Andrew Yang Wants To Break the Two-Party System
"We deserve better than this."

Independents are now America's largest group of voters.
After George Bush's presidency, fewer people called themselves Republicans. After Obama's, fewer called themselves Democrats.
How will these independents vote?
Andrew Yang hopes they'll vote for him.
In my latest video, the former Democrat explains why he's started a new party, the Forward Party.
"Our country is polarized and getting worse all the time…seeing each other as mortal enemies…I'm committed to doing everything I can to help change it."
He's written a book about that, Forward.
Compared with most politicians, Yang is refreshing. He opposes censoring people for what they say. Saturday Night Live fired a comedian after he called Yang a "Jew Chink." Yang tells me, "I didn't think that was right…he's a comedian. It's his job to push boundaries."
Yang says other things presidential candidates don't say, like: "Running for president requires traits that make you a terrible leader. You make false promises [and] regularly claim powers you do not have."
He cites worker retraining as an example. Governments keep funding expensive job training—the federal government alone has 43 retraining programs, but they almost never work. Many promise computer-coding jobs, but Yang points out, "If you actually go to a town that had the plant close, you find no one working as a coder….People walk out with valueless certificates and no job."
Unfortunately, Yang's plan to help people, a universal basic income, may be even worse.
Yang would simply give every adult $1,000 a month. But the United States is already going bankrupt, and a UBI would give more of your tax money even to people who don't need it.
Yang's UBI wouldn't even replace existing welfare programs [Charles Murray's proposal], so a drug user could just snort up $1,000 and apply for more handouts. His plan would encourage lazy people to stay lazy. People like me, when I was young.
I say to Yang, "I wouldn't have overcome my stuttering and worked as hard as I did if I had free money. Not having it…drove me."
"I'm a data guy," he replies, claiming more people would start businesses. "If you have that fallback, it makes you more likely to take a risk."
But at what cost? Already, we see an effect of government's reckless stimulus handouts: inflation is the highest in 40 years. Yang's UBI would give away four times that every year.
A better Forward Party proposal is automatic tax filing.
"We waste so much time figuring out our taxes," Yang complains. "It's stupid."
True. In some countries, government just sends you a bill or refund. You can dispute the results, but if you don't, you can file taxes in less than a minute.
The reason the USA does not have automatic filing, says Yang, is because "Intuit is making too much money off TurboTax. It lobbied"—actually, H&R Block and others lobbied, too—"and said, no, no, no! [You] can't do it automatically!"
Yang says other sensible things that Democratic politicians rarely say. During the heat of last year's anti-police anger, activists screamed at him because he opposed defunding the police. He stood his ground.
Yang's run businesses, so he doesn't say stupid anti-capitalist things.
But often, he acts like a typical politician. At the Democratic National Convention, he gushed over Biden and Harris. "You're just sucking up!" I tell him.
"I was willing to do or say whatever I thought would help get Trump out," Yang replies.
Why?
"Trump was erratic," says Yang, "not leading in a positive direction."
I'm glad Yang is around, with a new party. More choices are a good thing. Yang is a decent man who brings up some fresh ideas.
Unfortunately, many of Yang's ideas are bad.
He calls climate change an "existential threat." He wants every gun owner to re-register every five years. He wants to ban assault weapons but can't define them. He promotes government-funded journalism.
But at the end of our interview, we agreed about one thing:
"We can see very clearly the way our country is going," Yang concludes. "We deserve better than this."
COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Correct, he wants a one party system
My name is Paula, I'm 24 years old)) Beginning SEX model) I love to be photographed in the NUDE) Please rate my photos at - https://xurl.es/id378955
VP candidate?
Yes, this!
Andrew Yang, wang, dang, sweet poontang!
If the Wang, Dang, Sweet Poontang was easy and sleazy, and was at the HEAD of the ticket, with Dandy Andy as VEEP... We'd have a winner!
(Although vice versa has its merits ass well. Think slogans... "Dandy Andy and his Arm Candy!")
As a Koch / Reason libertarian, I also want to break the two party system — I want to import enough Democratic voters (especially from Mexico) to convert the entire country into single-party Democratic government like California has now.
#LibertariansFor50Californias
#OpenBordersWillFixEverything
You don’t even try anymore, do you?
Here are 7 at-home jobs that pay at least $100/day. And there’s quite the variety too! Some of these work-at-home jobs are more specialized, others are jobs that qwb anyone can do. They all pay at least $3000/month, but some pay as much as $10,000. GO HOME PAGE FOR MORE DETAILS……… Click Here
OFF TOPIC. TANGENTALLY RELATED.
I just read an answer on Quora where the poster described himself as a Libertarian Socialist.
Is that even possible?
Just for the record, every tax company out there has a free option out there, which deals with over half the population. The only reason people pay for tax software is because of the complexity of the US tax code. Treat all income the same, eliminate deductions, and lower the rate, and Bob's your Uncle.
Disclosure; I have filed online for free in less than ten minutes for over a decade. Both when employed (W-2) and retired.
