Political Roundtable Part XV

[gtn130]

Our current education system (which is based upon central government planning - probably one of the most socialistic parts of our government) isn't very competitive with other countries. It needs to change. But we have entrenched interests that have worked to keep it in place, namely professional educators. Not only do they provide a bad product, they are bankrupting our local municipalities. They have done everything they can to keep competition out. In the best performing countries kids and their parents are recruited with more than one choice of school.

Higher education is more or less unfettered capitalism. There is infinite choice, and lots of for-profit institutions. Not sure what's so good about that, as it seems like that system is failing and potentially a huge bubble?

Maybe instead of turning every education level into a for-profit free market enterprise, we instead just adequately fund our schools?

[dobrojim]

[snip]

Maybe it was akin to his speech last night. We will respect the sovereignty or nations. Well, well will respect them if we want to respect them. The logic is there - and then it isn't. Or it is there and just not consistent.

EJ Dionne had some words about this today (WaPo op-ed)

We're all for our own sovereignty but not so much for other countries unless they do what we want or
prefer them to do, N Korea, Venezuela.

[DCZards]

Yeah, you're still just making things up.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/sep/11/eric-schneiderman/has-daca-been-ruled-unconstitutional/

"It's a straightforward fact that no court has declared DACA unconstitutional and that the one appellate court that considered a related program declined to address the issue," said Amy Spitalnick, spokeswoman for Schneiderman.

Not one court has ruled DACA unconstitutional, but tell us more about how 'illegal' it is, my dude. For being so woke, you really like to tow the party line on every single issue, huh?

Yup, SD20 just blathered on and on about how DACA is illegal without providing a single court ruling to back up that claim. Someone needs to tell him that in America the courts--not constitutional experts--decide what's legal and illegal.

[gtn130]

Yeah, you're still just making things up.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/sep/11/eric-schneiderman/has-daca-been-ruled-unconstitutional/

"It's a straightforward fact that no court has declared DACA unconstitutional and that the one appellate court that considered a related program declined to address the issue," said Amy Spitalnick, spokeswoman for Schneiderman.

Not one court has ruled DACA unconstitutional, but tell us more about how 'illegal' it is, my dude. For being so woke, you really like to tow the party line on every single issue, huh?

Yup, SD20 just blathered on and on about how DACA is illegal without providing a single court ruling to back up that claim. Someone needs to tell him that in America the courts--not constitutional experts--decide what's legal and illegal.

I think the lesson is here is that we should all probably put SD20 on ignore. He truly does not care about fact or reality, and his word bombs are generally just cretinous nonsense. Validating his posts with a response is far too charitable to him imo.

[dckingsfan]

Our current education system (which is based upon central government planning - probably one of the most socialistic parts of our government) isn't very competitive with other countries. It needs to change. But we have entrenched interests that have worked to keep it in place, namely professional educators. Not only do they provide a bad product, they are bankrupting our local municipalities. They have done everything they can to keep competition out. In the best performing countries kids and their parents are recruited with more than one choice of school.

Higher education is more or less unfettered capitalism. There is infinite choice, and lots of for-profit institutions. Not sure what's so good about that, as it seems like that system is failing and potentially a huge bubble?

Maybe instead of turning every education level into a for-profit free market enterprise, we instead just adequately fund our schools?

Higher education - it is the one place where we have succeeded. We draw students from around the world. Then the federal government stepped in with loan guarantees - a bubble in the making if you will. DOE has been a disaster to higher education. Allowing schools with large endowments to be non-profit also turns my stomach - but this is more about the tax code.

But on K12 - you might want to do some research on funding - you can do the research. K12 Education has gobbled up more than their fare share of state and local budgets. Funding exploded until State and Local governments couldn't keep up. And the greater the funding the less return we have received for our education dollars.

You should also know that the federal share of funding for K12 schools is <10%. Most local governments have large unfunded pensions. So, you are asking local and state governments to raise taxes to add funding to K12 schooling - they just don't have the money to do what you wish.

