2020 US Presidential Election

[Zugzug]

Scandinavian socialism is a myth. A quote from former prime minister of Denmark:

"I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy."

Progressives needs to drop all parts of the socialism label. It's a waste of time. What they really support is a fair market economy. Fair capitalism is both more accurate and more palatable than some defense of socialism.

This is one of the reasons why Bernie lost. People couldn't understand why he felt like it was so important that people understood socialism better. They just assumed he had more communist leanings than he probably does.

Even I, someone who voted for him in 2016, was taken back by the Castro defense. It was weird and made me wonder what the guy really believed.

 

[Watasha]

Progressives needs to drop all parts of the socialism label. It's a waste of time. What they really support is a fair market economy. Fair capitalism is both more accurate and more palatable than some defense of socialism.

This is one of the reasons why Bernie lost. People couldn't understand why he felt like it was so important that people understood socialism better. They just assumed he had more communist leanings than he probably does.

Even I, someone who voted for him in 2016, was taken back by the Castro defense. It was weird and made me wonder what the guy really believed.

Thank you, interesting take. What is a fair market?

 

[PeteJ]

Scandinavian socialism is a myth. A quote from former prime minister of Denmark:

"I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy."

I would argue it's both. The State has much influence in the economy. Bailouts for some but not others. Why are mostly corporations bailed out at the expense of "Mom and Pop" stores? I bet ones in Denmark, Sweden and even in the US aren't helped if explosions, looting, vandalism etc. hurt their business. But, corporations are bailed out. Crony capitalism and government/corporatism with liberal dominance is part of capitalism, is it now?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidn...ncial-support-to-sas-over-coronavirus-crisis/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...siness-aid-to-increase-spending-by-15-billion

I guess the lines are blurred. Is it a market economy? Or is it socialism? Or some hybrid of both?

 

[Watasha]

It's technically "democratic socialism" which is probably ideal.

There are those that would argue different. I favor limited government, more local social safety nets, and low taxes, but would consider special taxes on ultra-wealthy to pay off national debt assuming we had a balanced budget. Democratic socialism is not compatible with the founding of this country and infringes on the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 49% of the country should not be forced to live under the socialistic rules of 51% of the country. This endeavor, done on a state by state basis, could help quell this concern. If the national government fails, we all fail. If a state government fails, then lessons learned, but we are endangering our monetary system with our debt levels and spending.

I am aware it's an opinion piece, there are plenty on both sides.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...-socialism-sweden-everywhere-else-ncna1158636

 

[FGG]

Progressives needs to drop all parts of the socialism label. It's a waste of time. What they really support is a fair market economy. Fair capitalism is both more accurate and more palatable than some defense of socialism.

This is one of the reasons why Bernie lost. People couldn't understand why he felt like it was so important that people understood socialism better. They just assumed he had more communist leanings than he probably does.

Even I, someone who voted for him in 2016, was taken back by the Castro defense. It was weird and made me wonder what the guy really believed.

I said this before but Bernie gave people too much credit in understanding the difference between democratic socialism and "red scare" socialism. Just call it something else and people would then be forced to see the nuance. Just call it "progressivism" maybe.

 

[Christiaan]

Scandinavian socialism is a myth. A quote from former prime minister of Denmark:

"I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy."

Progressives needs to drop all parts of the socialism label. It's a waste of time. What they really support is a fair market economy. Fair capitalism is both more accurate and more palatable than some defense of socialism.

This is one of the reasons why Bernie lost. People couldn't understand why he felt like it was so important that people understood socialism better. They just assumed he had more communist leanings than he probably does.

Even I, someone who voted for him in 2016, was taken back by the Castro defense. It was weird and made me wonder what the guy really believed.

That quote is from the former right wing liberal and prime minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen. So he tried to assert himself as someone who wants to move away from the concept that Scandinavia is locked in the ''nordic model'' syndrome, which is understandable from his point of view. His term is mostly defined by fiscally conservative measures like budget cuts and tax reform. However, there is now a left-wing social democratic government (led by Mette Frederiksen) who is trying to reintroduce some social market principles: focus on higher recruitment of teachers, higher minimal wage, lower gas emissions, etc.

Bernie Sanders definition of his ''Democratic Socialism'' is quite confusing TBH, I give you that. When he refers to Democratic Socialism, some Americans think of a state controlled economy (or simply put: communism, but that is totally different than democratic socialism). Europeans on the other hand think that he means a democratic planned economy, which entails that workers democratically control the means of production. So it's basically a rejection of private owned capitalism.

