Your favourite candidate's entire campaign was a scam to raise money for his friends, it shouldn't come as a surprise to you? ;-)
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Your favourite candidate's entire campaign was a scam to raise money for his friends, it shouldn't come as a surprise to you? ;-)
Spoiled Milk
Banned
I just found out that 50% of Israel's waste water is recycled. The US recycles 10%. Wtf kind of backwards country is this? Do we live in a third world country?
HUELEN10
Member
5th world easily in a lot of ways.
User 85168
Banned
Half of the country being a desert probably makes you more focused on stuff like that.
Israel is the size of a postage stamp
Cesare Borgia
Banned
I'm sure the PACs will do that for her. No need for the candidate to get dirty.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Your
vision
Israel has 8 million people! That's a lot! Also, they invented drip irrigation.
Israel has a greater need for water recycling than the united states does. Aside from Florida and California no other state has a direct need to spend the extra resources right now to get the necessary water reclamation plants up and running.
I know many farmers and people that have rain collectors to collect water for gardening and some farming purposes but its a lot of work to get it running on a large scale.
It's not something you can just change right away.
America has 320 million people and we invented democracy.
Fenderputty
Banned
LA County has more 25% more people that all of Israel. It's not a lot.
Which is the more morally reprehensible position:
A. A Flat Tax
B. Getting rid of public education
Huelen is for both.
HUELEN10
Member
Lies and slander, stop it. I am for the cutting of the DOE as Ron Paul proposed, not cutting public schools. That way school and department management would be more streamlined with less bureaucracy. Oy gevalt...
B. By a lot. But both are insanely damaging to the poor of this country.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...2016-becoming-nader-2000-213893#ixzz48q8A6keN
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
Why would shutting down the organization devoted to organizing and managing schools make schools better organized and managed?
FloydtheFathead
Member
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Is there a technocratic argument for universal pre-K? The meta-analyses I've seen on the impacts aren't that great compared to things like spending more money on tutoring services.
There's enough noise on the nurture vs nature debate to make me think it's a worthy way to spend money, although I admit I don't know nowhere near enough about the literature.
My impression is that there's certainly more there than making public higher education free, though.
Evidence differs. Here's an article: http://www.vox.com/2015/10/26/9616196/tennessee-preschool-study
The summary is that there are a couple of studies showing universal pre-K not having much benefit (in fact, having a slight negative benefit) and a couple of studies showing them having huge benefits. All of the studies have come in for statistical and methodological critique, but none really stand out. So there's presumably another factor, which may be quality of pre-K program (the studies that showed large benefits were analyzing well-funded, small-enrollment pre-K programs).
The biggest benefit of universal pre-K isn't really covered in these studies, though, which is that it would provide free childcare to low-income households. That is probably a pretty valuable result all on its own.
RustyNails
Member
Venezuela is a socialist DISASTER
I imagine it's like Sesame Street on PBS, since everyone benefits from it equally it fails to even things out and instead just lifts everyone up. Which I am totally OK with.
metalslimer
Member
I hate to do this but I would like to see how eliminating the DoE would help anything and examples where it has had a net negative effect
Actually if anyone had some good resources on education reform that would be great
Actually if anyone had some good resources on education reform that would be great
On the flat tax, in general, do people advocate for a flat tax for everyone, or for incomes above X threshold to account for living needs? Does it change the acceptance dramatically if you do offer a threshold?
While I haven't looked at the literature for pre-K, I would be worried that some studies could suffer from selection bias. The people who currently get pre-K probably skew higher on the socioeconomic scale. If you control for this, ie comparing rich kids without pre-K vs rich kids with pre-K, I would expect that you wouldn't see a huge difference because the rich kids will have a higher standard/starting point.
If the consensus of studies that look at poor children found that pre-K didn't help them, that would make me question the push for universal pre-K.
If the consensus of studies that look at poor children found that pre-K didn't help them, that would make me question the push for universal pre-K.
jack_package_200
Banned
Indictment tho #believe
balladofwindfishes
Member
Barely anyone is paying attention to Bernie or his supporters anymore. Unless they riot, in which case the media paints them as whiny and naive on the political process.
aspiegamer
Member
Democrats have been settled since March 15, regardless of what anything or anyone on the internet has tried to convince you otherwise.
