Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

[Chou Toshio]

I'm just going to leave this hear...

Episode 19 of "Hear the Bern", a lesson in intersectionality and solidarity from black radical feminism, is probably one of my favorite episodes of the podcast (and it's a great podcast... hope it continues even beyond the campaign, win or lose...)

Professor and author Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor joins Briahna for a conversation about solidarity, intersectionality, and how both concepts are important parts of building a political coalition.

Author of How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective on Haymarket Books: https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/... (https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/...)

"Solidarity Forever" by Hollow Sidewalks licensed under CC BY 3.0.

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Out of all your terrible takes in the last 24 hours, this is by far the most tasteless. I've done my best not to engage, but dude... what is wrong with you? Your obsession with me is melting your brain.

====

On another note, let's talk policy:

https://www.mediaite.com/news/norah...mises-you-dont-know-how-much-your-plan-costs/



How has he been running for 5 years and still be so dreadfully unprepared? He doesn't even try to give an answer. This is almost as bad as his NYDN interview from 2016.

Gotta commend him on being so great at failing upwards, though. Truly amazing.

Ohhh nooo a high estimate forecast predicts bernie's plan will cost 35 trillion over 10 years ohh nooo a true disaster...! (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...s-warren-healthcare-plan-rises-to-34-trillion)

Meanwhile today it's already 3 trillion a year a rising
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/ho...port-us-healthcare-spending-to-grow-by-4-2019

In all, Fitch Solutions forecasts healthcare spending to increase to $4.3 trillion a year by 2023.

 

[MikeDawg]

Do you deliberately try to miss the point every time I post? I even quoted the important part:

You don't know, I don't know, nobody knows how much it will cost!"

How does a man so fervently in support of a plan not know what it will cost? It's wild when he's standing next to 3 candidates on a debate stage with fully paid for plans. Heck, Liz is $12tril and a conservative supreme court ruling short, but at least she has a plan. He has no plan to pay for it, and he has no plan to even pass it. That's called "lying to your constituents". Then he has the gall to attack actual plans from other candidates (throwback to "joe biden's healthcare plan is worse than 23 9/11s!").

Newsflash: nobody gets healthcare if medicare for all isn't funded and passed through congress.

"I don't know" is not an appropriate answer when you're asked a question about the defining feature of your platform. It's even less appropriate when you've had 5 years to figure it out. If he thinks the experts' predictions are too high, he needs to highlight a study to contradict them, not just shrug and call it a day.

And you're willfully ignoring the cost of all of his other plans. All in all, he has a price tag of $60tril I think it was? That's absolutely ludicrous.

 

[TheJimJims]

Hello! I've been a Yang supporter for a while now, and I'm interested to hear why people choose Bernie over Yang. It feels like Yang's long list of planned policies listed on his site overshadows the core themes of Bernie's campaign.

 

[SergioRules]

Hello! I've been a Yang supporter for a while now, and I'm interested to hear why people choose Bernie over Yang. It feels like Yang's long list of planned policies listed on his site overshadows the core themes of Bernie's campaign.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/ I've used this site, granted not sure how reliable WaPo is on this stuff, but as you can see from the graphics, the main things that differ between Yang and Sanders are:

1. Sanders wants to tax assets on the wealthiest Americans, whereas Yang wants to adjust capital gains.
2. Sanders wants to cancel all student loan debt, while Yang wants to alleviate debt burdens in other ways.
3. Sanders wants to abolish the electoral college, while Yang wants to reform it.

Personally on these three specific issues, I side much more with Bernie.

I also think that Bernie has just been a more popularly used name with his run for the Democratic nomination in 2016 also already getting his name out there, while Yang hasn't had quite the same exposure to the media.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Hello! I've been a Yang supporter for a while now, and I'm interested to hear why people choose Bernie over Yang. It feels like Yang's long list of planned policies listed on his site overshadows the core themes of Bernie's campaign.

Hi JimJim, thanks for the question and hope I can provide an insightful and useful answer. Just for reference, I first discovered Andrew Yang early in 2018 when he appeared on Sam Harris’ podcast— I often listened to “Waking Up” at the time, and also a fan of Eric & Bret Weinstein. That’s before JRE, before watching him kick Ben Shapiro’s ass, long before there was a Yang Gang. I immediately took a liking to Andrew, and believed he had a good analysis of the problems plaguing the country. Compared to Bernie, I really loved how he honed in on the issue of automation, and putting UBI front and center. At the time, I believed (as I guess many Yang fans do) that he had a more “updated” understanding of the problems compared to Sanders. I even donated to Yang twice, hoping to see him make the debate stage and challenge Bernie on those issues, and put Automation in the center of discourse.

