Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
kingkongone

Triumph is going to destroy the 'BUSA :(

Recommended Posts

And because you're in a good mood. A local trump hanson supporter.

 

[ATTACH=full]220259[/ATTACH]

 

Ha! Yeah, and let me guess, they all look and sound exactly like him and want exactly the same thing that he wants.

 

Riiiight, I'm the same colour as him and I reckon I've more in common with many people who look and sound nothing like him.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Haha. I'm sure the closest you'd come to having a conversation with him would be accidentally receiving a pint of carlton draught and returning it to the bar.

 

While I generally avoid Gawker for anything outside of strictly automotive only content, this is pretty neat.

 

http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/this-wwii-booklet-helped-soldiers-translate-from-americ-1791909009

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "poll tax" - wow, never heard it described suchly.

 

That's pretty cool, might have to print the whole book out and have a read. I had to accompany an international visitor to the War Memorial this week for a guided tour with their leading historian. Try telling me that was a shit way to spend half a day....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Govt started giving the people some healthcare, now congress is going to vote to take it back? That would be a big fuck you to the American people. You never hear about what kind of health benefits Congress and other politicians receive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Govt started giving the people some healthcare, now congress is going to vote to take it back? That would be a big fuck you to the American people. You never hear about what kind of health benefits Congress and other politicians receive.

 

Though I agree with you regarding politicians and their health care, more specifically how they've managed to exempt themselves from the ACA and bank roll far better coverage with tax payer money (completely unconstitutionally I might add). That said the ACA is garbage and the idea that we're all entitled to free or even cheap health care is ridiculous and why its such a mess. Fact is health care is a service provided by an individual that put a massive amount of time, energy and cost into learning, using equipment that's extremely sophisticated, while operating in an environment that is generally high stress. All in all, the over head, especially after liability insurance is probably on the very highest end of the spectrum for most industries.

 

All this said, they're still a business and without free market competition they'll fail (as they should). Government being involved just fucks up the natural balance found in open markets. Considering they actually legislated us into having to buy a service, whether we want it or not, then imposing a fine if you decide to not participate is outrageous. The ACA is an absolute disaster and fact of the matter is its collapsing on its own (my theory is that this was preordained so they can implement single payer system which was likely the goal all along, but unlikely to be able to be passed initially). No comment on the fact that its dependent on some of us having to pay a premium to subsidize or all out pay for the health care of the rest of us or the fact that it was sold to the American people as a way to bring health care costs down despite the fact that costs have actually risen quicker since its implementation.

 

If you take a look at elective surgeries (stuff like plastic surgery or vision improvement), you'll note that this is not covered by any insurance, and definitely not the ACA plans. Yet that industry has managed to outpace most other segments of medical by making those services competitive and attractive. The techniques and success rates have evolved at a rate that outpaces most other segments of the medical industry, while the costs of them have actually come down unlike most of the medical industry which have risen dramatically. Like college educations, I might add.

 

The only thing you're entitled to (as an American at least) is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as well as what's been outlined in the Bill of Rights. We are not entitled to the services of another individual / business / industry and to expect it for free or for cheap is ridiculous. It costs what the market supports and demands like all other goods and services and if left alone, it would undoubtedly find equilibrium like all other goods and services.

 

Sorry @One Man Banned not directing this at you specifically, but that's my thoughts on the matter for whatever its worth.

 

On a personal tip, my kids used to have insurance I could afford before this mess. We lost our doctor, lost our coverage and the speech pathologist my son used to see once a week for his lateral lisp was no longer approved despite the fact that under the ACA my coverage was costing me almost 3x as much. Eventually, I was unable to afford it and so besides losing coverage for my kids, I'm supposed to pay a fine so that they can subsidize someone else's healthcare?!

 

Wake up people! Anything the government gets involved with goes to shit. We can't even take care of our vets, the people laying their lives on the line to fight whatever wars our government sends them off to. You really trust them to sort out everyone else's health coverage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I merely said I like the idea of people being given basic health benefits, which is a fraction of what Congress has allowed itself. I've been to other countries where people have basic health coverage if not more and well hey, having to go to a hospital in a foreign land it was kind of good to see that people were getting what they needed regardless of who they were- shit is expensive.

