nyblue23

Did you miss the Burnley match? I thought that was pretty enjoyable.

Yeah the bit about Rodwell was framed kind of interestingly. I will say there was one bit where Rodwell was filmed in the physio room after claiming he was as healthy as he’d ever been telling a teammate there was no chance he’d be suiting up to play that weekend. The series was vague about the circumstances surrounding that, but if Rodwell was actually refusing to play despite being healthy, that’s obviously problematic. The watch thing didn’t get to me, probably because I don’t wear nor give a shit about watches. They do have some truly passionate supporters, though, I’ll give them that.

I was a bit sauced while writing that. I meant an unregulated market, specifically referring to regulations on healthcare and pharmaceutical companies. Had a few too many last night hah.

They don’t have a particularly difficult schedule through February, so maybe that will be the case again. Still, not a pretty sight with the shite sitting atop the table.

Please City don’t lose any more games.

Repeatedly citing someone (Zepps) who is defending capitalism against the backdrop of socialism and alleging that they might have it spot on makes your appeal to the strawman a pretty weak one, but I’ll admit that you yourself never touted capitalism as a proven system (though you did explicitly mention it if you scroll up and Zepps also explicitly mentions it). Still, you did argue that a single-payer system was unacheivable at this stage, which makes me feel like my charges were pretty “spot on” in your defense of at least preserving a capitalist status quo for the time being. (I could also note that those charges were conditional in nature, as in “If you allege this, then...” but I digress.) Now that my own pretense is out of the way, I’m glad you agree. The thing is, in this country, agreeing with those beliefs aligns you with only the furthest left candidates. Because of the lack of regulation of our financial sector and the pervasiveness of money in our campaigns for both elected offices and legislation, those beliefs also necessitate an extremely skeptical attitude towards capitalism in this country generally, as otherwise, we have none of the revenue required to even begin addressing those issues. The ACA, which Hillary supported and wanted to strengthen, while well-intentioned, did very little to actually make healthcare affordable for most who need it. While it did insure literal millions of Americans at a baseline level, for most, actually using that insurance for anything but extreme medical emergencies was extremely cost-prohibitive. Trump’s rollback of the individual insurance mandate, which was inevitable in a congress that flip-flops as much as the American Congress, has only strengthened that prohibition. Hillary also claimed at one point during her campaign that single-payer health care would never happen:(https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/hillary-clinton-single-payer-health-care-will-never-ever-happen/ Universal healthcare does not work in a free market, and it never will (especially when pharmaceutical companies go nearly unregulated and have as much legislative buying power as they currently do). Hillary was hateable for so many reasons, and identity politics were pretty inarguably at the center of those reasons. But she was also a bad candidate for the reasons I cited previously and others (calling black children “Super predators,” attacking her husband’s female accusers, voting for the war in Iraq, etc.). The DNC had no business supporting her to the lengths that they did. I voted for her because I was terrified of Trump, but for literally no other reason. While she did run on a campaign of raising taxes slightly (cutting them for some) and promised infrastructure improvement, she never went quite far enough, including her plan to increase defense spending. And lastly, yes, I agree. Those are what the left in this country like to call “basic human rights,” though even the Democratic establishment often shies away from using that language.

Southampton 1 - 2 Everton Lookman

Nice one there. I’m sure your years of studying political theory and its manifestations throughout history would tell you as much, but the theories you’ve been discussing have themselves only been defined for just over two hundred years. You’re conveniently ignoring a lot of history and a lot of people groups if you say that socialism is a failed economic theory and that capitalism is not. Beyond that, I’m not sure you have the best understanding of how pervasive populism is in America. Clinton lost in no small part because of her gender and in part because she was seen as part of an entrenched political establishment, but she also lost because she was seen as a hypocritical member of a wealthy elite who earned millions for speeches given to investment bankers, who voted for a $700 billion bailout as a senator and whose husband’s deregulation of the financial sector was likely a large catalyst of the recession in the first place. If you’re asking me personally, I would vastly prefer a candidate who wants to raise taxes, cut defense spending, institute a program of single-payer health care, focus on fixing American infrastructure, fight racial injustice with deeper criminal justice reform and help states with their public housing crises, re-enter the Paris Climate Agreement and make environmental regulation a massive priority, and improve education with a number of policy changes. If that sounds like a populist candidate to you, I guess I prefer the populist candidate. I also think it’s a bit short-sighted to cynically ask whether that candidate would be more successful than a moderate candidate, as Sanders consistently outperformed Clinton in head to head polling against Trump while the DNC simultaneously made damn sure that Sanders wouldn’t win the nomination. I’m no Bernie bro, and believe he has his faults, but I also believe Americans are more ready to elect a candidate to the far left than most would have people believe. I don’t believe there is the broad center that you speak of.

Quite a lot of arrogance and pretense there. It’s late; I’ll respond to the non-pretentious part in the morning.

Came here to post that lineup.

Once again, unfettered capitalism is an equally failed ideology, and the younger generations in the U.S. understand this. Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. There are similar parties throughout Europe who are not opposed to a somewhat-controlled but still free market who favor strong regulation, high tax rates and an abundant social safety net. The only danger in branding that as socialism is the fear of the baggage that word brings to older generations.

Don’t really know how anyone could give it to anyone but Lookman. Nearly everything creatively came through his ball rentention and trickiness. While everyone else was giving the ball away at will, he was maintaining possession while crowded by sometimes 3 defenders. Also made some incredible passes and was always our liveliest player.

Lookman leagues ahead of us today.

How a single one of their players hasn’t seen a card is beyond me.

Good to see Zouma go hug Silva.

Too short.

This is why he wanted to stay in Germany.

Can’t believe I got up to watch this shit.

A red card is feeling increasingly likely.

I think it’s called winning, sadly.

There, fixed it.

Whoops read the Wolves line and was thinking we were on 29 points. We haven’t been very good, have we? Ha.

Redacted. Really hoping we can get our shit together and give a Burnley-esque display.

I don’t know what point I’ve proved other than demonstrating that you, Vox, Zepp and the prime minister of Denmark are all irrationally afraid of the word socialism. A welfare state is far from a capitalist principle. It’s a socialist one. All of those sources are unnecessarily splitting hairs over what kind of system a free market with loads of government sponsored-redistribution is/should be called.

Gylfi current. Cahill all time.