Democratic Primary Season 2020

[mbonder]

Guaranteed minimum income part of that seems goofy to me. I understand the concept from the standpoint that it's immoral for people to suffer because they don't have the money for basic necessities, however, much like my prior comments on the FAANG companies and people feeling as though they are manipulating news, can't people have personal responsibility over their lives? Make enough to eat, do the work. I'm not saying it's easy in any way, and I'm also not saying that there aren't people at a disadvantage because of something, but how difficult is it to make what appears to be $750/month?

The last line seals it, happier, but still unemployed. Great incentive!

[mrsleeve]

Given this has to do with some of the core issues most of these current D. 2020 hopefulls are hanging their hats on to get into the oval office I figured this is a thread as any other post it in.

So it seems the shit that the far leftists are pushing so hard for is very very expensive and is breaking down in one of their most shining examples they point to as how things should be done.

I am not finding this being reported at any of the normal major US media sites, and not seen it whispered about in the US media (but I have not been watching to much news). This seems like a bit of a temper tantrum in like likes of Cartman "screw you guys I am going home" kinda thing on the part of the PM and his cabinet, but that said its a good way to bring attention to the issues at hand with their state of affairs.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47496326

Finland's entire government has resigned over its failure to achieve a key policy goal on social welfare and healthcare reform.

Prime Minister Juha Sipila said he was "hugely disappointed" in the outcome.

Finland's extensive welfare systems are under financial pressure as the nation's population ages, yet reform plans remain politically controversial.

Mr Sipila's government is expected to stay on in a caretaker capacity until a planned election in April.

Some political opponents questioned the need for the high-profile resignation of the Centre Party government with just weeks to go until the election.

But Antti Kaikkonen, a senior member of the Centre Party, defended the decision, which was taken after it became clear the party could not achieve its goals.

"If anyone asks what political responsibility means, then I would say that this is an example," he tweeted.

Mr Sipila, a former IT entrepreneur who made millions before entering politics, had previously said he would consider resigning if his primary reform policy failed.

The government had hoped its planned reforms would save up to €3bn (£2.6bn) over the next decade.

What is Finland's healthcare problem?

Like many developed nations, Finland has an ageing population that is putting financial pressure on its social welfare systems.

As an increasing number of people live longer in retirement, the cost of providing pension and healthcare benefits can rise. Those increased costs are paid for by taxes collected from of the working-age population – who make up a smaller percentage of the population than in decades past.

In 2018, those aged 65 or over made up 21.4% of Finland's population, the joint fourth highest in Europe alongside Germany — with only Portugal, Greece, and Italy having a higher proportion, according to Eurostat.

Finland's welfare system is also generous in its provisions, making it relatively expensive. Attempts at reform have plagued Finnish governments for years.

Mr Sipila's proposed solutions included creating regional authorities for health and welfare services, rather than the local municipalities that currently manage the system, and offering including private companies in the healthcare system to a greater extent to offer "freedom of choice".

Mr Sipila's government also famously experimented with a guaranteed minimum income scheme – giving €560 (£480) a month to 2,000 unemployed people as a basic income with no conditions attached.

Initial results suggested the pilot scheme left people happier, but still unemployed.

[Schnitzer318is]

I'm not a fan of facebook, I have had an account since 2004, I rarely use it, but they are a private company, can't they choose to allow advertising in whatever way they wish?...

I agree with you to a certain extent. I am all for free enterprise. When it doesn't infringe on the rights of it's customers, or worse... the rest of us. I don't use Facebook at all, but of course some of our family and friends do so some of our info is on there too. Facebook catalogs and sells all that information. Data collections is getting out of hand (in all industries) and needs to be regulated. We already have data leaks/breaches left, right, and center but everybody acts as if that is no big deal. The Equifax data breach should have been a wake up call, but instead (as is typical), it's been business as usual.

