Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

[Thailandnotes]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUkv_jPgTeg

[Woodsman]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

the exchange of mutual abuse in this thread is juvenile and degrades us all. can we leave the election behind us?

we will live with its consequences, and those are likely worthy of discussion if and only if we can discuss them dispassionately.

You mean some of us should just sit still and let those taking pot shots at us hit the mark?

I'm sure every one here who's been called a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, half-wit, et al for having the temerity of expressing a different opinion would be perfectly willing to bury the hatchet, preferably in the proverbial ground but unquestionably in the metaphorical sweet spot of the brave swinging his own should necessity demand it.

But if the expectation is that we're to sit here as members of this community while other members have free reign to cast any aspersion, throw any insult, make any slander, we'll why is that a reasonable expectation of any reasonable person? Where else does that happen? I have no problem with passion, but why should anyone suffer slander of the sort some people here say as easily as one says "hello?"

Those who give respect, get it. Those who don't and aren't wise enough to steer clear get what they deserve. That's how it works IRL and anyone expecting anything different will suffer disappointment.

[Woodsman]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUkv_jPgTeg

Why should I care, Thai?

Why should a serious person be expected to give a Saturday Night Live cast reject the slightest presumption of gravitas when he's not an honest broker under any definition of the term? I don't care what Senator Stand-Up Al Franken has to say either. It's not like they're adding any light to the discussion anyway.

You cite these as some authority because to you they are authorities. That's great, but most of the folks at the grownup table just don't get the appeal (and get off my lawn).

Why Charlie Rose's opinion would be relevant to anyone who doesn't know him socially, I'll never understand. As for Van, if you want to get behind a Leninist of his sort, more power to you sir. But as an appeal to authority, no thanks. We're full up on crazy today.

[jk]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

You mean some of us should just sit still and let those taking pot shots at us hit the mark?

I'm sure every one here who's been called a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, half-wit, et al for having the temerity of expressing a different opinion would be perfectly willing to bury the hatchet, preferably in the proverbial ground but unquestionably in the metaphorical sweet spot of the brave swinging his own should necessity demand it.

But if the expectation is that we're to sit here as members of this community while other members have free reign to cast any aspersion, throw any insult, make any slander, we'll why is that a reasonable expectation of any reasonable person? Where else does that happen? I have no problem with passion, but why should anyone suffer slander of the sort some people here say as easily as one says "hello?"

Those who give respect, get it. Those who don't and aren't wise enough to steer clear get what they deserve. That's how it works IRL and anyone expecting anything different will suffer disappointment.

the war goes on, retaliation after retaliation, and thus can never stop. everyone wants the last word. that's "winning"?

and who is to say what we each "deserve"?

who is grown up enough to move on?

let it go. do good. be a light unto the world.

[Thailandnotes]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-stand-w451241

[vt]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

This will put an end to race baiting!

[santafe2]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

the war goes on, retaliation after retaliation, and thus can never stop. everyone wants the last word. that's "winning"?

and who is to say what we each "deserve"?

who is grown up enough to move on?

let it go. do good. be a light unto the world.

On this issue we must part company jk. This is not a collegiate debate. We're fighting fascism in the US and we're losing. Don't disrespect your position here by making a goofy Rodney King argument. I will never "move on". I will never "let it go". Billionaire fascists now own the US and the crayon clown crowd mostly control iTulip. Are you going to wait for another decade until they build concentration camps for people you know? Read Martin Niemoller and it may help you understand how fascism gradually overtakes people. We are not so far away from losing control in the US. You can continue to toss your dice or you can take a side.

[llanlad2]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

On this issue we must part company jk. This is not a collegiate debate. We're fighting fascism in the US and we're losing. Don't disrespect your position here by making a goofy Rodney King argument. I will never "move on". I will never "let it go". Billionaire fascists now own the US and the crayon clown crowd mostly control iTulip. Are you going to wait for another decade until they build concentration camps for people you know? Read Martin Niemoller and it may help you understand how fascism gradually overtakes people. We are not so far away from losing control in the US. You can continue to toss your dice or you can take a side.

