Nobody Cares: PRS

[Beebo Brink]

I don't agree with all of it, but the tl;dr: most of the boats are women and poc. Sanders' policies would disproportionately benefit women and poc.

The point of failure in this argument is the assumption that a rising tide lifts all boats equally. It ignores the fact that women and POC have been at the bottom because of institutionalized discrimination that deliberately forces them lower than the boats of white men. It's NOT enough to improve the economy "for everyone" because in our society "everyone" is defined as white men. Without active dismantling of discriminatory systems, women and POC will continue to lag behind.

 

[Anya Ristow]

How on earth can you do a podcast on how either Bernie Sanders or anyone could become "America's first feminist president" without mentioning their respective positions on issues such as protecting and strengthening American women's ready access to free (or at least affordable), safe and legal abortions?

This is one of his stump speech issues. His position is well known to his supporters.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/politics/democratic-candidates-abortion-survey.html

"Bernie strongly supports Planned Parenthood. Under Medicare for All, the Hyde Amendment will be repealed and all reproductive and abortion services will be provided free at the point of service. In order to ensure everyone can receive the reproductive health care they need under Medicare for All, Bernie will increase funding for Planned Parenthood, Title X and other initiatives that protect women’s health, access to contraception, and the availability of a safe and legal abortion."

Child care is another stump speech issue. He wants a universal child care and pre-K program. Equal wages for women? Stump issue. He supports the Paycheck Fairness Act. $15 minimum wage he has presented as an issue that will disproportionately affect women. Student Loan forgiveness: 2/3 of the debt is held by women.

I'm at work so I'm going to keep this short. I mostly came here to ask you and Beebo if there are policies other candidates have that you find lacking in Bernie Sanders.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

This is one of his stump speech issues. His position is well known to his supporters.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/politics/democratic-candidates-abortion-survey.html

Child care is another stump speech issue. He wants a universal child care and pre-K program. Equal wages for women? Stump issue. He supports the Paycheck Fairness Act. $15 minimum wage he has presented as an issue that will disproportionately affect women. Student Loan forgiveness: 2/3 of the debt is held by women.

I'm at work so I'm going to keep this short. I mostly came here to ask you and Beebo if there are policies other candidates have that you find lacking in Bernie Sanders.

I'm not supporting any candidate, since I don't know enough about any of them, though several of them seem like very bad choices.

I was just surprised by how unimpressive were his ideas and the way he explained them. If he put on a performance like that at a typical Labour Party local hustings for prospective MPs, I don't think he'd stand much chance of being selected for a winnable seat, at least not without powerful friends in senior levels of the party, or strong support from on of the stronger unions.

Good for him for making sure abortion clinics get funded and so on. What's the candidate who is said to be, at least potentially, the first feminist president planning on doing about various conservative state legislatures making it almost impossible for the newly well-funded clinics to operate in their jurisdictions, and what does he plan to do about these "fetal heartbeat" bills?

 

[danielravennest]

The point of failure in this argument is the assumption that a rising tide lifts all boats equally. It ignores the fact that women and POC have been at the bottom because of institutionalized discrimination that deliberately forces them lower than the boats of white men. It's NOT enough to improve the economy "for everyone" because in our society "everyone" is defined as white men. Without active dismantling of discriminatory systems, women and POC will continue to lag behind.

I would rephrase the maxim as "A rising tide lifts all boats except the ones anchored to the bottom".

There are a number of "boat anchors" that keep some people at the bottom. For example, when property taxes fund education, rich neighborhoods get more money for schools than poor. When home prices and rents are high, people with low income jobs can't save up enough to get out of renting, which is the first rung of economic stability. It goes on and on.

 

[Beebo Brink]

I mostly came here to ask you and Beebo if there are policies other candidates have that you find lacking in Bernie Sanders.

I voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary, so I'm not just carping at him out of partisan spite. I'm realistic about the strengths and weaknesses of all the candidates I support, and I'm not going to make excuses for them just because I like them.

Most of the top Dem White candidates are weak in their understanding of or commitment to issues of race. I'm not convinced Biden has a better intellectual understanding, but he's been out there pressing the flesh for a lot longer, so he has significantly more street cred than Sanders, Buttigieg, Warren or Klobuchar.

Unlike you, I'm not that focused on policy statements. They're useful for getting a general sense of a candidate's priorities, beliefs and attitudes, but beyond that I don't pay too much attention to them. Turning policy statements into legislation is a long, torturous road and the best of intentions can be quickly derailed. Of all the candidates, I think Buttigieg has a keener sense of the importance of messaging over policy details.

