The ..2012.... Political thread
-
SurSteven:
"The US doesn't have left, centre and right. The US has centre-right, far right, extreme right, f**king insane and Glenn Beck." AMEN "Here's the bigger problem: America has drifted so far to the right that there is no left - so people who are in the middle by any objective assessment seem like lefties by comparison. When people seriously claim that ensuring everyone has health cover is communism, that's when those of us who know about public health systems just shake our heads and laugh" AMEN
-
audi:
SurSteven:
"The US doesn't have left, centre and right. The US has centre-right, far right, extreme right, f**king insane and Glenn Beck." AMEN "Here's the bigger problem: America has drifted so far to the right that there is no left - so people who are in the middle by any objective assessment seem like lefties by comparison. When people seriously claim that ensuring everyone has health cover is communism, that's when those of us who know about public health systems just shake our heads and laugh" AMEN
I can't take credit for those, audi...I was quoting Bill from a couple of posts before mine. Bill is a fine Australian teacher. If him and Mustangsally were to run for office anywhere...I would support them.
-
Altanon:
"Too much smoke! More mirrors!! QUICK!!!"
Speaking of smoke, did you ever confirm the details on that story you told a while back about how some DEA agents acted like a bunch of idiots at a police convention and got called out by some very rational police officers who disagree with drug laws?
-
This thread has gone dead. Here's and idea. Let's play "hangman". ---- ------ --------- -- --------- ----!
-
EADG:
This thread has gone dead. Here's and idea. Let's play "hangman". ---- ------ --------- -- --------- ----!
Ok. I'll give you the first four letters. Paul ---u-- ap-l----- -- P-------- -u--!
-
LCH:
Obama was the most liberal senator while in office. I don't think he's an avowed socialist. He's at least smart enough not to show his hand. The thing that those outside of America don't comprehend is that MOST of us don't wish to be gauged by a global standard. Your liberal is not my liberal. Your socialism is virulent to me. Unacceptable. Look at who stood up to the forces of totalitarianism and attempted world domination. Are any of these funding a nanny state ? Oh right...it's a VERY short list. I will get nothing from the programs that Democrats have either enacted or envision. I am too rich. Boo hoo. Ha ha. Therefore I will endorse scrapping or reworking every single "entitlement" I encounter. Please note: entitlements are not the same as earned benefits (wounded veterans, disabled Americans, etc.). NO one is entitled to anything in this world. You earn help by doing. Proving that you deserve a helping hand. We all get exactly what we deserve.
God, I can't wait for the charade on this whole wealthy world to fall and for people like you, LCH, to have to say this again face-to-face to just one of the billions of people who are so incredibly poor, in part because your society and country have manipulated and stolen from so many others. That this attitude you just shared and the people who share this view are not shunned from society just as others who profit from harm to others are shunned tells us just how insulated from admitting the calculus of power and domination those with wealth are. Someone who describes themselves as "too rich" in the richest country in the world telling us "We all get exactly what we deserve". I'd laugh if I weren't so disgusted.
-
EADG:
EADG:
This thread has gone dead. Here's and idea. Let's play "hangman". ---- ------ --------- -- --------- ----!
Ok. I'll give you the first four letters. Paul ---u-- ap-l----- -- P-------- -u--!
Are there any "E"s? Yes. Paul ---u-- ap-l----e -- P-e---e-- -u--!
-
There.. will always be poor among us...there will always be wealthy among us...and there will always be those in the middle... that is how the universe is balanced.
-
jaipur:
There.. will always be poor among us...there will always be wealthy among us...and there will always be those in the middle... that is how the universe is balanced.
You are talking utter fiction. Wealth and poverty have been increasing and decreasing constantly throughout time, including today. The concentration of wealth today in the US is not the same as it's been at some mythical balance. Wealth is today at it's most contcentrated at the top in many many decades. The measure of inequality used in practically all academic studies, the gini index, constantly goes up and down over time for countries. And what changes them are tangible, social factors, such as the type of government, tax structure, healthcare system, regulation of industry, etc. There is no mythical balancing force, only social forces that can be tied directly to people's fates. What you say is the biggest con of those more wealthy to justify their position, just like LCH's post above. Look at any of the academic studies on inequality on Google Scholar for proof you could not be more wrong.
-
peacetrain:
jaipur:
There.. will always be poor among us...there will always be wealthy among us...and there will always be those in the middle... that is how the universe is balanced.
You are talking utter fiction. Wealth and poverty have been increasing and decreasing constantly throughout time, including today. The concentration of wealth today in the US is not the same as it's been at some mythical balance. Wealth is today at it's most contcentrated at the top in many many decades. The measure of inequality used in practically all academic studies, the gini index, constantly goes up and down over time for countries. And what changes them are tangible, social factors, such as the type of government, tax structure, healthcare system, regulation of industry, etc. There is no mythical balancing force, only social forces that can be tied directly to people's fates. I took a look at the google page describing the Gini index. It's very interesting. It doesn't really contradict lch's statement (ie, no society has ever had an index of 1, as far as I can tell). And on lch's other point about earning by Flig, do you know if there's been any research that studies whether societies with higher Gini indecies have higher mean per capita incomes and wealth, higher mean per capita income/wealth for the lower deciles, greater economic growth, greater socioeconomic mobility, etc? Or is the opposite true? Someone must have looked into this. Just asking. Look at any of the academic studies on inequality on Google Scholar for proof you could not be more wrong.