I'm still up with Kemp's flat tax plan: Make the 1040 fit on a postcard.
0.000001 point print.
Reducing font sizes, is it 1992 around here?
140 characters or less. The Twaxxer Party. And because Yang is a data guy, any opposition would be science-denying anti-Twaxxers. The whole thing falls apart when Roberts declares a 906-page document a penaltwax. Welcome to 2022.
Line 1. Total income last year =
Line 2. Taxes withheld last year =
Subtract line 2 from line 1; this is your tax due.
Simple.
Meh, I've got better:
1) What did you make
2) Send it in.
Let's try the libritarian approch
1. What did you make last year
2. Keep it
Let's try a head tax, and see what the average person thinks of the amount of federal spending when they have to write a check for $20,000 for each family member.
While I agree it is overly complex, it is also less simple than you propose because lots of people don't gather income in a w2 format. Small business owners and rental property owners are the 2 biggest earners that have to do more than just list what they make.
It's not so simple for investors either. Ask me how I know.
Would you believe that one of the only reasons our tax code is so complicated is because of lobbying efforts of tax prep software companies?
No, because it isn’t. You’ve said a lot of stupid, ignorant things here over the years. That was one of the most idiotic.
Tony turns stupid up to 11.
Its probably also due to racism, amirite?!
You cannot have a simple tax code and try to change people's behavior using the tax code.
Agreed but then politicians have to find other bribes for people to vote for them.
Plus, Blue states, you know the ones that want to tax the rich like Tony and Chem Jeff do, are already crying about the SALT deduction reduced to 10k. Imagine if it went away.
In my latest video, the former Democrat explains why he's started a new party, the Forward Party.
You know who else started a party that wanted to move the country forward?
Abradolf Lincler?
David Lee Roth?
Most stoners?
Which flavor? Republican girl-bullying slavers or mohammedans who stone women to death in the public square?
Saturday Night Live fired a comedian after he called Yang a "Jew Chink."
What was the offensive half of that joke?
The offensive part was someone on SNL being called a comedian.
Being a comedian was probably why he was fired.
Andrew Yang Wants To Break the Two-Party System
The two-party system has been broken for a long time.
Forward Party? Forward to what? Most parties at least hint at their ideology or program in their name. This is like a poll that says "83% of Americans are concerned with the direction of the country" without trying to ask which direction they think the country is going.
"Forward"... your paycheck to my PAC.
"I'm a data guy,"
Meaning "I'm not a common sense guy."
Mr. Yang, I grew up watching Mr. Data. Mr. Data was a friend of mine. You sir, are no Mr. Data. Don't even try.
Agreed! Mr. Yang doesn't even ask the right questions to have the correct data points...
I'd love to see not just the two-party system, but the party system itself smashed to bits, but neither is going to happen.
The Democratic Party is how the ruling class perpetuates its power, and the Republican Party is the wastebasket taxon for the disaffected and the contrarian, ensuring the illusion of choice.
There's no way that the power structure will loosen its grip barring a revolution.
If we largely disposed of the left in this country I’m pretty sure everything else would start to work itself out.
Anything to break the two-party duopoly is welcomed.
"Vote Hitler!" - chemjeff
Yes that's exactly what I meant, Mr. Interpret My Words In The Most Bad-Faith Manner Possible. Wanting to break the two-party system is exactly the same as wanting to vote for Hitler. You're a genius.
Yes that's exactly what I meant, Mr. Interpret My Words In The Most Bad-Faith Manner Possible.
Now say 'Congress shall make no law' and 'shall not be infringed'.
Okay?
'Congress shall make no law' and 'shall not be infringed'.
I support the First Amendment. I support the Second Amendment.
What, did you think I didn't? Did you actually believe Jesse and the Mean Grrlz were telling the truth about me, that I'm some sort of left-wing AOC-worshipping progressive?
'Congress shall make no law' and 'shall not be infringed'.
I support the First Amendment. I support the Second Amendment.
Now say "Donald Trump has an unfettered right to shitpost on twitter." and "Ashli Babbitt was killed for exercising her 1A rights in Congress."
Well, I would, if I agreed with those two statements, but I don't.
Do you agree with those statements?
Well, I would, if I agreed with those two statements, but I don't.
I didn't say you had to agree with them, I just said to say them. Why are you interpreting my order in bad faith?
I'm not. I'm telling you why I am declining to obey your order.
Espousing "freedom of speech, but with exceptions" is "censorship" for statist pussies too afraid to lay their cards on the table.
Well then.
Should Reason have banned SPB for posting child porn links? Is that intolerable censorship? "But child porn's illegal, that's different" is not an excuse, because based on what I have inferred, you might claim that the laws against child porn are themselves wrong and Reason should have taken a principled stand to fight those laws in court. Is that your view?
So you're asserting that you only say things you agree with?
It's hilarious watching collectivistjeff walk right into a trap and remain completely oblivious when it springs on him.
Can't fix stupid, or psychotic. And collectivistjeff is definitely both.