But if you look closely at his references (about Scandinavian socialism, medicare for all, free education, higher minimum wage, etc.), he basically means what we consider as a moderate social democratic model. It's moderate as in that private ownership is ok, but regulated for the benefit of the workers, consumers and small enterprises (right to form a union, protection against high prices, against monopoly), accessible insurance for everyone, free lower and higher education & higher taxes on the rich to finance basic public needs. These concepts define the social market economy, a mid way between the laissez-faire Anglo-Saxon model and socialist (state led) economies. A lot of social democratic parties in Europe were or are proponents of this model.

 

[ASilverLight]

Yep, that's certainly the case in most big 'n' diverse cities. There is a clearcut divide between the rural area/small towns vs. medium and bigger cities. Immigration issue is very minor in cities like Amsterdam. It's more about class & general communal issues, like keeping housing affordable (you need to be almost rich to own a house in the capital), accessible education, investment in cleaner energy and public transport. In general, the liberal and progressive parties own the big cities.

It's astonishing that you have those groups, in this freaking era! At least I'm glad we don't have these out and about extreme right wing organisations provoking white supremacy in the streets. Fascism is still fresh in our minds here, so open rallies are almost always repressed when these kind of groups want to openly show their hatred with pride. Sadly that's different for you guys with a president who is openly fuelling fear and division, legitimising those RW groups like Proud Boys and Unite the Right.

If anything, the far right (and far left!) groups we do have in this country (fellow dutchie, hi) are almost ridiculed by the media. They definitely exist but not to a very extreme degree, and only few likeminded individuals do take them seriously.

Just want to say I also agree with your previous posts re immigrants etc.

 

[Elmer B Fuddled]

Guys, it's entirely up to everyone what they want to do, and I know I'm going to be the recipient of a lot of very personal insults and abuse for saying this, but I would really encourage everyone to stop engaging with a certain member on this particular thread.

The insults have become really personal and nasty, and completely unwarranted as everyone has been really respectful in their responses. It's not about left vs right (my entire family are UKIP voters, and it's a pretty boring echo chamber if we all have the same opinions) -- it's about being respectful of other people's views. Some people are incapable of that.

If this is an inappropriate post, please delete -- I don't want to look like I'm censoring anyone. I can just see from experience how it is going to descend, and as tempting as it is to attempt to change someone's mind, you can't unless it's already open.

Or maybe get the administration to take it off this site. But you are correct, there's some bad things going on that's uncalled for.

 

[Greg Sacramento]

Many of the new mega rich and their corporations heir wealth through government connections/control and by understanding how government works. This is especially apparent on Wall Street.

This is regrettable because, in a crony capitalist system, the huge gains of the few really do come at the expense of the many.

Why the Nasdaq stock market has just hit a new all-time high with all the concerns now facing the nation is because of more government social spending. Do you think that a billionaire liberal cell phone CEO who does not pay taxes nor his company with 350 billion in the bank, that sells expensive services really cares about social other than a way to make his company money.

 

[Emgee]

Tom Brady being traded to the Bucs and Cam Newton being traded to the Patriots? Liberals

This had me dying.

 

[Christiaan]

If anything, the far right (and far left!) groups we do have in this country (fellow dutchie, hi) are almost ridiculed by the media. They definitely exist but not to a very extreme degree, and only few likeminded individuals do take them seriously.

Just want to say I also agree with your previous posts re immigrants etc.

Ey fellow compatriot Hoe is ie? I always thought you were from Belgium (didn't know why), but alright! Team Orange is well represented on this forum.

Yeah, Some media outlets have their fair share in doing that, mostly for entertainment purposes. Some journalists like to report on extreme stuff going on during rallies (fights or uproar between people), interview people with a colourful opinion (always someone with a bizarre explanation why they are involved in something, like the people who think there's a relation between 5G and getting the coronavirus). The usual shtick for journalists and sometimes quite entertaining when you watch the news at 8 o'clock.

 

[ASilverLight]

Ey fellow compatriot Hoe is ie? I always thought you were from Belgium (didn't know why), but alright! Team Orange is well represented on this forum.

Yeah, Some media outlets have their fair share in doing that, mostly for entertainment purposes. Some journalists like to report on extreme stuff going on during rallies (fights or uproar between people), interview people with a colourful opinion (always someone with a bizarre explanation why they are involved in something, like the people who think there's a relation between 5G and getting the coronavirus). The usual shtick for journalists and sometimes quite entertaining when you watch the news at 8 o'clock.

Yeah, lots of our news sources are almost entertainment! Which can be funny, but also quite bothersome. I'd rather see more nuanced reports but that's never going to happen. Also probably because I've mentioned being close to Antwerp ahah, just live fairly close to the Belgian border. Anyway, don't want to derail this topic too much.

I often struggle to express myself properly which is why I usually refrain from joining political debates unless I'm around friends. (since they get my train of thoughts). Will say this though, I sincerely hope no one is going to write in Kanye as a joke (or any other celeb or animal). Wish people would take politics more seriously...