[cammac]

Socialism isn't bad Canadian Federal Corporate Tax rate is 15% and 10.5% for small businesses.
1st Quarter GDP 3.5% 2nd Quarter 4.5%
Healthcare 10.7% GDP 100% coverage
Deficit estimation of 25 Billion now revised to 17 Billion also Canada has lowest National Debt % of any G7 Country
Rates 2nd Best Country in World after Switzerland and Best Country in the World to live.
About 66% of people want Canada to leave NAFTA without a fair deal.
Best education system in world from primary to secondary schools note education systems run by provinces % of GDP less than 5.5% with USA 7.3%
Post Secondary Education 52.6% spending per student $23.3K Canada 43.1% spending per student $26.0K note USA highest in spending and Canada #2
I hated Trumps UN speech condemning Socialism which he knows nothing about all I know if an ruling party ever suggested taking services from millions of citizens we would have a revolution.

cammac, please understand the definition of Socialism. Canada is foremost a capitalist society with a sprinkling of socialist policies. My guess is that if Canada ever tried to plan your private sector - Canada would be ruined. There was a lot not to like about his speech - but that wasn't one of them.

Unfortunately you are wrong Capitalism is a economic system which most advanced economic democracies follow and the majority of those systems have adapted socialistic policies to equalize the playing field for their citizens. If you listen to your Republican politicians they equate single payer system as socialism.

[dckingsfan]

Socialism isn't bad Canadian Federal Corporate Tax rate is 15% and 10.5% for small businesses.
1st Quarter GDP 3.5% 2nd Quarter 4.5%
Healthcare 10.7% GDP 100% coverage
Deficit estimation of 25 Billion now revised to 17 Billion also Canada has lowest National Debt % of any G7 Country
Rates 2nd Best Country in World after Switzerland and Best Country in the World to live.
About 66% of people want Canada to leave NAFTA without a fair deal.
Best education system in world from primary to secondary schools note education systems run by provinces % of GDP less than 5.5% with USA 7.3%
Post Secondary Education 52.6% spending per student $23.3K Canada 43.1% spending per student $26.0K note USA highest in spending and Canada #2
I hated Trumps UN speech condemning Socialism which he knows nothing about all I know if an ruling party ever suggested taking services from millions of citizens we would have a revolution.

cammac, please understand the definition of Socialism. Canada is foremost a capitalist society with a sprinkling of socialist policies. My guess is that if Canada ever tried to plan your private sector - Canada would be ruined. There was a lot not to like about his speech - but that wasn't one of them.

Unfortunately you are wrong Capitalism is a economic system which most advanced economic democracies follow and the majority of those systems have adapted socialistic policies to equalize the playing field for their citizens. If you listen to your Republican politicians they equate single payer system as socialism.

https://www.quora.com/Is-Canada-a-socialist-country

Or maybe we could change the definition?

[gtn130]

Our current education system (which is based upon central government planning - probably one of the most socialistic parts of our government) isn't very competitive with other countries. It needs to change. But we have entrenched interests that have worked to keep it in place, namely professional educators. Not only do they provide a bad product, they are bankrupting our local municipalities. They have done everything they can to keep competition out. In the best performing countries kids and their parents are recruited with more than one choice of school.

Higher education is more or less unfettered capitalism. There is infinite choice, and lots of for-profit institutions. Not sure what's so good about that, as it seems like that system is failing and potentially a huge bubble?

Maybe instead of turning every education level into a for-profit free market enterprise, we instead just adequately fund our schools?

Higher education - it is the one place where we have succeeded. We draw students from around the world. Then the federal government stepped in with loan guarantees - a bubble in the making if you will. DOE has been a disaster to higher education. Allowing schools with large endowments to be non-profit also turns my stomach - but this is more about the tax code.

But on K12 - you might want to do some research on funding - you can do the research. K12 Education has gobbled up more than their fare share of state and local budgets. Funding exploded until State and Local governments couldn't keep up. And the greater the funding the less return we have received for our education dollars.

You should also know that the federal share of funding for K12 schools is <10%. Most local governments have large unfunded pensions. So, you are asking local and state governments to raise taxes to add funding to K12 schooling - they just don't have the money to do what you wish.

Dude, the loan guarantees are not representative of a reasonable government approach to education. They're effectively the most free market, for-profit 'solution' imaginable. Instead of just subsidizing the cost of education, the government instead gave everyone a line of credit, resulting in colleges/universities maximizing their profits and pushing tuition costs to new frontiers. The capacity for colleges to turn massive profits is the corrupting force here that enabled DeVry, U of Phoenix and so on to come and go.

The higher education machinations over the last decade or so should confirm to everyone that privatizing education is a really bad idea.

And regarding K12 - we're 56th in GDP spending on education. Most of the good education systems spend more money with the exceptions being places like Japan and Singapore where they put their students under enormous amounts of pressure to succeed. Obviously the US could do some things more efficiently, but that doesn't mean we should privatize everything.

