moneypenny20

Wasn't going to argue about his policies. Don't try putting words in my mouth
My apologies however. I thought when you said a winning policy you meant a policy, not the election.

GarryP

Is it just me or are the local extreme right crowd taking on Trump cadences and phrases? I mean, seriously, 'terrible reputations' is what Trump is busy building at the moment.

I'm calling you a troll is actually a compliment - I don't think you are actually daft enough to really think Trump is doing well, and are just stirring things.

(PS as has been pointed out to you before, I'm a centralist, not a socialist.)

Beoz

Yes. The left are developing terrible reputations. Its been happing for a while. Have you missed it?

You are left BTW. You support hand outs, give unions respect, support open borders, and hate anything Liberal, Conservative, Republican. Don't be ashamed. If that's what you do, that's what you do

GarryP

Sigh

So you are telling me what I really think now?

You profess not to have any idea what left wing really means (and make some really howlers - open borders is left wing now?) I'll say it again, if you don't push for ownership of the means of production, you ain't left wing. The centre is where you balance the needs of individual and society in a nuanced way, emphasising freedom in the truest sense of the word - and that's where I am.

PS My feelings of far right wing aren't of hate, they are of disgust. Trump disgusts me.

OzTennis

My point which you fail to see is - where is the real threat to Americans? It's from Americans legally armed to the teeth. Your chances of being killed by a muslim extremist pale into insignificance compared to being killed in your home or on the street or more likely at your school, university or McDonald's by a person legally armed to the teeth. Trump is all about the threat to America from 'bad people' coming in. He's got millions and millions of 'bad people' with arms who don't need to be subject to a travel ban. If he had started in a blaze of glory on gun control we'd know he was attempting to tackle the real problem.

There were 372 mass shootings in USA in 2015 which is defined as 4 or more people killed in a single incident. How does that compare to the threat from muslims? I can't help but think that Trump and his supporters would view a couple of terrorist incidents as more serious and would move for more weapons to counter it (2016 onwards > 372).

OzTennis

Agreed. The Guardian for example is wrongly labelled a 'left wing rag' but as you point out it is centrist (i.e. well left of right wing). If one quoted from the Morning Star then the left wing tag can be justly applied.

morpeth

Maybe a good thread would be a discussion of what being to the "left" means these days, or even to the "right". I see many posts using these words whether (unfortunately) as an insult, or as a "shorthand" for a point of view but since no agreed upon definition, just detracts from whatever the debate is about.

morpeth

These are two separate problems, and certainly require different solutions. Actually it seems somewhat those who wish to not have stricter controls on those coming into the country, and those who want stricter controls on guns sharing a common mindset- not wanting stricter controls but not suggesting anything better.

Your point I think is a good one. Why have stricter controls to fight Muslim extremists ? To reduce chances on such attacks occurring now, and increasingly in the future. I see nothing wrong with countering that threat.

But by any objective means as you point out the greater threat is gun violence in the USA, yet generally doesn't attract the attention of the public, media or politicians on a regular basis like acts of terrorism. I don't know that gun control alone will address the problem, but I do know absent a major effort in perhaps a new direction, trends indicate things will stay the same. I have never understood how even the most ardent supporter of the second amendment could be against some sort of background check at a gun show.

OzTennis

True. Once one is in a debate and quotes facts and puts arguments forward and the reply is only that it comes from a left wing paper and that the holder of that view is brainwashed or believes in propaganda then it ceases to be a reasoned debate.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Trump holds views far right of say Turnbull or May so it is fair to label him at the extreme wing of that spectrum but there are others further right of course (who regularly get praise heaped on them in this forum).

I laugh inwardly when I see myself being labelled a leftie because I know the views I hold and the policies I would advocate are very much centre of the road. I'm just for giving everyone a fair go and treating people more equally than many.

Beoz

Hmmm isn't that funny. Have you actually read through Trumps policy on trade?

Beoz

You don't get it do you. Right or wrong American's care about threats they cannot control. Self inflicted deaths are part of being American. I'm not here to argue about the validity of that argument - its the way it is. Get over it.

GarryP

Here's the thing - real left wing is going to come back again in the near future, in a slightly different vibe.

See, with automation the generic push will be to allow owners/the rich to concentrate wealth even more - collapsing the economic system as we know it.

The only real solution is to spread the wealth in some way - which is where people having been talking about guaranteed minimum incomes etc. - and the taxation that would be needed. However there is another possible path - the government owns the means of production and the profits from that are used to fund the mincome. Perfectly possible, particularly for the staples of life where innovation is at a minimum.

For instance, it would be perfectly possible for the government to own an automated pharmaceuticals plant, churning out the out-of-patent basics at a controlled profit margin.

That's a VERY socialist idea - but one that arises naturally from the implications of automation and the needs of society. In the same way there's no need for the manufacturing plant to be overseas, there's also no need for it to be in private hands.

One way or the other, the future is going to have to look a whole lot more socialist, if it's not to look like a hellscape.

OzTennis

Yes, let's not forget that on the campaign trail Trump told everyone watching, him believing that Clinton would do away with the right to bear arms, that '2nd amendment people could act against Hillary Clinton if she won the election and appointed judges who would tighten up on gun controls.

“If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” Mr. Trump said, as the crowd began to boo. He quickly added: “Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”

Oblique as it was, Mr. Trump’s remark quickly elicited a wave of condemnation from Democrats, gun control advocates and others, who accused him of suggesting violence against Mrs. Clinton or liberal jurists. Bernice A. King, daughter of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., called Mr. Trump’s words “distasteful, disturbing, dangerous.”

Currently he's trying to whip up the idea that with his travel ban temporarily suspended Americans are in grave danger because of the bad people who could slip through the net. Well, you've got more to worry about from the guy next door who has a gun frankly.

OzTennis

I'll never 'get' that thinking. You don't think they can control (i.e. reduce) the mass murders and murders of <4 people? That's a pathetic argument actually that one threat can be 'controlled' and the bigger threat can't (which it can really).

There's not the will there for gun control (from Trump and his followers) and there is the will there to act like white supremacists and we have the above 'thinking'.

Beoz

2 things where you are wrong.

1. Automation creates jobs - you know that already.

2. We already have minimum incomes. Its called welfare.