Reason Roundup

'Everyone' Here Is a Socialist Except Most Americans: Reason Roundup

Plus: Amash 2020?...Huwei to sue the U.S. government...and who needs Russian bots when you've got TV reporters?


New York

Are tax cuts socialist? Is everyone? "Until very recently, it wasn't that socialism was toxic in a red-scare way. It was irrelevant, in a dustbin-of-history way," writes Simon van Zuylen-Wood in new cover story for New York magazine. "But then came Bernie Sanders's 2016 candidacy," a boost in Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) membership, the Chapo Traphouse podcast, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.).

These days, the magazine suggests, "everyone" has "become a socialist."

Now, I'm not one to begrudge a bit of editorial hyperbole. But the New York coverline—a more accurate and boring rendering of which would be something like "socialism is trendy again"—provides a good jumping off point for the latest numbers on Americans, socialism, and capitalism.

In a national NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released yesterday, respondents were asked about what traits are desirable in a presidential candidate and what traits they could do without. Overall, most people were comfortable with "an African-American" (87 percent), "a white man" (86 percent), or "a woman" (84 percent) becoming president. Majorities were comfortable with "a person who is gay or lesbian" (68 percent), "an independent" (60 percent), "someone under 40" (58 percent), "a business executive" (56 percent), or "an evangelical Christian" (54 percent) winning the presidency.

And a near-majority (49 percent) said they would be OK with a Muslim president of the United States.

Trailing significantly behind in acceptance were two traits. Only 37 percent of respondents said they would be OK with a president over 75 years old, and just 25 percent said they would be OK with a president who is a socialist.

Another poll question asked whether respondents viewed the term socialism positively. Just 18 percent did.

A full 50 percent viewed it negatively—a near mirror split from respondents' views on capitalism. Half of those surveyed said they viewed capitalism positively, versus 19 percent who viewed it negatively.

The poll reflects other relatively recent data, which continues to show strong support for free markets even as socialism's star rises in certain younger circles. For instance, a 2016 Harvard poll found 42 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds had a positive view of capitalism, while 33 percent had a positive view of socialism.

As demonstrated in the 2014 Reason-Rupe poll, and as others have also shown since, support for concepts like capitalism and socialism often shifts drastically depending on how the terms are defined or the specific phrasing of poll questions. Still, there are limits to linguistic fluidity, and some socialist-identified pundits are definitely pushing them. For instance, here's Jemele Hill suggesting that "tax cuts" are a socialist goal:



Presidential run not on Amash's radar. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich) told CNN's Jake Tapper yesterday that he would "never anything out" when it comes to running as the Libertarian presidential nominee in 2020. Alas, he added that "that's not on my radar right now."

Amash also criticized our polarized political culture:

"Right now we have a wild amount of partisan rhetoric on both sides," he said. "And Congress is totally broken; we can't debate things in a clear way anymore. Everything has become 'Do you like President Trump?' Or, 'Do you not like President Trump?' And I think that we need to return to basic American principles, talk about what we have in common as a people—because I believe we have a lot in common as Americans—and try to move forward together, rather than fighting each other all the time.

"Sounds like a platform," commented Tapper.

Meanwhile, in the Democrats' dominion, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is running.


Who needs Russian bots when you've got TV reporters? The Momo hoax isn't just being reported "as fact" by a lot of local TV stations; it's "seemingly embraced by local news sources," notes Nieman Lab.

"The Momo challenge is a fascinating example of how a fake story spreads in real time with the assistance of the U.S. mainstream media (no Russian trolls required)," writes Laura Hazard Owen. "I set out to name and shame some of the many local TV news stations that are spreading this story. There are many more examples out there — if you want to share one, DM me."


Huawei to sue the U.S. government. "The Chinese electronics giant Huawei is preparing to sue the United States government for banning federal agencies from using the company's products, according to two people familiar with the matter," reports The New York Times. "For many years, United States officials have said that Huawei's telecommunication equipment could be used by Beijing to spy and disrupt communication networks. The company has denied the allegations, but major wireless carriers such as AT&T and Verizon have effectively been prevented from using Huawei's equipment as a result."


• Sex workers and activists aren't buying the idea that Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) has actually changed her views on prostitution.

• Harris endorses statewide rent control:

• NBD, just our government bragging about being an "Angel of Death"…

• Some Florida media are starting to look skeptically at the Robert Kraft/Asian massage parlor investigation.

• "For as long as I've been in Washington, CPAC was the Creature Cantina of conservatism," writes Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark in a defense of its coverage of this past weekend's event.

• How not to address poverty:

• This seems like a cool project (learn more and lend support here):

Many documentaries have been made about sex work and the fight for sex workers' rights. Few center the narratives and contributions of Black and Brown people, how they have shaped this industry and an entire movement. We are hoping to change that with The Heaux History Project, a documentary series created by Black and Brown sex workers, centering Black and Brown sex workers.

• Rep. Thomas Massie stands with Sen. Rand Paul in opposing President Donald Trump making an emergency declaration:

• Megan McArdle with a good Twitter thread on why maybe calling out "Green New Deal" proponents for taking cars everywhere isn't so silly. Start here:

NEXT: Former Clinton Campaign Staffer Accuses Bernie Sanders of Failing to Mention Race, Gender in Speech That Explicitly Mentioned Race, Gender

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Are tax cuts socialist? Is everyone?

    Breadlines means things are going great. We should aspire to that.

