Why Are So Many Young People Becoming Socialists? - Page 19 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15165919
wat0n wrote:Why would they do anything like that if there were no rent controls? It would seem it was more profitable to them, at the time, not to redevelop and just charge the market price.

But in some cases, governments may let them run amok until they aren't small. For instance, they may prefer to charge low rents and dedicate the resources that would be used for maintenance to other ends, and let a future administration deal with the problem when it arises.

That is, there is a similar problem to the one you mention between private developers and owners, but this is between present and future administrations. You can also see it with the GOP's "starve the beast" strategy, leaving it to the Democrats to clean the mess.


Again, this is not how public building projects work.

Elected officials can choose to defund infrastructure, but all that means is that the government bodies who pay for construction and maintenance have less money. It does not mean that these bodies do lower quality work or use less stringent regulations. They just fire a bunch of people and do less.

No, it's not relevant if the present administration will leave all the consequences arising from a lack of maintenance to the next one.


And now we have a third argument.

I have dealt with this one as well. Please see above.

...Except when the inspectors come from the same city government that is also a landlord. That's why in that case you need the enforcement of maintenance regulations of public buildings to be carried out by a higher level of government (e.g. State/Provinces enforcing regulation on the cities).


No. The inspectors are hired by a different group of people who ask for and maintain buildings.

This entire argument seems to be based entirely on an ignorance of how public building projects are run, the different bodies involved, and who is liable to who.

Another thing you should know, then, is that this all a matter of public record. The city would also have to hire crooked accountants to cook the books. The number of people needed for this to work quickly makes it unfeasible and simply easier to actually do decent work.

This system even works in construction in places where there is a lot of organised crime in construction, like Quebec.
#15165924
Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, this is not how public building projects work.

Elected officials can choose to defund infrastructure, but all that means is that the government bodies who pay for construction and maintenance have less money. It does not mean that these bodies do lower quality work or use less stringent regulations. They just fire a bunch of people and do less.


That's now how public projects work... Until they do work like that, as shown by NYC's example.

Pants-of-dog wrote:No. The inspectors are hired by a different group of people who ask for and maintain buildings.

This entire argument seems to be based entirely on an ignorance of how public building projects are run, the different bodies involved, and who is liable to who.

Another thing you should know, then, is that this all a matter of public record. The city would also have to hire crooked accountants to cook the books. The number of people needed for this to work quickly makes it unfeasible and simply easier to actually do decent work.

This system even works in construction in places where there is a lot of organised crime in construction, like Quebec.


It just needs to shirk on maintenance, perhaps even claiming (and often with reason) that it has no funding to that effect, and that voters are not willing to accept tax hikes for maintaining public housing.
#15165925
When it comes to pubic projects. Many of them are approved by corrupt sons of a bitches that have numerous conflicts of interest. Most of the members of my county commission and city council are either real estate developers or have direct ties to real estate developers. COrrupt sons of a bitches! FIRE THEM ALL!!!

I think a rule to join the city council should be that you are only allowed to own one residential property, which is the one you live in. That would put a bigger dent in the housing crisis than just about any other thing. What I"m saying is that city councils are exactly aligned with making the housing problem worse, because it makes them rich.
#15165930
wat0n wrote:That's now how public projects work... Until they do work like that, as shown by NYC's example.


No one knows what NYC example you are talking about.

But even if NYC is an example of something bad, it does not contradict my claims.

It just needs to shirk on maintenance, perhaps even claiming (and often with reason) that it has no funding to that effect, and that voters are not willing to accept tax hikes for maintaining public housing.


What is “it”?

How does “it” shirk whatever it is supposed to be shirking?

Please be specific which department. Thanks.
#15165935
Julian658 wrote:
The homeless capital of the USA is San Francisco. It is a gorgeous city with incredible weather and controlled by the extreme left wing of the Democrat Party. Yes, they attract the homeless. At the same time San Francisco is home to wealthy people that see themselves as saviors of the disenfranchised. That is what SF is all about, the rich and the homeless. There is little room in that city for the middle or upper middle class. The situation worsens from year to year. The more they try the worse it gets. You are offering some of the same solutions. A new paradigm is needed.

The problem of homelessness in SF was somewhat under until 2015 .
Image

The woke lefties are part of the elite wealthy. They serve the SF wealthy and engage in massive virtue signaling when it comes to homelessness. You are correct in describing the massive hypocrisy of the American left. There are no Republicans in SF and yet the blame the Republicans for the homeless situation. Very clever.


I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that SF attracts the homeless, or that they are creating homelessness?
#15165945
Pants-of-dog wrote:No one knows what NYC example you are talking about.

But even if NYC is an example of something bad, it does not contradict my claims.


I already posted about that example and the $32 billion bill it has, shall I post it again?

Pants-of-dog wrote:What is “it”?


The municipality

Pants-of-dog wrote:How does “it” shirk whatever it is supposed to be shirking?


By failing in its duty to maintain the property its tenants are renting

Pants-of-dog wrote:Please be specific which department. Thanks.


That depends on how the municipality is organized. In NYC, that would be the NYC Housing Authority.
#15165950
Rancid wrote:I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that SF attracts the homeless, or that they are creating homelessness?


Both!
If you provide goodies such as syringes to inject drugs, alcohol, methadone, and grass the homeless will come out of the woodwork.
If you allow tents anywhere and the police is instructed to be lenient they will come.
If petty crime goes unpunished they will come.

