Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Noxx79]

This is a failure to address what I actually wrote. I'm not opposed to reforming the system going forward, I'm opposed to rewards people that behaved worse in the past.

Bullshit. It does address it. Why should you go to the grocery store? My ancestors had to hunt in the plains. It’s perverse that I Haven’t learned how to hunt with handmade spears, when others have.

You’re also Making the disgusting argument that everyone behind in student debt has done so because they mismanaged their finances.

It’s selfish, idiotic, and contrary to societally values.

[cubby]

Really? So, I have to vote for a potential senile sex offender "to save the country" because as you said "he is the candidate"? No.

No. I refuse to reduce myself to a fucking hypocrite. I am supposed to care about Trump and the country but not the Democratic Party? No. If this is the choice I don't care anymore and whatever happens if Trump gets re-elected we deserve it.

Give me a fucking alternative or I won't fucking vote at all.

Then you get Trump again. And "whatever happens" is on you.

[Spectral]

Bullshit. It does address it. Why should you go to the grocery store? My ancestors had to hunt in the plains. It’s perverse that I Haven’t learned how to hunt with handmade spears, when others have.

You’re also Making the disgusting argument that everyone behind in student debt has done so because they mismanaged their finances.

It’s selfish, idiotic, and contrary to societally values.

You're continuing to make the same mistake and it's getting dopey. Yes, do better than your ancestors going forward. No, don't reward your ancestors for bad behavior. People that made sacrifices to pay off loans should be in a better financial position going forward than people that did not pay their loans - the inverse outcome is perverse.

[cubby]

Her story broke on a podcast run by a Assad apologist and a racist.

Warren and Bernie (40 years of consistency) see right through this charade. Why cant the poster that used to "support" them?

Moar benefits from the Warren Endorsement!
Elizabeth Warren raised more than *$100 million* without doing traditional big-money fundraisers for her presidential campaign.
As part of her endorsement, she allowed Joe Biden to send a note to her full donor list today.


/geuss who just got a note from Biden

Plus, Biden will be fully tapped into Obama's fundraising network, which set the modern standard. Likewise, the VoteBlue site (forget actual name, lol) will be in full swing, while the GOP version is still set up to send most of the money to the owners rather than the candidates.

- - - Updated - - -

You're continuing to make the same mistake and it's getting dopey. Yes, do better than your ancestors going forward. No, don't reward your ancestors for bad behavior. People that made sacrifices to pay off loans should be in a better financial position going forward than people that did not pay their loans - the inverse outcome is perverse.

So don't fix mistakes of the past and make everyone's life better going forward? Wow - Trump loves you.

[Draco-Onis]

That's the nature of a two party system. It's going to be rare to get your candidate to be the perfect match to you. The political purity tests that people are bringing into the general election are incredibly self-defeating. The ideological purity belongs in the primaries. That's over now -- political reality has to set in and people need to realize what's at stake and not let perfect be the enemy of good -- or even just mediocre in this case.

Also, people need to stop being unreasonable. This meme that a Biden presidency would be indistinguishable or even worse than another term of Trump is so laughable it's frightening anyone is using that argument seriously.

It's not ideological purity Joe Biden is a republican to me but he is better than Trump heck I can't think of many people who I wouldn't vote for instead of Trump. If you want people to band together stop brushing their concerns aside as ideological purity tests because Joe Biden's record is clear. The reason he got the VP spot was because he is so right leaning to balance the fake progressive Obama.

- - - Updated - - -

You're continuing to make the same mistake and it's getting dopey. Yes, do better than your ancestors going forward. No, don't reward your ancestors for bad behavior. People that made sacrifices to pay off loans should be in a better financial position going forward than people that did not pay their loans - the inverse outcome is perverse.

Is this another pull yourself by the bootstrap thing? I gather you must hate social security, medicare, medicare and any social safety net.

[Endus]

You're continuing to make the same mistake and it's getting dopey. Yes, do better than your ancestors going forward. No, don't reward your ancestors for bad behavior. People that made sacrifices to pay off loans should be in a better financial position going forward than people that did not pay their loans - the inverse outcome is perverse.

This is literally just the Boomer Trolley Problem applied to policy.

"We can't make things better for people, because others had to deal with bullshit in the past and it would be unfair to them to improve things for others".

That's exactly your argument. It's like arguing that we can't have universal healthcare because it's "unfair" to people who were bankrupted by medical costs. That we can't have minimum wages because it's "unfair" to those who struggled to make ends meet while working three jobs.

Plus a heaping dose of victim-blaming, by imputing that anyone with unpaid student loans is financially irresponsible.

[Spectral]

Is this another pull yourself by the bootstrap thing? I gather you must hate social security, medicare, medicare and any social safety net.

