Demands from the left -

[TBF]

I've seen many lists the past few days. Lists of what Obama has perhaps accomplished in the past two years, lists of what would happen if Republicans were in power instead. I decided to put up my own list for your perusal. Well, it's not actually MY list, a good friend wrote it a few years ago. Hopefully it will not make too many heads explode. When you're wondering why we're not dutifully agreeing with everything the president is currently doing, keep in mind that this is what we'd like to see -


DEMANDS:

1) Universal Single Payer Health Care

2) Promotion/Development of Local Food Systems

3) Government subsidized heating programs

4) 90% Reduction In Military Budget

5) Immediate Development Of Nationwide Mass Transit System

6) Immediate Withdrawal Of US Troops From All Parts Of The Globe

7) Triple The Taxes For Anyone Making Over $75,000/ Year. Sliding Scale Tilting Upwards

8) Immediate Dissolution Of All Federal Banking Systems followed by Creation Of Local Currencies

8) Elimination Of Rent/Mortgage

10) Fair Trials For All Members Of The Senate

11) Open Borders For People, Closed Borders For Bananas

12) Elimination of all Free Trade Agreements

Naturally when I skip into my polling place and look for these issues on the ballot I'll be aroused and gleeful to pull that lever "in favor of" but lacking that I’d say it’s time for direct action.
____________________________________________________________
HOW TO DO IT:

- Massive boycotts and a general strike.

- A huge 'None of the above' vote-reform campaign

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Pretty hard core list, much of which is unachievable under our current system of government.

[maryf]

5. Does that mean we shouldn't make demands?

Whatever happened to feet to the fire?? All over the world people strike, protest, here...it can't happen so we'll just lay down and do nothing??

[TBF]

7. We need goals. This is a starting point. And I would argue

it beats the hell out of starting at center and being pulled right (which is what we've been watching the past 30 years & continue to watch under Obama)

[maryf]

16. hear, hear, nt.

[TBF]

9. Which are unachievable?

Granted it's an ambitious list, but unachievable?

[MineralMan]

2. Virtually none of your proposals are feasible in the United States.

Further, some make no actual sense.

You claim these are the goals of the "left." I claim you're all wet.

Unrecommended heartily.

[TBF]

3. Which make no sense?

nt

[MineralMan]

8. 8) Elimination Of Rent/Mortgage

To start. How do you figure this is going to happen? Do we just give everyone their house? Who builds these houses? What chance to do you see that there would be any real support for such a thing? Now, I don't have a mortgage. My house is paid for. Are you going to give it to someone else? I don't think so.

I could go on, but I won't bother.

[TBF]

10. Yes, private property should be the first thing to go.

You're an owner so you disagree.

[MineralMan]

13. You're funny. They tried that in the Soviet Union. Didn't work out

very well. How are you planning to administer such a program. As for my ownership, yes, I am a homeowner. It took me many years to pay off my home. You'll find that few people are going to be willing to give their homes up. Unfeasible. Stupid, in fact.

[AlabamaLibrul]

62. The reason it didn't work out is because it was predicated on a totalitarian government. Anyone who

suggests the Soviet Union is really an example of socialism, at least the democratic ideal of socialism, is eating the RW lies up.

The Soviet Union sucked because it started with a bad government which, over the years, was given very slight reforms. It's not the economic system. It's the totalitarianism.

ETA: In any case, it wasn't really socialism at all. It was state capitalism disguised as socialism, and I'm happy to K&R this to bring it back into the positive.

[TBF]

71. Thanks for the rec -

there were a few when it was new but they were unrec'ed quickly.

[Warren Stupidity]

166. China Vietnam Cambodia Poland Hungary East Germany Albania Romania ...

it really hasn't worked out anywhere. I'm sure there is a good explanation for all of these failures. Sure it doesn't work in practice, but in theory...

[proteus_lives]

60. "private property should be the first thing to go."

You're not going to find much support for that silly idea comrade.

:eyes:

[TBF]

66. Currently in the US I believe we're at least 65% ownership - correct?

A lot of the gains in home ownership were in decades like the 60's when there was less of a gap between rich and poor. I predict those rates will continue to drop as the gap between rich & poor continues to grow. Eventually with fewer owning their homes (and more going into foreclosure daily) there are going to be fewer folks thinking I'm silly on that....

[proteus_lives]

70. People want to own their own property.

They don't like being forced into communal ownership.

People will read that and turn away, ignoring the rest of your list.

[TBF]

76. So many in the world barely have food to eat -

and yet we in the States must each have our own McMansion? Seems a bit unfair to me.

[proteus_lives]

81. Life is supposed to be fair?

When did that go in effect? I must of missed that proclamation.

No matter where you go, there is unfairness. That's been a fact since day one.

[TBF]

89. Easier to make light of that when you're the one who's not

skipping meals. Yes, I would rather strive towards equality than prop up a system that is inherently unfair. In order for the very few to profit under capitalism everyone else serves as slaves. Yes, I do think we should strive for something better than that.

[proteus_lives]

97. Slaves?

I don't think you even know what that word means.

Yes, we should all be striving to better ourselves, our families, our friends, our communities, our nation and our world.

Strive towards equality but leave utopian nonsense at the door. It doesn't help anyone.

[TBF]

98. It doesn't help the owners that's for sure -

but we may be able to help many others. Wanting health care, education, and housing for all is not "utopian nonsense" by the way - these should be basic human rights.

[socialist_n_TN]

120. Now see, THAT'S a RW talking point that I've ALWAYS

disagreed with. Just because life isn't "fair" we're all just supposed to suck it up and not complain about unfairness. BULLSHIT! Just because life's unfair doesn't mean that we don't try to MAKE it as fair as possible for as many people as possible.

[TBF]

136. And getting to the roots of that unfairness is key -

WHY is it unfair? Is it just that way, or are there forces keeping it that way? Which interests are served by keeping people down?

[socialist_n_TN]

138. The only ones who benefit from unfairness

POLITICALLY and economically are the capitalists. They're also the ones who benefit the MOST from the meme that life's unfair and we should just "learn to live with it". Life is random and somewhat capricious and that is sometimes unfair, but MOST of the unfairness of life is the result of ORCHESTRATED unfairness that benefits a small group of moneyed interests. The capitalists.

[proteus_lives]

171. When did I say that?

Listen, you could implement every point on that list and guess what? Life is still going to be unfair.

Fact of life.

[socialist_n_TN]

175. It's the attitude. Life's unfair and you can't do anything

about it, so just accept it. As another one of my posts in this subthread said life is random and sometimes capricious and then you die, good and bad, so that means that it WILL be unfair at times, BUT....

MOST of the unfairness in life is a deliberate skewing of rules, regulations, and laws to benefit the wealthiest people WHO NEED THE LEAST HELP. And THAT'S the unfairness that should be fought at every turn with all our energy. Just because life's unfair at times randomly does NOT mean that we accept the unfairness WE CAN CONTROL like good little Germans. We fight to make what's unfair MORE fair for more people. Then you accept the random, capricious unfairness because you have to.

[proteus_lives]

82. Dupe.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

84. Why would we want to follow the epic failure of forced collectivism?

[TBF]

135. You're right -

forced homelessness is so much better.

