NY Governor Andrew Cuomo: America was never that great

[Richard]

I wonder who his target is and if the little girl winning has an influence,as in gearing up or pandering towards the socialist movement.

[Canadian Visitor]

I'm interested in you expanding on your last paragraph. What policies, etc..? I would say that serious slippage began under Woodrow Wilson's nods to corporatism and was expanded under FDR's combined corporatism and undermining of the Constitution but I would like your take on whatever happened 30 years ago. Also, why do you think U.S. press freedom misses the mark? I have some ideas about that but they would probably apply to most other western countries.

Last part first.

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

The above is a link to the press freedom index. It current ranks the United States 45th in the world.

Canada is 18th, Norway and Sweden are #1 and 2; the U.S. is ranked below Romania, and Namibia. Not exactly stellar.

Underlying Info is here: https://pressfreedomtracker.us/

****

In respect of the 'downward slide', I referenced a series of outcomes which might be deemed important and/or useful comparitors to different nations in an earlier paragraph.

We could have fun deciding what measures to use and how to weight them, but if you simply ask about life expectancy, infant mortality, median household income, social mobility, rates of post-secondary education, level of violent crime, economic freedoms, political freedoms or press freedoms, the US is not a top 5 finisher in any category.


I would suggest that most of these items have deteriorated in either relative or absolute terms since the Reagan era began.

So, as an example, rates of post-secondary education the United States have not actually fallen since 1980; what has happened is that the United States which has been a leader in this area, stopped growing access to post-secondary as the same rate as peer-group nations.

This is largely a function of higher tuitions, which are a function of lower levels of government funding, and in some cases de-regulation of tuition.

It is secondarily an issue that there hasn't been the same improvement as peer-group nations in secondary or High School graduation rates.

That's partly a total funding issue, partly a how funding is distributed issue, but also an issue of how academic time and money is invested; its also impacted by over all levels of poverty.

We could pick at some of those other items in a similar fashion.

If you look at the United States in the 20th C, I think could make a good case that the standard of living of the majority of Americans [[particularly white Americans), relative to global peers peaked around the late 1960s.

We could debate the exact causes, and surely we can admit there were a variety of benefits from the end of WWII, including the baby boom that helped foster a period of economic expansion.

But we could also note that this was a period of unprecedented investment in science, post-secondary, education, highways, public housing [[still shiny and new), and expanded government health coverages like medicare and medicaid that reduced poverty or mitigated its worst effects for ever more people.

From Reagan on, we have a period of reduced social investment. Public housing left to rot, ever more potholes on roads, soaring tuitions, and no significant expansions of government protections. The only major expansion of a federal program was Part D of medicare until Obama who then provided some medicaid expansion.

By contrast, other developed states have invested in new and improved programs. Parental Leave has become a major program in most counties; the US [[federally) still has only 12 unpaid weeks.

Canada, for comparison has 55 weeks [[17 of medical leave, 39 parental at 55% of income).

There have been concerted efforts to raise High School graduation rates in most countries.

They have risen in the US too, but not as quickly as elsewhere.

Its the culture of government is part of the problem, instead of part of the solution.

That was Reagan's unfortunate legacy. A culture of apathy and disinvestment.

[Bham1982]

I wonder who his target is and if the little girl winning has an influence,as in gearing up or pandering towards the socialist movement.

What "socialist movement"?

Is there a single politician in the U.S. who is for socialism? Even the most far left are for robust social welfare states, the norm in most of the first world, and embraced even by the far right in such nations.

[Honky Tonk]

Sorry...you've lost me. Where did I or Cuomo refer to America as a pos ?
As for Dr. King, I'll reference and quote any American historical figure I choose, and I don't have to take a headshot from an idiot to do it. If your pos comment was for Cuomo's mere criticism, well welcome to the fascist dictatorship you clearly desire.

The statement, "Make America Great Again" is nothing but a political slogan that panders to old white people. These are the same folks who claim President Obama was the worst thing to happen to race relations, that a women's main role is in the home and shouldn't be allowed to hold political office. We were all better off with Jesus in the all-white classroom, science is bad, any music featuring a sub-woofer should be banned, and minorities should play in their own league [[don't fool yourselves...most of these anthem protesters haven't watched the NFL in 30 years for that very reason). Stand for country, kneel for Jesus.

