MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Andrew Yang’

Those Yang Republicans – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on March 31, 2020

If Republicans were honest, they would say things like:….

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/03/laurence-m-vance/those-yang-republicans/

By

Andrew Yang, the son of immigrants from Taiwan, is a lawyer, entrepreneur, and philanthropist who founded the nonprofit organization Venture for America (VFA) in 2011. Yang left the organization in 2017 and filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on November 6 to run for president of the United States. Although Yang participated in seven of the first eight Democratic presidential debates, on February 11, 2020, shortly after the New Hampshire primary, he suspended his presidential campaign. A week later he joined CNN as a political commentator.

Yang’s main campaign focus was how the federal government should respond to the increasing automation of the economy. According to Yang2020:

I’m proud of the work I did at VFA. But during my time there, it became clear to me that job creation will not outpace the massive impending job loss due to automation.

So I went to Washington, and I visited Congressional leaders. I presented them with the hard facts. 78% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, 40% cannot afford an unexpected $400 bill, and so many live one medical emergency away from bankruptcy. A wave of automation is coming that will displace even more American jobs. I asked, “What will our government do?”

And here is what he thinks the federal government should do:

As president, my first priority will be to implement the big solutions America needs to get back on track. To start, I’d enact the Freedom Dividend: $1,000 a month, no strings attached, for every American 18 and older, paid for by a new tax on the companies benefiting most from automation.

Republicans baulked at Yang’s idea, just like they have generally run from other universal basic income (UBI) proposals. However, this does not mean that they oppose on principle the government giving Americans cash in their pocket.

The federal government twice under President George W. Bush—with overwhelming Republican support—sent Americans money.

In 2001, as part of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, the federal government sent a $300 check to single individuals and $600 to married couples.

In 2008, under the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, the federal government sent a $600 check to single individuals and $1,200 to married couples. Taxpayers with children eligible for the Child Tax Credit (CTC) received an additional $300 per dependent child.

And just recently—with practically unanimous Republican support—Congress passed, and President Trump signed into law, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act or “CARES Act.” Amid hundreds of pages of pork, it directs the federal government to send checks (or make direct deposits) of $1,200 to single individuals and $2,400 to married couples. Taxpayers with children eligible for the child credit will receive an additional $500 per dependent child.

If Republicans were honest, they would say things like:

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is a public health crisis.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when they need it.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when the economy needs a stimulus.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is a pandemic.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when unemployment claims drastically increase.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is an economic downturn.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except in extenuating circumstances.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there are severely distressed sectors of the U.S. economy.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when the economy collapses.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is a recession.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when many Americans need economic relief.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is a financial panic.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when the stock market tanks.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when there is a depression.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when Americans are hurting.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when certain industries need a bailout.

It is wrong for the federal government to give Americans money—except when Republicans vote to do so.

None of these Republican-supported government handouts should be viewed as surprising. Republicans have for decades supported the federal government giving Americans money in the form of welfare. Indeed, we already have a universal basic income in the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) that Republicans wholeheartedly support and increase every year.

Republicans have no philosophical objection to the federal government giving Americans cold hard cash. Don’t be surprised if round two of the CARES Act results in more checks to Americans, amidst all the pork it will contain, courtesy of the Republicans.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Andrew Yang: Government Takeover of Drug Manufacturing, Licensing Would Lower Prices

Posted by M. C. on December 11, 2019

He also advocates for punishing businesses who do not cooperate with the government.

Government already punishes businesses.

Military, education, health care, annual trillion dollar deficits. A 17 year long war, $trillion+  war with no end in sight that we were told would pay for itself. The  F-35 a $billion over budget. The first deployed $12 billion Ford class aircraft carrier has a launch system that won’t launch F-35 aircraft for years (if ever?).

Government has quite history of keeping costs down.

The sad thing is the sheeple will buy Yang’s story.

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/12/10/andrew-yang-government-drug-manufacturing-lower-prices/

by Penny Starr

Democrat entrepreneur Andrew Yang is a long shot to win the White House in 2020, but he is still rolling out his presidential plans, including more federal government control over the medical prescription industry.

Andrew Yang’s plan includes using international standards for drug pricing, licensing drug companies that cooperate with the government’s regulations, and public manufacturing of medications.

Yang makes a pitch for his plans on his campaign website:

We need to put pressure on these companies to get their prices under control and more in line with the rest of the world. Americans pay twice as much as Australians and three times as much as the Dutch on prescription drugs due to lack of price control. We have to give the federal government authority to negotiate drug prices and use standard international price reference points so pharmaceutical companies can no longer exploit our market and the American people.

If these companies are not willing to compromise, we need to ensure the U.S. government has the ability to force licenses for these drugs to companies who will. Additionally, we need to authorize the creation of public manufacturing facilities to make these drugs, as well as other necessary drugs and unprofitable but necessary medications, for the American people.

Yang also said that Congress should legislate to make it possible for Medicare — or the government — to negotiate drug prices. He also advocates for punishing businesses who do not cooperate with the government.

“If a company is charging too much, someone willing to charge a reasonable amount will be granted a license to make the medication,” Yang said on his campaign website.

“According to his campaign, Yang would also allow for importing prescription medication from other countries ‘if all else fails,’” the Hill reported.

Be seeing you

f35-moneydump

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Progressive journalist: MSNBC doesn’t try to hide ‘contempt’ towards Gabbard | TheHill

Posted by M. C. on November 27, 2019

“Fundamentally they’re beholden to whatever the market incentives are and right now it’s within their market interests to depict Tulsi as an infiltrator, as a Trojan horse in the Democratic Party and not deal on the substance with what she’s saying which is why over and over again they tar her as a Russian plant essentially,” Tracey told Hill.TV.

Follow the money (Soros)

https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/472056-progressive-journalist-msnbc-doesnt-try-to-hide-contempt-towards-gabbard

Progressive journalist Michael Tracey claimed Tuesday that MSNBC is has dropped all pretenses for their “contempt” towards Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).

The political news contributor said the left-leaning network has treated her fellow 2020 Democratic candidates, including businessman Andrew Yang and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) unfairly, but he argued that with Gabbard it, “crosses a certain threshold.”

“Fundamentally they’re beholden to whatever the market incentives are and right now it’s within their market interests to depict Tulsi as an infiltrator, as a Trojan horse in the Democratic Party and not deal on the substance with what she’s saying which is why over and over again they tar her as a Russian plant essentially,” Tracey told Hill.TV.

“There’s nobody who can really offer any kind countervailing view because it’s just not economically advantageous for them at this point,” he added.

MSNBC didn’t immediately return Hill.TV’s request for comment.

Tracey pointed to a fiery exchange between Gabbard and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) during last week’s 2020 primary debate as a prime example.

During the debate, Harris accused Gabbard of being a conservative media darling and consistently going on Fox News to bash President Obama during his tenure.

“I think that it’s unfortunate that we have someone on this stage who is attempting to be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, who, during the Obama administration, spent four years full-time on Fox News criticizing President Obama,” Harris said.

Gabbard dismissed the criticism, calling it “ridiculous.”

The California senator also hit Gabbard over her meeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who U.S. officials have accused of being a war criminal. Harris concluded her attack by saying that Democrats need a candidate who can take on President Trump as well as “bring the party and the nation together.”

The back-and-forth came after Gabbard criticized the Democratic Party of fashioning outdated foreign policies “represented “by Hillary Clinton and others’ foreign policy.”

“Our Democratic Party unfortunately is not the party that is of, by and for the people. It is a party that has been and continues to be influenced by the foreign policy establishment in Washington, represented by Hillary Clinton and others’ foreign policy, by the military industrial complex and other greedy, corporate interests,” she said.

Leading up to the fifth Democratic debate, Gabbard engaged in a weeks-long feud with Clinton after the former Democratic presidential nominee said the Hawaii lawmaker was “the favorite of the Russians.”

—Tess Bonn

news_presstitutes

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Truth Is A Kremlin Talking Point – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on October 18, 2019

I can remember when everyone had or needed “gravitas”. Now the media has a new buzzphrase.

Parasites feeding off each other.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/10/17/truth-is-a-kremlin-talking-point/

In response to a statement during the Democratic primary debates by presidential candidate Andrew Yang that both Russia and the United States have engaged in election interference, liberal pundit Molly McKew tweeted, “I now retract any vaguely nice thing I ever said about Yang knowing technology things because he answered the question on Putin with moral equivalency and a Kremlin talking point.”