 

I have no support for making people sign up for shit, taxing people, having to report it with taxes, all that type of shit. Just make shit available to people.

 

As far as doctors and cost of care and such let me start by saying that I do believe in people being paid what their service is worth. At the same time, I haven't heard of or seen many poor/struggling doctors. Certainly there is evidence throughout the medical field of companies or individuals collecting excessive amounts, such as that pharmaceutical douche who jacked the cost of his meds sky high for profit. That's not all doctors, but my overall belief is that most are well off enough to either not charge as much, or to do some pro bono or reduced rate work, or whatever.

 

But, I also see that a lot of the problem is insurance companies because they dictate the costs of a lot of care. If you're a practitioner, you want patients, and I'm sure you also want to charge what you want. But a lot of patients come from insurance companies, and people who pay for insurance want to use their benefits so they go where their plan allows. As a practitioner, to accept a certain insurance you have to be on the company's panel, and as part of that, they decide what you'll get paid for your services, which tends to be below what you would like to charge. The insurance companies also manage benefits that you paid for and are rightly entitled to, trying not to spend much on you. I know that ACA is not perfect, but I like that it does dictate to insurance companies that certain services, procedures, etc., people are entitled to have.

 

Final thought, don't know about other countries but it is unfortunate that the medical field has gone in the direction of business over care for quite some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really its too complicated a subject to really summarize in a forum post, but the issue (fundamentally) is Government, mostly in the form of subsidies and legislation that allows for shit like the medical insurance industry to operate as it does. People don't scrutinize medical bills because they're used to just having their insurance pay for it. If people had to pay $20 for an aspirin every time, you'd hear them screaming. When that sort of bill is passed to insurance we just shake our heads and feign outrage and likely laugh about how crazy it is. Reason it exists as such is that insurance companies don't even pay their own bills a large part of the time. Instead, they pay a percentage of it based upon them being a heavyweight middle man consumer. They're often paying pennies on the dollar for what passes through their doors, so to try and recoup medical cares charges outrageous fees and pad their invoices with unnecessary procedure.

 

The system is being abused from every angle with consumers putting every visit on insurance instead of major health events. Medical practices are tacking on services, inflating bills and more often than they should, charging for shit that was never done. Meanwhile insurance companies are paying pennies on the dollar and passing costs on to users exponentially, especially now when there's no real competition considering the government legislated it away and are forcing a consumer market whether they want it or not. They subsidize costs so that some people basically pay nothing, while the rest foot a far a higher bill and then protect inefficient business by protecting them from going under when they would otherwise.

 

Reality is that if it were left alone, costs would reach an equilibrium as to what the market can bear. It'll always be more than you want to pay, but left to its own, it would need to find a middle ground or there would be no demand for it. It's an equilibrium based upon how bad you want / need it against what the actual costs versus the investment(s) required. They could charge a premium, but then there's would be far fewer people consuming it. Naturally this provides an opportunity within the market for someone to fill the void of cheaper services and a larger potential pool of customers. Yes, the service may not be as premium, but then again you can stay at a Motel 6 or stay at the Waldorff based upon whether you can afford it and if you can, whether its worth it to you to pay the extra dough when all you want is a nights sleep. Reality is that the vast majority of procedures don't require an exceptional service (ie: seeing a doctor for a sore throat and sending off for a lab test). Obviously there's also laws in place that prevent malpractice and unsafe environments and practices.

 

Think of it like this... Compare the Post Office to UPS. One is subsidized by government and can't go out of business no matter how efficient and the other is a corporation built to make money by providing services according to market demand. Its a crude analogy, but imagine the government forcing a company to build a cell phone and offer cellular service and take a guess at whether you'd see an iPhone, app store and unlimited data, et al. Likewise, how long would it take before that industry collapsed if all of us were forced into a completely manipulated market place propped up on the backs of tax payers rather than the competition we see that allows you to ditch one carrier for another or forces one to match the general cost and feature set of the others (competition)?

 

Its a long tangled mess, but the best thing that could happen would be for the ACA to collapse and the government to step back and let the market correct itself. A shit load of people would go without insurance for a while and it would certainly be a shit show while it all unwinds, but eventually what you'd see is a competitive market place where service is based upon consumer value... If it sucks or cost too much, you don't buy until someone comes along and offers it.