Bernie was always my #1, but at the start my reasons were more political—his increasingly impressive efforts to galvanize the left, and most importantly, his promise to transform the Democratic Party and his movements to do so. Yang has never been sufficiently opposed to the party leadership for my taste— I needed to hear the promise of revolution; and it had to come from a voice with the moral authority and established trust to make that promise authentic.
(I’ll also note that at the time, Yang appeared to be staunchly for single payer)

But as campaign season kicked off, the engines of outreach in the Bernie machine geared up; and I watched the campaign & candidate evolve— and I evolved with them. From a policy standpoint, I can’t imagine supporting Yang, and the two candidates have seemed to become increasingly different.
In particular, “Hear the Bern” podcast challenged me to listen to broader ideas in the left, including bringing me to actually engage with real socialist voices like Richard Wolff & Michael Brooks— and I found their arguments more compelling than Yang’s or Weinstein’s. I probably moved from SocDem to DemSoc. They convinced me.

What I came to understand, from a policy perspective, the fundamental difference between Yang and Bernie (and between Warren & Bernie as well really) that spans all their policy choices, is whether or not you center power, structure. Whether you re-structure government and systems in order to put power into the hands of the people and focus on strengthening democracy, or if you try to use market mechanisms to “fix” capitalism. Single Payer Medicare for All does this. Strengthening Unions and giving workers increasing amount of shares and board seats does this. Raising the minimum wage, does this. And a Jobs Guarantee does that on steroids because you’re telling private employers “You need to pay this much ad provide benefits this good in order to get any employees at all.”

What I fundamentally came to believe is that the government, controlled by progressive democracy, by the people themselves-- must LEAD the transformation, and I couldn’t put my faith in a candidate who fundamentally structures his policies on the assumption that Government cannot be competent.

Progressive taxes, Single Payer Healthcare, Green New Deal w/ Federal Jobs Guarantee, Foreign Policy of Global Worker Solidarity, Democracy in the Workplace, Free University, Bernie’s Immigration plan…

Bernie continued to get sharper, his policies got sharper, a product of his team getting stronger, his message became clearer and he did the unique thing of putting the voices of people before his own. I loved Bernie in 2016, but my love for Bernie of 2020 is… really, truly, he is the leader that the American people need to write their own future history.

 

[TheValkyries]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm curious: why not Biden, for all of the reasons I listed above?

Even if we do believe that none of the candidates will fight for LGBT rights, he's the only one who has made it a centerpiece of his campaign, not to mention his aforementioned role in getting gay marriage legalized. Relative to the other candidates, he easily has the best chances of actually doing something.

I don't know if you noticed but all of those things he said are just words. Words are really easy to say but are much harder to keep, and it's pretty clear that the Democrats on the whole are more willing to compromise on LGBT rights than they are to actually fight to codify protections that we desperately need. Every policy rollback against the queer communities in these past few years have been met with tepid handwringing and no real action from the Democratic party.

The Democrats like to take credit for the legalization of Gay marriage, when it was actually done through the activism of the community itself and granted by the Supreme Court, not any legislation crafted by the Dems despite the fact that THEY WERE IN POWER when the Supreme Court made that decision. AND they also act like Gay Marriage was the end all be all, and that all that's left is to just play defense for that rather than do anything else for the community. There's still no solid clear language in any state or federal constitution that protects LGBT people from discrimination, and efforts to actually make those clarifications can probably be counted on one hand. And that is quite literally the LEAST they could do for the LGBT community right now. And they still havent done it.

The reason I trust Biden the least is because it's so brazenly craven and profiteering of him every time he speaks about it. The very fact that he's talking about it more than the others is WHY I don't trust him. Not a single candidate speaks as if they know the first damn thing about the modern struggles of the LGBT community, and Biden shows his ass every single time he (and/or his campaign) speaks. The more he speaks the more opportunities he has to show that he can't talk about anything in any real detail beyond platitudes. "Trans equality is the blah blah blah of our time" What specifically about trans equality Joe? Real easy to just say something vague and unthreatening so that the moderate bigots who still think themselves better than republicans dont get scared off by having to confront their transphobia. It's pathetic.

