I'm A New Democrat -Ask Me Anything

:evilgrin:

(edited to note that, evilgrin aside, I'm interested in the answer.)

my first thought also!

If not then why the "new"? What's wrong with just "Democrat?"

Answer?

I have been a Democrat since I could vote which was 1976


I call myself a New Democrat because I favor a Third Way- like Clinton, Blair and Schroeder.

I am in favor of some form of univeral health insurance but not single payer.

The best medical systems are in Germany, France, Britain, Australia, and Canada. ALL SINGLE PAYER. What exactly do have against a single payer system besides the fact that it works?

because there's no way it will pass with our current representatives.

I would expand Medicare and Medicaid and provide generous tax cuts to employers to pay for health insurance.

It would be a mandate.

Kind of like the Gephardt Plan though he's not a New Democrat


John Kerry also has an interesting plan.

The countries you cite do deliver good medicine to the masses but I think the U S still is on the cutting edge of medical developments.

Also, I know that the U K health care system is in need of reform as Blair is being criticized for lack of it.

When I was in London last fall, I met a homeless guy who was on meds for Hep C. Anyway, needless to say, though he didn't have a roof over his head, he did have some medical care. (and he had a roof, while i was there, much to the consternation of the hotelier...)
I would most certainly rather spend my tax money on helping other people maintain their health than spend it on dropping bombs on those who happen to be in an area that has a lot of oil...see what I say??
Anyway, I live in a high-tax, high income kind of place (Connecticut), used to live in another place, same thing...California. So the upshot of all this is...is when I (if i live long enough) to retire...i will have about 35 cents to my name, can't eat cat food, because anyone who has kitties knows that cat food is more expensive than Top Ramen. So let me de-bunk that rumour of old people eating cat food now!! (they are not eating anything at all.)
I really think we need to address the elderly contigent ASAP, since we are all going there sooner or later.

There are gobs of details, specifics, about how the French (#1 in the World my friend) and other single payer systems work.

I don't know of any reputable form of "some form of univeral health insurance but not single payer" out there, at least NOTHING that has a 100% coverage. Sounds like magic to me. Or at least some sort of silly talking point:-)

expanding Medicaid and Medicare and mandating employess provide their employees with health care coverage

Minus the private insurance raping of the system?

I could accept that for a time.

Why not let people buy into a good plan. That's what Kerry proposes and I like it alot better than expanding Medicaid and Medicare. Why promote programs that are sort of cruddy to start with?

A uniter - not a divider.

John Kerry is a newcomer but he's o k

And you're a new Democrat? What does that mean? Are you the most precocious (sp?) newborn ever? A newborn infant?

and the big shifts in the economy?

are part of the business cycle.

An expanding economy will allow more people to enter the middle class.

Under Clinton

Black home ownership reached new highs while black unemployment reached new lows

Same for Hispanics

Bill Clinton was da man


A rising tide lifts all boats- John F Kennedy

I really think if JFK and RFK were alive today they would be New Democrats.

expanding a shifting economy, if the jobs created are lower skill/wage jobs, does not solve the problem.

If the only job available to a systems engineer - whose field was outsourced over seas over a period of years - is fry cook, or retail sales (as the mgrs jobs were already filled by the line operators who were outsourced in the previous wave - and thus had time to take the sales and move up to local manager positions), or other lower wage jobs, then that systems engineer along with the entire sector is now engaged not in productivity (adds more to gdp), but in service (hotel clerk, care rental customer representative).

As fewer are able to consume as many goods - those industries are hit as well.

We are in this kind of cycle. How do you encourage, say, IBM from moving all of those high skill jobs to India. If the economy is expanding - don't they just say "great!" now we can make even more while we use the lower salaried workers abroad?

What policies (not broad stroke higher pie stuff) will change this cycle?

but nations will produce what they produce best.

I think we need to emphasize education and training to prepare people for the high tech jobs of the future.

I believe in free trade but I know there will be people displaced by it. I think the government should give these people vouchers to be trained for new jobs.