No, I'm pretty sure I've been consistent in endorsing free or cheap state university education for those that qualify academically. What I'm against is forgiveness is the specific context of student loans willingly entered into, especially when they were for expensive private universities. I am in favor of shifting to these being dischargeable in bankruptcy as other debts are to avoid them being a lifelong burden, but people that willingly entered a contract for a loan that they can pay for should pay the loan they chose to take. Having a jubilee would be particularly perverse in a context where other people chose to pay these off and will be materially worse off than people that instead chose to spend that money on a house or car. This is a really bad precedent.

I do dislike Social Security for a variety of structural reasons that are beside the point here (regressive taxation, no means testing, relies on a growing population), but broadly favor universal healthcare and UBIish or negative income tax safety net plans.

- - - Updated - - -

This is literally just the Boomer Trolley Problem applied to policy.

"We can't make things better for people, because others had to deal with bullshit in the past and it would be unfair to them to improve things for others".

That's exactly your argument. It's like arguing that we can't have universal healthcare because it's "unfair" to people who were bankrupted by medical costs. That we can't have minimum wages because it's "unfair" to those who struggled to make ends meet while working three jobs.

Plus a heaping dose of victim-blaming, by imputing that anyone with unpaid student loans is financially irresponsible.

Can you think of any reasons that medical costs and university attendance are materially different?

[Draco-Onis]

No, I'm pretty sure I've been consistent in endorsing free or cheap state university education for those that qualify academically. What I'm against is forgiveness is the specific context of student loans willingly entered into, especially when they were for expensive private universities. I am in favor of shifting to these being dischargeable in bankruptcy as other debts are to avoid them being a lifelong burden, but people that willingly entered a contract for a loan that they can pay for should pay the loan they chose to take. Having a jubilee would be particularly perverse in a context where other people chose to pay these off and will be materially worse off than people that instead chose to spend that money on a house or car. This is a really bad precedent.

You mean like when we gave and keep giving trillions of dollars to corporations? That kind of precedent?

[Spectral]

You mean like when we gave and keep giving trillions of dollars to corporations? That kind of precedent?

Yes, that was a bad precedent. Is this supposed to be a gotcha? One of the critiques of bailouts is indeed that perverse incentives are implied by the federal government going forward. I've been pretty consistent in being concerned about that. For both corporate bailouts and student loan bailouts, if you're going to do it you need to do something to prevent that implicit perverse incentive. If we're going to do forgiveness, it needs to come with a massive reform to who's on the hook for future accumulated debt.

[Endus]

Can you think of any reasons that medical costs and university attendance are materially different?

Sure. But that's true of literally any two different issues, because they are different issues.

I don't see how those differences are relevant here, since you're arguing against student loan reforms on the grounds that it would be "unfair" to people who struggled through the current, bad system. That's the same non-logic as arguing against healthcare reform because some people sold their house to pay for their surgery and it would be "unfair" to them if anyone could get surgery without selling their house.

What matters to this particular point is that the current system is punitive and abusive, and should be reformed. Opposing that on the basis that some people were able to survive the status quo is, without exception, a horseshit argument.

Edit: You seem to be basing your approach to policy based on protecting the ability to abuse and victimize those in need, rather than aiding them. That these people made poor decisions, and should suffer because of that. That's a premise I'm not ever going to agree to, because it's misanthropic at its core.

[Lenonis]

It's not ideological purity Joe Biden is a republican to me

But, no offense, that's a meaningless statement. He's a member of the democratic party running a democratic platform. What he isn't is a progressive. Saying "he's a republican to me" is like me saying "well Draco-Onis is a T-rex to me using stilts to type". Just because I believe that doesn't make it true. And it runs the real danger of falling into false equivalency -- because what I believe you ACTUALLY mean is "Biden is a republican circa 1980."

but he is better than Trump heck I can't think of many people who I wouldn't vote for instead of Trump.

Right. Which gets to my point about political realism and pragmatism vs unrestrained ideology.

[Spectral]

Sure. But that's true of literally any two different issues, because they are different issues.

I don't see how those differences are relevant here, since you're arguing against student loan reforms on the grounds that it would be "unfair" to people who struggled through the current, bad system. That's the same non-logic as arguing against healthcare reform because some people sold their house to pay for their surgery and it would be "unfair" to them if anyone could get surgery without selling their house.

What matters to this particular point is that the current system is punitive and abusive, and should be reformed. Opposing that on the basis that some people were able to survive the status quo is, without exception, a horseshit argument.

Edit: You seem to be basing your approach to policy based on protecting the ability to abuse and victimize those in need, rather than aiding them. That these people made poor decisions, and should suffer because of that. That's a premise I'm not ever going to agree to, because it's misanthropic at its core.

The relevant difference is the choices - student loans are voluntary, medical debt is typically not.

But sure, I'm on board for a combination of slamming the door on federally backed student loans for private universities, making public universities close to free for the student, and making student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy. This more or less requires noticing that there really was a predator though - private universities have massively enriched endowments and many of their students have loans they can't plausibly pay off.

[Endus]

The relevant difference is the choices - student loans are voluntary, medical debt is typically not.

I fail to see how that is really a relevant factor, here.

Particularly as post-secondary education is often as necessary as medical care, in terms of quality of life and so forth. We don't live in a world where you can do whatever you want with just a high school education.

It's like suggesting that slum lords are fine, because their tenants weren't forced to sign a lease with shitty, abusive fine print; they "voluntarily" did so.

[Spectral]

I fail to see how that is really a relevant factor, here.

Particularly as post-secondary education is often as necessary as medical care, in terms of quality of life and so forth. We don't live in a world where you can do whatever you want with just a high school education.

It's like suggesting that slum lords are fine, because their tenants weren't forced to sign a lease with shitty, abusive fine print; they "voluntarily" did so.

The first couple paragraphs seems obviously dumb, but whatever. If you think a liberal arts degree is just as essential to life as a bone marrow transplant, I probably can't convince you otherwise.

In the case of slum lords, the appropriate group to make eat shit with a policy is the slum lord - in this analogy, universities are slum lords, selling a shitty product that there's a strong implication is something other than what they're actually getting.

[Kasierith]

I have no problem with people who went in for "soft" degrees like communications getting bailed out. An entire generation and more got fed what amounted to outright lies, that if they get into college they will have a prosperous future and it would be a done deal. They're not the ones who sold that dream, and set up an economy hostile towards newcomers to screw them at the pass.

My main concern is that fully suspending fees would drive companies and professions to set hard requirements, because of the readily available access. Like with computer programming, which amounts to several years of nearly complete waste because what people are hiring for doesn't remotely match up with the didactic courses... but still need those useless degrees to pass HR regardless of what skills they actually have. Ultimately, I want vocational schools and the like to be more fully realized as an important part of preparing people for life.

[Endus]

The first couple paragraphs seems obviously dumb, but whatever. If you think a liberal arts degree is just as essential to life as a bone marrow transplant, I probably can't convince you otherwise.

Healthcare isn't just major treatment. It's also going to your GP because you've got a flu, or an infected toe. It's getting your ADHD diagnosed so you can deal with it properly. It's having digestive issues figured out with your gastroenterologist, because eliminating discomfort is a good thing.

You're also weirdly dismissive of the liberal arts. History, philosophy, psychology, these are important topics, and bring employable skills outside of their specific fields.

Getting a history and education degree and becoming a high school history teacher is just as valid a career path as getting a compsci degree and becoming a codemonkey.

[Spectral]

Healthcare isn't just major treatment. It's also going to your GP because you've got a flu, or an infected toe. It's getting your ADHD diagnosed so you can deal with it properly. It's having digestive issues figured out with your gastroenterologist, because eliminating discomfort is a good thing.

You're also weirdly dismissive of the liberal arts. History, philosophy, psychology, these are important topics, and bring employable skills outside of their specific fields.

Getting a history and education degree and becoming a high school history teacher is just as valid a career path as getting a compsci degree and becoming a codemonkey.

I like liberal arts just fine, but framing $100K in debt for the sake of having a deep grasp of Renaissance sculpture as being something someone couldn't reasonably be expected to avoid in basically the same way as needing a heart stent is the kind of dopey shit that only an academic at heart could love.

[AntiFascistVoter]

This goofy hypocrisy fascinates me. Its so cartoonish.

• I never supported Trump.
• I seldom never really criticize Trump.
• Everyone that criticizes Trump is clearly deranged.

One is clearly not like the other two.

This is a weird hill to die on six times-a-day. It's like strapping yourself to a crate of ACME explosives, over and over.

[Draco-Onis]

But, no offense, that's a meaningless statement. He's a member of the democratic party running a democratic platform. What he isn't is a progressive. Saying "he's a republican to me" is like me saying "well Draco-Onis is a T-rex to me using stilts to type". Just because I believe that doesn't make it true. And it runs the real danger of falling into false equivalency -- because what I believe you ACTUALLY mean is "Biden is a republican circa 1980."

You are being picky when you understand exactly what I mean you wouldn't call Joe Manchin a democrat just because he is part of the party, having a D next to your name doesn't mean you are left wing. I think the problem is being a republican is rather meaningless at the moment since they have no values to speak of.

[Thepersona]

-snip-

Biden is better than trump. Orders of magnitude better. He may not be better than Warren or Sanders, but even a turd is better than the orange in chief.