It's worth pointing out that communists went to the gas chambers under Hitler's regime, and that Hitler spoke disparagingly of communism in Mein Kampf. The Soviets used to liken the United States to the Nazis on the grounds that both practiced capitalism, even though both sides literally waged war against each other. Meanwhile, the United States used to think of Nazism and communism as two sides of the same coin, even though both sides hated each other for unrelated reasons.
It's worth pointing out that communists went to the gas chambers under Hitler's regime, and that Hitler spoke disparagingly of communism in Mein Kampf. The Soviets used to liken the United States to the Nazis on the grounds that both practiced capitalism, even though both sides literally waged war against each other. Meanwhile, the United States used to think of Nazism and communism as two sides of the same coin, even though both sides hated each other for unrelated reasons.
Worth a read. The United State's laws in regards to African-Americans were direct influences on Nazi policy makers:
North Korea's Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is not really a Democratic Republic either.
Yes, authoritarianism and nationalism are bad.
Socialism = state owning the means of production.
When the state impose how the means of production will produce via regulations, is socialism and yes, every country in the world have some degree of socialism. Unless private cities become "real".
Socialism refers to a broad range of philosophies, from European-style socialism to Karl Marx's communism. Only true communism involves public control of the means of production. The common thread is that all of them involve a "check" on the free market's power. For communism, that means the elimination of the free market, but for normal variants of socialism like those in the U.S. and Europe, it involves mostly free markets combined with regulations to protect the public good and/or public financing of things that are important for the people, but which the free market does not provide adequately. Environmental regulations, food and drug laws, and public funding for schools, infrastructure, and law enforcement are good examples of socialism in democracies.
Socialism by itself isn't really a useful term in my opinion, since it can refer to so many different things. It's a little too broad to generalize about it.
If the state prohibits me of owning a .30-06 semi auto rifle to defend myself from Land Workers Movement(MST) terrorists , forces me to hire based on affirmative action, forces me to submit to a draconian labor law, take a greater profit share via taxation than any other partner etc he is acting like the owner of my business(doesn't matter if i own the business on paper). He is saying how i should protect my business, who i should hire, in what therms i should hire, how i should produce, what i can produce and taking more from profits than any shareholder. This is clearly socialism...
Government in most countries have more control over companies than the majority of shareholders. Fabianism is a type of socialism who wanna gradually enlarge the power of the state and gradually take over the means of production ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society )
All countries in the world have some degree of socialism.
PS : Who will regulate the regulators? Who will prevent then from regulating in self benefit?
That's...pretty crazy to decide to dictate a single companies pay rate through law. I can think of about a million ways this would blow up in their face.
It's only slightly less crazy than the BEZOS act he introduced, that wants to tax employers for all the money their employees spend on federal benefits. Great idea, make employees who are on benefits cost extra money to employ. That certainly won't have the effect of making those on benefits the last in line for any potential job, trapping them into welfare by raising the bar to get out of it.
It's also pretty easy for Sanders to introduce these types of bills now, when he knows they will fail, rather than in the years when he had enough democratic seats to actually give it a snowballs chance in hell.
It's only slightly less crazy than the BEZOS act he introduced, that wants to tax employers for all the money their employees spend on federal benefits. Great idea, make employees who are on benefits cost extra money to employ. That certainly won't have the effect of making those on benefits the last in line for any potential job, trapping them into welfare by raising the bar to get out of it.
I'm not familiar with the law, but that sounds like a law a Republican lawmaker might introduce in an attempt to stop companies like Walmart from trying to get their employees on food stamps and welfare, and therefore decrease the number of people getting on public benefits.
4 - Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race. 5 - Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore, 6 - we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities. 16 - We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
Some progressive points
11 - Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery. 12 - In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits. 14 - We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries. 15 - We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare. 19 - We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order. 20 - The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program,
Some other points are autoritarian, not left or right. The classification of national socialism depends mainly of the definition. Hans Hermann hoppe definition? Left, revolutionary VS counter revolutionary? Extreme right. Efficience VS equality? Right. Since the definition of HHH is barely used on Academia, nazism is right wing by most definitions. Is right wing socialism but still right wing.
Anyway, the nazis only managed to raise to the power thanks to the fell of monarchy. Monarchy is less awful than democracy. An empreror can be autoritarian? Yes, but more authoritarian than Napoleon, Hitler or Stalin who rise to the power after the monarchy collapsed? Certain not. Hans Adam of Liechtenstein is much better than any president.
I really miss Dom Pedro II. The last Emperor. He was much better than the Workalcoholic Dilma or Lula. This guy
Mr. Sanders still needs to define the phrase "living wage". Against whose standards would that apply?
Consider a couple, both making $8 per hour--their base monthly pay would be $2560 or about $2265 after deducting Social Security and Medicare (their FWH is negligible); I am figuring they are keeping 0.885 of their base pay. A one-bedroom, long-term hotel suite with all bills paid will probably run them $300 per week (so $1200 per month). Let's give them one car with a monthly payment of $250, insurance on the car at $125, exactly one mobile phone line which they share at $50 per month, and let's give them a food budget of $125 per week (so $500 per month). All totaled, their monthly bills would come to $2125, so they have $140 left over each month--most of that money probably goes towards gas for the car.