 

[PeteJ]

That quote is from the former right wing liberal and prime minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen. So he tried to assert himself as someone who wants to move away from the concept that Scandinavia is locked in the ''nordic model'' syndrome, which is understandable from his point of view. His term is mostly defined by fiscally conservative measures like budget cuts and tax reform. However, there is now a left-wing social democratic government (led by Mette Frederiksen) who is trying to reintroduce some social market principles: focus on higher recruitment of teachers, higher minimal wage, lower gas emissions, etc.

Bernie Sanders definition of his ''Democratic Socialism'' is quite confusing TBH, I give you that. When he refers to Democratic Socialism, some Americans think of a state controlled economy (or simply put: communism, but that is totally different than democratic socialism). Europeans on the other hand think that he means a democratic planned economy, which entails that workers democratically control the means of production. So it's basically a rejection of private owned capitalism.

But if you look closely at his references (about Scandinavian socialism, medicare for all, free education, higher minimum wage, etc.), he basically means what we consider as a moderate social democratic model. It's moderate as in that private ownership is ok, but regulated for the benefit of the workers, consumers and small enterprises (right to form a union, protection against high prices, against monopoly), accessible insurance for everyone, free lower and higher education & higher taxes on the rich to finance basic public needs. These concepts define the social market economy, a mid way between the laissez-faire Anglo-Saxon model and socialist (state led) economies. A lot of social democratic parties in Europe were or are proponents of this model.

Mette Fredericksen was another 'sheep' politician that okay'd Danes' rights to be removed via covid-1984.

Look up what Ole Dammegard has to say.

 

[PeteJ]

Many of the new mega rich and their corporations heir wealth through government connections/control and by understanding how government works. This is especially apparent on Wall Street.

This is regrettable because, in a crony capitalist system, the huge gains of the few really do come at the expense of the many.

Why the Nasdaq stock market has just hit a new all-time high with all the concerns now facing the nation is because of more government social spending. Do you think that a billionaire liberal cell phone CEO who does not pay taxes nor his company with 350 billion in the bank, that sells expensive services really cares about social other than a way to make his company money.

They're too oblivious to realize you are criticizing their p.o.v. Or maybe they didn't think it applies with Democrat President administrations.

 

[FGG]

There are those that would argue different. I favor limited government, more local social safety nets, and low taxes, but would consider special taxes on ultra-wealthy to pay off national debt assuming we had a balanced budget. Democratic socialism is not compatible with the founding of this country and infringes on the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 49% of the country should not be forced to live under the socialistic rules of 51% of the country. This endeavor, done on a state by state basis, could help quell this concern. If the national government fails, we all fail. If a state government fails, then lessons learned, but we are endangering our monetary system with our debt levels and spending.

I am aware it's an opinion piece, there are plenty on both sides.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...-socialism-sweden-everywhere-else-ncna1158636

Not sure where you are getting your 51%/49% from but tax on the ultra wealthy is exactly where funding for social safety nets could/should come from.

Read your link, it argues that Sweden is very successful but points out it's due to not being involved in wars, not the social programs it enjoys. But really Bernie has argued that, too. If we didn't pay for needless wars, we could enjoy the same quality of life as Scandinavia.

 

[Watasha]

Not sure where you are getting your 51%/49% from but tax on the ultra wealthy is exactly where funding for social safety nets could/should come from.

Read your link, it argues that Sweden is very successful but points out it's due to not being involved in wars, not the social programs it enjoys. But really Bernie has argued that, too. If we didn't pay for needless wars, we could enjoy the same quality of life as Scandinavia.

The percentages are hypothetical where a simple majority can dictate 49% of a $330M have to live in a social welfare state utopia. This is not consistent with our founding principles. Taxation is theft, a necessary evil, that should be done with the utmost thoughtfulness.

I've made that point several times. In fact, the rest of the world lives under the safety and security that the United States brings to the world and can therefore spend their money on social/domestic programs. Trump understands this as well as actually bucked his party on it. If anyone thinks that China or Russia are going to promote democratic values they are living in a fantasy world, we are the balance sadly and it's time other countries start to pay their fair share.

 

[FGG]

The percentages are hypothetical where a simple majority can dictate 49% of a $330M have to live in a social welfare state utopia. This is not consistent with our founding principles. Taxation is theft, a necessary evil, that should be done with the utmost thoughtfulness.

I've made that point several times. In fact, the rest of the world lives under the safety and security that the United States brings to the world and can therefore spend their money on social/domestic programs. Trump understands this as well as actually bucked his party on it. If anyone thinks that China or Russia are going to promote democratic values they are living in a fantasy world, we are the balance sadly and it's time other countries start to pay their fair share.

I'm not aware of anyone on this thread who thinks China and Russia have ideal governments.

 

[Daniel Lion]

You really have a screw loose.

You noticed.
We can agree on something, we've reached consensus.

