Holiday Bright Spots For Progressives

[ellenrr]

"The fact is that voters agree with Democrats on most issues. When you word the questions fairly, people want government to fight for them, raise wages, provide a good retirement, protect the environment, make workplaces safe and other items on the progressive policy agenda. They want Social Security expanded. They want help for the less fortunate. They want fair trade agreements instead of job-killing, corporate-favoring trade deals."


http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/12/24/holiday-bright-spots-progressives

disclaimer: I don't agree with everything in this article,
but I agree that we should always stay conscious of the bright spots, such as the retail wage movement, which imo, (prior to the Black Lives Matter which also gives me hope) is one of the most positive trends going on.

[PoliticAverse]

1. "They want fair trade agreements" - did they actually ask someone if they wanted an 'unfair'

trade agreement? The problem with things like this is there is a known tendency for people
to give desirable answers to poll questions like "should government help poor people" while
voting against the same thing in the privacy of the voting booth. This is known
as "social desirability bias, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_desirability_bias .

[merrily]

2. Did anyone ask if they wanted an even lower minimum wage?

Most people really do think the wealthy should be taxed more, most people working full time should not make little as to qualify for food stamps or need to work more than one job, etc.

It's not all social desirability bias. For that matter, the very concept of social desirability reflects what a majority of people in a society thinks is correct, moral, good, etc.

The issue is that neither of the largest political parties is pushing any of these things as hard, consistently and skillfully as the private and political right screams things like "Socialism," "right to work," etc.

Alll the time, money, energy and blood this country--and many other countries--have, since the Russian revolution, put into defending the "rights" of the wealthy against those whose priority is the "common good" should give anyone pause.

[PoliticAverse]

3. I think if people actually voted on issues individually there would be both

a higher minimum wage and the wealthy would be taxed more.

[merrily]

5. Yep, and the poll numbers go well beyond any social desirability variation factor.

[ChosenUnWisely]

4. To achieve progressive goals what are people willing to give up?

For example...

Is the TPP a fair trade for Gay Marriage nationwide?

Is keeping tax cuts permanently in place worth the price of one year of funding for the unemployed?

People need to look at the larger picture and see that many of the positive things we the people get comes at a very high price to the 99% and cost the 1% NOTHING at all

Stopping the TPP would be a good thing for the 99% but our Democratic Leaders want to give it to the 1% before they leave office.

The price we the 99% will have to pay for change is cleaning house in the Democratic Party FIRST and that means removing the 'Democrats" who support the 1% over the 99%.

If We, the Democratic Party, do not change the Democratic Party will just become GOP lite and the people will have no reason to vote for the any longer.
.

[merrily]

6. Put people to work at good wages and they will focus a lot less on who marries whom.

The PTB of the two largest major Parties have put the focus mostly on so-called cultural issues, and for good reason, from their perspective and the perspective of their fellow one percenters.

Follow the money. It was the crux to understanding what was really going on in US politics during the Nixon Era, before the Nixon Era and after the Nixon Era.


Unfortunately, the money is not on the side of the 99%--but the votes are. The One Percenters are willing to use their money to get what is good for the 1%. Is the 99% equally as willing to use its votes to get what is good for the 99%?