HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2501  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2016, 10:10 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
I think we all underestimated Trump's appeal. I'm skeptical any Democrat could have beaten him, given how he ripped through the midwest. Perhaps Bernie could have, but we'll never know, and given how all the polls were predicting a Hillary win on Tuesday, they're obviously no indication of how a hypothetical different matchup would've gone.

Regardless, the lesson is clear: The Democrats' late 20th Century model of moderate neo-liberalism is dead. It was on its way out anyway as the country gets more and more divided, and this loss will only hasten that.

The other lesson is that gerrymandering and the electoral college have become serious threats to representative democracy in this country, and the Democrats were foolish to hope demographics would give them a permanent presidential firewall against that.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2502  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2016, 5:52 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Cirrus...
Reading Wikipedia I have to wonder if what you mean by "moderate neo-liberalism" is even related to what they explain?

I'm literally fascinated by the challenges ahead; it's complicated by Trump's mixed and conflicting messages. I was a little disappointed that he brought Kris Kobach in as an unpaid adviser but Oh Well.

It's important to remember that virtually all of the sausage making happens in Congress and currently the majority of Republicans are more sensible than those on the fringe. I'm expecting much hilarity.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2503  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2017, 6:12 AM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
All you photogs and history buffs out there (Sawtooth, RyanD, pablosan, CPVLIVE) might enjoy this:


Photo credit: KayLynn Deveney/Kehrer Verlag courtesy The Atlantic/CityLab

The Fading Romance of America's 'Cinderella Homes'
Mar 17, 2016 by KRISTON CAPPS - CityLab
Quote:
This story starts in 1954 in Downey, California, just outside Los Angeles, where Jean Valjean Vandruff built his first Cinderella Home. These low-slung, ranch-style houses, marked by high-gabled, shake-shingle roofs and decorative gingerbread trim, sold a fantasy.

(KayLynn) Deveney has spent the past 6 years photographing Cinderella Homes, which she first came to know in Albuquerque, where she grew up, and where she worked as a staff photographer for The Albuquerque Tribune in the 1990s.

Deveney’s book compiles her pictures from Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Anaheim, and outside Oklahoma City, the places where these princess houses proliferated in the 1950 and 1960s. Her photo collection’s singsong title takes its name from a pitch once used to advertise Cinderella Homes in Albuquerque: “All you can lose is your heart.”

Photo credit: KayLynn Deveney courtesy CityLab
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2504  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 4:44 AM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 3,234
Neoliberalism is a conservative/Republican ideology, not a Democratic one.
It refers to the classical definition of liberalism, i.e. laissez-faire capitalism with little to no regulation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
I think we all underestimated Trump's appeal. I'm skeptical any Democrat could have beaten him, given how he ripped through the midwest. Perhaps Bernie could have, but we'll never know, and given how all the polls were predicting a Hillary win on Tuesday, they're obviously no indication of how a hypothetical different matchup would've gone.

Regardless, the lesson is clear: The Democrats' late 20th Century model of moderate neo-liberalism is dead. It was on its way out anyway as the country gets more and more divided, and this loss will only hasten that.

The other lesson is that gerrymandering and the electoral college have become serious threats to representative democracy in this country, and the Democrats were foolish to hope demographics would give them a permanent presidential firewall against that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2505  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 1:51 AM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stenar View Post
Neoliberalism is a conservative/Republican ideology, not a Democratic one.
It refers to the classical definition of liberalism, i.e. laissez-faire capitalism with little to no regulation.
It all boiled down to The Map aside from FL (and traditional red states):


Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics via Bloomberg

I said early on that Trump owned the best piece of election real estate = the kitchen table.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2506  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 9:01 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
In a nutshell Neoliberalism means policies promoting privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, and free trade. Post Reagan-era Democrats are fully committed to free trade, arguably more committed to fiscal austerity than Republicans (who use it as an excuse to cut things they don't like but rack up huge deficits on other spending), and have been generally moderate on privatization (FasTracks being a good example). Only on deregulation do party machine Democrats really differ.

Anyway, if folks want to quibble over the semantics, I'll cede that I used the word a bit lazily. Regardless, the Democrats' acceptance of free trade and willingness to compromise on domestic/social spending are part of the economically conservative but socially liberal formula the party adopted to survive Reagan, are at least debatably neoliberal tendencies, and clearly are part of the populist unhappiness with them. The rising stars of the party care less about balanced budgets and trade deficits than the Clintons did.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2507  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 9:40 AM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 3,234
Democrats do not support fiscal austerity.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
In a nutshell Neoliberalism means policies promoting privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, and free trade. Post Reagan-era Democrats are fully committed to free trade, arguably more committed to fiscal austerity than Republicans (who use it as an excuse to cut things they don't like but rack up huge deficits on other spending), and have been generally moderate on privatization (FasTracks being a good example). Only on deregulation do party machine Democrats really differ.

