Yang vs. Sanders

[Revolutionary Think]

I think it's a difference between a MLK type and a Malcolm X type 

  

[TheAvatarState]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Sanders is the more progressive candidate with the most serious proposals that challenge the status quo.

Leo, you get to call me a devil and an unconscious dumbass for 2 hours every week (all true), so I feel it is now my duty to call out your obvious self-bias and ideology here.

This is actually an ideology you hold. This is because you used this line as a defense against someone else pointing out Yang having over 100 detailed policies. Notice how you dismissed the UBI vs. Federal Jobs guarantee as "number 7 on the list" and inferred Yang as a single issue candidate. This is a common misconception so I understand where you're coming from, but it's obvious you haven't done much research on Yang. And why would you? You've already found your candidate! This is textbook defense of an ideology. 

Your position was true in 2016, but the year is 2019, and a man named Andrew Yang is running. Andrew was a Bernie supporter in 2016 (their ideals align very much), and he has spent the last 7 years running a non-profit he founded called Venture for America. He saw a giant problem with our education system: we were sending our brightest grads to the coasts to become lawyers and bankers, leaving the middle of the country a relative wasteland of opportunity and talent. His solution was to start VFA and give recent grads the resources to become entrepreneurs in places like Detroit and St. Louis. VFA created thousands of jobs in the middle of the country, but Andrew saw it wasn't enough. The election of Donald Trump compelled him to run for 2020 to selflessly fix the problems he was seeing. I do respect Bernie immensely, but you have to admit that this is also a great example of visionary leadership. 

Yang has the most progressive campaign finance reform platform. I agree with you that this may be the most important area in order to fix our democracy (and yes I'm donating to Wolf-Pac soon). He's for $100 Democracy Dollars for every adult citizen, to give to their candidate(s) of choice. "This would wash out corporate money by a factor of 8:1," as he likes to say. Bernie has entertained this idea in the past, but it's inexplicably not part of his platform. Yang is also for ranked choice voting. Obviously overturn Citizens United, but that's more of a long term goal because it requires a constitutional amendment. And much more. 

Automation. If you watched the debate last night, you'll know there was a significant portion centered on automation and job loss. This was SOLELY due to Yang's influence on the national discussion. He is the only candidate educated and aware of the 4th industrial revolution we are in the midst of, and the only one with 21st century solutions. Please look further into Andrew Yang. Don't sleep on him, you're doing yourself a disservice. 

Human centered capitalism. Andrew is the only candidate with a plan to go to the Bureau of statistics and update our success measurements past GDP and Employment, to Health and life expectancy (which has declined for 3 years in a row but is great for GDP), freedom from substance abuse, clean environment, childhood success rates and education, etc. If you don't have the right measurements (which we currently have but don't value correctly), we can't move in the right direction. I.E. the quality of your values and measurements determine your direction and success. This should be immediately apparent how crucial this is, and Andrew is the only one talking about it. It's a bold, visionary direction. Part of he trick is aligning business incentives to these measurements, which is entirely doable, and Yang has the unferstanding to do this effectively. 

Fully legalize marijuana and pardon all non-violent drug offenders. AND decriminalize all opiates, refer addicts to treatment, increase funding for these services + safe injection sites. He often cites Portugal as a success, and looks at the data from other countries to inform his own policies based on human centered values. No other candidate has as progressive of a drug policy as Andrew Yang. Bernie is opposed to decriminalization. 

UBI, which he has branded the Freedom Dividend because it tests better, is the single most progressive policy ever put forth in this race. Make no mistake about it. UBI + VAT tax is genius, and will raise the purchasing power of the bottom 94% of Americans. It gives the Google's and Amazon's of the world a tax they can't evade (they paid zero income tax last year), a tried and true tax that every other developed country in the world has already implemented. Bernie has no such plan. His heart is in the right place, but "going after the one percent" and "billionaires shouldn't exist" are platitudes that won't get us very far in actuality. A wealth tax has been tried in Europe to abysmal results, and later repealed. It's way too tricky to implement in reality, even though he's for the spirit of it. 

