Democratic Party Rebuild

[Eternal Tecate]

Ya you're right it's all good, there probably won't be an election in 2028 anyway

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

why do people have the desire to preseve it rather than start a different party?

with which voters?

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

You could READ the comments.

There's no value in it.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

There's no value in it.

Leftist critiques of government lethargy can’t be whining about monopolies while ignoring regulations that allow monopolies to thrive.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Leftist critiques of government lethargy can’t be whining about monopolies while ignoring regulations that allow monopolies to thrive.

No, monopolies don't thrive because of too much regulation, they thrive because of weak enforcement, corporate capture, and decades of deliberate neoliberal policy choices that gutted antitrust enforcement, prioritized "efficiency," and let consolidation through without much scrutiny. People like David Dayen have written extensively on how these monopolies were built through deregulation, not in spite of it.

When people conflate regulation with protectionism or inefficiency, they ignore which regulations exist and who they're protecting. The ones that are removed make it easier for large corporations to run amok, while the ones that remain, create barriers to entry for smaller players. That's not because of some bureaucracy, it's because those monopolists lobbied for those specific rules.

The "abundance" crowd avoids talking about power, who has it, how they use it, and why markets don't self-correct. They treat the government like it's a neutral actor and markets as natural forces, which lets them push deregulation under a shiny new coat of paint, but ignores how the system is rigged by design to only benefit them.

We've seen this play out before. Doing the same thing, the same way, with the same power structures, won't give us different results, it'll only lead us right back to the same failures.

The Last Abundance Agenda

In the 1980s, Wall Street vowed to make housing more affordable through deregulation of housing finance. The result was the 2008 crisis.

prospect.org

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

No, monopolies don't thrive because of too much regulation, they thrive because of weak enforcement, corporate capture, and decades of deliberate neoliberal policy choices that gutted antitrust enforcement, prioritized "efficiency," and let consolidation through without much scrutiny. People like David Dayen have written extensively on how these monopolies were built through deregulation, not in spite of it.

Wrong. Things like parking lot minimums, easements, lot utilization, single stairway reform, height allotments etc all drive out mid-market builders and only allow luxury developers or single family housing units to be built.

You are fundamentally wrong.

The wrong regulations dont end up saving OR serving anyone.

You’re attached to blaming wealth instead of bringing in new business entities that can fill different needs…which have to be opened up with regulatory reform. Either democrats will get this or republicans will overcorrect.

You’ve been warned.

When people conflate regulation with protectionism or inefficiency, they ignore which regulations exist and who they're protecting. The ones that are removed make it easier for large corporations to run amok, while the ones that remain, create barriers to entry for smaller players. That's not because of some bureaucracy, it's because those monopolists lobbied for those specific rules.

The barriers will always exist. We need new barriers to fill existing needs.

Mind you, the current barriers are blocking out presents needs from being met. You seem to conveniently ignore this.

Businesses will exist. I just want businesses making shyt I want.

The "abundance" crowd avoids talking about power, who has it, how they use it, and why markets don't self-correct.

I truly dont give a shyt. Nor should you. Power and influence will always exist. How we manage that and deliver results is what matters. Addressing power isn’t addressing needs.

They treat the government like it's a neutral actor and markets as natural forces, which lets them push deregulation under a shiny new coat of paint, but ignores how the system is rigged by design to only benefit them.

You’re against deregulation because you dont have an answer for democratic failure.

We are on the verge of republicans winning mayoral seats nation wide in big cities and you seem to have no suggestions of how to fix this other than doubling down on failure.

You should have gotten the hint after the criminal justice reform prosecutors all got tossed out…

We've seen this play out before. Doing the same thing, the same way, with the same power structures, won't give us different results, it'll only lead us right back to the same failures.

