John Boehner criticizes Republicans, but does he reject neo-liberalism?

[Eric the Green]

John Boehner doesn't like where the Republican Party has gone. That's fine, but unless he renounces his neo-liberal philosopohy, then he upholds the cause of everything the Republicans have done wrong.

[Einzige]

Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

[Eric the Green]

More extended interview with Stephen Colbert

continued below:





It's fine for him to denounce racism and xenophobia, but the "principles" he adhers to, and his positive opinion of George W. Bush and Newt Gingrich and his vote for Donald Trump, only serve to make way for the extremism he denounces. Neo-liberalism must be dethroned. Boehner needs to renounce his statements to the effect that "raising taxes on those you expect to hire more people" does not work. He says he could work with Biden, if he were there. I wonder if he could, since he would have to support raising taxes and government spending. We can only speculate what he would do. But as he says, in his position he had to lead a right-wing Party. So it would still be difficult. That said, I always considered Boehner, although he subbornly resisted Obama's mild reforms, was a cut above the extremists in his Party, and basically decent.

[Eric the Green]

(04-19-2021, 11:13 PM)Einzige Wrote: Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

Of course they reject neo-liberalism. That doesn't make them communists like you. No-one could be that, and be elected.

[Einzige]

(04-19-2021, 11:30 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:13 PM)Einzige Wrote: Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

Of course they reject neo-liberalism. That doesn't make them communists like you. No-one could be that, and be elected.

The Biden Administration is currently deciding whether or not the top corporate tax rate should be 25 or 28 percent.

The top rate under Obama, a scant six years ago, was 31%.

Biden's Secretary of State believes that private business will solve climate change. The Biden Administration is not going to pursue a higher minimum wage.

The Biden Administration is neoliberal as Hell. It doesn't even amount to postwar Keynesian social democracy lite.

[Eric the Green]

(04-19-2021, 11:40 PM)Einzige Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:30 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:13 PM)Einzige Wrote: Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

Of course they reject neo-liberalism. That doesn't make them communists like you. No-one could be that, and be elected.

The Biden Administration is currently deciding whether or not the top corporate tax rate should be 25 or 28 percent.

The top rate under Obama, a scant six years ago, was 31%.

Biden's Secretary of State believes that private business will solve climate change. The Biden Administration is not going to pursue a higher minimum wage.

The Biden Administration is neoliberal as Hell. It doesn't even amount to postwar Keynesian social democracy lite.

His two giant spending bills are a departure from neo-liberalism. Raising taxes is a departure too. Biden has already proposed a higher minimum wage. OF COURSE private business will solve climate change, IF required to and prodded to by the government. It has already responded. We don't have to nationalize the energy industry to solve climate change. We need to force it to behave.

No-one here believes that you will ever support Biden-Harris. So what's your point?

The issue on this thread is Boehner, and similar Republicans. He might convince people that some Republicans are sensible. But supporting neo-liberalism and Reaganomics is not really sensible at all. It was seen as an extremist view for several decades, and should become so again. The Reagan counter-revolution should be reversed.

If Biden has not reversed it sufficiently, that is and will continue to be mainly the fault of the Republicans, and such support as they have.

[Einzige]

The Keynesian Democrats of ths 1930s-1960s, if confronted with an issue like man-made climate change, would absolutely have nationalized the energy industry, not because they were socialist (they weren't) but because nationalization is a sensible capitalist response to crisis.

Biden is a neoliberal, cut from the same cloth as Bill Clinton.

[Eric the Green]

(04-19-2021, 11:51 PM)Einzige Wrote: The Keynesian Democrats of ths 1930s-1960s, if confronted with an issue like man-made climate change, would absolutely have nationalized the energy industry, not because they were socialist (they weren't) but because nationalization is a sensible capitalist response to crisis.

Biden is a neoliberal, cut from the same cloth as Bill Clinton.

No, nationalizing industries is socialist, and Keynesian Democrats would not have even considered this. They were capitalists, "embedded liberals." Learn your history. 

No, Biden and all Democrats, including Bill Clinton himself, have moved left during this 4T era. Clinton in 1993 would never have proposed, let alone get passed, $2 and $3 trillion spending bills.