But rather than focusing my corporate rage at Google, and Amazon (they have their downsides too). AT&T, Timewarner, Comcast, the major banks, etc receive most of my ire. As I said I believe in the free market... not duopolies, regional monopolies, or collusion between 3 or 4 players in an industry. Same goes for Samsung, Hynix, and Micron who were caught price fixing and fined. Catch is they made so much money price fixing that the fine means nothing except some bad PR. But they are the only suppliers so they have us by the balls. We can be mad but we can't shop elsewhere. This same story is playing out in the insurance industry, telecoms, banking, etc, etc. I'm all for companies making money... but anti trust laws were created for a reason.

As for the Dem race... I wouldn't mind seeing O'Rourke as I have seen him local and he is much more centered. But seeing as the party is moving left (his party, not mine) I don't see him winning the nomination.

[z31maniac]

Did you guys see the piece in NYMAG about Biden a few days ago?

If that story gets some coverage, that could ruin any of his hopes.

[Wschnitz]

I hope O'Rourke, Warren, and Booker bow out asap

O'Rourkes voting history is not democratic or progressive

Warren may as well be un-electable with how she played the Native Heritage debacle.

Booker also doesn't have a voting history anyone progressive agrees with.

Gonna be honest so far I only really like Harris, Gabbard, Sanders, and maybe Kolbacher

[mbonder]

Beto O'Rourke announces he's in the race.

Up to 19 official candidates right now. 5-6 of them are regional unknowns, but at least a dozen have national name recognition. Biden is the last of the well-known possible candidates to possibly get into the race, I think we're going to be at 20.

[e30RS]

Too many running, it is going to be a free for all. Way too many have massive baggage: Warren, Booker, Harris.

[phillipj]

Facebook isn't a news organization, they are a social network. Why can't they post whatever the heck they want on their site? Same question for Amazon, Apple, or Google? I certainly can post nearly whatever the heck I want on facebook, if idiots believe it as truth, should I be to blame for their stupidity?

The only anti-trust law that facebook or apple, or amazon might be in danger of breaking in your example is the Federal Trade Commission Act, which in short bans "unfair or deceptive acts or practices that negatively affect consumers," which on the surface might fit your belief that "fake news" somehow classifies these companies for anti-trust law. However, reading further you get this statement: "such as mergers, agreements among competitors, restrictive agreements between manufacturers and product dealers, and attempts by monopolists to thwart new competitors," which has nothing to do with "fake news".

Side note, kind of funny that the left is using "fake news" now as well to justify their claims, or at least you did.

And before anyone asks, the information above on the FTC Act came directly from the government website: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/att...ion-counts.pdf

The grocery store analogy is my own ok on-the-fly example for Amazon's "marketplace" antitrust. Facebook has another set of issues related to monopoly. They distort the playing field because they rule and manipulate the only game in town. We could get into a lot more detail on that.

Just attempted to point out that there really is a ton more nuance than the way it's being talked about in this thread. NBD.

[mbonder]

Hm. Let's say you own a grocery store chain, and it happens to completely dominate the marketplace. You sell all these products in your store, and you keep track of what sells great and what sells poorly at your stores, to whom and for how much and when. You are the marketplace and you have all the information.

Over time you see that, let's say, a very particular type of beer is doing well at a certain location. So what do you do? You make an exact replica clone, slash the price, and put it eye level on the shelf, first thing you see when you walk in. You take that original beer and move it to the far-right, corner, lowest shelf, or maybe you manipulate the supply.

Now, you do this for all your stores, and you start doing this with all of your products... what do you think about this?

---

Now maybe imagine an enormously large & powerful place that controls much of the information you see everyday. They start doing exactly this with the "news" you see...

---

So, there is "big companies making money" and there is Anti-Trust Law. Helpful to read up on this

Facebook isn't a news organization, they are a social network. Why can't they post whatever the heck they want on their site? Same question for Amazon, Apple, or Google? I certainly can post nearly whatever the heck I want on facebook, if idiots believe it as truth, should I be to blame for their stupidity?

