Trump's Final 100 days
Quote: Mission146
Aside from that, a system of pure capitalism sets into motion a system by which labor can be exploited by the very rich. There are so many examples throughout history, even in this country, as to make such an almost undeniable fact. I think if you had capitalism that actually worked ideally such that the labor, on its own, would effectuate a reasonably decent standard of living, then maybe you wouldn't have a need for socialism or economic leftists. I mean, were everyone who works fundamentally taken care of, what would there be to complain about?
We are all capitalists. Communists are capitalists. Capital, is the means of production. The difference is who controls the means of production. (Notice I didn't say who owns the means of production) Free Enterprise is simply the natural result of a restricted government. In other words, the private sector controls, AND owns the means of production, because the State is bound by the chains of the Constitution.
Under fascism, the private sector still OWNS the means of production, but the State controls it, through regulation. Under communism, the State both owns AND controls the means of production, there is no pretense. But under both, the individual still feels the crush of the State's jackboot.
As an aside, you mention labor being "exploited" by the super rich. I must ask, who exploits labor more than the communists, de facto, even though communism is supposedly a movement of Labor. The truth is that communism is rule by the super elite. The Party. And labor is conducted by slaves.
Quote: gamerfreakThe Republican Party only cares about State’s Rights when it benefits their own agenda. Just look at Jeff Sessions and his crusade against legal marijuana.
You talking to me?
Quote: Mission146Um...depending on what state you live in, I guess. Or, until something like the 18th comes around, though the 18th was amended.
The states created the federal government, not the other way around.
Quote: Mission146
If lambs knew how to fight rather than try to run, I bet twenty determined lambs could take a single wolf.
Or a single, well-armed lamb, contesting the vote.
Quote: bobbartopWe are all capitalists. Communists are capitalists. Capital, is the means of production. The difference is who controls the means of production. (Notice I didn't say who owns the means of production) Free Enterprise is simply the natural result of a restricted government. In other words, the private sector controls, AND owns the means of production, because the State is bound by the chains of the Constitution.
Colloquial usage, you know what I meant by Capitalism.
I'm talking about redistribution of income via proportionate taxation, not the state taking over the means of production. I don't know where I said or implied anything about state control over the means of production. I'm really more focused on social safety nets as well as free basic/emergency healthcare and education through at least the state college and maybe Master's Degree level provided certain academic achievements are met and maintained.
If you're talking means of production in terms of what labor must be compensated and that everyone is paid equally for the same work, yes, I'm in favor of state control to at least that extent. Why? Because those who own the means of production often seem unable or unwilling to do that on their own.
I return to my earlier point of, if all employers paid all full-time employees a livable wage that at least provides for the fundamentals of a decent existence, then I wouldn't really have a gripe with that standard.
Quote:Under fascism, the private sector still OWNS the means of production, but the State controls it, through regulation. Under communism, the State both owns AND controls the means of production, there is no pretense. But under both, the individual still feels the crush of the State's jackboot.
Yeah, okay. No business owner/operator of the means of production has ever done what you're accusing the state of.
They say that labor will get paid whatever the market will bear...not so much when the market can do whatever the hell it wants to. Tried it, didn't work. Hell, forget wages/salaries, you couldn't even be guaranteed a reasonably safe working environment the old way.
Quote:As an aside, you mention labor being "exploited" by the super rich. I must ask, who exploits labor more than the communists, de facto, even though communism is supposedly a movement of Labor. The truth is that communism is rule by the super elite. The Party. And labor is conducted by slaves.
I don't recall mentioning being a Communist, can you please point me to where I did that?
Quote: bobbartopThe states created the federal government, not the other way around.
No, I mean individual civil/social rights are going to vary based on state with what you're saying.
Quote: Mission146No, I mean individual civil/social rights are going to vary based on state with what you're saying.
As they should. Thirteen individual "countries" created the federal government for the common defense, not to give away their sovereignty.
Quote: Mission146
I'm talking about redistribution of income via proportionate taxation, not the state taking over the means of production.
Talk about it. It's a free country.
Quote: bobbartopAs they should. Thirteen individual "countries" created the federal government for the common defense, not to give away their sovereignty.
Sounds more like what rightwingers say when they derisively describe Europe.
Quote: rxwineSounds more like what rightwingers say when they derisively describe Europe.
