Bernie.........and to think he could have been President !

Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
While I don't necessarily agree with every policy she advocates, to suggest that she and Trump are opposite sides of the same coin is completely without basis.

She recommends subway fare evasion? As far as I can tell, she is actually against the hiring of 500 new NYC transit cops, which will cost an extra $249 million over four years. The new hires are being partially justified by the suggestion that they will decrease fare evasion, although many observers say they won't come close to recovering their cost. She thinks the funds would be put to better use by investing in transit itself. If you interpret that as supporting fare evasion, I couldn't find any statements to support that view.

Recommending rent strikes? Supporting rent strikers who can't afford to pay their rent due to the collapsed coronavirus economy gets some sympathy from me.

I haven't delved deeply into these issue, as it's not where I live, but there's more to them than simplistic statements would indicate.

To insinuate that AOC and Trump are intellectually equivalent just does not gibe with anything I've seen or read.
The officers in question were proposed by Mario Cuomo, the governor of New York, because fare evasion was costing the Metropolitan Transit Authority (which reports to the state, not the city) hundreds of millions of dollars per year. The insinuation by Ocasio-Cortez that most of these evaders are noble underpaid workers who need transportation but can't afford it isn't supported by the MTA's data. The MTA funding model assumes fare paying, like it or not, and if fare evasion becomes too prevalent the entire system will fall apart. This was Cuomo's reasoning, agree with it or not. And even Ocasio-Cortez's fellow bleeding heart, prosecutor Cyrus Vance, apparently agreed, as did Bill de Blasio:


This is pretty good and balanced article about the "cancel rent" movement:

 
D

Danzilla31

Audioholic Ninja
What middle class would the repubs leave, they seem to have no regard for it whatsoever....except to bullshit about.
Honestly Lovin it doesn't seem to matter which group is in place middle class has been shrinking for a long long time
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
While I don't necessarily agree with every policy she advocates, to suggest that she and Trump are opposite sides of the same coin is completely without basis.
My point is that they use the same tactics to appeal to their voter bases. They both demonize people who aren't in their base. Sanders, Warren, and Ocasio-Cortez demonize the rich and successful. Trump demonizes immigrants and protestors. I don't agree with either one, and frankly they both make me sick. I don't believe in judging groups, any group. [Edit: this statement is too broad, because hate groups can be judged as a group, but I was really referring to racial, gender, ethnic, or economic groups.]

She recommends subway fare evasion? As far as I can tell, she is actually against the hiring of 500 new NYC transit cops, which will cost an extra $249 million over four years. The new hires are being partially justified by the suggestion that they will decrease fare evasion, although many observers say they won't come close to recovering their cost. She thinks the funds would be put to better use by investing in transit itself. If you interpret that as supporting fare evasion, I couldn't find any statements to support that view.
No, in tweets she actually supported the turnstile jumpers.



To insinuate that AOC and Trump are intellectually equivalent just does not gibe with anything I've seen or read.
My point was specifically that they use similar tactics with their support bases, and they both have poor mastery of the facts and poor understanding of highly relevant issues.
 
Last edited:
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
While AOC tries to 'punch her way up' you're right It probably won't hurt the upper crust but it will in all probability adversely effect the middle class, or what's left of it .........

I think Kamala is far smarter to begin with so hopefully she can keep AOC in check(for the time being)
How would a wealth tax on billionaires (one of AOC's favorite desires) not affect the upper crust? She has already said she thinks the max tax should approach the 90% rate of the past.

I think the top earners could easily pay more, but there's no reason to make them want to leave. The top income for Social Security should have been raised to $200+ or more as soon as the top earners were making much more than that, too. Congress wants nothing more than to get rid of it, but that would also eliminate a cash cow they have been humping for decades, so I guess they would turn to us for their pleasure, if you know what I mean.

Kamala has some skeletons, too- they all do and it's up to the voters to decide if they're bad enough to prevent voting for them but it also means the skeletons need to come out of the closet, too.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
While I don't necessarily agree with every policy she advocates, to suggest that she and Trump are opposite sides of the same coin is completely without basis.

She recommends subway fare evasion? As far as I can tell, she is actually against the hiring of 500 new NYC transit cops, which will cost an extra $249 million over four years. The new hires are being partially justified by the suggestion that they will decrease fare evasion, although many observers say they won't come close to recovering their cost. She thinks the funds would be put to better use by investing in transit itself. If you interpret that as supporting fare evasion, I couldn't find any statements to support that view.

Recommending rent strikes? Supporting rent strikers who can't afford to pay their rent due to the collapsed coronavirus economy gets some sympathy from me.

I haven't delved deeply into these issue, as it's not where I live, but there's more to them than simplistic statements would indicate.