 

Now that's not to say there aren't exceptions... There is in fact a social obligation to take care of those unable to take care of themselves. No doubt there can be a massive grey area here. I do not think we should be forced into this, at least not at the federal level, but then again, there's a shit load of taxes taken each year that could be applied to taking care of our injured veterans and the tiny fraction of the US population that are clearly incapable of taking care of themselves.

 

Rather than tax people for not participating in a service they may not even want, how about we provide tax breaks for gym memberships and eating healthy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this said, they're still a business and without free market competition they'll fail (as they should). Government being involved just fucks up the natural balance found in open markets.

 

I'm sorry Raven but that is simply untrue.

 

There are numerous countries in the world that have public health systems for decades and the businesses have not failed, including that of my country. That is not to say that any of them are perfect and that the systems are set-and-forget. But they exist and sometimes they work well. Personally, I have no problem paying $300 a year and a margin when I use the health system to help others less fortunate too access medical care. A stronger community makes me stronger.

 

I wouldn't be a fan of the fines you cats were faced with and I'm not a fan of some of the inducements that I'm faced with either. But I'd rather have it than not.

 

Also, I definitely like markets as unrestrained as possible and I most definitely like competition and the innovation and progress that freedom encourages. However I sometimes feel that you place too much faith in the markets as a "natural" system. Markets are driven by man and are thus as unrational as man. We have bounded rationality because we cannot tell the future and we cannot compute all the possible outcomes enough to plan for them. Thus, markets are the same as they are created and driven by humans. I'd prefer a market economy over a state driven one but I just don't think the market should be reified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sorry Raven but that is simply untrue.

 

There are numerous countries in the world that have public health systems for decades and the businesses have not failed, including that of my country. That is not to say that any of them are perfect and that the systems are set-and-forget. But they exist and sometimes they work well. Personally, I have no problem paying $300 a year and a margin when I use the health system to help others less fortunate too access medical care. A stronger community makes me stronger.

 

I wouldn't be a fan of the fines you cats were faced with and I'm not a fan of some of the inducements that I'm faced with either. But I'd rather have it than not.

 

Also, I definitely like markets as unrestrained as possible and I most definitely like competition and the innovation and progress that freedom encourages. However I sometimes feel that you place too much faith in the markets as a "natural" system. Markets are driven by man and are thus as unrational as man. We have bounded rationality because we cannot tell the future and we cannot compute all the possible outcomes enough to plan for them. Thus, markets are the same as they are created and driven by humans. I'd prefer a market economy over a state driven one but I just don't think the market should be reified.

 

Name a country that has 320 million people in which this works. There are some exceptions that show socialism working okay, but without exception its been countries with comparatively small populations and generally with comparatively abundant natural resources (which lead to stronger exports and therefore economies). And again, that's not to get into the actual legality of it. We have a constitution that explicitly defines the scope of our government, as well as the rights of its people.

 

No doubt that free market capitalism is imperfect as is man himself, but it's made the USA the nation that is and there is something to be said about that. Kudos to those willing to help their fellow man. In fact, I'd argue that the USA as a whole has done quite a bit in that regard, but you can't force that upon someone. Taxes are theft no matter how you qualify it. It's taking the success of one mans labor and redistributing it to another under the threat of violence. You don't pay taxes, you get fined. You don't pay the fine, you lose your freedom. You resist, and you're met with violence. Plain and simple.

  • Like 1
  • Props 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and...

 

Personally, I have no problem paying $300 a year and a margin when I use the health system to help others less fortunate too access medical care. A stronger community makes me stronger.

 

I think if it were only $300 people might be more inclined to participate, thought it should still not be forced via significant fine. The reality is the plan I qualified for was just over $1200 a month for a family of 4 with a $2000 deductible. No matter if I liked it or not, I simply could not afford an extra $1200+ a month. The next plan, if I recall correctly was $950 or so a month and had a $5000 deductible. So I'm literally paying almost $17,000 in a year before they cover my costs, assuming I use it at all. Regardless of how bad it is, I shouldn't be threatened by massive fine into participating.