What I want from a president is intelligence, compassion, composure, steady nerves under fire, persistence, passion, and energy. In short, leadership qualities. Ideally they will put those leadership skills in service to an agenda that matches my wish list of priorities for the country, but I'll take someone who is a mismatch on policy before I'll take someone who is a mismatch on character and personality. A president sets the tone for the country, and that is very important, not a triviality, for me.

I have reservations about Sanders' character. Nothing alarming, just niggling doubts based on how I've seen him interact with party machinery and opposing viewpoints and especially with topics outside his fixation on economic inequality. He's a bit touchy, a bit blinkered. Above all else, a president needs to be ready to deal with emergencies out of left field, and they need to see the bigger picture. Such as recognizing racism and misogyny and non-economic forces within our society that can't be solved with economic policies.

 

[Beebo Brink]

I would rephrase the maxim as "A rising tide lifts all boats except the ones anchored to the bottom".

There are a number of "boat anchors" that keep some people at the bottom. For example, when property taxes fund education, rich neighborhoods get more money for schools than poor. When home prices and rents are high, people with low income jobs can't save up enough to get out of renting, which is the first rung of economic stability. It goes on and on.

Again, this is just half of the picture. Realtors and financial institutions deliberately, consciously blocked black people from home ownership. They steered them to specific low-income, low-service neighborhoods, they deliberately denied them mortgages, thus denying them opportunities for growing wealth in ways that were encourage for white people. Even farther back, black veterans were denied benefits from the GI Bill, assistance that moved thousands of poor white men up to the middle class through education.

It's not enough to treat this as an economic problem. There are social mechanisms at work that intersect with our financial systems.

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

What I want from a president is intelligence, compassion, composure, steady nerves under fire, persistence, passion, and energy. In short, leadership qualities. Ideally they will put those leadership skills in service to an agenda that matches my wish list of priorities for the country, but I'll take someone who is a mismatch on policy before I'll take someone who is a mismatch on character and personality. A president sets the tone for the country, and that is very important, not a triviality, for me.

 

[Beebo Brink]

Trump's Plan to Criminalize Homelessness Is Taking Shape

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Meanwhile in Lolerado:

Host off the air for wishing for 'a nice school shooting'

A Denver radio host is off the air after a controversial comment he made during his radio program Tuesday.

www.kxlf.com

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Meanwhile in Lolerado:

Host off the air for wishing for 'a nice school shooting'

A Denver radio host is off the air after a controversial comment he made during his radio program Tuesday.

www.kxlf.com

So a couple months ago there was that Craig Silverman guy:


The headline's shit and the station and Silverman are at odds for what the firing was really about, but that's not what I'm here for.

Turns out that radio station has a producer who likes posting Nazi shit on Russian sites:

Kirk Widlund – Nazi Executive Producer at 710 KNUS (CO) – Colorado Springs Anti-Fascists

cospringsantifa.noblogs.org

ETA: The school shooting guy is sorry people took his joke the wrong way.

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

ETA: The school shooting guy is sorry people took his joke the wrong way.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Clearly it's your fault if you didn't get the joke, amirite?

 

[Lady Darnk Juniorette]

Washington Rep. Matt Shea engaged in domestic terrorism against U.S., says state House report

The report found the Spokane Valley Republican is associated with several armed militias and uses his prominence in the Patriot Movement to dispatch militia members to conflicts with government officials. The House Republican minority leader said Shea is now suspended from...

www.seattletimes.com

 

[Jolene Benoir]

The point of failure in this argument is the assumption that a rising tide lifts all boats equally. It ignores the fact that women and POC have been at the bottom because of institutionalized discrimination that deliberately forces them lower than the boats of white men. It's NOT enough to improve the economy "for everyone" because in our society "everyone" is defined as white men. Without active dismantling of discriminatory systems, women and POC will continue to lag behind.

Again, this is just half of the picture. Realtors and financial institutions deliberately, consciously blocked black people from home ownership. They steered them to specific low-income, low-service neighborhoods, they deliberately denied them mortgages, thus denying them opportunities for growing wealth in ways that were encourage for white people. Even farther back, black veterans were denied benefits from the GI Bill, assistance that moved thousands of poor white men up to the middle class through education.

It's not enough to treat this as an economic problem. There are social mechanisms at work that intersect with our financial systems.

