Kasich: Prominent Congressman to come out for Biden tomorrow

I'm glad we have youtube cause I'm going to watch the Rockets today , the politicians can take a backseat to what's more important!

i'll watch the recap , thanks Google!

 

that's pretty damn unpatriotic of you tinny

 

you should fire up the vcr and record it on a clean tape for later viewing

 

Thanks for posting... a very good speech, focusing on the things I focus on. Hopefully others will as well...

 

wait, did Kasich talk about Twitter? I should watch it, then, too.

 

The Rockets game is at 5:30 and barring multiple OT's should be done by the time the main DNC speeches happen.

 

Imagine if Silicon Valley actually had antitrust laws enforced and wasn't empowered to crush new entrants and extract monopoly rents for the last 20 years.

 

I largely agree and agree that wealth inequality is a problem. That said I'm very cautious about "wealth distrubution." I think we need a strong social safety net and government should be there to protect basic needs but I'm not bothered that there are Jeff Bezos, Zuckerbergs and Musks. I firmly believe if someone can develop or find a way to market new technology they deserve to become rich.

We shouldn't idolize them and put them on a pedestal but there should be incentive to take on risks and push advancement. Musk is a perfect example. He's a headcase but he is pushing advancement of the electric car and battery storage. When people point out the risk of Tesla because there are a lot of competitors that's true but to me that points to me how successful he is. If Tesla hadn't gathered so much attention I don't think there would've been as much interest in the market. At the same time Space X is bringing down the cost of space travel and if we really are going to permanently establish a presence in space and move humanity beyond our planet we need space to be commercialized.

 

This is generalizing it, and from the PoV of Tech.

The Gov invest in basic science. That is, by nature, long term research.

Companies invest in enabling those basic science into products. That does come with serious long term R&D, over 10 years even.

It's not either / or, it's a partnership and one that have worked fairly well as related to advancement of understanding, technology and technologically more advanced products.

But let's not confuse research investment to favorable policies, tax breaks and "the rich writing laws in their favor" - those are things that should be called out and dealt with. At least, I want that first attempt before ditching it as un-fixable and replace it with a new system. That's too much and too fast for me personally. Sometime I hear this idea that the very rich people are horrible, or are gods -- SMH a thousands time.

 

To be fair to Reagan himself, there's no indication that he himself was corrupt, and we just do not know what his opinion would be with how the Republican party and some corporate Democrats have taken his reforms & used it to line the pockets of billionaires which has created monopoly. We don't know how he would have, and if he would have proposed reforms to roll back even his own policies. But "Reaganism" is no longer really synonymous with Reagan himself. At the time, sure tax cuts made SOME sense, but the problem still is tax policy being absorbed into the executive branch which brings me back to my bigger point about Capitalism.

The framers designed our economic system to be broad consensus based when it came to big things like tax law, etc. that provide the framework for what is and is not allowed in the Capital market. The framers did not believe government should have much involvement at all in the day to day policing of the the markets where the executive branch called winners and losers. Very much the opposite.

Good Capitalism the way it is intended is where laws are created with broad consensus between Congress (who were designated to be the people's representative) and the Executive Branch. Then after those broad consensus laws are established, government gets out of the way and only independent watch dogs in law enforcement manage anything in the day to day policing.

The biggest issue I have is people conflating government intervention to play winners and losers with good old fashioned legislation starting in the House or Senate. THIS is what Republicans LOVE to call SOCIALISM, and it's completely the opposite. Congress creating laws in the House to reform the markets is exactly what good Capitalism is intended to look like. That is where the framers intended Capitalism to be monitored through that process where "the people" have the biggest say, and not an autocratic monarchy who can play winners and losers which then creates a compromised government which then creates monopolies which then hurts citizen consumers.

 

The government doesn't fund social security. The people do. When you collect it its your money.

Everything the government does is funded by the economy. Medicare is funded by taxes which come from your income.

Those are social programs to make sure people dont fall through the cracks but the fundamentals of our economy lie in goods and services that are over 90% provided by private industry

I think the biggest service the government provides instead of the private is education its either that or defense. Medicare is an insurance program that yes the government has an overwhelming influence in but the medical industry as a whole is a private industry.

Government programs rely on tax dollars that come from citizens and corporations

 

Actually the government does add funding to Social Security. It is how they keep up with COLA.

 

I agree with you about what the Framers intended but I think they intended a far lighter hand of regulation than what is being proposed today by people like Warren. They probably couldn't envision the size and complexity of financial systems but they were certainly aware of monopolies and were very aware of government involvement with commerce as companies like the Hudson Bay Companies operated hand in hand with the governments that chartered them.

As stated earlier I disagree with the use of the term "socialism" as used by the American Right and the American Left. Yes regulation isn't socialism but that still hasn't stopped both sides of the ideological divide as either using it as an epithet or embracing it.

What I really look at though is where do we draw the line on role of government in the economy. In this sense I am much closer to the ideas of the Framers than to the idea of modern Progressives or the New Deal. What troubles me with a lot of the current debate is that it is laced with class warfare and a view that regulation is a good in and of itself.

 

Social security and medicare are sizable parts of the economy.

Our economy isn't capitalism, it's a blended economy with elements of capitalism and socialism. Dumbass Americans just like to think it's capitalism because they really have no idea of all of the ways our government subverts capitalism.

 

Your next leader of the Republican Party

 

He is undeniably wrong an overwhelming amount of the time. I don't know if that was intended as sarcasm, Os, but in trump's case the phrase fits like a glove. That's not even getting into the fellow being awash in corruption up to his neck and telling lies about literally everything at a truly astonishing rate.

 

I was just trying to fit in, sheesh. You can please some of the people some of the time . . . .

 

Ted Cruz’s muscle?

 

Gym is America's Muscle!

Time for the US of A to GO TO THE JIM!