You got that much? My cut from “W” was, like, $50. As far as I can figure at the moment, when all is said and done, I’ll be paying more under 45’s grand scheme. And my senator thinks that’s just peachy.
4 Likes
Good thing I didn’t say anything of the sort, then. I wouldn’t want to be fraudulent!
1 Like
Hah!
Imagine for a second that even if you had the best programs available to help you out, childcare could still easily cost you $300-$500 per month per child JUST SO YOU COULD GO TO WORK.
Edit: And that’s only the hours that you work. Ever tried to time your baby’s nap so they could sleep on the stroller while you get your deep-cleaning done at the dentist (that you might be lucky enough to afford)? I have.
Edit: Not to even mention more trips to the doctor, and double your grocery bill.
Edit: and let’s not forget your doing all this financial planning and moving up the corporate ladder while getting five or six hours of sleep per night. (If you have a wonder-baby that is.)
6 Likes
For sure, even if it was a household with two parents doing all of this with multiple kids is not easy. One of my best friends has 3 kids and they are so busy and trying to budget their spending is a constant worry.
3 Likes
The kodos/kang meet certainly implies you believe they’re “equally bad”, but please don’t misrepresent yourself.
3 Likes
No, it certainly does not.
It implies that the outcome of voting for either one is enslavement and/or species extinction. Which is simply the truth.
You’re the partisan, you get to decide for yourself which way you like that, and whether one road is better than another.
1 Like
It implies that the outcome of voting for either one is enslavement and/or species extinction. Which is simply the truth.
Oh… ok they’re not equally bad just both mean extinction/enslavement. mmm… careful that you don’t cut yourself on that edge mister edge-lord. so edgy.
4 Likes
I’m buying stock in whoever makes K-Y.
2 Likes
This belies any possibility of any incremental improvement.
Which appears to fly in the face of history, not to mention potential.
I almost believe the USA could do with some partisans right now.
4 Likes
Explain to me exactly how the Democrats’ actions (their actual policies in office, not their propaganda) will prevent catastrophic climate change, dead oceans, and an end to cheap energy, friend.
Then you can tell me exactly why the Democrats couldn’t put an end to corruption in the FDA, institute common sense gun control, or enact single-payer health care when they held the presidency and both houses of congress.
It’s objectively true that the Republicans are worse than the Democrats (at the party leadership level, at least). No argument, you’re the only one claiming I’ve said that. I am not arguing that.
But will that matter to your grandchildren when they are choking to death in a dead landscape?
Voting third party (I include Bernie Sanders, an Independent, in that category) is the only hope we have for meaningful change through the ballot box. And frankly the odds aren’t even good for that - but I plan to go down fighting, rather than just giving up and voting for lesser evils.
5 Likes
Needs to be said: That’s less than $2 a day.
Budget carefully.
3 Likes
I’m still trying to unpack how you aren’t saying the two sides are equally bad but then say they both lead to extinction. So I’m left thinking it’s pointless to read anything else you say because you’re completely intellectually dishonest. You do you though.
3 Likes
That’s because you aren’t accepting that other people can have different value judgements than you do.
So perhaps it is pointless for you to read anything that doesn’t already agree with you.
2 Likes
Oooooor, say, gut the Democratic party of its center-right and militaristic wings by pushing for progressive candidates in open elections , like the DemSoc chapters are doing.
Until the Citizens United decision is nulled through constitutional amendment, I don’t feel much hope for getting anything done through third-parties. If you feel I’m mistaken, please make the case. I like feeling hopeful.
6 Likes
3 Likes
There’s two problems with that. Maybe three.
First, are those progressive candidates really progressive, or are they just anti-Trump reactionaries*, mouthing the appropriate slogans to get elected? This is the easiest thing to check on and deal with, but it’s still a real issue.
Second, are they immune to corruption? The behavior patttern of political machines is to propagate the machine, which means co-opting everyone who joins the party and converting their personal morals and values into an extension of the party’s survival effort. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts, and the way to power inside a political machine is to align your goals with those of the party.
And, finally, is it really easier to reform an old dog that’s set in its ways, or to train a puppy?
If you look at the sheer amount of time and money that was spent spreading lies about Jill Stein, you can see that the political machines are afraid of the tiny little hippy party… there’s good reason for them to be. Green parties are the only ones making the real problem of human survival their core campaign issue, despite attempts at greenwashing of the industrial war parties.
* I’m an anti-Trump reactionary myself, it’s not an insult.
4 Likes
I voted for Nader. I feel ya. I sincerely wish the Green party had better traction than it does. But I’ve also started to suspect that for that to happen, victories must happen at the lower levels of government before we start lunging for high positions.
I phrase my feelings that way because part of me still believes it could be done top-down. I mean, just look at Trump’s victory, right? But that really was years in the making–specifically, years of gerrymandering, years of voter suppression, and years of culture-shifting propoganda via outlets such as Fox News.
I don’t know. I just don’t know. Maybe overhauling the Dems is a lost cause. The evident corruption of the DNC certainly affirms that such a shift won’t be easy.
3 Likes
Well, there’s states that have complex rules designed to keep third parties out of lower levels unless the party has already done well in federal elections, and funding is also related to voting for higher offices, too. So you weren’t “wasting your vote” even though Nader did not win.
The good news is that Greens and other third parties are being elected to local offices. They’re definitely on an uptick. A lot of us fear, though, that the huge influx of new Democratic candidates is taking votes from Greens and Socialists rather than from the Trumpers.
I dunno either. I can see no way to accurately predict the eventual outcomes, and I correctly called the 2016 election many months in advance right here on BBS. All I know for sure is that voting for a Green candidate that loses is always a far more meaningful act than voting for a major party candidate that loses, and in most cases it’s better than voting for the winner.
2 Likes
Corruption isn’t something one can counteract permanently other than promoting perpetual criticism. It’s not magic bullet but it’s better than assuming revolutions should just stop after the last jerks were ejected from public office. Also, some of the DemSocs are definitely left of anyone in the political field (even left of Sanders). Some are social democrats but I’ve seen more overt communists among their ranks these days. Some are tending into Marxist-Leninist stuff which I’m not really a fan of but I’m a mutualist so what the heck do I know?
2 Likes