The Last Abundance Agenda

In the 1980s, Wall Street vowed to make housing more affordable through deregulation of housing finance. The result was the 2008 crisis.

prospect.org

Dayen isn’t focused on delivering for people. These guys keep dreaming up utopian solutions to problems that are already being fixed in certain places that have deregulated.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Wrong. Things like parking lot minimums, easements, lot utilization, single stairway reform, height allotments etc all drive out mid-market builders and only allow luxury developers or single family housing units to be built.

You are fundamentally wrong.

The wrong regulations dont end up saving OR serving anyone.

You’re attached to blaming wealth instead of bringing in new business entities that can fill different needs…which have to be opened up with regulatory reform. Either democrats will get this or republicans will overcorrect.

You’ve been warned.


The barriers will always exist. We need new barriers to fill existing needs.

Mind you, the current barriers are blocking out presents needs from being met. You seem to conveniently ignore this.

Businesses will exist. I just want businesses making shyt I want.

I truly dont give a shyt. Nor should you. Power and influence will always exist. How we manage that and deliver results is what matters. Addressing power isn’t addressing needs.

You’re against deregulation because you dont have an answer for democratic failure.

We are on the verge of republicans winning mayoral seats nation wide in big cities and you seem to have no suggestions of how to fix this other than doubling down on failure.

You should have gotten the hint after the criminal justice reform prosecutors all got tossed out…



Dayen isn’t focused on delivering for people. These guys keep dreaming up utopian solutions to problems that are already being fixed in certain places that have deregulated.

You're throwing around zoning buzzwords as if that's the core of what's being criticized. No one's defending bad zoning, but pretending that the root of monopolization is "too many regulations" ignores how wealth concentration, financialization, and corporate lobbying shape the market itself.

When mid-market builders are squeezed out, it's not just because of permitting delays, it's because they can't compete with private equity-backed developers who hoard land and political influence. You talk about "bad regulations" driving out competition, but deregulation has already been tried, and it gave us megadevelopers, luxury condos, and underbuilt affordable housing stock.

Your solution is to open the floodgates to capital, hoping it will magically serve the public good, but we've seen that already. The fact that we're still talking about this in 2025 proves it doesn't work.

You don't want to address power, yet power determines which needs get met and whose voices matter in the first place. And under our rigged system, the ones with the most money, hold the most power.

What you call "utopian" is really just naming the forces wrecking our economy. Abundance is just trickle-down for the YIMBY era. You can dress it up how you want, but stripping away guardrails while trusting markets to self-correct is the same hollow promise that's failed us for decades.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

You're throwing around zoning buzzwords as if that's the core of what's being criticized. No one's defending bad zoning,

You literally are because you’re mad someone is gonna make more money in the outcome.

Yes, builders build. I want them to be paid for doing os.

but pretending that the root of monopolization is "too many regulations" ignores how wealth concentration, financialization, and corporate lobbying shape the market itself.

You can regulate yourself into monopolies.

Again, let’s revisit this infamous episode

When mid-market builders are squeezed out, it's not just because of permitting delays

Mid market housing is literally not legal in many places unless city councils permit it. Thats what zoning laws have done. You don’t appear to know this.

, it's because they can't compete with private equity-backed developers who hoard land and political influence.

The funding of these things doesn’t exist because they’r illegal to build in the first place.

Allow more housing diversity and you’ll find buyers.

No one gives a fukk about private equity developers, which barely exist. Its the private equity capital BUYING built homes and selling them.

Ironically if you build more housing, the value of housing decreases and thus limits the power of private equity. How did you not grasp this point?

You talk about "bad regulations" driving out competition, but deregulation has already been tried, and it gave us megadevelopers, luxury condos, and underbuilt affordable housing stock.

Nope.

Developers already chase high ticket development because the other types of structures they can build have been outlawed leaving only those who can build according to stupid requirements like setting aside some number of apartments for low income earners or other developers who can jump through all the hoops of adhering to “community requests” and other greenwashing initiatives.

We’ve made it too expensive to build affordable housing because a lot of that affordable housing is illegal to build in many places.

Its zoning. Period.

