POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
The mystery is solved. The old gray mare goes way back. It was right before our eyes all this time
One thing for sure Trump can out smart and play the Dens and media like a puppet on a string. They all think they are so much smarter than he is, and yet he makes them reveal the idiots they really are.
Probably a paid troll
But how'd their founders feel about gay marriage?
That is what growth is, the fact that over time basically everything becomes cheaper due to increased efficiency and productivity which benefits the person at the bottom the most. In socialist utopia (democratic or authoritarian, doesn't matter) that ability is stunted to where it is counterproductive, it achieves in practice the exact opposite which it sets out to accomplish. At no point in time and in no place is it easier for you to fend for yourself, even in those failing towns, provided your stupidity is such that at least you don't self sabotage and you are smart enough to get out of your own way (excluding extreme cases).
I also agree capitalism is a means to an end and shouldn't be left unbridled as maybe some of those names support, but you have to be exceedingly careful with your interventionism since there is the obvious law of unintended consequences, like a medical hypocratic oath your first goal should be to do no harm. Harm here means the eventual destruction of the West and the successful emergence of authoritarian chinese communism to rule the world. All because you are jealous you can't keep with the Kardashians.
President Trump doesn't need to show you or your ilk anything. The people that elected and will re-elect him are fine without it. What President Trump has learned is NOTHING will satisfy a libdemocomunist other than total capitulation. Give them your transcripts, they go to your grade individually, give them your taxes they start strong-arming your associates, give them one detail they pry into another. (Has ANY dem congress person done anything this term? Please tell me what they have done for the American people.(American people who are legal citizens.))
They (Your ilk) NEVER stop. You must be defeated. Clinton welfare'd his way up, then found out how to "make" a pot of gold. Steal it from those less fortunate who cannot litigate you to death and call it a foundation. Did Clinton bow too? Nah, Mrs. Clinton just threatened them or claimed a vast conspiracy or whatever. Nothing to see....wipe it with a cloth.
He may be one himself. Gotta protect the back...
That's one way of looking at it, sort of like the "judgement" of Christianity, Islam, Judaism . . . each steeped with known historical basis (verified facts) yet still plenty of unknowns (just as you describe) which much simply be accepted in order to make the "science" complete. So it doesn't matter how you characterize it, and I'm not trying to beat up on any religion. But global warming, climate change is based on nothing empirical. Therefore a belief system is used to complete the circle, no different. It is taken on faith. It is religion.
This is an outstanding post . . . thank you . . 5 stars !!
A
anon_l8pbkn96tg3j6
Guest
How are government grants, immigration, federally funded student loans that fund colleges to research literal nonsense problems with capitalism?
OK, but with no moral grounding, what does that mean? To be frank, who the hell cares if a TV is cheaper? I mean, it's nice in some respect, but being able to afford more consumer goods is not what leads to stable society.
The answer to this problem is not government control of the economy in some authoritarian sense, but rather a smaller, moral government with clearly defined goals. At the top of that list should be the protection of the family. If that means interfering with a private company that has set as its goal to harm the family in some way, then the government should be free to punish that entity as it sees fit. I mean, this is basically what the United States was prior to World War II.
Also, claiming that simply not being stupid will allow you to not fail or that wanting to have copious amounts of material wealth as the driving factor behind this is sort of willful blindness to the problem.
That's your interpretation of what I said, what I meant was that either you have the ability to succeed which necessitates failure, or you have the government take care of you thereby removing the possibility of success by removing failure also. They are mutually exclusive in all reality it takes a Herculean balancing act once your moral government starts instituting what people should and should not do.
It's myopic of you to think the TV is just nice thing to have, no like a computer (now ubiquitous and cheap) it opens you to information and the ability to further advance yourself in whatever avenue you deem fit; even shitposting on the catpaw.
I'm not talking personally here by the way, just in general on your idea and viewpoint I don't think you have fleshed it out thoroughly and am interested in what you might say. We don't live in pre world war 2 America for a who myriad of reasons, if you cookie cut the soutions that worked then without taking into account the complexities of today, you have to prove to me that we regardless have the same Leave it to Beaver results.