 

Markets are driven by man and are thus as unrational as man

 

More reason to strive for individual liberty rather than impose the will of one man on another.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys and your smart talk make my brain hurt now that I'm a drink + some into the evening. But again, been places where they have standard access to health care for everyone and the country has not sunk into the ocean or anything so I think it's possible to replicate elsewhere. Things like that could easily be done here much in the way Hua says as far as cost if everyone contributed a small amount. I remember a few years back there was a news blurb about the amount of money my state makes on unreturned bottles/cans- you bought it, paid a bottle deposit, but didn't return it. It was millions, and that's just from 5 cents a can that someone tossed out a window or whatever. Turning brain off now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Name a country that has 320 million people in which this works. There are some exceptions that show socialism working okay, but without exception its been countries with comparatively small populations and generally with comparatively abundant natural resources (which lead to stronger exports and therefore economies). And again, that's not to get into the actual legality of it. We have a constitution that explicitly defines the scope of our government, as well as the rights of its people.

 

Well that's shifting the goal posts a little! Your previous statement didn't qualify "a business and without free market competition they'll fail in conditions identical to the USA". It was an absolute statement that you've now qualified. And to that qualification, you may be right, Australia, Sweden, the UK, Norway, etc. are all small populations compared to the US, but then again so are all other countries bar India and China!!

 

Secondly, the US may have a huge population but it is also endowed with some of the largest natural resources of all countries: oil, gas, coal, arable land, fresh water, minerals, etc. etc. But I won't get into whether it's suitable for the US as I am way out of my depth there. And as for the legality and constitution, that is a not a natural and absolute truth, you can choose to amend and change that if that suits the national interest. I'm not suggesting that is a good idea but you have to remember that the constitution is not a god, it's a man made reality that only exists because you choose it to.

 

No doubt that free market capitalism is imperfect as is man himself, but it's made the USA the nation that is and there is something to be said about that. Kudos to those willing to help their fellow man. In fact, I'd argue that the USA as a whole has done quite a bit in that regard, but you can't force that upon someone. Taxes are theft no matter how you qualify it. It's taking the success of one mans labor and redistributing it to another under the threat of violence. You don't pay taxes, you get fined. You don't pay the fine, you lose your freedom. You resist, and you're met with violence. Plain and simple.

 

This starts to get into ideas of the social contract, liberty, etc. All philosophical and fundamental issues of the utmost importance to modern life but something I'm not qualified (or particularly interest) to discuss. We did go through a lot of lectures at uni with the whole "the sate is organised crime" for the exact reasons you've pointed out above - and I might add that university in Australia is heavily subsidised. Interesting and important discussions but a direction I never really followed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well that's shifting the goal posts a little! Your previous statement didn't qualify "a business and without free market competition they'll fail in conditions identical to the USA". It was an absolute statement that you've now qualified. And to that qualification, you may be right, Australia, Sweden, the UK, Norway, etc. are all small populations compared to the US, but then again so are all other countries bar India and China!!

 

Secondly, the US may have a huge population but it is also endowed with some of the largest natural resources of all countries: oil, gas, coal, arable land, fresh water, minerals, etc. etc. But I won't get into whether it's suitable for the US as I am way out of my depth there. And as for the legality and constitution, that is a not a natural and absolute truth, you can choose to amend and change that if that suits the national interest. I'm not suggesting that is a good idea but you have to remember that the constitution is not a god, it's a man made reality that only exists because you choose it to.

 

Symantics, but I see your point. Still doesn't change the reality of what the USA faces in such a system. Also, a POV rarely considered is simply the cultural differences between the USA and everyone else. Obviously the culture of any country is unique, but the USA was built on a culture of rebellion and independence. Granted it's been diluted a lot as people lose site of the ideals and context that led to the countries founding, as well as influx of immigration that brings its own flavor into the mix, but as a whole (and especially in what they call the 'fly over states', there is still a streak of independence that likely tracks back to the pioneers that pushed West and settled this country. Freedom and independence runs deep here (for the most part) and the idea of taking care of yourself, and not joining a collective, is innate. The ideas of socialism is almost diametric to how this country is established and *supposed to be* governed.