    1. No, it means that people are consuming carbs. The horror!

      1. So we'll have tofulines instead?

        1. Tofu attacks toxic masculinity at the heart, in the testosterone.

      2. Which means they're not eating animals. Win!

      3. And processed food!

        1. Under the Green New Deal, we'll all stand in kale lines. And we'll either like it or off to the green re-education camps. For the planet. For the children. For Gaia and all that is good.

  2. Who needs Russian bots when you've got TV reporters?

    shot across the bow of RT

    1. Are you saying that watching RT is like watching a bot fly?

      1. Cue the crows from Dumbo...

        1. Were the crows eating botflies out of Dumbo's skin? I don't remember that part.

          1. Well you be-done-seen about nothing then.

    2. But they provided this handy guide.

      1. "Everyone who questions our aggressive foreign policy is a Russian bot!"

        - The Idiots Guide to Politics in the 21st Century

  3. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich) told CNN's Jake Tapper yesterday that he would "never anything out" when it comes to running as the Libertarian presidential nominee in 2020.

    Everyone wants to steal President Trump's votes!

  4. The Momo hoax isn't just being reported "as fact" by a lot of local TV stations...

    It distracts from the ever increasing number of planking deaths.

    1. Who is faking Nepalese dumplings? That's pure evil.

  5. Listen, SF absolutely must spend more money on homelessness. For sure.

    Is she being sarcastic there or does she actually believe something that stupid?

    1. If you notice, she does not say 'to combat homelessness'. This kind of Freudian slip reveals the truth that progressives want more homelessness. Then they can, with a clean conscience, hire another 5 of their buddies' kids with otherwise useless social science degrees and spend $140,000 a month to house 10 families.

      For sure, if you want more of something, all you gotta do is subsidize it. I am not which is worse, more homelessness or more social science degrees.

    2. You could use them as fuel since they are a renewable resource.

    3. I think she's just conceding that point at this moment so it's not a distraction to her main point, which seems to be the current funding is already incredibly mishandled.

  6. Megan McArdle with a good Twitter thread on why maybe calling out "Green New Deal" proponents for taking cars everywhere isn't so silly

    this has to have set a record for the pattern of
    a) partisan makes point
    b) opposite partisan discredits point
    c) neutral party says wait, there's something to point

    like so fast, that (c) may as well just say (a)

    1. Forget cars, how about they give up private airplanes?

      1. Some are more equal than others, John. This is Socialism 101.

        1. It's apparently a bridge too far to expect a journalist to have read Animal Farm.

          1. I know quite a few people who have read it but completely missed the allegory. They just think it's a cute story about animals.

            1. Those are the horses that don't remember exactly what was written, only that it sounded good at the previous time and present. By good I mean approximate to grammatically correct.

          2. Oh, they read it. They just reached a different conclusion than you did.

            1. some see it as a warning others see it as directions

    2. When the left shuts up about my driving on a 'public' road, then i will shut up about them driving on public roads.

      1. You didn't build that.

      2. White line privilege?

    3. When the left shuts up about my driving on a 'public' road, then i will shut up about them driving on public roads.

  7. Some Florida media are starting to look skeptically at the Robert Kraft/Asian massage parlor investigation.

    Additional footage shows that the MAGA hat-adorned Kraft waded into the sex workers and drummed in their faces!

    1. It's too early for your sick and twisted euphemisms, Fist.

      1. Pretty straightforward euphemism.

    2. While smirking

    3. I would like to see reporting on the horrendous number of handjobs our boys in blue had to suffer through, during this months long investigation. And watch. Watching those hours and hours and hours of video.

      1. Boys in blue... balls?

  8. so?cial?ism
    noun: socialism
    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
    (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

    1. One of the greatest inventions at Millennial's fingertips (internet) and they cannot look up the definition of Socialism?

      1. This.

        One supposes that since everyone *is* a socialist there's no need to know what socialism *is*.

        1. They probably have a different definition and they should be invited to spell it out at every turn.

          1. "I'm not going to dignify that invitation with a reply!"

          2. They say what they want is Democratic Socialism. As if democracy makes the socialism acceptable.

      2. Spend 10 minutes on Reddit and you'll see thousands of people who seem incapable of googling or using Wiki. Instead they "ask the internet" and take the first answer provided by a 14 year old autistic boy.

    2. It's the people in the community who do the work and create the goods for the capitalists. Why shouldn't they collectively own the means of production? They do the labor. They create the goods. Without them the capitalists wouldn't have any workers or customers! It all relies on the community! So they should collectively own everything! Because fairness! Aaaauuuggghhh!

      1. The big joke is that under Capitalism, the workers can own the means of production if they want. They can own the company or own all the stock of whatever.

        Under Socialism and Communism, the workers cannot possibly own the means of production because the state owns it.

        Workers are still freer and have more power under Capitalism.

        1. I know you hate it when I quote Bastiat, but this is apt:

          A Confusion of Terms
          Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

          We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

          Socialists believe that if the state owns it, the people own it, because the state and the people are one in the same.

        2. Well the problem is that when they form these cooperates voluntarily, they never work because a few people end up doing all the work so they quit. When the state controls it, you can't quit because you're a slave of the state. That's obviously what the left wants because everyone on the left thinks they're going to be one of the vanguard, not one of the slaves.

        3. Too true. How would unions respond to a law requiring they invest the union pension fund solely in company stock, so they lose money when they make outrageous demands?

          1. While it would be hilarious to hear the gnashing of teeth and lamentations of their people, I don't think we need more laws on association or business.