I thought I made it rather clear. In the case of government grants, that is in response to the refrain of libertarians that people just need to "build their own X" if they don't like what private company Y is doing. My point was that is a free market solution to a non-free market problem, which is a recipe for disaster. IF we had a true free market, then that might be a reasonable solution. But this ignores the fact that Google (stand-in for any large corporation in America) has received help from the government that someone starting a competitor from the bottom up has not. My point wasn't that the government grant is a free market failure, but rather people who propose free market solutions to this and other problems, ignore that they aren't dealing with a free market in the first place.
In the case of immigration, I also made it clear that this is a correlation issue. Sure, you don't have to be pro-immigration as a free marketeer, but the vast majority are. I was commenting on the movement, not the ideology.
And lastly, in the case of student loans. Again, the libertarian response is for people to suck it up who have crippling student loan debt. They either strawman the situation and claim all of these people are SJWs who have $250k in debt from NYU to get a Lesbian Fetish Literature degree or act like 17 year olds should be held responsible for the most trusted and respected institutions and people in their lives telling them to do something. And even if both of those things were true, it is still the height of stupidity to tell a large swath of the youth to piss up rope when it comes to starting families and accumulating assets just to defend some abstract principle that is trampled daily in virtually every other economic arena. Especially when the most reasonable solution to this problem is simply allowing student loans to be defaulted on like consumer debt.
But I wasn't just talking about student loans. Usurious credit card and pay day loans are even more of a problem. And again, the refrain from free marketeers is that people shouldn't be so stupid. OK, let's grant that only stupid people making reckless choices go into debt, it's still going to cripple the damn economy if something isn't done. It's like coming upon your child who jumped off the couch and broke his arm, and instead of taking him to the hospital you just berate him for how stupid that was. IT WAS STUPID! But you're also not fixing the problem by just yelling about it. And just like the child in that case, people are stupid and fallen. Not everyone is a perfect rational animal in a Milton Friedman book. To just let those people be left to wallow because they gave into their own faults is not only heartless, but it also will eventually hurt everyone
Impeach 45!!!
Oh 45, why should we impeach thee? Let me count the ways...
1) Because Maxine Waters said you are a meanie. True...but that’s pretty weak evidence for impeachment.
2) Others said it’s because you colluded with Russia to manipulate the 2016 election. Which makes a lot of sense...because a foreign spy named Steele fabricated a fake dossier...which was paid for by the HRC campaign...in an attempt to actually, physically manipulate the 2016 election for real. Yep. Makes perfect sense. Impeach 45!
3) Next it was because you obstructed justice concerning aforementioned fabricated Russian collusion conspiracy...where the HRC campaign colluded with a foreign spy to actually manipulate the 2016 election. Yessir! Much stronger case now!
But let’s not forget...
4) Your supposed violations of the foreign emoluments clause. Unfounded. Unproven. But it sounds really official and stuff and most people won’t even bother learning what it means. That’ll do just fine. I like it!!!
And then there’s the most reasonable reason of all...
5) Accusations that you have been "Associating the Presidency with White Nationalism, Neo-Nazism and Hatred". Hahaha. Pure poetry. Who wouldn’t want to impeach “literally Hitler”?
6) In my haste to count the ways I forgot what 6 was for...oh yeah...45 should be impeached because Joe Biden and his son are corrupt mofos. Nonsensical misdirection? Maybe. But in the words of Kommrade Harry Reid...”whatever works”.
My personal favorite...
7) IMPEACH 45 BECAUSE ORANGE MAN BAD111
And last but not least...
8) A steaming pile of dog shite. Why? Well, because it’s the only thing mentioned on this list that will actually stick to the wall.
#Impeach45!!!
#WokeJedi
Oh 45, why should we impeach thee? Let me count the ways...
1) Because Maxine Waters said you are a meanie. True...but that’s pretty weak evidence for impeachment.
2) Others said it’s because you colluded with Russia to manipulate the 2016 election. Which makes a lot of sense...because a foreign spy named Steele fabricated a fake dossier...which was paid for by the HRC campaign...in an attempt to actually, physically manipulate the 2016 election for real. Yep. Makes perfect sense. Impeach 45!