If you mean the European Union, that's exactly what they've done. Just as we will surrender our own sovereignty if they merge us, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union. But that's not at all what our founders did, they created a very SMALL federal government, not a piecemeal step toward WORLD government. Surely you can see the difference. Were you awake during grammar school? I don't know how old you are. Do they even TEACH American History now?
Quote: Mission146Colloquial usage, you know what I meant by Capitalism. ....
....
I don't recall mentioning being a Communist, ....
I don't either. But most people identify "capitalism" and "communism" as opposing terms. That is wrong, and Marxist dialectic. More accurately "free enterprise" and "monopolistic capitalism" are opposing terms.
Quote: bobbartopBut that's not at all what our founders did, they created a very SMALL federal government
What else would you do? Almost everything starts small.
They are still writing it.Quote: bobbartop....Do they even TEACH American History now?
Quote: rxwineWhat else would you do? Almost everything starts small.
Oh c'mon, rxwine, now you're jerking me around. Does it say "Big Fish" on my forehead? I thought I had that taken off.
Besides, the vast majority of men throughout history have lived under a large central government. It wasn't the Trump Family that made our nation great, it was our form of government. The great American Experiment. Read about it sometime.
You're a funny guy.
Quote: petroglyphThey are still writing it.
That's what I'm afraid of.
This is just beyond ridiculous. Not just thinking it should be like that, but to even suggest it.Quote: Mission146...I'm really more focused on social safety nets as well as free basic/emergency healthcare and education through at least the state college and maybe Master's Degree level provided certain academic achievements are met and maintained...
What happened to:
-If you want it, you have to pay for it.
-If you can't afford it (or don't want to pay it), you don't get it.
-If you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.
Not only is it ridiculous to force people to pay into something they may not want or need (taxation on something unnecessary), but for it to go through the government is just mind boggling bottling*. Instead of using a system that doesn't completely suck, you'd rather move the money through the government, where as we should all know, government gets their cut first. A lot of money, time, and efficiency is completely wasted.
What motive does a government have to incorporate something efficient(ly?) while not wasting time or money? Hint: There is none, as evidenced by how the government currently operates.
Quote: bobbartopYou talking to me?
Did I quote you?
You said the 10th amendment, which I believe outlines state’s rights, will take care of these types of issues. Republicans, the supposed state’s rights party LOVE to use the states right’s card when it supports their agenda....abortion, gay marriage, religion in govt.....yet when it comes to prohibition, they are 100% ready and willing to trample over the will of the voters who came together invoked their state’s right to create legislation.
How do you reconcile?
Quote: MaxPenCan you name one successful Socialist country?
You sure like to put your hands into other people's pockets. It's all fine until OPM runs out
The kind I'm talking about? Most of Western Europe and Canada. Those people work less, are more healthy, and are happier.
And right now, China.
Actually China would be a good example of where Trump wants to take you. Destroy the free press (via libel suits which would render opinion pieces useless if critical). Remove environmental legislation. Establish tariffs and erect trade barriers. Build a wall. Remove immigration. Increase the gap between rich and poor. Keep power and corruption at the top. And the Hang Seng outperformed the Dow 30 last year (36% vs 28%) so by your measure of 'success' China is the place to be!
Politico seems to agree with me...
It’s Now Likely Mueller Thinks Trump Obstructed Justice
"Thursday’s bombshell news points toward one conclusion: The special counsel has the goods on the president."
Why is colluding with a foreign government wrong, after all...
it seems to be a nothing burger. As long as I am working, keep getting paid, and my dollar lasts about the same time, I really don't care who is president or what he does.
This is the new normal.
Quote: boymimboThe thing is, though, is that we are learning that nobody cares. If the president paying off $130k to Stormy Daniels isn't a controversy, then what is?
Their sex was consensual though, so it really isn't a big deal.
It's good for a few jokes, that's about it.
Quote: boymimboThe thing is, though, is that we are learning that nobody cares. If the president paying off $130k to Stormy Daniels isn't a controversy, then what is? If the president still maintaining his business interests with TrumpCo and directly profiting off of his success (or lack thereof) isn't a controversy, then what is?
Why is colluding with a foreign government wrong, after all...
it seems to be a nothing burger. As long as I am working, keep getting paid, and my dollar lasts about the same time, I really don't care who is president or what he does.
This is the new normal.
And THIS is the danger.
The office of the Presidency, and the standards of our representative to the world, should be of the highest order. To normalize this stuff is to demean the Presidency and the country itself. The coverage is still out there, but anybody covering it is derided as partisan , and lots of garbage distraction is thrown up there to further dilute the impact.