Yeah, but Hillary is going to Gitmo and all delegates and supers are in the process of switching to Birdie.
Abinash117
Member
I think they gave a good explanation as to why the strategy they are doing is the preferred one. The example you gave is something some people won't care about, just another reason for the people who already wouldn't vote for him to not do so, or it just shows something typical of what you expect of Trump. Attacking his issues on policies is something he'll have to defend against. As we all know, any discussions on policy is his weak point attacking that makes the most sense. It'll either show that he really is clueless to the point of being idiotically dangerous and a risk that can damage the country. People at this point will want to know what he stands for if he doesn't have any solid ground and keeps switching positions no one will really know what exactly what he wants. Some will lose confidence of supporting him. The campaign can also use his positions like the wall to imply that he is a racist.
Using his offensive antics is something that the PACs and surrogates can use on their own and that would be effective in some cases. Most people like some white Americans are really going to care about the stuff he says and the minorities aren't going to vote for him en mass anyway. They are mostly are going to care about policies and that his Trumps weakest aspect. The campaign can really just focus on the wall and how unrealistic it is, how it can hurt relations with other countries and how it can effect the economy. Eventually he'll start to make less and less sense to do and getting Trump to backtrack will highlight the problem I stated and the article said above. He has no ground to stand on and still no one would really know what he is running for.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Trump's negatives won't improve. People know what he's said and he will continue to say ignorant things. Focusing on policy directly while allowing PACs to savage his comments on women/minorities/etc makes sense. It also will drive a contrast between the candidates. Hillary is whip smart. Hearing her discuss policy in contrast to Trump evading/attacking will be very powerful.
And don't underestimate the debates. Trump has a clear problem when he is confronted by women directly, and Hillary is going to make him self destruct in a debate.
And don't underestimate the debates. Trump has a clear problem when he is confronted by women directly, and Hillary is going to make him self destruct in a debate.
HUELEN10
Member
Most every modern flat that proposal has details to not fuck you over if you are poor. Take my man Ben Carson's tax plan. He was for a no-deductions, no-loophole flat 14.9 percent tax that takes income only once, with no double up for capital gains, no AMT, and no pointless itemization for everyone above 150 percent poverty level.
Seems fair to me.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the next President (but certainly not Vice President!) of the USA:
Yup. There's no reason for Hillary herself to get her hands dirty. Let the SuperPACs and the media hit him on his bullshit. I guarantee the media will love digging up Trump shit since it's an easy way to hit deadlines.
User 85168
Banned
Holy Shit
I agree that there's no reason for Hillary to get negative against Trump. Honestly, the media does a fine enough job of that by simply letting him speak in front of a camera. She should stick to policy, a positive message, and only attack Trump on the actual legislation he's voiced support for. As long as the economy keeps humming along and ISIS keeps losing ground, there's really nothing Trump can touch Hillary with.
And_Gignac
Member
Never!
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
jack_package_200
Banned
Bernie won't be Nader 2016 if he does concede and endorse Hillary.
nature boy
Member
Well he's not doing much to calm down the situation.
Fenderputty
Banned
I'm not sure this is much better than cutting public funding, honestly. Though next time I'll get it strait.
So this doesn't fuck poor people over how?
Officerrob
Banned
Black Republican
Member
ahahahahaha
You are what's wrong with America.
Why would a flat tax be fair when the marginal utility of money has diminishing returns?
At the rate he's going he's going to be more McCain 2008. Losing made McCain a bitter old man
It's fair to charge 15% tax on the 43% of American households that are so poor that they currently pay no income tax?
People still getting baited by Huelen. What a mess
That's definitely a big benefit, especially for single parent homes. It looks like full time daycare for a year can cost $12,000+ per kid depending on location. Crazy when you think about minimum wage being $7.25 and a 2000 hour work year only netting them $14,500
That's definitely a big benefit, especially for single parent homes. It looks like full time daycare for a year can cost $12,000+ per kid depending on location. Crazy when you think about minimum wage being $7.25 and a 2000 hour work year only netting them $14,500
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
I have given up trying to follow Huelen's logic. Legitimately the musings of a crazy person.
- Status