Sorry, sometimes the sarcasm comes out...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

172. Indeed forced collectivism caused massive failures in housing and food production

Sorry, sometimes the truth comes out to trump fantasy wrapped as sarcasm.

[TBF]

177. Those tent cities aren't fantasies, Professor,

they are the result of capitalism.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

184. Neither was Stalin

Who exiled and killed so many more

[MineralMan]

11. 2) Promotion/Development of Local Food Systems

So, in California, everyone will eat as many fruits and veggies as they like. In Minnesota, no oranges for you, since you can't grow them here. There'll be lots of rutabagas, though. They grow great here.

Local food is great! I shop at my local farmer's market every week. But...I eat things they don't sell there, so I also shop in the supermarket. It's nice to have veggies other than root veggies in the Winter. Life would be pretty boring otherwise.

So, explain how people get a balanced diet in parts of the USA where the growing season is short.

No supermarkets? Nice. Especially in large cities.

[TBF]

17. Nobody said no supermarkets -

why would you assume that? The point is that I'd feel much more comfortable eating fresh foods from local growers than having it all come from China. Check your local produce section at whatever favorite supermarket you frequent and check out the origins of the products.

[MineralMan]

24. But, you see, supermarkets are corporate entities, supported by

a healthy transportation system, in vehicles that burn fuel and require highways and all stuff like that. How do I get an orange in Minnesota do ya think? Are they going to transport it by mule train from California?

And, how are you going to post on Democratic Underground if there's no internet available or even telephone lines so you can use your modem. All those corporations will be gone, you see. No computers, no telephone system, except maybe in your own neighborhood. Maybe no electricity, either, since there won't be any corporations to build all the solar power stuff you're going to need.

Around my area, I haven't seen any Chinese produce. Lots from Mexico and places like that, though. I do like bananas, but they don't grow them here in the United States either. Or in China.

My local farmer's market is open from about July to October. The rest of the year, there's no produce, you see. It's Winter. I like to eat fresh veggies.

You seem very naive about how things work. Truly you do.

[TBF]

25. Why do corporations have to own everything? nt

[MineralMan]

27. They don't. But supermarkets exist because of corporations that

own them. Before supermarkets, with their warehouses, trucking fleets, and purchasing power existed, you bough your groceries from small shops. The butcher, the baker, the greengrocer, the candlestick maker. There are still small shops like that. Do you shop in them? Do you even know where they are in your city?

C'mon, tell us about your lifestyle and how you're putting all this into practice. Maybe we can learn from you.

[TBF]

45. I know about Walmart destroying small business -

anyone who has been awake the past couple of decades has seen it. The issue is how we get rid of Walmart and all of the other problems that come along with Capitalism...

[Warren Stupidity]

129. That is a silly statement, with plenty of weasel room of course.

The number one item in that list is universal health care - we implemented that program for everyone 65+ 45 years ago, so quite obviously extending medicare to everyone is massively feasible.

Other items are also feasible. Some are preposterous. Perhaps that is what you meant by 'virtually none'?

[maryf]

4. Love it all!!

Not sure about bananas? :;): Enormous K&R and I'm here to kick more! :yourock:

[TBF]

6. lol @ the bananas -

but open borders for peoples - that's non-negotiable :)

[flamingdem]

12. Demands are OK if you are walking the walk

But if it's just talk you're part of the problem, in my honest opinion.

Please do list the things that you are doing to know where you're coming from.

[MineralMan]

14. A most excellent point. I'd be interested in hearing about this

person's own lifestyle and choices. I'm guessing single, young, and perhaps a student.

[TBF]

19. Smart choices.

If everyone would just be smarter and make the right choices we wouldn't be in this mess. It can't possibly have anything to do with the system we're living under...

[MineralMan]

28. Tell us about your choices, then. What will you be eating this

evening. What clothes will you be wearing as you eat? Where did the food and clothing come from? Where did you buy them, and who made them? Are you using a community computer to post in this thread, or do you have your own computer? Where did you buy it? Where was it made? How many pairs of shoes are in your closet? How many of those were made in the USA? You do know that there are places where they make shoes. Texas is full of bootmakers. So, fill us in.

We want to learn from you, so tell us how you are putting your goals into practice.

[TBF]

32. In several posts now you've done your best to make this personal -

What is your reason for doing so? I would imagine focusing on the personal gets away from talking about the big picture - as in why do we support this egregious system that is Capitalism?

[MineralMan]

36. Yes, I have. It is all personal. You're calling for something, so

you must be working to put that into effect. It is the first step in achieving your goals. You cannot ask for what you are not willing to do. So, I'm asking what you have done. What lifestyle changes have you made to help put this utopian dream into practice? What are you willing to do? What are you willing to sacrifice so that we can all live as equals?

Of course it's personal. How else could it be?

[TBF]

40. Lifestyle changes are not going to do it. Sorry. It's going to take

a little more effort than that, and we are going to have to work together.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

167. You're saying we should vote with our dollars in a free market?

:shrug:

[TBF]

178. No, not at all -

I'm saying that it really doesn't matter what you do on an individual level. Sure, go ahead and vote, and recycle, and give money to your favorite charities (I do all those things). But we can't make the mistake to thinking that will change anything politically.

[proteus_lives]

83. I believe you've hit the nail on the head.

[TBF]

90. Wrong on all counts,

but my personal situation is not the issue. One person failing or succeeding under capitalism means nothing. We need to look at the big picture and admit that for a very small percentage to live extremely well, all the others are in various levels of slavery.

Unfortunately politics seems to draw the wealthy (of course, they have property to protect) so of course I'm getting a lot of push back from those of you who believe you have something to lose.

[cliffordu]

15. A 90% reduction in the military budget would mean that

you couldn't afford oil to drive to the walmart.

Free trade agreements? End them and it's good luck buying the chinese crap at the walmart once you get there..........

[TBF]

20. WalMart needs to go too. nt

[MineralMan]

21. She won't go to Walmart. She'll spin her own flax thread and weave

cloth, then hand-stitch all her clothing together, in the times she doesn't have to tend her garden in what used to be a park in the city where she lives. From her garden, she'll trade carrots and radishes for fuel to burn in the little stove that replaced the heat in her apartment. The vent pipe goes out through a metal panel in what used to be the window.

Walmart won't exist. We'll all buy our clothes from the neighbor who makes them from wool she spun from the sheep in the communal pasture, and pots and pans made by the local blacksmith and mended by the itinerant tinker who drops by every six months or so. Shoes will be sandals made from old car tires and hempen rope that'll be the byproduct of the marijuana growers just around the corner.

Yes, it'll be the 18th century all over again. But, we won't know, because the computers will all be just junk and handwritten letters will take weeks to cross the country. Still, the abacus will be reborn, and that'll be good.

[TBF]

23. Why do we need to have clothing from China?

We used to have factories to make clothes here - you know, back when people had jobs.

[MineralMan]

26. Oh, dear. Factories. That won't do, though, you see, in your

utopia. Handwork in people's homes. That's the ticket. Buy your clothing from your neighbor or barter for it with some rutabagas from your garden.

We still make clothing in the USA. I'll bet every piece of apparel in your closet has a Union-Made label and is US in origin, right? You must have lots of money, to be able to clothe yourself in all USA-made clothing.

