I would argue that in 2010, that was not something people were ready for. In part because it had been, to some degree, a Hillary Clinton idea from the 1990s. So it was saddled with the distrust people had in her, and the uncomfortableness of what that would look like (and this is beyond all the Republican propaganda). Now, it falls under the affordability umbrella, particularly with Republicans wanting to take away our healthcare, or make it prohibitively expensive. And I say "our" as I am insured under the ACA. So do think that single payer, if not a winning idea, at least considered a serious idea.
Yes, lot of food for thought here, as usual with Piketty. His wife Julia Cagé -an economist too- is just as brilliant as he is.
It's a bit stricter here since we tend to post a lot of news stuff. It also gets into copyright issues here in the US.
I realise this thread was only ever intended as a repository for shitposts, but it's kind of frustrating that the entire framework of debate started off in bad faith. As will be noted from Piketty, no one is talking about implementing Russian Marxism or Chinese Maoism. Rather we are talking about social market capitalism and where the balance should be. I am sure a few of us who saw the seventies will be familiar with forms of government that were much more command and control yet were also democracies. There were large public industries. Many people worked their whole lives in one of the public services. Markets were not very free as there was a lot of capital controls and restrictions. But no one was living under socialism.
Okay, I see, I should have thought of that, it was a bit silly of me. I don't want to give the moderators a headache. They're free to delete my message if they want.
Piketty knows his shit and I agree with almost all of his points in the interview. When the Fed dropped interest rates to zero and loaded up the balance sheet with treasuries and MBSs to manage the fallout from the GFC, there should have been a firm exit strategy once some level of normalcy had returned. Instead, Western governments and their central banks around the world held onto these measures since inflation stayed cool and who doesn't like a hot economy? IMO, this has had 2 disasterous effects: wealth inequality and inflation. I don't know why inflation was so long in arriving but I've read a theory that the west escaped inflation by exporting it to China and other developing economies due to off shoring. Running the ZIRP / QE playbook for Covid without normalizing post GFC was too much to keep inflation at bay.
What I like about Thomas Piketty and Julia Cagé (they work together) is that—unlike many economists—they don't consider economics a separate science, but rather integrate other social sciences into their analyses: history, geography, sociology (he mentions Pierre Bourdieu in the interview I copied). They aren't the only ones to do this, of course: Daniel Cohen did it, as did Krugman and Stiglitz.
Mamdani 's strongest advocate is...Joe Scarborough!?!?!? Joe pushes real hard against Greenblatt's "non political" attacks and insinuations against Mamdani, such as supporting the firebombing of seniors.
https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/ne...ps-veterans-day-parade--scoops-meals-for-vets Mamdani stays true to his word from the campaign and skipped his first campaign, choosing to serve food to veterans so that he could sit down and meet with them at an event by the Volunteers for American Veterans’ Residence Commonwealth. The first real showdown between Mamdani and the Billionaires is probably going to be between him and NYPD Chief Jessica Tisch. Who knows how qualified she actually is, given that she is an heiress to the Loews Corporation(net worth 10 billion) . She is Harvard educated, but then again Donald Trump graduated from the University of Pennsylvania. All of her jobs have been appointed by the Mayor so make no mistake she is a direct representation of the Oligarchy. A symbolic showdown no doubt.
