Convince me to vote for Kerry

[Dis]

how can you not vote for this man (although his reason for not carrying the bird himself is cheesy)

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
There is a pattern to the leftist dialetic.

dialectic == the logic of change
This is an inappropriate use of the term.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Or poor or a woman or gay or an intellectual or basically anything else that went against the mainstream. The 50s, a culturally dead, soul sucking vampire decade. The reason the 60s were so over the top was because of the 50s.

God yes....any era that advocates valium to make sure women don't become bored when they stay at home all the time and do housework has serious problems.

-Drachasor

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Ned


There is a pattern to the leftist dialetic. If they lose the battle of ideas, they either divert attention or attack their adversary personally.

Both sides do this when they're either losing an argument or frustrated with the opponent. A leftist will typically call the opponent stupid or evil, and a rightist will typically call the opponent a degenerate (socially values) or a traitor. *shrug*

-Arrian

[Ned]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
But you give someone who's making $5.15 a raise to $7.00 and you know what? They're not going to save that extra $1.85. They're going to take that extra money -- maybe $40/week after taxes -- and buy some new clothes, or more food, or maybe just new cds, or eat out more, or go to the movies instead of watching tv, or whatever. They're going to put it right back into the consumer economy, where it will do the most good.

True for those who remained employed. Not true for those who are laid off or who never get a job in the first place due to the price barrier.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned
Dis, think.

1) You raise wages of a significant number of people you get two short term effects: more buying power in the hands of the minimum wage worker; and

2) Continued buying power for those who are laid off due to unemployment insurance.

But after a while, the unemployment compensation ends, and overall employment and employability is reduced. This reduces overall economic activity.

Money does not grow on trees. Neither does the ability to pay wages. Those who tell you otherwise are lying to you.

Handily ignoring the fact the more buying power means the companies are getting more profit; the working class loves to spend money. That's going to increase the profits companies make.

-Drachasor

[Dis]

Originally posted by Ned


True for those who remained employed. Not true for those who are laid off or who never get a job in the first place due to the price barrier.

but they will be compensated by unemployment insurance. And in the mean time the higher paid workers will be spending the extra money putting it back into the economy creating more jobs. They won't be out of work long.

I expect a temporary dip in employment if the minimum wage increases. But overall I think it is good for the economy to raise minimum wage every so often.

[Ned]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
some different reasons to vote for Kerry. (not that im sure I will)

In the late 1940's some dems thought that it was necessary for the GOP to take over, to force them to be responsible, to stop sniping at the Cold war from the sidelines (who lost China and all that) and to face up to the real difficulties Cold war policy dilemmas presented.

We may be at that point now. The WOT has to be a national war, and not a GOP war. Its easy to snipe at policies in Iraq, at the failure to capture bin laden, at the Patriot act. It is necessary that a Democrat President face dilemmas of dealing with Musharraf and the Saudis, of hunting for OBL, of dealing with reconstruction in Iraq. That a Dem Attorney General face the prospect of revising the Patriot Act, deciding what parts need to be kept, and then defending that decision. That a Dem Sec of Homeland Security administer the alert system, or scrap and replace it if theres a better one. Tha a Dem foreign policy team ultimately face down those elements, in the US and abroad, that are not reconcilable, that are not supportive of even a more multilateral WOT - as the Eisenhower admin ultimately faced down Joe McCarthy.

I cannot assure you that the above will happen in a Kerry administration, but IF it does, it will be very valuable.

This is perverse.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Arrian
Both sides do this when they're either losing an argument or frustrated with the opponent. A leftist will typically call the opponent stupid or evil, and a rightist will typically call the opponent a degenerate (socially values) or a traitor. *shrug*
-Arrian

Originally posted by Ned in response to a long-winded post by a possible leftist
This is perverse.

Entry: perverse
Function: adjective
Definition: mean
Synonyms: abnormal, bad-tempered, *****y, cantankerous, capricious, contradictory, contrary, contumacious, corrupt, crabby, cross, degenerate, delinquent, depraved, deviant, disobedient, dogged, erring, fractious, hard-nosed, headstrong, intractable, intransigent, irritable, miscreant, mulish, nefarious, obdurate, obstinate, ornery, petulant, pig-headed, rebellious, refractory, rotten, self-willed, spiteful, stubborn, unhealthy, unmanageable, unreasonable, unyielding, villainous, wayward, wicked, willful

-Drachasor

[Arrian]

Well done, sir.

-Arrian

[Japher]

Handily ignoring the fact the more buying power means the companies are getting more profit; the working class loves to spend money. That's going to increase the profits companies make.

That will more likely increase inflation.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Drachasor


That's funny, because when I have said I am a socialist, everyone starts telling me what my policies are concerning government ownership of near everything, and so forth. When I tell them I am for social equality and related items, but I disagree with the way these have traditionally been implemented in Europe, I am told I am not a socialist. (My position is then that I am either not a socialist, but share some beliefs with them, or I am some sort of neo-neo-socialist or a "pragmatic socialist").

Anyhow, you can't act like socialism is crazy or bound for horror if you allow "socialists" to use any methods they want to foster greater social equality. There are a lot of things that simply haven't been tried.

-Drachasor

Good.

That some people can define socialism to be exactly what their personal manifesto is and that everyone who does not agree with this manifesto is not a socialist is interesting but not important. Such rigid orthodoxy is like saying the only Christians are those who adhere to all the dogma of a particular sect.

Socialists seem to have central values, but differ in methods. The main central value seems to be that government should promote "social equality."

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Japher
That will more likely increase inflation.

Not really, you might have some product shortages here and there, but that will cause a ramp in profits which would then cause a ramp up in production.

Any negative effects would be temporary.

-Drachasor

[Ned]

Originally posted by Drachasor


LOL, you think that is what caused the Great Depression? Overpriced stocks, buying stocks on credit, and Hoover's raising of farm *tarriffs* made and worsened the depression. Kerry isn't proposing any tarrifs (the only thing even close is equalizing the taxes for off-shore companies compared to ones in the U.S. which is quite different).

The economy is already on a slow recovery, and it will recover faster by giving the working class the equivalent of tax breaks. The rich can survive a few rough months a lot better than the poor, and heck, the only thing keepin the economy from fully recovering is the lack of spending by the working class. Right now a lot of business have made much more massive recoveries than the job market; they can take a hit to their incomes (and they were doing just fine under Clinton too).

-Drachasor

Drach, the consensus view seems to be that unbalanced budgets and government induced demand are a primary if not the only way to get out of a depression, and that balancing budgets and raising taxes only reinforces a recession into a depression.

Remember, we only really got out of the depression of the 30's when we began massive deficit spending during WWII.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Dissident


I don't like the word social. I'd use civil instead. And of course the primary purpose of the federal goverment is to provide national security- ie a military to unite the states against a common aggressor.

I did not say "THE." I said "A."