I'm Republican on a federal level but on a Municipal and State level I'm a hard blue Democrat. I support State industrial policy of subsidizing housing to keep rents low, I support density over sprawl, I support investment in infrastructure like transportation, trains to reduce car usage, taxes on the wealthy, public schools, etc. I'm like a true MidWest Huey Long type Democrat and I'm tired of pretending I'm not. We need to use State policy to encourage family based policies that make it easier for people to have bigger families and get those birthrates up. For example I love Mamdani. That said I support Republican on a Federal Level since they're more willing to leave my State alone to do our own thing and not try to Federalize everything, plus they are restrictive on immigration.
>>515595213>Let's use the state to just do a bunch of good things for good people so that they can have good livesIndeed, a great rendition
>>515595213Jewish op kill yourself
>>515595213>I support State industrial policy of subsidizing housing to keep rents lowpic>I support density over sprawlto keep rents high>I support investment in infrastructure like transportation, trains to reduce car usagestabbed by a feral nigger
>>515595213Do you think it's more effective to meditate in full Lotus
>>515595530Youre going to be hanged for sedition
>>515596051By you ?
>>515595213Yes. I’m a fascist. Economics is only a tool for the state to use in support of the nation and people comprising thereof.
>>515595213Forget about the left/right bullshit, support what rings true to your values and what you think logically would do the most good.
>>515596215By 328 million people
>>515596520Are they all going to cross the pond? That's gonna be something to see
>>515595530>Yeah, helping people is bad, lets just make everything purposely worse.Great ideology pal, I'm sure that will go over with the voters.>>515595899Density is literally what keeps rents low. It's sprawl zoning that forces inefficient use of land that keeps rent high. If we could double the amount of apartment complexes built we could lower relative rents.
>>515595213I like some of that stuff in theory (like urbanism), but it's not possible without crime control, and leftists can't control crime in the US due to their racial ideologies.
>>515596806It's just a good rendition because it's perfectly juvenile without any indication of having heard an argument against it, and of course with the exquisite implication that the "republicans" just want bad things to happen cause they are bad or dumb or both.
>>515596806>Density is literally what keeps rents low.Moronic. Prices are determined by supply and demand. Reduce the land available through artificial means => raise the price of land.
>>515595213No. Far right here, but I appreciate the nuance in your approach between a right wing federal vs left wing local organization. You must be at least 40 years old to hold that kind of nuance, if not you're ahead of your time.
>>515596900Nayib Bukele method works pretty well.>>515596980>It's just a good rendition because it's perfectly juvenile without any indication of having heard an argument against it, and of course with the exquisite implication that the "republicans" just want bad things to happen cause they are bad or dumb or both.I listed a bunch of policies, I explained why they would be good, either explain the issue with them or shut up.
>>515597274Nah you didn't explain why they would be good, you just said they would be. Which is also why you think opposing them is the same as opposing good things happening, like the typical leftist 20 something.
>>515597274It would work if it were implemented, but which Democrat has the courage to semi-permanently lock up around ⅓rd of the black male population in a given city?
>>515597046Density increases the amount of available land use by allowing for more buildings and resential use to be allocated to the same land.Restricting development means the same number of people will have to compete for fewer living units.Basic economics.
>>515597196Appreciate it, I'm 23.
>>515597385You're the one who thinks I only support these things because I want to see you suffer. Very childish view.
>>515597781No I don't think that, I think you support those things because of the childishly naive view we are all taught that the purpose of the state is to use money to do good things for good people. Why one would oppose such obvious goodness is beyond such a person. Heart in the right place, terminally propagandized with easy leftist solutions. Many such cases.
>>515597614Permissive zoning (which is fine) is not the same as encouraging density. If you see ""sprawl"" as a problem, you're being a fool.>Basic economicsThe entire field of economics is right wing.
>>515596806Gibs me dat
>>515598003>I think you support those things because of the childishly naive view we are all taught that the purpose of the state is to use money to do good things for good peopleI think you were childishly taught by your parents that anybody who thinks outside the way you do is a terrible person and wants bad things.>Why one would oppose such obvious goodness is beyond such a person. Heart in the right place, terminally propagandized with easy leftist solutions. Many such cases.Yeah you're right, if free market capitalism and Conservatism is so great, why would I ever oppose it? I just want to see bad things happen? I guess anyone who doesn't adhere to your simple solutions is a bad person?
>>515595213Republicans want to end all human civilization and should be exterminated to the last. That is all that matters right now.