The same people selectively forget about 90% tax rates, nasty-ass nuns & molesting preachers, Jim Crow laws, crooked & unsupervised police, cooking with lard, and a limited access media that lied as much then as now....maybe more. Again, it's tough to keep up on scientific breakthroughs when their last exposure was a barely passed 9th grade earth science class in 1970. Science is bad, God is good, now pass the potatoes !


Speaking of idiots,well, maybe not, maybe just stoners who think a head full of weed somehow makes them brilliant and more "enlightened". I copied and pasted your original post for you, since you can't seem to find it or comprehend what you wrote.

[Richard]

What "socialist movement"?

Is there a single politician in the U.S. who is for socialism? Even the most far left are for robust social welfare states, the norm in most of the first world, and embraced even by the far right in such nations.

Yes the girl that won in New York with her everybody deserves a basic wage from the government platform.She would be considered a politician.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.9e426e1bd746

Millennials are known for favoring socialism more than any other age group in the United States: In one widely reported 2016 YouGov survey, 43 percent of respondents in the 18–29 age group viewed socialism in a positive light. [[In the 30–44 age group, with the oldest millennials clocking in at age 37, 27 percent saw socialism favorably.)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...709-story.html

That was in 2016 it is showing higher now,so why would a politician take the platform with the intention of disenfranchising a segment about how America is not great unless he was pandering towards that 43%,he then included women in the talk so that brings him over 50% of the potential vote.


A democratic socialist society would also guarantee a wide range of social rights in order to ensure equality of citizenship for all. Vital services such as health care, child care, education [[from pre-K through higher education), shelter and transportation would be publicly provided to everyone on demand, free of charge. Further, in order to ensure that the enjoyment of full citizenship was not tied to ups and downs in the labor market, everyone would also receive a universal basic income — that is, a base salary for every member of society, regardless of the person’s employment status. Finally, the work week would be gradually reduced and vacation time would be expanded to guarantee that everyone in society benefited from increasingly efficient technologies that decrease the overall amount of labor needed in the economy [[and also to ensure that all who wish to find employment are able to do so).

https://www.dsausa.org/resistance_ri...cal_revolution

[oladub]

Last part first.

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

The above is a link to the press freedom index. It current ranks the United States 45th in the world.

Canada is 18th, Norway and Sweden are #1 and 2; the U.S. is ranked below Romania, and Namibia. Not exactly stellar.

Underlying Info is here: https://pressfreedomtracker.us/

****

In respect of the 'downward slide', I referenced a series of outcomes which might be deemed important and/or useful comparitors to different nations in an earlier paragraph.

We could have fun deciding what measures to use and how to weight them, but if you simply ask about life expectancy, infant mortality, median household income, social mobility, rates of post-secondary education, level of violent crime, economic freedoms, political freedoms or press freedoms, the US is not a top 5 finisher in any category.


I would suggest that most of these items have deteriorated in either relative or absolute terms since the Reagan era began.

So, as an example, rates of post-secondary education the United States have not actually fallen since 1980; what has happened is that the United States which has been a leader in this area, stopped growing access to post-secondary as the same rate as peer-group nations.

This is largely a function of higher tuitions, which are a function of lower levels of government funding, and in some cases de-regulation of tuition.

It is secondarily an issue that there hasn't been the same improvement as peer-group nations in secondary or High School graduation rates.

That's partly a total funding issue, partly a how funding is distributed issue, but also an issue of how academic time and money is invested; its also impacted by over all levels of poverty.

We could pick at some of those other items in a similar fashion.

If you look at the United States in the 20th C, I think could make a good case that the standard of living of the majority of Americans [[particularly white Americans), relative to global peers peaked around the late 1960s.

We could debate the exact causes, and surely we can admit there were a variety of benefits from the end of WWII, including the baby boom that helped foster a period of economic expansion.

But we could also note that this was a period of unprecedented investment in science, post-secondary, education, highways, public housing [[still shiny and new), and expanded government health coverages like medicare and medicaid that reduced poverty or mitigated its worst effects for ever more people.

From Reagan on, we have a period of reduced social investment. Public housing left to rot, ever more potholes on roads, soaring tuitions, and no significant expansions of government protections. The only major expansion of a federal program was Part D of medicare until Obama who then provided some medicaid expansion.

By contrast, other developed states have invested in new and improved programs. Parental Leave has become a major program in most counties; the US [[federally) still has only 12 unpaid weeks.