[cammac]

It is all about priorities. The US just agreed to raise military spending by $80 billion (Trump only asked for $56 billion). Bernie Sander's initiative to have free college was $70 billion.

I'm not a socialist but if you leave this country and go to china or india you will see over the top poverty and the potential to have more college educated people in each country than we have total people - period. China and India are playing the long (100 year) game and we fighting over 4 to 8 year elections where the next guy can roll back the clock on progress. When a country has 5 to 10 times the educated people AND that many more uneducated laborers to manufacture goods and arm thier militaries, please tell me how we are supposed to compete? If we dont socialize education we might not have enough brains just to keep up. America and the western world doesn't have the market cornered on science and technology. I hate the thought of socialism but for the survival of our nation we need more classically educated people.

we keep up with a reformed immigration policy. we pluck the cream of the crop. aka we take all of their "geniuses" and make them our geniuses. This is also part of Trumps immigration reform. libs are crying foul, of course.

this is another trump soon-to-be victory. he's going to get it no matter how much the stupid and moronic far left cry "elitism" or whatever "ism" they cry next. they are frickin morons. dont listen to them. and they know this is an issue. no matter what they "cry" on CNN they are going to get this passed. They understand the urgency. The future of the entire military is going to revolve almost strictly around technology. They get it. they'll get this done. watch.

But, You are right. This is the weak link. we just dont have the man power. and in term of total brain power. other countries, no matter how poor. just have significantly more brain power.

I've been saying this for years. immigration policy should completely change. we should create manufacturing zones for new immigrants and "work towns" for immigrants. Allow corporationss to Build massive towns and with manufacturing plants and allow them to "hire" immigrants and pay them sig lower wages for a period of time as they assimilate they make a wage more consistent with typical american wages. This would bring back jobs, manufacoturing, tax dollars, etc. educate their children with the best of educations to help keep up with foreign education systems like china and japan. Force their children into military service. say 2 years. as former military let me be clear. its the best thing i did for myself. and created a sense of loyalty and duty to the USA. something every lib can benefit from tbh. pick up a gun and stand a watch. then let's talk politics.

do that and make ing"recruit" high end talent part of immigration reform and we will get smarter and grow as a popluation. Both will be necessary down the road.

By the way, any of you guys ever ask yourselves what is going to happen when we run out of food!???????? that day is coming. we are going to run out of food at some point. The world is just not that big. we are on pace for 11.2 Billion people in 2100. Thats without HgH. Once we start taking HgH we are going to live even longer. the earth is heating up. and rogue nations are being allowed to compile nuclear warheads and test missiles. we will see what happens when people pesticides and other contaminants spoil the soil and the demand for food continue with the population and people start to get hungry.

Well your views are somewhat bizarre you are basically suggesting setting up concentration camps for foreigner workers to be abused by corporate giants and to be deported at the whim of those employers. Many of the undocumented workers in the USA are already being abused by American business and in many cases consumers picking up workers near Home Depots. Yes there is nothing wrong with having points systems for immigrants which Canada does successfully but also will take about double the number of refugees in real numbers that the USA does this year. By the way a good number of those refugees are crossing the border from the USA. Yes Canada requires seasonal workers and also service area workers but they also have the same protections in the work place as Canadians and the employers must pay minimum wages.

[dckingsfan]

Dude, the loan guarantees are not representative of a reasonable government approach to education. They're effectively the most free market, for-profit 'solution' imaginable. Instead of just subsidizing the cost of education, the government instead gave everyone a line of credit, resulting in colleges/universities maximizing their profits and pushing tuition costs to new frontiers. The capacity for colleges to turn massive profits is the corrupting force here that enabled DeVry, U of Phoenix and so on to come and go.

Agreed the loan guarantees were a horrible solution to our problem - you couldn't have conceived of a worse solution. It should have either been an approach where the federal government took over all higher Ed or left it alone. Guaranteeing the loans had the effect of driving up the cost of education and putting our young people in debt.

A corollary is what the federal government did when getting involved in loans for real estate. It never ends well.

The higher education machinations over the last decade or so should confirm to everyone that privatizing education is a really bad idea.

Incorrect - it should just confirm that a hybrid approach is the wrong one... higher ed was doing really well until the federal government became involved. We could have left it as self-funded or funded at a state/local level.