Is that "living"? They have shelter with air conditioning and heat in the winter, indoor plumbing with hot water as needed, electricity, the ability to cook fresh food on a daily basis, and access to washers and dryers for their clothes. They are able to pay their monthly expenses and do not have to borrow money to do so. They clearly aren't going to get ahead but they aren't going to starve or be homeless, either. Technically, they have everything we normally think we need to "live" in the 21st Century (most of those long-term rooms have Internet access built in, but this couple probably doesn't own a computer, unless someone gave them a hand-me-down). Most people would not be happy with that life but it does qualify as "living". Their conditions are significantly better than living conditions for most people in the world today.
Now let's throw a child into this scenario. Obviously, $8 per hour won't suffice--school clothes, school supplies, possibly day care, etc. What if one of them picks up another part-time job at $8, though? An extra 20 hours per week would drop another $566 into their pockets, which might be enough to keep all the bills paid even with the extra school-related expenses.
I suspect this would not qualify as "living" to Mr. Sanders, though. He probably envisions the couple being able to own two late-model cars, in a house (with all the associated utility and tax expenses), with the ability to dine out once or twice each week, etc. Compared to the first couple this is not "living" but "luxury". You don't *need* those extra things to "live". Anyway, that is why the phrase "living wage" is vacuous--in and of itself it doesn't mean anything and has no base definition. I didn't even take into account the fact that being able to "live" in Houston has a different base price as compared to being able to "live" in New York City.
It isn't 1953 any more, Bernie. The vast majority of us cannot afford to have only one person in the household bringing in all the income and using that to build towards the future while putting children through school, much less college. Only 2.3% of hourly wage earners are at or below the Federal minimum wage, in any event, so raising the minimum wage would not positively impact that many people.
A wealthy Progressive is a person who is not living according to their own principles.
Mr. Sanders still needs to define the phrase "living wage". Against whose standards would that apply?
Consider a couple, both making $8 per hour--their base monthly pay would be $2560 or about $2265 after deducting Social Security and Medicare (their FWH is negligible); I am figuring they are keeping 0.885 of their base pay. A one-bedroom, long-term hotel suite with all bills paid will probably run them $300 per week (so $1200 per month). Let's give them one car with a monthly payment of $250, insurance on the car at $125, exactly one mobile phone line which they share at $50 per month, and let's give them a food budget of $125 per week (so $500 per month). All totaled, their monthly bills would come to $2125, so they have $140 left over each month--most of that money probably goes towards gas for the car.
Is that "living"? They have shelter with air conditioning and heat in the winter, indoor plumbing with hot water as needed, electricity, the ability to cook fresh food on a daily basis, and access to washers and dryers for their clothes. They are able to pay their monthly expenses and do not have to borrow money to do so. They clearly aren't going to get ahead but they aren't going to starve or be homeless, either. Technically, they have everything we normally think we need to "live" in the 21st Century (most of those long-term rooms have Internet access built in, but this couple probably doesn't own a computer, unless someone gave them a hand-me-down). Most people would not be happy with that life but it does qualify as "living". Their conditions are significantly better than living conditions for most people in the world today.
Now let's throw a child into this scenario. Obviously, $8 per hour won't suffice--school clothes, school supplies, possibly day care, etc. What if one of them picks up another part-time job at $8, though? An extra 20 hours per week would drop another $566 into their pockets, which might be enough to keep all the bills paid even with the extra school-related expenses.
I suspect this would not qualify as "living" to Mr. Sanders, though. He probably envisions the couple being able to own two late-model cars, in a house (with all the associated utility and tax expenses), with the ability to dine out once or twice each week, etc. Compared to the first couple this is not "living" but "luxury". You don't *need* those extra things to "live". Anyway, that is why the phrase "living wage" is vacuous--in and of itself it doesn't mean anything and has no base definition. I didn't even take into account the fact that being able to "live" in Houston has a different base price as compared to being able to "live" in New York City.
It isn't 1953 any more, Bernie. The vast majority of us cannot afford to have only one person in the household bringing in all the income and using that to build towards the future while putting children through school, much less college. Only 2.3% of hourly wage earners are at or below the Federal minimum wage, in any event, so raising the minimum wage would not positively impact that many people.
A wealthy Progressive is a person who is not living according to their own principles.
I think you are vastly overestimating how many 3 person familes are living in expenses paid long-term hotel suites. I'm not disputing your numbers, I'm disputing the reality of this being a feasible situation for the vast majority of people.
Mr. Sanders still needs to define the phrase "living wage". Against whose standards would that apply?