Do not let anybody change the facts you know or the standards you hold. Trump.is an aberration, not a new normal. Believe your lyin' eyes, and resist being sucked into resignation or acceptance.
"If we didn't remove incredibly powerful fire retardant asbestos & replace it with junk that doesn't work, the World Trade Center would never have burned down."
Quote: ams288Their sex was consensual though, so it really isn't a big deal.
It's good for a few jokes, that's about it.
The evangelicals seem to trump views over abortion (murder) over sexual improprieties (adultery) these days. I thought something like that would be a big deal to them, but I guess they're used to affairs and readily forgive those. Apparently commandment #6 has precedence over commandment #7.
Quote: RSThis is just beyond ridiculous. Not just thinking it should be like that, but to even suggest it.Quote: Mission146...I'm really more focused on social safety nets as well as free basic/emergency healthcare and education through at least the state college and maybe Master's Degree level provided certain academic achievements are met and maintained...
What happened to:
-If you want it, you have to pay for it.
-If you can't afford it (or don't want to pay it), you don't get it.
-If you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.
Not only is it ridiculous to force people to pay into something they may not want or need (taxation on something unnecessary), but for it to go through the government is just mind boggling bottling*. Instead of using a system that doesn't completely suck, you'd rather move the money through the government, where as we should all know, government gets their cut first. A lot of money, time, and efficiency is completely wasted.
What motive does a government have to incorporate something efficient(ly?) while not wasting time or money? Hint: There is none, as evidenced by how the government currently operates.
1. We literally do it for K-12, what is the difference, other than just making it longer?
2. Work is a factor, academic criteria must be met. If the criteria is not met because the person is unable or unwilling, then they must take a loan and go to a private institution.
What we want is for people who are fundamentally bright, regardless of the family they are born into, to have closer to the same chance without incurring years upon years of debt.
It seems pretty fair to me. You have the chance of a
Quote: Mission146Quote: RSThis is just beyond ridiculous. Not just thinking it should be like that, but to even suggest it.Quote: Mission146...I'm really more focused on social safety nets as well as free basic/emergency healthcare and education through at least the state college and maybe Master's Degree level provided certain academic achievements are met and maintained...
What happened to:
-If you want it, you have to pay for it.
-If you can't afford it (or don't want to pay it), you don't get it.
-If you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.
Not only is it ridiculous to force people to pay into something they may not want or need (taxation on something unnecessary), but for it to go through the government is just mind boggling bottling*. Instead of using a system that doesn't completely suck, you'd rather move the money through the government, where as we should all know, government gets their cut first. A lot of money, time, and efficiency is completely wasted.
What motive does a government have to incorporate something efficient(ly?) while not wasting time or money? Hint: There is none, as evidenced by how the government currently operates.
1. We literally do it for K-12, what is the difference, other than just making it longer?
2. Work is a factor, academic criteria must be met. If the criteria is not met because the person is unable or unwilling, then they must take a loan and go to a private institution.
What we want is for people who are fundamentally bright, regardless of the family they are born into, to have closer to the same chance without incurring years upon years of debt.
It seems pretty fair to me. You have the chance of a
Isn't a person born with a certain IQ and that IQ doesn't change much throughout life? We all hear coaches that say "you can't teach speed". If the guvment has the nation's youth for the 14 most important years of their lives and, they still aren't functional, productive members of society, that is failure. You can't put short people on a NBA team and expect them to magically grow taller.
Quote: boymimboThe kind I'm talking about? Most of Western Europe and Canada. Those people work less, are more healthy, and are happier.
And right now, China.
Talk about a racist post. Why not choose any one of the non majority white and asian countries? Venezuela? Cuba? Any central African nation?
Quote: RogerKintYou can't put short people on a NBA team and expect them to magically grow taller.
No, but you can teach them how to play basketball.
Quote: gamerfreakDid I quote you?
You said the 10th amendment, which I believe outlines state’s rights, will take care of these types of issues. Republicans, the supposed state’s rights party LOVE to use the states right’s card when it supports their agenda....abortion, gay marriage, religion in govt.....yet when it comes to prohibition, they are 100% ready and willing to trample over the will of the voters who came together invoked their state’s right to create legislation.
How do you reconcile?
I believe in the Constitution, not the Republican Party. That's how I reconcile.
Quote: TigerWuNo, but you can teach them how to play basketball.
