- Jun 23, 2004
- 34,008
- 8,042
- 136
Past... 2012: Victory Tastes Sour
To recap some background info. I grew up in a non religious Republican household in CA. In 90s the President was the "bad guy" for "reasons". Later it was a running joke that Clinton's legacy would be marred as sex between two Bushes. Fun and games, not a great deal of attention paid. That changed on September 11, 2001. Youthful zeal, patriotism, war fervor, call it what you will, my initial positions were formed at that point. Yay to Afghanistan, getting "stuff" done with the Patriot Act, and regime change in Iraq. Smashing the "bad guys". Should young men know better with a country at war?
Enter P&N, 2004. Questions on the patriot act immediately seemed reasonable. The Iraq war, no so much. I would be constrained by ego and party identification. Neocon, you're attacking me right? Two years passed and it took a person considered on "my side" to speak out against it. Without a partisan barrier, and some potent truths of the mess we'll leave behind, the tide was turned. Moreover, you guys were constantly knocking Bush the spender, Bush's deficits. Seemed reasonable. To side with civil liberties, smarter (less) wars, and small government I found myself comfortable with Libertarians. Neocons were the Republicans like Bush, attacking our liberties, killing our men in pointless war, and spending money like crazy. Big gov Republicans, not my ideals. Democrats, Libertarians, everyone combined made a very compelling case for the damnation of Bush and men like him.
Such was the influence early arguments had. Bush really had wronged us. In 2008 and 2012 I saw Republicans nominate men like Bush. With moderate traits that signaled further Neoconservatism. Not my cup of tea. GOP won House and Senate, and I told you the victory was sour. Libertarian was all that remained of my political identity. I would argue that it shouldn't be anarchy, but thought of as Constitutionalism. Of keeping to a limited government of enumerated powers that protects our civil liberties and yields as much management to state and local governments as possible. Smallest Democracy is Best Democracy.
Present...
That's where you think it ends, right? No. I was wrong on stimulus. I mean, we're still in a heck of a mess from 2008, but economic liquidity is a proven factor. People need money to keep the flow of goods moving, and each other employed. I cannot deny the role government has in helping people. It is up to us to ensure it is restrained, respectful, and not corrupt. But there are economic tasks suited for our currency.
I'll next explain the part you can relate to, and hopefully understand. My parents always told me when they were young you could pump gas and support a family. That they lived better with $20/yr in the early 1970s than a low 6 figure income today. Fanciful tale, or has America lost its mojo? Enter Robert Reich. Someone here linked a Youtube video for Inequality For All before it was taken down (pay wall), and I won't argue its case here, but suffice it to say I was stunned. He proved with facts what my parents knew to be true. Robert Reich could explain modern American hardships in a way I never understood, and he had the reasons behind it. Long story short, our labor has lost significant value over the past ~40 years.
Now, prior to Mr. Reich's transformative message, I had begun my own musings. Where is technology headed? You have to think it through to the end. What does a future full of automation look like? I calculated out the cost of a basic income for our nation. $1,000 /mo can be done for $2.6 trillion. Within our current budget, and replacing many programs that already cost as much. This is such a leap, that I was uncomfortable with it. Then I grasped the need for liquidity to maintain demand, I saw the effects of income inequality, and I recognize the obvious trend we already face today. Americans are getting poorer, welfare is steadily rising, and automation is about to leapfrog mankind. You may not see this as I do, but economics will force us to rethink everything.
Future...
So I start off with a set of values that I thought the Republicans spoke for. Then I witnessed that they acted against. I found Libertarians had sound policy for civil liberties, adopted their economic theory... but it fell short. Now, "do nothing" feels entirely unsuited to meet the challenges we face. Bill Clinton was not wrong when, in 2012, he said: we believe that “we’re all in this together” is a far better philosophy than “you’re on your own.” That's quite a statement. Plus its a fact. Today is not the founding of America, there's no open land, no wild frontier. There's no water to drink or food to gather that does not already belong to someone else. How can each man be an island when there are no more free islands remaining?
I have always appreciated that there's a safety net, but now I realize the challenges it faces. It needs to be economically sound and robust enough to ensure a full, healthy market. I fully endorse efforts to, as Mr. Reich put it, restore American labor. Then looking to the future, I do not have an alternative to basic income. I encourage Republicans and Libertarians to try but I've heard of no compelling theory. If "trickle down" has given us the economics of the past ~40 years... then they have harmed us. I cannot in good conscience support the status quo. Americans are hurting and need an economic revolution.
