Over and over again, political pundits and journalists make
constant reference to the Democrats’ “progressive base.” Without heavy
progressive turnout, we are told, the House won’t flip in 2018 and
Democrats will have to endure the most painful, humiliating victory
Tweetstorm from President Trump.
This is likely true, but it raises an important question: What exactly
is a “progressive” at this point?
The group of voters currently holding Democratic leaders (and let’s face
it, donors) hostage has made it clear that the party’s next nominee for
president must adopt certain policies, such as single-payer health care
and a nationwide $15 minimum wage, to secure their support. Such
policies will likely be sold by the press and Democratic leaders as a
“Strong Progressive Agenda,” or something similar.
More @ NRO
Retweeted by Justin Raimondo:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/jimasher/status/891627941360275457
Bannon wants a higher income tax on the wealthiest!
I actually think that's a good approach, though it's not ideal. It'll win more voters in the current environment
My primary focus is I think smaller businesses are better. Paul Craig Roberts recently labeled big gov and big business as "fascism" (in his latest article). Whatever terms work :p But smaller is better.
Centralised wealth redistribution is "socialism", but desiring a large middle class with many small businesses is not.
Bannon wants a higher income tax on the wealthiest!
DeleteRead a few articles on that and it was a surprise to me.
==============
a large middle class with many small businesses is not.
Reminds me of the many in Vietnam before '75 and now.
I don't know Vietnam's situation of course. I love the little shops you post pictures of, but they'll be wiped out by competition as Vietnam develops. I somewhat like the Internet; I like greater efficiency which ultimately leads to greater wealth.
DeleteCapitalism is curious, bc it clearly works at times; but it trends towards monopoly and otherwise towards an over concentration of wealth, expansion outside borders, and centralisation of that wealth and power.
Amazon is booming in part because it has pursued growth at any price, even at a loss. That's been great for customers, but Amazon now supposedly helps the NSA etc. surveil Americans.
I can readily post the target of my anger, but it's certainly not easy to post what the solution is. I have my little heroes, but in Europe where distributists are read, they're portrayed as drunken peasants. In the US, I don't think Southern Agrarians are even much read outside Abbeville. My ideas aren't respected, haha.
The AltRight doesn't like my dream of a state that aims to preserve itself, ruled by an elite that doesn't value greed above all else. AltRight mostly seems to want to recreate Rome.
One day I'm going to surprise people with a new website with new ideas, or rather old ideas that just aren't heard much today.
I don't know Vietnam's situation of course. I love the little shops you post pictures of, but they'll be wiped out by competition as Vietnam develops.
DeleteYou would think so, but since 2005 there have been many large stores which have opened and where many go for higher ticket items, but I see very little difference between the Ma & PA on each street from 1967 to 2017. One item which enables this is that their stores are also their houses.
They might have limited opportunity, and the Communists might be doing something. I was reading earlier about North Korea: It intentionally rejected capitalism out of fear it could threaten the power of the central government, open society to external threat.
DeleteWe tend to think, "Communism is bad", but there might be some lesson to be learned. Clearly China has used trade advantageously, grown at a ridiculous pace, sucked US and European capital into China. So, government seems to work when capable people run it.
That's not to say I want "communism" or "socialism" but that there might be a lesson here. As the Chronicles group, others like to say: Make the economy work for society, not society for the economy.
-
The ideal of England is a society of little shops, presumably with foreign colonies supplying the raw materials which are then manufactured and resold in the English shops.
Today we see all of that gutted.
It's very sad seeing the little Southern towns gutted. I wonder if some sort of government intervention isn't justifiable to save a bit of a downtown? I just can't picture how that'd be done.
I've said before that one idea is to offer businesses no taxes, other than user fees. Only tax personal consumption (especially luxury items) and foreign trade. That might work to somehow give local stores an edge.
Many were gutted by Wal-Mart when it brought in Chinese-made goods. And Wal-Mart sold at a loss until it had destroyed all the local competition, then it would raise profit margins.
I'm a believer government action can work. The right law just needs to be figured.
Whatever the case, I'm excited by how a, um, downtown area in SC is likely to boom due to industry moving there. It had become almost a ghost town. For Christmas one year, I bought a liquor at a store (for a present). The shop was closed the next year. And the cooking store recently closed. Everything was closing, but now industry is coming. Lifeblood should return then.
It's very sad seeing the little Southern towns gutted.
DeleteIt's unfathomable to me. It's like tearing out the heart of the South.