Why add the word intolerable, Lying Jeffy?
Fucking children isn't speech, no matter how you slice it, pedo.
Oh no no no, this isn't about the act of sex with children, this is about IMAGES of sex with children. You said "Espousing "freedom of speech, but with exceptions" is "censorship" for statist pussies too afraid to lay their cards on the table." So, are you in favor of censoring people who post images of sex with children?
To be clear, I am totally fine with laws against redistributing child pornography, I am totally fine with Reason censoring or banning anyone they wish for any reason they wish from their property since I believe free speech rights trumps anyone's claim to utter speech on someone else's property without the property owner's consent.
But you position yourself as a free speech absolutist, so this must be unforgivable censorship from your POV. So, put up or shut up.
So you're asserting that you only say things you agree with?
I am asserting that I am done playing this stupid game with you.
Do you support bears riding around in trunks’s right to keep and bear arms?
Instead of this trolling, why don't you discuss ways to break the two-party system. That is why you decided to comment on an article discussing how to break the two-party system, right?
That is why you decided to comment on an article discussing how to break the two-party system, right?
You do realize that Stossel wrote this article and not Yang, right? That shattering a false dichotomy with a false option doesn't make a truth or right?
But of course you do, you're so transcendentally enlightened beyond the two-party duopoly, you wouldn't fall for any false flag/stalking-horse nonsense. You're too smart to let that slip by you, especially if a writer writes half an article spelling it out for you.
You’re the king of bd faith interpretations. Just look at some of the other threads above where you respond to me. You’re just lying filth.
Fuck yeah, all hair the monarchy.
No more parties.
Can't be done without a new constitution, I fear, or at least a radically new election system nation-wide.
I'd suggest picking the party that contains your particular proclivities within its broad coalition and voting for that one.
Yet another "third" party.
Yawn.
You can't break an anvil.
You can't break an anvil.
I can't guarantee this, but I suspect that if you sat it in liquid helium until it stabilized at 4K, then took it out and very quickly wacked it with a maul, it might well shatter.
turns out you don't have to get to liquid He temps:
https://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/iss/kap_9/illustr/s9_1_1.html
You can't break an anvil.
Does breaking half an anvil count? There are plenty of people around here who like to assert that Trump broke one, if not two, halves of an anvil.
"Forward" is as meaningless as Republican and Democratic.
To get to multiple parties we should name them accurately.
MAGA Fascist
Socialist
Green
Liberal/Libertarian
Fundamentalist Christian
That covers 99% of voters.
Combine 2-3 and 1-5 and we have what we do now but named appropriately.
Yeah, I can see how a leftist pedophile, such as yourself, would see things that way.
Jesus fuck, how much money does the Joe Rogan smooth-brain crowd have to throw around on charlatans? Are you all like wealthy? Nothing but Patreon money coming out your orifices?
Surely that pie must be shrinking by now. Ben Shapiro can only pretend not to know the difference between gender and sex for so many years. Rogan is actively killing his fans because of the money it generates, but, it's like, the dead can't drive Uber and give their entire paycheck to these fucktards, can they?
WTF are you blabbering on about?
There are a lot of grifters out there taking the internet money of the "free thinking independent" types.
You’re not. You have the government to do it for you. So you can live off the rest of us.
You could insert any Democrat name in here. Or you know CNN, MSNBC, because they are part of a cable package if you want them or not.
Rogan is actively killing his fans because of the money it generates, but, it's like, the dead can't drive Uber and give their entire paycheck to these fucktards, can they?
I don’t care what you do with me, Brer Tony. Just don’t make that money printer over there stop going 'Brrrr!'. Roast me, hang me, drown me, skin me, whatever you're gonna do Brer Tony, but whatever you do, don’t make the money printer stop going 'Brrrr!'. Anything but that!
The same thing happens to every single person who becomes famous: they develop an ego. Many learn to ditch it after two years. Many do not.
Joe Rogan five years ago: "I'm a stupid idiot who hits things for a living. Don't listen to me."
Joe Rogan now: "Behold, for I am the surgeon general of Retardistan."
Tony, YOU are the surgeon general of retardistan. So stop pretending you understand science in any way. You don’t.
YOU are the surgeon general of retardistan.
That's actually the correct solution! I can expound further on the logic, but Tony's riddle distills down to a slight variation on the 'Two Guards/Two Doors' riddle where both guards are liars. You're cast into the pit guarded by nothing but liars and told you can't escape until you find the King of Retardistan. As you regain your senses you find two guards standing there so you ask, "Are either one of you the King of Retardistan?" Joe Rogan, the famous performance artist, replies "I am." and Tony, renowned liar and idiot who almost certainly knows Joe Rogan is a performance artist, replies "He is."
Arguably, there's a bit of meta "As I was going to St. Ives..." mixed into the riddle as well, as it's entirely possible that Joe Rogan never uttered those words (the majority of my logic stems from the relative ignorance of what Joe Rogan has said, much less when, if ever, he said it and let alone entirely the veracity with which he said any of it) and Tony's "I am the King of Retardistan." that he falsely ascribes to Rogan is actually first person.