 

No doubt resources plays a huge part into the success of socialism, but only when those resources are owned by the people as a whole (socialism) or the state (communism). That's not really the case here, but again, the size of our country compounded by the size of our population means that we're essentially 50 countries (or close to it). Every state in the USA has its own particular culture at the macro level. Even comparing ones that are politically aligned like California and New York City (I know NYC is not a state, but its still roughly 8+ million people), you see that the culture is completely different. This becomes more obvious when you compare urban vs rural, northern vs southern and eastern vs western, but really even states next to each other are vastly different (ie: Massachusetts vs New Hampshire or New Jersey vs Pennsylvania). I know this is similar to a degree in other larger countries (Australia for example), but nobody else has the population AND geographic disparity that we do (except perhaps China, which ironically is moving away from communism / socialism to capitalism or at least a unique hybrid of it unique to them).

 

This starts to get into ideas of the social contract, liberty, etc. All philosophical and fundamental issues of the utmost importance to modern life but something I'm not qualified (or particularly interest) to discuss. We did go through a lot of lectures at uni with the whole "the sate is organised crime" for the exact reasons you've pointed out above - and I might add that university in Australia is heavily subsidised. Interesting and important discussions but a direction I never really followed.

 

Yeah, again... These are ideas that are absolutely fundamental to America. America's political system is entirely unique, and especially at the time of it's founding. Some influence was taken from ancient Greek democracy, some from ancient Roman republicanism, and much from essays on freedom from England during a time that their people we're reigning in the power of the monarchy. Ultimately, it's setup as a Constitutional Republic with very specific legislation mean to hold our governments power in check and to preserve the individual liberty / freedom of the people to which the government is accountable. There are segments that are subject to democratic vote, which are very clearly outlined and absolutely subject to the Bill of Rights that sit above all of it. Further, the process was very well documented (they literally took 4 years to finalize and ratify it) so there's a ton of context that very clearly explains the spirit of the law, for all the assholes that come since that are unable to accept the letter of the law.

 

And to conclude my rant, that's why there should not be government managed, or large scale subsidization, of our health care.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good reading in here. I'd like to add that I've noticed an uptick in people thinking the Constitution is a "living document" that is meant to change with the times. The Constitution, as it stands, is not meant to be changed and was meant to withstand the test of time for any foreseeable future. The Constitution IS why America is America and we're seeing a lot of groups today trying to limit things like Free Speech and Gun Rights under the guise of "progress".

 

The only progress I'm seeing is pushing towards a police state where the unruly have been so pushy about trying to get their way that the police have to step in and the government has to put a stop to it. On the subject of socialism, it's a horrible idea and would never work in America. Just because you vote to steal from someone doesn't make it not immoral to steal. It's a highly ridiculous notion that someone with a lot of money should pay for those that have not applied themselves in life to also be successful. I'll use my younger brother as an example:

 

1. We came from an apartment and were raised by a single mother.

2. We always got good grades in school because this was made to be a priority in our house hold.

3. Being grounded and getting spanked for not following rules and/or "talking back" was a thing.

4. Later my younger brother "tried" college and realized that it wasn't going to get him where he wanted to go quickly.

5. Younger brother buys books with his own money and studies to get a Cisco CCNA, then CCNP, and now CCIE.

6. Younger brother makes well over 6 figures of income all on his own volition without handouts from anyone.

7. Younger brother pays more in taxes each year than many people make in a year.

8. Younger brother hates "programs" that "steal from the rich to give to the poor."

 

The government isn't the peoples' own personal robin hood. If you want something in life you need to work for it. If you intend to have "hand outs" to get you by then maybe North Korea is a good spot to go, where the government dictates what people have and don't have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Constitution is absolutely a living document, you are familiar with the 13th and 21st amendments, yes?

 

What a selective view of handouts and distribution/redistribution you have. The measly percentage of your tax money that goes to individual humans which you use as a backbone argument are laughable in comparison to defense, agricultural subsidies, and definitive corporate handouts. Here is a breakdown of meme/reality that clarifies what is actually spent.