            1. Exactly. Under our system, we have a few basic rules for the game and if you don't follow them, the market destroys you or you are criminally prosecuted for violating one of the very few laws that a tiny and limited government created.

              1. Under our system, we have a few basic rules for the game and if you don't follow them, the market destroys you or you are criminally prosecuted for violating one of the very few laws that a tiny and limited government created.

                In what universe does this paradise exist?

                1. Our system in the USA was built based on the limiting principles of the Constitution.

                  What we currently have is not that.

                  1. So then it isn't our system.

                  2. The constitution was ineffective at limiting encroachments right from the start. The whiskey rebellion, the Sedition act, etc, and right on through today.

                    One could argue that constitutionalism fails because it is immediately replaced with authoritarianism.

                    1. lc believes that constitutions are magic. Just like leftists believe intentions are magic.

                      He's a conservative. He has beliefs, not principles.

                    2. The sockpuppets do not understand how the Constitution has helped keep the USA from becoming a Socialist nation like Venezuela.

                    3. Is that your new straw man argument? Cool. The nanarchist shtick was getting really old.

        4. Under capitalism, you have to use the market to get to the point where you own the means of production. This means being clever and working hard.

          Under socialism, you just point a gun at the owner and tell them to get lost, because now you are the owner. This doesn't require being clever or working hard. You just have to be an asshole and have no empathy.

          It's no mistake these people support the latter and abhor the former. They are serial losers, or they are Bernie Sanders: winners who stand on the shoulders of losers.

    3. Socialism is anything the government does, duh!

      Except the icky military. Ewww! (Every single Chapo retard on reddit.)

      1. The funny thing is, is that the military is probably the closest thing to a true socialism. We were given free food (or food allowances), housing (or housing allowances), medical care, clothing etc. Yet most who want socialism would never survive the first week of basic, if they even signed up. You want socialism, go down to your recruiter, they'll get you some.

        1. The analogy goes even further, because for the most part the military can reassign you or change your job for the good of the service. They can recall you, even if you are discharged for a certain amount of time (and as in my case ignore you discharge date and stop loss you). They decide where you live and when you'll move. And they expect you to sacrifice yourself if needed to benefit the good of the whole. Don't get me wrong, that is what is necessary in a military and I'm a proud vet.

  9. For as long as I've been in Washington, CPAC was the Creature Cantina of conservatism...

    The tree that refuses to bend to big government authoritarianism will break.

  10. Okay, so a number of people have responded to this by saying basically, "You can't expect AOC to live as if she's already in the GND world. Wanting better public transit doesn't mean you have to take the inadequate stuff we have now."

    You can't expect evangelical preachers to live like we are already in a theocratic world. Wanting to end the scourge of lust and adultery doesn't mean you have to refrain from enjoying the whores that are out there now.

    That is perfectly analogous to what these idiots are saying.

    1. I could kinda accept their argument, if they could reciprocate and realize that we Little People also have to live in the world as it really is. But they won't.

    2. The funniest part is that she was a one-minute walk from the subway. Now, to be fair, I can see Cortez as the kind of hipster that takes Uber everywhere rather than go down into the tunnels with the Morlocks, but it does serve to show how sheltered her class of urban swell is.

      1. AOC opposes Uber.

        But she also uses Uber.

        As Kermit the Frog used to say, "It's not that easy bein' green." So AOC doesn't bother to try.

    3. Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, called her a "pompous little twit." Aside from the misspelling, he's right.

    4. "Wanting to end the scourge of lust and adultery doesn't mean you have to refrain from enjoying the whores that are out there now."
      Seemed to work for the Catholic church. They even ran the whorehouses for a minute there.

  11. Sex workers and activists aren't buying the idea that Sen. Kamala Harris (D?Calif.) has actually changed her views on prostitution.

    Look, do you want to hear what you want to hear or not?

    1. You would think a sex worker like KM would be more empathetic.

  12. You will not find a credible economist who endorses rent controls - so naturally a leading Democrat candidate for President is.

    Harris is like a contestant on Supermarket Sweep at this point just haphazardly grabbing for whatever policy position looks like it might get her the most value when they tally up the cart at the end.

    1. Supermarket Sweep. Dipping into the deep cuts.

  13. Her-cu-les, Her-cu-les!
    You don't want to be on the receiving end of this gunship, aka the Angel of Death.
    ? U.S. Dept of Defense (@DeptofDefense) February 28, 2018

    This tweet wouldn't have been necessary if you'd have only had the president's parade.

    1. Hillary would have paraded the Angels of Death over Syrian airspace.

    2. Has no one else realized, the "Angel of Death" is actually dumping every flare in its stocks, running scared like it's about to take a heat-seeking missile up the rear?

      More like "Angel of Filling Pants" in that video.

    3. I preferred when the AC-130 was called Puff.

    4. I don't get the reason for ENB's Panties-Shitting Hysteria over the idea that an AC 130 gunship would actually *gasp* kill people.

      A military -- which is a legitimate, constitutional function of our federal government -- is supposed to kill people and destroy their stuff. That's kinda the whole point of war in the first place.

      To paraphrase Pvt. Frost: what else are they going to use, harsh language?

      Yet another example that most libertarians are actually progressives who stood in line too long at the DMV.

  14. Democrats running for president 2020:
    Juli?n Castro
    Andrew Yang
    Cory Booker
    Kirsten Gillibrand
    John Delaney
    Tulsi Gabbard
    Kamala Harris
    John Hickenlooper
    Jay Inslee
    Amy Klobuchar
    Bernie Sanders
    Elizabeth Sanders
    Marianne Williamson
    Pete Buttigieg

    1. You can tell who Reasons thinks will be first loser to Trump, since Reason has not covered every candidate.

    2. I'm sure you mean Elizabeth Warren. She, Harris, and Gillibrand are still my top 3. However I'd be proud to vote for any of them except that awful Russian stooge Tulsi Gabbard.

