The Democratic Party's Slide Into Irrelevance

In 1941, the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor prompted FDR to ask that the nation unite in the war effort.

The entire nation immersed itself in a single minded focus. We worked as a team in a socialist undertaking. We instituted strict rationing.

That's the future ..... some American president is going to speak to the nation and say we have to win against the consequences of our historical freedom to pollute and everyone is going to fall in line. We're going to ration again. It's not that complicated .... we've been through this drill before.

Sure, societies do that all the time... when the enemy is at the gates or they're going through economic hardships. Realistically, it will take something of similar shock value for the people to give up most everything they've been working for.

When I run the capital consumes itself/robots do all the work model, the only thing left of value is what people willfully do for the good or benefit of others. Nothing else would be of any worth to anyone because they could get whatever they want for free. Only what someone would do for you of their own initiative would mean anything to you. Everything else would be like the air.

I think a sustainable automated economy that keeps levels in check is going to be what happens - not going back to what we did a quarter million years ago.

I don't know what jobs you've worked but labor destroys people, it breaks backs, hands, makes people depressed and a million other things. The masses just aren't going to do that **** out of reasons that you states and billions of people aren't going back to hunters and gatherers without mass death - over a fear of death.

But I'd imagine in about 50 years, there is a credible chance that about half the people will be working a typical 30-40 hour work week as AI replaces work, and hopefully, UBI begins to supplement those areas that no longer exist. That's a workable model. Eliminating money and going back to the stone age on a whim that it will all work out accordingly, isn't..

This of course completely ignores the fact that billions of people living a primitive setting ins't a gauranteed way to tackle the climate issue.

Educated people understand that the enemy is indeed at the gates.

You struggle with context. Living without money doesn't mean we go back to being hunter gatherers dressed in animal pelts.

We will still have electricity, housing, internet, hospitals, universities, vehicles, chemical fertilizers, computers, gyms, sports, arts, forklifts, camping and pizza.

What we'll have to give up is the highly polluting aspect of our existence.

Things that will have to go ..... single use plastics. Recreational aviation (travel will be electric vehicles or rail and via ship). Beef. Bitcoin. We might have to convert to using compostable toilets. 3,000 sf private homes. We're going to have to learn to share things. Wear more durable clothing.

I'm glad that you're at least seeing the light with UBI. Just imagine that it isn't cash.

How?

I've been a supporter, here, of UBI in its original form for a long time - which includes income.

The government simply gives you the things you would use money for.

Housing, food, clothing, medical care, education, etc.

There would be some optional things too that you could get. A musical instrument. Art supplies. Vacation. There would still be a system of positive reinforcement and perks associated with work performance.

You’re describing a distribution system, not a production system. Free stuff doesn’t appear magically. You still need a way to organize labor and resources. What is the mechanism that replaces money for that? It's easy to give stuff away, not so easy to produce it.

You're mentioning positive reinforcement and perks. What are these perks, because we all get the supplies and they don't cost anything.

Also, what about things like nicer clothes, art classes, teeball for the kids, golf ...literally everything. How does this perk system work?

There are thousands of different jobs which need to be done. I would just ask people which jobs they are passionate about and let them choose. To the extent that certain unimportant jobs are undersubscribed, I offer perks. Nicer housing. More vacation. Assignment to a community which might have a golf course. Whatever it takes to get those important jobs filled.

If a person didn't want to participate in the production, then they might risk being frozen out of the distribution.

fyi - golf courses are going to be fewer, especially the ones that require a lot of toxic fertilizer and petrol to mow the grass to be maintained in pristine shape.

Children's needs would be a high priority. Plenty of work for adults will be available to work with them. Teachers, coaches, medical professionals, etc.

Walz was actually serious option for 2028? Seems like a candidate that wouldn't even make the first primary.

The corporate media is pumping up Gavin Newsom because he's a useful troll in the Machiavellian divide and conquer messaging who won't change anything substantively. Buttigieg is another loyal to the establishment favorite.

There's a gang of 8 more progressive Senators who are challenging Schumer and the DSCC's recruiting. Bernie and Warren are among them and too old to run for POTUS. But maybe one of the others will emerge and consolidate progressive support in the 2028 primary.

I'm looking forward to the next Democratic POTUS primary. The neoliberal legacy candidates are all too old and have been exhausted. It should be a real competition. Time for a changing of the guard.

Did you see where I mentioned that there would still be universities ?

Doctors would still need to be trained and accredited. We're still going to need scientists and trained engineers.

You should read up on how we organized in America for WW2.

You make it seem as if simply doing what we already have successfully done in the past is some impossible dream.

Churchill had a great quote about America ...... said Americans will eventually do the right thing ..... after all other options are exhausted. Denial is rough f72.

Irrc, Bernie was talking about seizing the means at the North Pole. Supposedly a lot of idle capacity out of peak season. That seems to be about as far as they get with this issue.

In the USSR doctors only made about 50% more than say a nightwatchmen.

I'd personally rather take my chances with Climate Change than the Prison-on-Earth that Nutty wants to steer us into.

Just my personal preference. To each their own.

I'm not bashing the argument that we may need to treat climate change like a world War. I'm critiquing the idea of removing money from a system that currently relies on it on the thesis that we didn't have money 250,000 years ago.

FDR had markets, money and wages. We forced people into the military to fight a war but it was temporary and a selected group, as opposed to billions with no real timeline. The perk system is a comedy bit and I think we do better there, imo.

We're all already in a prison on Earth. It's the only habitable planet available to us. We don't have anywhere else to go unless you consider a small space station completely reliant upon Earth resources.

The harsh reality of your stance is that you're not only willing to gamble with your own life .... you're willing to gamble everyone else's life as well.

I guessing most are placing their bets somewhere between your draconian methods and doing abolutely nothing.

What are you going to tell people in third world countries, "Sorry, no life style improvements, so make jumpropes and enjoy each others company."

I don't want to force you to pick a path but if we really did create a truly sustainable climate future for 8 billion individuals, it would almost certainly be a very high tech world.

I mean, you’re talking about next-gen batteries, smart grids, and massive solar and wind build outs then EVs, self-driving fleets, logistics, global recycling, and smart everyting operating around the world.

Would you sacrifice the market 5xing with more money in circulation if it meant accomplishing your emissions standards?

The problem isn’t money or technology. The problem is that raising the rest of the world’s living standards to the level he wants to reduce Western living standards to would require the West to triple its industrial output for decades just to produce all the necessary goods to lift ~7 billion people up to our reduced standards.

Apparently one of us doesn't know what the word 'prison' means in context.

I'll trust the discerning reader to figure out which one of us that is.

Well said.

I'm certainly not in the 'do absolutely nothing' camp. But if the only choices were 'do nothing' or Nutty's Prison-on-Earth, I'd personally go with 'do nothing.'

Now you're just being ridiculous.

What I personally do or don't with respect to climate change is virtually irrelevant.

And if folks want to go all-in with your Draconian scheme, I can't stop them.