This is the same old: Good intention plan without realizing the unintended consequences.
#15165951
Godstud wrote:@Julian658 Get educated. Your knowledge on homelessness is pathetic, and inhuman in its lack of empathy.
Image


I am not an social justice warrior. You are one!
We finally agree!
#15165952
jimjam wrote:I don't want to sound like a moronic left wing commie but ….. I love you man and I respect your opinions ….. now please excuse me, dude, but have to get back to reading Das Kapital…… ;)

Thank you for your sincerity.
You are reaching for comic relief because you are a bit lost with your pseudo-arguments. I suggest you keep repeating the platitudes of the SJWs.
#15165953
Rancid wrote:When it comes to pubic projects. Many of them are approved by corrupt sons of a bitches that have numerous conflicts of interest. Most of the members of my county commission and city council are either real estate developers or have direct ties to real estate developers. COrrupt sons of a bitches! FIRE THEM ALL!!!

I think a rule to join the city council should be that you are only allowed to own one residential property, which is the one you live in. That would put a bigger dent in the housing crisis than just about any other thing. What I"m saying is that city councils are exactly aligned with making the housing problem worse, because it makes them rich.

Municipal politics and real estate developers are always sleeping in the same bed together. Pure corruption. Wolves at the door.
#15165954
The only somewhat sane parts of the USA are the north-east and parts of the mid-west.

Southern California's economy is based around fantasy (entertainment industry), you're not going to find many smart policy-makers in a place obsessed with botox and boob jobs and designer dogs.
#15165959
Julian658 wrote:Thank you for your sincerity.
You are reaching for comic relief because you are a bit lost with your pseudo-arguments. I suggest you keep repeating the platitudes of the SJWs.

Yo Dude !! Meet me in TLTE. I need to discuss the politics of toe nail fungus with someone who thinks outside the box and I think you are up for the challenge.

Socialism vs Capitalism is hardly a black and white debate. In many ways young people are way more astute than old people. Their thinking process has not yet been fully corrupted by the highly aggressive propaganda apparatus fielded by the capitalist system to protect a self serving corrupt system. Capitalism and predatory capitalism are two distinctly different animals.Myself , and perhaps some young folks, see a need to adapt a degree of socialist theory to neutralize the inherently extreme greed driven aspects of predatory capitalism.
#15165973
jimjam wrote:Yo Dude !! Meet me in TLTE. I need to discuss the politics of toe nail fungus with someone who thinks outside the box and I think you are up for the challenge.

Socialism vs Capitalism is hardly a black and white debate. In many ways young people are way more astute than old people. Their thinking process has not yet been fully corrupted by the highly aggressive propaganda apparatus fielded by the capitalist system to protect a self serving corrupt system. Capitalism and predatory capitalism are two distinctly different animals.Myself , and perhaps some young folks, see a need to adapt a degree of socialist theory to neutralize the inherently extreme greed driven aspects of predatory capitalism.


I have said many times that the analysis of Karl Marx regarding the flaws of capitalism is right on the money. Marx was 100% correct regarding the evil aspect of capitalism. Therefore in every generation many young people fall in love with socialism. Sadly, the flaws of socialism are never discussed in our universities and colleges. Most young people of this era do not know about the atrocities of socialism in China and the Soviet union.

You also have idealists that they can do Socialism a bit better than in the past. Somehow we are to believe that these new fools of these era have found a solution to the inability of socialism to provide and to create wealth.

No one is stopping you and your comrades to form a commune and live like socialist. No one is stopping you from sharing your home and your private property With all the socialist that think just like you. However, you guys want the capitalists to transfer their wealth to you and then you also demand that they stop being Capitalists.

I am very much in the center and a favor national healthcare, abortion, and rights for the LGBTQ AAA plus community. I do not mind a healthy social net for the disadvantaged as long as the capitalists are not considered the evil actors in this movie. You guys want the wealth created byThe capitalists and at the same time you blame the capitalist for the evils of the world. This is the most prosperous time in world history thanks to capitalism.
#15165977
@Julian658 NO one is asking for 100% Socialism. They are talking about a mixed economy, with private industry and some government ones. eg. Government run healthcare and education. People want a balance, which is perfectly achievable.

You always say "left" and "socialism" as if they are some evil Bogey-Man, but you understand neither.
#15165980
Godstud wrote:@Julian658 NO one is asking for 100% Socialism. They are talking about a mixed economy, with private industry and some government ones. eg. Government run healthcare and education. People want a balance, which is perfectly achievable.

You always say "left" and "socialism" as if they are some evil Bogey-Man, but you understand neither.

You did not read my post above. That would be my reply to your words.
#15165986
Julian658 wrote:
I have said many times that the analysis of Karl Marx



Naw, you're just lying.

No one here is advocating that where it counts. Find me one Congressperson that is a Marxist.

That's the Big Lie of propaganda again... you do it constantly. If you look at the successful European countries, they have robust social programs. Even there, you'd need a microscope to find anyone with power arguing they should be Marxist.

I said a couple days ago you would lie again, and here you are. You pretend to be rational, but you like the paychecks for trolling a lot better, now don't you.

"Integrity is the essence of everything successful."

R. Buckminster Fuller
  • 1
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 34

Do your forums have US and UK paid propaganda tro[…]

@Unthinking Majority Trump used the "Sle[…]

Big Vehicles: War Wagons

There's a weird dominance thing with some drivers […]

Unless the deep state is selectively arresting j[…]