This thread and the election one are a reason why I let my subscription lapse. The bile and hatred and extremism are out of order and statements are made based on "faith" rather than reality or evidence. I voted Brexit in the UK. I am not racist. I am against free movement of people within the EU. I am not right wing. I am against TTIP for very sound democratic reasons.

Recently you appeared on Finster's thread from out of nowhere "warning" him not to get involved in "partisan" discussions after he asked me if I saw parallels in Brexit and Trumpit.

I did not believe the UK is doomed punditry (any more than I am clinging on to some sense of the UK as a great power. After Brexit the UK was supposed to be doomed in some sort of "they know not what they do" type situation. Higher interest rates, job losses, collapsing stock market, reduced GDP, cutbacks on spending, rampant racism were all predicted to happen immediately after the vote. Predicted by almost every political commenter, economist, world leader.


Well so far the establishment are wrong and the crayon clown crowd (as you so insultingly put it) are right on every single count in the aftermath of Brexit.

Trump will be much more pragmatic than you imagine. The US is still a well-developed democracy. It will remain so. Germany pre-Hitler was not. It's like comparing apples and oranges. The US will not resort to fascism any more than it has in the past.

[Woodsman]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

I will never "move on". I will never "let it go".

And there you have it, from the first mover himself.

So when one is asked, "what happened to iTulip" we can point to SF2 as the one with the burning Molotov cocktail in his hands. The "true believer" will sink the entire ship and drown us all to defend his "purity."

I had lobbied the community to act on this person but was shut down as folks don't want to be seen as taking sides. And anyway his brand of hate and extremism seems to have some following. Or maybe it's just schadenfreude on the part of some folks? I stopped caring a while ago, thus my terse responses of late. I save the effort of argument for people of goodwill. Rabid dogs get maced in the face because they are dangerous animals and can't help themselves.

I mentioned I reached out to EJ on this once but won't do it again. He seems aware but unwilling to act against this provocateur other than to close down a thread here and there. I can't blame him, as I said previously, what with the Christmas season being so critical to the success of VirZoom.

But all that seems to do is embolden SF2 as he is beyond reason and whatever decency was in him once has been crowded out by his abject terror manifesting itself as hate.

Are you going to wait for another decade until they build concentration camps for people you know?

He's a cognitive casualty, like so many other Americans, of the establishment's psychological operations and information war. In any other circumstance I'd probably feel some sympathy for a person mired in this state. But there's nothing anyone here - even you, doctor - can do for him until he does for himself. And now that he's declared with pride that he will never move on or let it go, he's delighted to hold us all hostage until he gets whatever it is he wants.

And if that means leaving iTulip in ashes he seems perfectly willing. We're not unique in facing challenges like this, but without an active moderator we're at the mercy of terrorists like SF2. I expect it will get worse. Nobody else here seems similarly afflicted, so SF2 will believe he has no choice but continue to escalate things further in an attempt to "reach" people to gain allies in his struggle against "fascism."



Maybe now that SF2 is lashing out against Finster - the last remnant of this site's original macroeconomic glory days - perhaps the community will understand the threat and act, but I'm not counting on it.

As for myself, I'm satisfied that enough folks have either witnessed or been subjected to SF2's behavior to know the score. And with his inadvertent confessional, I have to trust that is all the the folks I respect here need to know who's culpable and who's not.

With that, I'll take one for the team, put SF2 on ignore and just assume that folks understand that he's gone barking mad and will say just about anything to those who are his objects of hate. Maybe he'll consider this a "win" and that will calm his fugue for the moment, at least.

Consider it an early Christmas present delivered in the spirit of the season.

