The Defending Joe Biden Mega-Thread
- Thread starter Gergar12
- Start date
The whole time.
Well, that's not fair. You shifted so many goal posts you blew passed this argument a few times
Remember when I was bringing up the percentages of BLM that had looting? That was the time this was your argument
I never said any more than the one 6-block area in Seattle was taken over by BLM.
More so what I meant by that was based on just visuals, I'd say a higher percentage of people that took part in BLM protests were destroying/stealing property than those at January 6th, there was only a very very very small number of people on January 6th doing more than just occupying the Capitol. You guys were saying there was X amount of Election protests and a higher percentage of them featured violence vs the all the BLM protests and their percentage that featured violence. I was never trying to say that. I was saying Jan 6 was mostly peaceful because the vast vast vast vast majority of people there weren't violent. Just like when there's a building on fire in the background of a live news broadcast and the reporter says the protest has been mostly peaceful.
Loading…
thehill.com
Essentially, you can spin Jan 6th in the same manner if you wanted to.
I can imagine the economists around Biden screaming at him not to put a price ceiling on rent. Then again, they likely say the same thing about a 15-dollar minimum wage in Minnesota, I think this may work given how high rent is compared to inflation. Economists tend not to think about the negative externality of the power differential between renters, and landowners in this current economy and the economic warped gravity of landlords pulling the money out of renters through the broken housing sector. Given that most homeowners would rather burn the country down than increase the number of houses being built due to housing as an investment, and are more likely to be voters, this policy may start to make more sense than it seems.
Only in America do we think this problem may be solved either down the line, through some miracle like how World War II and FDR's Keynesian policy helped end the great depression for the US, or some combination of the above.
Absolutely not. The Jan 6 peeps were way more violent than the BLM peeps. Its not even close. We already did the math
And this is from some who has REGULARLY stated that most of the Jan 6 protest was not violent
You just keep repeating false statements not matter what the actual reality is. No amount of videos or pictures will change it. I can bring up beaten up officers and shootings through barricades if you like. It's just got nothing to do with statistics
It's much simpler than that.
The truth is investment banks, hedge funds, and asset management companies -- and their executives/board members -- fund major economics schools through donations, endowments, and grants. Hell, Ken Griffin paid $125 million to have the University of Chicago's economics school, AKA neoliberalism HQ, named after him. At the same time, those parties own and operate, or fund, the major economic think tanks. And corporate media, by the way.
No party involved is going to bite the hands that feed them by furthering anything other than neoliberal economic goals. That means universities are going to have selection bias towards neoliberal students and fund neoliberal research. Think tanks are going to push neoliberal policy positions, and media is going to exert editorial bias towards neoliberal narratives. That ownership and contribution returns on investment by manufacturing consent for neoliberal policy, under which investment banks, hedge funds, and asset management companies profit.
The last thing any of these parties will be inclined to do, is call out the economic, social, political, and frankly national security threat posed by investment banks, hedge funds, and asset managers monopolizing the residential property and development markets as we've seen post-2008, but especially post-Covid. As Upton Sinclair put it, "it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Except in this case those involved are damned well aware of the scenario before them, they either agree with it and are paid to propagandize it, or they disagree with it and are paid to say nothing about it.
Most actual homeowners aren't private citizens, they're institutions. Only one out of three "homeowners" in the US have 100% equity in their homes. I put "homeowner" in quotation marks, because those with mortgages and loans (i.e. financial institutions are lienholders) are still categorized as such -- and that's approximately 66% of the US population. So, only about 22% of US households are actually owned in any substantive legal sense by their occupants.
The problem is votes don't matter, money does by way of campaign expenditure and lobbying. That favors the institutions which legally own 78% of US households. The approximately 26% of the US population who are obnoxious, slack-jawed, morons gleefully voting against their economic and social interest, and the approximately 27% who are obnoxious, arrogant, morons gleefully voting against their economic and social interest? They're just the excuse for the policies bought and paid for by oligarchs.
It bears reminding to everyone in the thread, the "housing shortage" is fake. Those investment banks, hedge funds, and asset managers are a de facto cartel, limiting the number of units on the market at any time to generate false scarcity. Even in the less-than-a-handful of urban areas in which the shortage appears genuine, it's still fake and driven entirely by corporate RTO policies in which those same companies have interest.
Ironically, the problem's root cause is the worst-of-all-worlds chimeric monstrosity that is the US's implementation of Hayekian policy during boom cycles, and Keynesian policy during bust cycles. That never actually gives either the state or private markets genuine recovery time, and just accelerates and aggravates boom-bust cycles. But, it does greatly benefit oligarchs who are positioned to profit on upward and downward market trends and thereby have a vested interest in maximum market volatility at all times.
Either-or would be preferable to what we do now, though Keynesianism has the far better track record for moderating the length and severity of the cycle for stronger, more consistent, and sustainable economies.
I was reading about George Soros’s reflexivity theory last night which seems to tie into that from an investment standpoint.
Moreover on the issue of violence in cities, was also reminded of the little web squabble he and Musk had a while back.
