Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Elegiac]

I've read quite a few articles about a $15/hr minimum wage further destroying Puerto Rico's economy, but it's hard to tell how much truth there is to it. They do seem to have been impacted by the previous increase to $7.25.

Yes, it must certainly be that and not all the colonialism.

Y'all...

[Endus]

Better idea, make them a State.

Seriously, there should be a simple process of, say, after 10-25 years of being a protectorate or whatever, if your population is above X (where X is the total population of the least-populous current State), you automatically "graduate" to Statehood, with representation coming in the next federal election cycle.

That would've made Puerto Rico a State decades ago. The other remaining protectorates would fail the population requirement, but I'm honestly not arguing that as a reasonable grounds for denying Statehood, just that if you've got a higher population than a current State, there's basically no defensible justification for denying Statehood. If Hawaii's a State, Puerto Rico should be, given that it's got twice as many people and is even closer to the continental USA to boot.

Like, this process shouldn't be debated. It should just be automatic.

[Nurasu]

Yes, it must certainly be that and not all the colonialism.

Y'all...

I mean, a federally mandated minimum wage that doesn't address the realities of the island is part of that colonialism is it not?

[Elegiac]

I mean, a federally mandated minimum wage that doesn't address the realities of the island is part of that colonialism is it not?

Cool, that wasn’t what I was responding to. I was responding to the claim that Puerto Rico’s economic woes were the result of a minimum wage increase.

Statehood won’t fix Puerto Rico’s problems anymore than it fixed Hawaii’s: it’s a necessary stepping stone, just like a minimum wage increase is nationally.

[Endus]

Cool, that wasn’t what I was responding to. I was responding to the claim that Puerto Rico’s economic woes were the result of a minimum wage increase.

Statehood won’t fix Puerto Rico’s problems anymore than it fixed Hawaii’s: it’s a necessary stepping stone, just like a minimum wage increase is nationally.

I mean, is the issue the overall poverty of Puerto Rico in general? And a fear that paying people a $15 minimum wage will lead to inflation of prices?

First, the connection between minimum wage hikes and inflation is VASTLY overstated, and anyone making close to minimum wage will see an increase of purchasing power, guaranteed, mathematically certain.

Second, paying people enough to live better is the fastest way out of the worst excesses of poverty. You're not gonna improve Puerto Rico's economy by seeking to depress wages on the island.

[Zardoz541]

... If Hawaii's a State, Puerto Rico should be, given that it's got twice as many people and is even closer to the continental USA to boot.

Like, this process shouldn't be debated. It should just be automatic.

The only caveat I would add is the population of said protectorate needs to vote to become a state. Like the 52% that did this past election.

Endus/Vegas, most of this isn't directed at you, but may be of interest to those who don't know the history here.

Hawai'i is a state because and only because we flat out stole it.

Quick background - A group of snow-white rich American business pricks conspired not once, but twice, to overthrow the rightful Hawai'ian monarchy in order to enrich themselves and their sugar plantation overlord missionary families. First with King Kalaka'ua in the 1880's with the Bayonet Treaty, and then with Queen Liliuo'kalani in the 1890's. Sovereignty over Hawai'i was surrendered to a group of white-ass businessmen representing the "interests" of the United States on August 12, 1898.

As of 1946, Hawai'i was still listed as a colony of the United States by the United Nations, and the effort to confer statehood was ONLY brought about because in 1959, the United States was facing forced decolonization of the islands by order of the United Nations. By then, the population of Hawai'i had grown from approx 90,000 in the late 1800's to well over half a million people. Proportionally, where Hawai'ians made up 98% of the population around 1890, they made up less than 15% of the population in 1959.

So, the 85% white population, not wanting to give up all the loot they had claimed over the last 80 years, stuffed the ballot box in favor of statehood. As if that weren't bad enough, the ballot itself was illegal. By the UN rules and US law at the time, the ballot had to offer four choices: Statehood, Territory, Free Association Relation, or Independence. The actual ballot only said something to the effect of "Statehood: Yes or No?".

In 1988, the USDOJ issued a memorandum regarding the illegality of the aforementioned vote, saying "The stated justification for the joint resolution – the previous acquisition of Texas – simply ignores the reliance the 1845 Congress placed on its power to admit new states. It is therefore unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawai‘i can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty."

---

Okay, so what does any of that have to do with what you said?
What it really comes down to is no, the process should most assuredly not be automatic, - AND
The process absolutely should be debated.