Your solution is to open the floodgates to capital, hoping it will magically serve the public good, but we've seen that already. The fact that we're still talking about this in 2025 proves it doesn't work.

You have to remove like 60% of the housing zoning reforms. Especially the community input nonsense.

A generation of NIMBYS on the left got trapped into thinking saving grandma’s house and preserving the character of neighborhoods was some noble task. You’re not helping “people of color” by making it harder for them to live wherever they want.

You don't want to address power,

I don’t know what this means.

yet power determines which needs get met and whose voices matter in the first place.

More power spread out is fine by me.

And under our rigged system, the ones with the most money, hold the most power.

Remove the singular hold that power can purchase by opening up the market. Monopolies happen when competition can’t thrive under increasing regulatory demands.

This is precisely why red states are outbuilding blue ones in energy, housing, and infrastructure.

What you call "utopian" is really just naming the forces wrecking our economy.

This sounds like progressive p*ssy moaning.

Abundance is just trickle-down for the YIMBY era.

Did you think the “earned income tax credit” was trickle down?

How about home buyers assistance programs?

How about…we make it easier for people to build more shyt where they want?

You can dress it up how you want, but stripping away guardrails while trusting markets to self-correct is the same hollow promise that's failed us for decades.

You dont even know what guardrails you’re defeinding

Ironically, the big corporate builders you’re defending are the ones who dont want to change regulations because allowing new types of housing to be built undermines their singular hold on high priced exclusive options in the market. You’re the handmaiden to the status quo. How tragic.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

One of the best things we’ve learned about the Trump years was that the wine moms were right… and so where the neoliberals

Progressives are cancerous and dangerous. We should do all we can to limit their influence in the party. My party.

 

[Loose]

One of the best things we’ve learned about the Trump years was that the wine moms were right… and so where the neoliberals

Progressives are cancerous and dangerous. We should do all we can to limit their influence in the party. My party.

When all fails blame progressives for neoliberals losing the presidency to trump . Literal neoliberal policies gave the presidency to trump but hey a internet commentating progressive doesn't support a genocide let's blame them

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

.

You haven't engaged with anything I said. This is nothing but a Gish gallop of half-baked takes, misdirection, and bad-faith garbage. You have consistently failed to refute the central issue, which is the abundance movement is nothing more than a Trojan horse for capital. It pretends deregulation equals liberation while not-so-subtly funneling more power to wealth developers, financiers, and tech-aligned monopolists.

Removing "barriers" without addressing who holds land, money, and political influence just clears the way for them to dominate even more. That is *not* a rebellion against the status quo, it *is* the status quo, only dressed up in pseudo-populist branding. I understand guardrails, and I clearly understand that *you* don't want any. You just want a free-for-all where the only winners are the capital holders.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

You haven't engaged with anything I said.

You didn’t like my answers. I’m not aiming to coddle you. It’s time to stop protecting your failed priors.

This is nothing but a Gish gallop of half-baked takes, misdirection, and bad-faith garbage. You have consistently failed to refute the central issue, which is the abundance movement is nothing more than a Trojan horse for capital. It pretends deregulation equals liberation

I dont know what “liberation” means.

while not-so-subtly funneling more power to wealth developers, financiers, and tech-aligned monopolists.

You’re protecting the regulations that monopolists currently enjoy.

Removing "barriers" without addressing who holds land, money, and political influence just clears the way for them to dominate even more.

Yeah. Deregulating zoning to allow multifamily units free from oppressive community pork.

That is *not* a rebellion against the status quo, it *is* the status quo, only dressed up in pseudo-populist branding. I understand guardrails, and I clearly understand that *you* don't want any. You just want a free-for-all where the only winners are the capital holders.

I want more builders with different business models in the space.

You seem to not understand how building works.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The Hard Calls Dems Must Make to Regain Power

Democrats want to win over more moderate voters. But are they willing to adopt moderate positions?

www.thebulwark.com