget. Helps that it is a small amount of money since as above CA CC students don’t pay much to begin with.
I am referring to this:
The Democrats needs better sales people. That was an “own goal” and created a huge controversy.
How do you decide who is an “oppressor”? How is that term defined?
Yeah. “Unable to work” was fine, “unwilling” was a massive can of worms.
The Democrats needs better sales people. That was an “own goal” and created a huge controversy.
[/quote]
Yeah, as a conservative that scares me. Being on the right, I don’t understand why expecting personal responsibility from the population is villianized by the left. Does the left really think it is wrong to expect those who can work to do so?
Does the right really not understand that there are people who ‘we’ do not expect to have jobs* even though they can ‘work’?
*The retired, parents of small children, familial caretakers for the sick, etc.
Right, instead of losing their minds over the phrasing, why don’t conservatives stop and think that as a society, we don’t want to force everyone who can work to work in order to get basic needs met? Single parents or sole carers for the elderly, for example, shouldn’t have to make a choice between choosing a job that amounts to negative income (when you take other costs, such as paid care, into account) and neglect of their dependents’ needs.
Wow, you answered a question with a question, very tricky. Bah, you got me. Left, here I come.
True, but it’s still a better answer than a non-answer.
Yep, I knew what you were referring to. You are truly a bottomless wellspring of compassion.
I agree this is a fine goal for any country. My wife and I had a rough start economically and would not have made it without wick and the other great programs out there. But it seems like a decision is being proposed without considering the economic impact. Let’s figure out what the country can afford and then do what we can to help those in need.
The idea that we as the richest country in the world and the largest economy can’t somehow afford to provide basic needs to people when we waste trillions on pointless wars and that we have to sit down with voters and show them a ledger sheet before they can understand that making sure that people in general prosper actually represents cost-savings in monetary and other terms is astonishing.
No one asks to see whether the country can “afford” to do any number of things, except for some reason when it comes to helping the unfortunate, left behind, or disadvantaged.
How about we do it the other way around—agree to the principles and then let the number-crunchers figure out what the optimal level of funding is, taking our resources into account?
American society agrees with you with respect to people too old or disabled to work. That’s why Social Security was created. (Note that Social Security, aka the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance [OASDI] program was created as a self-funded federal insurance program, and was not intended to be funded by taxes.)
The rest is trickier, and is a tough sell for many Americans, even those who are more centrist. One reason it’s trickier is the question of how to pay for it.
I actually think it would be a good idea for society to give more assistance to those caring for others. The counter-argument that will be made is that people will say they didn’t receive help for childcare, so why should their taxes be used to help others with childcare? (Forgetting, of course, that wage stagnation and the relative high cost of childcare for those at the bottom of the pay scale makes this a much harder proposition than it used to be.)
Personal aside (select arrow to read)
Speaking from personal experience, though, I will say that my wife took five years off from working to raise our son for the first five years of his life. We really struggled with this. The first thing we did was to move to a cheaper place to live when my son was only two months old.
The best colleges in many countries is free. It’s just really hard to get in. For example I think the best college in Korea is Seoul national University. I think it is tuition free. There are no service requirements attached.
I think the same is true or nearly so of many european countries.
We don’t have to increase the capacity of our public university system, just increase the selectivity.
There was a time when the City university of new york was very selective and produced a lot of talent, then they went open admissions and it turned into day care for young adults.
We have to get away from this idea that everyone benefits form a college education. If our k-12 education is doing it’s job, college is mostly cost (opportunity and otherwise) with little benefit.
And this is why progressives by definition will never win. By definition, they can never get what they want because they will always want something more progressive than the rest of society is willing to adopt.
I would say to the OP that the essence of being a progressive is not giving up despite never winning. By the time we got gay marriage, it wasn’t even a progressive issue anymore, it was pretty centrist. By the time people got serious about global warming, it wasn’t really a progressive issue anymore.
Progressive push from the left and reactionaries push from the right and they are never satisfied. Every step in their direction is just a good first step. The crappy progressive ideas get cast aside (see the push to actually abolish the police) and the better ones get a little bit of traction (the notion that cops may not be the best people to handle a lot of the stuff they are asked to handle). We need progressives (and reactionaries) but we just can’t let them drive the bus.
And even further before that, if they had started their push for gay acceptance by demanding gay marriage back in the 90’s they would have lost that. In spite of how backward they seem today, civil unions and “Don’t ask Don’t tell” were actually a marked improvement over the status quo and allowed the public to get used to the idea that Gays weren’t mentally ill perverts preying on children, paving the way for gay marriage a twenty years later.