3) Next it was because you obstructed justice concerning aforementioned fabricated Russian collusion conspiracy...where the HRC campaign colluded with a foreign spy to actually manipulate the 2016 election. Yessir! Much stronger case now!
But let’s not forget...
4) Your supposed violations of the foreign emoluments clause. Unfounded. Unproven. But it sounds really official and stuff and most people won’t even bother learning what it means. That’ll do just fine. I like it!!!
And then there’s the most reasonable reason of all...
5) Accusations that you have been "Associating the Presidency with White Nationalism, Neo-Nazism and Hatred". Hahaha. Pure poetry. Who wouldn’t want to impeach “literally Hitler”?
6) In my haste to count the ways I forgot what 6 was for...oh yeah...45 should be impeached because Joe Biden and his son are corrupt mofos. Nonsensical misdirection? Maybe. But in the words of Kommrade Harry Reid...”whatever works”.
My personal favorite...
7) IMPEACH 45 BECAUSE ORANGE MAN BAD111
And last but not least...
8) A steaming pile of dog shite. Why? Well, because it’s the only thing mentioned on this list that will actually stick to the wall.
#Impeach45!!!
#WokeJedi
Oh, they are breaking the law alright. So few that do so many horrible things against this country.
Last edited:
I'm not making the free market libertarian case here, to be clear, but that defaulting on loans or having the governemt print money to pay for your mistakes also has consequences for the rest of us.
It is damned if you do, damned if you don't and I see no real evidence that what you propose as a solution doesn't make things worse for the rest of us. It probably doesn't help most of those people you purport to help either (perhaps selfishly, perhaps you are one of them, not an attack just a point) as making mistakes is part of achieving success.
Life is supposed to be hard. YOu aren't supposed to be following a yellow bricked road to riches, chances are pretty good if you do you'll find it was a sham in the end and only hurt yourself and toto.,
It is damned if you do, damned if you don't and I see no real evidence that what you propose as a solution doesn't make things worse for the rest of us. It probably doesn't help most of those people you purport to help either (perhaps selfishly, perhaps you are one of them, not an attack just a point) as making mistakes is part of achieving success.
Life is supposed to be hard. YOu aren't supposed to be following a yellow bricked road to riches, chances are pretty good if you do you'll find it was a sham in the end and only hurt yourself and toto.,
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
A cult is more like it. They need some of that grape koolaid..Or, you have a system whereby the goal isn't to "succeed or fail", but rather to simply live your life in a normal average way. You actually don't have to have a safety net free live or die society that forges men into titans of industry or a dole system that creates indigents and debauched maniacs. Again, the system that basically every country lived by for generations (regardless of form of government or economic system) was that free exchange is the best way to facilitate the distribution of goods, but certain circumstances arise at various times that require intervention from the top to correct something. The only reason it's considered common knowledge that this will lead to all out socialism or command economy is because of the current set up we have whereby the people have totally lost control of the government, but the government still has to pretend to get consent. So, giving them an inch will result in them taking a mile, but only in a quicker way than they are already doing.
Until we get back to some form of legitimate republican government or monarchy or something that isn't economic globalism masquerading as democracy I'm not in favor of the government doing anything. But that's the rub; something has to be done. So we're at an impasse where the government needs to step in, but we have a government that can't be trusted to do so.
Dang! (I agree with your premise) But, dang you bunched up some serious words.
Again you seem to be accusing those pointing out this problem of wanting material wealth or simply freedom from want. That is not the case. There is a wide gap between "I don't want to worry about material concerns" and "predatory loans and usurious interest rates are devastating the economy and the promotion of a stable society."
Of course life is hard, but that's no excuse to ignore real problems. Like the example in my other post; a broken arm is hard, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't take your kid to get it fixed to toughen him up.
How can a corrupt and morally bankrupt society expect government officials to be any better?
Here’s kind of an example that I just saw...
The Supreme Court ruled that sandy hook families can sue Remington because they made a gun that killed children. What in that hell kind of nonsense is that. The Supreme Court decided that bs?
Our society is too far gone, tbh. The greed and stupidity is outrageous.