Canada, for comparison has 55 weeks [[17 of medical leave, 39 parental at 55% of income).

There have been concerted efforts to raise High School graduation rates in most countries.

They have risen in the US too, but not as quickly as elsewhere.

Its the culture of government is part of the problem, instead of part of the solution.

That was Reagan's unfortunate legacy. A culture of apathy and disinvestment.

Thank you for your reply [[post#27) but Press Freedom Tracker seems to have its biases. Using its own criteria, its assessment seems fair enough. Trump does intimidate the likes of CNN and loses points for doing so. However, I would consider other things. We have large corporations like Facebook actually censoring news. To me, that is worse than Trump calling CNN "fake news". Antifa, not Trump supporters, attacked journalists recently in D.C. and Charlattesville. CNN Democrat Chris Cuomo even argues that Antifa has more of a right to be violent than nuts on the right Cuomo disagrees with. 51% of Democrats want to unconstitutionally declare what they consider "hate speech" a crime. That's another criteria of the Press Freedom Tracker list that I object to. How can Scandinavian or Canadian press freedom be ranked so high when there are punishments for reporting thing deemed hateful or anti-Islamic in those countries? Such edicts prevent discussion of issues by media. Also, I notice, that Canadian publications are less likely to have comment sections.

Regarding your concept of a 'slide' since Reagan, I would argue that the slide began with Woodrow Wilson instituting the privately held Federal Reserve national bank and the federal income tax. Controlling the money supply and transferring much of the tax burden from corporate importers to middle class taxpayers were major corporatist [[corporatism=economic fascism) initiatives. Also, those things you mentioned, "Public housing ...potholes on roads, soaring tuitions" some protections, and medical care are, according to the 10th Amendment, powers generally delegated to States not the federal government. Of course, you could still make the valid point that no state, not even any Democratic state, has enacted a single payer plan like those of any Canadian province. All the wars the U.S. has waged and other military spending have also been a huge drag on the U.S. economy. The huge federal debt accrued by Bush [[$5T), Obama [[$10T), and Trump [[So far, an estimated $1T) will also diminish U.S. Growth necessary to improve the U.S. position in the categories you mentioned.

[Canadian Visitor]

Thank you for your reply [[post#27) but Press Freedom Tracker seems to have its biases. Using its own criteria, its assessment seems fair enough. Trump does intimidate the likes of CNN and loses points for doing so. However, I would consider other things. We have large corporations like Facebook actually censoring news. To me, that is worse than Trump calling CNN "fake news". Antifa, not Trump supporters, attacked journalists recently in D.C. and Charlattesville. CNN Democrat Chris Cuomo even argues that Antifa has more of a right to be violent than nuts on the right Cuomo disagrees with. 51% of Democrats want to unconstitutionally declare what they consider "hate speech" a crime. That's another criteria of the Press Freedom Tracker list that I object to. How can Scandinavian or Canadian press freedom be ranked so high when there are punishments for reporting thing deemed hateful or anti-Islamic in those countries? Such edicts prevent discussion of issues by media. Also, I notice, that Canadian publications are less likely to have comment sections.

Regarding your concept of a 'slide' since Reagan, I would argue that the slide began with Woodrow Wilson instituting the privately held Federal Reserve national bank and the federal income tax. Controlling the money supply and transferring much of the tax burden from corporate importers to middle class taxpayers were major corporatist [[corporatism=economic fascism) initiatives. Also, those things you mentioned, "Public housing ...potholes on roads, soaring tuitions" some protections, and medical care are, according to the 10th Amendment, powers generally delegated to States not the federal government. Of course, you could still make the valid point that no state, not even any Democratic state, has enacted a single payer plan like those of any Canadian province. All the wars the U.S. has waged and other military spending have also been a huge drag on the U.S. economy. The huge federal debt accrued by Bush [[$5T), Obama [[$10T), and Trump [[So far, an estimated $1T) will also diminish U.S. Growth necessary to improve the U.S. position in the categories you mentioned.

You and I would agree on a great deal. I'm no fan of what Wilson was up to.

I would, however, say that I based my premise on when standard-of-living for the greatest number actually started stagnating, rather than concerning myself w/policies w/which i merely disagree.

In respect of press freedom, I'm not aware of a single Canadian journalist being jailed for any reason.