      1. If you've truly combed through the list, you would have added Klobuchar.

          1. Give yourself 10 lashes for explaining easy joke.

      2. #HillaryThisTime For Sure

        1. #AdjustingCrown

    3. Pete Buttigieg

      Now you are just making up dumb names.

      1. "It's pronounced 'Eye-Gore'."

      2. meet-pete

        I wish I was.

        I did mess up Elizabeth Warren and put Elizabeth Sanders. Freudian slip, I guess.

        You know which other Austrian had Freudian 'slips'?

        1. "A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean a mother."

          1. So lovecon89 wishes Warren and Bernie were his parents?

            1. That would be one ugly and stupid child.

            2. I'm gonna Sioux you in the "People's Court".

        2. Arnold Schwarzenegger?

    4. Of all those, Hickenlooper's probably the only one who could reasonably lay claim to being able to work across the aisle. He'd probably be able to push liberal policy issues without pissing off the Republicans too badly because he's such an amiable guy.

      But he's a Fuckin' White Male, and only Biden can overcome that card.

  15. "The Momo challenge is a fascinating example of how a fake story spreads in real time with the assistance of the U.S. mainstream media (no Russian trolls required)," writes Laura Hazard Owen

    Tonight at 11, the 3 hidden dangers lurking in a Laura Hazard Owen article.

    1. I got a dangling participle, use of double space after a period, and what's the third?

      1. An unnecessary ellipsis...

      2. Her middle name

  16. Voters will be more open to democratic socialism as they learn more about its key proposals. For example, the democratic socialist desire to #AbolishICE is rapidly gaining popularity and will be part of the platform of the 2020 Democratic Party nominee.

    1. Haven't you heard? The editors are now saying that democrats have supported border security and checkpoints all along. Funny how such an unpopular, anarchist, BS opinion suddenly gets denied as existing in the first place.

      Don't believe your lying eyes

  17. Her-cu-les, Her-cu-les!

    Much better "Angel of Death" stuff on YouTube.

    1. Her-cu-les could put a hurtin' on a concentration of militant socialists.

    2. Her Cules? We are still talking about Hillary, right?

      1. He's Belgian...

  18. Volvo imposes speed limit on cars to bring attention to 'dangers of speeding'

    Another reason not to buy a Volvo.

    That and those cars are not very innovative compared to cheap imports from Asia.

    1. The 37,000 deaths sounds so large until you realize that there was 3.2 trillion miles driven in 2017. That translates into one death for every 86.5 million miles driven. Driving is actually quite safe by any objective measure. And the biggest contributing factors to deaths is not speed but smaller cars and drugs and alcohol use.

      1. Right. Speeding is not the leading cause of accidents. Inattentive/distracted driving is.

        Speeding might make an accident worse but the highest death tolls comes from Distracted driving, claiming 3,450 in 2016.

        1. USDOT Releases 2016 Fatal Traffic Crash Data

          Distraction-related deaths (3,450 fatalities) decreased by 2.2 percent;
          Drowsy-driving deaths (803 fatalities) decreased by 3.5 percent;
          Drunk-driving deaths (10,497 fatalities) increased by 1.7 per?cent;
          Speeding-related deaths (10,111 fatalities) increased by 4.0 percent;
          Unbelted deaths (10,428 fatalities) increased by 4.6 percent;
          Motorcyclist deaths (5,286 fatalities ? the largest number of motorcyclist fatalities since 2008) increased by 5.1 percent;
          Pedestrian deaths (5,987 fatalities ? the highest number since 1990) increased by 9.0 percent; and
          Bicyclist deaths (840 fatalities ? the highest number since 1991) increased by 1.3 percent.

          1. Weather and darkness would be relevant data.

      2. And it doesn't seem like lowering the top speed from 130 to 112 or whatever it is really addresses speeding. I'm guessing that most of the supposed speed related deaths are not happening in Volvos going over 100 mph.

        1. Unless you take your car to the track, this seems like a pretty meaningless gesture. Outside of Germany, few people actually drive over 112 mph.

    2. Some guys refuse to own a Volvo because the name reminds them of something.

      1. some people just find scaping the COEXIST and "NPR Mind in a Fox News World" bumper stickers that come standard to be just too much of a hassle.

        1. I've noticed most of the COEXIST bumper stickers are covered over with #RESIST now.

          1. There are a lot of those. And "my dog is smarter than your president" is another one. And I think the Toyota Pius has taken over as the standard socialist automobile from the Volvo in the last 20 years.

              1. This is why I love John. He has consistently the most unintentionally hilarious typos.

                1. That one was intentional.

      2. Shopping for a new car last time, I checked out the Volvo. The SMUG coming pouring out of that showroom caused me to turn around almost immediately. That and you can get most of the Volvo features for tens of thousands less on a Hyundai, Nissan, Honda, or Toyota.

        1. I didn't get a lot of smug from the volvo I tried. Just...meh. Tons and tons of meh. I liked the integrated kids booster seats, but when put down, they became comfortless chairs for adults. The interior was not spartan, it was just bleh. Spartan would be a thing (see Tesla Model 3). This was just a strict teacher's desk of placing things where they belong- not integrated into a full package.

