2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | and now we're throwing binders

Oct 25, 2017
288
Review of Warren's Book

This is a really neat episode of the Bruenigs where they give a lefty critique of Warren's Two-Income Trap. I had no idea that she had these kinds of views on the traditional single earner family structure. The hosts sort of brush over a few things that deserved more investigation - but it's still a good listen if you have some time to kill. Her views have changed a ton since 2003.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,745
How is this remotely acceptable? Here in Europe, for-profit prisons are seen as straight out ultra-capitalist dystopia.
This is the future Americans actually want. The orthodoxy on both sides thinks everything can be solved by applying market theory, whether keynesian or neoclassical.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,843

How is this remotely acceptable? Here in Europe, for-profit prisons are seen as crazy ultra-capitalist dystopia.
Did you read the context? That's not a case for for-profit prisons. That's a case for "the current system is fucked because we're paying a ton of money into it and receiving no benefit". Which she's been for most of her career.

Primary season 2020: "Out of context quotes, everywhere"
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,710

How is this remotely acceptable? Here in Europe, for-profit prisons are seen as crazy ultra-capitalist dystopia.
You are going to deserve the ratio on this post. Steel beat me to it in explaining the problems. Socialists who view any invocation of mainstream economics as immoral/evil are a problem.
This is the future Americans actually want. The orthodoxy on both sides thinks everything can be solved by applying market theory, whether keynesian or neoclassical.
Many of the best arguments for decriminalizing marijuana, reducing prison populations, and other issues are economic in nature!
 
Oct 31, 2017
1,959
Canada
Did you read the context? That's not a case for for-profit prisons. That's a case for "the current system is fucked because we're paying a ton of money into it and receiving no benefit". Which she's been for most of her career.

Primary season 2020: "Out of context quotes, everywhere"
It's another Aimee Terese tweet. There hasn''t been any honest context with these posts. It's just misinformation to attract outrage and stupidity.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,745
Many of the best arguments for decriminalizing marijuana, reducing prison populations, and other issues are economic in nature!
Justifying a moral position by dangling the bait of profit is not exactly a great place for your society to be. This does not change my post in the slightest.

"Why don't you do this good thing?"

"No reason to."

"What if I told you you could boost GDP with it?"

"Tell me more."
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,710
Justifying a moral position by dangling the bait of profit is not exactly a great place for your society to be.
Moral arguments are inherently stupid and unwinnable, so they're not worth having. Because morality is, at the end of the day, "I'm gonna do what I want to do and justify it to myself."

Ethics and data you can argue. Morals you can't. I learned that fast when it was morally wrong for me to be attracted to guys in some people's eyes.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,843
Justifying a moral position by dangling the bait of profit is not exactly a great place for your society to be. This does not change my post in the slightest.

"Why don't you do this good thing?"

"No reason to."

"What if I gold you you could boost GDP with it?"

"Tell me more."
She's justifying a moral position by saying that the current system isn't giving us the results we want for a lot of money spent. It's not a "we could boost GDP" it's a "We're paying a shitload of money for no return" and that return is less people in prison not dollars.

Again, she's not making an argument for for profit prisons, she's making an argument against them.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,710
mr stirner i didn't know you posted here
When you keep having to debate "We should do *insert policy here* (for example, Ban the Box) because it's the right thing to do" vs "This thing actually backfires" you become profoundly uninterested in having arguments on strict moral arguments. You aren't going to change who people fundamentally are.
 
Oct 25, 2017
408
Moral arguments are inherently stupid and unwinnable, so they're not worth having. Because morality is, at the end of the day, "I'm gonna do what I want to do and justify it to myself."

Ethics and data you can argue. Morals you can't. I learned that fast when it was morally wrong for me to be attracted to guys in some people's eyes.
kirblar I gotta say I respect your desire to never stop posting no matter how little you know
 
Oct 28, 2017
6,072
Moral arguments are inherently stupid and unwinnable, so they're not worth having. Because morality is, at the end of the day, "I'm gonna do what I want to do and justify it to myself."

Ethics and data you can argue. Morals you can't. I learned that fast when it was morally wrong for me to be attracted to guys in some people's eyes.
So... what about the civil rights movement? What was the data you could argue for it instead of morals?
 
Oct 27, 2017
872
Moral arguments are inherently stupid and unwinnable, so they're not worth having. Because morality is, at the end of the day, "I'm gonna do what I want to do and justify it to myself."