-
-
Let me try that again. I meant to say: ... on lch's other point about earning by doing, do you know if there's been blah blah blah. by the way, i'm not asking a rhetorical question. I really am curious whether i higher or lower gini index correlates with desireable social results. My guess is that it's not correlated one way or the other, across societies and within individual societies over time, but i could be wrong.
-
It's like studying a bell curve...what is the most finely tuned and all inclusive perfectly balanced bell curve?...maybe it looks more like a sombrero?
-
SurSteven:
It's like studying a bell curve...what is the most finely tuned and all inclusive perfectly balanced bell curve?...maybe it looks more like a sombrero?
i did a quick search on google last night on the subject of socioeconomic mobility in the US. i found an opinion piece on huffpost on the topic (i won't post the link because i think the guy's analysis is flawed). the guy was writing about a study that studied socioeconomic mobility by looking at fathers' income levels as a predictor of their children's income levels. The study found that in the US there is a 50 correlation between the two, which is the third highest among the countries analyzed. His conclusion was that socioeconomic mobility is very low in the US. The problem with that analysis, of course, is that fathers' and children's income levels mignt be correlated not with each other but with some other variables associated with the children that aren't being measured in the study. The most obvious ones would be intelligence and work ethic. I wonder if anyone has ever studied the ratio of children's income to fathers' income for the lower quartiles/deciles of fathers' income (or parents', generally) and measure the correlation of that ratio with some measure of the children's intelligence and/or tendency to work hard. My guess is that the US would have a pretty high correlation over time, including the present day. Either that, or all those millions of immigrants who have come to the US over the years (including the present day) are delusional.
-
EADG:
EADG:
EADG:
This thread has gone dead. Here's and idea. Let's play "hangman". ---- ------ --------- -- --------- ----!
Ok. I'll give you the first four letters. Paul ---u-- ap-l----- -- P-------- -u--!
Are there any "E"s? Yes. Paul ---u-- ap-l----e -- P-e---e-- -u--!
Nobody is playing, so let me give you another letter: S Paul s--ul- ap-l---se -- P-es--e-- -us-!
-
ok, I'll give you a hand...are there any Ts?
-
peacetrain:
LCH:
Obama was the most liberal senator while in office. I don't think he's an avowed socialist. He's at least smart enough not to show his hand. The thing that those outside of America don't comprehend is that MOST of us don't wish to be gauged by a global standard. Your liberal is not my liberal. Your socialism is virulent to me. Unacceptable. Look at who stood up to the forces of totalitarianism and attempted world domination. Are any of these funding a nanny state ? Oh right...it's a VERY short list. I will get nothing from the programs that Democrats have either enacted or envision. I am too rich. Boo hoo. Ha ha. Therefore I will endorse scrapping or reworking every single "entitlement" I encounter. Please note: entitlements are not the same as earned benefits (wounded veterans, disabled Americans, etc.). NO one is entitled to anything in this world. You earn help by doing. Proving that you deserve a helping hand. We all get exactly what we deserve.
God, I can't wait for the charade on this whole wealthy world to fall and for people like you, LCH, to have to say this again face-to-face to just one of the billions of people who are so incredibly poor, in part because your society and country have manipulated and stolen from so many others. That this attitude you just shared and the people who share this view are not shunned from society just as others who profit from harm to others are shunned tells us just how insulated from admitting the calculus of power and domination those with wealth are. Someone who describes themselves as "too rich" in the richest country in the world telling us "We all get exactly what we deserve". I'd laugh if I weren't so disgusted.
Wow to Lan's post. Poor little rich boy. If you have to pay more taxes, I don't feel the least bit sorry for you. That is what a society is all about. I totally agree with peacetrain. I am totally disgusted. There are a lot of people out there who cannot find a job, they have been laid off and the republicans are blocking an extension of unemployment. Why? The republicans want unemployment to be funded, but not the tax cuts for the wealthy. Sorry I'm not rich and can't understand how the rich think.
-
"Hangman is coming down from the gallows and I don't have very long" "Come Sail Away" ~ STYX n other good guy rolling stones
-
oobu24:
ok, I'll give you a hand...are there any Ts?
yes Paul s--ul- ap-l---se t- P-es--e-t -us-!
-
peacetrain:
jaipur:
There.. will always be poor among us...there will always be wealthy among us...and there will always be those in the middle... that is how the universe is balanced.
You are talking utter fiction. Wealth and poverty have been increasing and decreasing constantly throughout time, including today. The concentration of wealth today in the US is not the same as it's been at some mythical balance. Wealth is today at it's most contcentrated at the top in many many decades. The measure of inequality used in practically all academic studies, the gini index, constantly goes up and down over time for countries. And what changes them are tangible, social factors, such as the type of government, tax structure, healthcare system, regulation of industry, etc. There is no mythical balancing force, only social forces that can be tied directly to people's fates. What you say is the biggest con of those more wealthy to justify their position, just like LCH's post above. Look at any of the academic studies on inequality on Google Scholar for proof you could not be more wrong.
So glad to see that misinterpretation is alive and well here......