Puerto Rico should be conferred statehood by and only by a majority vote of Puerto Ricans, in a manner so as to offer more than a simple up/down vote on the matter in question. To do anything less would do a disservice to Puerto Ricans, put (yet) another stain on the United States with respect to our history of colonialism, and be yet another backhand across the face of those who we already pillaged, occupied, and overthrew.

I appreciate Vegas' assertion of the same, and recognize that these votes have come up to indicate desire to admit PR into statehood.
I just think we need to go above and beyond to make sure it's all above-board this time.

Ua mau ke Ea 'o ka Aina i ka pono.

[cubby]

Okay, so what does any of that have to do with what you said?
What it really comes down to is no, the process should most assuredly not be automatic, - AND
The process absolutely should be debated.

Puerto Rico should be conferred statehood by and only by a majority vote of Puerto Ricans, in a manner so as to offer more than a simple up/down vote on the matter in question. To do anything less would do a disservice to Puerto Ricans, put (yet) another stain on the United States with respect to our history of colonialism, and be yet another backhand across the face of those who we already pillaged, occupied, and overthrew.

I appreciate Vegas' assertion of the same, and recognize that these votes have come up to indicate desire to admit PR into statehood.
I just think we need to go above and beyond to make sure it's all above-board this time.

Ua mau ke Ea 'o ka Aina i ka pono.

What do you suggest we do over and above the up/down vote?

And what do think on the issue of D.C. statehood?

[Nurasu]

I mean, is the issue the overall poverty of Puerto Rico in general? And a fear that paying people a $15 minimum wage will lead to inflation of prices?

First, the connection between minimum wage hikes and inflation is VASTLY overstated, and anyone making close to minimum wage will see an increase of purchasing power, guaranteed, mathematically certain.

Second, paying people enough to live better is the fastest way out of the worst excesses of poverty. You're not gonna improve Puerto Rico's economy by seeking to depress wages on the island.

Historically, the average inflation rate has almost always fallen after a minimum wage hike (correlation != causation, necessarily). In Puerto Rico though, there is such a high % of people that earn that rate (or % of people that made less than that rate, before they were mandated to meet it in the 80s I believe) that the opposite occurs and unemployment rises.

I guess I'm curious if there's a point when inflation becomes a leveling factor and their economy is 'reset' so to speak, or if it would be less damaging to exclude them from the increase. Perhaps in the future statehood will solve the problem, but that isn't necessarily a short term prospect.

- - - Updated - - -

What do you suggest we do over and above the up/down vote?

And what do think on the issue of D.C. statehood?

Curious as well. Previous referendums split the vote between independence/remain a territory, while the yes votes are obviously more consolidated. Kind of skews the results, imo.

[Zardoz541]

What do you suggest we do over and above the up/down vote?

Curious as well. Previous referendums split the vote between independence/remain a territory, while the yes votes are obviously more consolidated. Kind of skews the results, imo.

I recognize that Puerto Rico 2021 is a different situation than the forced vote of Hawai'i 1959, but I'd like to think a similar battery of options on an initial vote could be given as was back then. A vote that includes options beyond STATE=YES/NO would give those who we govern without right to vote for the President and without right of representation in congress a more meaningful choice.

As an aside, I'm not sure Independence as a standalone sovereign nation is in PR's best interests, though I am not Puerto Rican so I cannot say for sure. I would think that any such move would doom the newborn country economically pretty much immediately. Then again, Jamaica, Armenia, Mongolia and Uruguay have similar populations, so who knows, maybe it could work? I'm neither a politician or an economist, so I can't be certain.

My only real point is to give a more meaningful choice than we have given historically to those we seek to annex.

[cubby]

I recognize that Puerto Rico 2021 is a different situation than the forced vote of Hawai'i 1959, but I'd like to think a similar battery of options on an initial vote could be given as was back then but with a few changes.

I'm not sure Independence as a standalone sovereign nation is in PR's best interests, though I am not Puerto Rican so I cannot say for sure. I would think that any such move would doom the newborn country economically pretty much immediately. Then again, Jamaica, Armenia, Mongolia and Uruguay have similar populations, so who knows, maybe it could work? I'm neither a politician or an economist, so I can't be certain.

Aside from that, a vote that includes options beyond STATE=YES/NO I think would give those who we govern without right to vote for the President and without right of representation in congress a more meaningful choice.

But what choices would you offer in that vote and how would you structure it? I get that protecting PR from both itself and the United States is an issue, but at the same time, we would need to be able to lay out any other choices in a clear and concise matter.

On top of that, how would those choices affect the available status' that protectorates can chose, either within the confines of the United States' laws and the United Nations?