Here’s kind of an example that I just saw...
The Supreme Court ruled that sandy hook families can sue Remington because they made a gun that killed children. What in that hell kind of nonsense is that. The Supreme Court decided that bs?
Our society is too far gone, tbh. The greed and stupidity is outrageous.
That's not what I mean, I am talking (not accusing) of pragmatism. What is the end result when you limit the economic freedom of the individual and what problems does that necessarily create?
You are making, I gather, a genuinely extreme conservative argument for a bigger government? What happens when it is the liberals or far left who have gained control of that government and they institute their moral vision of what the economy should be?
This type of government is already in place in Bhutan. You can move there, take up Buddhism and be happy(er). What we have now is a system where the onus is on the individual to self actualize, in whatever matter he deems fit and in the end that has raised thewealth standard of living of the entire world. Being poor necessitates that your options are limited and I'm (probably) for whatever you want to do to eliminate taking advantage of those people like usury pay day loans. But I am not for relinquishing student debt to some girl who chose to take upon a worthless psychology degree who had to go out of state tuition to be with her boyfriend and is now lamenting she can't start a family because of it. It makes no sense whatsover to help her and is not the same as fixing her broken arm to any degree.
(again my examples are meant to be illustrative of pragmatic real world results, not accusatory, my heart bleeds for her too
)
You are making, I gather, a genuinely extreme conservative argument for a bigger government? What happens when it is the liberals or far left who have gained control of that government and they institute their moral vision of what the economy should be?
This type of government is already in place in Bhutan. You can move there, take up Buddhism and be happy(er). What we have now is a system where the onus is on the individual to self actualize, in whatever matter he deems fit and in the end that has raised the
(again my examples are meant to be illustrative of pragmatic real world results, not accusatory, my heart bleeds for her too
)Well, one of the goals of the government should be to eliminate that possibility. Either via a legitimate check and balance (i.e. military) or getting rid of voting. If you told me I could have a government who's only job was to actually manage the day to day affairs of the country and not push partisan policy agendas each election cycle, I'd take it in a heartbeat. And before anyone gets too squeamish, I merely ask what your vote has gotten you in your lifetime: a near endless state of war, drag children, mountainous debt (government, not private), a surveillance state that would make the Stasi blush, being taxed like a socialist country and served like an anarchist one?
You don't make me squeamish by those ideas, I actually support in theory something akin to what you mean, a genuine Plato's Republic where we are ruled by a senate of philosophers as opposed to lawyers and only the learned are given votes in society. Trouble is, that's a Knights of the Round table fantasy that only exists in Camelot.
Is that going to get me my 5 dollar foot long delivered by Amazon drone in 30 minutes or less so I can go about the rest of my productive day and live my life as I see fit? The answer I think is pretty clearly a resounding no. Then there is a cascading effect on other productive members of society to the point where simply cannot live in that Utopian ideal. In the end, all those broken arms you went about fixing end up being broken necks you no longer have the resources for to sustain fixing.
Is that going to get me my 5 dollar foot long delivered by Amazon drone in 30 minutes or less so I can go about the rest of my productive day and live my life as I see fit? The answer I think is pretty clearly a resounding no. Then there is a cascading effect on other productive members of society to the point where simply cannot live in that Utopian ideal. In the end, all those broken arms you went about fixing end up being broken necks you no longer have the resources for to sustain fixing.
Trump's daughter works at the WH
Her husband works at the WH
Rudy's son works at the WH
Barr's son works at the WH
Barr's daughter works at the treasury
Trump's sons do foreign business
His daughter is getting Chinese Patents and Saudi's grants
But you want to talk about the Biden's?
Her husband works at the WH
Rudy's son works at the WH
Barr's son works at the WH
Barr's daughter works at the treasury
Trump's sons do foreign business
His daughter is getting Chinese Patents and Saudi's grants
But you want to talk about the Biden's?