 

This is barely the tip of the iceberg. If you dig into this man's world, you will be pleasantly surprised. I mean, I can't even believe we have such an amazing candidate, I thought Bernie was amazing! But Yang is the Bernie of the 21st century. He's the most intelligent, most progressive, most forward-thinking (he's actually a systems thinker), he's the only candidate taking mental health seriously (one of his sons is on the autism spectrum). 

But most importantly, it is Yang's selfless character that has inspired me the most. He never puts others down. He's not even nasty towards Trump, he just sees him as a symptom of a greater underlying issue. This is in stark contrast to every other candidate. This is the man we need as president. 

[Revolutionary Think]

3 minutes ago, TheAvatarState said:

But most importantly, it is Yang's selfless character that has inspired me the most. He never puts others down. He's not even nasty towards Trump, he just sees him as a symptom of a greater underlying issue. This is in stark contrast to every other candidate. This is the man we need as president. 

Hear hear couldn't have said it better myself. 

[Leo Gura]

@TheAvatarState I have known about Yang's long policy list for a long time.

But I feel he's way too stuck on UBI as his signature policy to the point to being a one-note candidate.

Like I said, a candidate has to be evaluated holistically, taking into account every thing, including their experience with politics and government.

Yang's biggest upside, in my mind, is his authenticity. But I don't consider his policies progressive enough.

UBI could easily be dismantled by conservatives in the future and hurt the welfare state.

Of course you're welcome to vote for whoever you like best. I got nothing against Yang. He's a cool guy and if he wins I will vote for him.

[Revolutionary Think]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

UBI could easily be dismantled by conservatives in the future and hurt the welfare state.

Of course you're welcome to vote for whoever you like best. I got nothing against Yang. He's a cool guy.

That's cool Leo but, I feel that Yang is more in the middle than Bernie is. Trump or no Trump this coming election if Sanders gets elected how can he ever work with the Republicans/Conservatives to get things passed? I feel that Yang can at least meet them half way but, more to the left side. 

[Forestluv]

19 minutes ago, Revolutionary Think said:

I feel that Yang can at least meet them half way but, more to the left side. 

Obama 2.0. Republicans are not oriented like that. 

[Aeris]

16 hours ago, Revolutionary Think said:

You're right Leo I agree. Yang has over 100 policy proposals that are all relevant to the 21st century. I doubt that Sanders tackles as many issues that Yang does. Also Yang is running on Sanders legacy. Yang actually voted for Sanders when Sanders was running. The problem I see is that free college and $15 minimum wage does nothing to address people not being able to actualize themselves because when a job is out of reach or you have a job you hate and it only give the bear minimum it's really hard to spend time on thinking of anything other than basic survival needs. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/  

for me when a country or a governement allow someone to hold in power the life of more than a billion people, that's a crime against humanity. ( but just my view )

someone in power should put his power to improve his community, cause he IS the community.

 

And the current state of France/USA, invisible hand that control you to be an obediant, taking all job bs slave.

I call that being put in non visible chains, it's not receivable to just let people "find a work, become intelligent, reasonable, and stop being lazy and poor.

this kind of thought is a disease.

 

there is no way to grow when you're in fucking INVISIBLE CHAINS,

Of course I could work instead of taking the welfare, like in a restaurant ? become then like everyone, depressive, and kill myself.

I don't see the point in living for surviving, my situation for me is good, but not good enough, AND WORST FOR OTHERS !

 

getting the equivalent of 5$ an hour in term of absolute gain right now if I start to work ( yes you read well ). ( when you take holisticly the welfare/etc ).

 

it's not about "being lazy" it's about having a stable ground to work from and a system that update itself from 0.0005 to 0.2

In fact that's just a bullet in the head, not that you should give a lot to everyone,

and it's not about "monney", it's about power to do things. ( I m tackling the economic debate )

give people the right amount of power to being allowed to growth.

if one guy own the power of a billion, then the system is a falacy.

our current society, it's a multi dictator tribe that looks like a hot girl.

fear of being dead because no work, that's the best way to FUCK your country.