To insinuate that AOC and Trump are intellectually equivalent just does not gibe with anything I've seen or read.
If more transit cops would result in less fare evasion and she wants to use the money for something else, how would her plan change far evasion? Spending more on transit AND fare evasion are a losing proposition- how can the system not lose its ass if less is done about fare evasion?

$249 Million over 5 years for 500 transit cops? Jesus! I want to be a transit cop! That's $99,600 per year/cop!

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who owns rental property, but they aren't a large company or property owner who has a lot of rental units- rent strike means they could very well lose their property if they still have a mortgage- how is that not screwing those property owners? The large property owners can afford to absorb some revenue decrease, but the amount depends on how they structured the business. In MKE, one guy knocked off a large amount from what he asked people to pay- I don't know how many units he owns, but that was a pretty cool thing to do.

Sympathy is fine, but what about the property owners, or are they all greedy bastiges, too? Some definitely are, but it would be best if the god ones are considered, as well.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
The officers in question were proposed by Mario Cuomo, the governor of New York, because fare evasion was costing the Metropolitan Transit Authority (which reports to the state, not the city) hundreds of millions of dollars per year. The insinuation by Ocasio-Cortez that most of these evaders are noble underpaid workers who need transportation but can't afford it isn't supported by the MTA's data. The MTA funding model assumes fare paying, like it or not, and if fare evasion becomes too prevalent the entire system will fall apart. This was Cuomo's reasoning, agree with it or not. And even Ocasio-Cortez's fellow bleeding heart, prosecutor Cyrus Vance, apparently agreed, as did Bill de Blasio:


This is pretty good and balanced article about the "cancel rent" movement:

I think most (if not all) transit companies offer discounts to low income riders and NYC's is no different- they offer 50% discount-

 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
The officers in question were proposed by Mario Cuomo, the governor of New York, because fare evasion was costing the Metropolitan Transit Authority (which reports to the state, not the city) hundreds of millions of dollars per year. The insinuation by Ocasio-Cortez that most of these evaders are noble underpaid workers who need transportation but can't afford it isn't supported by the MTA's data. The MTA funding model assumes fare paying, like it or not, and if fare evasion becomes too prevalent the entire system will fall apart. This was Cuomo's reasoning, agree with it or not. And even Ocasio-Cortez's fellow bleeding heart, prosecutor Cyrus Vance, apparently agreed, as did Bill de Blasio:


This is pretty good and balanced article about the "cancel rent" movement:

The manner in which the MTA compiled its data is not in undisputed, but I would agree that not every fare evader does so because they can't afford it. And, yes, transit must be financed somehow. But, I'm sure you will agree, thousands of working poor who already can't afford their rent also can't afford $120+ a month to get to and from work. Such issues aren't confined to NYC; it just happens to be highlighted there.

Which segues into the rent issue. The article you linked is indeed a good overview of the problem. But, it doesn't really criticize rent strikers. NYC rent was already unaffordable for too many low-income people. The economic fallout from the pandemic was just the straw that broke many backs. It speaks to the failure of housing policy in NYC, and elsewhere.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
My point is that they use the same tactics to appeal to their voter bases. They both demonize people who aren't in their base. Sanders, Warren, and Ocasio-Cortez demonize the rich and successful. Trump demonizes immigrants and protestors. I don't agree with either one, and frankly they both make me sick. I don't believe in judging groups, any group. [Edit: this statement is too broad, because hate groups can be judged as a group, but I was really referring to racial, gender, ethnic, or economic groups.]



No, in tweets she actually supported the turnstile jumpers.





My point was specifically that they use similar tactics with their support bases, and they both have poor mastery of the facts and poor understanding of highly relevant issues.
I would respectfully disagree with that assessment. While AOC may criticize, she certainly does not demonize people the way Trump does. While you may not agree with her statements and policies (and again, I don't agree with all of it), they certainly come from a far more reasoned approach than the incoherent nonsense emitting from the White House on a daily basis.

I don't agree with Karl Marx, but that doesn't mean he pulled his economic philosophy out of his derriere.

While Trump most certainly panders to his base in the most deplorable manner, I think AOC is quite sincere in her statements and policies. While you may not agree with any of it and I may not agree with all of it, there's no way anyone can fairly lump them together. It might look like I'm a fan of hers, but I'm actually kinda neutral.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
If more transit cops would result in less fare evasion and she wants to use the money for something else, how would her plan change far evasion? Spending more on transit AND fare evasion are a losing proposition- how can the system not lose its ass if less is done about fare evasion?

$249 Million over 5 years for 500 transit cops? Jesus! I want to be a transit cop! That's $99,600 per year/cop!