Consider a couple, both making $8 per hour--their base monthly pay would be $2560 or about $2265 after deducting Social Security and Medicare (their FWH is negligible); I am figuring they are keeping 0.885 of their base pay. A one-bedroom, long-term hotel suite with all bills paid will probably run them $300 per week (so $1200 per month). Let's give them one car with a monthly payment of $250, insurance on the car at $125, exactly one mobile phone line which they share at $50 per month, and let's give them a food budget of $125 per week (so $500 per month). All totaled, their monthly bills would come to $2125, so they have $140 left over each month--most of that money probably goes towards gas for the car.
For a lot of us, living is a lot cheaper than that.
Across PA from major cities to the boonies i've never paid more than 800$ a month for 2/3 bedroom apartments or houses. I never live in bad areas.
But I understand cost of living is higher elsewhere, but those places typically do get paid higher wages or have higher state minimums already.
Maaaaaybe we should be skeptical of the list, given that #9 asserts "All Citizens must have equal rights and obligations".
Do you think that was upheld by the Nazi party when put in place?
I hate using wikipedia as source, but the second paragraph on the topic essentially says "This started from a concept of anti communist collectivism... and quickly abandoned maybe core principles out of need"
By WW2, the NSDAP was far more corportist than socialist.
Typically, I think the misconception comes from the fact that the state was also very authoritarian. So there was necessarily a great deal of control of the economy by Germany. It wasnt nationalized necessarily though, and so wasnt necessarily what we consider to be central planning socialism per se.
Maaaaaybe we should be skeptical of the list, given that #9 asserts "All Citizens must have equal rights and obligations".
Do you think that was upheld by the Nazi party when put in place?
I hate using wikipedia as source, but the second paragraph on the topic essentially says "This started from a concept of anti communist collectivism... and quickly abandoned maybe core principles out of need"
By WW2, the NSDAP was far more corportist than socialist.
Typically, I think the misconception comes from the fact that the state was also very authoritarian. So there was necessarily a great deal of control of the economy by Germany. It wasnt nationalized necessarily though, and so wasnt necessarily what we consider to be central planning socialism per se.
#9 is in line with Nazi ideology, considering that #4 states "Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race."
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
Mr. Sanders still needs to define the phrase "living wage". Against whose standards would that apply?
Consider a couple, both making $8 per hour--their base monthly pay would be $2560 or about $2265 after deducting Social Security and Medicare (their FWH is negligible); I am figuring they are keeping 0.885 of their base pay. A one-bedroom, long-term hotel suite with all bills paid will probably run them $300 per week (so $1200 per month). Let's give them one car with a monthly payment of $250, insurance on the car at $125, exactly one mobile phone line which they share at $50 per month, and let's give them a food budget of $125 per week (so $500 per month). All totaled, their monthly bills would come to $2125, so they have $140 left over each month--most of that money probably goes towards gas for the car.
Is that "living"? They have shelter with air conditioning and heat in the winter, indoor plumbing with hot water as needed, electricity, the ability to cook fresh food on a daily basis, and access to washers and dryers for their clothes. They are able to pay their monthly expenses and do not have to borrow money to do so. They clearly aren't going to get ahead but they aren't going to starve or be homeless, either. Technically, they have everything we normally think we need to "live" in the 21st Century (most of those long-term rooms have Internet access built in, but this couple probably doesn't own a computer, unless someone gave them a hand-me-down). Most people would not be happy with that life but it does qualify as "living". Their conditions are significantly better than living conditions for most people in the world today.
Now let's throw a child into this scenario. Obviously, $8 per hour won't suffice--school clothes, school supplies, possibly day care, etc. What if one of them picks up another part-time job at $8, though? An extra 20 hours per week would drop another $566 into their pockets, which might be enough to keep all the bills paid even with the extra school-related expenses.
I suspect this would not qualify as "living" to Mr. Sanders, though. He probably envisions the couple being able to own two late-model cars, in a house (with all the associated utility and tax expenses), with the ability to dine out once or twice each week, etc. Compared to the first couple this is not "living" but "luxury". You don't *need* those extra things to "live". Anyway, that is why the phrase "living wage" is vacuous--in and of itself it doesn't mean anything and has no base definition. I didn't even take into account the fact that being able to "live" in Houston has a different base price as compared to being able to "live" in New York City.
It isn't 1953 any more, Bernie. The vast majority of us cannot afford to have only one person in the household bringing in all the income and using that to build towards the future while putting children through school, much less college. Only 2.3% of hourly wage earners are at or below the Federal minimum wage, in any event, so raising the minimum wage would not positively impact that many people.
A wealthy Progressive is a person who is not living according to their own principles.
I dunno where you live, but that couple better hope they don't get sick, or their baby get sick. All it takes is one illness to wipe this couple out. Also, the cheapest motel (not even a suite) where I used to live in NJ was $60 a night. And that was an okay place, nothing to brag about- no internet of wifi, a double bed and a shower.
Depending on where you live, I will grant you some places may be cheaper. Also, most employees pay other taxes that come directly out of your paycheck. FICA, sometimes union dues (depending on where you work- my dad had to pay them. I paid $10 a paycheck for mine, but I was only part time.) Then you add Federal Tax, State Tax and sometimes county or city tax (depending on where you live, again) plus other fees and taxes.