 

but I m with sanders, as long as there is a problem within big corporation the tentacle cancer that is "dictator ship corporation".

big monney corporation should NEVER be private in their choices, they should be a pure extension of governement.

I m not talking about being communist, I m talking real meritocracy, after being cured of the disease firstly.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Aeris

[Thewritersunion]

I think ubi can come from the taxation of machines in China and our own automated factories 

[TheAvatarState]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

But I feel he's way too stuck on UBI as his signature policy to the point to being a one-note candidate.

That's deliberate at the debates because he always gets the least speaking time. And it has worked amazingly well for him, because remember he went from a nobody to top 6. In reality, he is far from a one-note candidate. Please watch a long-form interview on YT. 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Like I said, a candidate has to be evaluated holistically, taking into account every thing, including their experience with politics and government.

Government experience doesn't make you more qualified. It doesn't make you a leader. If you reflect for a minute, being in Washington for a while almost certainly, by definition, makes you a follower. 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Yang's biggest upside, in my mind, is his authenticity. But I don't consider his policies progressive enough.

Yang has the most progressive and visionary policies. Not fake progressive, not idealism progressive... Actual progressive. Policies that will actually, on the ground, do the most to improve people's lives. We're talking about nearly eradicating poverty overnight. Poverty line is $12,700 per year, Freedom Dividend is $12k per person. Do the math. 

How about a Constitutional Amendment to hold the government accountable for the environment? 

"As President, I will...

I support the calls for a constitutional amendment requiring states and the federal government to protect, preserve, and improve the environment." -from his website. He views climate change as an existential threat, in fact the most important thing we need to do, and in my view has the most progressive and realistic plan to combat it. The reason why he's so focused on UBI is because it's all connected. The economic boot on people's throats (2/3 can't afford an unexpected $400 bill) is preventing us from planning ahead on things like climate change. Economic scarcity makes us hostile, objectively less intelligent (lowered IQ 1 standard deviation), and locked into scarcity. 

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

UBI could easily be dismantled by conservatives in the future and hurt the welfare state.

UBI has bipartisan support, believe it or not. One state has had a dividend for nearly 40 years, Alaska, which is a deep red state. UBI would be a huge win for rural areas. And the reason conservatives and libertarians like it as well, is because it's universal! There's no stigma. There's no bureaucratic red tape. The government isn't telling you what to buy. A similar policy actually passed the House of Representatives TWICE in the 70's. I think it's the policy most likely to pass Congress if he were to become president. 

As for hurting the welfare state... Does trading out $200 in food stamps for $1000 in cash "hurt the welfare state?" The person gets to choose based on his/her needs, but if you ask people on welfare whether they'd like conditional welfare or cash, take a wild guess what they'd prefer... One of the downsides of the current welfare state- and this is a bigger issue than you may realize- is that it keeps people down both physically and psychologically. Physically, they can't get a job or even VOLUNTEER for fear of losing benefits. Mentally, they see themselves as disabled, and they are stuck with this negative label due to monetary reasons. This promotes a scarcity mindset. Conditional love.

Be careful not to conflate "the welfare state" and "the common good." These aren't the same things. And no one would be forced out of their current benefits. The goal is to shrink enrollment and bureaucracy over time, saving hundreds of billions of dollars a year. AND if you follow people's quality of life, it improves too. This is a clear example of "size of welfare state" not equating to common good. 

You can obviously vote for whoever you want, and I have nothing against Bernie. But Yang honestly has fresher and more progressive policies. Yang will be the next FDR- he has kind of said it himself. I just don't want you to be misinformed, that's all. I don't think you've really understood Yang's campaign yet. Dig deeper. Please watch a long-form interview on YT. 

 

[ivory]

Interesting thread guys. Great read.

[CreamCat]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

UBI could easily be dismantled by conservatives in the future and hurt the welfare state.

It can be dismantled, but it's still good to try it even if it is not implemented well initially.

At least, if we try it, we will get more large-scale data and learn from it. Economic results can be random. But, learning is always progressive.

Edited October 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Leo Gura]

13 hours ago, Revolutionary Think said:

I feel that Yang is more in the middle than Bernie is.