Imagine if you lent someone some money, and you're asking them to pay it back, and they say "I really believe in paying back debts". Now imagine them bringing up that "belief" A LOT. It's a whole lot of "Yeah, totally; trust me" with no guarantees or substance and its less believable every time.

 

[Ningildo]

For the viewers at home: this is the dude Bernie had to fire because they found out he was incredibly racist.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1183454363353833472

What is wrong with all of you this week? One Joe Rogan endorsement and the "identity politics" euphamism turns into actual bigotry.

I don't know how to put this, but if this passes as "extremely racist" to you, it comes across as if you've never set foot outside your gated community. Or at least never heard of 4chan.

Also, guilt by association. Because of the pedantic need to purity test every little thing to be as "inclusive" as possible.

Out of hundreds of millions of speeches and videos in the world, why did he choose that one? It's really telling that his edit wasn't even an apology, but rather a, "Why is everyone so mad that I desecrated one of the most important moments in American civil rights history? Dumb snowflakes!"

White supremacy is more than just hate crimes and tiki torch marches.

Because it was extremely well known by everyone in America to the point of being remembered word by word (or at least knowing the general gist)?
Thus making it extremely obvious that it was being doctored to something else entirely?

While I'm here

Ohhh nooo a high estimate forecast predicts bernie's plan will cost 35 trillion over 10 years ohh nooo a true disaster...! (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...s-warren-healthcare-plan-rises-to-34-trillion)

Meanwhile today it's already 3 trillion a year a rising
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/ho...port-us-healthcare-spending-to-grow-by-4-2019

From that first article, it states that

"even after accounting for the fact that the federal government would be absorbing costs currently paid by states and households, overall health spending in the United States "would grow by about $720 billion in 2020." ".

Unless I'm overlooking something, this would imply that current costs that are being made (the ones referenced in the second article) would increase on top of the money needed to enact this plan to begin with. Also, this

"Between 2020 and 2029, the federal government is projected to collect $26.8 trillion in income taxes from individuals and corporations — thus, doubling income taxes on individuals and businesses would still leave a hole of over $7 trillion. "

is an issue, because it means even if you spent every last dime in taxes on healthcare, not only would this not be enough to support the plan (either requiring more taxes (good luck with that) or lending the money and increasing debt by a cool 7 trillion), you now have no money for anything else. Say, for example, paying off all student loan debt that you promised to cancel.

No real stake in this tbh (not even American, lol), just curious in how exactly this would be funded and what the consequences would be for other areas of government spending.

 

[Chou Toshio]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/605500/

OMG this article from war criminal David Frum is HILARIOUS

honestly I had ignored it and figured it was just more ridiculous smearing but I didn’t figure it would be ridiculous in the extremely amusing sense. Was listening to Chapo and they started reading to mock it and I just had to read the rest... omg, this is all they got and it’s loltastic.... truly a thing of beauty

but what can you do? This is the guy who goes to Trudeau’s Canada and gets spanked by Steve Bannon on whether Populism is a thing. Lololololol

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

"Sanders jumps to lead nationally among non-white voters"

3 point lead per CNN poll reported on MSNBC


Who was the dumbfuck saying we had to vote Biden because he had all the black support?

 

[MikeDawg]

"Sanders jumps to lead nationally among non-white voters"

3 point lead per CNN poll reported on MSNBC


Who was the dumbfuck saying we had to vote Biden because he had all the black support?

TIL non-white is the same as black.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vic...ts-overwhelming-black-voter/story?id=68195923

And nobody said you "have" to vote for anyone. You can do whatever you want.

There is, however, significance in the fact that he leads black support by 30 points in a 12-person race. If that's not a metric you value, great. But facts are facts.

 

[tcr]

The Democrats like to take credit for the legalization of Gay marriage, when it was actually done through the activism of the community itself and granted by the Supreme Court, not any legislation crafted by the Dems despite the fact that THEY WERE IN POWER when the Supreme Court made that decision. AND they also act like Gay Marriage was the end all be all, and that all that's left is to just play defense for that rather than do anything else for the community. There's still no solid clear language in any state or federal constitution that protects LGBT people from discrimination, and efforts to actually make those clarifications can probably be counted on one hand. And that is quite literally the LEAST they could do for the LGBT community right now. And they still havent done it.