Yeah, you can waste your time and resources teaching short, uncoordinated people how to play basketball. You can even give the losers trophies and say they're all winners. Unfortunately, the free market is going to choose the real winners, and the losers are whining bout their student loans.
Quote: RogerKintYeah, you can waste your time and resources teaching short, uncoordinated people how to play basketball. You can even give the losers trophies and say they're all winners. Unfortunately, the free market is going to choose the real winners, and the losers are whining bout their student loans.
Comparing physical attributes with intelligent quotient is not a very good comparison. Most sports are the best of the best of the best BASED ON physical gifts which cant be changed generally
People for the most part can learn if they are given the opportunity. Not every one can be a brain surgeon but every one can learn sonething that suits them
Quote: RogerKintYeah, you can waste your time and resources teaching short, uncoordinated people how to play basketball. You can even give the losers trophies and say they're all winners. Unfortunately, the free market is going to choose the real winners, and the losers are whining bout their student loans.
Not everyone can be a Magic Johnson or a Larry Bird or a Michael Jordan, but almost anyone can play basketball to an exceptional degree given enough time and practice if that's what they truly want to do. There are hundreds of people in the NBA, and thousands more on elite college teams. Not all of them are genetic gods; most of them got to where they are by simply practicing a lot and never giving up.
Quote: RogerKint
Isn't a person born with a certain IQ and that IQ doesn't change much throughout life? We all hear coaches that say "you can't teach speed". If the guvment has the nation's youth for the 14 most important years of their lives and, they still aren't functional, productive members of society, that is failure. You can't put short people on a NBA team and expect them to magically grow taller.
IQ’s do change, but that’s a minor point. They generally decline as one ages.
What is a, “Productive member of society?” The stuff I’m seeing on here leads me to believe it is someone who comes out of high school and immediately gets into some sort of manual labor job, or the armed forces, or something.
Do we really want smart people who could become doctors, or any other number of useful and high-paying professions, to go work in a coal mine instead because the potential for student loan debt is so daunting?
I’m also not talking about taking 1.6 GPAs and giving them free state college. I haven’t even discussed any specific academic criteria, but I can assure it would be at least moderately difficult to achieve.
One of the main problems with the public education system is just that, in my view. Depending on state laws, you’re forcing it upon someone who doesn’t want to be there. Also, funding is somewhat based on graduation rates, so that encourages pushing people through it, including those who shouldn’t be passing traditional classes.
For one, I wouldn’t hesitate to aggressively direct academic underachievers into vocational programs so that they can come out and become a productive member of society. Academically speaking, I’d even potentially encourage doing just enough to get them through the ASVAB, so they could go the armed forces route if they like.
The very best students will still get scholarships to private institutions, so most of them will go that route. The super athletic, too. I imagine private institution scholarships will still disproportionately favor the rich, as they do in some (not all...probably not even most) institutions.
I’m mainly talking about second-tier students. Low A-average to Mid-High B average, particularly those from High Schools that aren’t the most renound. They can’t choose where they grow up.
That’s what I’m saying about putting people on the same footing. Too much of the chances some people get in life are based on the wealth of their parents. They already have enough of an inherent advantage as it is growing up comfortably.
So, you see what they can do. GPA must be maintained throughout college, at least B-Level, or they have to start paying until their cumulative is back up.
Quote: RogerKintYeah, you can waste your time and resources teaching short, uncoordinated people how to play basketball. You can even give the losers trophies and say they're all winners. Unfortunately, the free market is going to choose the real winners, and the losers are whining bout their student loans.
Muggsy Bogues seemed to do okay.
(The above sentence is 15% of everything I know about basketball.)
Quote: Mission146Muggsy Bogues seemed to do okay.
(The above sentence is 15% of everything I know about basketball.)
LOL that guy was a freak!
"Socialism works because Muggsy Bogues" - Mission146
Quote: darkozComparing physical attributes with intelligent quotient is not a very good comparison.
It is but I just don't care enough to continue this discussion lol.
Quote: TigerWuNot everyone can be a Magic Johnson or a Larry Bird or a Michael Jordan, but almost anyone can play basketball to an exceptional degree given enough time and practice if that's what they truly want to do. There are hundreds of people in the NBA, and thousands more on elite college teams. Not all of them are genetic gods; most of them got to where they are by simply practicing a lot and never giving up.
Well said. Are you a motivational speaker by any chance?
Quote: RogerKintLOL that guy was a freak!
