lannarebirth

3 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

It's chicken and the egg they should have never been given the authority to enact it a law against it, in the first place. By default governments don't grant rights. All rights are their until a law prohibits it.

Ayn Rand much?

4 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

The thing is the3 government as a cure is worse than the disease. 

Right, you make my point. They never should have enacted the law allowing for market manipulation in the first place. Forget about the zombie corpoations, of which their are hundreds. It has contributed to extreme wealth inequality in the US. And that WILL be addressed. Hopefully at the ballot box.

8 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

I would love it but I don't think if Biden is elected he would be around in 18 months. That leaves the goon squad of the left he will be forced to appoint.

 

Also if a corporation doesn't take a bailout the government shouldn't dictate what they buy or dividends. If you https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/10/22/examining-corporate-priorities-the-impact-of-stock-buybacks-on-workers-communities-and-investors/ your factories to make health equipment for the government you should be exempt of any conditions.

 

If you take the guberment tit yeah I agree you get terms dictated to you. Airlines and Cruise companies oil.

Actually they should just repeal the law allowing for corporate buybacks, which were illegal before Reagan, because it is a manipulation of the market. If they can't do that, they should AT LEAST pass a law that says you can't borrow money for the purpose of buying back stock. Additionally, ifitis to be allowed, there should be a law that says you can only buy back stock if it FALLS a certain amount, say 20%-30%. That wouldmake for very robust and resiliant corporations, as opposed to the ones lined up for the lion's share of the bailouts now.

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/10/22/examining-corporate-priorities-the-impact-of-stock-buybacks-on-workers-communities-and-investors/

2 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Well, a good portion of those people are disgruntled now. I would actually accept a Biden win other than the fact he would have to make AOC secretary of state, Booker gets HUD, Warren is appointed to the FED, Bernie runs the treasury, Abraams is VP, which is fine, Beto is head of Homeland security, and Ilhan Omar becomes a Supreme Court justice.

Biden is a corporate shill. He will toe the Clinton/Obama neoliberal line. You should love that. Everything is financialized/monetized. The market, that has all information, yet is constantly wrong, decides everything.

He did suggest corporations wait a year before they start their buybacks, but they know that was just for public consumption and not to be taken seriously.

2 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

It leaked somewhere awhile back that Obama personally said he would intervene if Sanders was the nominee.

There's been lots of anecdotal evidence that Obama intervened to get Buttigieg and Klobuchar to drop out so all centrist Democrat (Republican) votes would go to Biden and squeeze out Sanders. I guess it also helped that they had their media arm paint Sanders interchangably as a communist or a Nazi. Only the people wanted Sanders, and you can't have them calling the shots.

Just now, sucit said:

I would go further than that and say they knew that Biden was unsuitable and were willing to have Trump over the possibility of Sanders. 

There ya go.

16 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, the very popular ex-president who spent the vast majority of his eight years in office polling below 50%.

True. Obama was a horrible president and Biden will be worse still. Then there's Trump who is the worst ever.

The one thing that may save Biden is that circumstances might become so awful that he and the Congress may be forced, against their will, to help make American's lives better.

12 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Sad for the Chinese but they will have another 4 years of Trump. There is virtually no one left in the USA that isn't acutely aware of Biden's failing mind. Even Xi knows that.

Probably. But he'll also know he can trade some flattery for trillions in concessions from Trump. Or just outright buy him for not much money. Assuming Vlad approves.

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

No.  As indicated, Trump doesn't know how to debate.  That's ok with his base, but not with anyone else.

That may very well be true, and I agree with you; but we may very well be wrong as we were before. The problem the Democrats face is they are being forced to vote for someone the nation didn't choose, who only is the nominee because the party undermined the leading candidate that the electorate wanted. So now, we have to vote for what we are against, rather than what we are for, becacause no one is actually for Joe Biden.

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

More on this issue. 

 

As sick and unpresidential as that behavior is I consider attempts at defending this equally sick. The 45 fans enable this moral rot at the top. 

 

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/28/exchange-aid-trump-wants-praise-governors-can-use-campaign-ads/

 

In Exchange for Aid, Trump Wants Praise From Governors He Can Use in Campaign Ads

 

 

AS HE INCREASINGLY tries to shovel blame for the shortage of medical supplies onto the governors of states with densely populated areas that are suffering the most from the coronavirus pandemic, President Donald Trump was asked on Friday what more he wants them to do. It was, he said, “very simple: I want them to be appreciative.”

 

Trump singled out two Democratic governors in particular for criticism: Jay Inslee of Washington and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.

 

I agree with all of that. That said, doesn't it bother you that you are being forced to choose a candidate that was not democratically chosen by the electorate and has said that he will step down after one term after choosing a female VP, (none of which I can think of that would be ready to be president, except Klobuchar, whom he won't choose).  Nina Turnerwould be a good choiceif he were going to be there 8 years, but he'll be dead by then.

Fauci's going to come out of this looking better than he deserves to. Like Biden he's been there for the past four decades and whatever was missing from national stockpiles predates this administration. That in no way holds this administration harmless for it's reckless disregard for human life by cutting needed funds for agencies specically meant to deal with global pandemics and replenish stockpiles which the previous administration failed to do.

10 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

You forget why Trump won in the first place. People don't want what Biden is offering.  They don't want someone who supports the status quo of more corporate welfare as a bribe to support the government's social programs. They are sick and tired of the modern agenda pushed by both sides of the political aisle.

 

Trump won because he promised something genuinely different. Less cooperation internationally. More concentration on domestic issues that matter. America first. The question now is whether or not, when push comes to shove, people are going to be willing to accept that Trump was not the answer to their prayers. That doesn't mean Biden is a good thing. He may be a good man, but he is most definitely not what Americans want as a president.

 

Biden as a candidate means that Trump is basically running unopposed in this race. He only has himself to beat. A few weeks ago I would have said this means 4 more years. This virus has thrown a wrench into everything though. Trump's bungling of this may be his undoing, but it remains to be seen which option Americans think is less palatable.

 

Correct, on all counts. Biden is like a poster boy for the Republican party, and as the old political saying goes, "when the race is between a Republican and a Republican, vote for the Republican".

When it comes down to it, you've got one candidate that is clearly addled versus another that is clearly a sociopath. That's why primaries are so important. Yet for one reason or another most voters ignore the primaries and let the media pick their candidates, based on ratings potential.

30 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

Please explain what alternative source of information on the impact of the virus in China the WHO should have relied on?

 

Let’s keep in mind here, the US had an intelligence officer in China whose specific job was to report health threats in China to Washington, or at least the US did have until Trump’s administration cancelled the post.

 

The US was informed of the threat on exactly the same day as was South Korea, the response of each government stands in stark contrast.

 

So Trump does what he always does, blames others for his own miserable failure.

You're probably talking about this guy:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/3/23/21190713/coronavirus-trump-china-cdc-embed-quick

27 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

I’m not sure Joe Biden knows what he stands for.

Of course he does. He stands for eveything that caused people to think voting for Trump might be a good idea. I'll guess we'll see if they still feel that way.  Ironically, they agree on about 80% of all policy.

22 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

ome people don't pay enough attention

Correct. That's why you're in this mess now.