And regarding K12 - we're 56th in GDP spending on education. Most of the good education systems spend more money with the exceptions being places like Japan and Singapore where they put their students under enormous amounts of pressure to succeed. Obviously the US could do some things more efficiently, but that doesn't mean we should privatize everything.

[gtn130]

Incorrect - it should just confirm that a hybrid approach is the wrong one... higher ed was doing really well until the federal government became involved. We could have left it as self-funded or funded at a state/local level.

Not at all. What have loan guarantees proven regarding subsidized tuition costs? Making community college free, for example, would invariably lower the cost of tuition for every other four year school. The problem is two-fold:

1) Cost
2) The erroneous belief that a college degree has a guaranteed positive ROI and everyone should go to college

The government can help with both.

And your chart doesn't really prove much regarding government spending. The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more, and while rethinking how that money is spent is an absolute necessity, money being spent inefficiently doesn't mean we should cut spending. There are clearly a large number of countries that spend more money on education as a % of GDP than we do, and they're having better results than we are.

[dckingsfan]

Incorrect - it should just confirm that a hybrid approach is the wrong one... higher ed was doing really well until the federal government became involved. We could have left it as self-funded or funded at a state/local level.

Not at all. What have loan guarantees proven regarding subsidized tuition costs? Making community college free, for example, would invariably lower the cost of tuition for every other four year school. The problem is two-fold:

1) Cost
2) The erroneous belief that a college degree has a guaranteed positive ROI and everyone should go to college

The government can help with both.

And your chart doesn't really prove much regarding government spending. The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more, and while rethinking how that money is spent is an absolute necessity, money being spent inefficiently doesn't mean we should cut spending. There are clearly a large number of countries that spend more money on education as a % of GDP than we do, and they're having better results than we are.

First, guaranteeing the student loans drove up the cost of higher education - I am going to assume that you understand that aspect.

Second, by guaranteeing the loan regardless of major it if reduces the ROI of the investment.

Third, Junior Colleges are almost exclusively funded at the state and local level. They have been very effective - you want the federal government to come in and make them more effective? And most education spending and revenue for that spending comes from the state and local level. When Bernie comes in and says free college education for all - what he really means is - I know I can't do anything about this since it is at a state level - what at terrific sound bite - you should love me an elect me President (yep, I am lying).

Lastly, I am not advocating a reduction in spending on education. I am advocating getting the Federal Government out of the loop - they have provided a net negative return on our dollars and hampered those at a local level. We are amongst the highest spending countries on education - that is just a fact. We just get one of the lowest levels of return on those dollars. I also advocate competition at the local level - each state should be able to experiment to see what works best for their constituents.

[stilldropin20]

I'm not a socialist but if you leave this country and go to china or india you will see over the top poverty and the potential to have more college educated people in each country than we have total people - period. China and India are playing the long (100 year) game and we fighting over 4 to 8 year elections where the next guy can roll back the clock on progress. When a country has 5 to 10 times the educated people AND that many more uneducated laborers to manufacture goods and arm thier militaries, please tell me how we are supposed to compete? If we dont socialize education we might not have enough brains just to keep up. America and the western world doesn't have the market cornered on science and technology. I hate the thought of socialism but for the survival of our nation we need more classically educated people.

we keep up with a reformed immigration policy. we pluck the cream of the crop. aka we take all of their "geniuses" and make them our geniuses. This is also part of Trumps immigration reform. libs are crying foul, of course.

this is another trump soon-to-be victory. he's going to get it no matter how much the stupid and moronic far left cry "elitism" or whatever "ism" they cry next. they are frickin morons. dont listen to them. and they know this is an issue. no matter what they "cry" on CNN they are going to get this passed. They understand the urgency. The future of the entire military is going to revolve almost strictly around technology. They get it. they'll get this done. watch.

But, You are right. This is the weak link. we just dont have the man power. and in term of total brain power. other countries, no matter how poor. just have significantly more brain power.

I've been saying this for years. immigration policy should completely change. we should create manufacturing zones for new immigrants and "work towns" for immigrants. Allow corporationss to Build massive towns and with manufacturing plants and allow them to "hire" immigrants and pay them sig lower wages for a period of time as they assimilate they make a wage more consistent with typical american wages. This would bring back jobs, manufacoturing, tax dollars, etc. educate their children with the best of educations to help keep up with foreign education systems like china and japan. Force their children into military service. say 2 years. as former military let me be clear. its the best thing i did for myself. and created a sense of loyalty and duty to the USA. something every lib can benefit from tbh. pick up a gun and stand a watch. then let's talk politics.

do that and make ing"recruit" high end talent part of immigration reform and we will get smarter and grow as a popluation. Both will be necessary down the road.