Again, the minute one of this couple gets sick, it's all over. Any money they had saved is wiped out by a visit to a hospital or urgent care center. Medications cost more, and if they are out of work due to sickness, you generally don't get paid for that time. So there goes more money. And the stress of trying to figure out how to afford stuff now means stress which means a greater chance of getting sick.
There was a documentary showing what it is like to live in such circumstances. I wish I remembered the name of it, but this guy and his girlfriend were wiped out monetarily by a trip to the hospital. One of them got sick and they had to pay out of pocket (because they didn't have healthcare), which meant they paid through the nose for everything. and I mean *everything*. Also, people who are poor tend to eat not as healthy food because it's cheaper. Also, most hotel suites I've been in are not ones you can cook in. They lack pots or pans. What you want is more of an studio apartment that has an actual kitchen rather than a "kitchenette".
Plus, you also have to deal with a landlord, who may not be the best human in the world, either.
All I can point out is that your example is highly flawed.
#9 is in line with Nazi ideology, considering that #4 states "Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race."
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
I was thinking less Jewish, more handicapped individuals - who were also massacred in concentration camps due to be "inferior". In many (most) cases, these were full blooded German citizens.
Anyways. I think we're largely agreeing. Nationalist Socialist's economic model (how it played out) wasnt socialism really. It was definitely collectivist though, and in that way, shares a great deal in common with Communism.
And one other thing I forgot to add... laundry. You have to do laundry. That means going to a laundromat and dropping $10 (at least) on laundry machines and dryers. Sometimes more. If you have a child, that means buying diapers, not just clothes. And diapers are EXPEN$IVE. They are probably one of the most expensive things you can buy. They can't get reused if you buy disposables, and cloth diaper laundry services are also very expensive. And formula. (if you're gonna breast-feed you are going to need additional stuff like a pumping machine, which also costs money.
#9 is in line with Nazi ideology, considering that #4 states "Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race."
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
I was thinking less Jewish, more handicapped individuals - who were also massacred in concentration camps due to be "inferior". In many (most) cases, these were full blooded German citizens.
Anyways. I think we're largely agreeing. Nationalist Socialist's economic model (how it played out) wasnt socialism really. It was definitely collectivist though, and in that way, shares a great deal in common with Communism.
So were the mentally ill. They were considered "unfit". And Homosexuals got their own stars---but theirs were pink!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800142/ "Much less well known is the German genocide of other groups, including gypsies, homosexuals, and individuals with physical deformities, mental retardation, and serious psychiatric disorders, especially schizophrenia."
#9 is in line with Nazi ideology, considering that #4 states "Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race."
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
I was thinking less Jewish, more handicapped individuals - who were also massacred in concentration camps due to be "inferior". In many (most) cases, these were full blooded German citizens.
Anyways. I think we're largely agreeing. Nationalist Socialist's economic model (how it played out) wasnt socialism really. It was definitely collectivist though, and in that way, shares a great deal in common with Communism.
So were the mentally ill. They were considered "unfit". And Homosexuals got their own stars---but theirs were pink!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800142/ "Much less well known is the German genocide of other groups, including gypsies, homosexuals, and individuals with physical deformities, mental retardation, and serious psychiatric disorders, especially schizophrenia."
I agree, but what is the difference between blaming jews from everything wrong in the world to blaming white man?
#9 is in line with Nazi ideology, considering that #4 states "Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race."
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
I was thinking less Jewish, more handicapped individuals - who were also massacred in concentration camps due to be "inferior". In many (most) cases, these were full blooded German citizens.
Anyways. I think we're largely agreeing. Nationalist Socialist's economic model (how it played out) wasnt socialism really. It was definitely collectivist though, and in that way, shares a great deal in common with Communism.
So were the mentally ill. They were considered "unfit". And Homosexuals got their own stars---but theirs were pink!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800142/ "Much less well known is the German genocide of other groups, including gypsies, homosexuals, and individuals with physical deformities, mental retardation, and serious psychiatric disorders, especially schizophrenia."
I agree, but what is the difference between blaming jews from everything wrong in the world to blaming white man?
The Liberal government of Ontario attempted to do a study on living wages/guaranteed income in the province and began a pilot project in the waning months of their rule to see how the program would play out. There was some negative backlash when it was first announced.
The program was actually benefiting the people involved until the newly elected Conservative government cancelled it early and without warning.
That hasn't stopped both businesses and other support groups from taking the information gathered in the short life of the study in an attempt to come up with their own solutions.
I personally believe a high minimum wage is bad for an economy. As I mentioned before, labour costs is one of the few things a company has control over well selling a good or a service. Forcing the company to increase all of its workers salaries at once will increase the cost products served. In the old thread I actually gave examples of this, in real time when Ontario's minimum wage increased from $11.25 to $14 an hour.
Also things that are cost by supply and demand (such as Rent and Housing) will also increase as landlords know new tenants will have more disposable income to bid on places, especially if the housing market is tight.
