***Official Political Discussion Thread***

IMG_2164.jpeg

This is one of those common retorts that if you think about it for a sec is actually transphobic.



Comparing a trans person desire to be known as the pronouns of the opposite sex to something as trivial as a nickname is pretty belittling.
 
Yup the "they're both the same" crowd from 2016 bears the brunt of all of this idiocy.
Cornell West still singing the same chorus. Couldn't believe my ears when he called Trump brother and went on and on about love and ****.

How blind is he?
 
For me the 2022 midterms changed my perspective on the whole situation.

If the GOP had romped AND we got all these horrible rulings I’d be feeling like the slippery slope of GOP anti majoritarianism is inescapable.

But the fact that they got slammed for messing with women and young people is heartening. The impulse for majoritarianism and a more egalitarian country is strong and it is the majority position.

Undoing counter majoritarian norms and purging conservatism and corruption from the body politic is akin to a retired prize fighter getting back into shape. The fighter had a health scare a year ago. By November, he was feeling much better. He made steady gains in the first half of 2023. He suffered some some injuries on his next run. But he’ll be back to training pretty soon. We know our fighter could while jogging get hit by a red raised truck, or succumb to apathy next year. We don’t know the outcome but we know that our fighter has a high pain threshold, a will to persist, and an understanding that if he doesn’t achieve his goals, his quality and length of life will be diminished. I have a feeling our fighter will be doing a solid 10k in November of 2024 and our fighter may be very fit and heathy before this decade ends.

———

As far as voting and student debt goes we all know that I have my critiques of its limitations. But it’s still worth it for several reasons.

Can we vote ourselves a classless, stateless, moneyless, borderless, raceless, genderless world? Of course not. But student debt cancellation, free college, something like a public option for health insurance, bringing back affirmative action, fair districting, an easy path to citizenship, taking in more refugees, unbanning books, expanding the court, an interstate voting compact, full legal protections for LGBT+, transferring money from police departments and the pentagon to social services. That’s all doable as a best case scenario if Democrats, on balance, keep on winning.

Now to go beyond that, we’d need revolution. Things like a UBI. Land back, reparations, abolishing the carceral state, worker control of the economy, won’t be done by voting. But having a suite of socially democratic policies means that marginalized people can feel relatively safe and secure and would be in a position to demand more of the state, of the economy, and of society itself.

Here’s a small problem. As us millennials are slowly turning 40 many are turning from former Obama supporters that helped elect him both times to slowly turning into republicans. This needs to slow down but people get jaded as they get older unfortunately .
 
I am glad that the loan forgiveness was struck down

Higher ed needs broad reform, and any legislation that doesn't address pricing is flawed
How does addressing pricing (which I agree with) addresses ALL the issues related to school loans?

Every nation, especially one that aspires to prosperity needs educated workers and educated citizens. School loans and the way they are currently structured have a tremendous socioeconomic cost for the nation, and quite frankly, you're not solving the pricing problem either as long as you don't convince Americans that they must fund education THROUGH TAXES.
 
How does addressing pricing (which I agree with) addresses ALL the issues related to school loans?

Every nation, especially one that aspires to prosperity needs educated workers and educated citizens. School loans and the way they are currently structured have a tremendous socioeconomic cost for the nation, and quite frankly, you're not solving the pricing problem either as long as you don't convince Americans that they must fund education THROUGH TAXES.
I never stated it addressed all the issues, but it would def address more than loan forgiveness

I would argue that pricing could be solved by reducing headcount in administrative posts, reforming tenure and encouragement starting at the k-12 level of alternative paths post high-school. Taxes of course could help relieve costs, but government and reduced costs don't exactly go hand in hand.
 
By the logic that anything that is not sweeping reforms is flawed and should be opposed is deeply flawed

Let us not base gun control bills because they won't solve gun violence

Let us not pass any infrastructure bills that don't fix all infrastructure

Should be against something like the ACA too, that does address the entire health insurance and care system.

Against zoning reforms that won't completely fix housing issue

Against mail in voting, and more polling places in black neighborhoods

Let us not try to make the country marginally better

Even more, the country should not try to make amends to the people that have been affected my it's systemic failures

That just seems like an unserious way to think about policymaking
 
I never stated it addressed all the issues, but it would def address more than loan forgiveness

I would argue that pricing could be solved by reducing headcount in administrative posts, reforming tenure and encouragement starting at the k-12 level of alternative paths post high-school. Taxes of course could help relieve costs, but government and reduced costs don't exactly go hand in hand.
Are you aware that the rising cost of education is largely driven by states cutting education budgets?