Anyway, if folks want to quibble over the semantics, I'll cede that I used the word a bit lazily. Regardless, the Democrats' acceptance of free trade and willingness to compromise on domestic/social spending are part of the economically conservative but socially liberal formula the party adopted to survive Reagan, are at least debatably neoliberal tendencies, and clearly are part of the populist unhappiness with them. The rising stars of the party care less about balanced budgets and trade deficits than the Clintons did.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2508  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 4:41 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
In practice they do more than Republicans. Every GOP president of the past generation has increased the budget deficit, while every Democrat president has decreased it. Republicans cut programs with negligible costs in order to look popular with their base, and then ring up massive deficits in military spending. Democrats come much closer to actually passing balanced budgets. You can follow the rhetoric or you can follow the numbers.

It's possible the true-fiscal-conservative wing of the GOP might act more austere if given the chance. But they've never had the chance. That wing has never actually wielded enough power within the party to pass policy over the objections of the military spending, tax cuts for millionaires, anti-immigration, or evangelical wings.

But honestly, the GOP/Dem comparison doesn't matter much. I said "arguably" because it's not important which party does it more. Go ahead and disagree with me on that if you want. The point is simply that reducing government debt has been a pillar of Democratic governance for the past generation.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads

Last edited by Cirrus; Jan 24, 2017 at 4:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2509  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 5:48 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Cirrus.. I generally agreed with you until that last bold statement. You can't just cherry pick the facts that you like.

While Obama ultimately brought down annual deficits due to an improving economy the debt exploded from the impact of the ARRA. The ARRA was the absolute right thing to do but that debt was massive.

You also overlook that policy is enacted by Congress. The President only signs the Bills. During the Clinton years it was the Republican Congress that, for example, insisted on a cut in the capital gains taxes which when coupled with a tech explosion (which had nothing to do with either party's philosophy) and a Bull Market resulted in an explosion of tax receipts.

Reagan with cooperation from a Dem Congress cut taxes and increased spending - which is exactly what is needed (deficits) to come out of a Recession by stimulating the economy.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2510  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 9:39 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
I'm not cherry picking facts. I'm talking long term trends. You said it yourself, ARRA increased the debt, but it ultimately came back down.

You're right that Congress plays a part. But Congress has been able to strike bipartisan deals to bring down the debt because Democrats have valued that as a responsible thing to do, and have therefore been willing to compromise to make it happen. It's been accepted as a core value that a lower debt is a good thing. They could have drawn a line in the sand and said "no, we'll fight tooth and nail to avoid these cuts," but they did not because ultimately they agreed that cuts had to happen. It was only ever a matter of where.

Meanwhile, the tax hikes the Democrats initiated when they controlled both the White House and Congress were extremely moderate. There was no proposal to return to the vastly higher tax rates from the pre-Reagan era, because establishment Democrats didn't actually want to do that. Because ultimately they largely support fiscal austerity, albeit in a different form than what Republicans call for.

__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2511  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 10:11 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
I'm not cherry picking facts. I'm talking long term trends. You said it yourself, ARRA increased the debt, but it ultimately came back down.
Oops, you're conflating debt with deficits. Although the Yuge annual deficits did come down the Yuge debt continued to go up.

I'm not buying your general spin but especially not about the Dems ever worrying about deficits. Did they compromise? Ofc they did as did the Republicans and whoever was President.

So far as Obama's tax increases which were to help fund the ACA, that was all good. In fact, I've learned even recently the "genius" of Obamacare and why it's got the R's in such a pickle.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2512  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 10:57 AM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 3,234
Cutting budgets is fiscal responsibility, NOT austerity. Fiscal austerity means deep, drastic cuts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
In practice they do more than Republicans. Every GOP president of the past generation has increased the budget deficit, while every Democrat president has decreased it. Republicans cut programs with negligible costs in order to look popular with their base, and then ring up massive deficits in military spending. Democrats come much closer to actually passing balanced budgets. You can follow the rhetoric or you can follow the numbers.

It's possible the true-fiscal-conservative wing of the GOP might act more austere if given the chance. But they've never had the chance. That wing has never actually wielded enough power within the party to pass policy over the objections of the military spending, tax cuts for millionaires, anti-immigration, or evangelical wings.

But honestly, the GOP/Dem comparison doesn't matter much. I said "arguably" because it's not important which party does it more. Go ahead and disagree with me on that if you want. The point is simply that reducing government debt has been a pillar of Democratic governance for the past generation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2513  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2017, 7:59 PM
Old&New's Avatar
Old&New Old&New is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,536
And Utahns wonder why so many opportunities pass them by.

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2514  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2017, 7:40 PM
Old&New's Avatar
Old&New Old&New is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,536
Utah Stories

Editorial Opinion – Utah’s problem: Finding a Governor Who Will Discourage Theocracy but Stay Home [Utah]

April 13, 2017 by Rhett Wilkinson



Photo of the Utah State Capitol by Steven Vargo

It’s funny – Mormon scripture commands for separation of church and state (Latter-day Saint Doctrine & Covenants 134:9 – “we do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government”). It jives rather well with the religious freedom provision of the First Amendment that safeguards from theocracy.

Amazing, the extent that supposed adherents of Mormonism have violated the holy text.