That doesn't mean I do not think companies shouldn't pay their employees (or a majority of their employees) a living wage. Mathsorcerer ask who determines what a "living wage" is? Well studies have been done. Here's how Ottawa's was calculated. I personally believe that number is too high, although that may have to do with the child care component and hydro (which I receive for free/don't pay for).
Should everyone who has a job have make the living wage? Obviously not. Students, semi-retired and newly hired employees should start lower than a calculated living wage. In Ottawa, it is +$4/hour which is significant. However, I do believe an employer should strive to pay those who rely on the job a living wage.
IMO, full time employment should be Living Wage where Part Time employment should be (or start at) minimum wage. A company should be rewarded (lower taxes) for employing more full-time employees making the set living wage based on the amount of gross profit it has made in the calendar year. Companies that fail to pay their employers this wage would have to pay a higher tax to offset the costs of social programs. This will help with regional inflation and keep costs down while paying employees enough to actually survive while maintaining lower stress. Whatever all these variables are can be calculated by people much smarter than me though. It doesn't hurt to start having the discussion with businesses, politicians and economist
And one other thing I forgot to add... laundry. You have to do laundry. That means going to a laundromat and dropping $10 (at least) on laundry machines and dryers. Sometimes more. If you have a child, that means buying diapers, not just clothes. And diapers are EXPEN$IVE. They are probably one of the most expensive things you can buy. They can't get reused if you buy disposables, and cloth diaper laundry services are also very expensive. And formula. (if you're gonna breast-feed you are going to need additional stuff like a pumping machine, which also costs money.
Car repairs. Assuming your car CAN be fixed. Anytime in the last 5 years I have saved up any substantial amount of money, a $500 to $1000 car repair came just around the corner. So when my car most recently shit the bed, I didn't even bother. I am lucky enough that I landed a job that just so happens to give me a straight-shot 10 minute bus ride practically to the front door of my work 4 days a week, and I take Uber the 5th. I am EXTREMELY lucky in this regard, and can now afford to just let some money pile up before getting another car, because I don't need it. Most people are not in this camp.
Emergency Grants to Help California Wildfire First Responders and Victims
https://broadwaycares.org/wildfires2018/?fbclid=IwAR37h-UC5S0Vb9k4fraHKFJ07ntTa847b-FUbJMu8p2gpLcvbW4td-5k9hQ Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS is awarding $225,000 in emergency grants to immediately help those battling and affected by the historically devastating wildfires spreading in California. On behalf of the entire theatre community – those onstage, offstage and in the audience – Broadway Cares is providing a $100,000 grant to Los Angeles Fire Department Foundation, $25,000 to Los Angeles County Animal Care Foundation and $100,000 to The Actors Fund to augment the emergency assistance being provided to entertainment industry and performing arts professionals across California. Good, since Trump seems to want to give CA a middle finger. :P
Official: Michael Avenatti in Los Angeles police custody
Avenatti was always headed for a crash and burn. His only redeeming quality was that he seemed to revel in rolling around in the same muck Trump does and was able to engage him at his level. Guess what?? I believe his accuser. See how easy that is?? Now watch me not engage in conspiracy theories about how he was set up by Trump or Republicans. Sounds like he's in a world of trouble. Really stupid of him to engage in anything remotely like this kind of behavior with that kind of magnifying glass on him.
Also, I have said before and I'll say it again, I don't even run the RISK of running a male candidate on the Democratic ticket in 2020. Because at this point it seems like this kind of story coming out is about a 50/50 proposition. I know it isn't that high, but some days it seems like it.
Curious. Vegetarianism and veganism is usually more associated with left-leaning types. I suppose the influence of vegetarianism among the Nazi leadership might account for it. Funnily enough, it wasn't a few weeks ago that we had some white nationalists proudly drinking lots of milk to boast of their lactose tolerance--vegetarian, perhaps, but definitely not vegan.
I suppose there's no reason white nationalists would have a unified ideology. Maybe it's just that white nationalism has grown enough that there are lots of different strains of it.
It is perhaps worth noting that the drive for purity in nazism also drove research into smoking because of fears of potential genetic mutation after long term exposure to tobacco. That research demonstrated that it could have harmful effects, and made the third reich a pioneer in anti-smoking campaigns- though it was characterised as a habit of Jews & undesirables.
This article has the stinger that:
"After the end of the war and the Nazi collapse, tobacco became widely available once more. The US even shipped 69,000 tonnes of it to Germany in 1949 as part of the Marshall Plan – to the delight of American cigarette manufacturers."
Comments
North Korea's Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is not really a Democratic Republic either.
Yes, authoritarianism and nationalism are bad.
https://aeon.co/ideas/why-the-nazis-studied-american-race-laws-for-inspiration
When the state impose how the means of production will produce via regulations, is socialism and yes, every country in the world have some degree of socialism. Unless private cities become "real".
Socialism by itself isn't really a useful term in my opinion, since it can refer to so many different things. It's a little too broad to generalize about it.
Government in most countries have more control over companies than the majority of shareholders. Fabianism is a type of socialism who wanna gradually enlarge the power of the state and gradually take over the means of production ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society )
All countries in the world have some degree of socialism.