By the way, any of you guys ever ask yourselves what is going to happen when we run out of food!???????? that day is coming. we are going to run out of food at some point. The world is just not that big. we are on pace for 11.2 Billion people in 2100. Thats without HgH. Once we start taking HgH we are going to live even longer. the earth is heating up. and rogue nations are being allowed to compile nuclear warheads and test missiles. we will see what happens when people pesticides and other contaminants spoil the soil and the demand for food continue with the population and people start to get hungry.

Well your views are somewhat bizarre you are basically suggesting setting up concentration camps for foreigner workers to be abused by corporate giants and to be deported at the whim of those employers. Many of the undocumented workers in the USA are already being abused by American business and in many cases consumers picking up workers near Home Depots. Yes there is nothing wrong with having points systems for immigrants which Canada does successfully but also will take about double the number of refugees in real numbers that the USA does this year. By the way a good number of those refugees are crossing the border from the USA. Yes Canada requires seasonal workers and also service area workers but they also have the same protections in the work place as Canadians and the employers must pay minimum wages.

Not. At. All. Your own mind took you there and made it sound bizarre. not my words.

My family is from the south side of chicago. Roseland. Pullman precisely. they came here as immigrants in the early 1900's and worked for Geroge pullman in his "company town." They Rented(to own) one of his small company homes that he built for his workers, and used his company script(money on the books) to buy groceries at his company store, etc. It was a utopia at first. before the credit markets dried up for him because european investment bankers began to reinstitue our central banking system and constricted the money supply in the early 1900's so as to squeeze US politicians into accepting their federnal reserve system. ah but i digress again. Pullman was hit hard by the calling on his line of credit. Creditors called in their lines of credit everywhere in the US but espeicially Pullman who was using company script (which like bitcoin et al, could be a way to avoid constistions in the money supply). The calling of his credit and sharp increases in interests rates forced Pullman to make his workers work longer hours and pay more for rent and groceries-just to stay afloat. But It was still a utopia (for the working class) compared to most factory conditions and lving conditions in the US at that time. it was the First "city" in america with modern plumbing, modern electric, and amny things. just a beautiful small manufacturing town (10 minutes from down town chicago with no traffic). But the narrative got spun on Pullman and his town into this being a "bad" thing. And taking advantage of workers, blah blah blah.

yet, My grand parents never felt taken advantage of though. In fact, My family still owns that house today as well as multiple other family members still live in pullman today. and when i talked to my grandparents about those early times: they loved Pullman. stayed there their entire lives. Raised me to appreciate the town and what it meant for us(the 3rd and 4th generation). They cam here from nothing and with nothing. and went to work immediately. bought a home immediately. raised their children and grandchildren with the self respect of making a living.

So "Company towns" can work. they dont have to be evil. at all. And if you are newly immigrated to the US, like my great grand-parents, you should come here with the understanding that you ARE GOING TO WORK-likely for lower wages. You are going to "earn your keep." for whatever probationary period...i dont know? 4 years? 6 years? But there should be programs like these that benefit the newly arrived immigrant, and already present americans. And I believe that all american should spend time in the military. ALL of them!! My grandpa and great uncle did (1st gen) as did the 3rd and 4th gen).

And to that end i ask, why should a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th generation americans lose jobs to a newly arrived immigrant? All things being equal in terms of skills, if both people can do "the job" why on earth would we put a system in place that allows a corporation to give that "plush" job to a newly arrived immigrant? My family worked for very low wages for their entire lives. when they arrived and didn't speak any english. Yet my grandfather from spain via italy was an italian college graduate and was fluent in italian, spanish, french and german (all which made him one helluva an asset in ww2) but when he arrived here he got a very low paying job in sherwin williams mixing paint. He worked 60 or more hours per week and "tended bar" in the evenings and weekends. even christmas. he worked there 30 years!!!! His retirement (at 100% his last years monthly wages) was $852.00 per month!!! His social security was about $250.00 per month. My grandma made sandwiches for $5.00 per hour up until she was 75 years old!! yet they still managed to save over $500,000 and disperse to their children. Their children, my mom and uncle were put through trade schools in the 60's. They managed to buy my uncle his own mechanic shop and fully fund it. And my mom her own beauty salon and fully fund it. I ended up in private schools and a doctor (after I served in the US NAVY out of high school.) MY FAMILY PAID THEIR DUES!!!! the company town worked for me and my family. My entire family is and was very proud of our company town and the opportunities it provided us.