Yes, he is. Which is why I prefer Bernie. Compromising with ideologues doesn't work so well.

Quote

Trump or no Trump this coming election if Sanders gets elected how can he ever work with the Republicans/Conservatives to get things passed? I feel that Yang can at least meet them half way but, more to the left side. 

That's the beauty of Sanders, he will lead a populist revolution to publicly shame them and shift our entire culture. That's what's really needed. No progressive laws are gonna pass a Republican controlled Senate anyway. Republicans are not going to let Yang do anything and they will demonize him as a socialist.

Meeting them half-way is what we've been doing for the last 40 years. Something new is needed.

Also, your analogy between Malcolm X:Bernie, MLK:Yang is not right. MLK was a radical progressive socialist. So if anything Bernie is like MLK. Malcolm X was a militant ideologue which is not analogous to Bernie. Bernie is leading a progressive social movement just like MLK.

Quote

"Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children." -- MLK

"We must recognize that we can’t solve our problem now until there is a radical redistribution of economic and political power… this means a revolution of values and other things. We must see now that the evils of racism, economic exploitation and militarism are all tied together… you can’t really get rid of one without getting rid of the others… the whole structure of American life must be changed. America is a hypocritical nation and [we] must put [our] own house in order." -- MLK

https://mlkglobal.org/2017/11/23/martin-luther-king-on-capitalism-in-his-own-words/

YangGang is Diet MLK

[Leo Gura]

@TheAvatarState I've heard all your arguments for Yang before. Standard YangGang points. Nothing new you're telling me.

I've watched his interviews. He says the same stuff every time.

May the best (wo)man win.

I don't doubt that Yang or Bernie would beat Trump. Their biggest hurdle is beating the other Dems.

I think Yang will over-perform in the end but not beat the other Dems. Let's see how it goes. Should be fun to watch. I'm guessing Yang will do well because he feels so authentic.

[Scholar]

Do you really think UBI could be dismantled? I feel like it would be so difficult to just take away 1000$ from all US citizen especially when they get used to it. Infact, I feel like even if it was harmful overall there might be a risk of not being able to pull it back because of how much backlash it would cause from the population.

 

People would structure their life around the increase in income, so simply "dismantling" it would disrupt literally the life of pretty much all americans for whom it would make a signficant difference. I don't know much about US politics but I wouldn't dare to pull that away as a politician, or even dare to attempt do so, fearing the overwhelming negative response from the general population.

 

This is in my opinion why UBI is both so promising and so dangerous, because it will be so difficult to pull it back once people have gotten their share of it.

[Revolutionary Think]

@Leo Gura I think Yang is more progressive than Bernie. Let the best person win. https://medium.com/basic-income/there-is-no-policy-proposal-more-progressive-than-andrew-yangs-freedom-dividend-72d3850a6245 And Yang would absolutely demolish Trump. I know a ton of former Trump supporters who almost automatically switch to him. 

[Anderz]

23 hours ago, TheAvatarState said:

Make no mistake about it. UBI + VAT tax is genius, and will raise the purchasing power of the bottom 94% of Americans. It gives the Google's and Amazon's of the world a tax they can't evade (they paid zero income tax last year)

Great point. The big corporations today can evade tax to obscene levels. Legally! Although I still believe it's too early for a UBI but I could be wrong.

[TheAvatarState]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That's the beauty of Sanders, he will lead a populist revolution to publicly shame them and shift our entire culture. That's what's really needed. No progressive laws are gonna pass a Republican controlled Senate anyway. Republicans are not going to let Yang do anything and they will demonize him as a socialist.

Meeting them half-way is what we've been doing for the last 40 years. Something new is needed.

I believe I'm starting to understand your perspective better. Please correct me if I'm wrong. And I truly don't mean to judge your perspective or even change your mind. I'm using what I've learned from you, so please bear with me. Sometimes we all need an outside perspective on our own views. 

When you say "I don't find Yang's policies to be progressive enough," what you really mean is that he doesn't display the progressive ethos or ideal you have in your mind. And this is the root of your ideology. It's not the policies themselves that draws you in like you claim, it's actually this fighting spirit or "populist revolution" attitude you believe Sanders to provide. You believe Sanders will provide the kick we need to get the gears turning. No matter how they turn, we just need them turning. 