PS : Who will regulate the regulators? Who will prevent then from regulating in self benefit?
https://medium.com/the-mission/here-are-5-unbelievably-toxic-things-good-parents-never-do-1fc3477657c
It's only slightly less crazy than the BEZOS act he introduced, that wants to tax employers for all the money their employees spend on federal benefits. Great idea, make employees who are on benefits cost extra money to employ. That certainly won't have the effect of making those on benefits the last in line for any potential job, trapping them into welfare by raising the bar to get out of it.
It's also pretty easy for Sanders to introduce these types of bills now, when he knows they will fail, rather than in the years when he had enough democratic seats to actually give it a snowballs chance in hell.
Obvious political stagecraft is obvious.
A little background on what they stood for, including nationalization of industries, welfare expansion, and other quintessential socialist ideals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program#The_25-point_Program_of_the_NSDAP
Trump: "Nobody supports our troops more than me folks*, believe me" *Weather permitting *Current & former troops not included
Pretty funny.
4 - Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race.
5 - Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.
The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore,
6 - we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.
16 - We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
Some progressive points
11 - Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.
12 - In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
14 - We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
15 - We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
19 - We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order.
20 - The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program,
Some other points are autoritarian, not left or right. The classification of national socialism depends mainly of the definition. Hans Hermann hoppe definition? Left, revolutionary VS counter revolutionary? Extreme right. Efficience VS equality? Right. Since the definition of HHH is barely used on Academia, nazism is right wing by most definitions. Is right wing socialism but still right wing.
Anyway, the nazis only managed to raise to the power thanks to the fell of monarchy. Monarchy is less awful than democracy. An empreror can be autoritarian? Yes, but more authoritarian than Napoleon, Hitler or Stalin who rise to the power after the monarchy collapsed? Certain not. Hans Adam of Liechtenstein is much better than any president.
I really miss Dom Pedro II. The last Emperor. He was much better than the Workalcoholic Dilma or Lula. This guy
Is much better than this
Consider a couple, both making $8 per hour--their base monthly pay would be $2560 or about $2265 after deducting Social Security and Medicare (their FWH is negligible); I am figuring they are keeping 0.885 of their base pay. A one-bedroom, long-term hotel suite with all bills paid will probably run them $300 per week (so $1200 per month). Let's give them one car with a monthly payment of $250, insurance on the car at $125, exactly one mobile phone line which they share at $50 per month, and let's give them a food budget of $125 per week (so $500 per month). All totaled, their monthly bills would come to $2125, so they have $140 left over each month--most of that money probably goes towards gas for the car.
Is that "living"? They have shelter with air conditioning and heat in the winter, indoor plumbing with hot water as needed, electricity, the ability to cook fresh food on a daily basis, and access to washers and dryers for their clothes. They are able to pay their monthly expenses and do not have to borrow money to do so. They clearly aren't going to get ahead but they aren't going to starve or be homeless, either. Technically, they have everything we normally think we need to "live" in the 21st Century (most of those long-term rooms have Internet access built in, but this couple probably doesn't own a computer, unless someone gave them a hand-me-down). Most people would not be happy with that life but it does qualify as "living". Their conditions are significantly better than living conditions for most people in the world today.
Now let's throw a child into this scenario. Obviously, $8 per hour won't suffice--school clothes, school supplies, possibly day care, etc. What if one of them picks up another part-time job at $8, though? An extra 20 hours per week would drop another $566 into their pockets, which might be enough to keep all the bills paid even with the extra school-related expenses.
I suspect this would not qualify as "living" to Mr. Sanders, though. He probably envisions the couple being able to own two late-model cars, in a house (with all the associated utility and tax expenses), with the ability to dine out once or twice each week, etc. Compared to the first couple this is not "living" but "luxury". You don't *need* those extra things to "live". Anyway, that is why the phrase "living wage" is vacuous--in and of itself it doesn't mean anything and has no base definition. I didn't even take into account the fact that being able to "live" in Houston has a different base price as compared to being able to "live" in New York City.
It isn't 1953 any more, Bernie. The vast majority of us cannot afford to have only one person in the household bringing in all the income and using that to build towards the future while putting children through school, much less college. Only 2.3% of hourly wage earners are at or below the Federal minimum wage, in any event, so raising the minimum wage would not positively impact that many people.
A wealthy Progressive is a person who is not living according to their own principles.
Across PA from major cities to the boonies i've never paid more than 800$ a month for 2/3 bedroom apartments or houses. I never live in bad areas.
But I understand cost of living is higher elsewhere, but those places typically do get paid higher wages or have higher state minimums already.
Do you think that was upheld by the Nazi party when put in place?
I hate using wikipedia as source, but the second paragraph on the topic essentially says "This started from a concept of anti communist collectivism... and quickly abandoned maybe core principles out of need"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
By WW2, the NSDAP was far more corportist than socialist.