I hear you saying we need to do something, but I don't see you saying what needs to be done specifically.

(btw - loved your summary of the history of Hawaii )

[Zardoz541]

But what choices would you offer in that vote and how would you structure it? I get that protecting PR from both itself and the United States is an issue, but at the same time, we would need to be able to lay out any other choices in a clear and concise matter.

On top of that, how would those choices affect the available status' that protectorates can chose, either within the confines of the United States' laws and the United Nations?

I hear you saying we need to do something, but I don't see you saying what needs to be done specifically.

(btw - loved your summary of the history of Hawaii )

I edited my original reply a bit but I think perhaps even that won't suffice to answer your direct question; my bad on that.

When it really comes down to it, I can't think of a better ballot option than what SHOULD have been offered on the measure in 1959 with respect to Hawai'i, as per United Nations regulations/rules.

I mean... I guess we could add an option to give it back to Spain? But i'm not sure that's in anyone's best interests either...

[cubby]

I edited my original reply a bit but I think perhaps even that won't suffice to answer your direct question; my bad on that.

When it really comes down to it, I can't think of a better ballot option than what SHOULD have been offered on the measure in 1959 with respect to Hawai'i, as per United Nations regulations/rules.

I mean... I guess we could add an option to give it back to Spain? But i'm not sure that's in anyone's best interests either...

No sweat - done that so many times myself.

But I think I get what you're saying. Essentially, it's fine for PR to decide, but let them decide on all FOUR options (Statehood, Territory, Free Association Relation, or Independence), not just YES/NO statehood.

I like those four choices, and apparently so does the law, lol. One thing to consider is what threshold would count as the "winner". If those four choices were put to a vote, and Statehood got 38% of the vote (and it had the highest amount), would that count? Or would you create a weighted voting system. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I promise (), but I'm genuinely curious about this, as I'm just learning about the history of Hawaii and their statehood path. And what if the four choices ended with totals close to 25% each? Would the vote be a wash?

Very interesting.

[Endus]

Endus/Vegas, most of this isn't directed at you, but may be of interest to those who don't know the history here.

Hawai'i is a state because and only because we flat out stole it.

I freely admit I don't know a heck of a lot about Hawaiian history (I'd be interested to dig into it, but my list of "things I'm interested enough to dig into" is pretty damned big and constantly growing; there's just too damn much to learn, everywhere). My position was entirely based on a desire for systemic representation for the peoples of those protectorates.

The other option would, of course, be independence. Don't take my argument as condemning that option. I just find the "infinite protectorate" to be a pretty galling state of affairs, overall; there should be some kind of representation of their interests federally. As it stands, they pay US taxes, but get no federal representation, which I don't agree should be a tenable state of affairs.

I'm by no means a friend of colonialism, but the current state of affairs renders Puerto Rico and the other US protectorates into colonies in practice, even if the legal terminology differs, allowing them to be exploited by the USA economically, without any representation of their interests. Statehood would, at least, offer them that representation. Independence would remove the exploitation, and allow for true self-governance. There are different answers about what's best, but I don't see "remain a protectorate indefinitely" as a viable option for that list.

I may also be overlooking some matter of Statehood that would negatively impact Puerto Rico, but IMO those issues can be handled separately in other ways, and may be part and parcel of the exploitation in question.

[Zardoz541]

And what do think on the issue of D.C. statehood?

Personally, as a former resident of the Maryland suburbs of DC, having grown up with the "Taxation without Representation" DC License plates and pondering the implied historical hypocrisy, I am in favor of pushing for statehood for Washington DC. I also believe that the citizens of DC should be included in the process. Here, though, I still struggle with pondering whether a simple Up/Down vote on statehood is appropriate.

I don't really see this vote as anything other than a binary question of become a state or remain a federal district, but sometimes feel like I should. But I can't do that just for the sake of itself, and have yet to come up with any compelling reason why it can't be a simple binary.

- - - Updated - - -

One thing to consider is what threshold would count as the "winner". If those four choices were put to a vote, and Statehood got 38% of the vote (and it had the highest amount), would that count? Or would you create a weighted voting system. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I promise (), but I'm genuinely curious about this, as I'm just learning about the history of Hawaii and their statehood path. And what if the four choices ended with totals close to 25% each? Would the vote be a wash?

Very interesting.

Honestly, this is where i throw up a shrug emoji and say, in earnest, I don't know. I genuinely do not know what the right course of action would be with respect to the mechanisms of how such a vote should be run. Shooting from the hip, I'd say that the four choices are put on an initial ballot, and the bottom choice is eliminated, further discussion/debate is held and a second ballot is offered with the remaining choices.

