The predominantly ludicrous lawmaker from Georgia did Biden a solid this weekend, telling Republicans the Democratic president is fiendishly attempting to make people’s lives better.

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is largely the platform of modern neoliberals, if you take away meaningless terms like a “living wage” and make it generally less dumb

    Hillary Clinton was the first major modern candidate to push for universal health care, back in the 90s.

    • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And then Hillary Clinton came out against a public option when she was running against Obama in '08. It was her husband, Bill Clinton who pushed the Democrat Party to start taking corporate and billionaire donations.

      How is “living wage” a meaningless term? Right now, working a full time minimum wage job anywhere in the country is not enough to support basic essentials, such as housing, food, and utilities.

      Obama said that if he was running in the '80s, he would have been considered a Republican.

      https://thehill.com/policy/finance/137156-obama-says-hed-be-seen-as-moderate-republican-in-1980s/

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah that because Obama was also a badass neoliberal king. He also fought hard for public health care.

        Not sure what your criticism here is.

        And a “living wage” is a literally meaningless statement. Like, give it a dollar amount

        If your dollar amount varies by locality (due to differences in cost of living) then guess what, that’s also the modern neoliberal position.

        Your problem is that the word neoliberal doesn’t mean what you think it means, and your confusion is just born from the fact that neolibs don’t intrinsically hate the wealthy.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Is that why Obamacare is a public option? Oh wait, it’s not. In fact, Obamacare was an act that forced Americans to buy private health insurance, which I’m sure the private insurance companies secretly loved.

          RE: Living wage

          https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/21/health/wages-mortality-risk/index.html

          https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2801679?guestAccessKey=1cdec717-ea64-4ad2-b6e7-3b2ad0f24715

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Obamacare is not a public option because they couldn’t get 100% of democrats to vote for that, because not all Democrats are neolibs or progressives. Some are just “less conservative” - see Manchin today.

            Like, he literally televized a meeting with the Republicans who pushed “death panels” to try to rally more support. He’s a President, not a king.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Again I’m not seeing what you’re missing.

                As a former reddit user who was a regular on /r/neoliberal I assure you I am well versed in it.

                • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  So then you’re aware that neoliberalism is a pro-capitalist idiology. Are you aware that socialism is, by definition, not pro-capitalist? Social democracy is the in-between point of socialism and capitalism, where the basic needs are covered, and the non-essentials are left to the free market to decide.

                  Williamson is a social democrat. Obama/Hillary are not.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I am extremely pro-capitalist.

                    One can be pro-capitalist and pro-social safety net. Sweden has greater wealth disparity than the US and uses the Nordic Model you’re trying to claim as socialist, and which is in fact a capitalist society. I am pro-union. So is Joe Biden. So are Hillary and Bill Clinton.

                    Again not seeing your issue.

                    If you gave some stoned suburban mom the Democrat platform and told her to scrapbook it, you’d have MaryAnn Williamson