TexasTiger

How did you learn Christ was about love? I learned from the Bible.

As God originally intended, but damn human error.

Sounds like Old Testament.

Again, I’m not suggesting blanket adoption. If I run a company, I’m scrutinizing the competition to see what they do well and what we may adapt. But the conservative default has long be derisive dismissal. There are reasons for this, which at the point of origin, probably aren’t rooted in ignorance, but self interest. I was raised with this propaganda and largely believed it. Travel opened my eyes. Further research opened it more. All that said, I believe in democracy and you have to sell it. That’s a tall order and no one is doing it particularly well. Bernie was more effective than most, but still too ideological. There’s a pragmatic case to make for doing somethings differently. For example, focus on what’s not working— health care premiums, copays, out of pocket expenses. Focus on which alternative systems work best. Detaching health insurance from particular jobs frees entrepreneurial opportunity- there’s a capitalist case for universal healthcare, and I don’t mean just enriching insurance companies that most people already hate. What elements make sense? What works better? What can we tweak or adjust? It’s poor management/leadership to not ask those questions. It’s poor management/leadership to not recognize the challenges to change, also.

But go nuts at what, exactly? One of the selling points of federalism is having 50 laboratories to try things out and see what works and what may be adapted elsewhere. We’ve long thought that other countries should be more like us— and for years we had processes and approaches that others adapted. It’s obviously overly simplistic to expect a huge, diverse country with our history to adopt broad wholesale changes overnight based on much smaller, homogeneous countries, but I often see these countries dismissed out of hand with little (and usually no) analysis which seems unwise and counterproductive. I’m always curious about what other organizations (and in this case countries) do well and what can be learned. A few years ago conservative social media went crazy over a report that McDonald’s paid $20 an hour in Denmark. It was broadly panned as “socialism” run amok and paying low skill menial labor too much. Then we soon after reached the conclusion such labor is “essential.” I revisited Denmark shortly after and was curious about the McDonald’s. Visited a few different venues. Most efficient, well-run McDonalds I’d ever visited and the prices were pretty in line with ours. Even an attractive “value menu.” Employees were sharp, friendly, fast-moving and looked like folks who could work in any office. What’s the problem? Why the derision? When certain countries consistently report the highest level of life satisfaction, surely they are worth examining for possible improvements, aren’t they?

Don’t you rely on the Bible to know Christ’s teachings?

I don’t think we become Denmark for many reasons. But I see most people mischaracterizing “European socialism,” so I was wondering what your specific issues are with it. The stores and malls I visited were higher end than most here, well stocked and doing brisk business. The airports are much nicer. Even a country like Portugal, I’ve seen food courts in department stores that were mind blowing. Most Americans criticizing it have no clue, but I know you do— thus my question.

Let’s take Denmark, for example— what do you like? Take issue with?

Bernie hit a chord in 2016– on progressive economics with little mention of identity politics. If democrats could hone that message they’d get a lot more traction.

Link that for me, instead.

Pretty low key, perfunctory boom. No punctuation, but at least he capitalized the first letter.

Not what she actually said.

Sad. Also tribal. And that’s a change from 40 years ago.

This. When I was young, folks had guns, but few had gun fetishes. Gun fetishes are common now.

Like the debt— stop making it worse.

It took Ross Perot doing 30 minute commercials to sell the American public on taking action on the debt. Since him, few politicians have wanted to risk prescribing unpleasant medicine. Part of me thinks a clear thinking, common sense, non partisan candidate could have some success with a no-nonsense problem solving approach. That won't happen as long Trump dominates the Republican Party. He has no interest in solving problems. Every instinct he has is totally self-serving. He will poo poo any solution and for some unknown, bizarre reason he has a strangle hold on the GOP. Reelecting him kills any chance of solving anything. If he loses again, maybe a problem solving "conservative" can get a toe hold. Such a person who doesn't alienate independents will put pressure of the Dems to be problem solvers. Strengthening Trump is a disaster for the country. Biden winning doesn't really strengthen Democrats or any other candidate. It would begin the 2028 election on both sides.

We need to stop adding to it at the very least. Hopefully, over time and the growth of the economy (a long, long time) the impact of it will lessen. It starts with working toward a balanced budget. That requires more revenue and cuts. The last President to run on raising taxes was Bill Clinton. Joe wants to raised them now on higher income folks. Trump wants to slash them. Slashing taxes is popular. Dubya set us on this unsustainable path. Affable guy, total disaster as president.

And I won’t argue with you or anyone else saying there’s little to no evidence Biden will work on the debt. I do think your “well he never personally went bankrupt is disingenuous. Would you do business with a guy that’s had 6 businesses go bankrupt? Would you question his ability to manage debt?

That threat assures they’ll be no compromise. But that threat is also impossible. Repeal is amending. Same process. Virtually impossible.

Would you rather be hunted with a knife or AR15?

Any potential changes to the amendment would be the result of compromise. The challenge is a willingness to compromise.

I haven't knocked it. It's unfortunate he chooses to be polarizing.

Some good may come from his actions. But his dad strived to be nonpartisan in a way that made him able to reach more people. Franklin is deeply partisan and divisive. His father was far more "Christ-like".

He was a decent man. He died six years ago and stopped being active long before that. Hid son’s little acorn brain fell far from the tree. A crazy wind must’ve blown it far from his father’s roots.

A relatively small group wants to outright repeal the amendment. More would amend it because of its vagueness and recent interpretation— it’s a mess. That’s where much opportunity for compromise lays. But there are others which most Republicans steadfastly refuse to consider. And they use arguments like this to do it.