          Compared to the BMW and Audi, it was just the plainest girl at the dance. I thought the Lexus was fantastic for technology and styling, but that NA engine was just garbage at altitude, compared to the turbos on the other two. The Hyundai Genesis (this was 5 years ago) was very intriguing, but still needed some polish. And it lacked an AWD at the time. Nevertheless, I am looking heavily at the new Genesis G80 with 420 HP (and finally an awd transmission that can handle that torque).

          While I agree that the asian manufacturers have some really intriguing new features, the Koreans especially have trouble tying it all together into a well designed package. It is like they are really good immitations of the german brands, but little bits of fit and finish create deal breakers when you are talking about dropping $60k on a vehicle. In the old Genesis it was a bad transmission. In the new ones, I think it will continue to be the engine powertrain- not quite as responsive.

          1. Oh forgot to mention the Jag. It was the most american of the euro luxury cars I tried, and I mean that in a bad way. The engine, AWD and transmission were bonkers. But the interior looked like someone had taken a mustang and upgraded it with some brushed aluminum. There were cheap looking buttons on the center console- and they had been placed so they were difficult for the driver to see and use them. The LCD was a tiny 6 inch screen that ran slowly. Bits of ABS plastic were scattered about where you should see soft touch plastic, leather or cloth. Overall the cabin felt cramped- like a fighter jet cockpit.

            If I had to pick among the cars for the best driver, that Jag was fantastic. But I needed a car to spend 3 hrs a day in, and it was not at all that. For me it all rendered down to the Audi and BMW, and the Audi won based on price and interior creature comforts.

            1. I would take a Mercedes over an Audi or a BMW. Audis and BMWs are faster, but the Mercs are more comfortable. A C class Merc feels like a five series BMW. And an E class Merc feels like the most expensive luxury model BMW or Audi make. They are just really comfortable well made cars.

              1. Those Europeans have the tax on the engine size now, so many cars are 4 bangers with turbos and the Engine-Off feature when temporarily stopped. This gets the higher MPG requirements.

                The EU is sending the European car market down the drain.

                Trump rolled back those EPA standards IIRC, so 2020 cars stop that stupid Engine-Off feature.

              2. Has Mercedes dealt with their quality issues from several years ago?

              3. I would take a Mercedes over an Audi or a BMW

                I cannot get over the Cheese Wedge styling of the Mercs. The C class looks fine, but like the A4 and 3 Series, was just too small for me to take a couple adults to lunch when at the office. The E Class just looks terrible in my opinion. While the A6 and 5 Series have wide, tall front ends balanced with the trunk. The E Class tapers the hood down too far towards the bumper and (in the 2013 model I drove) the grill also goes at an angle from the bumper to the hood, accentuating that cheese wedge look. My understanding is that this form factor was a method of meeting EU pedestrian safety guidelines (hitting a walker would put them up on the hood, instead of under the car), but it looked bad compared to the straight, wide grills of the other euro-brands.

            2. Mechanics love spending spend 3 hrs a day in Jags.

        2. I really thought you lived in a barn.

          1. I'm rich bitch! I made a grip on Bitcoin too.

            Why would I live in a barn? You trolls and your weird fantasies about your troll victims.

            I have a barn bigger than your house. Guaranteed.

      3. They start out as warm, inviting, generally fun to be in. Then you realize that they are extremely high maintenance and frigid inside. Not to mention they develop new leaks almost on a monthly basis. Mine takes a lot of effort just to get started anymore.

        1. Like many cars, they lost a lot of their charm and reliability as cars became more complex. The old Volvos were very simple cars and pretty much bomb proof. Today, they are not so simple and it is hard to make a complex car bomb proof if you are not Japanese.

          1. You might have missed Rich's joke.


            1. Read between the lines. John is continuing with the analogy.

            2. I totally missed it. I am even more earnest than I usually am when the subject is cars.

              1. Damn. And there I thought you admired the strong pimp hand of the typical Japanese husband.

              2. I'm actually more upset that you apparently thought that I fit the mold of a Volvo owner.

                1. I have a thing for Swedish cars. They are usually well engineered and delighfully strange without being too far out. Saabs were cooler than Volvos but Volvos have their charm.

                  1. My best friend owned both a Saab and a Volvo in the late 90s-early 2000s. He ended up getting rid of both fairly quickly because something was always breaking on them, and he was a poor college student. He finally bought a Chevy S-10 and kept it for about 15 years.

                  2. John, the most interesting thing about a Saab or Volvo (I cant remember) was that you could turn off the passenger side dash lights while keeping your instrument panel lit up.

                    For long drives in the USA, where your passenger is sleeping it might make sense but in Scandinavia it seemed a bit odd. That and if oncoming headlights didnt wake your passenger up then why would inside dash lights.

                    I would never pay a bunch extra for that as a feature.

                    It bugs me to no end that cars are one of the few products that get artificially more expensive each year because car manufacturers add features to keep price higher than it normally would be.

                    Most products get cheaper and 'better' over time as production winds up and tech makes production cheaper. Not vehicles.

                    1. And government mandated features aren't helping either.

                      But I still find it pretty amazing how little a modern car costs. There is a lot of pretty amazing engineering in there. And a lot of it will actually just work for 10 years.

          2. Yeah, when safety and efficiency are both goals, things get complicated and difficult to repair. If the company is trying to be some kind of luxury brand with social consciousness, it's even worse.