 

If any tax-and-redistribution is theft, all redistribution is theft and I would expect to see you on the front line protesting things that take a much greater piece of your tax dollar such as defense spending, police spending, corn subsidies (which only act make people fat and sick), corporate welfare, etc . Remember, "Just because you vote to steal from someone doesn't make it not immoral to steal;" so if its a level playing field, tax money spent on a new jet or weapons system is as equally egregious as tax money spent feeding disadvantaged children or helping mentally challenged homeless people. (you cannot half-assedly resent socialism).

But I understand, poor people are a much easier target to paint red and blame for their own short comings, after all, if you can feed yourself, why can't everybody else?

 

Resenting the poor and needy for culture shifts, most of which have been driven by corporate policy and failed government policies (particularly within education and prison politics), is outright offensive.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist and the greatest trick the capitalists ever pulled was convincing the poor that one day they would be rich too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am a complete noob on the US constitution but the fact that it can be and does get amended means that is 100% a living document, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only progress I'm seeing is pushing towards a police state where the unruly have been so pushy about trying to get their way that the police have to step in and the government has to put a stop to it. On the subject of socialism, it's a horrible idea and would never work in America. Just because you vote to steal from someone doesn't make it not immoral to steal. It's a highly ridiculous notion that someone with a lot of money should pay for those that have not applied themselves in life to also be successful.... The government isn't the peoples' own personal robin hood. If you want something in life you need to work for it. If you intend to have "hand outs" to get you by then maybe North Korea is a good spot to go, where the government dictates what people have and don't have.

 

Um, how many politicians, how many of the top 1%, do you think are self made men/women? They exist, but a lot of those old ass politicians and corporate jerk offs had shit handed to them by their parents, by breaks afforded them to run businesses, by earning off the sweat of other people's backs who really were poor, downtrodden people, immigrants with little to start, etc. Do I feel bad if they have to somehow compensate or make up for that? Not one bit. Fuck those people unless they really are trying to do something to give back.

 

Kind of separate but related topic, but the concept of wealth in America (elsewhere too?) is pretty fucked, kind of geared toward needing to have more and more with no ceiling. Not talking about rights to amass wealth, more that it's kind of a meaningless concept, numbers on paper. Can't recall if it was Russia or where that at one point their economy tanked so bad that you basically would need a pile of 1s to equal what was previously $1. I'm sure most big businesses have back-ups, mirrored sites, etc., but after things like 911 and the idea of hitting America in its financial sector I wonder what would happen if some of these hackers wiped the acounts of some corporation or Richie Rich type. Not stole from per se, just erased numbers and set it back to 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I am a complete noob on the US constitution but the fact that it can be and does get amended means that is 100% a living document, right?

 

Don't worry, I'd wager that the overwhelming number of Americans do not know the Constitution and can't name more than the 3 amendments they see commonly used on TV/the news, like "I plead the 5th."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've literally got a copy of the constitution sitting next to my computer monitor right now.

 

I just opened it up and read that the last amendment was the 27th and it was ratified on may 7th 1992, so yes its a living document albeit the amendments don't occur too often, the 26th becoming ratified on july 1st 1971.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The measly percentage of your tax money that goes to individual humans which you use as a backbone argument are laughable in comparison to defense, agricultural subsidies, and definitive corporate handouts.

 

If any tax-and-redistribution is theft, all redistribution is theft.

 

But I understand, poor people are a much easier target to paint red and blame for their own short comings, after all, if you can feed yourself, why can't everybody else?

 

Resenting the poor and needy for culture shifts, most of which have been driven by corporate policy and failed government policies (particularly within education and prison politics), is outright offensive.

 

You're entitled to being offended, but it is a choice you make to spend your energy that way. You're correct in saying that all tax is theft. I agree but that doesn't mean that I agree to paying a higher percentage of tax for programs that I do not agree with. I'd be willing to guess that many protestors (read spending time not working/stimulating economy/earning money) are trying to get some of the rich's money because they somehow think it's owed to them. I, personally, have worked hard to get where I am and don't like giving my hard earned money to fuckos that want to spend their time tossing back malt liquor and don't have the testicular fortitude to drag their sleeping in asses out of bed and get to work every day. I've been making that decision for years and intend to continue doing so.