Are you aware that trade school is no longer the cheap way to economic prosperity it used to be, which is due to the increased interest in trade careers? Young tradespeople are taking loans to go to school, especially if they don't live in areas where local companies are willing to shoulder the cost of developing replacements for their aging workforce?

If you remove tenure, what kind of incentives do you offer to keep research professors in the States so that we can continue profiting from this work, and how do these incentives not result in the (re)creation of state research labs?

Sure, limit the administrative headcount; however, how much money are you really saving and putting towards college students' education?

And remember, in your scenario, you're still dealing with a huge mass of people who will owe money into retirement, probably won't own a home, and won't generate as much taxes as they could have. That means more elderly folks who become public charges, and more poverty for themselves and the communities they live in.
 
This is one of those common retorts that if you think about it for a sec is actually transphobic.



Comparing a trans person desire to be known as the pronouns of the opposite sex to something as trivial as a nickname is pretty belittling.
Is simplifying respect what someone asks you to call them belittling? Seriously asking to learn for myself
 
Lots of blame to go around for this current Court situation. But to boil it down to a single sentence - **** James Comey.
 
Are you aware that the rising cost of education is largely driven by states cutting education budgets?

Are you aware that trade school is no longer the cheap way to economic prosperity it used to be, which is due to the increased interest in trade careers? Young tradespeople are taking loans to go to school, especially if they don't live in areas where local companies are willing to shoulder the cost of developing replacements for their aging workforce?

If you remove tenure, what kind of incentives do you offer to keep research professors in the States so that we can continue profiting from this work, and how do these incentives not result in the (re)creation of state research labs?

Sure, limit the administrative headcount; however, how much money are you really saving and putting towards college students' education?

And remember, in your scenario, you're still dealing with a huge mass of people who will owe money into retirement, probably won't own a home, and won't generate as much taxes as they could have. That means more elderly folks who become public charges, and more poverty for themselves and the communities they live in.

What do you propose to lower prices?

I doubt these tradespeople are taking out loans they can't afford to pay back because I know what they stand to make after graduation. I also disagree that lower source of revenue for state schools is driving prices up, what data do you have to support this? I know this is plausible for perhaps a bit of an increase and case- by-case basis, but I would be curious to see what actual impact if any it has on the prices schools are charging. I know one thing for sure, state funding hasn't decreased 3 fold anywhere.

College is a choice, a significant one that requires betting on yourself. Student loan forgiveness is essentially erasing that gamble and requires zero adjustment from the institutions or the individuals going forward in place as to why these people couldn't afford to pay off their debt in the first place.
 
Last edited:
What do you propose to lower prices?
The same thing that every country that offers low-cost education does: have state/federal governments subsidize it. There's no magic to it, and that's what these USA used to do before Reagan. The higher taxes that used to be levied on the wealthiest corporations and individuals were reinvested in human capital*

*mostly white human capital (let's be honest)

College is a choice, a significant one that requires betting on yourself. Student loan forgiveness is essentially erasing that gamble and requires zero adjustment from the institutions or the individuals going forward in place as to why these people couldn't afford to pay off their debt in the first place.
College may be a choice, but it's not the one-way road to profit that many folks portray it as. Kids take advantage of the educational resources college offers in order to turn into income-producing citizens who will keep the country running and thriving. I disagree with the notion that it is, or should be a gamble. It is a continuous investment in the future stability of the country. Can you imagine what would happen to the electric grid (and the economy) if one day, there aren't enough engineers and technicians to prevent and address its failures immediately?

Companies started hurting for labor as soon as Covid shut down the human capital pipeline into the US and exposed that American resilience in light of poor K-12 education, poor early childhood policies, and poor fertility rates boils down to its ability to attract people who already have degrees and/or experience and are willing to work here legally or otherwise.

Companies that deal with work that requires a university-level knowledge base are having a lot of trouble finding employees because less folks are entering college due to the cost. And in a lot of these fields, employees get older, and a lot of them retire and take important institutional knowledge with them before they can transfer it to enough new people so that things keep running.
Safe infrastructure doesn't get built and maintained with a K-12 education. An effective medical body doesn't get built with K-12. Even tradespeople need to understand the concepts behind the things they put together, and that is not happening when they can barely read at fifth grade level. Blueprints are not written at 5th grade level. Higher education is not a luxury; it's a need.
 
Back
Top Bottom