So Not only would it work. It could be a giant step forward compared current working conditions oversees and wages and life style and most importantly OPPORTUNITY going forward as compared to the current sweatshops oversees. Just like it was for our family...who again, paid our dues. i would like to think that any 3rd,4th, 5th, 6th 7th, etc. generation america has their own story not too much unlike mine and also paid their dues. Those americans deserve the higher paying jobs. newly arrived immigrants should be willing to understand that coming to the US is not necessarily going to be an overnight success. That they are going to pay their dues as well.

And of course, we haven't even touched how implementing programs like this can bring back low end manufacturing jobs. but also mid level and high end jobs will be created for current american workers. someone has to build "those corporate town" and then their will be whole new micro-economies created. new schools, new hospitals, etc etc. Mass migration could ensue. which equal mass growth. mass revenue. mass tax dollars! we might even be able to fund some of bernie sanders paltform with mass immigration plans like these.

But alas. it will never happen!! This is america!! we cant pay some one low wages!!!!!!!!! we can only buy product that are made in sweatshops overseas made by 12 year old children working for $12 per day!! out of site!! out of mind!!!! ah yes! the great "american" way. I totally forgot how we do things.

[dckingsfan]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

[stilldropin20]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

amen!

[I_Like_Dirt]

America does have a spending problem. The real trick, though, is the kind of value for dollar they're actually getting, and on a lot of fronts, it isn't very good. The solution may include reducing, and likely at the very least restructuring entitlements, but there needs to be a bit of a hard look at why the value for dollar isn't there anymore.

Capitalism is great, but at its core, it's basically an economic system powered by greed. That isn't actually as bad as it might seem on the surface, but it requires a check to it, and that check absolutely is a functioning government. I'd suggest that government has ceased to function nearly so well relatively recently thanks to capitalism seeping into the system, which is not desirable in the same way it isn't desirable to have the government seep into business. It's a tricky distinction, too, because the governments job is to regulate capitalism, but not control it or save it or hinder it, while capitalism as a force clearly has an incentive to try to gain access to government. It really isn't hard to see how Trump the businessman is benefiting from being president. How big of an issue that is can be debated, but the reality is clear.

There are a lot of forces at play, though, and I couldn't hope to capture them all. Automation is increasing the disparity between the well-off and those not so, and shifting the numbers away from the well-off. Those well-off, except for a few super wealthy, aren't necessarily doing wonderfully, either, and so bristle at the idea of helping those falling behind. That's going to change, though. Automation is eventually going to hit sectors like law, medicine, pharmacy, engineering, etc., too. Then what?

I'd actually suggest that we need a long, hard rethink of capitalism. That doesn't necessarily mean socialism or communism or that we need to do away with capitalism completely or anything in particular, but we need creative ideas and we need them soon, because the economic structure we currently have in place isn't going to work for another century, and it's going to cause an awful lot of social upheaval on an awful lot of levels as people's base beliefs they keep hidden come out more in order to justify their secret belief that they're really better than most of society, so when things go relatively poorly for them, they should go worse for others. We're seeing it already.

[FAH1223]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

The estimated cost of the tuition free program is $47 billion a year by Bernie. That would cover, Sanders estimates, 67% of the $70 billion it costs for tuition at public colleges and universities. States, he proposes, would cover the remaining 33%.

And the US Senate just increased military spending by $80 billion and yet no one is talking about "HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT?!!! OMG!!!"

Medicare for All would require tax increases across the board that's true. But the appeal is, do we keep propping up insurance companies jacking up premiums or would paying taxes for healthcare be a cost-saver? (Hint: it is). Would it help small businesses who don't have to provide health insurance to their employees and negotiate every year with insurance companies.

People talk about the corporate tax rate bogging down competitiveness. It's actually our healthcare system. These companies from other countries like Germany or wherever don't have to worry about providing healthcare to their employees because the government is doing it.