 

It also doesn't tickle me when people that don't earn try to vote as to where my money should be spent. Currently I'm saving to buy some land and I would doubt there are many land owners out there putting bandanas on their faces and kicking cars/breaking windows/throwing rocks at police. It's because they've worked to earn something in life and they have something they stand to lose by getting in trouble with the police. When you ain't got shit going on, I guess go protest because going to jail cannot be that much worse than the efficiency apartment you can barely afford with 6 of your "bros" sharing rent and making gourmet ramen recipes.

 

The reason I can feed myself (and my brother that currently lives with me, and my girlfriend) is because I've consistently gotten rather decent pay raises over the past 6 years of my life by applying myself and moving to better opportunities when they present themselves. I've also got stock option in two startups that I've worked for now so whenever they decide to go public, the money I've spent buying those options will multiple itself by quite a bit. This is an example of being good with money and working to improve your own life for anyone that is taking notes. If you're not doing this or moving towards a goal of a better life for yourself without it involving the taking of other peoples' assets.... well then I dgaf about you. It's not about if you make 30k/yr or if you make 250k/yr.... it's about the effort you're putting forth to contribute.

 

Protesting isn't contributing to anything but a bunch of kids that want to cry and break other peoples' toys because they basically can't figure shit out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not offended, just think you're making incomplete arguments to back up a wholly selfish agenda without regard for humanity.

 

To be clear, I'm using your argument of "taxation as theft" to call you out. You do not get to pick and choose--yet you are.

I find the libertarian, "I didn't sign the social contract" argument to be childish and selfish, let alone illogical and incomplete. Taxation without representation perhaps has a leg to stand on, the rest does not.

 

Bitching about the unemployed/poor/lazy/whatever-pejorative-you-want-to-use voting to benefit themselves is fucking stupid. Is it okay for the rich to vote to benefit themselves? By everything you've said I expect a, "well of course, they've earned the right to do so through hard work, perseverance, and application of testicular fortitude..." The thing about democracy is that absolutely nobody, especially you, can say that one person's vote is more or less valuable. (Felony disenfranchisement and corporate person-hood are other can-o-worm arguments related to this thread). NOT voting in your own best interest would of course be stupid, but consistently voting against the livelihood of the poor/sick/weak among us is inhumane.

Your arguments are principally split between supporting oligarchy and anarchy. (Anarcho-capitalism is dumb).

 

If you think the benefits of an unregulated market, voter suppression, etc outweigh human existence or environmental impact then we will find no middle ground.

 

The crux of all your arguments/complaints are all anecdotal fallacies. Your experience and your view of the world is singular. Your assumptions of what people who vote for social programs do is kind of frightening.

 

Edit: Plenty of us own land, homes, and protest. Stating,"Protesting isn't contributing to anything but a bunch of kids that want to cry and break other peoples' toys because they basically can't figure shit out." clarifies not only a lack of historical understanding on your part, but also reinforces your pick-n-choose approach to the Constitution. Not a good look.

 

_______________________________________________

 

Where is Frankie at these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I kind of agree with his last sentence though, coming from prior arguments I've made that today's protestors are disorganized and misguided in so so many ways. Not that they don't have good causes, just not a good way to go about it. Like the 60's ended and people didn't need a voice anymore and/or forgot how to protest. Kind of ironic given that people have much more opportunities to have a voice these days with social media and all.

 

I just had to do some reading on racism, types/levels of, one was Symbolic Racism, paraphrasing here but it "encompassed people who believe that minorities violate traditional American values such as hard work or self-reliance. They deny their prejudice and believe that social/economic problems of minorities are due to personal, internal factors like lack of effort or discipline. In surveys they are found to reject obvious forms of prejudice/discrimination but openly oppose programs designed to assist those who have been victims of discrimination."

 

@Dirty_habiT I pretty much disagree with what you wrote but appreciate your opinion and hope you'll be back to argue it some more. Curious based on what you've said, how you view govt's roll of representing the people- not just the rich people, yet govt gives itslf and businesses a lot of breaks and incentives that don't really benefit many beyond themselves. I mean voting is not based on how much $ you have, so govt should be repping the poor people and doing something for them too, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...