Your first clue that this is indeed an ideology is that this is the exact same core belief that Trump supporters had in 2015. Exactly the same. "Gridlock for 40 years" argument (straw man)+ "Trump (Sanders) will shake things up" + revolution to keep the wheels turning + calling out the bullshit of the left (right). It's a myopic and combative mentality. You are still stuck in left vs. right. This is the game they want you to be playing. 

Your 2nd clue that this is indeed an ideology is that you haven't been open to discussion with us. You've dismissed all our points as "seen it before" or not important, and all your points have been "Sanders is just what we need." If you were after Truth and transparency, you would engage with us and provide non-ideological points on why you believe Sanders to be the best candidate. Even if I didn't agree with your points, I would appreciate the honesty. However, it always comes back to your core belief of "he's the kick in the ass we need." Have you seriously questioned this belief? Notice that any excuses popping up like "I'm above that" or "I don't have time" come from ego. You could be handling this much better even if those were true. 

Your 3rd clue that this is indeed an ideology is that you consider "authenticity" to be your favorite thing about Yang. I've learned from you, and verified for myself, that authenticity is the single most important character traits to have. I've admired your rise in authenticity, and it has been inspiring to watch over the last couple of years. The fact you admit authenticity to be the defining trait of a candidate you're NOT voting for is kind of telling of something askew.

Your 4th clue that this is indeed an ideology is that your values align with Yang more than Bernie. According to your own Conscious Politics pt. 4, which I enjoyed and agree with, you should pick the highest consciousness person most aligned to higher values. You don't have to believe me. I invite you to observe their characters for yourself. My claim is that if you observe the level of cognitive development, open-mindedness, love, etc. For both Bernie and Yang, you may be in for a shock. I really liked Marianne Williamson, but she was probably 50 years ahead of her time. She's fully stage Green. Yang appears orange because of his business experience and his ability to connect with stage Blue and Orange. However, he has evolved past orange and is green/yellow, while still being an effective bridge for orange. That's actually the proof that he's more developed into the spiral. You owe it to yourself to read his book "The War on Normal People" if you don't believe me. 

 

 

[Revolutionary Think]

@TheAvatarState *nodding my head in agreement*

[Leo Gura]

6 hours ago, TheAvatarState said:

When you say "I don't find Yang's policies to be progressive enough," what you really mean is that he doesn't display the progressive ethos or ideal you have in your mind. And this is the root of your ideology. It's not the policies themselves that draws you in like you claim, it's actually this fighting spirit or "populist revolution" attitude you believe Sanders to provide. You believe Sanders will provide the kick we need to get the gears turning. No matter how they turn, we just need them turning.

No. He is the most serious candidate in terms of specific policy reforms which America badly needs. He has the longest, most proven track record of being a visionary leader in terms of the progressive agenda (over 40 years). He has the passion, the vision, the right leadership style, the balls to take on the status quo, the insider experience in Washington necessary to understand how the system works, he has the largest grassroots donor base of anyone in the country, he has tangible policies, and he doesn't play games with identity politics.

He has a lot of experience with how to deal with Republicans, Washington insiders, and media. He know exactly what to do and he can be trusted to do it (as long as his healthy holds up). He also has the best understanding of foreign policy of the Dem candidates.

This is not about ideology.

And it helps that he actually has a decent chance of winning. Yang's chances are very long. I don't want to give my support and money to someone who probably will not win. Yang might be a good choice in 2024 or 2028 when he has some more experience and name-recognition. This kind of thing needs to be built over time.

6 hours ago, TheAvatarState said:

Your first clue that this is indeed an ideology is that this is the exact same core belief that Trump supporters had in 2015.

Hehe, give me some credit.

[Revolutionary Think]

Fair enough @Leo Gura we'll just have to see how they debate each other. I really want to see Bernie's response to Yang's criticism of the UBI vs FJG that should be in the month of November. I'm hoping if it is Bernie he adopts the UBI but, I'm still with Yang.