CCN: Andrew Yang Has Stupid Ideas

I’m not sure I grasp this argument.

According to the globalists, free trade is a great unalloyed blessing for the world. It is making the world a better place and more wealthier place over time:

“Yang is not running as a Republican, but potentially stirs a populistic aura similar with Donald Trump’s.

Democrats could be pushing Yang in that they realize Trump has hit home with most voters, and that Yang can similarly engage them by presenting a comparable image. The only question remaining is whether Yang, as a Democrat, can boast the same toughness and tenacity that Trump exhibits. Or will he instead cave to outside influence and fight against the wall and everything else designed to keep Americans safe? Could Yang potentially be just a “light” version of George Soros?

So far, his plans seem rather unseemly. One proposal involves $12,000 a year for “lazy freeloaders.” In other words, if you don’t want to work, you’ll still garner $1,000 a month. In this sense, Yang is nothing like Trump and terrible for the country. A nation of non-workers can only lead to economic instability and an early death for America’s infrastructure.

This isn’t that different from AOC, whose Green New Deal would have offered base salaries to residents “unwilling to work.” It’s a case of spending money while getting none back. At the end of the day, Yang only looks different, but he’s still pushing the same stupid ideals. …”

I agree that trade is good.

If that is indeed the case, then why is a redistribution of wealth from the oligarchs to the dispossessed workers such a radical idea? How is it a more radical idea than global free trade? The one forces rips apart the social fabric by gutting the economy and concentrating wealth at the top of the social scale. The other force would heal the damage by redistributing the benefits.

About Hunter Wallace 9321 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

5 Comments

  1. The market isn’t failing these young men, they are failing themselves. At ANY time the pitchforks and torches could rise up and overthrow if they chose.

    • TRUE AMERICANS sHoULd revolt! I wish I could organize and lead a revolution!!! ‘Dorald Blomprf’ and that zionist creep Pence are doing nothing for America!

      • Yes, but all that talk about ‘revolution’ is silenced (now Faceberg, formerly Yahoo, Google, etc. etc.) wherever you turn. Even here on OD, calls to violence are silenced before they begin- I’m actually surprised your comments were even approved by HW!

        And unless such advocates (of violent overthrow) would go for the HEADS of these organizations, to strike at the root, random Rambo killings of [sic] ‘innocent Mohammedans,’ only serve to embolden the Left even more in their quest for Ultimate Power and Control.

        Professional, I consider your comment about young whites ‘failing themselves’ to be callous and self-serving, corroborating the caricature of the ‘uppity boomer’ – not understanding that the TIMES HAVE CHANGED, and what once passed for the “route to Adulthood’ is CLOSED TO ALL WHITE MALES, in almost ALL OCCUPATIONS.

        Did you read HW’s comment? “why is a redistribution of wealth from the oligarchs to the dispossessed workers such a radical idea? How is it a more radical idea than global free trade? The one forces rips apart the social fabric by gutting the economy and concentrating wealth at the top of the social scale. The other force would heal the damage by redistributing the benefits.”

        Think about that, while you sip your latte at Starbleccchs.

  2. “the market is failing” ..free .$1000/month, or 10 000$/m, will not change this market because here the job-market is the problem….investing 1 trillion in rebuilding the US infrastructure ( as Trump promised), or blocking the imports of cheap Chinese goods through stiff tariffs, and/or stopping legal and illegal immigration into US, these would indeed make available more working-class jobs, and manufacturing jobs, and would have an impact on this market

    “romantic partners”…women always “look upwards”, women seek men who are better/higher financially and socially than them.
    If Yang intends to give those $1000 only to men such thing would indeed create (statistically) a wealth-status difference which in turn will help some of these young men get ‘romantic partners’.

  3. “If that is indeed the case, then why is a redistribution of wealth from the oligarchs to the dispossessed workers such a radical idea?”

    It’s called working at a paying job.

Comments are closed.