This is something that interests me as I myself am not a part of LGBT. I've asked this before in certain circles and gotten some good answers (thanks myzo) but maybe this can also be extended to the subforum as I know there are other people like me who are simply unaware.

What specific codifications would you like to see enacted? Some examples of things I think fit the bill of "LGBT rights" have been explained to me to be, for example, protection against housing discrimination (such as parents kicking out trans teens, or discrimination when shown apartments or housing). I know that my senator Tim Kaine introduced the Fair and Equal Housing Act but it has not gone to any floor vote yet.

One other thing I can see being a good issue would be eliminating "for cause" firings in the workplace, which are potentially used to circumvent discrimination suits (fired for being "too feminine" in the workplace wrt trans mtf, for example). I think fighting to put sexual orientation in the Equal Rights Act, or creating alternative legislature (personally I think an amendment would be more than sufficient and easier to pass through house and senate) would be a good way to protect the rights of those targeted individuals.

What other specific legislature would you like to see from a candidate? I know there is probably a lot of stuff to pass for transsexual individuals, but is there anything for cis homosexual individuals you see as an issue?

 

[Celticpride]

And don't forget about how wrong polling got it in the 2016 Democratic primaries in Michigan (also mentioned in the article). Polls have been undercounting young people ever since cell phones started becoming more of a thing and there's no getting around it. And even if polling is showing things are good for your guy, you shouldn't let that blind you to the fact that polling has been missing the mark frequently lately - it missed it on the 2016 election in particular, so I think some skepticism on polling is warranted given one of the times polling was wrong is still burned into people's memory.

Polling for 2018 was largely on point. I’d imagine that statisticians and polling operations adjusted based on some of the misfires in 2016, and I would also say that one outlier year does not constitute the level of skepticism around polling this time. The landline and undercounting young people thing is also a basically a myth at this point, it’s not 2010 anymore. Are polls perfect? No, but people need to stop overcorrecting in the other direction too.

On a different note, I find it hard to believe someone other than Biden or Sanders will win the nom. Maybe Bloomberg if he keeps dropping insane amounts of cash.

 

[Chou Toshio]

OMG another one!!!!!

 

[orch]

It's interesting that Buttigieg surged. The neoliberal vote is split between Biden and Buttigieg while Sanders is draining away the leftist voters from Warren. It seems like Sanders' strategy of attacking identity politics is resonating with the populist left.

I'm still disappointed that Yang only has a minority share because I think that he's the best neoliberal and would drain away the white voters from Trump.

 

[Celticpride]

How in the hell is Klob polling at 10%?! There’s been a couple polls that have her in that range too. Thought she was dead in the water.

 

[MikeDawg]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1222181428244492290

Massive sample size, great pollster. Results are unsurprising except for Steyer at 17% (!!!).

Maybe instead of pushing petulant smears about wine caves, the populist candidates should focus on attacking the two actual billionaires in the race. Celticpride is right: they're the only ones who have a legitimate chance alongside Biden and Bernie, and they're rising really quickly.

Steyer wouldn't even tell us what Liz and Bernie said to each other after the debate. He's literally useless.

On that note, the most worrying part of Bernie winning the nom is that he will lose to Trump. I personally think he'll get crushed on his own merits, but even if you think he can put up an actual fight, that goes down the drain when Bloomberg runs 3rd party and splits the vote.

I vehemently disagree with prioritizing anything in the general above beating Trump, but it's kind of poetic that the 2020 #bernieorbust crowd is getting a taste of their own medicine with the Bloomberg threat. I'm guessing (read: hoping) that Bloomberg won't actually go 3rd party, but it's healthy to have that balance so that an 80 year old independent (who is already registered as an independent for 2024... throwing a preemptive tantrum is a great look) can't hold the party hostage.

Plus, Biden is by far the most electable. Even if you don't agree with his worldview, it's delusional to deny that. You can believe another candidate is capable of winning and predicate your support on that (which is a thought I absolutely subscribe to), but Biden would win harder.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1221614935828049921

Between his unwavering poll numbers and the fact that he's been thoroughly vetted already (thanks Obama, thanks Bernie bros, thanks Donald), there's very little chance that he crashes and berns like some populist supporters seem to think ("just wait til the debates!!").

