Do you believe the democrats actually care about poor people?

[Swollerbear]

Energy costs specifically impact the poverty class in the United States the most. When you reduce energy costs, you reduce poverty. This correlation is widely accepted amongst economist for many years. The democrats push sustainable energy to an extent where it's no longer affordable. What's the priority here?

[lightbulb27]

Didn't this party come out of the "slavery" concept. That thinking permeates as they look to control and confiscate... from everyone... to distribute to control.

By increasing the debt continually and govt spending, they crush the lower people. Their medical, educational interference raises costs. etc..

They do some, but they are more about taking from some to give to others.

If they really cared, they'd cut back on their ludicrous spending, and give proceeds to the poor. Have they ever skipped a steak and lobster dinner or expensive flight? Even one?

None of these people care... people whom go out and meet with the poor on a frequent basis, helping them heal and become independent, they care.

[goaded]

That would be the southern states, not the party. Which party holds most of the former confederacy today?

[lightbulb27]

@goaded they were democrat at the time.
a lot of the south has gone republican. Some of the north went democrat.

[goaded]

When was that, then? Four, five, six generations ago? This is a ridiculous argument, that the Democratic party is still the same as it was when the country was in its infancy.

[lightbulb27]

@goaded im pointing out an element of their thinking. The other side has some of tha tas well, everyone wants power.

[Soteris]

Sustainable energy is.. well.. sustainable. Where as unsustainable energy is.. well.. unsustainable.. meaning you can not provide reliable unsustainable energy, period. Even if its cheaper, by your argument if not reality, that means nothing if they can't get it even by paying for it. Like for example what happened repeatedly in Texas.

With sustainable energy you become more isolated from outside threats, be they domestic or foreign. You do not suffer because some Arab country decides to lower production of oil to maintain high prices or whatever. It is a better system for national security and you will have fewer catastrophies and a more resilient energy grid. Even if it costs more, (it really does not), the extra cost buys you safety and reliability which is by far more important when talking about vulnerable people like the poor.

[Swollerbear]

So the trade-off is to sacrifice poor people and in return gain more sustainable energy. I don't know if I'd say that's the party that cares about the poverty class. The thing is, my background is economics and I understand what you're saying full and well. When I look at the policy being implemented by the democrats concerning regulation around energy is marginal cost over exceeding marginal benefit. The question is why?

[Swollerbear]

[Swollerbear]

Typically, you want to regulate right where marginal costs intercepts marginal benefits. Specifically the Biden administration is pushing marginal costs so high, to where it doesn't make sense. It's an over correction, and I can't figure out the incentive as to why.

[Soteris]

Well, I have been nice enough to not mention this but... sustainable energy is not only the best quality due to its sustainability, the ability to be independent from global factors and such things but also has two other massive advantages.

First of all, its the future. It is where both the jobs and economic growth is going to be going forward so anyone investing into it yesterday gets a permanent leg up on the rest of the world tomorrow. USA is already late quite frankly, and it shows as you are falling behind in infrastructure and development in these fields.

Secondly, this is the most profitable and cheapest product AKA electricity. There simply is no advantage to fossil fuels outside of already established infrastructure that is about to become obsolete and relative simplicity. Not jumping on sustainable energy today is a terminally stupid decision for anyone, even the poor.

[WindAtMyBack]

They claim to, but their policies say otherwise. If they really cared about "poor people" they'd drastically cut the welfare system. I put "poor people" in quotes, because even the bottom 1% in the US are rich compared to most of the world.

As for energy, the government doesn't have a whole lot of control over energy costs, other than taxes. I can't see moving in the direction of sustainable energy having a huge impact on overall energy cost. Plus, you could rightfully argue that sustainable energy is far cheaper in the long run. Wait until the world can't produce enough oil and watch the price skyrocket.

[NewsReader]

They try to make it look like they do, but they actually do the opposite. Taxing the rich will not help the poor. It will hurt them along with the middle class because poor people are supposed by those above them. Trying to hurt the rich hurts the poor.

[normalice]

Obviously. The problem is right winggers need poor people to vote for republicans even though right wingers want to subjugate poor people, if not just kill them off. So they come up with stupid reasons to vote republican, leaning heavily on the assumption that poor people are stupid enough to believe them if they have some angry man or boobied blonde on YouTube or fox news repeat them enough times. Sadly, it seems to be working.

[notwoke]

quite the opposite. All of the most progressive cities in the country have the largest inequality by far. The highest cost of living, the highest percentage of people who can't afford a home, the most addicts, prostitutes, effective poverty rates, etc. When you jack the taxes up so high in order to fund your giveaways you end up raising costs so high even engineers can't afford to buy a house.

[NamerOfStars]

Nobody cares about poor people, until their property values start to go down.

[KostasKouvalis]

To an extent. Bur Democrats believe the solution is to just give them handouts, rather then actually getting them out of poverty.

[Anonymous]

Then only care about votes, and they will break the law to get them.

[FilmGuy93]

Ehhh no... Democrat representation couldn't be bothered to give half a shit.

[exitseven]

They just care about getting re-elected. Buying votes from poor people is how they do it.

[Anonymous]

No, they only care about perpetuating their planned reintroduction of slavery and the poor are a primary target of that to manufacture electricity

[Pterodon]

Fuck no all they want is to tie people to the government

[Anonymous]

Of course not. There is a reason why people refer to them as “limousine liberals.”

[Anonymous]

Democrats care about poor people's votes. End of caring.

[Dargil]

Not if they aren't voters.

[ElGato31]

Nobody cares about poor people.

[Anonymous]

Nope, of course not.

[Akam93]

Absolutely not.