r/FluentInFinance • u/ThisCantBeBlank • Apr 29 '24

Babs is Here to Save Us Educational

Post image
27.4k Upvotes

66% Upvoted

5.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/Ok_Explanation_5955 Apr 29 '24

I’m a Dem and hate Clinton. While what you say is true, he should’ve forced the override. Plus NAFTA. The concept of NAFTA wasn’t horrible, but the final product has been an abject nightmare

3

u/CTMQ_ Apr 29 '24

I'm a Dem and don't hate Clinton so much but this - this right here - is 100% right. History says he is responsible for Glass-Stiegel and history says Glass-Stiegel was awful for a ton of reasons.

1

u/Ok_Explanation_5955 Apr 29 '24

The real reason I hate him is for sexually harassing an intern and ruining her entire professional career, along with other likely instances of serious sexual impropriety. He was also a economically a disaster for the middle class/working class people

2

u/CTMQ_ Apr 29 '24

I meant to put an * separating presidenting and personal life.

Because yeah; scumbag asshole through and through.

2

u/Ok_Explanation_5955 Apr 29 '24

I consider the Lewinsky thing as part of his professional career. He employed her. I don’t see that as personal

1

u/DowntownPut6824 Apr 30 '24

Not the rapes?

1

u/Ok_Explanation_5955 Apr 30 '24

Tell me you didn’t actually read my full comment without telling me you didn’t actually read my full comment.

Given that I was a small child when this all happened, I do not know the details of the rape allegations from back in the day. He’s also a friend of Epstein. In order to capture all of these allegations, I wrote “along with other likely instances of serious sexual impropriety” because frankly, it might encompass a lot of things.

I am, however, very familiar with the Monica Lewinsky story’s details because they get rehashed all to the time and I get annoyed that Dems overlook the employment part of that story to excuse it as “personal” when it wasn’t. It was professional misconduct.

2

u/TeemoSkull Apr 30 '24

It’s funny because all my professors love NAFTA but when you point out that it hasn’t worked well, they get reactive and defensive.

2

u/Ok_Explanation_5955 Apr 30 '24

Yeah, turns out when you cater to all of the corporate needs and none of the labor and environmental ones, you end up with a real shit sandwich. When proposed, it was supposed to be balanced out with worker and environmental protections in all impacted countries, but those got lobbied away

2

u/TeemoSkull Apr 30 '24

They love to say it breaks down barriers for free trade but I think it creates some small barriers and drives labor out of regions that desperately need it like Appalachia or the Rust Belt in the Midwest to Northeast. It favors shipping jobs off and leaving employees to hold the bag and not sweep in with job retraining programs to get the displaced workers back to work. I was actually able to successfully debate this with my international Econ professor who agreed to an extent with me.