Which lead to my assessment below: "I wish I could fuck goats the way I think Joe Rogan fucks goats." - Tony
I just wish I had as much money as he does. It looks like we work roughly equally as hard at our jobs.
Joe Rogan five years ago: "I'm a stupid idiot who hits things for a living. Don't listen to me."
Joe Rogan now: "Behold, for I am the surgeon general of Retardistan."
I don't know how else to read this other than: "I wish I could fuck goats the way I think Joe Rogan does." - Tony (bending over Ken "Popehat" White's idiom)
He's simply pointing out the totalitarian idiocy of shitheads like you. Fauci and democrats are responsible for every single "covid death". Hopefully you'll die from your endless boosters and 18 masks.
"Trump was erratic," says Yang, "not leading in a positive direction."
That is the wimpiest reason to vote against Trump I have heard.
You’re almost as obsessed with Trump as you are fucking young boys.
I like Andrew Yang and I do think he brings ideas to the table. That said I think the idea of a new third party succeeding is unlikely.
I like the idea of a guaranteed income because I think it would really help the working poor. It would give them a financial buffer that could help them succeed. As for the lazy person, if they can live on $1000/mo without working more power to them. I am guessing we are talking a small life, but I could be wrong.
I also think he is right about the IRS. The reality is they run your taxes through a computer anyway. What's the point of you doing it again? Why not just have them bill you and leave it at that.
Ok $20K a year per person as GI but NO other federal welfare programs. End it all
Nope. Pay out what's owed to currently enlisted service members and veterans, end it, and salt the earth lest the military-industrial-academic-scientific complex take root again. You wouldn't let people rack up student loan debt and then offer extra incentives covering their student loan debt to encourage them to enlist. We aren't in any World or Forever Wars and, even if we were, any chicks with dicks whining about not getting the same bennies as the boys who stormed Omaha Beach in 1944 for remote-piloting drones in the ME from Nevada in 2022 can pound sand. At best, sunset it until the time comes to liberate the Jews from New York, Austria, or Australia by force and, again even then, sunset it once the last Jew sets foot on free soil.
The easy fix to prevent abuse of military service incentives is to I’m erase fitness standards back to the old days, and restore disqualifying conditions back to where they should be. No more trannys, or any other freak show exemptions.
Ever notice that "independent" redistricting committees are usually made up of red and blue team members based on voter registration or 50/50 but nobody else?
I'll bite how would you set up a committee to do the work? Also, I less concerned with the committee make-up and more concerned that the work be done publicly. No drawing maps in a back room and then showing them as completed.
Sorry, second line should be "Also, I am less concerned..."
No people involved. A relatively simple computer program can divide a state population and geography into districts that are contiguous and with equal voter numbers. No more bullshit about protecting the interests of splinter groups, i.e. no more gerrymandering for any reason.
Computers are already drawing maps. It is the instructions given to the computer that determine the outcome and those instructions are given by people. Again, we need transparency. The instructions to the computers must be public records.
If you believe in fairness and transparency, then you should renounce your democrat affiliations.
Yang wanted to run as a Democrat and announced that he was, but then he weighted in on the first issue and took a total beating from his fellow Democrats. Just as I predicted. Like Trump, he has not held office, is not a long time political participant in one of the two major parties, so is hated by not only the opposition party, but his own.
That is why he is trying to start a new party. The establishment hates anyone that challenges them, any one with new ideas, and anyone they fear will do a better job than they have done, which sure won't be hard.
"I was willing to do or say whatever I thought would help get Trump out"
This comment is the Leper's Bell of Statism and Tyranny.
So Kazakhstan is wilding out right now.
Fun timing.
It being 1/6, you'd think the left would point to it, and the bloodshed, as an example of the horrors of insurrection, the extent of which America so narrowly avoided a year ago. But... that would mean Russian intervention as requested by the Kazakh government okay.
Or they could paint it as another mostly peaceful protest turned violent by an evil Russian-backed oligarch brutally oppressing the noble freedom fighters. But... that's a position very obviously inconsistent with what "anniversary" rhetoric is and will be.
Considering the CIA's+Open Society Foundation's possible/probable involvement, and definite desire to attack Russia, I'm pretty sure they'll dial the cognitive dissonance to 100 on a 1-10 scale and try to both laud the Kazakh revolt and continue vilifying 1/6 American protesters.
Let's hope it proves to be fatal.
Now Pelosi is talking about labeling half the congressional GOP members as ‘insurrectionists’ and denying them candidacy in the midterms. If successful, it will be time to remove the democrats from all elected positions.
We don't need a 3rd party led by Yang that still does not respect the Constitution.
What we need is a return to McCarthyism, so we can purge the marxists from America. They’re already openly planning a permanent takeover. It’s time for them to go away forever.