Unsurprisingly the CNN bots hit the antisemitism button, while ironically Soros himself has history being critical of Israeli policy and its effects both domestically and overseas, and at the very least has been outspokenly indifferent to its plight.
Contrasting that to the conveniently omitted parts of Musk’s statements,
Basically reaffirms what big media conglomerates will never admit.
George Soros’s Bad Bet
The billionaire funded a series of experiments in the U.S. criminal-justice system—with disastrous results.
www.city-journal.org
Funny how Musk changed his tune on Trump though.
Joe Biden’s Gaza Problem: It’s Not Just the Pundit Class That Wants Him Gone
On Wednesday evening, I opened up the New York Times homepage—something I do with fevered regularity these days as Gaza coverage slips further and further down the pecking order—and began to scroll…
lithub.com
Yep. Biden is out.
www.nbcnews.com
President Joe Biden drops out of 2024 presidential race
Biden, after a five-decade career, faced a reckoning over his age and his ability to defeat Trump. He endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as his party faces a historic effort to replace him.
That leaves the Dems to look for a replacement candidate, Harris is an obvious choice as she has VP experience and is already on the ballot, but I'm not sure she can stand up to Trump in a meaningful way and that's to say nothing of the misogyny and racism she'll undoubtedly have to deal with.
Beyond Harris the Dems are a little short on obvious candidates, I've heard som suggest Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, and Newsom, though I'm not sure how they'd fare.
Beyond Harris the Dems are a little short on obvious candidates, I've heard som suggest Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, and Newsom, though I'm not sure how they'd fare.
It’s officially Joever.
This is probably for the best but I imagine it still stings for Biden. His presidency was a success yet rather than be rewarded he has to resign in relative disgrace. In contrast Trump presided over four years of chaos and misrule, and tried to do a coup yet he’s about to be rewarded American dictatorship for it
One good thing that might come from this is that it forces the American electorate to show their true colors. For months I've seen people argue that they aren't sleepwalking into a Trump dictatorship due to gross irresponsibility and neglect. Instead they argued they risked the dictatorship because Biden's old age was just THAT much of a problem....even compared to the barely younger rogue demagogue who's mental state has always been in extreme disarray.
Okay! Well then! The age factor is no longer a problem. So now the road is open to do the right thing......right?
Yeah actually I'm not holding my breath. I just don't trust the medium American voter on this. They'll find another reason to drag their feet.
This is probably for the best but I imagine it still stings for Biden. His presidency was a success yet rather than be rewarded he has to resign in relative disgrace. In contrast Trump presided over four years of chaos and misrule, and tried to do a coup yet he’s about to be rewarded American dictatorship for it
One good thing that might come from this is that it forces the American electorate to show their true colors. For months I've seen people argue that they aren't sleepwalking into a Trump dictatorship due to gross irresponsibility and neglect. Instead they argued they risked the dictatorship because Biden's old age was just THAT much of a problem....even compared to the barely younger rogue demagogue who's mental state has always been in extreme disarray.
Okay! Well then! The age factor is no longer a problem. So now the road is open to do the right thing......right?
Yeah actually I'm not holding my breath. I just don't trust the medium American voter on this. They'll find another reason to drag their feet.
Being a minority is a two way street though. Harris will likely be fanatically opposed by racist and sexists, but she can also garner minority support that might have been lost if the first black/Indian VP was unceremoniously skipped.
I still find the whole topic somewhat juvenile. Biden isn't Trump or someone like Bernie sanders. He wasn't nor would he be some kind of maverick. He has a team of 50+ advisors and committees that make all his decisions. I hate this whole narrative of "hes too old", too old for what? Literally all he would have done in his second term is show up for events and sign laws. Harris is the obvious nominee and she would be no different.
The argument could at least mildly be made that if you vote for Trump you're not strictly voting for the establishment. He did a few wild card dumb stunt bills that made him more of his "own" president, but even those ultimately fell apart. His legacy was ultimately just doing whatever the Christian Nationalist donors wanted to shit on immigrants and LGBTQ and to rollback consumer, environment, and worker protections, as designed by congressional citizens united sub-committees in the corporate pockets.
I hate that we play this dumb mascot game like we aren't just voting for donor fee return machines. "We vote for BIG STRONG MAN" fucking whatever.
The argument could at least mildly be made that if you vote for Trump you're not strictly voting for the establishment. He did a few wild card dumb stunt bills that made him more of his "own" president, but even those ultimately fell apart. His legacy was ultimately just doing whatever the Christian Nationalist donors wanted to shit on immigrants and LGBTQ and to rollback consumer, environment, and worker protections, as designed by congressional citizens united sub-committees in the corporate pockets.
I hate that we play this dumb mascot game like we aren't just voting for donor fee return machines. "We vote for BIG STRONG MAN" fucking whatever.
John Stewart's reaction to Biden saying that he'd be fine with losing to Trump as long as he knew he did his best because that's what it's all about was very funny and true. He yelled that's not what it's all about!!! That's like FDR saying of losing to Hitler after WW2 saying, "well, at least both sides had a good time."