Imma be honest. Both sides are guilty in this. I just hate that we need to be roped into their shitty religious squabbles. I feel very sorry for the people, but the pragmatic in me tells me we should just let the region sort out their issues on their own and whatever happens happens. No matter which side you take you’re supporting religious extremism and genocide.

There’s a reason the founding fathers created the electoral college. They knew popular democracy was and is a mistake.

It works, it’s just not perfect because no system is. Monarchy or benevolent dictatorships are arguably the most perfect system on paper, at the very least they have the capacity to be the most efficient and bring about it the best results, but it all hinges on one man not becoming alienated from his subjects, which is almost impossible.

But yes that’s how democracy works, the majority are allowed to make bad decisions if they all agree that this is the way they want to go. Democracy doesn’t necessarily mean “everyone gets to vote “, for most of history it has been “this handful of people are allowed to vote”. Back then it was usually white rich men, today I would argue we need to return to a limited democracy but based on merit. Ie “you must be this smart to vote”. Of course the argument is that this can be manipulated to create systemic issues that purposely exclude certain groups based on things other than merit or intelligence so we return to square 1.

Yes that’s how democracy works.

Read the federalist papers, the founding fathers knew this would happen which is why the didn’t want everyone to vote. This utopia in which there is universal suffrage and people actually vote conscientiously will never exist, because most people are not interested in devoting a lot of time to thinking about anything, much less about their vote. Fucking Plato knew this already like what, 3000 years ago?

Progressives alone cannot win an election. The nature of democracy is that you need to get most people behind you, that includes the ones you don’t like all that much.

I don’t think this is an American thing. It’s a human thing.

Somewhat inconclusive proof that TDS is real.

The founding fathers warned about this….

Yeah it doesn’t work like it does for him without a face. There’s no face here. It works for him because it’s him, personally, doing and saying wild shit.

Well, he’s more consistent than I expected.

That’ll show him!

Are you a journalist by any chance?

Any ideas on how Trump might clap back?

Reminder that absolutely no one has anything nice to say Ted Ratto Cruz. His own party hates and him even his constituents hate him.

It’s the first and second point of the white paper but ok.

You do not understand MMT.

Edit: The reason I say that is because MMT basically says the opposite of what you just wrote there. A Government that mints their own currency doesn’t need to take any loans to spend money, all they have to do is print more money.

It would have been a byproduct I agree, but it’s one that he’s aware about it even if it’s not the goal. I don’t care about his goal, those are always misaligned . I care about what the actual effect is. Again, the breaking of the economy is more of a feature than a bug. I said this already.

Now I would need to write an essay here to explain why that is a somewhat necessary thing but I won’t. I’ll just say that no paradigm change has happened without pain, so we either accept the pain or we let things hum along and hope that they get better (they wont, the existing structures will only calcify more until change is impossible and collapse ensues)

I hope the next president gets the vision, but they will inevitably be a neoliberal corporat so, fat chance of that happening.

MMT doesn’t rely on being the reserve currency. In fact I think it sometimes argues against it? I’m not an expert on everything MMT yet though, so I can’t speak to that point.

But fair point yes, the implementation as not great. That still doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t have had some very good effects for the rest of the world even at the cost of US hegemony. (Since when that became a good thing anyways?)

It would have been a byproduct of them that I believe he doesn’t give a fuck about, but he has allude to in a few occasions.

I agree on the second point. The tariffs needed to be wide ranging but somewhat phased. But he can’t do that because he knows he doesn’t have the time, so like everything else he’s doing it with the startup mentality of move fast and break shit. Which I favor in this particular case because I don’t see a neoliberal corpo puppet democrat pushing for tariffs ever.

Sure the implementation is fucked. But the basis of it is not necessarily bad. And I believe that even botched implement would have resulted in long term gains that would have been beneficial.

Also economic experts are almost exclusively coming from a neoclassical vision, which is incomplete because it disregards the role of money. Modern Monetary Theory simply fixes that limitation and adds a new perspective that is more complete than the neoclassical vision.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gvDcMU_ko1h5TeVjQL8UMJW9gmKY1x0zcqKIRTZQDAQ/mobilebasic

When the experts of any given field are said that they are incorrect they tend to react with rejection, so it is no surprise that they would reject MMT, as it destroys a lot of what their work has been based on. So don’t just listen to what the experts say, they have incentives to reject revolutionary ideas in their field.

Excellent rebuttal. Well thought out.