I have wanted to break the two-party system as well. The solution is the correct voting system. Sadly, Yang, despite his adverse experience in the NYC Mayoral race, thinks the system should be Instant Runoff Voting (IRV). His attempts to cooperatively "game" IRV failed and even the New York Times wonder about the 139,000+ "exhausted ballots", the votes of which weren't counted. In fact, IRV throws votes away all throughout the process. For some reason, no one has yet sued on the basis that not counting legitimate votes is illegal.
The correct voting system to use is Round Robin Voting (known in Social Choice Theory as Condorcet Voting). It uses the same ranked ballot at IRV except that the tally algorithm pairs every candidate other head-to-head with every other candidate. The true majority winner is the candidate who beats all others. This system actually eliminates the split-vote problem that is the reason voters desert the Libertarian Party when votes are cast.
I left the Libertarian Party back in 2002 because I couldn't get the Indiana LP to support my bid for Secretary of State, running on the platform of changing the voting system in Indiana. Back then I was pushing Approval Voting (AV), a non-ranked system that is very simple to use and a decent 2nd best to Round Robin. While a third of the delegates to the state nominating convention agreed with me on this, the rest thought my approach risked ballot access (SoS determines party ballot access in Indiana) and preferred selecting a woman candidate on the grounds that a woman had a better chance of getting the necessary 2% vote. Idiocy.
The point of this is that only a true majoritarian system that will function as such when three or more candidates are on the ballot will allow the evolution of a viable multi-party system. I am still pushing this issue. Within the next couple of days, I will be officially registering as a candidate for Indiana Secretary of State at the Republican Convention later this year. We'll see how that goes. On a parallel track, I'm going to be posting some videos an other material of a non-partisan nature dealing with Round Robin voting.
"The correct voting system to use is Round Robin Voting..."
Why do you get to decide that? The biggest problem with Condorcet voting, setting aside that fact that their are at least a dozen variants of it, is that it can be confusing to the voter. If Bush v. Gore taught us nothing else, it is that voters do not pay attention to voting policies and procedures.
A much simpler system is Approval Voting. One ballot per voter and for each position being voted for the voter can select as many or as few candidates as they wish to approve. While this can result in a majority for more than on candidate, there can be only one plurality... they become the winner.
Yang might be right about the one thing that unites most Americans: they want the government to give them stuff, either direct handouts or through economic "management".
I mean, I'd rather have my taxes go back to ME instead of defense contractors, foreign countries, etc. How is that so wrong? It's apparent we're not gonna spend less so I may as well get some of my fucking money back.
Most of you democrats want other people’s taxes for yourselves.
Yang has a lot of earnestly held bad ideas and has inspired virtually no constituency. He is not the one to break anything.
"Yang would simply give every adult $1,000 a month. But the United States is already going bankrupt, and a UBI would give more of your tax money even to people who don't need it."
Yet Reason points a finger at something like this and not spending near 10 trillion freaking dollars a DECADE on the military. What a crock of shit.
Regardless, the duopoly isn't going anywhere because our voting system is shit. Ditch the EC, make ranked choice or some other sensible voting system the standard, then you might start to see people vote for who they WANT (instead of against someone) and for someone worthwhile.
Voting is always going to be a compromise between what you want and what a viable majority want. It is inherent in the nature of democracy.
The military is a legitimate function of national governments. Doling out money from the public fisc to people for just existing is not.
No. The real solution is to get rid of the leftists. Then things can be fixed. You really are to blame.
It's not left vs. right. It's the cops versus everybody.
And landlords would raise the rents because the housing supply is still limited through zoning restrictions, a point I once mentioned to Yang at a townhall meeting.
OMG, Stossel should know better. Yang is just another idiot with TDS and delusions of Great Leader syndrome.
Hopefully Yang will be a commie anarchist magnet. That would purge hostile infiltrators from the LP platform committee and take votes from the Dem party.
I was a good Ron Paul Revolutionary, and a good libertarian, first clearing the Doctrine of Enumerated Powers issue. I brought up liberty issues. Then I changed Yang's campaign slogan from "Make America Think harder" (which is impossible, because America cannot think) to "Make Americans Think Harder" while I modeled my question after the Preamble.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiYQ9Mrwpk8&t=1475s
Ron and Randal Paul are girl-bullying republican politicians. They are no more libertarian than Gerald Ford
Increase the U.S. House to the Constitutional maximum of 1 per 30,000. The cost of remodeling on Capitol Hill would be nothing compared to the value of a significant improvement in our lives. Each rep. would get 1 staffer in DC and 1 in the State.
10,000 Congresscritters. They could just meet in CapitalOne Arena. So could work. This is the least weird of your ideas
If the population of the state is 1,000,000 and there are 400,000 voters, then the ratio is 2.5 persons per voter. Then you give your proxy to somebody who is collecting proxies. If a politician gets 50,000 proxies, that means when she votes NAY her vote counts for 125,000 into the NAY column. There would be a problem because you'd be paying the representative and so there's have to be a minimum number of proxies she would need. How to fix that? Back to the old drawing board.
I would love to see the two party system broken to, but Yang's nutty proposals are not going to do that.
