[Potemkin]

Apart from the strikes, I don't see much difference in the 70s between both nations. If anything Britain was too reliant on coal and that money wasn't spent on progress that caused Britain to be the sick man of Europe Pote, not economic output.

Productivity declined catastrophically during the 1970s, @B0ycey, and the fabric of civil society was being frayed by the constant strikes and political conflict. This is why even working class people ended up voting for Thatcher in 1979. They were foolish, in my opinion, but I can sort of see why they did it. They'd had enough of the stalemate between the working class and the bosses. It wouldn't have been so bad if either side could actually win, but Keynesianism had set up a system where stalemate was the only possible outcome of any class conflict. Britain was trapped in a downward spiral in the 1970s. Thatcher "broke the wheel" by breaking the Keynesian consensus.

But we could debate that and still not agree so perhaps I ask you to address this instead. In the Budget of March 2020, Sunak announced billions being spent on infrastructure and Bojo's was talking about a new Deal. Why do you think they did that if Keynesianism is dead in the UK? Because it isn't. It was I suppose but Reagaonomics (Thatcherism) didn't work, austerity didn't work and the only thing that worked that we can be sure of was Kenyesianism as it got us through Post WW2 when borrowing was off the chart. That is why he is back. Because it works.

You actually take anything BoJo the Clown says seriously?

[B0ycey]

You actually take anything BoJo the Clown says seriously?

The money was set aside from the budget Pote. It was to pay for Brexit. That is he knew jobs were going to be lost so now it was time to build the infrastructure we lacked for the past three decades. What has happened since is worse than Brexit in terms of economics of course. So I expect to see more projects and money set aside, not less over the next three budgets at least. That doesn't mean I take the clown seriously. Sunak however seems keen on Keynes and as such proves you wrong.

[Rancid]

The Covid relief bill is one of the most Progressive pieces of legislation I have ever seen. Maybe the most Progressive, Congressfolk are already talking about continuing some of the more Progressive aspects, like the child allowance.

I did not expect that. If you have Biden's past in mind, I really did not expect that.

Senator Clyburn is arguing that we need to kill the filibuster so we can start passing other Progressive pieces of legislation, like HR1 (voting rights).

I agree with that, and it's not something I expect. But I'd be happy to be wrong again.

It is a surprise. There's even more discussion about UBI after this relief bill. I used to laugh when people suggested that Biden has the potential to be a significant and influential president like FDR, JFK, Lincoln, etc.

Shit... they might actually be right.

[Oxymoron]

Socialism will come when the ruling elite themselves recognise that the social and economic system itself cannot survive without it. The bailouts of 2008 and beyond, and now the furlough scheme and this relief bill, are the first signs.... neoliberalism is collapsing in practice, as reality delivers hammerblows to its smug certainties, and its ideological collapse will soon follow....

Yes when nefarious Socialist and their ilk have been poisoning our society for decades in the US, obviously the paid of DNC will continue to push leftist agenda's.
If the Filibuster is gone, then the left is declaring open war. I am not wishing for this, but if it comes to that the right to bare arms will play a big role.

[Rancid]

Indeed, but after 2008 this was no longer a process of "smoothing out" economic "fluctuations"; instead, it became a process of propping up a collapsing house. There is a qualitative difference. Left to its own devices, the capitalist system is prone to complete and catastrophic collapse, which can only prevented by a massive redistribution of wealth. These bailouts are becoming bigger and bigger and more and more frequent. The final crisis of capitalism seems to be approaching. If the ruling elite wish to salvage anything from the wreckage - and I'm guessing that they do - then they will have to implement socialism themselves, before the people who actually have to work for a living do it for them.

Spot on.

[late]

If the Filibuster is gone, then the left is declaring open war.

I am not wishing for this, but if it comes to that the right to bare arms will play a big role.

You simply can't run the country, except into the ground, demanding 60 votes. Which is prob what you want, to run the country into the ground, because that's what the Right has been doing for over 40 years.

Only if they move Congress into a strip club.

[Oxymoron]

You simply can't run the country, except into the ground, demanding 60 votes. Which is prob what you want, to run the country into the ground, because that's what the Right has been doing for over 40 years.

Only if they move Congress into a strip club.

Our system as worked for centuries, why would it run the country into the ground? If you remove the Filibuster, you will get swift movements to either side as the Congress changes Majorities and our policies, laws and economics will become unstable.

[late]

Our system as worked for centuries, why would it run the country into the ground? If you remove the Filibuster, you will get swift movements to either side as the Congress changes Majorities and our policies, laws and economics will become unstable.

The filibuster was a mistake. No one planned to have it...

Actually, the Founding Fathers didn't want parties, so the plan was nonpartisan. Unsurprising that it doesn't work with high levels of partisanship.

The most popular use of the filibuster was by racists.

You are right about one thing, you can't hide in the 1800s much longer without killing the Republic.

[Oxymoron]

The filibuster was a mistake. No one planned to have it...