I'm sure you also only buy local products, so you probably wear a lot of homespun stuff, being in Texas, as you are. They do grow cotton there in Texas, so I'm sure there's a mill nearby where cloth is made, and neighborhood sweat shops full of little children sewing your outfits.

Feh! Tell us how you live. Tell us where you buy your goods. Tell us about your air conditioning and your nice laptop you use to type on DU.

Do, please.

[TBF]

29. I wish I lived in some Utopia, but unlike you I am not a property owner

intent on keeping others as miserable as myself.

I'm just an average American like most, doing the best I can. We all do as much as we can, given our circumstances, to buy local and make sound decisions regarding how many resources we use.

But the thing is that you have to look at the big picture. I know you are content, your house is paid off and all that. I also know that you are not young (if that is you on your blog), and I am not either. Consider the world we are leaving our children and/or grandchildren. Do we leave them with capitalism - which is destroying everything in it's wake? Or do we try to do better?

[MineralMan]

33. You're funny. Thanks for visiting my blog. How do you figure

I'm intent on keeping others miserable. I've never made more than about $30,000 a year. I own my house, because I'm frugal as the dickens. I'm not content. I'm getting along.

I also don't have any children or grandchildren. That was a conscious decision I made in my 20s. By not having children, I did not contribute to the increase in population which makes your dream a fallacy. You simply do not understand that there is no way to feed the world's population without the extensive distribution system we now have. There's no way to clothe it, either.

You think you have revolutionary ideas. You don't. You have unrealistic, romantic ideas about a simpler time that cannot be realized. Unless this planet sheds a majority of its population, I'm afraid you're stuck with systems that can almost cope with feeding, housing, and clothing that population.

I've asked you some questions in one or another post. I hope you'll think about those questions and try to answer them.

[TBF]

47. Well however unrealistic these ideas may be, it's a starting point

to figuring out how we are going to do things differently if we want to survive. Capitalism is killing us. I see it first hand down here in Texas with the recent Gulf disaster, but such accidents could just as likely happen in your Great Lakes.

[Common Sense Party]

100. +1,000,000

[maryf]

53. It wasn't so long ago that many clothes were made in the USA, NAFTA

destroyed that, allowed corporations to increase their slave labor elsewhere...Remember when Walmart used to brag about their stuff being made in the USA???

[MineralMan]

88. There are still clothes made in the USA. Do you own any?

Go look at the labels in your closet.

I own lots of clothes made in the USA. I look for them. They're more expensive, but better in quality.

So, tell me how many items of clothing you currently own that have a Made in the USA label on them.

[maryf]

94. I buy my clothes second hand...

99% of the time...I also buy a lot of clothes that are old enough to have been made here at a reasonable price (I like clothes from the 50's-70's and can find them very cheap...

know why made in usa are more expensive?? because the workers maybe are making a semi-decent wage...but don't believe that label, fabrics are often imported.

I'm not a real big consumer, myself, and either donate or keep clothes forever...wearing a dress from the early 70's as I write this...have had it for 15 years already...

How often do you shop for clothes?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

168. What do you have against Chinese workers?

:shrug:

[janx]

127. You are killing me!

:rofl:

[Warren Stupidity]

130. "you couldn't afford oil "

what? The only reason we can afford oil is because we have guns pointed at those selling it? Really?

[Catherina]

144. Yes really. I disagree with supporting it but the sad truth is that he's right n/t

[cliffordu]

152. Believe me I hate being right.

[Warren Stupidity]

162. why would the saudis not want to sell their oil?

why do we have to force an embargo on Iran?

[Catherina]

143. It's good to have on record that you're fully cognizant of your support for the war machine

so you can drive to walmart.

[L0oniX]

193. A 90% reduction in the military budget would mean that we'd be spending twice as much as Russia.

[Marr]

18. Tripling the taxes of people making more than $75k is way off.

If you want to bump up the taxes on capital gains, I'll be right behind you. Jacking up the taxes on people making $300k or more would be good, too. But $75k is not actually much money in a big city.

[TBF]

22. This is a chart I found earlier today about tax rates

historically. Note the highest marginal tax rates in the 50's & 60's (you know, back when we had a middle class)-

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

[MineralMan]

31. Yes, those were the rates in the 50s and 60s. Do you have any

idea how few people made $75,000/year in those days? No? I didn't think so. Ask your grandparents. They'll be happy to tell you how much they made then. This is 2010. It is not 1950.

[TBF]

34. You think our rates are in line with what people are making now?

Seriously? Do you know what the average person makes in this country? 45K or so...

Here is a fairly recent article about gap between rich and poor in this country: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/income-gap-between-rich-a_n_639984.html

And you are against taxing the wealthy?

[MineralMan]

37. I am 100% in favor of taxing the wealthy, and very heavily, at that.

$75,000/year is not wealthy.

[TBF]

41. Sure, I'm ok with negotiating on that number -

we can go up to 100K if that makes you more comfortable. That's more than twice the median so maybe more to your liking.

[maryf]

49. I don't have a problem

working up from 100,000, myself, especially considering COL in NYC for example. It's silly that people here don't realize that this list is not set in stone...it's a list to work from and discuss...

[Marr]

59. One dollar in 1950 was worth about what eight dollars is worth today.

[Warren Stupidity]

131. It isn't 'big money' anywhere in the US.

People have a really hard time adjusting for inflation.

[FooshIt]

170. Why do you deserve that much money

when so many are starving? what makes you so much better

[Marr]

174. You're trolling.

And it's obvious.

[Laughing Mirror]

30. Excellent list!

Something is bound to replace the capitalist system, which has been around 500 years, is gasping its last breath and will be gone in a few decades. So a new system will evolve to take its place. But what system? The items on your list are a good place to start for the kind of system that would be more egalitarian and more human than the tragic mess we have today.

May we all live to see the day.

[TBF]

39. Thank you - I was beginning to think I was alone in this.

I know the list isn't perfect, but it's a starting point. I actually got out this list in response to a thread in a different post, when someone was asking what our goals would be for a general strike. Thought I'd post it and see if there were any like-minded folks on here ...

We know what we have doesn't work for most of us (sure the top 5% are happy), and the goals I've listed may not be considered practical given how we're currently living, but we've got to have something to start with.

[Laughing Mirror]

44. No you are not alone in this

Although it may seem that way to you now.

It is early yet, and the stark reality of the situation we are experiencing has not hit everybody yet. But it is hitting a lot of people and a lot of people confused by all the lies constantly fed them are finally starting to see through them. You see it more every day. More and more people are starting to wake up to the insanity of the system we are living in today.

[maryf]

50. You have a great list and I'm with you too!!

as a platform to build from! and so many have no clue how with our crumbling infrastructure, growing number of workers who can't find a full time job, if any job, and the corporations looking elsewhere to hire to pay pittances , that this country is on the way to joining much of the rest of the world in becoming a virtual slave state, and we need to take action now, not just for us here, but for all workers world wide. General strikes work wonders...

Hey, you're my hero du jour just for having the hutzpa to write this!! :applause:

[WonderGrunion]

186. Wow! You sound like a fundie expecting the rapture to occur any day now.

Until Star Trek like replicators come into being, possessions will have value in our society. As long as possessions have value, capitalism will dominate our society.