Mr. Stossel: Baloney. The only reason he's starting a new party is because he failed in his old one. He wants to be a big fish no matter what size the pond. He'd jump back to the D's the moment somebody crooks their finger at him and appoints him to some Cabinet post.
Here are 7 at-home jobs that pay at least $100/day. And there’s quite the variety too! Some of these work-at-home jobs are more specialized, others are jobs that anyone can do. They all pay at least $3000/month,*/*vfzfc but some pay as much as $10,000. GO HOME PAGE FOR MORE DETAILS…...... Home Profit System
Right Is Right
Republicans, whatever happened to smaller government? To a balanced budget? Weren't these two claims the foundation of the Republican Party? Yes, in words but not in deeds.
As described in Retribution Fever, that which the Republicans did to the Whigs in the 1850s a new, apolitical party should do to the Republicans today ... abolish it. Few of its members are anything more than feckless hypocrites striving for personal power. Their motto should be "Power Without Principle!"
Apolitical? Yes, A party that follows the guidelines of the Scientific Method ... a party where science and politics intersect.
The Republican party organized to ban slavery and raise tariffs. It now seeks to enslave women into involuntary reproduction and ban production and trade. See their leeeengthy platform
Thanks to Stossell for warning us about the aspirant to Hirohito 2. Bad enough that the Orange Christian National Socialist just moved the country 50 years nearer to the Klan, Silvershirt, Bund, Prohibition republicans of 1932.
Andrew Yang is a well meaning politician who I believe genuinely wants to help people and while he's got some great ideas he's still to close to a collectivist form of governance, a form that will never work. You can't realistically execute a Universal Basic Income program. Some nation ends up being the slaves to the rest for something like that to even come close to possibly working for a while. Bless his heart for genuinely wanting to help and he does have some good ideas about voting but he's a collectivist and that's bad.
Post-translational Modification
https://www.profacgen.com/post-translational-modification.htm Post-translational modification (PTM) refers to the covalent and generally enzymatic modification of proteins during or after protein biosynthesis in the cell. To date, more than 350 types of distinct
Ross Perot is the only one that came even close to breaking the two party system, and those two parties immediately colluded to make sure it never happens again. We are much closer to the Democrats attaining a one party system with their "voting rights" laws, court packing, censorship, political retribution and making liberal cities states, than we are to breaking the two party system.
The real priority isn’t about the number of parties, it should be about wiping out communism.
A third party for the sake of a third party makes no sense at all if a statist ass clown like Yang is the best a third party has to offer.
Whether it's a Republican Party and two communist parties or a choice between three communist parties, it's still a false choice.
Yang is a fucking idiot and a communist
Yes, he is an idiot.
He is also a communist.
He is also a Progressive.
He is also a Marxist.
He is also a racist.
Because all those terms mean the exact same thing, in modern Reason comment board discourse - "someone I don't like".
UBI isn’t communism. I would take it as a lesser evil over institutionalized welfare in the spirit of Milton Friedman negative income tax. I think inflation concerns are overblown. I don’t think it will cause inflation of basic services other then housing. Housing is an issue that the market will take awhile to solve. I think much or all of the inflation to wealthier earners will be absorbed by the market itself. Much of the current inflation is caused by consolidation in certain industries (often due to corporate cronyism making it difficult for new entrants) where they can arbitrarily raise prices without fear of competition. Margins are significantly increasing in these industries indicating that inflation is being used as an excuse to raise prices.
Communism is pretty much dead. Other than Cuba, China, and North Korea, it's dead. And even in those countries it's not really communism anymore.
The failed experiment has failed. Blindly calling the blue party communists isn't helping anything, it just makes you look stupid.
p.s. Of course, socialism still exists, and is still a problem, but not even the blue party is socialist, they just have a tiny handful of socialist politician members. There's a difference. If it's not fair calling Republicans fascist, then it's equally not fair calling Democrats socialists.
Communism is pretty much dead. Other than Cuba, China, and North Korea, it's dead. And even in those countries it's not really communism anymore.
The failed experiment has failed. Blindly calling the blue party communists isn't helping anything, it just makes you look stupid.
A compelling argument if The Who hadn't written "Won't Get Fooled Again" 50 yrs. ago.
The Titans are dead, all hail Zeuss. Meet the new boss.
No no no. "Communist" just means "someone I don't like".
So Yang is a communist.
And Biden is a communist.
And Trump is a communist.
They're all communists!
The bolshies came to America and infected our media, academia, wall street, big tech and the democratic party. Pushing cultural marxism they are the threat to liberty and freedom. The Russians throw off the bolshevik yoke and in America it grew anew. There is a sickness of in the left...an anti American Cosmo woke Central European type of sickness.
Fascism is a left wing ideology, like communism, distinguished mostly by national vs international emphasis.
Correct terms for the left: totalitarian collectivist, global socialist. Both communist and fascist are appropriate shorthand.
Truth isn't fair. National Socialists and fascists are socialists who force children to fear God and kneel before Jesus.