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who owns rental property, but they aren't a large company or property owner who has a lot of rental units- rent strike means they could very well lose their property if they still have a mortgage- how is that not screwing those property owners? The large property owners can afford to absorb some revenue decrease, but the amount depends on how they structured the business. In MKE, one guy knocked off a large amount from what he asked people to pay- I don't know how many units he owns, but that was a pretty cool thing to do.

Sympathy is fine, but what about the property owners, or are they all greedy bastiges, too? Some definitely are, but it would be best if the god ones are considered, as well.
I believe it was $249 million over four years. My impression was that she believes - and she's not the only one - that the cost of more cops will not be paid back with greater fare compliance, and that if there is any investment to be made, it should be in improved service. Plus, she believes POC will be disproportionately targeted by these extra cops - and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that this would happen. I agree that transit has to be paid for. I don't know if more cops is the answer.

I certainly sympathize with the many small landlords caught in the middle of the rent issue. Again, it speaks to the failure of housing policies, not just in NYC, but in cities around the world.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
I would respectfully disagree with that assessment. While AOC may criticize, she certainly does not demonize people the way Trump does. While you may not agree with her statements and policies (and again, I don't agree with all of it), they certainly come from a far more reasoned approach than the incoherent nonsense emitting from the White House on a daily basis.
Well, I have to respectfully disagree with your disagreement! :) Here's AOC on billionaires:


I have met several billionaires, and I gotta tell you that the ones I've met earned it and are pretty extraordinary people. AOC's classification that you don't make a billion, you take it is unforgivable bullshit. If this isn't demonization, I don't know what is.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Field Marshall
after watching that AOC video , well I actually couldn't stomach watching the whole thing, regardless , she is FOS.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
Well, I have to respectfully disagree with your disagreement! :) Here's AOC on billionaires:


I have met several billionaires, and I gotta tell you that the ones I've met earned it and are pretty extraordinary people. AOC's classification that you don't make a billion, you take it is unforgivable bullshit. If this isn't demonization, I don't know what is.
I suppose I was looking at the term "demonize" in a different manner. When Trump referred to "shithole countries", "nasty women", "rapists and thieves" and suggested that Members of Congress should "go back to their countries", that's what I consider demonizing. If you think "you don't make a billion, you take a billion" is even in the same demonization ballpark, I really don't know what to say.

Although it's an utterly simplistic statement, there is some substance to what she says when she expands on it. You certainly become a billionaire more quickly when you pay employees a paltry wage, when you offshore production, create cartels and monopolies and break unions. Not all billionaires got there that way and unfortunately all tend to get painted with the same brush.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic General
...
they both have poor mastery of the facts and poor understanding of highly relevant issues.
Having watched AOC in committee hearings and Trump on TV, I fail to see how you can see them even remotely just as bad.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
I suppose I was looking at the term "demonize" in a different manner. When Trump referred to "shithole countries", "nasty women", "rapists and thieves" and suggested that Members of Congress should "go back to their countries", that's what I consider demonizing. If you think "you don't make a billion, you take a billion" is even in the same demonization ballpark, I really don't know what to say.

Although it's an utterly simplistic statement, there is some substance to what she says when she expands on it. You certainly become a billionaire more quickly when you pay employees a paltry wage, when you offshore production, create cartels and monopolies and break unions. Not all billionaires got there that way and unfortunately all tend to get painted with the same brush.
I'm done trying to convince you of anything. You've already made up your mind, regardless of what I say. You also have a very pre-1990 view of billionaires. The only US billionaire I can think of that fits your list above is Sam Walton, and he's dead.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic General
Well, I have to respectfully disagree with your disagreement! :) Here's AOC on billionaires:


I have met several billionaires, and I gotta tell you that the ones I've met earned it and are pretty extraordinary people. AOC's classification that you don't make a billion, you take it is unforgivable bullshit. If this isn't demonization, I don't know what is.
I'm sure that you must have felt privileged to have met not only one, but several billionaires (US citizens?), and power to you! A billionaire, assuming in USD, is very much extraordinary just by having amassed that amount of wealth, by whatever means. That does not imply that they've "earned" it, though.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
I'm sure that you must have felt privileged to have met not only one, but several billionaires (US citizens?), and power to you! A billionaire, assuming in USD, is very much extraordinary just by having amassed that amount of wealth, by whatever means. That does not imply that they've "earned" it, though.
The only ones I'm aware of who definitely haven't earned it are people who inherited the billions, like the example of the Walton family, now the richest on the planet. Unfortunately, the lack of effective estate taxes are not just a problem in the US, there are hundreds of worldwide examples in Europe and Asia too.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top