Take care PeteJ,
Daniel

 

[Watasha]

I'm not aware of anyone on this thread who thinks China and Russia have ideal governments.

I never said anyone did, but they are the alternative to Global Influence if the US withdraws military support for the world. Meanwhile everyone points to the rest of the worlds "social spending" like they are benevolent saints while provide/subsidize their security. And again, Trump has tried to pull us out of these webs and to get foreign allies to step up.

 

[PeteJ]

Not sure where you are getting your 51%/49% from but tax on the ultra wealthy is exactly where funding for social safety nets could/should come from.

Read your link, it argues that Sweden is very successful but points out it's due to not being involved in wars, not the social programs it enjoys. But really Bernie has argued that, too. If we didn't pay for needless wars, we could enjoy the same quality of life as Scandinavia.

Sweden went bankrupt from the migrant crisis. They had to BORROW money. You really don't know anything.

That means they had no revenues to afford it. Thus they had to print money they didn't have. That's not a good sign of a healthy country or economy.

Morons will blame it on COVID-19 but things were bad before that.

 

[PeteJ]

You noticed.
We can agree on something, we've reached consensus.

Take care PeteJ,
Daniel

What good will that do? Are you in the "get me censored/banned" club? It's not needed. But, it will be you liberals and maybe one dissenting voice. You can try to find different ways to agree on the same things.

 

[FGG]

I never said anyone did, but they are the alternative to Global Influence if the US withdraws military support for the world. Meanwhile everyone points to the rest of the worlds "social spending" like they are benevolent saints while provide/subsidize their security. And again, Trump has tried to pull us out of these webs and to get foreign allies to step up.

When Trump was running, literally the one thing I agreed with him on is a relatively non interventionist stance.

But weirdly, he is actively posturing to get Russia back in the G7 and whether or not you think he knew about the bounty on our troops then, he has not said a peep about condemning them.

Instead of war, it's shady deals with Russia and the Saudis. A non interventionist without selling us and our allies out would be a nice substitute.

 

[aot]

 

[FGG]

What good will that do? Are you in the "get me censored/banned" club? It's not needed. But, it will be you liberals and maybe one dissenting voice. You can try to find different ways to agree on the same things.

Just to be clear, it's not the "dissenting" opinion that people have a problem with, it's the way you talk to people.

@Watasha can have a conservative opinion without slinging insults and making personal attacks.

I'm not for censoring anyone but continuing a dialogue or not in a situation where someone isn't being respectful is also a form of free speech we can all exercise.

 

[Juan]

For what I am reading in US forums, the unemployment money won't last long, tenants have started non paying rent, and landlords are starting to get under water.

Everything is set for the perfect storm.

 

[Watasha]

When Trump was running, literally the one thing I agreed with him on is a relatively non interventionist stance.

But weirdly, he is actively posturing to get Russia back in the G7 and whether or not you think he knew about the bounty on our troops then, he has not said a peep about condemning them.

Instead of war, it's shady deals with Russia and the Saudis. A non interventionist without selling us and our allies out would be a nice substitute.

Yes, he wants Russia there, as well as South Korea, Australia, and India in order to discuss China's future. Makes sense to me. You cannot force Russia and China together. The Russian people are relatively conservative and this is likely the gamble he's taking in trying to wedge the two countries apart.

 

[PeteJ]

Just to be clear, it's not the "dissenting" opinion that people have a problem with, it's the way you talk to people.

@Watasha can have a conservative opinion without slinging insults and making personal attacks.

I'm not for censoring anyone but continuing a dialogue or not in a situation where someone isn't being respectful is also a form of free speech we can all exercise.

Some of you made condescending remarks and indirect insults but I just ignored it. I didn't whine about it. I stuck to the topic and all I did was accuse you and others of hypocrisy and evasion which I think was legitimate. I can't help it if you or others perceive it as insults.

 

[Watasha]

View attachment 39757

This doesn't mean much. It was sent back down to the lower courts to be re-tried.

 

[FGG]

Yes, he wants Russia there, as well as South Korea, Australia, and India in order to discuss China's future. Makes sense to me. You cannot force Russia and China together. The Russian people are relatively conservative and this is likely the gamble he's taking in trying to wedge the two countries apart.

Do you have any evidence that Trump is trying to wedge Russia and China apart or is this your personal speculation?

 

[Daniel Lion]

What good will that do? Are you in the "get me censored/banned" club? It's not needed. But, it will be you liberals and maybe one dissenting voice. You can try to find different ways to agree on the same things.

Dude, I was being nice, you misunderstood me.
It was my attempt at humor trying to bring peace and levity to our discussion.
I was handing out a hand or olive branch for peace.
I think you misunderstood my intentions which were kind.

I will say it again,
Take care PeteJ,
Sincerely Daniel