Ethics and data you can argue. Morals you can't. I learned that fast when it was morally wrong for me to be attracted to guys in some people's eyes.
your reasoning for hinging your policy arguments around capital is because you're gay?
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,745
I think Kirblar gave up making subjective arguments and instead opted to rely entirely on empirical arguments (?) owing to his experiences with arbitrary moral persecution.

Which is fine. I think it's restricting but I'm not here to denigrate your history.
 

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
11,230
your reasoning for hinging your policy arguments around capital is because you're gay?
I think his point is you can't stop someone from being a total asshole and bigot with a moral argument, but you can convince them to do non-asshole/bigoted things if you appeal to their selfishness/self-interest.
 
Oct 27, 2017
872
I think his point is you can't stop someone from being a total asshole and bigot, but you can convince them to do non-asshole/bigoted things if you appeal to their selfishness/self-interest.
im also lost on kirblar's distinction between people being amenable to "ethical" arguments but "moral" ones are useless

maybe someone could clear that up for me
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,843
So... what about the civil rights movement? What was the data you could argue for it instead of morals?
I believe Kirblar's point for that is that the argument against civil rights was based on "morals" and not empirical evidence, E.G. "Those coloreds aren't full humans, so it would be immoral to mix our society with them".

The empirical evidence FOR civil rights was that... Black people aren't sub-human and separate is not equal.

im also lost on kirblar's distinction between people being amenable to "ethical" arguments but "moral" ones are useless

maybe someone could clear that up for me
Ethics and morals relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. While they are sometimes used interchangeably, they are different: ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
https://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals

Both are subjective, of course.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,590
Of the Senators announced so far I really only think Harris has the chops to go all the way. It's just so damn crowded now, and we're still without the 2 potential largest candidates.
 
Oct 25, 2017
7,622
I think his point is you can't stop someone from being a total asshole and bigot with a moral argument, but you can convince them to do non-asshole/bigoted things if you appeal to their selfishness/self-interest.
If that's true, then I welcome you to the cult of Bernie, Comrade Kirblar.

Edit: No! I refuse to accept your post below!
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,710
So... what about the civil rights movement? What was the data you could argue for it instead of morals?
There's not really a point in arguing "people are people" vs "yeah Jim Crow's fine", the latter are simply the enemy. But yes, the data also is on the side of "yeah slaveholding/apartheid/etc. are horribly inefficient" as well. It just wasn't very relevant once you got to the "all people are people part."
I think his point is you can't stop someone from being a total asshole and bigot, but you can convince them to do non-asshole/bigoted things if you appeal to their selfishness/self-interest.
Not really what I was going for. Morality is just inherently self-justifying.
If that's true, then I welcome you to the cult of Bernie, Comrade Kirblar.
It's not!
 
Oct 25, 2017
408
Mind expanding on your arguments beyond "Lol, look at that poster, what a joke amirite?"
it was a joke because I know if I went into poliera and said "democrats should try and win trump voters over by making an appealing redistributive program" I would get yelled at by a lot of people

Why? I don't think she'd have any major issues beating Trump.
well the problem is that afterwards we'd have president klobuchar and it would be nice if the horizons of our politics went farther than tax-advantaged savings accounts
 
OP
OP
pigeon
Oct 25, 2017
3,344
Okay I didn’t expect kirblar to go full Randian

Let me take a super hot take position here and say actually morality is good and utilitarianism would see us all enslaved
 
OP
OP
pigeon
Oct 25, 2017
3,344
I think his point is you can't stop someone from being a total asshole and bigot with a moral argument, but you can convince them to do non-asshole/bigoted things if you appeal to their selfishness/self-interest.
You can actually stop people from being bigots with moral arguments, that is literally the only thing that can possibly work to do so
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,843
i don't care what the dictionary definition of them is, the ethics in social systems are extensions of individual morality

you get to feign objectivity when your personal morals just so happen to line up with the dogshit ethics of our current socioeconomic system
I'm not feigning objectivity. I don't think Ethics are objective. They're just more than personal feeling-outs.

You can actually stop people from being bigots with moral arguments, that is literally the only thing that can possibly work to do so
I'd argue the opposite. Bigots have misconceptions like "Illegal immigrants are criminals" that they use to justify their moral stance. It is pretty much impossible to get a bigot to see what they're doing wrong without first getting them to accept the information these use to justify their bigotry is wrong.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,745
I think the ethics/morals thing was just an unfortunate off-the-cuff remark because it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny as morals informs ethics or vice versa depending on which system you believe supercedes the other, the morality of society or the ethics of society.