"Socialism works because Muggsy Bogues" - Mission146
For reasons I’d prefer not to spell out, I edited my actual first name out of that post.
Quote: Mission146For reasons I’d prefer not to spell out, I edited my actual first name out of that post.
That's my fault. I vaguely remember you changing your preference on that.
Quote: bobbartopI believe in the Constitution, not the Republican Party. That's how I reconcile.
I was thinking you were a die-hard Trumper/Republican. My fault.
My point was, most Republican's are staunch supporters of State's Rights, but the actions of the Republican party are anything but.
Quote: gamerfreakI was thinking you were a die-hard Trumper/Republican. My fault.
My point was, most Republican's are staunch supporters of State's Rights, but the actions of the Republican party are anything but.
When the Federal Government oversteps its constitutional authority, the states can and should seek nullification. "Nullification", look it up.
As an aside, this is one reason we should never have passed the 17th. US Senators used to be elected by the state legislatures. In so doing, they were more like statesmen, protecting the Constitution to which they swear an oath to uphold, and protecting states from federal tyranny. Once the 17th allowed for popular election of the senators they became like any other politician that can be bought.
Quote: TigerWuNot everyone can be a Magic Johnson or a Larry Bird or a Michael Jordan, but almost anyone can play basketball to an exceptional degree given enough time and practice if that's what they truly want to do. There are hundreds of people in the NBA, and thousands more on elite college teams. Not all of them are genetic gods; most of them got to where they are by simply practicing a lot and never giving up.
Disagree. The month you are born matters. When you look at the distribution of birthdays in professional sports and look at birthdays of NHL players by month, you get the following: January 797, March 747, February 731, April 729, May 703, July 633, June 614, September 584... December 509. Being born in the early months gives you a 50% advantage over the later months. The same is true for MLB (August, and now May). The conclusion is clear that the older you are by a cutoff date, the more successful you are likely to be in professional sports.
The same effect in the NBA is there but is much smaller.
Quote: darkozComparing physical attributes with intelligent quotient is not a very good comparison. Most sports are the best of the best of the best BASED ON physical gifts which cant be changed generally
People for the most part can learn if they are given the opportunity. Not every one can be a brain surgeon but every one can learn sonething that suits them
Disagree.
Parenting matters; the school matters; opportunities for extra-curriculars matter; sometimes, a single teacher from a single grade can really matter. Nutrition matters; genetics matter; divorce matters; race matters. I don't believe for a second that everyone is born with the same opportunities, which is why I consider myself extremely lucky everyday. I can tell myself that I put in the hard work. But frankly, if it weren't for my parents, the steady job that my father had to feed us, the steady hand of my mother to guide me, my genetics, the whiteness of my skin, my grade 5 teacher, and one really good friend, I wouldn't be where I am today.
Quote: bobbartopWhen the Federal Government oversteps its constitutional authority, the states can and should seek nullification. "Nullification", look it up.
That has never happened though. And in the most recent attempt, SCOTUS ruled explicitly that the states may not nullify federal law.
I’m not really on board with the free college thing, but it’s no secret our doctors are not necessarily our best and brightest young minds/students. By in large they are among our brightest among families that already have multi-generational wealth. Yes there are exceptions to that.
Quote: mcallister3200Lots of people get free college without having the money for it or ever paying for it, they’re called rich kids and then middle class kids whose parents choose to spend their wealth on children’s education rather than themselves.
I never paid for college because I got a 33 on my ACT.
#humblebrag
Quote: Mission146IQ’s do change, but that’s a minor point. They generally decline as one ages.
Wait hold on......what? IQs tend towards being constant since it's based on the average score of other people your age.
Why would a university give a scholarship when, under your perhaps "ideal" scenario, the government will pay for these people to go to college? Whether the person graduated with a 3.4 GPA or a 4.2 GPA?
Quote: ams288I never paid for college because I got a 33 on my ACT.
#humblebrag
I think everyone who still reads your posts probably knows that, you’ve told us multiple times. Congrats on what seems to be he crowning achievement of your life at the age of 17, you should be proud.
Quote: RogerKintWell said. Are you a motivational speaker by any chance?
No, I'm not. And I'm not even a fan of basketball, either! Haha...
Quote: ams288I never paid for college because I got a 33 on my ACT.
Dang, is a 33 ACT the cutoff for free college? I got a 32 and had to pay for every last cent. I was even an honors grad in high school.