Live long and prosper, but that list is a distant pipe dream.

[Warpy]

35. 4, 7, 8, 11, and 12 should be dumped from the list

and replaced with:

4. Reduction of the military budget by 10% per year until our spending is in line with the rest of the world's and our unaffordable empire is gone.

7. Restore the progressive income tax and peg it to the mode, the wage which most people in the country earn, and not to fixed dollar amounts. That will allow it to rise and fall with inflation or deflation, something the last attempt did not do and which allowed Reagan to sell us the snake oil of a "flatter, fairer tax you can send in on a postcard." The top rate, applicable only to the top 2% of earners/grabbers, should be confiscatory.

8. Renationalize the mortgage holding companies, Fannie and Freddie. Make sure slumlords go to prison. Subsidize housing for abandoned families and marginal workers, the same housing everybody else lives in and not housing projects.

11. Liberalize border crossings with our closest neighbors but strengthen and enforce laws against exploitative employers who hire aliens in order to drive down wages and bust unions. Make union membership mandatory, although each workplace can freely choose or change its parent union.

12. Eliminate free trade without fair trade. If exporting countries mistreat workers or their environments, then assess high tariffs on their products to take the extra profit out of offshoring.

[TBF]

42. Not bad -

I'd take it over what we have right now.

[Warren Stupidity]

132. excellent adjustments!

[Quantess]

38. No rent / mortgage? How does that work?

[TBF]

43. No private ownership of property. Nobody homeless. nt

[Common Sense Party]

67. So who owns it? And who takes it from those who now own it?

[TBF]

69. See reply #63 -

some ideas. Open to others....

[Synicus Maximus]

87. When you say no private ownership of property, do you mean

all property or just real property? Does everyone have to give up their car, tv, computer and all other bits and pieces of private property?

[TBF]

91. I was thinking more in terms of real property -

especially people who think they need multiple homes, or in the case of John McCain, cannot even remember how many homes they own.

[Warren Stupidity]

133. that hasn't worked out so well anywhere

try again.

FDR had it right with his second bill of rights. We do not need (and hardly anyone wants) another marxist dystopia, instead we need a social system that eliminates economic insecurity.

Here is the program that should be the platform of the Real Democratic Party:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

[TBF]

142. We can't keep capitalism and expect to eliminate economic insecurity.

nt

[Warren Stupidity]

145. quite a few social democracies have done just that

we need a democracy of by and for the people, instead we have a plutocracy, or if you prefer a kleptocracy, of by and for a fairly small group of elites.

[BOG PERSON]

46. Curiously absent from your program:

any mention of reducing the incarceration rate, rehabilitating nonviolent offenders, legalizing marijuana :thumbsdown:

[TBF]

48. Consider them added. I have no problem with any of the things

you listed.

Incarceration rates here are ridiculous - just did a quick google search to get some numbers for anyone interested. Here is a blog discussing how our rates are higher than anyone else's:

"With more than 2.3 million people behind bars at the start of 2008, the United States leads the world in both the number and the percentage of residents it incarcerates, leaving even far more populous China a distant second, noted the report by the nonpartisan Pew Center on the States"

http://leisureguy.wordpress.com/2008/02/28/the-us-imprisonment-nation/


And no problem with legalization of drugs. Takes away the violence and black market.

[maryf]

51. not just marijuana but hemp...nt

[Starry Messenger]

52. I love #10

I would also like to see fully federally subsidized public education, uncoupled from local taxes. The 90% reduction in military spending would probably help that out. There should also be free college education.

[maryf]

54. Yep, yep, yep ...

people don't get how much goes to the military, over 50% of the federal budget...28% of the federal budget to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone...

I strongly advise folks to compare what we could have here without this graft and corruption machine called the Pentagon:

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

[Starry Messenger]

55. It's insane. Truly.

Every time I see someone post about how "expensive" our public education system is, I just want to scream. These wars have been an utter sham, and yet they are getting an open purse.

[maryf]

56. but, but, our national security is at stake!!!

how secure is it to have a nation of illiterates?? Very secure for the ruling classes...and look at all the handy cannon fodder to send abroad...

[FooshIt]

57. I'd change 7) to start at 50K and how would u accomplish 8?

Otherwise its a pretty damn fine list

[Grabo]

58. Yes, private property should be the first thing to go.

How to you go about getting people who've worked hard for thirty years to pay off their mortgage to just give up their house ?

[TBF]

63. I don't know that you would -

could be the kind of thing where people could keep one primary residence that they know own at least for the current generation, and work from there. Lots of houses sitting in foreclosure, those could be filled with homeless families. Building safe housing for others in need would provide additional jobs. I don't know if it would be state ownership, or by community ownership in future generations. That would be something to discuss.

[Common Sense Party]

74. I would say that before "the left" (i.e., you and your friend) start "demanding"

anything, you'd better work out the hairy details. That is a proposal that is doomed to failure as it is, even more so if it's followed by, "We don't know how it's gonna work. We'll figure that out later. But we DEMAND it!"

[TBF]

75. Every detail does not need to be ironed out to reject capitalism.

We certainly know what we don't want, that is a place to start. If you are pro-capitalism you are not going to like the demands. That may make you a liberal but not a leftist (there is a difference).

[Xenotime]

195. Simple. Eminent Domain could obtain anything the government needs.

[Glassunion]

61. A question about human nature.

Humans are competitive by nature. If you eliminate private property mortgages and rent for example along with triple the taxes on income. What would be the incentive to work?

I enjoy competition myself. I came up from absolutely nothing. I'll give you a little history. At 17 I was homeless and starving with no education. Today I am still uneducated(so to speak), but everything I have, I busted my ass for because I did not want to live that way. I started with a job for 5.10(minimum at the time) and had $12 a week for food. The company I started with did not have much money at the time.

I have been with the same company for 17 years. We no longer start any employee no matter what at minimum wage. We have an amazing close knit staff of 1200 people. I know almost all of their names.

But to my point. My company wanted to compete/beat their competitors in the area. So they drove sales with a good marketing team and raised wages to attract better employees. That first year they did that we ended in the red. This year, back in Feb, every employee received a profit share(we are a private company) of 138% of 7% of their annual wage. Because we compete. Now if you want to take away our homes, and tax us for doing the right thing then what would our incentive be to continue.

If you tell me that no matter how hard I work, I will never have anything better, why work hard? Right now me, and the people that report to me are rewarded very well for the work we do. But if the reward slips and I can have the same for less, well I would just do less.

Now I do understand that my company is in the small percentages as far as companies taking care of their people, but what would happen at companies that treat their people like shit?

[TBF]

78. I don't know that humans are competitive by nature -

I do know that it is encouraged and rewarded by Capitalism. To a certain point anyway. There are many people being laid off lately who have skills, motivation, and good attitudes - they aren't simply "dead wood" as some would have you believe.

Why should some people luck into so much more money than others? Because they are "smarter" or "work harder"? Or maybe are more willing to cheat others? Or simply born in the right family? (there are many ways to make more money, I'm not saying you personally are any of those things).

[Glassunion]

I totally see where you are coming from.

Socialism looks great on paper, but so does Capitalism. The problem with both is that to me they are impossible to execute.