Meanwhile, Bernie is consistently boosted by the Republican party (and Russia, based on the Mueller report) and has avoided any serious public vetting. Even if you hand wave away all of his flaws with extreme nuance, benefit-of-the-doubt, and "Republican talking points!"... that means nothing to the general electorate. Every week he writes himself a new, potent attack ad.

All of the others (besides Bloomberg, based on polling iirc) are too close to Trump in general polls to feel particularly secure. I have no confidence that Liz can handle Trump ("highly educated and affluent" was enough of an insult to make her and her base riot). Pete seems to have all the right tools but just isn't performing in general polls.

 

[Chou Toshio]

How in the hell is Klob polling at 10%?! There’s been a couple polls that have her in that range too. Thought she was dead in the water.

Her surge is part of the last minute panic.

 

[Chou Toshio]

And now that I'm waking up and looking around more:

Boston Herald NH:
Bernie 29
Biden 22
Warren 16
Buttegieg 10

Berkeley California:
Bernie 26
Warren 20
Biden 15
Buttegieg 7

Bernie is now atop the RCP averages for Iowa, NH, and CA

 

[RODAN]

nice drawing you made mikedawg

 

[MikeDawg]

I'm basically a celebrity here, even 6 months later. I love it.

 

[The Amazonian Rainforest]

You severely overestimate yourself MikeDawg.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Gabbard catching up to Warren lol

 

[TheJimJims]

For those who responded to me, thank you! I'd start by just expanding upon my beliefs, but I hope they'll come out more naturally the more I participate here.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/ I've used this site, granted not sure how reliable WaPo is on this stuff, but as you can see from the graphics, the main things that differ between Yang and Sanders are:

1. Sanders wants to tax assets on the wealthiest Americans, whereas Yang wants to adjust capital gains.
2. Sanders wants to cancel all student loan debt, while Yang wants to alleviate debt burdens in other ways.
3. Sanders wants to abolish the electoral college, while Yang wants to reform it.

Personally on these three specific issues, I side much more with Bernie.

I also think that Bernie has just been a more popularly used name with his run for the Democratic nomination in 2016 also already getting his name out there, while Yang hasn't had quite the same exposure to the media.

Thank you! I use Yang's policies list here: https://www.yang2020.com/policies/ so I'll try to respond the best I can with only the information he provides, as well as any he's expanded upon in interviews

In regards to wealthy Americans being taxed, Yang has a similar plan. The Freedom Dividend (I'll just refer to it at the 1k a month thing) is primarily being paid for by a VAT of 10%, meaning that we're taxing corporations 10% of their production. This makes it harder for corporations to hide profits and income. Super powerful corporations are going to be putting much more into the Dividend than most of their administrators are going to get out of it. I think that a VAT is much stronger than a flat wealth tax because it's not limited to those above a certain income rate and scales alongside the power of a corporation. If a corporation makes 10k yearly income and another 100bil, the latter is going to be hit much harder. Capital gains are a major part of it, but wealthy Americans aren't getting off scot-free.

I like the total relief of student debt idea from Bernie. It's one aspect where I prefer Bernie over Yang. That isn't to say Yang has a plan, but total relief for all current student debt and major reform for how loans are constructed going forward is a big part.

3. Yang's plan for voting is pretty large but I'll try to tackle the points about the electoral college here. The main issue is that abolishing the electoral college isn't feasible. We'd need 38 states to agree to an amendment, which we don't have the support for. Even then, the abolition of the electoral college wouldn't change the demographics of the states. Whether we get rid of it or not, Texas is going to have an overwhelming majority of Republican votes and California is going to have an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters. This is why I think Ranked Choice Voting with Proportional Voting would be the best option. Neither would require an amendment and better represents the feelings of the people. Ranked Choice Voting is a fantastic solution to the issue of swing states. Having a state that's solidly red or blue depresses turnout because those who think "well, shit, i wanna vote blue in texas, but that's an L waiting to happen" now have three shots at a blue vote. Our current system leads many to not vote for their favorite candidate, but rather the one they like that also will probably win. This is an issue a lot of Yang supporters are trying to cover; lots of people say they would vote for Yang, but they think he probably won't win. Ranked Choice allows people to vote for their favorite as their top and then the person they think will actually win second.