In recent years, chiefly for fighting gay marriage, but it started when the United States owned territories in antebellum America. Mormons claimed they owned some because… God, if you believe their supposition wasn’t due to “popular sovereignty” but Mormons’ also-recorded belief that the land was theirs because God wanted it for them. And of course, Brigham Young, as governor and prophet simultaneously, sought and usually obtained his will across the state.

Yet, 140 years after Brigham’s death and 121 after Utah became a state, theocracy yet reigns in so many ways. But could Utah, in 2017, get a governor committed to the state but wouldn’t encourage theocracy?

After all, aren’t Mormons supposed to be what many scriptures, including LDS ones, describe as a “peculiar people” or variations of the phrase? (Herbert’s actions are self-fulfilling, yes.) The .05 mark will be the lowest in the nation – that makes the Mormon-heavy state, where the LDS church is headquartered, pretty peculiar.

And that’s aside from all the cultural ways Utah is peculiar, which include the many Mormons observing a health code that include requirements of abstinence from alcohol, mandatory for utmost salvation. And that’s beside legislative action that is as much, like the resolution last year, which Herbert signed, declaring pornography, of which abstinence from is also mandatory for utmost salvation, a public health crisis. Then there are the constant occasions in which the church issues statements on public policies, including those during legislative sessions in which a policy or bill is changed in lockstep with the church’s desire for it. (Last year, it was the church opposing legislation legalizing medical cannabis and making hate crimes… official crimes.)

It’s too bad that the governor and state legislature, through policies like this one and a sagebrush rebellion that caused a key economic driver (outdoor retailers) to leave the state, is making Utah a place unwelcome to environmentalists, tourists and non-Mormons.

Days were better during those of the moderate Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr. He worked to dispel stereotypes about Mormons and Utah, removing private club laws and endorsing civil unions for gay couples. He made non-Mormons believe that Mormon politicians didn’t despise them after all and may stop the moral-crusader, holier-than-thou mindset and become inclusive, rather than exclusive.

Unfortunately, Huntsman’s lust for notoriety meant that he left state just a few years after he started running it. His two prior U.S. ambassador positions totaled just 29 months. Personally, I’ll never forget learning how much of a politician, an aspirer, Huntsman is. It was the 2013 Herbert inauguration. I was the first person he saw when Capitol elevator doors opened. The same second he walked out and turned his head, seeing me, he said hello and shook my hand, just in case, perhaps, I was someone important. I was an intern.

Herbert’s dedication to aligning Utah with his Mormon church’s characteristics, as indicated in his making .05 the DUI mark, continues to make many aspects of Utah still a theocracy. And in aborting the governorship, Huntsman is proving that he will do anything to appease his appetite for high-profile politics.

It will be a great day when we get a governor who will want to stay physically home yet won’t impose his spiritual home on the other.

http://utahstories.com/2017/04/edito...acy-stay-home/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2515  
Old Posted May 9, 2017, 6:47 PM
BG918's Avatar
BG918 BG918 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,549
Hey Salt Lake City, I'm coming from Denver to visit a friend in June. This will be my first time back in SLC since '08 so I'm sure things have changed quite a bit! I'll be staying at his place in Sugar House and would like any recommendations for places to eat and check out for a weekend. He doesn't have a car and only uses public transit so that's how I'll be getting around or taking Uber/Lyft.

Some things I would like to see based on reading threads here:
- City Creek Center downtown
- Temple Square
- Sugar House streetcar - does it go all the way downtown?
- Univ of Utah campus

Any good mountain hikes that we can take transit to near the city?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2516  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2017, 7:12 PM
Sawtooth's Avatar
Sawtooth Sawtooth is offline
♏SeanTheBoiSean
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northend Historic District, Boise
Posts: 4,182
A Boise summer rite ~ Downtown Boise

Last month, July, was the latest opening date on record to float the Boise River because it has been running so high and dangerous from record snowmelt
draining out of the Sawtooth Wilderness and Boise Mountains.
I may have to plan an Eclipse Float on Monday.


















__________________
🌲Keep Idaho Green🌲
🌳The City of Trees #boise🌳
Have you also learned that secret from the river; that there is no such thing as time? That the river is everywhere at the same time, at the source and at the mouth, at the waterfall, at the ferry, at the current, in the ocean and in the mountains.-Hermann Hesse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2517  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2017, 4:26 PM
Northernlad Northernlad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SLC, Utah
Posts: 536
Ok, river envy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2518  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2017, 12:33 AM
Sawtooth's Avatar
Sawtooth Sawtooth is offline
♏SeanTheBoiSean
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northend Historic District, Boise
Posts: 4,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernlad View Post
Ok, river envy.
Sorry about that
__________________
🌲Keep Idaho Green🌲
🌳The City of Trees #boise🌳
Have you also learned that secret from the river; that there is no such thing as time? That the river is everywhere at the same time, at the source and at the mouth, at the waterfall, at the ferry, at the current, in the ocean and in the mountains.-Hermann Hesse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2519  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2017, 3:50 PM
twig twig is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Salt Lake
Posts: 65
great pics!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2520  
Old Posted Sep 20, 2017, 8:17 PM
JMK JMK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 436
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:33 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.