Compared to some of the fascist NYPD commishes in the recent past, she's practically a...socialist https://gothamist.com/news/the-daylight-between-mamdani-and-tisch-as-nypd-leadership-choice-looms
My prediction is that it will be much ado about nothing. Mamdani seems to have good instincts and America is far away from being able to accept open socialism. I think he's going to spoon feed it to the city. His campaign focused on class consciousness without selling it as class consciousness. He was just selling it as affordability. I think he will do the same with police. Instead of saying defund for example, he's going to reduce the scope of what they respond to and take away some of the "edge" from the force. From the article that seems to support the narrative: Tisch has not taken a public stance on some of Mamdani’s signature proposals, including sending civilians to some 911 calls instead of armed officers — a staple of Mamdani’s public safety agenda. Neither has she shared her thoughts on his intent to disband an aggressive NYPD unit known as the Strategic Response Group, though she has praised the unit's successful handling of protests. She’s been far less lenient toward police misconduct than past commissioners, but she has been willing to block some disciplinary cases. Criminal justice reformers, meanwhile, have credited Tisch with rooting out inefficiencies and alleged corruption in the NYPD's ranks. "She's been all about returning police to police functions,” said Elizabeth Glazer, a former federal prosecutor who runs the public safety nonprofit Vital City. Glazer said Tisch and Mamdani share the goal of returning police to fundamental police work: “Her first couple of months were all about pulling back in the specialized units, returning strength to the precincts, so that they could do their core police job.” One of the first controversial decisions Tisch made as NYPD commissioner was transferring hundreds of officers from specialized units to patrol duties.
Isn't this already resolved? Mamdani has said multiple times that he is going to keep her and that if she leaves, it will be her decision based on her unwillingness to implement the policy changes Mamdani wants to put in place.
Putting here as it seems most relevant, since we don't have a thread for dumb things tech people say. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles...ns-proletarianize-235603611.html?guccounter=1 In the correspondence to Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Andreessen and others, he warned that “When 70% of Millennials say they are pro-socialist, we need to do better than simply dismiss them by saying that they are stupid or entitled or brainwashed; we should try and understand why.” Thiel expanded on those concerns in an interview with the Free Press that was published on Friday, saying strict zoning laws and construction limits have been good for boomers, who have seen their properties appreciate, but they have been terrible for millennials, who are having an extremely hard time buying homes. “If you proletarianize the young people, you shouldn’t be surprised if they eventually become communist,” he explained.
Somebody said it was a bad thing and everyone else joined in wihout thinking, and now we're all at the point where even the mention of the words "communism" or "socialism" gets some people's Depends in a dribble. As I've said many times and will continue to say, it's better to watch it all burn down than to just parrot the enemy's fetishes against the most vulnerable.
For fun, some group should create a Christian sounding name like the Bible Voting Coalition, and then send out candidate questionnaires asking if they agree with Isaiah 55:1. We’ll be communist in no time.
I was in a Bible Study class in 1990 with a then-80 or so year old Ethel Biddle. We were studying Acts* of the Apostles. We got to that verse and Mrs. Biddle looks up with some astonishment: “that’s straight up communism.” Not for or against, just deeply surprised. I still remember that. *Acts apparently is better translated as Praxis, which a) would upend how English speaking Christians think about the Bible and b) make “praxis” a word I could use in everyday conversation without sounding like a pretentious douchebag. So, two losses there.
Soooo, maybe Gallup sums it up best... "Bottom Line Americans’ opinions of capitalism were generally steady prior to this year, but the 54% who now view it positively is the lowest Gallup has measured to date. While Americans retain generally positive views of the U.S. economic system, they are less positive toward it than toward free enterprise and small business, two specific aspects of capitalism. Americans overall continue to be skeptical of socialism, but Democrats are the exception. Since 2016, more Democrats have held positive views of socialism than of capitalism, with the gap expanding to 24 points today. Democrats’ more positive views of socialism occur at a time when many high-profile Democratic officials — most notably, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as well as New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — have identified themselves as Democratic socialists and advocated policies calling for a significantly expanded government role in economic matters." Image of Capitalism Slips to 54% in U.S. Poll: Capitalism is out … and socialism is in - POLITICO Trouble is, this simply doesn't math well for Democrats and our comeback chances. Most of us boomer Dems didn't sign up for socialism, the two-party system and capitalism are never going away, and we're going to see more left on left infighting (in the run up to next November) at a time when we desperately need party unity if we hope to stem the tide of fascism. And, if this forum gives us any indication of where things are headed, three out of four respondents favor abolishing capitalism and replacing it with socialism which looks like pure fantasy to this old boomer Dem.