Hi JimJim, thanks for the question and hope I can provide an insightful and useful answer. Just for reference, I first discovered Andrew Yang early in 2018 when he appeared on Sam Harris’ podcast— I often listened to “Waking Up” at the time, and also a fan of Eric & Bret Weinstein. That’s before JRE, before watching him kick Ben Shapiro’s ass, long before there was a Yang Gang. I immediately took a liking to Andrew, and believed he had a good analysis of the problems plaguing the country. Compared to Bernie, I really loved how he honed in on the issue of automation, and putting UBI front and center. At the time, I believed (as I guess many Yang fans do) that he had a more “updated” understanding of the problems compared to Sanders. I even donated to Yang twice, hoping to see him make the debate stage and challenge Bernie on those issues, and put Automation in the center of discourse.

Bernie was always my #1, but at the start my reasons were more political—his increasingly impressive efforts to galvanize the left, and most importantly, his promise to transform the Democratic Party and his movements to do so. Yang has never been sufficiently opposed to the party leadership for my taste— I needed to hear the promise of revolution; and it had to come from a voice with the moral authority and established trust to make that promise authentic.
(I’ll also note that at the time, Yang appeared to be staunchly for single payer)

But as campaign season kicked off, the engines of outreach in the Bernie machine geared up; and I watched the campaign & candidate evolve— and I evolved with them. From a policy standpoint, I can’t imagine supporting Yang, and the two candidates have seemed to become increasingly different.
In particular, “Hear the Bern” podcast challenged me to listen to broader ideas in the left, including bringing me to actually engage with real socialist voices like Richard Wolff & Michael Brooks— and I found their arguments more compelling than Yang’s or Weinstein’s. I probably moved from SocDem to DemSoc. They convinced me.

What I came to understand, from a policy perspective, the fundamental difference between Yang and Bernie (and between Warren & Bernie as well really) that spans all their policy choices, is whether or not you center power, structure. Whether you re-structure government and systems in order to put power into the hands of the people and focus on strengthening democracy, or if you try to use market mechanisms to “fix” capitalism. Single Payer Medicare for All does this. Strengthening Unions and giving workers increasing amount of shares and board seats does this. Raising the minimum wage, does this. And a Jobs Guarantee does that on steroids because you’re telling private employers “You need to pay this much ad provide benefits this good in order to get any employees at all.”

What I fundamentally came to believe is that the government, controlled by progressive democracy, by the people themselves-- must LEAD the transformation, and I couldn’t put my faith in a candidate who fundamentally structures his policies on the assumption that Government cannot be competent.

Progressive taxes, Single Payer Healthcare, Green New Deal w/ Federal Jobs Guarantee, Foreign Policy of Global Worker Solidarity, Democracy in the Workplace, Free University, Bernie’s Immigration plan…

Bernie continued to get sharper, his policies got sharper, a product of his team getting stronger, his message became clearer and he did the unique thing of putting the voices of people before his own. I loved Bernie in 2016, but my love for Bernie of 2020 is… really, truly, he is the leader that the American people need to write their own future history.

Yang has more in common with Bernie than you may think. Single Payer Healthcare / Medicare for All is his #2 policy after the Freedom Dividend, even if it is a slightly more moderate take than Bernie's. The VAT is a progressive tax which 169 other countries currently have. Also, he's for the Green New Deal, but he says that because we're only 15% of global emissions that even if we took a total 180, we'd make a dent in the acceleration of climate change, but wouldn't be able to reverse it.

I must say, my biggest fear as a fan of Bernie is the $15 minimum wage. I say this because this is going to lead to corporations wanting to save money by automating more jobs. I work in retail right now, and my job would be trivially easy to automate away. The issue with capitalism is that the capitalist at the top is going to look for ways to save and make money, and automation is going to strip that away. I watched an interview with Richard Wolff where he stated that because of the massive move to production in China, India, Brazil, etc. that people can't buy back what they're selling. I fear that this will happen if minimum wage is raised. MORE production will be moved to automation or countries with lower wages.

Hopefully, I can start a fruitful conversation and be here more often.

 

[Chou Toshio]

For those who responded to me, thank you! I'd start by just expanding upon my beliefs, but I hope they'll come out more naturally the more I participate here.