[Einzige]

(04-19-2021, 11:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:51 PM)Einzige Wrote: The Keynesian Democrats of ths 1930s-1960s, if confronted with an issue like man-made climate change, would absolutely have nationalized the energy industry, not because they were socialist (they weren't) but because nationalization is a sensible capitalist response to crisis.

Biden is a neoliberal, cut from the same cloth as Bill Clinton.

No, nationalizing industries is socialist, and Keynesian Democrats would not have even considered this. They were capitalists, "embedded liberals." Learn your history. 

No, Biden and all Democrats, including Bill Clinton himself, have moved left during this 4T era. Clinton in 1993 would never have proposed, let alone get passed, $2 and $3 trillion spending bills.

1. No it isn't. Read Engels.


https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/wo...p/ch03.htm

Quote:But, the transformation — either into joint-stock companies and trusts, or into State-ownership — does not do away with the capitalistic nature of the productive forces. In the joint-stock companies and trusts, this is obvious. And the modern State, again, is only the organization that bourgeois society takes on in order to support the external conditions of the capitalist mode of production against the encroachments as well of the workers as of individual capitalists. The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine — the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage-workers — proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done away with. It is, rather, brought to a head. But, brought to a head, it topples over.

Nationalization is not socialism. This is why FDR nationalized Louisiana's oil industry, to Huey Long's chagrin.

2. Biden is spending 11 billion more on the military this year than Trump spent in his last term. Why is that?

This guy is a noncommunist, pro-capitalist Leftist. He also identifies Obama and Biden as neolibs.

[Eric the Green]

You can find some Leftist to call them names; that doesn't mean anything. High military spending is not neo-liberalism; it is neo-conservatism. Biden is more of one of those than Trump, perhaps; although specific military actions are being reduced under Biden.

The federal government could never run the entire USA energy industry, nor would it ever happen. But there were municipal energy companies created before the neo-liberal era, such as in Los Angeles and Santa Clara CA. Measures to create these more recently have failed even in liberal cities like San Francisco. But now city companies are partnering with energy companies to produce and offer green energy. I now pay only for green renewable energy, and I pay it to San Jose Clean Energy company, although I get whatever is on the grid, and pay a fee to PG&E for this service too. Actually I don't pay anything to SJCE, because I generate more energy than I use from my solar panels.

[pbrower2a]

Standing for an evil objective but showing regret about the methods in use for their achievement is absurd. No honorable means can redeem an evil purpose.

[Classic-Xer]

(04-19-2021, 11:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:51 PM)Einzige Wrote: The Keynesian Democrats of ths 1930s-1960s, if confronted with an issue like man-made climate change, would absolutely have nationalized the energy industry, not because they were socialist (they weren't) but because nationalization is a sensible capitalist response to crisis.

Biden is a neoliberal, cut from the same cloth as Bill Clinton.

No, nationalizing industries is socialist, and Keynesian Democrats would not have even considered this. They were capitalists, "embedded liberals." Learn your history. 

No, Biden and all Democrats, including Bill Clinton himself, have moved left during this 4T era. Clinton in 1993 would never have proposed, let alone get passed, $2 and $3 trillion spending bills.

The Democratic leadership is moving Left because that's where the bulk of the money is coming from these days. As far as the spending bills, who cares,, the government is broke and the bulk it won't ever be spent anyway. The future Democrats are pretty much screwed.

[David Horn]

(04-20-2021, 10:38 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Standing for an evil objective but showing regret about the methods  in use for their achievement is absurd. No honorable means can redeem an evil purpose.

Well said.

[David Horn]

(04-20-2021, 11:31 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The Democratic leadership is moving Left because that's where the bulk of the money is coming from these days. As far as the spending bills, who cares,, the government is broke and the bulk it won't ever be spent anyway. The future Democrats are pretty much screwed.

If the government is truly broke, blame the tax-cutters and and enforcement obstructers.

[Classic-Xer]

(04-20-2021, 03:24 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: You can find some Leftist to call them names; that doesn't mean anything. High military spending is not neo-liberalism; it is neo-conservatism. Biden is more of one of those than Trump, perhaps; although specific military actions are being reduced under Biden.