[cammac]

we keep up with a reformed immigration policy. we pluck the cream of the crop. aka we take all of their "geniuses" and make them our geniuses. This is also part of Trumps immigration reform. libs are crying foul, of course.

this is another trump soon-to-be victory. he's going to get it no matter how much the stupid and moronic far left cry "elitism" or whatever "ism" they cry next. they are frickin morons. dont listen to them. and they know this is an issue. no matter what they "cry" on CNN they are going to get this passed. They understand the urgency. The future of the entire military is going to revolve almost strictly around technology. They get it. they'll get this done. watch.

But, You are right. This is the weak link. we just dont have the man power. and in term of total brain power. other countries, no matter how poor. just have significantly more brain power.

I've been saying this for years. immigration policy should completely change. we should create manufacturing zones for new immigrants and "work towns" for immigrants. Allow corporationss to Build massive towns and with manufacturing plants and allow them to "hire" immigrants and pay them sig lower wages for a period of time as they assimilate they make a wage more consistent with typical american wages. This would bring back jobs, manufacoturing, tax dollars, etc. educate their children with the best of educations to help keep up with foreign education systems like china and japan. Force their children into military service. say 2 years. as former military let me be clear. its the best thing i did for myself. and created a sense of loyalty and duty to the USA. something every lib can benefit from tbh. pick up a gun and stand a watch. then let's talk politics.

do that and make ing"recruit" high end talent part of immigration reform and we will get smarter and grow as a popluation. Both will be necessary down the road.

By the way, any of you guys ever ask yourselves what is going to happen when we run out of food!???????? that day is coming. we are going to run out of food at some point. The world is just not that big. we are on pace for 11.2 Billion people in 2100. Thats without HgH. Once we start taking HgH we are going to live even longer. the earth is heating up. and rogue nations are being allowed to compile nuclear warheads and test missiles. we will see what happens when people pesticides and other contaminants spoil the soil and the demand for food continue with the population and people start to get hungry.

Well your views are somewhat bizarre you are basically suggesting setting up concentration camps for foreigner workers to be abused by corporate giants and to be deported at the whim of those employers. Many of the undocumented workers in the USA are already being abused by American business and in many cases consumers picking up workers near Home Depots. Yes there is nothing wrong with having points systems for immigrants which Canada does successfully but also will take about double the number of refugees in real numbers that the USA does this year. By the way a good number of those refugees are crossing the border from the USA. Yes Canada requires seasonal workers and also service area workers but they also have the same protections in the work place as Canadians and the employers must pay minimum wages.

Not. At. All. Your own mind took you there and made it sound bizarre. not my words.

My family is from the south side of chicago. Roseland. Pullman precisely. they came here as immigrants in the early 1900's and worked for Geroge pullman in his "company town." They Rented(to own) one of his small company homes that he built for his workers, and used his company script(money on the books) to buy groceries at his company store, etc. It was a utopia at first. before the credit markets dried up for him because european investment bankers began to reinstitue our central banking system and constricted the money supply in the early 1900's so as to squeeze US politicians into accepting their federnal reserve system. ah but i digress again. Pullman was hit hard by the calling on his line of credit. Creditors called in their lines of credit everywhere in the US but espeicially Pullman who was using company script (which like bitcoin et al, could be a way to avoid constistions in the money supply). The calling of his credit and sharp increases in interests rates forced Pullman to make his workers work longer hours and pay more for rent and groceries-just to stay afloat. But It was still a utopia (for the working class) compared to most factory conditions and lving conditions in the US at that time. it was the First "city" in america with modern plumbing, modern electric, and amny things. just a beautiful small manufacturing town (10 minutes from down town chicago with no traffic). But the narrative got spun on Pullman and his town into this being a "bad" thing. And taking advantage of workers, blah blah blah.

yet, My grand parents never felt taken advantage of though. In fact, My family still owns that house today as well as multiple other family members still live in pullman today. and when i talked to my grandparents about those early times: they loved Pullman. stayed there their entire lives. Raised me to appreciate the town and what it meant for us(the 3rd and 4th generation). They cam here from nothing and with nothing. and went to work immediately. bought a home immediately. raised their children and grandchildren with the self respect of making a living.

So "Company towns" can work. they dont have to be evil. at all. And if you are newly immigrated to the US, like my great grand-parents, you should come here with the understanding that you ARE GOING TO WORK-likely for lower wages. You are going to "earn your keep." for whatever probationary period...i dont know? 4 years? 6 years? But there should be programs like these that benefit the newly arrived immigrant, and already present americans. And I believe that all american should spend time in the military. ALL of them!! My grandpa and great uncle did (1st gen) as did the 3rd and 4th gen).