Communist means communist -- as in, universal basic income, gun confiscation, and government funded journalists.
So, Milton Friedman and Charles Murray are communists? They both advocated for UBI.
Great Britain and Australia are communist countries? They both have pretty strict gun control.
And the entire Western world, that has a type of public broadcasting service, they are all communist?
Is that so?
No no, I didn't ask what you thought the world was "drifting towards". I'm talking right now. You said "Communist means communist -- as in, universal basic income, gun confiscation, and government funded journalists." So as of right now, you think Charles Murray is communist, Great Britain is communist, and all of Europe, US and Canada are communist. Is that your contention?
How about a one-party system where a central strongman leads by diktat?
But enough about your fantasies.
Did Charles Murray advocate for gun control? Because, standalone, 'universal income' and 'commune' are highly analogous ideals.
I've had it up to here with friggin isms.
I say this to my friends right and left: there is no perfect political philosophy. There is no simple set of rules for all human civilization. We've been trying since the beginning of philosophy, and we haven't figured it out yet.
All we can do is a science experiment. There are 195 countries on earth. Pick the ones with the best results, and copy them. That's what I say.
More hyperbole from Jeffy. As he has no argument.
It's a willful misrepresentation of Murray and Friedman's propositions. The proposition wasn't "We don't have a safety net, we should implement UBI." it was "We have an expensive, ineffective, and unjust safety net. UBI would be a more affordable, effective, and just safety net."
Of course, the subtlety is selectively lost by someone who would otherwise consider themselves able to split the hairs between safety and efficacy.
Got it. You believe Milton Friedman was a communist. Idiot.
Libertarianism, in my view, is a front for global communism
Is that so.
Let me guess - you think nationalistic populism is better?
Good Lord. Even by the own author's estimation, Friedman is "96% capitalist", but because he fails in that last 4% in the author's analysis, that means Friedman is a "socialist". This is ridiculous. If the capitalism tent is so small that it cannot even accommodate Milton Friedman, then the tent might as well be microscopic and therefore nonexistent. That entire essay is a giant No True Scotsman fallacy on display.
If "96% capitalist" is not good enough, then no one is pure enough to qualify as a True Scotsman Capitalist according to the author. Fine, whatevs. It is missing the forest through the trees.
Entitlements only run in one direction. Anybody recommending a universal basic income scheme on the assumption that every other entitlement program is going to be scaled back or eliminated, or that the universal basic income scheme is itself going to become a bottom less put of corruption and inefficiency, is deluding themselves and everyone else.
Sure, but that doesn't refute the notion that there various 'less wrong' options. We already have a bottomless pit that gives money to people specifically because they make bad decisions. Giving them money to make no decisions or to choose equally between good and bad options isn't more wrong.
Nobody is going to vote themselves less goodies.
Not even Republican voters? Not even libertarian voters?
More realistic? I do not think so.
I'm not familiar with the entirety of the UBI context, but I don't believe Murray or Friedman were advocating that anyone run on it as the central theme of their (libertarian) platform as much as demonstrating how, once again and out of hand, even an exceedingly simple idea could both cut down on government waste, provide better equality, and incentivize better outcomes. Simple, neat - and less wrong.
Yang's the first to seriously propose it as policy in the political theater nationally and Murray/Friedman have never endorsed him for it, right?
There are 195 countries on earth. Pick the ones with the best results, and copy them. That's what I say.
How conservative of you.
We have 50 States in the United States..how bout letting each one run itself with a very limited Federal Govt...don't need a federal department of education or pretty much any of the agencies created after say 1960...
No, pick the one that you think is best for you and MOVE THERE.
Tonto imagines the right kind of initiation of force will grant his wish.
How about a new Federalist Party? ha ha
Where did I say that I supported UBI?
'60? We went something like 70 yrs. with 4 departments if you roll War/Army/Navy up into 'Defense'. Fuck the Department of the Post Office and go straight State, Treasury, and Justice. Even then, the primacy of the individual states should render someone flashing a warrant with 'Department of Justice' letterhead to a citizen directly nearly meaningless. "Oh, you're from the Department of State? Well, why didn't you say so?! In that case, go talk to a local judge and make him issue a warrant I should care about."
Tried it already. We had to stop the experiment what with the rampant desperate desire of some people to enslave others.
Derp. So much internet, yet so unwilling to learn simple things.
It would depend on the scenario. I am skeptical that it could work, but I am also open to persuasion. I'm not a rigid ideologue. My beliefs are informed by empirical reality and if reality changes or a new argument comes along, I remain open to changing my beliefs accordingly. So, could there be a situation where UBI is preferable? Possibly. I won't say there is a zero percent chance.
Haha!
G: You support UBI.
Lying Jeffy: Where did I say that I support UBI?
G: Say you don’t.
Lying Jeffy: Blah blah blah blah*
* None of the blahs say he doesn’t support UBI.
There is no circumstance where UBI "works" if you are a person that understands or values a free market economy or personal liberty.