The federal government could never run the entire USA energy industry, nor would it ever happen. But there were municipal energy companies created before the neo-liberal era, such as in Los Angeles and Santa Clara CA. Measures to create these more recently have failed even in liberal cities like San Francisco. But now city companies are partnering with energy companies to produce and offer green energy. I now pay only for green renewable energy, and I pay it to San Jose Clean Energy company, although I get whatever is on the grid, and pay a fee to PG&E for this service too. Actually I don't pay anything to SJCE, because I generate more energy than I use from my solar panels.

The federal government can hardly run itself these days. It spends more time tripping over itself, undermining itself and getting in its own way these days. It's kind of sad but it is what it is which is why it's going to be let go of in favor of a do over and a fresh new start. It's coming dude and I want to see the look on the Democrats face when it happens and see their response. So, what to do think. do you think their arrogance/aggressive and greed will get the best of them?

[Classic-Xer]

(04-21-2021, 09:10 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-20-2021, 11:31 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The Democratic leadership is moving Left because that's where the bulk of the money is coming from these days. As far as the spending bills, who cares,, the government is broke and the bulk it won't ever be spent anyway. The future Democrats are pretty much screwed.

If the government is truly broke, blame the tax-cutters and and enforcement obstructers.

Of coarse you would blame the tax cutters, you're always blaming the tax cutters while ignoring the tax spenders and continually calling for more spending.

[Classic-Xer]

(04-19-2021, 11:46 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:40 PM)Einzige Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:30 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:13 PM)Einzige Wrote: Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

Of course they reject neo-liberalism. That doesn't make them communists like you. No-one could be that, and be elected.

The Biden Administration is currently deciding whether or not the top corporate tax rate should be 25 or 28 percent.

The top rate under Obama, a scant six years ago, was 31%.

Biden's Secretary of State believes that private business will solve climate change. The Biden Administration is not going to pursue a higher minimum wage.

The Biden Administration is neoliberal as Hell. It doesn't even amount to postwar Keynesian social democracy lite.

His two giant spending bills are a departure from neo-liberalism. Raising taxes is a departure too. Biden has already proposed a higher minimum wage. OF COURSE private business will solve climate change, IF required to and prodded to by the government. It has already responded. We don't have to nationalize the energy industry to solve climate change. We need to force it to behave.

No-one here believes that you will ever support Biden-Harris. So what's your point?

The issue on this thread is Boehner, and similar Republicans. He might convince people that some Republicans are sensible. But supporting neo-liberalism and Reaganomics is not really sensible at all. It was seen as an extremist view for several decades, and should become so again. The Reagan counter-revolution should be reversed.

If Biden has not reversed it sufficiently, that is and will continue to be mainly the fault of the Republicans, and such support as they have.

Boehner isn't an issue anymore. He's been out of office and getting rich off his political connections (working as a lobbyist for the legal pot industry) for a while now. He must have done pretty good for himself since he's officially retired and living comfortably now days. I don't think he'll have much input or influence as to what happens from now on.

[pbrower2a]

(04-21-2021, 11:39 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(04-20-2021, 03:24 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: You can find some Leftist to call them names; that doesn't mean anything. High military spending is not neo-liberalism; it is neo-conservatism. Biden is more of one of those than Trump, perhaps; although specific military actions are being reduced under Biden.

The federal government could never run the entire USA energy industry, nor would it ever happen. But there were municipal energy companies created before the neo-liberal era, such as in Los Angeles and Santa Clara CA. Measures to create these more recently have failed even in liberal cities like San Francisco. But now city companies are partnering with energy companies to produce and offer green energy. I now pay only for green renewable energy, and I pay it to San Jose Clean Energy company, although I get whatever is on the grid, and pay a fee to PG&E for this service too. Actually I don't pay anything to SJCE, because I generate more energy than I use from my solar panels.

The federal government can hardly run itself these days. It spends more time tripping over itself, undermining itself and getting in its own way these days. It's kind of sad but it is what it is which is why it's going to be let go of in favor of a do over and a fresh new start. It's coming dude and I want to see the look on the Democrats face when it happens and see their response. So, what to do think. do you think their arrogance/aggressive and greed will get the best of them?