This is exactly what I mentioned earlier, though. Presenting a worst case scenario that, if it happened in isolation, would not necessitate a government intervention as the norm. The problem is that it's not just that girl, it's hundreds of thousands of teenagers, many of whom are getting degrees at relatively cheap schools in fields they were told will be beneficial to them economically, then graduating and finding out that isn't the case. Again, this is a government caused problem. They allowed the loans to be given to people who had no business qualifying for them. It's totally nonsensical to say that sense technically tax payers fund the government, the government shouldn't be held responsible for its bad actions.
This is the same excuse people give for not giving payouts to people who win civil suits against the government. Who cares if the police officer sodomized you with his K-9 unit, that's my tax money and I say no!
It's not nonsensical because the government is the people. You punish the government, you punish the people. The government punishing itself is the people punishing themselves, you are picking winners and losers.
So when you pick the winners, you invariably have to give to whole slew of people who don't actually need it, say in my example maybe my girl only needs to put off her family for 3-4 years before she is better equipped to start her life. Maybe she has to leave San Francisco and move to Idaho, maybe she has to make better but hard choices.
For me it's not excuses; it's what's a good idea and what is a bad idea? You are eloquently supporting a bad idea.
So when you pick the winners, you invariably have to give to whole slew of people who don't actually need it, say in my example maybe my girl only needs to put off her family for 3-4 years before she is better equipped to start her life. Maybe she has to leave San Francisco and move to Idaho, maybe she has to make better but hard choices.
For me it's not excuses; it's what's a good idea and what is a bad idea? You are eloquently supporting a bad idea.
But what I'm proposing (through various forms, but with similar outcomes) was the norm up until very recently. How is that high minded abstract philosophy or fantasy LARPing? And why did none of the governments prior to WWII where economic intervention was the norm turn into communist command economies, or even countries where these economic decisions cascaded into monstrous problems that compounded themselves, making it worse than the do nothing solution? The post-WWII paradigm is a totally constructed reality designed for a particular purpose. It was not the nature of government prior to the destruction of Europe and the following social revolution to expand in linear fashion. There are reasons for this that you probably know, but I'll hold off on going into until someone legitimately wants to know for the sake of brevity given my other ridiculously long posts.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/12/business/remington-sandy-hook-supreme-court/index.html
SCOTUS allows lawsuit against Remington to go forward. they could be about to lose a ****ton of money.
SCOTUS allows lawsuit against Remington to go forward. they could be about to lose a ****ton of money.
Was the school district already sued? I would assume so. They are responsible for the safety of those at school. They would be a lot more responsible than an inanimate object.
But this isn't a new thing or a "gun" thing, we determined a looooong time ago you can sue anything with money. Give it to me. Give me the money, baby. F U. That's my money!
The fact the Supreme Court decided this is what is so disturbing.
But this isn't a new thing or a "gun" thing, we determined a looooong time ago you can sue anything with money. Give it to me. Give me the money, baby. F U. That's my money!
The fact the Supreme Court decided this is what is so disturbing.
If we take your opinion at face value that "the government is the people", then "the people" necessarily have to take responsibility for the bad actions of "the government" because they are one and the same. How else can that paradigm hold if that isn't the case?
I understand a lot of where you are coming from so no need to go into those sort of details about really going into specifics of pre and post WW2 world in ridiculously long posts.
What I'm trying to get at is broader, much more fundamental. It's one thing to take from the productive and give to the unproductive when there is a daily struggle for your existence, when if you don't you might find yourselves in some Grapes of Wrath society. That's your failure then.
It's something entirely else when all your real problems are answered... where your biggest real problem is having the luxury of engaging complete strangers in a battle to the death over a Popeye's chicken sandwich. Then that's your failure.
What I'm trying to get at is broader, much more fundamental. It's one thing to take from the productive and give to the unproductive when there is a daily struggle for your existence, when if you don't you might find yourselves in some Grapes of Wrath society. That's your failure then.
It's something entirely else when all your real problems are answered... where your biggest real problem is having the luxury of engaging complete strangers in a battle to the death over a Popeye's chicken sandwich. Then that's your failure.
First, what if she already lives in Idaho? Move to Mississippi? If she already lives in Mississippi, sell herself into sex slavery? This is the point, uprooting families and entire communities because of a widespread societal and government failures for the sake of maintaining a non-existent free market is a sure fire way to destroy your culture