Typically, I think the misconception comes from the fact that the state was also very authoritarian. So there was necessarily a great deal of control of the economy by Germany. It wasnt nationalized necessarily though, and so wasnt necessarily what we consider to be central planning socialism per se.
Since we're already here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany#Privatization_and_business_ties
Hitler also wrote it himself.
Wikipedia isn't always the best source, so here's an alternate one from the Hitler Historical Muesem.
http://www.hitler.org/writings/programme/
And yeah, I agree they didn't carry it out in practice, but the article you presented explains in part the complete impracticalities of isolating private industry while engaged on a war on all fronts.
Depending on where you live, I will grant you some places may be cheaper. Also, most employees pay other taxes that come directly out of your paycheck. FICA, sometimes union dues (depending on where you work- my dad had to pay them. I paid $10 a paycheck for mine, but I was only part time.) Then you add Federal Tax, State Tax and sometimes county or city tax (depending on where you live, again) plus other fees and taxes.
Again, the minute one of this couple gets sick, it's all over. Any money they had saved is wiped out by a visit to a hospital or urgent care center. Medications cost more, and if they are out of work due to sickness, you generally don't get paid for that time. So there goes more money. And the stress of trying to figure out how to afford stuff now means stress which means a greater chance of getting sick.
There was a documentary showing what it is like to live in such circumstances. I wish I remembered the name of it, but this guy and his girlfriend were wiped out monetarily by a trip to the hospital. One of them got sick and they had to pay out of pocket (because they didn't have healthcare), which meant they paid through the nose for everything. and I mean *everything*. Also, people who are poor tend to eat not as healthy food because it's cheaper. Also, most hotel suites I've been in are not ones you can cook in. They lack pots or pans. What you want is more of an studio apartment that has an actual kitchen rather than a "kitchenette".
Plus, you also have to deal with a landlord, who may not be the best human in the world, either.
All I can point out is that your example is highly flawed.
Anyways. I think we're largely agreeing. Nationalist Socialist's economic model (how it played out) wasnt socialism really. It was definitely collectivist though, and in that way, shares a great deal in common with Communism.
https://septentrio.uit.no/index.php/nordlit/article/viewFile/3638/3584
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800142/
"Much less well known is the German genocide of other groups, including gypsies, homosexuals, and individuals with physical deformities, mental retardation, and serious psychiatric disorders, especially schizophrenia."
Minimum Wage vs Living Wage vs Actual Wage.
The Liberal government of Ontario attempted to do a study on living wages/guaranteed income in the province and began a pilot project in the waning months of their rule to see how the program would play out. There was some negative backlash when it was first announced.The program was actually benefiting the people involved until the newly elected Conservative government cancelled it early and without warning.
That hasn't stopped both businesses and other support groups from taking the information gathered in the short life of the study in an attempt to come up with their own solutions.
I personally believe a high minimum wage is bad for an economy. As I mentioned before, labour costs is one of the few things a company has control over well selling a good or a service. Forcing the company to increase all of its workers salaries at once will increase the cost products served. In the old thread I actually gave examples of this, in real time when Ontario's minimum wage increased from $11.25 to $14 an hour.
Also things that are cost by supply and demand (such as Rent and Housing) will also increase as landlords know new tenants will have more disposable income to bid on places, especially if the housing market is tight.
That doesn't mean I do not think companies shouldn't pay their employees (or a majority of their employees) a living wage. Mathsorcerer ask who determines what a "living wage" is? Well studies have been done. Here's how Ottawa's was calculated. I personally believe that number is too high, although that may have to do with the child care component and hydro (which I receive for free/don't pay for).
Should everyone who has a job have make the living wage? Obviously not. Students, semi-retired and newly hired employees should start lower than a calculated living wage. In Ottawa, it is +$4/hour which is significant. However, I do believe an employer should strive to pay those who rely on the job a living wage.
IMO, full time employment should be Living Wage where Part Time employment should be (or start at) minimum wage. A company should be rewarded (lower taxes) for employing more full-time employees making the set living wage based on the amount of gross profit it has made in the calendar year. Companies that fail to pay their employers this wage would have to pay a higher tax to offset the costs of social programs. This will help with regional inflation and keep costs down while paying employees enough to actually survive while maintaining lower stress. Whatever all these variables are can be calculated by people much smarter than me though. It doesn't hurt to start having the discussion with businesses, politicians and economist
Trump aide Ricardel forced out after showdown with first lady
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-aide-ricardel-forced-showdown-melania-232418805.html?.tsrc=notification-brknewsI heard this was because Melania felt that Mira Ricardel was getting too close to her husband. In that, she was afraid they might be having an affair (or planning one).
13 news organizations back CNN lawsuit against White House
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/416647-13-news-organizations-issue-joint-statement-in-support-of-cnn?fbclid=IwAR3idBgd8AHfN3Z4zCXwA7QfsNmgikl4YWzIRnHNvMWPmKa39xhe4jTjyJ0Good. It's clear the tape of Jim Acosta was doctored, and I think Trump is turning America into a third-world Dictatorship.