>>515598098Economics was right wing 50 years ago, it's now left wing. Spawl occurs because we can't have density. Zoning laws make it so every house needs a big yard and space in between them. If we had zoning, we could have more people living in a smaller area, build towers UP to create more units, and we wouldn't need to spend on infrastructure to connect every house (roads, wiring, plumbing, etc)
>>515598558OK but now you're just accusing me of what I just accused you of, the difference being that you literally posted it just a few minutes ago.>>Yeah, helping people is bad, lets just make everything purposely worse.Anyway>if free market capitalism and Conservatism is so great, why would I ever oppose it? Now we're getting somewhere. Those things are definitely not great, and I wouldn't recommend you to support either of them. They do however come with a few poignant criticisms of how your well-meaning solutions might fail spectacularly, or have already.
>>515595213>t.
>>515595213>For example I love Mamdani.NYC is already pretty socialist with public housing, hospitals and the largest mass transit system in the US , all subsidized with taxes. Its a very complex system and Mamdani has no experience running any kind of bureaucracy. His absurd rent freeze, government run grocery stores and free busses will not help anybody and bankrupt the city.
>>515598729>Economics was right wing 50 years ago, it's now left wing.It's not. If we polled economists, 95% of them would agree with me on 95% of issues.>If we had zoningWe do have zoning. I assume you mean less restrictive zoning here, which I already addressed. Zoning restrictions are an interference in the market (they are a left wing idea).
>>515598907That was a direct response to your comment which didn't even address a single point I made or a single policy, it was just a sarcastic remark. I don't know how else I was supposed to.>Now we're getting somewhere. Those things are definitely not great, and I wouldn't recommend you to support either of themSo you're not for state run economies and you're not for market economies. I don't know what you would identify as politically.>>515599688The big economists now like Picketty and Krugman openly support deficits to finance infrastructure projects if said projects are set to have a positive ROI.>We do have zoning. I assume you mean less restrictive zoning here, which I already addressed. Zoning restrictions are an interference in the market (they are a left wing idea).They have become a right wing thing because they're used by wealthy suburbanites to maintain their position of power in society to the detriment of middle class people trying to afford rent and housing. They are reshaping society into a Neo-Feudal realm where the boomer homeowners continue to profit from rent-seeking and monopolizing real estate while middle class people like me spend 60% of my income on the lowest rent possible.
>>515600378>The big economists nowThey're "big" because leftists love them, not because their claims have any merit.>They have become a right wing thingNo. All market manipulations are left-wing, that is what "economic left" refers to. It is true that ""right-wing people"" sometimes support left-wing economic ideas. For example, Trump the lifelong democrat supports big taxes on imports.
>>515600378I am definitely for at least a partially state-run economy, though probably in a very different way you imagine. Obviously I'm right-wing, I don't know how or why you wandered in here with your opinions otherwise. Whatever, all I wanted was to point out that you come across as someone who has heard all about the good reasons for his ideas and has never heard a peep from the other side, typical of a young man. That is still the point I want to make, and apparently it's offensive to you . So be it. Better luck with the other anons
>>515600859*And even Krugman would agree with me on like 70% of issues. Last I heard he opposed student debt relief, for example.
>>515600859The real divider between right wing and left wing politics is whether the goal is to uphold or suspend hierarchy. Government intervention can be right-wing if it's done for elitism or to enhance wealth inequality.Would you say the Fascist economic interventions in Germany or Italy to maintain the cartels would be economic leftism? Or what about the guild system in middle age europe that prohibited anyone from outside of a guild from partaking in a certain trade? What about protectionism done for nationalistic purposes? Would you call that left wing?
>>515601087>That is still the point I want to make, and apparently it's offensive to youYou think the idea of public investments in school is offensive. You got insulted by the idea of subsidized housing.>all about the good reasons for his ideas and has never heard a peep from the other sideFunny because I was an avid Milton Friedman sycophant for years. Read all of Ayn Rand and heard every argument in the book for unregulated markets. Thomas Sowell was my highschool hero.