[jk]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

On this issue we must part company jk. This is not a collegiate debate. We're fighting fascism in the US and we're losing. Don't disrespect your position here by making a goofy Rodney King argument. I will never "move on". I will never "let it go". Billionaire fascists now own the US and the crayon clown crowd mostly control iTulip. Are you going to wait for another decade until they build concentration camps for people you know? Read Martin Niemoller and it may help you understand how fascism gradually overtakes people. We are not so far away from losing control in the US. You can continue to toss your dice or you can take a side.

if you think that arguing about it on itulip makes a difference, you are more naive than i.

i am aware of the potential threat to democracy. i wondered, after trump's victory, if the fear that i and others experienced was somehow similar to what some people felt when hitler first assumed the chancellorship. i have stated on numerous occasions that i believe we are echoing the 1930's both economically and politically - i hope just as farce and not as tragedy. however, i don't think the ad hominems here help us understand more, nor do they convince anyone - either participant or onlooker- to change his/her mind.

if, otoh, you are e.g. donating to campaigns in which you believe, involved in organizing in your communities-local and/or regional and/or national, engaged directly in political action, or similar activities, please explain how your behavior here, in this online community, adds value to the causes in which you believe.

do you think there are readers here who don't understand the issues and need you to point them out? and furthermore do you think that pointing out your positions in the manner you've adopted makes them more comprehensible and attractive?

if you want to discuss strategy - how to protect and preserve democracy and inclusive social values - let's do so. for example, i think energy might be better spent working within the democratic party to make it less the captive of wall street and more progressive in its policies. but that belief of mine is debatable. what do you think? as lenin wrote: "what is to be done?"

this post, of course, is not meant to single you out. ALL participants in this mutual slander are equally culpable, and imo equally foolish and equally distracting from the issues that truly need discussion.

woodsman was correct - to my surprise - that trump would set off a crisis within the democratic party. it remains to be seen whether trump truly shakes up the republican party, which i fear might capture him with a paul-ryanish agenda. but crisis means opportunity- the crisis in the democratic party is truly a chance to make it a different and more successful enterprise. but i am not sure that that will happen.

[llanlad2]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

if you think that arguing about it on itulip makes a difference, you are more naive than i.


woodsman was correct - to my surprise - that trump would set off a crisis within the democratic party. .

This is exactly what happened and is still happening in the UK with the Labour Party after Brexit. At the same time the Conservatives have more or less closed ranks and embraced Brexit and see it as opportunity.
They have also implemented anti-house price inflation measures-which was something the left-wing never dared do in the last 20 years. Oh, and austerity is on its way out in the UK.

Trump and the Republicans will have to deliver to the voting working and middle classes because they will get voted out next time. Democracy works- but slowly. They will have no excuses when it comes to the US economy, debt and austerity.

Here on itulip it's long been known that inflation will be the solution to the debt problem. Well the solution is on its way. And it will be the Republicans that provide the inflationary fuel for it. In the same way "Only Nixon could go to China" only the Republicans can allow the deficit to rip.

[vt]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

Nut cases to the left and nut cases to the right:

"Billionaire fascists now own the US and the crayon clown crowd mostly control iTulip. Are you going to wait for another decade until they build concentration camps for people you know?"

Or right loonies:
"Number One Reason Americans Will Be Sent to FEMA Camps In a Hillary Clinton Presidency"


My new majority party of the moderates will save us from the sick minds on the fringes.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

Here on itulip it's long been known that inflation will be the solution to the debt problem. Well the solution is on its way. And it will be the Republicans that provide the inflationary fuel for it. In the same way "Only Nixon could go to China" only the Republicans can allow the deficit to rip.

Fascinating llanlad2, and as likely to be true as any other hypothesis.

Where do you think inflation might start?
In the 1970's it was oil prices.
In the 1950's it was rebound after the strict controls from WWII were removed and the troops came home.

Here's a hundred year chart.

[jk]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

Where do you think inflation might start?

this question is probably worth a thread of its own, or perhaps a subthread in a broader one on the trump admin's effects on the economy.