The only anti-trust law that facebook or apple, or amazon might be in danger of breaking in your example is the Federal Trade Commission Act, which in short bans "unfair or deceptive acts or practices that negatively affect consumers," which on the surface might fit your belief that "fake news" somehow classifies these companies for anti-trust law. However, reading further you get this statement: "such as mergers, agreements among competitors, restrictive agreements between manufacturers and product dealers, and attempts by monopolists to thwart new competitors," which has nothing to do with "fake news".

Side note, kind of funny that the left is using "fake news" now as well to justify their claims, or at least you did.

And before anyone asks, the information above on the FTC Act came directly from the government website: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/att...ion-counts.pdf

[phillipj]

i already know what sleeve's answer is going to be.

he cares about what is legal; not what is ethical.

Well, in legal cases throughout history you see many examples of rulings against Anti-Trust and Monopolies. The idea here is that we are dealing with behemoth Tech companies that really don't have a competitor and are manipulating markets akin to ways that, in the past, have been ruled very much not 'legal'.

US Anti Trust Law short Wiki

Is breaking up these companies a solution? Maybe, maybe not. But there needs to be an important conversation had about regulation for the public interest.

>> Also interesting to see Warren purchased and put up ads about her Tech Anti-Trust Plan on Facebook -- Facebook noticed and censored them. When that was called out, FB then put them back up.

[decay]

i already know what sleeve's answer is going to be.

he cares about what is legal; not what is ethical.

[phillipj]

Hm. Let's say you own a grocery store chain, and it happens to completely dominate the marketplace. You sell all these products in your store, and you keep track of what sells great and what sells poorly at your stores, to whom and for how much and when. You are the marketplace and you have all the information.

Over time you see that, let's say, a very particular type of beer is doing well at a certain location. So what do you do? You make an exact replica clone, slash the price, and put it eye level on the shelf, first thing you see when you walk in. You take that original beer and move it to the far-right, corner, lowest shelf, or maybe you manipulate the supply.

Now, you do this for all your stores, and you start doing this with all of your products... what do you think about this?

---

Now maybe imagine an enormously large & powerful place that controls much of the information you see everyday. They start doing exactly this with the "news" you see...

---

So, there is "big companies making money" and there is Anti-Trust Law. Helpful to read up on this

[mrsleeve]

^
Yes we are in 100% agreement on this it seems, I have no issues with big companies making money, they make my life easier and provide me services, in the case of bookface I have never had an account and never will, same with tweeting or instagraming and shit like that, my life is not that interesting. Besides I have all you goofy fucks ;) to interact with and thats more than enough for me to pull what little hair I have left out at times :p

Personal responsibility is something I am kind of big on, it means I over analyze almost everything from buying groceries to my investment strategies, to how to go about a task and will wear my brain out some days trying to keep ahead of all other stupid people to prevent problems from even occurring in the 1st place.

[mbonder]

I'm not a fan of facebook, I have had an account since 2004, I rarely use it, but they are a private company, can't they choose to allow advertising in whatever way they wish?

The problem that I have is that people want to take away the ability to operate freely for private enterprises because individual people are too dumb to differentiate what is fact and what is fiction. This creates a culture with a lack of personal responsibility, which I just can't buy in to.

Is Zuckerberg an asshole? Of course! Do I envy Facebook's ability to make huge piles of cash off the simple platform to share pictures, thoughts, and opinions? You bet I do! But they shouldn't be forced to change the way they operate just because they have power, money, and influence.

[Wschnitz]

Facebook is the only Company I would be ok with beating the shit out of.

Its pretty easy to see how they continue to exert influence through selective advertisement. Along with allowing legit trash to advertise on there, I swear there are more conspiracy theory links/ads on that site then Infowars.

I really hope biden doesn't run, I don't see him leading the party.