Emergency Grants to Help California Wildfire First Responders and Victims
https://broadwaycares.org/wildfires2018/?fbclid=IwAR37h-UC5S0Vb9k4fraHKFJ07ntTa847b-FUbJMu8p2gpLcvbW4td-5k9hQBroadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS is awarding $225,000 in emergency grants to immediately help those battling and affected by the historically devastating wildfires spreading in California.
On behalf of the entire theatre community – those onstage, offstage and in the audience – Broadway Cares is providing a $100,000 grant to Los Angeles Fire Department Foundation, $25,000 to Los Angeles County Animal Care Foundation and $100,000 to The Actors Fund to augment the emergency assistance being provided to entertainment industry and performing arts professionals across California.
Good, since Trump seems to want to give CA a middle finger. :P
Official: Michael Avenatti in Los Angeles police custody
https://www.yahoo.com/news/official-michael-avenatti-los-angeles-police-custody-231930734--politics.html?.tsrc=notification-brknewsFor Domestic violence. I can't say I'm surprised. I wish I could say I was surprised.
Donald Trump becomes even more petulant and erratic after midterms make him look like a loser
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/donald-trump-becomes-even-petulant-erratic-midterms-make-look-like-loser/?fbclid=IwAR2U8eGHYpwDN0knNtD3GhJTotW0LsUEidsqGDsbpfcCtmBqaIIzC4ZfXtoFor a man who hates looking bad, who is all about superficial realities, it's not really a surprise. He didn't want to go to the ceremony in France because it was raining, and he was concerned that his hair would look bad. And then he yelled at his staff for not warning him how bad his not going would make him look. Did re really NEED to be told that?
Florida Senator who tweets Bible verse to defend his recount conspiracy is owned on Twitter
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/14/1812759/-Florida-Senator-who-tweets-bible-verse-to-defend-his-recount-conspiracy-is-owned-on-Twitter?detail=emaildkreThis really made me laugh. Spot-on and to the point.
Trigger-happy Michigan firefighter sentenced for shooting at black teen asking for directions
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/13/1812605/-Trigger-happy-Michigan-firefighter-sentenced-for-shooting-at-black-teen-asking-for-directions?detail=emaildkreSeven months after shooting at a teenager seeking directions to school, a former Detroit firefighter was sentenced to a minimum of four years in prison on Tuesday. Jeffrey Zeigler, of Rochester Hills, Michigan, was convicted in October for his gun-wielding attack on Brennan Walker, then 14, who knocked on his door after getting lost in Zeigler’s neighborhood on April 12.
He got 4 years. Sure hope he learns a lesson from this. And not "Next time, don't miss".
Twitter users slam dunk on Marco Rubio after he fumbles sports analogy about Florida vote count
In America, we love us some sports analogies. And if you get them wrong, you will be twitter-shamed!https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/14/1812772/-Twitter-users-slam-dunk-on-Marco-Rubio-after-he-makes-hilariously-wrong-sports-analogy-about-Florida?detail=emaildkre
American officials have heard audio of journalist's murder, but White House refuses to take action
Wonder if it has something to do with Jared being in the pocket of the Saudis, like they claimed...https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/13/1812554/-American-officials-have-heard-audio-of-journalist-s-murder-but-White-House-refuses-to-take-action?detail=emaildkre
Republican loser sues newly elected Latina legislator, claiming she wasn't born in the US (she was)
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/12/1812343/-Republican-loser-sues-newly-elected-Latina-legislator-claiming-she-wasn-t-born-in-the-US-she-was?detail=emaildkreWhat won't these losers stoop to?
Donald Trump gets back to the United States, and someone explains what they were saying in Europe
So he threatened France. Of course.https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/13/1812487/-Donald-Trump-gets-back-to-the-United-States-and-someone-explains-what-they-were-saying-in-Europe?detail=emaildkre
Donald Trump delivers a box of French whine
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/13/1812495/-Donald-Trump-delivers-a-box-of-French-whine?detail=emaildkreTrump claims he was told Marine One couldn't fly in the rain. Which would make it a bad choice... for marines!
College degree holders increasingly vote Democratic
This was an interesting article. Apparently, this is why Republicans did so bad in the election despite their Gerrymandering.https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/12/1812347/-College-degree-holders-increasingly-vote-Democratic?detail=emaildkre
The 2020 electorate will be even younger, better-educated, and more diverse than this year's
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/12/1812328/-The-2020-electorate-will-be-even-younger-better-educated-and-more-diverse-than-this-year-sAccording the article above, bye bye Republicans, bye-bey!
Also, I have said before and I'll say it again, I don't even run the RISK of running a male candidate on the Democratic ticket in 2020. Because at this point it seems like this kind of story coming out is about a 50/50 proposition. I know it isn't that high, but some days it seems like it.
This article has the stinger that:
"After the end of the war and the Nazi collapse, tobacco became widely available once more. The US even shipped 69,000 tonnes of it to Germany in 1949 as part of the Marshall Plan – to the delight of American cigarette manufacturers."
https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3d78d24a-c068-11df-8a81-00144feab49a