Efficiency is a good thing unless it serves questionable ends or does evil things to people. The Holocaust was efficient in killing innocent people, and as a rule the most important thing about Rudolf Hoess (rhymes with "hearse") to his legacy is not that he was an efficient  administrator of the concentration and extermination camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau. 

Stalin had the most efficient legal process ever known, with people going from seeing people going from unlikely suspects to corpses in a very short time, in view of the infamous sentence of "ten years imprisonment without the right of correspondence". I suggest that one read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago to learn what that phrase means. 

OK, it was cover for nearly-summary execution. The convict was taken away from the court, quickly shot, and of course he never corresponded again. So you need not read any Solzhenitsyn. 

By most accounts, the Atlantic Slave Trade was highly efficient.  

We sacrifice some efficiency in the legal process (what could be more efficient than a lynching?) to protect the rights of the accused. 

By the way -- you (Classic X'er) have admired Donald Trump, and it's a good thing that he wasn't as efficient in destroying human rights and civil liberties as he wanted to be. It's telling that another leader who admitted that he admired dictators of the past was Saddam Hussein, who modeled himself in part on Hitler and in part on Stalin. I see far more similarities in practice (including the body counts) of Fidel Castro and Agosto Pinochet.

It's a good thing that Trump did not get his way, especially on January 6, 2021. Maybe we would have the dungeons or concentration camps, perhaps even with people like me "disappearing".

[pbrower2a]

(04-21-2021, 12:30 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:46 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:40 PM)Einzige Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:30 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 11:13 PM)Einzige Wrote: Lmao. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't reject neoliberalism, so...

Of course they reject neo-liberalism. That doesn't make them communists like you. No-one could be that, and be elected.

The Biden Administration is currently deciding whether or not the top corporate tax rate should be 25 or 28 percent.

The top rate under Obama, a scant six years ago, was 31%.

Biden's Secretary of State believes that private business will solve climate change. The Biden Administration is not going to pursue a higher minimum wage.

The Biden Administration is neoliberal as Hell. It doesn't even amount to postwar Keynesian social democracy lite.

His two giant spending bills are a departure from neo-liberalism. Raising taxes is a departure too. Biden has already proposed a higher minimum wage. OF COURSE private business will solve climate change, IF required to and prodded to by the government. It has already responded. We don't have to nationalize the energy industry to solve climate change. We need to force it to behave.

No-one here believes that you will ever support Biden-Harris. So what's your point?

The issue on this thread is Boehner, and similar Republicans. He might convince people that some Republicans are sensible. But supporting neo-liberalism and Reaganomics is not really sensible at all. It was seen as an extremist view for several decades, and should become so again. The Reagan counter-revolution should be reversed.

If Biden has not reversed it sufficiently, that is and will continue to be mainly the fault of the Republicans, and such support as they have.

Boehner isn't an issue anymore. He's been out of office and getting rich off his political connections (working as a lobbyist for the legal pot industry) for a while now. He must have done pretty good for himself since he's officially retired and living comfortably now days. I don't think he'll have much input or influence as to what happens from now on.

Lobbyists are often more the power behind legislation than the elected legislators in Congress and many state legislatures these days.

[David Horn]

(04-21-2021, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(04-21-2021, 09:10 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-20-2021, 11:31 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The Democratic leadership is moving Left because that's where the bulk of the money is coming from these days. As far as the spending bills, who cares,, the government is broke and the bulk it won't ever be spent anyway. The future Democrats are pretty much screwed.

If the government is truly broke, blame the tax-cutters and and enforcement obstructers.

Of coarse you would blame the tax cutters, you're always blaming the tax cutters while ignoring the tax spenders and continually calling for more spending.

Our physical infrastructure is falling apart.  By international standards, it's a very sick joke. Our human infrastructure isn't in much better shape, with students carrying outrageous financial burdens for schooling typically provided for free or cheaply in other countries.  Those are only two of many examples.

Like I said, blame the tax cutters and the politicians who made tax enforcement a joke too.  Current estimates are $200Billion per year of tax cheating, mostly by the rich.  Who defunded the IRS? Oh yeah, the Republicans.