Look at the American dream for example. Where else can someone with nothing make a good life for themselves if they work hard. But then you have those(corporations) some good and some bad that just want more and more and do not care who they step on to get there.

The problem with both ideas is that in practice they are both easily corruptable with power.

I learned a long time ago that life was this way. At the time, when I was homeless and needed help, but did not qualify, that there was something wrong with the system. But I did not blame those who had more than me. So what someone 2 blocks away was born into a million dollar trust fund? So what there were people with the same skill set(none in my case) who had jobs and a full stomach. So what? In any case it was not the fault of either of those people that I was where I was at. It really was not my fault either. It was a bad set of circumstances that got me there and huge failure of oversized failing government that kept me there.

The solution as I see it is that everyone should receive a fair shake. Equal, quality education, disability opportunities, wages, etc... If we could stop the worthless 23bil dollar a year war on drugs, these sickening wars on terror that have cost us God knows how much, we could easily pay for these programs and put people into quality housing that need it. We also need to look at how we do it. There are something like 23 federal programs to feed people. They don't work because people are still hungry. Trim that shit down and make it more effective.

[TBF]

86. I know where you're coming from as well -

I came from the same place. Not homeless, but rural poor and pulled myself out with scholarships. Two of us made it out and others do too, but that doesn't change that it's a system stacked against most. In order for that 1% to live so well there are so many around the world that live with so little. I do feel that the problems are systemic, and that capitalism has to go for us to have any chance at saving this earth and having any sort of equality.

I do hear what you are saying about the wars as well and agree.

[MadHound]

64. These aren't demands of the left, these are demands of your friend,

They read more like bad parody than anything else.

Next time, before you decide to talk for all the left, why don't you try consulting us in? Otherwise you wind up making us look like a caricature and yourself look like an ass.

[TBF]

73. I'd love to hear your definition of "left" -

as far as I'm concerned it does not include the DLC.

[MadHound]

85. Umm, go do some searching around here,

You'll find that I'm as far from the DLC as can be.

Your list sounds more like disinformation propaganda put out by the DLC, or worse yet, by some idiot like Beck. "Look, look, look at what those nasty leftists want!"

And again, this is your friend's list of what he wants. You don't speak for all of us on the left. In fact I would suspect that you speak for a small minority.

[Catherina]

146. So start talking MH

I have reservations about numbers

7) Triple The Taxes For Anyone Making Over $75,000/ Year. Sliding Scale Tilting Upwards

and

9) Elimination of rent/mortgages




$75,000 is what it takes to just barely subsist in some areas. Besides, there's no need to raise taxes if we dump the MIC. On the contrary, taxes should either come down or we should get, for free, services we pay for now (health, trash, water, heating, education).

I can't support elimination of rent/mortgages either but the entire for profit mortgage system needs to go and rentors need to be protected.

I'd like to hear your comments.
I like TBF's thread because it's a good start.

[TBF]

155. Thank you Catherina -

I appreciate that you understood the intent of my post. With everyone making lists the past few days (like "how it would be if you get Palin instead" I decided to throw this into the mix...

We shouldn't have to settle. We can work together towards something better. :toast:

[Common Sense Party]

65. 13. Universal Free Distribution of Whatever it is that You're Smoking

You are stoned if you think you'd have half a chance at enacting much of anything on this list. If you think any of this is feasible, you're not paying attention to what country we live in.

[maryf]

93. Do we really have to settle? can we demand more?

not that we'll get it right away, or easily, but if we don't voice we might as well just go to sleep, I guess. OH, that is the new way here, isn't it??

[Common Sense Party]

68. You want to triple my taxes?

Ummm...no, thanks.

[TBF]

72. To provide for people who are homeless and starving - yes.

I'm tripling my own as well, and that is the only personal comment I'll make on this.

[MrScorpio]

77. The art of haggling is lost on most Americans

You should already know that

[TBF]

79. I do know democrats can't negotiate -

we start in the center and then wonder why the only place to move is right.

[MrScorpio]

95. Bingo!

I like the cut of your jib.

[TBF]

99. Likewise. nt

[TBF]

80. A comment on the "hairy details" of how it could work -

I'm not sure how this country could look without capitalism. One place we can look for ideas, though, is the KKE party of Greece. They have become a strong force in Greece and have a very informative website - http://inter.kke.gr/


Here is their stated general blueprint (which I do admit has more detail than my bullet points above, but is not reams of paper either):

KKE’s PROPOSAL
The Anti-imperialist, Anti-monopoly,
Democratic Front – People’s power and economy
The Greek people have to choose between two paths of development for Greek society, the path which is
being followed and that which must be fought for by the people.
We maintain with facts and with proof that Greece, despite the serious and destructive damage that it has
experienced in certain sectors due to the dominance of capital and of monopoly competition, has the prerequisites
to create and develop a self-reliant people’s economy.
The negative developments of the last 20 years in certain branches of industrial production, in the
agricultural economy, can be dealt with under different political-economic and social conditions. It’s not too
late.
Greek has a satisfactory level of the concentration of production, the means of production, a trade network,
and a specific level of development in modern technology. It has a large, experienced labour force, with an
improved educational level and specialization in comparison to the past, a large labour force in science.
It has valuable natural wealth-producing resources, important reserves of mineral wealth, which are an
advantage in industrial production and the production of consumer goods.
It has the great advantage that it can ensure sufficient food supplies for people’s needs as well as for external
trade. It has capabilities in the production of modern products, machinery, tools and appliances.
In order for a people’s economy to exist for all, we must find a solution to the problem of ownership for the
satisfaction of people’s needs and not the needs of profit.
The choice is one: a change in the historically outdated social relations of ownership that determine the
political system as well and concern the basic and concentrated means of production in the following areas:
energy, telecommunications, mineral wealth, mining, industry, water supply, transportation.
Socialization of the banking system, the system of extraction, conveyance and management of natural
resources; external trade, a centralized network of internal trade; housing for the people, research and the
democratic provision of information to the people.
An exclusively public, universal and free system of education, healthcare, welfare and social security.
We estimate that there may be areas that will not be included in complete, nationwide, universal
socialization. Complementing the socialized sector, a sector for the productive cooperatives in small-level
agriculture may be formed, of small businesses in branches where concentration is low. Their participation in
cooperatives will be understood as a beneficial choice, based on experience that exists from the monopoly
ring.
The socialized as well as the cooperative sectors, production and distribution as a whole must be included in
a centralized, national economic mechanism of planning and administration so that all of the means of
production and the labour force can be mobilized, so that every possible form of international economic
cooperation can be utilized based on mutual benefit. Domestic production will be protected and the interests
of the workers will be protected from any possible consequences that arise from the needs of external trade.
Central planning is necessary in order to formulate strategic goals and choices, in order to prioritize branches
and sectors, to determine where greater forces and means will be concentrated. The materialization of
programming demands distribution by branch and area, and first of all, workers’ control of administration in
every production unit and service, in every administrative organ.
The government as an organ of people’s power will be obliged to ensure the participation of the people in
this completely new, totally unknown task, to support the people’s movement, to support and to be
monitored by that within new institutions of workers’ and social control.
The centrally planned development of society is a need that stems from today’s demands, first of all the
demands of mankind which is the primary productive force. The need to satisfy the wide-ranging modern
needs of the working people, the need for the means of production to develop, for science and technology to
develop for the benefit of the people, make central planning a vital necessity.
People’s power promotes intrastate commercial agreements and exchanges, agreements for the utilization of
techno-knowledge based on mutual interest.
The public debt will be re-examined under people’s power with the main criteria being the interests of the
people.
At the very beginning, people’s power will have to confront an organized internal and international reaction.
The EU and NATO, the agreements with the USA, do not leave much room for manoeuvring by EU member
countries.
The solution to this problem by withdrawal from the EU is inevitable with the aim a self-reliant, popular
development and cooperation that is in the interest of the people.
It is necessary to step up our activity on the basis of the struggle against the problems.
We struggle ceaselessly for immediate gains for the working people and we will continue so that measures
can be imposed by the power of the movement reducing the acute problems, and relieving the people.
We have developed positions and demands for every single problem and issue that has come up. However,
that is not enough today; an alternative proposal for progress is needed so that the struggle has an aim, a
goal, meaning, and ultimately can apply pressure in every phase.