1. trump's infrastructure plan appears to be centered around tax breaks for private investors in infrastructure projects. so projects that are funded in this way will have to generate an income stream, e.g. in the form of tolls, water or electricity bills, and so on. it is also not clear that there will be a net increase in infrastructure spending, or just a shift from unsubsidized projects to ones that are subsidized.

whatever its form, however, trump's plan will cost the federal gov't money. so will tax cuts. so will increased defense spending.

i doubt that revenues will be raised to balance this spending. although claims will be made that increased economic activity will generate more tax revenue, i think it is a pretty good bet that we will see rising deficits. this will lead to some combination of helicopter money and rising interest rates. the latter will increase fund flows from abroad, as the spread between u.s. treasuries and other nations' sovereign bonds continues to widen.

IF [big "if"] there is increased infrastructure spending, we can expect rising prices for its inputs, and increased employment and wages for the relevant trades. whatever happens to infrastructure, we can expect increased defense spending.

jimmy carter called for energy conservation to be [william james'] "moral equivalent of war." [unfortunately turned into "meow" by critical media.] if trump's defense build-up is large enough, it -along with any net increase in infrastructure spending - will function as the financial equivalent of war. ["feow"?]

defense goods are the perfect sink hole for inflation-producing spending. they are produced but - we hope - not consumed, so the inputs produce nothing on which consumers can spend their resulting incomes. and even if infrastructure is eventually paid for by rents in some form [increased tolls, increased utility bills] that diversion of consumer spending will only occur well after the spending on the projects themselves, with their accompanying increased financial flows to infrastructure inputs- both labor and material.

so i nominate sharply increased federal deficits as a major source of future inflation.

2. if trump follows through on a protectionist trade policy, this will raise the cost of goods which are either produced abroad but now priced higher by the tariff, or produced domestically by a more highly paid work force or with expensive automation.

so trade policy will be a secondary source of inflation.

[shiny!]

Re: Mother Jones Interviews Van Jones

this question is probably worth a thread of its own, or perhaps a subthread in a broader one on the trump admin's effects on the economy.

1. trump's infrastructure plan appears to be centered around tax breaks for private investors in infrastructure projects. so projects that are funded in this way will have to generate an income stream, e.g. in the form of tolls, water or electricity bills, and so on. it is also not clear that there will be a net increase in infrastructure spending, or just a shift from unsubsidized projects to ones that are subsidized.

whatever its form, however, trump's plan will cost the federal gov't money. so will tax cuts. so will increased defense spending.

i doubt that revenues will be raised to balance this spending. although claims will be made that increased economic activity will generate more tax revenue, i think it is a pretty good bet that we will see rising deficits. this will lead to some combination of helicopter money and rising interest rates. the latter will increase fund flows from abroad, as the spread between u.s. treasuries and other nations' sovereign bonds continues to widen.

IF [big "if"] there is increased infrastructure spending, we can expect rising prices for its inputs, and increased employment and wages for the relevant trades. whatever happens to infrastructure, we can expect increased defense spending.

jimmy carter called for energy conservation to be [william james'] "moral equivalent of war." [unfortunately turned into "meow" by critical media.] if trump's defense build-up is large enough, it -along with any net increase in infrastructure spending - will function as the financial equivalent of war. ["feow"?]

defense goods are the perfect sink hole for inflation-producing spending. they are produced but - we hope - not consumed, so the inputs produce nothing on which consumers can spend their resulting incomes. and even if infrastructure is eventually paid for by rents in some form [increased tolls, increased utility bills] that diversion of consumer spending will only occur well after the spending on the projects themselves, with their accompanying increased financial flows to infrastructure inputs- both labor and material.

so i nominate sharply increased federal deficits as a major source of future inflation.

2. if trump follows through on a protectionist trade policy, this will raise the cost of goods which are either produced abroad but now priced higher by the tariff, or produced domestically by a more highly paid work force or with expensive automation.

so trade policy will be a secondary source of inflation.

Inflation is sometimes understood as devaluing a currency via printing (deficit spending), and other times understood to be rising prices. You are suggesting both forms. You're probably right!