Nor prosecuted on hate charges.

Not even the dim bulbs over at Rebel Media [[roughly Canada's answer to Fox, but much smaller and less important)

[Pam]

I wonder who his target is and if the little girl winning has an influence,as in gearing up or pandering towards the socialist movement.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is 28. How about calling her a "young woman" instead?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez

[Bham1982]

Yes the girl that won in New York with her everybody deserves a basic wage from the government platform.She would be considered a politician.

That's not a remotely socialist platform. That's standard social welfare state. Even the far right in Europe supports such benefits.

Also, the misogynism is pathetic. I have no doubt you love it when Trump trashes women, minorities, immigrants, refugees and the like. He "speaks the truth", right?

[oladub]

You and I would agree on a great deal. I'm no fan of what Wilson was up to.

I would, however, say that I based my premise on when standard-of-living for the greatest number actually started stagnating, rather than concerning myself w/policies w/which i merely disagree.

In respect of press freedom, I'm not aware of a single Canadian journalist being jailed for any reason.

Nor prosecuted on hate charges.

Not even the dim bulbs over at Rebel Media [[roughly Canada's answer to Fox, but much smaller and less important)

I don't know of any Canadian journalist jailed for anything they wrote but Mark Steyn fled to New Hampshire to write after being questioned for writing non complimentary things about Muslims. It must be difficult to, for instance, openly discuss immigration policies without free speech.

The Canadian Border Service apparently has a “Quarterly List of Admissible and Prohibited Titles.” This is something the government of Canada produces every few months to inform its citizens which works of “Obscenity and Hate Propaganda” — that is, books, magazines, DVDs, CDs, and sometimes even flyers, posters, and stickers — have been denied entry into their country."

All of which suggests to me a chill blanketing freedom of the press in Canada.

University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson became well known when he refused to obey a Canadian law making it a crime to refuse to use trans gender pronouns like ze and zir. Quoth Peterson, " "But to compel me to use a certain content when I'm formulating my thoughts or my actions under threat of legislative action, I thought no, the government has introduced compelled speech legislation into the private sphere. It's never happened in the history of English common law, so I said there's no way I'm abiding by that."I don't care what you're damned rationale is. 'We're compassionate'. No you're not. You're playing this radical, collectivist left-wing game. You're trying to gain linguistic supremacy in the area of public discourse.
"You're doing this by using compassion as a guise as you're not going to do it with me."

The good professor had to deal with University inquisitors but in the end they backed off and except for being cut off from some academic funding was not otherwise punished so whatever legislation he mentioned didn't have very long teeth. But would journalists without tenure be so willing to make a stand?

Albeit Canada is generally a fine place which I have a high regard for, I prefer the wide open intolerance for censorship of the press guaranteed by the 1st. Amendment. I know almost nothing about the Canadian Constitution but from what I read it guarantees freedom of expression. The caveat is that it has a catch. "The very first section of that charter sets out “reasonable limits” against which all of our supposed freedoms are measured. This caveat has given other arms of government carte blanche to curb allegedly offensive speech in the past decade". Who needs government bureaucrats deciding for them what are 'reasonable' limits, what books can be brought into the Country, and telling us what pronouns to use? Maybe that's just my American and non Democratic Party perspective.

"It is long past time to free Canada’s speech. Even if it means putting up with Ann Coulter."

[Canadian Visitor]

I don't know of any Canadian journalist jailed for anything they wrote but Mark Steyn fled to New Hampshire to write after being questioned for writing non complimentary things about Muslims. It must be difficult to, for instance, openly discuss immigration policies without free speech.

The Canadian Border Service apparently has a “Quarterly List of Admissible and Prohibited Titles.” This is something the government of Canada produces every few months to inform its citizens which works of “Obscenity and Hate Propaganda” — that is, books, magazines, DVDs, CDs, and sometimes even flyers, posters, and stickers — have been denied entry into their country."

All of which suggests to me a chill blanketing freedom of the press in Canada.

University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson became well known when he refused to obey a Canadian law making it a crime to refuse to use trans gender pronouns like ze and zir. Quoth Peterson, " "But to compel me to use a certain content when I'm formulating my thoughts or my actions under threat of legislative action, I thought no, the government has introduced compelled speech legislation into the private sphere. It's never happened in the history of English common law, so I said there's no way I'm abiding by that."I don't care what you're damned rationale is. 'We're compassionate'. No you're not. You're playing this radical, collectivist left-wing game. You're trying to gain linguistic supremacy in the area of public discourse.
"You're doing this by using compassion as a guise as you're not going to do it with me."