This statement was found here - http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1005

[maryf]

92. Thanks for this!

Good stuff TBF! wish I could rec more than once!

[TBF]

96. Thanks -

I was happy to find that KKE Statement. Good starting point. :)

[maryf]

101. maybe

it should be it's own OP, one more rec to go at this time!!

[TBF]

114. I love that piece as well -

but doubt it would fare well considering what's happened to this one.

It's ok, I saw this get up to +5 at one point, then immediately drop back down to +3 with unrec's. I think all that proves is that we have many in the democratic party who still have quite a bit to lose. That doesn't surprise me - politics is essentially a rich woman's game (ha!) ... people who are working 2 or 3 jobs don't have time to sit at their computer (how many in the world don't even have access to this sort of technology...).

I am excited that folks actually stopped by to talk, however, that's a first step. Have a wonderful Sunday :)

[maryf]

169. You did yourself proud!

and probably have tons of folks thinking beyond this small world here!! :yourock:

[sendero]

102. These are not the "demands of the left"..

... they are demands of morons.

A more reasonable list would include....

Medicare for anyone that wants it. Opt ins would pay taxes to support it, nothing is FREE.

Glass-Stegall or its equivalent reinstated. HFT outright outlawed with stiff penalties for violations.

Progressive income tax system in which the rich PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.

Disincentives for companies to move jobs offshore.

No more blanket "free trade" - countries selling to us would have to buy from us.

You know, shit that could actually be done very easily and would have a huge impact.

[TBF]

103. From Dallas I would expect nothing less than right-wing rhetoric.

This list is very scary here in the states, but the European leftists would consider it only very basic and add to it. And, yes, that is probably where I will move at some point.

[sendero]

104. You know what..

.. I believe in a certain amount of dreaming but for fucks sake that list is RIDICULOUS.

Let's get some economic justice and leave the unicorn-shitting-skittles stuff for later.

Oh, did leave out two important things

Get the fuck out of the middle east

Give gays the civil rights they were promised

And while I'm here, fuck your veiled assertion that all Dallasites or even Texans for that matter are wingnuts. You clearly don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

[TBF]

105. I've lived in Dallas, and I now live in Houston -

I know what I'm talking about and I'm not saying all Texans are wingnuts. There are plenty here though and the rhetoric abounds...

"Get the fuck out of the middle east" was covered under reduce military spending by 90%

and I completely agree with "give gays the civil rights they were promised" - under a more equitable economic system we would ideally see equality for all.

I understand the call for sensibility - I really do. As I discussed with another poster above (who understood), you can't start from center and expect to move anywhere but right. Start from the left and then negotiate with the other side. We might like the results a little better if we try that approach. Just a suggestion.

[sendero]

106. If you are going to use..

... the "soviet style" negotiation tactic, maybe you should say so up front.

[TBF]

107. If you're going to red-bait maybe you should say so up front. nt

[sendero]

109. That's not the point..

.. "soviet style" was coined by an author to describe the way the soviets typically engaged in negotiation. Which was to start way past where they would be happy.

My comment had no intention, implicit or otherwise, of calling you a communist, and frankly I could think of several worse things to call you if I were looking to do so.

[TBF]

112. Did a google search and couldn't find that -

but I trust you are sincere. Thank you for the explanation.

[socialist_n_TN]

122. Rather than calling them the demands of morons

why not support the IDEALS (or maybe most of them) and then SETTLE for your list?

As another poster pointed out, it's called negotiating. You don't START negotiations with what you'll settle for and expect to get it. You START with the IDEAL of a communal and, yes, FAIR (there's that utopian word again) world and then you MIGHT settle for your list.

[ibegurpard]

124. These are NOT my ideals

I used to consider myself a centrist and Sendero's suggestions are exactly what I believe in.
It's fucking ridiculous that I have to align myself with people who consider OP's ideas the ideal because the Democratic Party has gone so far right.

[TBF]

125. Just as it's "fucking ridiculous" that labor is now represented

by the same folks who want to break their unions. There is definitely a disconnect in the party. I agree with that point.

[socialist_n_TN]

126. Well I guess I'm a moron then or at least moronish...........

because I agree w/o reservation with 6 of the above proposals, agree in principle with 4 of them and I'm not sure about 2. But then I've never considered myself a "centrist". I'm a socialist.

But I will GUARANTEE that you ain't getting what you want (which are also worthy goals), if you START there. They'll all be compromised away RIGHTWARD.

[TBF]

149. It's very troubling -

it's as if the democrats have become the party of the status quo. On the other side we've got the harsh free market of the republicans. Who is supporting labor?

We've got a few genuine leftists on this site, but the free marketer's have unrec'ed this piece repeatedly. Re-building the left may be our only hope (and I am not talking about third parties here - it's beyond electoral politics. I'm thinking more of building movements... similar to the labor and civil rights movements in our history...)

[Stoic]

108. That's jut crazy talk.

Our Democratic Overlords, since their defeat by Reagan, have decided that the only way to get elected is to lie to their base and supplicate themselves to corporate interests. This notion that the government should represent the interests of the people and that the gov't should REGULATE the environment, commerce and industry is just so much crazy talk coming from those crazy liberals.

[JHB]

110. Actually these are "Demands from TBF", not "from the left"

Just because you count yourself on the left does not mean you speak for all on the left.

There's no hive mind at work here, even though those on the right often seem to think ther is.

[TBF]

111. Never said I did -

Leftist is a decidedly different animal than liberal. I am offering a leftist perspective (admittedly far left) for debate. Though I realize republicans have no idea what a socialist is (as evidenced by the references to president Obama being socialist - which always makes me laugh), many democrats at least have a clue that there is a continuum on the left. Not to put too much into labels (because many are just used to stigmatize) I would offer that many calling themselves socialists have no problem at all with capitalism and that is what I'm calling out in this post.

Is capitalism working for us? Is it possible that it could ever work for us given the inherent inequities of the system?
Are we as citizens getting what we need? Should we be breaking the unions? Should we break down public education and go towards charter schools? Should basic health care be a luxury? Should 1% of the country live in luxury while many are jobless and homeless?