And to that end i ask, why should a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th generation americans lose jobs to a newly arrived immigrant? All things being equal in terms of skills, if both people can do "the job" why on earth would we put a system in place that allows a corporation to give that "plush" job to a newly arrived immigrant? My family worked for very low wages for their entire lives. when they arrived and didn't speak any english. Yet my grandfather from spain via italy was an italian college graduate and was fluent in italian, spanish, french and german (all which made him one helluva an asset in ww2) but when he arrived here he got a very low paying job in sherwin williams mixing paint. He worked 60 or more hours per week and "tended bar" in the evenings and weekends. even christmas. he worked there 30 years!!!! His retirement (at 100% his last years monthly wages) was $852.00 per month!!! His social security was about $250.00 per month. My grandma made sandwiches for $5.00 per hour up until she was 75 years old!! yet they still managed to save over $500,000 and disperse to their children. Their children, my mom and uncle were put through trade schools in the 60's. They managed to buy my uncle his own mechanic shop and fully fund it. And my mom her own beauty salon and fully fund it. I ended up in private schools and a doctor (after I served in the US NAVY out of high school.) MY FAMILY PAID THEIR DUES!!!! the company town worked for me and my family. My entire family is and was very proud of our company town and the opportunities it provided us.

So Not only would it work. It could be a giant step forward compared current working conditions oversees and wages and life style and most importantly OPPORTUNITY going forward as compared to the current sweatshops oversees. Just like it was for our family...who again, paid our dues. i would like to think that any 3rd,4th, 5th, 6th 7th, etc. generation america has their own story not too much unlike mine and also paid their dues. Those americans deserve the higher paying jobs. newly arrived immigrants should be willing to understand that coming to the US is not necessarily going to be an overnight success. That they are going to pay their dues as well.

And of course, we haven't even touched how implementing programs like this can bring back low end manufacturing jobs. but also mid level and high end jobs will be created for current american workers. someone has to build "those corporate town" and then their will be whole new micro-economies created. new schools, new hospitals, etc etc. Mass migration could ensue. which equal mass growth. mass revenue. mass tax dollars! we might even be able to fund some of bernie sanders paltform with mass immigration plans like these.

But alas. it will never happen!! This is america!! we cant pay some one low wages!!!!!!!!! we can only buy product that are made in sweatshops overseas made by 12 year old children working for $12 per day!! out of site!! out of mind!!!! ah yes! the great "american" way. I totally forgot how we do things.

Yes turn back a civilized society back a 100+ years.
This is a major part of Trump versus NAFTA criticizing Mexico for unfair labor practices.
Its easy to stop exploitation of people in other countries buy fair trade products and stop shopping at Walmart the Satan of the modern world.

[dckingsfan]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

The estimated cost of the tuition free program is $47 billion a year by Bernie. That would cover, Sanders estimates, 67% of the $70 billion it costs for tuition at public colleges and universities. States, he proposes, would cover the remaining 33%.

And the US Senate just increased military spending by $80 billion and yet no one is talking about "HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT?!!! OMG!!!"

Medicare for All would require tax increases across the board that's true. But the appeal is, do we keep propping up insurance companies jacking up premiums or would paying taxes for healthcare be a cost-saver? (Hint: it is). Would it help small businesses who don't have to provide health insurance to their employees and negotiate every year with insurance companies.

People talk about the corporate tax rate bogging down competitiveness. It's actually our healthcare system. These companies from other countries like Germany or wherever don't have to worry about providing healthcare to their employees because the government is doing it.

Let's see if I have this right. We started with the notion that Bernie's expanded SS + expanded and free healthcare + free higher education isn't feasible. You then broke the argument down by saying higher education would only cost $70B and we just spent that on the military (ties into the lie that Rs are fiscal conservatives).

So, are you saying that Bernie is only kind of lying? And I doubt that free higher ed would only cost $70B - I won't get into why - but Bernie is saying that the states need to pickup around 20B (or so) of that - and how are the states going to pick that up?

[gtn130]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

But I actually believe we can afford these things. Raising taxes on the rich and cutting military spending would finance basically any single thing we'd want to do. Obviously there are limits to what we can afford, and I don't know precisely what those limits are, but that doesn't mean we can't have these conversations.

Like, personally I would prioritize more money being spent on healthcare, education and sustainability. I don't know exactly what we can afford, but I know we spend way more money than I'd like us to spend on the military. And I know we could definitely tax the 1% more.