The good professor had to deal with University inquisitors but in the end they backed off and except for being cut off from some academic funding was not otherwise punished so whatever legislation he mentioned didn't have very long teeth. But would journalists without tenure be so willing to make a stand?

Albeit Canada is generally a fine place which I have a high regard for, I prefer the wide open intolerance for censorship of the press guaranteed by the 1st. Amendment. I know almost nothing about the Canadian Constitution but from what I read it guarantees freedom of expression. The caveat is that it has a catch. "The very first section of that charter sets out “reasonable limits” against which all of our supposed freedoms are measured. This caveat has given other arms of government carte blanche to curb allegedly offensive speech in the past decade". Who needs government bureaucrats deciding for them what are 'reasonable' limits, what books can be brought into the Country, and telling us what pronouns to use? Maybe that's just my American and non Democratic Party perspective.

"It is long past time to free Canada’s speech. Even if it means putting up with Ann Coulter."

I know Jordan Peterson.

Took his class ages ago.

Interesting guy.

But full of it on this.

I understand his feelings towards the obnoxious types at U of T who want to hector on about everything.

But his career and funding are just fine, and the law in question never had compelled speech or the threat of jail as a feature.

There is nothing you can read in the US that I can't.

We have the internet, LOL, and its not censored.

The fact CBSA [[border services) may not allow a KKK pamphlet through doesn't really disturb me, and I don't think it threatens freedom of the Press at all.

Fox News is on cable here. We get more than enough Ann Coulter.

Mr. Steyn is a paranoid twit. He sometimes says intelligent things, but then shoots himself in the foot by saying incredibly stupid things with even greater frequency.

He was not in any danger of jail here.

[Richard]

That's not a remotely socialist platform. That's standard social welfare state. Even the far right in Europe supports such benefits.

Also, the misogynism is pathetic. I have no doubt you love it when Trump trashes women, minorities, immigrants, refugees and the like. He "speaks the truth", right?

Not sure if you noticed yet but we are not the far right in Europe,how has Democratic socialism worked in Venezuela?

If you peel back the layers it is not working so well in other countries.

No problem coming up with platforms but at the end of the day they need to be paid for and sooner or later you do run out of other peoples money.

Look at her platform.

Free collage for everybody.

Not everybody is collage material,there are 5 collages in the United States that offer free tuition to the poor,attending collage does not gaurentee a well paying job or even a job in the first place.

A government supplied basic income for all.

325 million in the United States,government provides basic income,how much per person and how is it paid for?

Everybody deserves a house.

Okay fine,you have section eight,government HUD provided subsidized housing and new housing loans.

Provide the homeless with free housing.

Some prefer to stay homeless,the cities that have the largest homeless population numbers are democratic controlled cities that have had decades to solve a problem that is getting progressively worse.

Sorry not much of a track record there.

Health care for the poor.

In Florida anyways,the poor have excess to medicare or Medicaid even if you are illegal,so health care is already provided for the poor,maybe it is different in Democratic controlled cities?

So even if you are poor you can have a roof over your head,food to eat and basic health care.

A shoe can get up in front of an audience and promise everybody the world of free but at the end of the day it still needs to be paid for.

I posted the link for the DSA please feel free to read it.

Their solution is the taking over of private enterprise and running everything as a collective in order to pay for everything,read it is in there.

It has been proved many times over,even at that you would not be able to raise enough revenue to cover the health care aspect.

Also do a little research on immigration to the socialist democratic countries,most of them have requirements starting with learning the common language,agreeing to blend into society and not creating your own little groups like in this country and so on and so on.

Nice try at the whole,because you do not agree with somebody throw a label at them,usually it is done because you really have nothing of structure to say.


Basically you have a democratic socialist,that ran in a Democratic district where 50% immigrants that are lower income,you get up in front of them on promise of everything everything should be provided for them free of charge because it is their right,because they are in America.

Nobody stops to think that they are already living in a district that has been under democratic control for a long time but yet are still in the same position that they always have been,always being promised the same thing over and over at election time but yet still in the same spot.

Talk about Trump and the media,do you know she has banned the media from her town hall speeches and meetings?