It's not simply an academic exercise. We've got a lot of people seriously suffering right now. 401K's were pilfered, homes being foreclosed on, folks losing jobs through no fault of their own, losing health care because they can't afford to pay the premiums. Not everyone has a trust fund (in fact most don't) - no paycheck may well mean no food on the table (if you still have a table that is).

These are serious problems. Are we going to work together to make progress, or are we going to be dismissive of helping others and guard our own property with our weapons and let everyone fend for themselves?

In solidarity there is strength, and I remain in solidarity with those non-owners who would like to work towards a better world.

[JHB]

113. I understand all that, very clearly...

I do, however, think it's something that could have been reflected better in your OP subject line.

Witness the number of poster who dismiss your post out of hand instead of being in any way pusuaded by the dialoge.

[TBF]

116. I suppose I could have called it "demands from the far left"

to appease those who call themselves left, but in reality are quite pleased to keep some sort of kinder, gentler capitalism rolling.

Personally, though, I think we've done enough appeasing. Look where President Obama is getting with his appeasing and compromising with the Republicans. My position is that we should be taking a much harder line.

[Catherina]

148. In all fairness to TBF, DU is center right to left of center, not left. n/t

[treestar]

115. You have to talk enough voters into it

Anyone can demand anything. The political system does not respond, since it involves potentially everyone. So many do not agree with you and what do you intend to do about them? All you can legally and ethically do is try to persuade them. Which brings us to the left's biggest failure. Inability to be anything but smug and superior and "right."

[TBF]

117. I'm not convinced that "so many" do not agree with me.

Certainly on this site many do not agree - that is clear and I expected that response. If I could put this list out to the down-trodden of the world (in the tent cities, homeless, living in huts, etc...) I think I'd get a better response.

[treestar]

118. But they never join that strike

And that strike never happens. Because in the end, the "downtrodden" are not convinced.

[TBF]

119. The strike -

It has happened here before -



Civil rights march.


And it's happening in Greece -



Mass and militant counterattack till the victory Speech of the General Secretary of the CC, cde Al. Papariga, at the nationwide demonstration of the party on 15 May.

http://inter.kke.gr/


Will our generation step up to the challenge?

[leftstreet]

121. 'Fair Trials For All Members Of The Senate'

:rofl:

LOL that one caught me off guard!

Excellent ideas, however I think I'm getting lazy in my old age...I'd make Eliminating the Accumulation of Capital & Exploitation of Labor #1. Seems the rest would easily follow.

K&R

[TBF]

123. I'm with you on that my friend. nt

[Catherina]

128. Rec'd yesterday. Surprised at how unrecced this has been n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

137. Sorry but this list is seriously flawed and hardly representative of 'the left'.

[Catherina]

140. Depends how you define the Left. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

147. outside of a tiny group of irrelevant communists groups on the left

are not advocating elimination of private property. That is just silly.

[Catherina]

151. You'd be quite wrong and I suggest you understand what private property is

Hint, it's not your car or your house.

[Warren Stupidity]

154. hint: it is exactly that to the OP.

Go read his list again, and his responses to this issue. The OP appears to explicitly include housing in the private property the OP wants abolished.

[TBF]

156. Private property is means of production.

Personal property is homes, cars, etc.. But I personally wouldn't mind taking some of those foreclosed properties and putting some folks in there who need homes.

[Warren Stupidity]

159. So you are contradicting the subthread on housing

here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8898059&mesg_id=8898105

where you appear to be advocating the confiscation of houses?

Make up your mind what you actually mean.

And regardless of what you mean, hardly any groups on the left, outside of the marxist-leninist communists, are advocating confiscation of the means of production- that form of private property. Again, please consult history. Your experiment failed badly.

[TBF]

164. I just said I personally would like to see

confiscation of some housing. That is something that would be a hard sell in this country, given all the propaganda on home ownership. You were talking about classical definitions so that is what I provided.

[TBF]

141. To that I would respond "define left" (and I mean as opposed to liberals).

nt

[Warren Stupidity]

150. there isn't a concise definition

however advocacy of the elimination of private property puts you in a very small segment of the left, inhabited mostly by marxist-leninist communists who have not revised their ideology since the 60's. The rest of us have rejected that sort of dystopian nonsense.

[TBF]

153. This kind of dystopian nonsense -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/05/tent-cities-national-coal_n_487908.html


Except it isn't imaginary.

[Warren Stupidity]

157. which comments of mine support our current system?

I reject radical utopianism as its implementation has a massively poor track record. However that does not mean that I support our current system, a system that I consider a plutocracy or kleptocracy. Rejecting your 'abolish private property' nonsense does not imply 'support corrupt current system'. Implying it does, is dishonest, implying that there are only two choices here is a false dichotomy.

[Chan790]

134. Ouch...

I'm a pretty staunch leftist but I've got to be honest, much of that list isn't even desirable, let alone feasible.

1) Right there with you.

2) Not really a governmental concern. Best tackled at the local level, federal administration and development for food distribution and systems is so inefficient as to be wasteful. The answer is co-ops, run and administered locally.

3) Yes.

4,6,8,9.) Paste you into the far loonie fringe. Most people will actively oppose you on all of these as trying to destroy the United States. You might get away with suggesting a 30% defense cut and strategic draw-down of US forces. Further than that or the undermining of banking or property ownership or national currency and you're getting into the most people will actively oppose you with violence if need be category.

5) Sure. Not viable outside of the coasts, Great Lakes, Florida, and interior Northeast but sure, we should at-least be working towards it.

7) Um, no. Not just no. Hell no. Fuck no. There is nothing wrong with limited affluence and tax policies actively conspired to spark deflationary depressions are not a solution to anything. Let me modestly suggest a counter proposal: Increase the top tax rates to what they were under Eisenhower, peg the tax rate for individuals making less than $200K to 0% thus rendering the income tax into a high-affluence tax. Have enough tax revenue to full fund Soc. Sec., universal healthcare and real economic stimulus without borrowing from the Chinese. Have enough revenue that if we spend wisely (because honestly, the government is not a wise spender.) we can pay-off the foreign-owed portion of the national debt within 20 years.

10) Criminalization of membership in the ruling oligarchy worked ever so well for the Dantonists until they became the rulers.

11) ??? Do you mean actual bananas? I love them and they don't grow domestically, you see. I eat close to 3 lbs of them a week. I will be compelled to board a plane to Chile to buy them, smuggle them into the country and gun down in cold blood anybody who tries to deny me banana-yumminess or oppose me.

12) Love it, will never happen.

[TBF]

139. "Staunch Leftist" but still support capitalism?

Just asking. Appreciate your comments, counter-proposal on taxes isn't bad.

I'm going to have to negotiate on the bananas, a few people have freaked over that one. Non-negotiable on people having open borders though. Would add a few that people have suggested in this thread - equality for gays, legalization of marijuana. Others we could add as well I'm sure.

The list is obviously directed towards a world of socialism, not just this country. It's going to take some time. But we'll never get there if we're not even going in the right direction.

[Chan790]

158. Keynes was a staunch leftist anti-communist and so am I.

That's the guy in my sig line.

John Maynard Keynes. I, like he, believed in the primary necessity of corrective social benefit in economics, also that it was impossible completely outside of capitalism. The system exists for the benefit of people, not people for the system. “Regarded as a means, (the businessman) is tolerable; as an end, he is not so satisfactory.”