>>515601488>You think the idea of public investments in school is offensive. You got insulted by the idea of subsidized housing.More head canon just like your first response about making things purposely worse. I don't consider either of those things offensive and I never indicated otherwise. You took my response to your presentation personally.>Friedman, Ayn Rand and SowellYeah those are not the other side. Whatever number two, we tried and failed, ships in the night
>>515601309>The real divider between right wing and left wing politics is whether the goal is to uphold or suspend hierarchy. Government intervention can be right-wing if it's done for elitism or to enhance wealth inequality.No, that is a leftist definition that does not reflect right-wing beliefs. However, it's also not a true characterization of leftists. Leftism is an anti-white, anti-normal coalition. It is a coalition of special interests.>Would you say the Fascist economic interventions in Germany or Italy to maintain the cartels would be economic leftism? Or what about the guild system in middle age europe that prohibited anyone from outside of a guild from partaking in a certain trade? What about protectionism done for nationalistic purposes? Would you call that left wing?Yes, of course. There are plenty of people on /pol/ who call themselves ecnomic leftists and consider themselves fascists/natsocs. If you look for someone who opposes all these things you will find them on the "libertarian right" portion of the political compass, which is also where economists are.
>>515601753>More head canon just like your first response about making things purposely worse. I don't consider either of those things offensive and I never indicated otherwise. You took my response to your presentation personally.It was a snarky response to my OP which was just an attempt to put the ideas out there. Of course I didn't have a wall of text explaining each one in detail and why they work. A sarcastic response "oh why didn't we think of this already" didn't add any value.
>>515602045What would you define as right wing then? Lack of government or state intervention in life and the economy?
>>515602465>A sarcastic response "oh why didn't we think of this already" didn't add any value.Except I'm convinced that you haven't heard any arguments from the other side, and the entire thread has confirmed it. Take it or leave it kiddo, you can either be smug and self-righteous or informed and possibly vulnerable
>>515602551Economic right is laissez-faire. Intervention in social issues is better mapped as authoritarian-libertarian. On the other hand, you could also correctly describe economic leftism as "economic authoritarianism." It would then contrast with "economic liberalism" which taken to the extreme is libertarianism.
>>515603203Ok that's a fair definition.>>515602757I am convinced you've never heard a Liberal or left wing argument. You've only heard what your parents or Conservative Church community wanted you to think. If you opened your eyes to new ideas you'd realize your parents don't know everything. Just because the raised you to believe something doesn't mean it's true.
>>515603636>He's still offendedAbsolutely not gonna make it here
>>515598729sprawl occurs because people want to live in single family homes with yards. even if you could live in a tenement full of niggers and it was affordable do you think people would want to? subsidizing housing for niggers won't make housing for whites more affordable because the whole reason housing is expensive to begin with is because whites don't want to be neighbors with niggers.
>>515595213Are you actually retarded? Yes you are. Lefty.Scumbag
>>515595213Test. And no, you are gay
>>515603877You got triggered by literal zoning suggestions>>515604323>sprawl occurs because people want to live in single family homes with yards. even if you could live in a tenement full of niggers and it was affordable do you think people would want to? subsidizing housing for niggers won't make housing for whites more affordable because the whole reason housing is expensive to begin with is because whites don't want to be neighbors with niggers.Ok but besides the few wealthy whites who can buy their megamansions with yards... what is everyone else supposed to do?For example, I'm white, I work in finance, my wife is a nurse. We don't have any plans to buy a house with a yard because that's for Senior Meta Software Engineers and HR Heads who are netting insane salaries. What should we do if not rely on subsidized housing?You could say "well don't have kids if you're not successful enough", well then you're creating a system where 90% of whites don't have the means to have kids.
>>515595213Yeah I would like to see southern democrats come back but it’s not gonna happen
>>515595213>I support State industrial policy of subsidizing housing to keep rents lowOh so you're retarded stopped reading here
>>515595213>I support State industrial policy of subsidizing housing to keep rents low>i support giving free money to landlordswhy?
>>515604867No, I'm just not stupid, like you.>>515604900>The State building rental units to compete with private landlords and lower rent.... somehow is free money to landlordsI don't get it. If I own an apartment complex, the last thing I want is for the government to build an adjacent building right beside me and undercut me.
>>515595213democrats might want a couple of those economic policies, but they also want infinite brown migrants. This is destroying America and it has to stop in order for us to start fixing things.
>>515604752suburban living used to be affordable for middle income people. my parents bought their house 40 years ago with only my father's salary as an engineer. instead of trying to force people to live in pods you should address the greater economic issues that put suburban living out of reach.