Thank you! I use Yang's policies list here: https://www.yang2020.com/policies/ so I'll try to respond the best I can with only the information he provides, as well as any he's expanded upon in interviews

In regards to wealthy Americans being taxed, Yang has a similar plan. The Freedom Dividend (I'll just refer to it at the 1k a month thing) is primarily being paid for by a VAT of 10%, meaning that we're taxing corporations 10% of their production. This makes it harder for corporations to hide profits and income. Super powerful corporations are going to be putting much more into the Dividend than most of their administrators are going to get out of it. I think that a VAT is much stronger than a flat wealth tax because it's not limited to those above a certain income rate and scales alongside the power of a corporation. If a corporation makes 10k yearly income and another 100bil, the latter is going to be hit much harder. Capital gains are a major part of it, but wealthy Americans aren't getting off scot-free.

I like the total relief of student debt idea from Bernie. It's one aspect where I prefer Bernie over Yang. That isn't to say Yang has a plan, but total relief for all current student debt and major reform for how loans are constructed going forward is a big part.

3. Yang's plan for voting is pretty large but I'll try to tackle the points about the electoral college here. The main issue is that abolishing the electoral college isn't feasible. We'd need 38 states to agree to an amendment, which we don't have the support for. Even then, the abolition of the electoral college wouldn't change the demographics of the states. Whether we get rid of it or not, Texas is going to have an overwhelming majority of Republican votes and California is going to have an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters. This is why I think Ranked Choice Voting with Proportional Voting would be the best option. Neither would require an amendment and better represents the feelings of the people. Ranked Choice Voting is a fantastic solution to the issue of swing states. Having a state that's solidly red or blue depresses turnout because those who think "well, shit, i wanna vote blue in texas, but that's an L waiting to happen" now have three shots at a blue vote. Our current system leads many to not vote for their favorite candidate, but rather the one they like that also will probably win. This is an issue a lot of Yang supporters are trying to cover; lots of people say they would vote for Yang, but they think he probably won't win. Ranked Choice allows people to vote for their favorite as their top and then the person they think will actually win second.




Yang has more in common with Bernie than you may think. Single Payer Healthcare / Medicare for All is his #2 policy after the Freedom Dividend, even if it is a slightly more moderate take than Bernie's. The VAT is a progressive tax which 169 other countries currently have. Also, he's for the Green New Deal, but he says that because we're only 15% of global emissions that even if we took a total 180, we'd make a dent in the acceleration of climate change, but wouldn't be able to reverse it.

I must say, my biggest fear as a fan of Bernie is the $15 minimum wage. I say this because this is going to lead to corporations wanting to save money by automating more jobs. I work in retail right now, and my job would be trivially easy to automate away. The issue with capitalism is that the capitalist at the top is going to look for ways to save and make money, and automation is going to strip that away. I watched an interview with Richard Wolff where he stated that because of the massive move to production in China, India, Brazil, etc. that people can't buy back what they're selling. I fear that this will happen if minimum wage is raised. MORE production will be moved to automation or countries with lower wages.

Hopefully, I can start a fruitful conversation and be here more often.

Yang is non-starter for me because he won’t oppose party leadership and because he’s totally opened himself to PACs and wealthy fundraising. It’s not enough to have policies for money in politics— I need principle and promises about the way the campaign is run.

Yang has moved away from single payer. Only using the name while being right of Biden on healthcare is completely unacceptable.
VAT is regressive and vulnerable to corruption no matter how you try to tweak it.
On the Green New Deal it sounds like he’s completely wrong-headed— if emissions are done by more than the US, by much of the world, that the US should help (especially the developing world). It means the US has to do more for the developing world in order to help them industrialize and transition; especially with the history of western imperialism we have played. Bernie’s plan calls for a radical green foreign aid plan that will mean eliminating far more than 100% of US emissions because we will be reducing foreign emissions as well.

On trade fundamentally Yang is a free trade candidate, and he’s got nothing on Bernie in terms of keeping jobs in the US.
If we’re worried about where companies go and what they do, the answer is empowering the IRS, working foreign policy to eliminate tax havens, and using the government to generate the economic activity we need at home— and we will generate a lot of activity, as we transform our infrastructure, provide universal childcare, eliminate food and medical deserts, and do massive housing projects. The wealth of the country is its labor— and the main inputs into improving productivity, improving that wealth is in making people healthier, more educated, more connected (infra), and with more open use basic research— all of which come (or should come) primarily from the government. This understanding is antithetical to Yang’s view of how the economy works, and that’s why I have no faith in him.