Should there be mechanisms in place if no clear option gains a specified percentage of the overall vote, or if a runner-up is within X percentage points? Shit, man, I don't know. Probably? What specific mechanisms/thresholds should there be? Fuck if I know...

I'm genuinely not trying to be a dick here and opine without offering some semblance of a cogent solution; I just don't really know what the "best" option is, and I certainly don't think I am qualified to state specific percentage numbers as thresholds for recounts or the like.

My position was entirely based on a desire for systemic representation for the peoples of those protectorates.

The other option would, of course, be independence. Don't take my argument as condemning that option. I just find the "infinite protectorate" to be a pretty galling state of affairs, overall; there should be some kind of representation of their interests federally. As it stands, they pay US taxes, but get no federal representation, which I don't agree should be a tenable state of affairs.

I'm by no means a friend of colonialism, but the current state of affairs renders Puerto Rico and the other US protectorates into colonies in practice, even if the legal terminology differs, allowing them to be exploited by the USA economically, without any representation of their interests. Statehood would, at least, offer them that representation. Independence would remove the exploitation, and allow for true self-governance. There are different answers about what's best, but I don't see "remain a protectorate indefinitely" as a viable option for that list.

I may also be overlooking some matter of Statehood that would negatively impact Puerto Rico, but IMO those issues can be handled separately in other ways, and may be part and parcel of the exploitation in question.

I think you and I are in complete agreement on this aspect of the subject.

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-amer...onciliation-to

So...how popular is the Democrats push for stimulus, even if they functionally ignore the Republican members of Congress? Pretty fuckin popular, actually.

The survey finds 94 percent of Democrats support using budget reconciliation to further relief legislation along with 68 percent of independents.

Roughly 6 in 10 Republican respondents support Democrats in Congress using budget reconciliation to pass another stimulus package.

Reminder that Democratic/progressive policies and legislation are historically far, far more popular than Republican/conservative policies and legislation, and that trend continues today.

[Kaleredar]

Uhm... I said it, to give Biden credit... not to discredit... how is calling Biden’s actions liberal, a way to discredit him... on this forum? Yeah, if this was some Trump forum, this would be an attack... but, here? In defending Biden from being called not liberal enough? Are you sure?

I don’t know, my dude... If I keep calling positive action, liberal action... am I discrediting it or am I attempting to bolster it? It’s not like I said neoliberal... which I have shown to be idiotic, since the term was used for Milton Friedman in the 60s... making modern use, idiotic... how is something neo, be 60 years old? If one is to go along with the modern interpretation of classic liberal being at the turn of the century... that means the time span from classic to neo, is nearly the same as from neo to now. Implying, in that context, neo has now lasted almost as long, as the existence of liberal, until it became classic.



Yeah, it’s like conservatives and liberals, value things differently.

Uh I think you completely misread what I was saying my dude.

I was making no statement on Biden's political leaning or any sort of right-left scale; merely making an observation as to why the GOP and conservatives "politicize" what should otherwise be apolitical scientific fact and why they make a point of it to do so.

[szechuan]

Joe Biden is taking a diplomatic stance against Human Rights Abuses in China.
Yet idiotic right wing republican are still calling him a Chinese Puppet.





https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/10/polit...all/index.html

[Bodakane]

I just think if an area becomes a district or a territory, it should mean that during any election cycle, the full time citizens of that district/territory can hold a yes or no vote on becoming a state. It really shouldn’t be more complicated than that.

- - - Updated - - -

Joe Biden is taking a diplomatic stance against Human Rights Abuses in China.
Yet idiotic right wing republican are still calling him a Chinese Puppet.





https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/10/polit...all/index.html

This is why it’s so important to solve our own civil rights issues at home. How much can any US President achieve on that front when the other foreign leader can counter with a George Floyd video?

[JohnBrown1917]

I just think if an area becomes a district or a territory, it should mean that during any election cycle, the full time citizens of that district/territory can hold a yes or no vote on becoming a state. It really shouldn’t be more complicated than that.

- - - Updated - - -



This is why it’s so important to solve our own civil rights issues at home. How much can any US President achieve on that front when the other foreign leader can counter with a George Floyd video?

Or as long as the US is engaged in any wars.

[Breccia]

Yet idiotic right wing republican are still calling him a Chinese Puppet.

They're just expecting Biden to make a better deal with China than Trump could, and are tainting the waters prior to this.