>>515605284That's why I vote Republican on a Federal Level.State Democrats and Mayorial candidates have zero control over immigration policy.>>515605397>suburban living used to be affordable for middle income peopleI find it hard to believe because my parents were extremely wealthy oligarchs and they could hardly afford a suburban house. They did get one because my dad was an accountant, but it was only his high social class that allowed him to get one.>address the greater economic issues that put suburban living out of reach.I literally did in my OP... zoning regulations that restrict development make housing expensive, for everyone, including apartment renters.It's impossible to have everyone live in the suburbs because you cannot have a society where everyone is an aristocrat in a castle. A proper society tries to dismantle rigid hierarchies that allow some to live like Gods in Kingdom Palaces (Suburbia) while others can't afford to rent a den. Boomers in the Suburbs used their power to block additional unit development, artifically increasing rent prices and inflating their house values.
>>515605184Everything the government touches gets more expensive if you don't know this you are 17, a female or yes retarded. I know I know just tax the rich lmao
>>515605935>I find it hard to believe because my parents were extremely wealthy oligarchs and they could hardly afford a suburban house. They did get one because my dad was an accountant, but it was only his high social class that allowed him to get one.Everybody in my family (5 kids) lives in a suburb and has inherited nothing. It's far from unattainable unless you're living in some super-expensive area.>some to live like Gods in Kingdom Palaces (Suburbia) while othersThe reason people live in suburbs is to get away from negroes, and the #1 reason suburbs are nice is that there aren't as many negroes there.
>>515595213You’re a based MAGAcommunist I respect that
>>515606970>Everything the government touches gets more expensive You're completely retarded. Not even your own side agrees with you.>B-but im not a Reagan fan!!!! I'm not a Chicago School/Austrian Scho..Not a single economic school of thought agrees with "everything the government touches gets more expensive". That's just your own simplistic understanding because you're dumb.
>>515607054>Everybody in my family (5 kids) lives in a suburb and has inherited nothing. It's far from unattainable unless you're living in some super-expensive area.Well I need to live within commute distance from my job.I'm an only child and my parents house is over a million dollars.... my wife is also an only child and her parents are millionnaires too. We're inheriting 100% of it and we don't see any way to afford to live in the suburbs. We're trying to save every dollar and eat as cheap as possible to save every cent so that one day in our 40s we can get a mortgage.>The reason people live in suburbs is to get away from negroes, and the #1 reason suburbs are nice is that there aren't as many negroes there.Well if we had white only cities that wouldn't even be an issue.
>>515607150Thanks bro.>>515607054The only way to live in the suburbs is if you're retired, since to afford a suburban house you'd have to live far enough away from the city to buy a cheap (under $1m) house... but if you're that far from the city you can't work. So unless you're rich enough to retire, you can't afford to live in the suburbs.It's a bourgeois segregated zone.
>>515605935if housing was affordable 40 years ago with the same zoning laws that we have now why would zoning laws be the reason that it's not affordable now? you have some kind of mental illness if you think living in the suburb is for aristocrats. my grandfather was able to buy a suburban house in the 40s as a dockworker.
>>515607602It wasn't, that was just a myth.My extremely wealthy parents could barely afford a house. If the elites could hardly afford one how could anyone think that.>you have some kind of mental illness if you think living in the suburb is for aristocrats. my grandfather was able to buy a suburban house in the 40s as a dockworker.If you think suburbanites aren't bad people you have a mental illness.My dad was once removed from the governor, his dad was a corporate executive. He was a top accountant at a Big Four Firm, my mom was the Manager at a Pension Fund. They were by all means in the upper bracket of society. They had to save up for over a decade and get assistance from their parents to get a mortgage in 1986.
>>515595213I'm socialist, national socialist
>>515607429>Well if we had white only cities that wouldn't even be an issue.You're never going to get that voting democrat. I'm tempted to say you wouldn't get it from republicans, either, but they've been getting more based about the Civil Right Act lately. Still probably will never happen. What absolutely won't help you is subsidized housing, which is a negro magnet.>Well I need to live within commute distance from my job.>but if you're that far from the city you can't work.There are jobs within commuting distance in the area I live.
>>515608031>It wasn't, that was just a myth.so my parents and grandparents all lied about how they lived in the suburbs and how their neighbors were electricians and salesmen? where the fuck do you live where your parents are millionaires and couldn't afford a house? cape cod? hawaii?
>>515608741>where the fuck do you live where your parents are millionaires and couldn't afford a house? cape cod? hawaii?They live in NYC, and they couldn't just move because they needed to be there for work.Are my parents lying? Was my mom lying about being a pension fund manager? Was my dad lying about being a senior accountant at Deloitte?
>>515608741I should say they DID live in NYC.They now moved to a cheap area where houses are only $1m each.Any house within commute distance to my job in Manhatten is $4-5m.We'd have to inherit $3.5m after tax and then get a $500k mortgage to even hope to get the cheapest $4m house.So we plan to live in subsidized housing.