Which brings me to election 2016.
About two weeks prior to the election I made my choice. Believe me, the establishment's hatred of Trump was a temptation, as was my soft spot for Libertarians. With each candidate I found policy I liked and policy that I opposed, but two candidates I personally despised, one was a fool, and the remaining seemed reasonable on a personal level. I told you I was voting Green.
I checked yesterday, it turns out my vote went to the candidate who I most likely identify with now. I wasn't certain of that on Tuesday, there's a great deal of uncertainty and internal conflict following a mea culpa, of admitting that my positions were wrong. My values remain the same, but how I will honor them through policy has been redefined through learning, through arguing, through having an open mind. Maybe that is the value you can find in P&N.
Is my political compass result a fluke? Throughout this election cycle I have voiced support for Bernie Sanders. Maybe tepidly, but the idea that I did not oppose him was growing on me. Senator Sanders largely shares my values, and the more think about it, the more economics has forced my hand. Immediately following the election I decided that we need people like Bernie Sanders, we need people who endorsed Bernie Sanders. The next day I changed my signature to endorse my beliefs.
The election results? The American people fought back against Republicans in 2006, and 2008. Obama gave them a youthful, charismatic, and positive campaign, he delivered the IDEA of hope and change. His nomination speech that summer was genuinely moving, even for an ardent opponent. If he could hold a third term, I'd give it to him. Trump won because you hate him. He won because you tapped into a regressive, cold, negativity from a 1990s era. You stooped down into the mud and challenged a pig at his own game. Trump was given an opening to represent the hope for change that President Obama offered voters in 2008.
The DNC can do better. Sanders surprised you in the primaries because the American people want more hope, more change, more campaign 2008. The old guard failed to deliver that in 2016. The American people will turn out to vote for a strong, positive message that "we" have a plan of action to help them. That we will fight for them. It's time for young progressives to make their stand, to let Senator Sanders retire knowing that he moved us, and that we will finish what he started.
This has been my quadrennial address.
tl;dr: It's the economy, stupid!
To recap some background info. I grew up in a non religious Republican household in CA. In 90s the President was the "bad guy" for "reasons". Later it was a running joke that Clinton's legacy would be marred as sex between two Bushes. Fun and games, not a great deal of attention paid. That changed on September 11, 2001. Youthful zeal, patriotism, war fervor, call it what you will, my initial positions were formed at that point. Yay to Afghanistan, getting "stuff" done with the Patriot Act, and regime change in Iraq. Smashing the "bad guys". Should young men know better with a country at war?
Enter P&N, 2004. Questions on the patriot act immediately seemed reasonable. The Iraq war, no so much. I would be constrained by ego and party identification. Neocon, you're attacking me right? Two years passed and it took a person considered on "my side" to speak out against it. Without a partisan barrier, and some potent truths of the mess we'll leave behind, the tide was turned. Moreover, you guys were constantly knocking Bush the spender, Bush's deficits. Seemed reasonable. To side with civil liberties, smarter (less) wars, and small government I found myself comfortable with Libertarians. Neocons were the Republicans like Bush, attacking our liberties, killing our men in pointless war, and spending money like crazy. Big gov Republicans, not my ideals. Democrats, Libertarians, everyone combined made a very compelling case for the damnation of Bush and men like him.
Such was the influence early arguments had. Bush really had wronged us. In 2008 and 2012 I saw Republicans nominate men like Bush. With moderate traits that signaled further Neoconservatism. Not my cup of tea. GOP won House and Senate, and I told you the victory was sour. Libertarian was all that remained of my political identity. I would argue that it shouldn't be anarchy, but thought of as Constitutionalism. Of keeping to a limited government of enumerated powers that protects our civil liberties and yields as much management to state and local governments as possible. Smallest Democracy is Best Democracy.
Present...
That's where you think it ends, right? No. I was wrong on stimulus. I mean, we're still in a heck of a mess from 2008, but economic liquidity is a proven factor. People need money to keep the flow of goods moving, and each other employed. I cannot deny the role government has in helping people. It is up to us to ensure it is restrained, respectful, and not corrupt. But there are economic tasks suited for our currency.