If you’re in the mood for some depressing amusement, just type the words “Kremlin talking point” without quotation marks into Twitter’s search engine and scroll through all the results which come up. Just keep on scrolling and observe how this label, “Kremlin talking point”, gets bleated by mainstream empire loyalists to dismiss subjects ranging from the rigging of Democratic primaries to criticism of US regime change wars to endless US warmongering to concerns about new cold war escalations to disliking John McCain to criticism of Nancy Pelosi. Any criticism of the status quo which cannot be labeled false or misleading gets labeled a “talking point” of Russia/Putin/the Kremlin by those who support and defend the status quo of US-centralized imperialist world hegemony.

Yang’s statement about US intervention in foreign elections is indisputably true, of course. Both alternative and mainstream media outlets have thoroughly documented the fact that the US government’s own data shows them to have interfered in scores of foreign elections, far more than any other nation on earth. This includes an interference in Russia’s elections in the nineties that was so brazen they made a Hollywood movie about it. Former CIA Director James Woolsey openly admitted on Fox News last year that the US still interferes in foreign elections to this very day.

These are not conspiracy theories. These are not even secrets. These are facts. But because they are inconvenient facts, they get labeled “Kremlin talking points” by those whose job it is to defend the status quo.

Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was also branded with the accusation of voicing “Kremlin talking points” for remarks she made during last night’s debate. In her case those “talking points” consisted of the indisputable fact that the bloodshed in Syria can be blamed on US politicians from both parties, and the indisputable fact that the US has armed extremist militias in that nation with the goal of effecting regime change.

“Literally a Kremlin talking point, but whatever,” tweeted #Resistance pundit Leah McElrath in response to Gabbard’s debate comments.

“It is a fact that the Russian talking point for years has been that the United States arms al-Qaeda in Syria. Tulsi Gabbard just said it on national television,” tweeted journalist Scott Stedman.

“How odd to listen to Tulsi Gabbard mouthing Syrian and Russian talking points on the Democratic debate stage…sorry but no one thinks US troops withdrawn by Trump were there as part of a ‘regime change war’ by the US,” tweeted Susan Glasser of CNN and The New Yorker.

So the establishment narrative managers now have an official three-word debunk of any criticism of the establishment which employs them, which applies even when that criticism is fully based in facts and reality. Facts are a Kremlin talking point, and anyone who believes them is Russian. Facts are Russian. Truth is Russian. Skepticism is Russian. Asking questions is Russian. Dissent is Russian. Revolution is Russian.

So let’s all get Russian then, baby. Let’s all fill our heads with objectively true Kremlin talking points and Cossack dance our way to a fact-based relationship with reality. Get as Russian as possible. Get aggressively Russian. Get offensively Russian. Get so Russian it hurts. Get so Russian it curls Louise Mensch’s hair. If they are going to start telling us that truth is Russian, then the only appropriate thing to say in response is dasvidaniya.

_____________________________

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemitthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Andrew Yang is Ross Perot for millennials

Posted by M. C. on March 19, 2019

imperial fact-checker!!!

Like dystopian horror? Read this.

https://theweek.com/articles/829377/andrew-yang-ross-perot-millennials

Matthew Walther

You know how sometimes you come across something that you never thought would exist only to realize you’ve been dreaming of it for years without knowing it, like the amazing country album The Supremes cut in 1965? This is how I felt when I discovered the Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, a.k.a. Ross Perot for millennials. It had never occurred to me that what the Democratic presidential race needed in 2020 was a soft reboot of the Texan businessman’s maverick populist wonkery, but now that I know it exists I’m absolutely delighted… Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Another Totalitarian Communist – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on March 18, 2019

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/03/michael-s-rozeff/another-totalitarian-communist-running-for-president-as-democrat/

By

His name is Andrew Yang. His proposals are here.

We have a choice in assessing the Democratic hopefuls like Yang, Harris, Sanders, O’Rourke, Warren, Booker, Biden, etc. Are they colossal idiots, or are they Communist Totalitarians?

We know their ideas, and these ideas are so bad, so destructive and so evil, that we might think that these people are colossal idiots.

That would be a mistake. They have given detailed plans. They are mature people. They are successful people. They are educated. They are advertising their policies and actively seeking power.

We MUST assume that they know exactly what they’re proposing and what they intend to do if given power. We MUST take them at their word. It’s not plausible to dismiss them as morons. They didn’t get where they are by being stupid. They didn’t draft detailed communist policies for the fun of it. They are telling us to our faces what they believe and what their intentions are.

We MUST assume that these people are fully aware of what their plans for us mean. In that case, they all have to be viewed as Totalitarian Communists. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »