Perfect Answer to Ocasio-Cortez

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
and...

5. Comparing Climate Change to World War II

In a speech on her economic plan, Ocasio-Cortez likened combating climate change to the challenge posed by Nazi Germany in World War II, surmising the United States confront the issue with the same amount of resources.

“So we talk about existential threats, the last time we had a really major existential threat to this country was around World War II

well, only if you're too retarded to remember the cold war and the nuclear arms race, mutually assured destruction, duck and cover, etc

, and so we’ve been here before and we have a blueprint of doing this before,” Ocasio-Cortez said, adding:

What we had was an existential threat in the context of a war. We had a direct existential threat with another nation, this time it was Nazi Germany, and the Axis, who explicitly made the United States as an enemy, as an enemy. And what we did was that we chose to mobilize our entire economy and industrialized our entire economy and we put hundreds if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country. We have to do the same thing in order to get us to 100 percent renewable energy, and that’s just the truth of it.

so, she's going to call for a return to an active selective service operation, a return to the draft, forcing 9% of the population into training centers?

she's going to call for governmental control of industry and raw materials?

here's how it played out back in the early 40's:

War Administration

From the beginning of preparedness in 1939 through the peak of war production in 1944, American leaders recognized that the stakes were too high to permit the war economy to grow in an unfettered, laissez-faire manner. American manufacturers, for instance, could not be trusted to stop producing consumer goods and to start producing materiel for the war effort. To organize the growing economy and to ensure that it produced the goods needed for war, the federal government spawned an array of mobilization agencies which not only often purchased goods (or arranged their purchase by the Army and Navy), but which in practice closely directed those goods’ manufacture and heavily influenced the operation of private companies and whole industries.

Though both the New Deal and mobilization for World War I served as models, the World War II mobilization bureaucracy assumed its own distinctive shape as the war economy expanded. Most importantly, American mobilization was markedly less centralized than mobilization in other belligerent nations. The war economies of Britain and Germany, for instance, were overseen by war councils which comprised military and civilian officials. In the United States, the Army and Navy were not incorporated into the civilian administrative apparatus, nor was a supreme body created to subsume military and civilian organizations and to direct the vast war economy.

Instead, the military services enjoyed almost-unchecked control over their enormous appetites for equipment and personnel. With respect to the economy, the services were largely able to curtail production destined for civilians (e.g., automobiles or many non-essential foods) and even for war-related but non-military purposes (e.g., textiles and clothing). In parallel to but never commensurate with the Army and Navy, a succession of top-level civilian mobilization agencies sought to influence Army and Navy procurement of manufactured goods like tanks, planes, and ships, raw materials like steel and aluminum, and even personnel. One way of gauging the scale of the increase in federal spending and the concomitant increase in military spending is through comparison with GDP, which itself rose sharply during the war. Table 1 shows the dramatic increases in GDP, federal spending, and military spending.

Table 1: Federal Spending and Military Spending during World War II

table doesn't copy - the take- away is this - by the end of the war, defense spending accounted for almost 90% of all federal spending

and how did they pay for it?

Taxation

However, these agencies were often quite successful in achieving their respective, narrower aims. The Department of the Treasury, for instance, was remarkably successful at generating money to pay for the war, including the first general income tax in American history and the famous “war bonds” sold to the public. Beginning in 1940, the government extended the income tax to virtually all Americans and began collecting the tax via the now-familiar method of continuous withholdings from paychecks (rather than lump-sum payments after the fact). The number of Americans required to pay federal taxes rose from 4 million in 1939 to 43 million in 1945. With such a large pool of taxpayers, the American government took in $45 billion in 1945, an enormous increase over the $8.7 billion collected in 1941 but still far short of the $83 billion spent on the war in 1945. Over that same period, federal tax revenue grew from about 8 percent of GDP to more than 20 percent.

Americans who earned as little as $500 per year paid income tax at a 23 percent rate

, while those who earned more than $1 million per year paid a 94 percent rate. The average income tax rate peaked in 1944 at 20.9 percent (“Fact Sheet: Taxes”).

https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-american-economy-during-world-war-ii/


AOC is an ignorant child

she reminds me of someone, someone familiar .... :think:

:idea:
Spoiler
 
Last edited:

genuineoriginal

New member
this story is from November 06, 2018
"Well, I think a lot of it has to do with changing our strategy around governance. You know there’s a lot of inside baseball and inside the beltway as you, you always hear that term thrown around. But there are very few organizers in Congress. And I do think that organizers operate differently. It’s a different kind of strategy. And what it is, is really about organizing and, and really thinking about that word: organizing. Segmenting people. Being strategic in their actions in really bringing together a cohesive strategy of putting pressure on the chamber instead of only focusing on the pressures inside the chamber."

:doh:
wise-men-speak-because-they-have-something-to-say-fools-18255228.png
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Cortez:
What we had was an existential threat in the context of a war. We had a direct existential threat with another nation, this time it was Nazi Germany, and the Axis, who explicitly made the United States as an enemy, as an enemy. And what we did was that we chose to mobilize our entire economy and industrialized our entire economy and we put hundreds if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country. We have to do the same thing in order to get us to 100 percent renewable energy, and that’s just the truth of it.

reality:
gw-graphic-pie-chart-co2-emissions-by-country-2015.png



is this 29 year old dolt suggesting that we should compel, by force if necessary, the rest of the world to stop their 85% of global carbon emissions?
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
She is pretty, she is a congresswoman, but you misspelled "pubescent" (a person at or approaching the age of puberty).
She definitely is not "prescient" (having or showing knowledge of events before they take place).

She is a 30 year old woman.
She needs to grow up and act like one.

Grow up and act like Donald J. Trump?
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
"When this country started we did not operate on a capitalist economy" :doh:

Who elected this idiot?
In the Democratic Primary (June 26, 2018), Ocasio-Cortez received 57.13% of the vote (15,897) to 10-term incumbent Joe Crowley's 42.5% (11,761).

Ocasio-Cortez won the election with 78% of the vote (110,318) to the Republican Pappas's 14% (17,762).

Unlike the current President, Ocasio-Cortez actually received the majority of the popular vote.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Ocasio-Cortez won the election with 78% of the vote (110,318) to the Republican Pappas's 14% (17,762).

Unlike the current President, Ocasio-Cortez actually received the majority of the popular vote.

the general was a foregone conclusion, the dems could run a trained monkey in that district and beat the reps - who are the idiots who voted for her in the primary?

betcha they were union households, blacks and latinos



5:29 support for the deal:

union households 53%
blacks 70%
latinos 81%
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
"I knew that if we were going to win, the way that progressives win on an unapologetic message is by expanding the electorate. That's the only way that we can win strategically. It's not by rushing to the center. It's not by trying to win spending all of our energy winning over those who have other opinions. It's by expanding the electorate, speaking to those that feel disenchanted, dejected, cynical about our politics, and letting them know that we're fighting for them."
- Ocasio-Cortez

Ocasio-Cortez was the first person since 2004 to challenge Joe Crowley, the Democratic Caucus Chair, in the Democratic primary.

Nearly 75% of her donations were small individual contributions,

Ocasio-Cortez's campaign budget ($194,000) was less than 1% of Crowley's contributions ($3.4 million).
 

genuineoriginal

New member

Ocasio-Cortez Displays Her Economics Genius Once Again. Donald Trump Jr. Crushes Her In One Tweet.

On Friday, Donald Trump Jr. took a moment out of his day to shred Economics Guru™ Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) for her ridiculous claim that New York could somehow invest the $3 billion Amazon would have gotten as a tax break for building in Long Island City, located in Ocasio-Cortez's 14th District of New York. Trump Jr. tweeted, “Will someone please explain to me how it is possible for NYC to SPEND a $3 Billion tax break on anything? This is insanity.”

What Ocasio-Cortez apparently doesn’t or won’t understand is that there is no $3 billion out there that New York could spend; it was simply $3 billion in unpaid taxes from which Amazon would have benefited by staying in New York.


Ocasio-Cortez has a degree in international relations and economics, but doesn't understand that giving tax breaks are not the same as giving money?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
looks like the key aspects were low voter turnout, changing demographics and a message that resonated with the new demographic
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond

Ocasio-Cortez Displays Her Economics Genius Once Again. Donald Trump Jr. Crushes Her In One Tweet.

On Friday, Donald Trump Jr. took a moment out of his day to shred Economics Guru™ Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) for her ridiculous claim that New York could somehow invest the $3 billion Amazon would have gotten as a tax break for building in Long Island City, located in Ocasio-Cortez's 14th District of New York. Trump Jr. tweeted, “Will someone please explain to me how it is possible for NYC to SPEND a $3 Billion tax break on anything? This is insanity.”

What Ocasio-Cortez apparently doesn’t or won’t understand is that there is no $3 billion out there that New York could spend; it was simply $3 billion in unpaid taxes from which Amazon would have benefited by staying in New York.


Ocasio-Cortez has a degree in international relations and economics, but doesn't understand that giving tax breaks are not the same as giving money?

she's an idiot


....it was simply $3 billion in unpaid taxes from which Amazon would have benefited by staying in New York.

and lost are the 25000 - 60000 jobs that would have been available, along with the tax revenues from payroll, spending, etc


and so, her constituents have lost that tax revenue, lost those jobs (and the auxiliary jobs that would have been and now won't be), lost the projected future taxes, etc


how long until the left turns on its own?

Cuomo was very careful not to mention AOC in his press release
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Ocasio-Cortez has a degree in international relations and economics, but doesn't understand that giving tax breaks are not the same as giving money?
Based on Silicon Valley, Ocasio-Cortez and the people she represents know that most of those employed by Amazon wouldn't be coming from the Bronx, and that the increase in land values will only make housing unaffordable for the average resident!

As for tax breaks, the $1+ trillion "ta cut" for the middle class that was passed by Congress last year, was opposed by the majority of voters and has only added to the national debt - the Republicans wouldn't even claim it as a "success story" during the 2018 Interims!
 
Last edited:

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Based on Silicon Valley, Ocasio-Cortez and the people she represents know that most of those employed by Amazon wouuldn't be coming from the Bronx,

hence my reference to auxiliary jobs - construction, maintenance, service, support staff, etc, etc

and that the increase in land values will only make housing unaffordable for the average resident!

so they're against any new job creation in the area?

that seems short-sighted
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
hence my reference to auxiliary jobs - construction, maintenance, service, support staff, etc, etc

so they're against any new job creation in the area?

that seems short-sighted

When she was 19/20 and still a college student, Ocasio-Cortez served as an intern in an immigration office.

To her amazement, she was the only Spanish speaker, and forced to field the calls from distressed family members when ICE made arrests - a responsibility that should have been handled by the more senior, better paid staff who also were lacking in the language skills to do their jobs!

Ocasio-Cortez and her supporters aren't opposed to jobs, but not jobs that cater to outside university "techno geeks" that will drive up the housing costs and force them out of the district - as is the case in Silicon Valley!
 

genuineoriginal

New member
When she was 19/20 and still a college student, Ocasio-Cortez served as an intern in the immigration office;

To her amazement, she was the only Spanish speaker, and forced to field the calls from frantic family members when ICE made arrests as a result - a responsibility that should have been handled by more senior staff who were lacking in the language skills to do their jobs!
Are you making the false assumption that Spanish is one of the official languages of the United States of America?
Or are you making the false assumption that senior staff of the immigration office need to be fluent in all of the top 10 languages by population spoken in the world?
  1. Mandarin Chinese
  2. Hindi
  3. Spanish
  4. English
  5. Arabic
  6. Portuguese
  7. Bengali
  8. Russian
  9. Japanese
  10. German
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Are you making the false assumption that Spanish is one of the official languages of the United States of America?
Or are you making the false assumption that senior staff of the immigration office need to be fluent in all of the top 10 languages by population spoken in the world?
  1. Mandarin Chinese
  2. Hindi
  3. Spanish
  4. English
  5. Arabic
  6. Portuguese
  7. Bengali
  8. Russian
  9. Japanese
  10. German
I would assume that those speaking Spanish in New York City don't represent some obscure % of the population, and that staffing in an immigration office should have to rely on the language skills of a 19 year old intern as their token interpreter!
 
Top