        2. They start out as warm, inviting, generally fun to be in. Then you realize that they are extremely high maintenance and frigid inside. Not to mention they develop new leaks almost on a monthly basis.

          but enough about Hillary voters

        3. So like an ex-wife?

    3. Volvos used to be made by social democrats now they're made by Chinese communists. AOC puts it on her best buy recommendations. Bernie prefers Zil.

  19. US and China in 'final stages' of trade deal talks that could end this month, sources say

    Boehm and other Reason staff that want the USA to fail to get lower trade restrictions, hardest hit.

    1. Trumpistas who claim USCMA is better than NAFTA, and then refuse to back up their claims, hardest hit.

      loveconstitution1789|12.3.18 @ 10:20AM|#

      Do you need me to link the rules of NAFTA and USCMA so you can compare and contrast the "worseness" for us?

    2. Alphabet troll is back.

  20. "Are tax cuts socialist?"

    Well if they are used as a means to redistribute wealth they are socialist. If the government borrows money to give a take break to the wealthy, we all incur a debt so that some people can have more money.

    The truth is that no modern first world country has either a socialist or capitalist system. The systems are blended and the format of that blend often depends on the goals of the people of the country. In my mind you want the minimum amount of socialism to necessary to provide opportunity and peace of mind. After that you want capitalism for innovation and excellence. You also want to focus on the young and middle class. A strong economy depends on opportunity for the young and get its strength from the middle class.

    1. Tax credits I can see being called socialist.

    2. When's the last time that tax cuts only went to the wealthy?

      1. "Moderation4Ever", bro

  21. About socialism.

    It's basically an argument over definitions.

    Those on the right tend to define "socialism" as "Venezuela/Soviet Union, with gulags and death camps".
    Those on the left tend to define "socialism" as "Sweden/Norway, with capitalism and wealth redistribution coexisting side by side".

    1. Except that no one ever talks about what Sweden and Norway are really like. They have VATs but have similar income taxes and much lower corporate taxes and taxes on capital than the US. It is highly debatable whether they are any more "socialist" than the US is. The US already has the most progressive taxation system in the world and some of the highest corporate taxes in the world.

      So mostly, it is people on the left begin mendacious and ignorant. They are selling Venezuala but pretending its Sweden.

      1. List of government enterprises of Sweden

        While the USA does also have a few state owned companies or mix owned companies (USPS, Amtrack, FDIC), America's biggest jump into Socialism came with the welfare state (Social Security, Medicare, medicaid, ObamaCare).

        Most countries around the World that are Socialist, want Socialism and had to mix in Capitalism to keep the Socialist state afloat.

        1. Hey buddy. I asked you a direct question on the Prohibition thread and I'd like an answer. You say the only thing wrong with the drug war is that it wasn't done by constitutional amendment. Does that mean prohibition becomes morally just when enacted through your approved process?

        2. I don't think I agree that any of those are really socialist. I think there's a difference between a government provided safety net and them actually owning the means of production. It' not like there aren't retirement plans offered by the market.

          1. They call Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and ObamaCare taxes but they also control huge swathes of the means of production for that industry.

            I can see the argument that SS, Medicare, medicaid, and ObamaCare do not completely control the means of production in those industries but Medicare is so controlling that it sets prices for most medical costs.

            401k is hopefully going to push Social Security out as the main retirement income source starting with gen Xers. Until then, Social Security is a ~$1.046 trillion dollar taxed retirement scheme.

            1. Fair enough on Medicare.

              I know we don't have a free market in any of those sectors, I just think it's important not to give them an inch.

              1. Definitely no more concessions and take back what we can.

                I don't think Trump will tackle Social Security and Medicare cuts but I hope he does.

    2. The left does not understand incentives. Only intentions.

  22. ENB is full of it this morning, and by "it", I mean awesomeness.

    "Another poll question asked whether respondents viewed the term socialism positively. Just 18 percent did.

    A full 50 percent viewed [socialism] negatively?a near mirror split from respondents' views on capitalism. Half of those surveyed said they viewed capitalism positively, versus 19 percent who viewed it negatively."

    I suspect that the chattering classes aren't trying to mislead us.

    "When did Everyone become a Socialist?"

    ----New York Magazine

    I think they're probably just deep in the bubble of that 18% who think that socialism is fashionable. Where's Postrel to tell us how socialism became glamorous and how to make it stop?

    One of the things I'm hoping will come from the AT&T takeover of Warner Media is that we'll see some of these news outlets, like CNN and ESPN, subject to the market discipline of a telecommunications company. CNN seems to think their job is to be the revolutionary vanguard, but they're actually selling a commodity product that should be seeking to capture as lucrative an audience as possible. I'm not sure it's possible to maximize profits and pose as the revolutionary vanguard at the same time.

  23. I laugh out loud when socialists give me the "roadz is socialism!" routine. I'm old enough to remember when calling New Deal or Great Society programs "socialism" would make them foam with rage. Now they're arguing that anything done cooperatively by two or more people is "socialism".

    1. Now they're arguing that anything done cooperatively by two or more people is "socialism".

      Well, that should help Kraft.

      1. You give him too much credit. I seriously doubt Kraft was contributing.

        1. Brings a whole new meaning to "deflated balls"

    2. Calling something socialism before too many people are dependent on the $$ is evil. Afterward, it is necessary.

    3. Now they're arguing that anything done cooperatively by two or more people is "socialism".

      Unless it's a core-pour-ray-shun. That's tyranny. Because rich people and profits. But cooperation under threat of force? That's voluntary.

    4. "Roads is socialism" always gets my goat for a number of reasons.

      1) It always seems to come with a side order of "If you're intellectually consistent and morally consistent, you shouldn't use the roads because they're paid for by the government"--as if the taxpayers shouldn't use things they've paid for? Yes, Ayn Rand cashed her social security checks. Why shouldn't she get her money back?

      2) There's a weird distinction in people's minds between what the government pays for and and what taxpayers pay for--as if the government pays for anything! No, the government did not pay for those roads. The government has never even earned a gross profit! The taxpayers paid for those things--not the government. The only money the government has is money that took from us because we earned it.

      1. Not only that, but private companies actually built the roads. Government only paid for them. With someone else's money.

        1. And the government onlly had the money because capitalism produces so much wealth. They never mention that either.

        2. The government doesn't even always pay for the roads. Just ask pretty much any developer.

          1. ^THIS

            Every road in my neighborhood, as well as every sidewalk, was paid for by the developer. The costs were passed through to the homebuyers and ownership was deeded to the city.

            That's how pretty much how most suburban roads are built and how they become the property of a government. It's not a terrible system, but it arrant nonsense to say that roads require governments.

      2. Plus, they rave on how wonderful the government is "becuz roadz!" and then without pausing to take a breath they whine about people using them.

      3. Ken Shultz|3.4.19 @ 10:30AM|#
        ""Roads is socialism" always gets my goat for a number of reasons"

        You can also mention that if the gas taxes weren't leaking money for choo-choos and bike lanes, they would be fully funded by what amounts to user-fees.

  24. When "everyone" is something, and "everything" is something, I know he's hiding something.

  25. "For as long as I've been in Washington, CPAC was the Creature Cantina of conservatism," writes Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark in a defense of its coverage of this past weekend's event.

    Yeah, nothing says "Strong conservative principles" like sending an abortion activist to report on CPAC. Maybe they were afraid if they sent Kristol, the crowd would start chanting "throw the Jew down the well."

    1. Right-wing infighting is so interesting.

      1. It's more interesting to watch "libertarians" defend the good honor of neocons.

        h/t Cathy Young

        1. The libertarian thought police > all other thought police.

          1. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

            1. A gander is a goose that's had the ole switch-a-roo pulled on it... right?

  26. "'Listen, SF absolutely must spend more money on homelessness. For sure. But it's actually way, way more important that the process for spending the money improves. Like not paying $40,000/month to shelter 5 families"

    Sounds like no, they absolutely do NOT need to spend more money on homelessness.

    1. I can't figure out is she is being sarcastic there or not. If she is not being sarcastic, she is a total dingbat.

    2. SF absolutely must spend more money on homelessness.

      I love that they phrase it that way. Because that's exactly what they are doing. The more you spend the more homeless you get.

      1. So many of our big cities are just overrun with homeless people. This at a time when unemployment is lower than it has been in decades. Clearly, whatever we are doing about the problem is making it worse.

        1. the #1 cause of homelessness is good weather. The #2 cause is spending money on homelessness. The Bay Area leads the world in both so there you have it.

          1. They are everywhere in Washington DC and Philadelphia. It is just appalling.

            1. I saw a guy begging for money on an interstate off ramp.

              Guy was ~55 and was standing for hours.

              I went to 3 fast food places less than 1000 feet from where he was standing and got employment applications. I took the time to go all the way down the interstate so I could go back on the off ramp.

              I gave him the 3 employment applications.

              1. Sadly, that was a waste of your time.

              2. At least half (and probably way more) of the folks hanging out on the street corners with signs asking for money are fakers and con artists (kind of like Reason "libertarians" in 2019).

                Real, honest-to-goodness homeless people almost always smell the way you would expect a person who hasn't bathed in a couple of weeks to smell. If there's no foul stench to be detected, you can be 99% sure it's just a con artist.

            2. Plenty of shelter space in Philly when it is cold. But a certain percentage of homeless refuse to go to them, preferring to sleep on the street where the enablers distribute blankets and hot soup. One would think that the proggie governments in these cities would be rounding them up and putting them in shelters for their own good but this appears to be one situation where the right to be left alone is paramount.

  27. People are FOR Socialism only when they have no clue what Socialism is. I get the "elites" loving it --- they think they will be in charge. The proles are going to get fucked so hard by it.

    1. I remember when I was just out of government indoctrination camp, er I mean public school, and I honestly believed that the government was what protected us from the corporations. The greedy corporations were swallowing all the wealth, and the only thing that stood between the corporations and the people was government. Because government WAS the people. It was collective action. I believed that there was a fixed amount of wealth out there, so if the rich got richer the poor must get poorer. Because that is what I was taught. That is what young people believe.

  28. Start making cash online working from home .I have received $18954 last month by working online from home in my spare time. I am a full time college student and just doing this job in part time just for 3 hrs a day. Everybody can get this and makes extra dollars online from home by just copy and paste this website and follow details...

  29. Your girl Molly made a fool out of herself and the never trumpers at the Bulwark.... Funny how you leaned on John Last instead of letting your strong feminist ally speak for herself.

    Making fun of cancer survivors is totes cool and libertarian

  30. "most people were comfortable with "an African-American" (87 percent), "a white man" (86 percent), or "a woman" (84 percent) becoming president"

    So Americans really are racist and sexist. Wonder what these numbers would look like in other countries? Also, are these numbers for registered voters?

    1. A decent percentage of France is of black African dissent. What do you think the chances of a black person becoming President of France or the UK are? Slim and none. Yet, somehow it is the US that is the most racist nation on earth.

      1. It's definitely one the left's greatest lies.

      2. Not even a white French person whose family was from Algeria could win the presidency in France.

      3. Can't repeat this enough. Had an English- educated African try to explain the impenetrably racist roots of the US to me, "and how many non- white, non-Christian PMs are you touting from a nation which has had far longer to get shit together with more minority candidates firmly entrenched into your power- system?" is a good shutter-upper.

  31. Listen, SF absolutely must spend more money on homelessness. For sure.

    Just...can't bring ourselves to say they should be spending less money. Just... can't.

    1. Libertarianism is not about reducing the size of the state. It's about taking statist positions that are popular and then declaring "Libertarian Moment!" incessantly

    2. ENB missed this gem:

      "SF Mayor Breed wants Embarcadero to have SF's largest Navigation Center"
      "San Francisco's newest homeless Navigation Center could come with one of the best views in the city.
      City officials are hoping to persuade the Port Commission to bring what would be San Francisco's largest Navigation Center to the Embarcadero, just south of the Bay Bridge.
      Mayor London Breed has signed off on a plan to erect a 24-hour, 200-bed Navigation Center on Seawall Lot 330 ? a 2.3-acre parcel across from Piers 30-32. It's been a target for development for years."

      1. Can we really ever spend enough on homelessness?

  32. "Who needs Russian bots when you've got TV reporters?"

    God you're an idiot

    1. *they're


  33. Every time someone says they are fine with socialism, I just ask them to define it. They can't. Not one single person I've asked has been able to. That says a lot of the socialist propaganda machine when people like an the idea of enslavement without even knowing it.

    1. Most people I've asked this come up with a pretty good description of fascism.

      1. And then you read them a quote from Mussolini decrying the excesses of capitalism and people just can't even anymore

        1. Mussolini was a Socialist and then created Fascism for Italy.

          fas??cism | \ ?fa-?shi-z?m also ?fa-?si-\
          1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
          2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

          While this definition would allow right-wing people to be Fascists, the extreme right-wing is Monarchy and Theocracy.

          Its not common for people to swing from extreme Right-wing (Monarchs) to extreme Left-wing (Socialists/Nazis/Communists/Fascistii)

          1. "Its not common for people to swing from extreme Right-wing (Monarchs) to extreme Left-wing (Socialists/Nazis/Communists/Fascistii)"

            That is precisely what Bismarck's "social democracy" pulled off.
            First it drew Left to Right (socialist to monarchist) but that quickly reversed, so that now all at-heart-monarchists pimp socialism.
            Socialism is the best system to thinly veil what is neo-feudalism

            1. Interesting premise.

  34. NBD, just our government bragging about being an "Angel of Death"...

    Prepare the fainting couches.

  35. My only request is that we have Momo articles without an image of Momo. Cuz that bitch nasty.

  36. Everyone who is friends or acquaintances with the New York's editors is a socialist. I can believe that. As to what it means, the broad definition is that socialism is anti-free-market-capitalism.

  37. I am too late to the party to participate, but I still wanted to give you some feedback about that prostitution article. I did not read it the same way you did, apparently.

    They uncritically repeated the position that most sex workers are not voluntarily entering into an economic transaction but are in fact coerced into it against their will.

    the main point they seemed to be making was that it is very difficult for prosecutors to make the case against the organized crime behind the massage parlor. In my reading, the main point of the article was that most sex workers are a part of a large organized crime syndicate that is beyond the reach of local law enforcement.

    They did not seem the least bit skeptical of civil asset forfeiture, making sex work illegal, or even the idea of arresting John's in order to inhibit demand for sex work.

    Overall, I thought the article was pretty much a party line view of sex trafficking as the sole source of sex workers and most of that being run by organized crime rings that brings unwitting young women from rural China to be sex workers who are held against their will in America.

  38. For a very long time there has been a meme that illustrated the various economic and political systems with a story that starts off with "You own two cows ..." The capitalist version is, "You own two cows. You sell one cow and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and you earn handsomely on sales of milk and beef on the hoof." The communist version is, "You own two cows. The state seizes the cows and forces you to milk them and to deliver the milk to the state. When everything goes right, it gives you some milk." Etc., etc., for all sorts of systems in between.

    It's time to add a new one: "Democratic Socialism / Green New Deal: You have two cows. The state confiscates the cows, euthanizes them, and incinerates the carcasses. The state sends you the bill for environmental services. A coalition of environmental groups then sues you for greenhouse gas emissions."

    1. Not clever or meaningful at all.

      Everyone engaged in any political discussion is almost certain to be advocating for a capitalism-based mixed economy. Communism was never achieved. Socialism failed. The only thing up for debate is what goods and services are controlled by government and which are left to the free market, with some regulation thrown in. And the only thing that matters is how well the mix of public and private benefits human beings.

      Anyone talking about anything else is a liar and a fraud with an agenda.

      1. Tony|3.4.19 @ 4:55PM|#
        "...Communism was never achieved..."

        Fucking ignorant scumbag.

        1. From a Marxist perspective, it's technically true, because communism would involve the withering away of the state, and the socialist state never withered away, QED.

          1. From a realistic perspective, it's but one more lefty excuse.

  39. "Cathy Reisenwitz
    Listen, SF absolutely must spend more money on homelessness. For sure."


  40. ?Google pay 95$ consistently my last pay check was $8200 working 10 hours out of every week on the web. My more young kin buddy has been averaging 15k all through ongoing months and he works around 24 hours consistently. I can't confide in how straightforward it was once I endeavored it out.This is my primary concern...GOOD LUCK .

    click here =====??

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.