I'll next explain the part you can relate to, and hopefully understand. My parents always told me when they were young you could pump gas and support a family. That they lived better with $20/yr in the early 1970s than a low 6 figure income today. Fanciful tale, or has America lost its mojo? Enter Robert Reich. Someone here linked a Youtube video for Inequality For All before it was taken down (pay wall), and I won't argue its case here, but suffice it to say I was stunned. He proved with facts what my parents knew to be true. Robert Reich could explain modern American hardships in a way I never understood, and he had the reasons behind it. Long story short, our labor has lost significant value over the past ~40 years.
Now, prior to Mr. Reich's transformative message, I had begun my own musings. Where is technology headed? You have to think it through to the end. What does a future full of automation look like? I calculated out the cost of a basic income for our nation. $1,000 /mo can be done for $2.6 trillion. Within our current budget, and replacing many programs that already cost as much. This is such a leap, that I was uncomfortable with it. Then I grasped the need for liquidity to maintain demand, I saw the effects of income inequality, and I recognize the obvious trend we already face today. Americans are getting poorer, welfare is steadily rising, and automation is about to leapfrog mankind. You may not see this as I do, but economics will force us to rethink everything.
Future...
So I start off with a set of values that I thought the Republicans spoke for. Then I witnessed that they acted against. I found Libertarians had sound policy for civil liberties, adopted their economic theory... but it fell short. Now, "do nothing" feels entirely unsuited to meet the challenges we face. Bill Clinton was not wrong when, in 2012, he said: we believe that “we’re all in this together” is a far better philosophy than “you’re on your own.” That's quite a statement. Plus its a fact. Today is not the founding of America, there's no open land, no wild frontier. There's no water to drink or food to gather that does not already belong to someone else. How can each man be an island when there are no more free islands remaining?
I have always appreciated that there's a safety net, but now I realize the challenges it faces. It needs to be economically sound and robust enough to ensure a full, healthy market. I fully endorse efforts to, as Mr. Reich put it, restore American labor. Then looking to the future, I do not have an alternative to basic income. I encourage Republicans and Libertarians to try but I've heard of no compelling theory. If "trickle down" has given us the economics of the past ~40 years... then they have harmed us. I cannot in good conscience support the status quo. Americans are hurting and need an economic revolution.
Which brings me to election 2016.
About two weeks prior to the election I made my choice. Believe me, the establishment's hatred of Trump was a temptation, as was my soft spot for Libertarians. With each candidate I found policy I liked and policy that I opposed, but two candidates I personally despised, one was a fool, and the remaining seemed reasonable on a personal level. I told you I was voting Green.
I checked yesterday, it turns out my vote went to the candidate who I most likely identify with now. I wasn't certain of that on Tuesday, there's a great deal of uncertainty and internal conflict following a mea culpa, of admitting that my positions were wrong. My values remain the same, but how I will honor them through policy has been redefined through learning, through arguing, through having an open mind. Maybe that is the value you can find in P&N.
Is my political compass result a fluke? Throughout this election cycle I have voiced support for Bernie Sanders. Maybe tepidly, but the idea that I did not oppose him was growing on me. Senator Sanders largely shares my values, and the more think about it, the more economics has forced my hand. Immediately following the election I decided that we need people like Bernie Sanders, we need people who endorsed Bernie Sanders. The next day I changed my signature to endorse my beliefs.
The election results? The American people fought back against Republicans in 2006, and 2008. Obama gave them a youthful, charismatic, and positive campaign, he delivered the IDEA of hope and change. His nomination speech that summer was genuinely moving, even for an ardent opponent. If he could hold a third term, I'd give it to him. Trump won because you hate him. He won because you tapped into a regressive, cold, negativity from a 1990s era. You stooped down into the mud and challenged a pig at his own game. Trump was given an opening to represent the hope for change that President Obama offered voters in 2008.
The DNC can do better. Sanders surprised you in the primaries because the American people want more hope, more change, more campaign 2008. The old guard failed to deliver that in 2016. The American people will turn out to vote for a strong, positive message that "we" have a plan of action to help them. That we will fight for them. It's time for young progressives to make their stand, to let Senator Sanders retire knowing that he moved us, and that we will finish what he started.
This has been my quadrennial address.
tl;dr: It's the economy, stupid!
Last edited: