Why is the Democratic Convention being held in a right wing racist state?

Nordberg said:
It extended coverage to millions who were without. it made huge strides in many ways, including no limits on costs, forcing Insurance Companies to 15 profit margins and several others.l like pre-existing conditions. It was an important first step. Anyone had to know the Repubs would try to kill it. Obama could not take insurance companies out of the equation for obvious political reasons.
Click to expand...

There were numerous exemptions regarding profit limits. A lot of the most oligopolistic and monopolistic markets for insurance were allowed whatever margins they wanted. The main reason for said exemptions didn't come from Republicans. It came from "Blue Dog" Democrats who had insurance connections. Max Baucus was one of them.

As you said, Republicans were going to vote against it no matter what, so this is why the negotiating was done with corporatist Democrats.

Another often overlooked factor was that many people chose not to have insurance. Not everyone wants to deal with insurance, and some people are able to use the few cash-only doctors out there -- or ones that are able to make their own payment plans. A lot of people signed up for insurance solely to avoid fines, not because they wanted insurance.
 
Woko Haram said:
In the American context, Democrats weren't as much into identity politics. They still had a significant working class focus. They were also much more supportive of free speech than they are today. They still recognized the importance of border security.

In the European context, the EU hadn't ventured as far into social policy. It was still primarily an economic institution that allowed its members to make most of their own policies outside of trade.
Click to expand...

The Identity Politics thing is totally true, but that's just part of America becoming multiracial. The Republicans have also become more into Identity Politics. So yeah, I agree with you on this point, but it's not an example of America going downhill because it's becoming more liberal.

Democrats aren't against free speech at all. Even AOC, one of the main scapegoats of the Right, has said that Trump's hate speech should remain legal. At the very most, some Democrats have argued that Twitter and Facebook should crack down on hate speech, but that's it.

And yet, Arab Muslims are quite different, no? They also have significantly higher birth rates. All of the most feminist and progressive European countries have low native birth rates. In combination with immigration and refugee policies, that adds up.
Click to expand...

First generation immigrants have higher birth rates, but then the birth rate drops with the second generation. And it's the same for all immigrants, regardless of race. This means that the immigration policy of countries like Germany is good because most of the immigrants they take in are Whites from Eastern Europe.
 
maybe the Demmycrats decided to hold their convention somewhere that the demmycrats wouldn't burn to the ground before the convention.......
 
StoneByStone said:
The Identity Politics thing is totally true, but that's just part of America becoming multiracial. The Republicans have also become more into Identity Politics. So yeah, I agree with you on this point, but it's not an example of America going downhill because it's becoming more liberal.

Democrats aren't against free speech at all. Even AOC, one of the main scapegoats of the Right, has said that Trump's hate speech should remain legal. At the very most, some Democrats have argued that Twitter and Facebook should crack down on hate speech, but that's it.
Click to expand...

If Democrats are still supportive of free speech, why is it that so many progressives argue for "deplatforming" conservatives? This happens a lot on social media. Shadow bans and various other tactics are used as well on things like Youtube and Twitter.

Maybe many of their elected officials still support it, but clearly, much of their base and many of their political persuasion in powerful media positions don't. A lot of academia has shifted away from the idea as well.

StoneByStone said:
First generation immigrants have higher birth rates, but then the birth rate drops with the second generation. And it's the same for all immigrants, regardless of race. This means that the immigration policy of countries like Germany is good because most of the immigrants they take in are Whites from Eastern Europe.
Click to expand...

"The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray goes into greater detail as to why Europe faces a demographic issue with their immigration policies. I may post a relevant excerpt from it here eventually. I borrowed it from a friend a while back, but I don't have a copy with me at the moment.
 
Woko Haram said:
If Democrats are still supportive of free speech, why is it that so many progressives argue for "deplatforming" conservatives? This happens a lot on social media. Shadow bans and various other tactics are used as well on things like Youtube and Twitter.

Maybe many of their elected officials still support it, but clearly, much of their base and many of their political persuasion in powerful media positions don't. A lot of academia has shifted away from the idea as well.
Click to expand...

Freedom of speech means the government can't stop you from saying things. It does not mean you're entitled to a platform.
I've heard lots of people call for Trump to be banned from Twitter, but I haven't heard anyone say he should be arrested for his tweets.

"The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray goes into greater detail as to why Europe faces a demographic issue with their immigration policies. I may post a relevant excerpt from it here eventually. I borrowed it from a friend a while back, but I don't have a copy with me at the moment.
Click to expand...

I'm familiar with Douglas Murray. He mainly uses two arguments. One is the myth of the mass migrant rapes, which still isn't supported by the evidence. And the other is this idea that European countries are being filled with Muslims who refuse to assimilate. Like I said before, the countries most often cited still have a Muslim population of less than 10%. And Murray never offers real examples of how Islam has changed European cultures. He says that Germany now has Sharia Law, but always leaves out the facts that this is only in certain circumstances, only applies to Muslims without German citizenship, and can not contradict secular German law.
 
Woko Haram said:
I agree with you on insurance. Honestly, I'd be ok with nationalizing all insurance, since it's the only industry where you profit more from denying service than providing it.

That's the issue though. The rest of the medical industry is mostly ok. Get rid of the insurance middlemen, and the problem is mostly solved. Now, if you want to create a public healthcare system that still leaves room for a competitive private one, then I'm ok with that. That's how France does it. It allows consumers to reap the benefits of each system.
Click to expand...

Watch Dirty Money on Netflix. There is an episode on PHARM that will make your blood boil. Our medical system is a source of looting people.
 
Woko Haram said:
I think the West has been going downhill culturally since the 2000s. The 90s were basically the apex of Western culture.

There will come a time when certain cultures outside of the West will rise to the top. We already see that Islamic culture will eventually replace parts of Europe, for example. Progressivism has reached a point where it is self-destructive. This is already beginning to show in things like birth rates and suicide rates.
Click to expand...

Islam & not China??
 
StoneByStone said:
Freedom of speech means the government can't stop you from saying things. It does not mean you're entitled to a platform.
I've heard lots of people call for Trump to be banned from Twitter, but I haven't heard anyone say he should be arrested for his tweets.
Click to expand...

But if the platform only exists because of government cronyism, then I don't see much difference there. The problem is that we have a concept of free speech that assumes government and the private sector are disconnected. They aren't anymore, at least when it comes to the internet and social media.

To be fair, that's kind of the problem with our economy as well. The biggest players in a lot of markets only maintain their position through government favoritism.

StoneByStone said:
I'm familiar with Douglas Murray. He mainly uses two arguments. One is the myth of the mass migrant rapes, which still isn't supported by the evidence. And the other is this idea that European countries are being filled with Muslims who refuse to assimilate. Like I said before, the countries most often cited still have a Muslim population of less than 10%. And Murray never offers real examples of how Islam has changed European cultures. He says that Germany now has Sharia Law, but always leaves out the facts that this is only in certain circumstances, only applies to Muslims without German citizenship, and can not contradict secular German law.
Click to expand...

So the grooming gangs of the UK are myths? The fact that most of the perpetrators are specifically South Asian in descent is a myth as well? For someone who prefers racial separatism, you are surprisingly apologist for the people you supposedly want to keep out.
 
Woko Haram said:
But if the platform only exists because of government cronyism, then I don't see much difference there. The problem is that we have a concept of free speech that assumes government and the private sector are disconnected. They aren't anymore, at least when it comes to the internet and social media.
Click to expand...

It's beside the point. Even if Facebook and Twitter only exist because of government funding, getting banned from them still doesn't affect your freedom of speech. You're still free to say whatever you want without fear of government oppression.

So the grooming gangs of the UK are myths? The fact that most of the perpetrators are specifically South Asian in descent is a myth as well? For someone who prefers racial separatism, you are surprisingly apologist for the people you supposedly want to keep out.
Click to expand...

The grooming gangs are, as you said, almost always South Asian. So this isn't about Muslims, it's about South Asians, specifically Pakistani immigrants. This is another problem I have with Murray. He conflates ethnicity and religion. This would be like pointing to the high levels of crime among brown people in America and saying that Catholics commit a disproportionate amount of crime. Technically it's true, but far from accurate.
 