>>515609508>live in NYCYeah no wonder you have such a warped perspective on suburbs
>>515610111If I moved out of NYC.... I wouldn't have a job to afford suburb life.I've applied to jobs online in smaller areas but when you're an Investment Banker from NYC nobody wants to hire you. You have to come from well connected families in these areas to get hired in high paying jobs there.
>>515595213I don't think in terms of red and blue when it comes to policy but yeah generally I'm pro socialism on many issues.Plebs shouldn't have to worry about bothersome things like medical bills, insurance, all the paperwork toil bullshit. Most of them just want a job and a family.As a governing entity the biggest concern with it is that you can very quickly bite off more than you can chew especially when you start getting into transportation. Communism is the most susceptible to this issue.
>>515595213Fucking retard> subsidizing housing>investment in infrastructure like transportation>trains to reduce car usageAll comes from taxation..
>>515595213please shoot this one
>>515612877https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5JTn7GS4oA&pp=ygUVbW9uZXRhcnkgbW9uZXkgdGhlb3J5
>>515612877Ok and???Same with all government functions, retard.
>>515596806Density creates more competition for housing...which raises property values...which in turn raises rents.
>>515597614Who builds the buildings retard?
>>515604752>you work in finance>your wife is a nurseAnd you can't afford a house? Where the fuck do you live?
>>515613092MUNICIPAL> subsidizing housing>investment in infrastructure like transportation>trains to reduce car usageWould not be feasible because MUNICIPAL governments do not have the tax revenue to support it.
>>515613369So you think blocking housing development so we have fewer units being built would be good for rent prices?>>515613588The government stupid.>>515614149We'd need to 2.5x our gross salary to afford a townhouse.NYC.I've looked for jobs outside of NYC but there's zero places that have considered hiring an investment banker or former investment banker other than NYC and San Fran.
>>515614653But they have fewer people, so it balances out for scale.Federal Government has more revenue but more constituents.
>>515613034MMT does not work for MUNICIPAL governments. No one wants their debt.
>>515595213>Any other Economic Leftists Here?What part of National Socialism do you not understand? It wont work without a homogeneous society.
>>515595213>I'm the good guy who helps people, all my opposition are thus the bad guys who should be shot and killedWhy are leftists like this?
>>515615030>If you support subsidized housing you're a traitor who works for Iran and you're a demon and hate white peopleWhy are Nazis like this?
>>515614763Fucking retard. XD The government doesn't build houses. Private developers do. The government subsidizes their purchase through tax incentives and FHA loans. FHA limit in NYC is like 1 million dollars. You could buy an apartment forlike 300-400k.
>>515614845It does not balance out. Federal tax rate is 24% State tax is 6% City tax is 6%. Municipalities don't collect enough to do that.
Unlike in the George Floyd case, this case will not have big international repercussion. Because the Great Media is made of shitskins and they hate the White Race.Don't let her death be in vain, white brothers.- - - Death of Iryna Zarutska - - -.....
>>515616874Shut the fuck up you are a shitskin.
>>515595213Kill yourself, faggot
>>515615438You’re a fucking moron. Mamdanis plan is to literally have government built housing units.You’re an illiterate hick who can’t even read a platform
>>515618930>Claims to know the shitskins "plan".>Does not actually know the shitskins "plan".I'm starting to think you might be a low IQ ghetto shitskin yourself.Triple the amount of housing built with City capital funds. A Mamdani administration will construct 200,000 new affordable homes over 10 years for low-income households, seniors, and working families.By putting the public sector in the driver’s seat, we’ll be able to increase the share of new units built that are affordable to families who are low-income or are stuck in our City’s shelter system. We’ll significantly expand programs that serve families with the greatest need:HPD’s Senior Affordable Rental Apartments (SARA), which produces 100% affordable low-income housing for seniors.HPD’s Extremely Low and Low-Income Affordability (ELLA), which produces 100% affordable housing for families who earn less than $72,000 for a family of fourHRA’s Master Lease Program, which allows the City to pool its rental assistance programs (like CityFHEPS) to create project-based, subsidized housing for families at risk of eviction and/or living in the shelter program. This will go even further, as Zohran will drop lawsuits against CityFHEPs and ensure expansion proceeds as scheduled and per City Law.You will read that and not understand any of it because you are a stupid ghetto monkey that thinks the zoran the mexican is going to build you free housing. XD