Yes, historically when the rising tides argument has been used, often to squash demands for real change, there were deliberate efforts even within economic programs and policies designed to lift people up, poc were often deliberately excluded from benefiting. This is why I tend to bristle when I see that same argument being used as if focusing solely upon economic issues, with a primarily white audience in mind, will actually address institutionalized discrimination. I get irate when people who do desire to focus upon these issues are portrayed as using "identity politics", as if a large group of white voters being pandered to and having thrown a huge hissy fit in the form of electing DJT isn't "identity politics".

I desire to see plans of action in particular as it relates to HUD planning, as it relates to education, as it relates to the prison industry, as it relates to assistance programs, as it relates to domestic violence and other crimes committed against women, as it relates to police discrimination, as it relates to the freedom of women to have control over their own body.

I don't want to be told, "Hey, we're going to try and fix economic inequality, with an emphasis on the middle class, and you "should" benefit, as well, but please stop demanding that these other subjects be discussed because it makes people uneasy"

 

[Han Held]

White woman ran down teen girl with her car just because she was 'a Mexican': police

A white woman in Iowa earlier this month ran down a 14-year-old girl in her Jeep Cherokee just because the girl was Hispanic, police say.The Des Moines Register reports that 42-year-old Nicole Marie Poole Franklin admitted to police that she targeted a 14-year-old student at the Indian Hills...

www.rawstory.com

 

[Innula Zenovka]

You can't fix economic inequality, since it's an inherent part of the current international economic system.

What you can, and should, do is try to ameliorate and control some of its consequences, but that needs specific targeted programmes and initiatives, and "joined-up thinking" between different departments of state. And when it's apparent that members of particular groups and sub-groups -- whether defined by gender, sexuality, colour, age, disability and so on -- are at particular risk of suffering the consequences of this general economic inequality, or suffer more severe consequences, then that needs particular attention.

Letting the tide rise is a hopeless metaphor anyway, at least for people advocating this policy as a long-term solution for anything, because the whole point about tides is that they rise and fall according to particular laws of physics, so they're going regularly to go up and down, and sometimes higher than normal and sometimes lower, regardless of what anyone does.

Bit like the world economy, when you come to think of it, only that behaves according to less clear and well-understood rules.

So hoping to raise things permanently by general measures is doomed to failure.

 

[Han Held]

You can't fix economic inequality, since it's an inherent part of the current international economic system.

I hope you mean that you cannot eliminate it -and I agree (though it's still very good to try). But it can be fixed, it's a lot worse than it was just 40, 50 years ago which means it's possible to fix -which means it can be better again.

We need to make things better for as many people as we can, and work to minimize economic inequality to the greatest degree possible.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

 

[Dakota Tebaldi]

Yes, historically when the rising tides argument has been used, often to squash demands for real change, there were deliberate efforts even within economic programs and policies designed to lift people up, poc were often deliberately excluded from benefiting. This is why I tend to bristle when I see that same argument being used as if focusing solely upon economic issues, with a primarily white audience in mind, will actually address institutionalized discrimination.

Yeah - "a rising tide lifts all boats" is great if you have a boat. Not so great if you're wearing concrete shoes.

 

[Beebo Brink]

You can't fix economic inequality, since it's an inherent part of the current international economic system.

What you can, and should, do is try to ameliorate and control some of its consequences, but that needs specific targeted programmes and initiatives, and "joined-up thinking" between different departments of state. And when it's apparent that members of particular groups and sub-groups -- whether defined by gender, sexuality, colour, age, disability and so on -- are at particular risk of suffering the consequences of this general economic inequality, or suffer more severe consequences, then that needs particular attention.

The way you frame this conversation still seems to side-step the issue of institutionalized racism and sexism that are separate from the financial mechanisms that we all use. Yes, there will always be income inequality, but when employers systematically pay women less than men, for the same job, this not an unavoidable consequence of capitalism. This is prejudice, pure and simple.

When someone applies for a mortgage and they are turned down specifically because they are black, or they are steered away from specific neighborhoods, this prejudicial repression is not directly related to the financial system. The system is being used by the racists to punish minorities or keep them at a distance, in contradiction to market forces that would usually demand than anyone with the appropriate funds can buy the house they can afford.

That blatant discrimination needs to be called out loudly, clearly, repeatedly to counter the erroneous, racist view that minorities need "extra help" to prosper in an otherwise level playing field. It's not just that they've fallen behind, it's that they keep getting pushed back at the same time that they're falling behind due to the all the other times they've been pushed back. They're not just suffering from a one-time disadvantage that is gathering interest.

"Specific targeted programs" aren't going to help the situation as much as they "should" while racism and misogyny are still active forces. That racism needs to be acknowledged as an issue to itself, separate from systemic economic inequalities.