Actually, the Founding Fathers didn't want parties, so the plan was nonpartisan. Unsurprising that it doesn't work with high levels of partisanship.

The most popular use of the filibuster was by racists.

You are right about one thing, you can't hide in the 1800s much longer without killing the Republic.

Only Washington did not want parties.... Filibuster has been used successfully to bring stability to our Republic. if the Democrates try to eliminate the filibuster and then pass partisan legislation it will lead to armed conflict. If they fail to pass partisan legislation then the Republicans take over and then really go to work without the Filibuster. Either case lefties shit bags loose.

[skinster]

[late]

1) Only Washington did not want parties....

2) Filibuster has been used successfully to bring stability to our Republic.

3)if the Democrats try to eliminate the filibuster and then pass partisan legislation it will lead to armed conflict.

4) If they fail to pass partisan legislation then the Republicans take over and then really go to work without the Filibuster. Either case lefties shit bags loose.

1) "Many of them saw parties—or “factions,” as they called them—as corrupt relics of the monarchical British system that they wanted to discard in favor of a truly democratic government.

“It was not that they didn’t think of parties” George Washington’s family had fled England precisely to avoid the civil wars there, while Alexander Hamilton once called political parties “the most fatal disease” of popular governments. James Madison, who worked with Hamilton to defend the new Constitution to the public in the Federalist Papers, wrote in Federalist 10 that one of the functions of a “well-constructed Union” should be “its tendency to break and control the violence of faction.”
https://www.history.com/news/founding-fathers-political-parties-opinion

They weren't the only ones, so lay off the fiction writing.

2) Which is amazing seeing how it wasn't used much. If you can't govern effectively, you're screwed, and we are screwed.

3) We already know your side is full of traitors that want to destroy the Republic...

4) The same way they killed Obamacare? Why do you think Republicans were shut out of power by the voters? It wasn't because they were doing their job, and now they're even worse.

[JohnRawls]

https://twitter.com/ARmckay82/status/1370169404630179846?s=20

It is the largest stimulus program that will go directly to the people and then people can decide what to do with it. Actually it is the largest stimulus program in human history that will go directly to the people. So I am not sure why are you unhappy about it.

[skinster]

[JohnRawls]

https://twitter.com/VoiceofCal/status/1367309144231993346?s=20

You are calculating direct payments as cash drops. The bill has many parts to it. The "money to big business" is only around 25%. The rest is basically direct payments to people in one form or the other.

[skinster]

Direct payments to landlords and banks.

[JohnRawls]

Direct payments to landlords and banks.

As a person who probably didn't even read the previous bills, you don't even know how the lines are usually divided. If you exclude direct payments in your understanding, there are other direct payments like payments per child and indirect payments like funding for schools, healthcare, public services and direct loans for small businesses who are basically small family companies in a lot of cases.

Usually around 20% goes to Local governments for their discretion which basically translates to local direct payments. And don't forget job retention subsidies. Around 20-25% goes to big businesses as tax cuts and those who are badly hurt as loans.

Read the previous bills as an example. The current bill doesn't have a full breakdown but I am pretty sure that it should have similar structure.

[skinster]

I'm not interested in your opinion about politics. When you have anything to back up what you say, maybe I'll be interested. Good day.

[JohnRawls]

I'm not interested in your opinion about politics. When you have anything to back up what you say, maybe I'll be interested. Good day.

It takes 30 seconds to google the structure of the previous bills. It also takes 30 seconds to google the text of the current bill or to read the outlines but once again, you are too lazy. Heck why not, lets bang my head against the wall again. Here is last year. I hope this is an understandable format for you:

[skinster]

If it takes 30 seconds for you to find stuff to support your position, you should do it more like I ask, since I don't care about your opinion on politics since you're a neoliberal warmonger.

Anyway, what are you trying to say/prove? Are you trying to tell me that two $1400 cheques for Americans who did their taxes last year is meant to be a good thing? That things have changed for the people of America, now the government serves them?

[JohnRawls]

If it takes 30 seconds for you to find stuff to support your position, you should do it more like I ask, since I don't care about your opinion on politics since you're a neoliberal warmonger.

Anyway, what are you trying to say/prove? Are you trying to tell me that two $1400 cheques for Americans who did their taxes last year is meant to be a good thing? That things have changed for the people of America, now the government serves them?

You are criticizing the bill as if it is something bad because some money will go to big business. I fundamentally disagree with that logic in this case. This is not quantitative easing and is mostly either direct or indirect cash drops. Also the latest bill introduces payments for policies that one might consider socialist that didn't exist before. It is a win for anybody who is left or socialist etc because not only it reinforces older programs but also introduces new ones.

Change doesn't come instantly and is usually consists of Salami tactics. Slice by slice so to speak. The Reaganites did it the same way starting from late 70s/early 80s. Knowing you though, it seems you don't like that it doesn't give everything so to speak. That is not how it works in democratic societies.

Non-the-less this is a very positive development for American middle and lower classes.