StoneByStone said:
It's beside the point. Even if Facebook and Twitter only exist because of government funding, getting banned from them still doesn't affect your freedom of speech. You're still free to say whatever you want without fear of government oppression.
Click to expand...

It doesn't affect your constitutional freedom of speech, but at this point, there are practical aspects of speech that go well beyond strictly defined constitutional freedoms. Silicon Valley has more power over shaping societal norms than any previous media formats had. Because of the oligarchy in social media, they essentially determine the direction of political discussions via censorship.

Granted, the left is perfectly fine with this, since Silicon Valley favors their social views.

StoneByStone said:
The grooming gangs are, as you said, almost always South Asian. So this isn't about Muslims, it's about South Asians, specifically Pakistani immigrants. This is another problem I have with Murray. He conflates ethnicity and religion. This would be like pointing to the high levels of crime among brown people in America and saying that Catholics commit a disproportionate amount of crime. Technically it's true, but far from accurate.
Click to expand...

But as soon as someone suggests that Pakistani immigration should be limited, the left shouts that down as racism or Islamophobia. So, I agree that it's not actually about Islam itself, but the left has made it impossible to separate the two by continually making the argument that it discriminates against Muslims.
 
Bill said:
....... Collapse?? Would you like to lay it out when you get a chance, I would love to read it....
Click to expand...

They have tons of private debt that they won't be able to deal with in the long term. The loans they made to their general public are the majority of the reason for why they even have a middle class at all.

They also are experiencing quite a bit of fallout from how they handled COVID 19. By deceiving much of the world about it while taking as much PPE from the rest of the world as they could before revealing their situation, they have soured much of their relations with the world.

Finally, what they are doing to Hong Kong will eventually destroy its financial importance in the world. Hong Kong's main selling point was its freedoms, both economic and political. Now that Beijing is moving forward with a strict takeover of Hong Kong's system, many of the world's biggest financial players will be leaving that city. They certainly won't be moving to Beijing either.
 
Woko Haram said:
They have tons of private debt that they won't be able to deal with in the long term. The loans they made to their general public are the majority of the reason for why they even have a middle class at all.

They also are experiencing quite a bit of fallout from how they handled COVID 19. By deceiving much of the world about it while taking as much PPE from the rest of the world as they could before revealing their situation, they have soured much of their relations with the world.

Finally, what they are doing to Hong Kong will eventually destroy its financial importance in the world. Hong Kong's main selling point was its freedoms, both economic and political. Now that Beijing is moving forward with a strict takeover of Hong Kong's system, many of the world's biggest financial players will be leaving that city. They certainly won't be moving to Beijing either.
Click to expand...

The hk problem is an issue the ccp miscalculated, but that is still to be seen.....

In five years which economy will be the biggest?? In ten years?? Who will set & dictate global standards??
 
Bill said:
The hk problem is an issue the ccp miscalculated, but that is still to be seen.....

In five years which economy will be the biggest?? In ten years?? Who will set & dictate global standards??
Click to expand...

I think we're headed for a multi-polar world. It's going to be messy, just like all previous multi-polar power struggles.
 
Woko Haram said:
That can be part of it. It might just end up as another Cold War, with a lot of proxy battles involved.

Granted, China has been engaging in cyberwarfare for years now.
Click to expand...

Yes they have been very invasive.......

IMHO the belt & road is a direct challenge & threat to the dominance of the USA & West.....

While they sell themselves as users of soft power, especially as opposed to the USA, I don't think their neighbors, or the Muslims in East Turkistan, India, Vietnam, philippines etc believe that bs..
 
Bill said:
Yes they have been very invasive.......

IMHO the belt & road is a direct challenge & threat to the dominance of the USA & West.....

While they sell themselves as users of soft power, especially as opposed to the USA, I don't think their neighbors, or the Muslims in East Turkistan believe that bs..
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Unfortunately, our corporations and media turn a blind eye to China's abuses against Hong Kong and the Uyghurs, because China makes a lot of money for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top