Unlike you, I have the humility and experience to understand that I don't know everything about every scenario that might arise, and I am open to new information and new empirical data that can have an impact on how I view the world. You sound like some 15-year-old teenager who just discovered Atlas Shrugged and now thinks he understands exactly how everything works.
The fact that you are open to scenarios where it "works" just means you are open to coercive statism and redistribution.
Are you open to having publicly funded roads, police and fire departments, judicial system? Then you too are "open to coercive statism and redistribution". Or perhaps it is "the statism that *I* like is okay, but the statism that *YOU* like is totally awful!"
You're a communist without the balls to admit it.
Also unlike you, I am capable of nuance beyond simplistic black/white thinking. "Unless you support total anarcho-capitalism, that makes you a COMMUNIST" is retarded and dumb. There is a vast degree of separation between total anarcho-capitalism and total communism. If you can't see that then that is your problem not mine.
Nothing blind about it. The democrats are Marxist. More openly so every day. As they barely retry to hide it anymore. If you think that sounds stupid, you’re blind and I can’t help you.
What a dishonest rant. Typical hyperbolic Pedo Jeffy. You know you have no real argument Jeffy, that’s why you say such stupid things.
You’re a lying, sea lioning sophist. A total shitweasel.
Well, Australia doe have a gulag now.
Hey, you're not very well travelled are you? Have you lived in those countries? How about South Africa? Japan?
If you take American constitutional liberties seriously you wouldn't use any of those places as a model!
Go play with Klaus Schwab in Davos!
That represents the lefty leadership, not the bad. We need to get rid of the de o rats, and then turn our retention to RINO trash. Like Romney, Cheney, etc.. they have to go too.
Yep. That’s always a problem with you democrats. Always trying to enslave people.
They were democrats when there were actual plantations, and now they have black people trapped on their neo-segregated, BIPOC safe space approved, virtual plantations (coming to the metaverse maybe?!) where, as one Joe Biden told a black man:
"If you dont vote for me, you aint black!"
Imagine if a dirty *shudder* republican dared to make that kind of statement. The comparisons to the massa would be endless.
Being a tranny is a psychological condition, not a biological one. There is no scientific basis for saying otherwise.
It’s unfortunate that you’re such an ignorant, weak minded individual. Though it does explain your politics.
Delusional psychosis is not a gender.
"Pick the ones with the best results, and copy them."
Using that criteria most people globally would pick the US (and I say that as a Canadian), but not Tony.
Probably because he has a cartoon version of the rest of the world and how it operates in his head.
Shoot a quarter million of them to death in a war over it, make them swear that they won't do it again and, within a decade, they're back home passing laws that they totally swear aren't to oppress black people, but just keep them out of diners, general stores, hotels, and all the various other places they don't belong.
Even going so far as having a 101% of the voting public turn out in S. Carolina to overwhelmingly support Tilden so that they work a deal to preserve Jim Crow/the remnants of slavery.
Tony and his ilk regularly walk into the lab, dump the nearest beaker or test tube over their heads, slap some woman on the ass, take a shit on the nearest minority, declare that the experiment failed, and walk out the door. Continually demonstrating why we shouldn't let anyone remotely like them near any reins of power anywhere unless we really don't care if the place winds up burnt to the ground and, even then, only if we're fairly certain we can make sure they're inside when it happens.
Nothing blind about it.
The democrats are Marxist. More openly so every day. As they barely retry to hide it anymore. If you think that sounds stupid, you’re blind and I can’t help you.
Testing a theory, I'm pretty sure I've been closing my italics/quotes appropriately and they keep getting clipped after the first line.
Yeah, double line breaks appear to break closing HTML tags. WTF? I'm having trouble fathoming what moron would make that change to functioning code and why? Did somebody 'unbreak' an italics tag somewhere or something?
Yay! New comment feature! /sarc
So, yeah, I wasn't saying "Blindly calling..." it's a direct quote from BrandyBuck above me. My comment starts where his ends.
Wow, your joke was SOOOO much funnier than mine! Where is your stand-up gig?
Start working at home with G00gle! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this–4 weeks past.I began this 8-months ago and immediately was brindfswdging home at least $77 per hour.
I work thr0ugh this link, G0 to tech tab for work detail.………>>> Visit Here
You’re funny in the way that a homeless dude jacking it on a street corner is funny. We’re laughing AT you.
where "delusional psychosis" means "people who refuse to adhere to the gender stereotypes that I assign to them, therefore they must be mentally ill".
Science is not yours to make up.
*That should have said: I think much or all of the inflation to wealthier earners will be absorbed by the received UBI itself. In other words basic services like food will not see the same levels of inflation. Housing will, but only because we have had a lack of housing for a decade or more.
Shut up, Elizabeth.
Does
Lol you people are so fucking racist.
That's right. Treating all people as equal under the law, and equally subject to sarcasm, is racist.
How about people who refuse to adhere to their species "stereotype".
I think you may have a point, since a communist immigration policy would involve mine fields, machine gun nests, and even a wall!
That's more accurately their emigration policy.