It's counter productive to protect industries that are no longer competitive

that hinders workers and governments in other countries from setting minimal standards for workers and prevents workers from organizing. IN the past the cycle of industrialization has led to an over all increase in the standard of living across the country. THis happened in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. This is not happening today. This impacts US industries as where wages used to begin to climb (not to US levels) in other countries that when added to higher costs of making the products overseas and importing them to the market, that some companies would decide it made more sense to house the production here.

These days there is protectionism - don't think there isn't. But it is corporate protectionism which is turning the old cycles which lead to development on their head.

I, too, believe in more education and jobs training. However there is a cycle we are currently in which just sends those new jobs away as well. Folks being displaced may not be able to keep up with the cycles of training for new jobs, working, being displaced, acquiring more education, etc.

I believe that a policy of targeted tax cuts rather than giving the barn away - could be used in selective industries that are creating higher wage jobs. Tax cuts targeted to investment in the development of new products and industries that will lead to the creation of jobs.

On edit -- I thought this was lost.

an English economist of Italian-Jewish ancestry and one of the great ones. Karl Marx' favorite bourgoise economist, by the way, because he systematized the Labor Theory of Value. He also proposed the theory of trade according to comparative advantage, to which you refer in your first line, about 1800. It has never been strongly supported by evidence, but gobalization does seem to be moving in that direction. The problem is that, when the theory of comparative advantage is fully realized, software jobs will be moving from India to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in search of lower labor costs and wages in the good ole USA will be down to about $1000/year, as they are in Congo. Do you look forward to living on $1000 per year?

OK, before you flame, remember I did say that the evidence has never supported the comparative advantage theory. You are the one who invoked it, not I.

So you are for laissez faire economics? That makes you a dinosaur democrat, because that is what many democrats believed before FDR.

New Democrats that emerged after the Depression were Dems who were socially liberal, not economically liberal ((and when I mean economically liberal, I am talking about hands off the economy).

Your ideas aren't new; indeed, they are quite antiquated.

So perhaps you should refer to yourself as a "Paleo Democrat"?

Ok, seeing how I'm still a second class citizen on this board, even after offering really good server advice (cough!), I cannot post new threads. I wanted to bring up the topic of the cheapening, exploitation and routine desecration of our flag.

Since 911, flying flags on every upright object sticking out of your motor vehicle, fashoining clothing from US flags, and even tatooing the US flag on your nether regions has been en vouge.

The flag is used as an advertizing tool to sell cars, alcohol, drain-unclogger, you name it.

Much press has been given to a very few incidences of "flag burning", and upside-down (distress) flags on college campuses. How much press is given to the thousands of flags that are truely disgraced and desecrated by car-antenna patriots?

How does it make you feel to see our flag in a rumpled ball with candybar wrappers and cigaratte butts on the side of the road? A discarded fashion accessory? I run a small retail store in western mass, and very often while cleaning my sidewalks and parking lot, I find my flag amoungst the cigarette butts and soda cans.




ps: I have a pile of 5 flags so far, that I plan to retire honorably. (by fire and prayer)

forum - slightly related. Title is something about him getting confronted by a Freeper.

its not completely related - but I think you will find a receptive conversation for you issue.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=89492&mesg_id=89492&page=

Since I'm a part of the New "Heavily Armed Left" I'm "Pro"...

as long as they are registered

I think only because he thinks someone is going to go up to that God-forsaken town in Maine and take his Glocks away. I'm like, what the @#$%, Dad, why sleep with guns under your pillow, afraid of Moose?? I have to let the old fellas have their delusions, JUST AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT IN PUBLIC OFFICE!

As opposed to Dixiecrat? I don't get what you are saying.

Are you aware that Democrats are Democrats because they don't think with a monolithic mind like Republicahs?

Are you aware that Democrats are Democrats because they invite diversity, including people who are of the more conservative persuasion, like you, and people who are of the more liberal persuasion like me?

And, finally, are you aware that by imitating the Republicans by creating a label like "Neodem" you are fracturing the party, at least semantically?

Why not just say you are a moderate Dem? Why create a party within the party?

Oh well, call yourself what you want.

And, by the way, where do you stand on abortion rights???

Abortion should be safe legal and rare.

I don't consider myself a conservative or a moderate Democrat.

I am liberal on social issues.