“The love of money as a possession - as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life - will be recognized for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities.”

(Both quotes John Maynard Keynes.)

[TBF]

163. Fair enough -

I don't see capitalism reacting well to constraints, but I've only seen conservative rule (basically) the past 30 years.

[Warren Stupidity]

161. democratically regulated capitalism

see 'social democracy'.

[TBF]

190. I have a hard time envisioning a regulated capitalism

having grown up under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush - and it's hard also to imagine given our propensity for war. The european countries don't have the defense expenditures taking over their budgets.

But you're certainly right that it's an interesting debate - whether we can do it through regulation. Some of you who lived through the Kennedy years and earlier may have seen more regulation and results of that (certainly the taxation rates were higher).

[nessa]

160. Massive boycotts and a general strike..

How do you get massive amounts of people to agree with your list? You can't have massive boycotts and a general strike without a majority or at least a pretty significant minority to agree with you.

It doesn't appear that you even have a majority here, and people here are much more likely to be receptive to your ideas than most other places.

[TBF]

192. I wouldn't agree that people here on DU would be more receptive to my ideas -

with the exception maybe of number 1 - health care for all.

Higher income folks on DU and/or other political sites are not going to want this. It's got to come from the working class.

In terms of movements - I could see a lot of folks willing to march re Gay Rights, Education, Social Security - those are specific areas that jump out right now. Unemployment too if they end up cutting it without jobs to get people back to work.

Thanks for your comment.

[MicaelS]

165. I agree with all of them ,except 8, 9 and 11.

No way, no how, under no circumstances, would I ever agree to those.

[apocalypsehow]

173. "Elimination of Rent/Mortgage"? LOL - good luck with *that*.

This is more like a thread to caricature the "Left," not quantify a set of reasonable goals. :thumbsdown:

[TBF]

179. That seems to be the one that freaks people out the most -

well that and the bananas. I personally don't see the big deal about ownership, but I guess people are used to a house being the only thing they really "have" in this country (the lucky ones anyway), so we might have to adjust that one a little.

Anyway, thanks for your comment.

[blindpig]

176. late kick

Most excellent list, realization is gonna take a lot of work but what work could be more worthwhile?

[TBF]

181. Agreed, I believe ridding the world of capitalism is the only thing that will help the animals -

I still can't get over what has happened to the poor turtles in the Gulf. Have been watching the stories as they send the ones they find to different rehabilitation groups around the country. So sad.

And it is going to help people out quite a bit too.

[blindpig]

200. Nothing could do more for nature...

than the elimination of the profit motive.

[alcibiades_mystery]

180. Unrecommend for Weirdo Martyr Complex

"When you're wondering why we're not dutifully agreeing with everything the president is currently doing..."

Nobody requires you, desires you, seeks to persuade you, or otherwise wants you to do anything of the sort. I stopped reading at this sentence, since it is just dumb and whiny, so I didn't expect anything else from your list. You can argue like an adult, or a petulant teenager. You chose the latter. Good luck with that.

[TBF]

182. If you had read the entire paragraph (or understood it) you'd know that

was in response to the myriad lists of "how Palin would be worse", "what the president has accomplished so far" etc... But I've gotta say after watching the comments this weekend I think it would actually turn my stomach to vote for the guy knowing how you supporters act.

I had hope in the guy, campaigned for him (donations, phone-banking, walking door to door, working in my precinct), and now I see more than ever that capitalism is a system that is never going to allow for anything but allegiance to the corporation, no matter how well-intended individual servants might be.

Keep insulting others and you'll keep turning away what used to be your base. We'll see how that works for you later this year and in 2012.

[alcibiades_mystery]

183. You're the one that insults

When you claim that anyone "dutifully agrees." I know you don't understand this to be an insult, since you are too busy puffing yourself up as some kind of radical or some other such fantasy about your ACTUAL political effects on the world, but it is an insult, and I did read the rest of the whiny paragraph. I have no doubt that the 5-8% who claim to be the "base" will happily sabotage themselves and the rest of us in order to make themselves feel righteous. Good luck with that. When any of your candidates manages more than 8% in a national race, come talk to me. Until then, you actually DO NOTHING but put Republicans into power, then complain about how awful it all is. Because you like martyrdom.

[TBF]

187. It's not feeling righteous -

it's actually doing something for normal folks. You may not understand that if your focus is electoral politics (which you are exactly right on - I actually worked on the campaign & voted because at some level it matters - mostly cultural issues). I do believe movements (marches, strikes, etc) are the only thing that actually give us any leverage on the economic issues though.

I complain about how awful it is no matter who is in office (until I see some results), but sorry if that came off as "whiny". That certainly was not the intent.

[Evasporque]

185. Revised list after Democrats negotiate with Republicans...

1. Big tax cuts for the wealthy.

[TBF]

188. lol - ok that's funny. nt

[NeedleCast]

189. Hard for me to get behind your program

when you propose tripling my taxes because I make very slightly over 75,000/year.

Let me know when you have a set of realistic demands.

[TBF]

194. Taxes are key -

my family income is higher as well. Right now we're paying for everything (those of us in that elusive upper middle class area). But we do have it a heck of alot easier than those making 30K ...

Maybe I should raise that number to 250K - that is where Obama set it during the campaign (tax breaks for those making under $250K) and that seemed fair to many.

[Xenotime]

196. Greater than $250k is very wealthy and can afford a large tax hit.

[NeedleCast]

203. No, you shouldn't raise the income level, you should set the tax at a resonable level

Your proposal to triple my taxes would mean I'd be paying roughly a 90% tax rate.

[MilesColtrane]

191. The Green Party has key platform planks that seem to be close to these demands.

Are you a Democrat?

Not going for a "purity test" here. I'm sincerely interested if you consider yourself a party member.

[TBF]

197. I've been a dem since birth -

my dad worked in a steel mill and belonged to a union. Both parents high school graduates. I've always voted dem, and most recently worked on the Obama campaign. Not because I thought he would change much economically - but on cultural issues I'm more in line with him.

Do I consider myself a dem? In voting and that sort of thing I fall there. But I also read the Communist Manifesto when I was about 15 and thought it was the most amazing thing I'd ever read politically. There is a group of Marxists I hang with on-line and I've learned tons. Not sure how I would label myself honestly.

Also didn't want to make this thread about me, obviously, we are talking about making things better for the majority of folks. But your question seemed sincere so I responded in kind.

[MilesColtrane]

198. I applaud your wanting to push the party to the left, but I think that most people will see some...

of the demands on your list and completely dismiss you out of hand.

I'm only an incrementalist because that is the only way I've seen any progress happen in my lifetime.

Barring a complete economic collapse, there will be no universal strikes in this country.

Capitalism isn't going anywhere. I believe it can be tempered though, and my model wouldn't be Greece, but the Scandinavian countries.

[maryf]

199. Barring a complete economic collapse

get ready...but it's going to be like the frog being heated up slowly, I think, don't get cooked before you decide to act...

[nemo137]

201. What do you mean "local currencies?"

Are you talking, say, Pound Sterling vs. Euro, or Federal Reserve Note vs. Busey Bank of Urbana Note?

[LoZoccolo]

202. Cool story, bro. n/t