I am a New Democrat because I think the free market is the best deliverer of goods and services. The government should only get involved when free markets fail.

I think we are seeing some of that now. It is because we have policies that greatly assist the largest corporations giving them an incredible advantage over mid and small size businesses. That is a BIG part of the problem.

I believe businesses with fifty or less employees create 80% of the new jobs.


Why did that guy take umbrage to my calling myself a New Democrat.

I started my intellectual journey as a Democratic Socialist. I still share many of their goals but not their methods.

I will support the nominee of my party. I'm not trying to start a new party like the Greenies.

from monopolies and trusts IS the problem.

to your point - that points to part of the problem - especially under bush, with tax policies and social (privatization) policies that give huge advantages to largest companies. For example, non-competitive contracts - not good. If your figures are correct it would suggest that these polices aren't going to result in much job creation. BTW, I would consider 80 employees a small midsize company.

destroy most of the jobs that are lost. (The average lifetime of a small business is less than a year). They also pay less than big business. Small businesses are businesses that are not good enough to get big. That's all.

I have worked in small businesses all my life.

Some businesses are not conducive to growing to be the size of a Wal -Mart.

If you open up a little print shop you don't have to grow it to the size of a Kinkos to make a decent living.

I am well aware that most businesses ventures fail. They fail due to lack of capital or a sound business plan.

I agree. Sounds like "New Dem" is a Social Darwinist who believes only the strong should survive, even if it means that Walmart pushes out Mom&Pop Family Grocery.

Monopolies, Trusts, and Cartels, OH MY!

I specifically said I would provide vouchers to folks who lose their jobs so they can be retrained.

I think it's counterproductive to protect dying industries.

compete with monopolists and trusts...so, in my opinion, you are saying that those who compete best should survive.

What do you think about mergers and monopolies?

to help the Mom and Pop stores don't you economically disenfranchise alot of working folks who shop at Wal Mart because they can get good stuff cheap.


We have economies of scale here.

Economics has its own laws

There are always choices to be made.

Laissez Faire economy was the hallmark of old Dems.

I never said I was in favor of laissez faire capitalism.

I am a Keynesian.

I just think the best social program is a high paying job with benefits.

The private sector creates jobs. It is the job of the government to creat an environment where the private sector can prosper.

I don't see anything in my posts that suggest I want to repeal the New Deal.

To that accusation, I suggest you read Arthur Schlessinger's seminal work on The New Deal in which he argues that The New Deal was a conservative program in that it conserved capitalism by ridding it of it's excesses.

reading more recent histories than Schlessinger.

Perhaps The End of Reform, by Alan Brinkley (1996).

I just know that I am not a economic liberterian no matter how much you want me to carry that banner.

Keynesian economics began consumerism during the ND, which basically ended good and necessary reforms to industry and finance.

By creating a culture of consumerism (because Keynes advocated demand-side economics--increasing demand) a solution was found that helped industry instead of hindering it. So, what emerged from the New Deal was a liberalism that no longer demanded changes to corporate capitalism, but focused on social issues.

It is really a good book and you can pick it up in paperback for about 15 bucks. I think it is a necesary read for ALL democrats to understand the stream of dem consciousness.

Politics and Markets

Is he a recent author? What's his thesis?

Charles Lindbloom was a Princeton Political Science Professor. It's hard to label him. I'll call him a democrat socialist or a garden variety liberal.

Politics and Markets is broken into two parts. In the first part he demonstrates how there has never been a state that has had both a democratic polity and a command economy. In the second he argues why it would be a good thing. I remember the quoute some twenty years later ,"the future belongs to those who plan."

I have also read most of Michael Harrington's and John Kenneth Galbraith's stuff.

My favorite contemporary economist is Paul Krugman.

was on my father's dissertation committee. But my father's training at Harvard led him to a different view of economics (and one that is a bit less absolute - in terms of theory) than yours.

was a welfare state liberal or a garden variety liberal or a democratic socialist. Kind of like Ted Kennedy but "socialism" has such a negative connotation in American politics I would not like Ted Kennedy tagged with that label.

I'm sure you know that John Kennedy Galbraith was the ambassador to India during the Kennedy administration. JFK used to tease him about having a socialist in his administration. He also tutored Ted Kennedy about economics in 1962 when he was recuperating from a plane accident. It was Birch Bayh, father of current senator Evan Bayh who saved his life... Small world.

I read something interesting on this board and I'll paraphrase it. Those on the right call Medicare and Social Security socialist cuz they don't like it and folks on the left also call it socialism because they do like it and offer it as examples of socialist programs that work.

Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, food stamps, AFDC imho are just part of the mixed economy that we have.


btw-I'm not an economic absolutist. I am not 100% in any economic camp.

Keynesian economics began consumerism during the ND, which basically ended good and necessary reforms to industry and finance.

By creating a culture of consumerism (because Keynes advocated demand-side economics--increasing demand) a solution was found that helped industry instead of hindering it. So, what emerged from the New Deal was a liberalism that no longer demanded changes to corporate capitalism, but focused on social issues.

It is really a good book and you can pick it up in paperback for about 15 bucks. I think it is a necesary read for ALL democrats to understand the stream of dem consciousness.

...I guess we disagee on when the free market fails, though...

My 3-eyed one headed kid would be 23. I had typed a long dissertation as regards to being a young Repug and a delegate to the 1980 convention, but it got lost in space, and I am too tired ot re-iterate it...(it was an interesting story, too)
So lets just say...PRO CHOICE....will always support Planned Parenthood, because they keep everyone healthy regardless of their ability to pay. When I was poor they were there, when I wasn't poor, they were still there. I guess that the upshot is...there is a lot to being a "new democrat" as you were pointing out to the previous poster...the thing is that you may not find people to agree with all the platforms. That is why I don't go totally communist, like with ANSWER, only because group-think is not my cup of tea...Anyways, sometimes you have to "create a party" within the party when you diverge from the stated platform...but in the long run, we must all get together to usurp what's going on now, don't you think?
XXXOOO

Are you going to take your head out of your ass? Could you find your ass if you decided to take your head out of it?

I guess if you have to resort to ad hominem attacks you have already conceded the argument.

and you have not responded to my other, substantive posts.

Demsincebirth has been supporting his position without attacks, and I am enjoying chatting with him to ascertain what he is saying...even though we don't appear to agree, it doesn't give anyone the right to personally attack him, which is against the rules of DU.

Sorry I had to say this, but I don't think you are being fair. They guy has already said he supports a woman's right to choose.

n/t

I'm not a

right to lifer

a foe of affirmative action

a friend of Bush's tax cut

an advocate of unilateralism

a Social Darwinist-that's fascist to me.

I am a New Democrat or a Third Wayer but you know if I went to the Freepers Board I would get the same trashing because I have been at boards where the right and left meet and I get the same crap from the Far Righters.

Also, despite what you guys think my views are alot closer to most Democratic voters than you think or wish to admit.

I have a B.S. in Social Science, an M.A. in Political Science, and have done post-grad work in Government.

When I was in grad school I fancied myself a Democratic Socialist. I read everything by Michael Harrington.

But times have changed and so have I.

I have come to see the efficacy of markets and I believe the government should get involved only when markets fail.

There are plenty of situations that aren't amenable to market solutions like insuring old folks who get sick alot. That's where government should get involved.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton " The era of big government is over but that doesn't the mean that the era of every man for himself has just begun"

That's my philosophy.

"I have a B.S. in Social Science, an M.A. in Political Science, and have done post-grad work in Government."to quote DemocratSinceBirth


" Wow!:wow:" to quote Lady Freedom

I worked part time but I aldo did alot of it on the government's and my parent's dime.

go to newdem.org

we're not a Fifth Column or anything like that

also, if you guys want to, maybe there's a way to continue the dialogue.

As a liberal, a humanist, a Christian, a businessman I think I bring alot of perspectives to the debate.

1. If you are a "new democrat" and a "democrat since birth" does that make you the best-typing, most-aware newborn ever?

1. I was just reading a different thread that mentioned "light, sweet, crude" oil. Who/why/how/when did anyone decide that was a good name for oil?

thread: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=90400&mesg_id=90400&page=>

oil because it requires the least refinement.