Current Topics
Historic Corruption
by NW Ponderer
0 seconds ago
RoundTable for December 2018
by Jeffery J. Haas
Today at 05:15 AM
Why Record $1.465 Trillion Student Debt Could Test U.S. Economy
by NW Ponderer
Today at 04:43 AM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by pondering_it_all
Today at 03:42 AM
Yes, John Edwards is a precedent - that is bad for Trump
by pondering_it_all
Today at 03:37 AM
Another Solution
by Greger
Today at 03:20 AM
Justice is coming
by jgw
Yesterday at 10:24 PM
ICE - the new gestapo
by jgw
12/16/18 07:24 PM
What Left?
by jgw
12/16/18 07:17 PM
Archie Moore vs Yvon Durelle, December 10, 1958
by Greger
12/14/18 04:27 PM
Judge orders porn star Stormy Daniels to pay Trump $293,000 in attorneys' fees,
by pondering_it_all
12/12/18 09:51 PM
Election Day
by NW Ponderer
12/12/18 03:42 PM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Golem
12/10/18 09:15 PM
Smart watches: Need Xmas Advice for Wifey
by rporter314
12/10/18 04:32 PM
None of the Above (NOTA)
by rporter314
12/09/18 06:03 PM
Israel negotiating with Hungary on revisionist Holocaust museum
by pondering_it_all
12/07/18 11:22 PM
Brexit Eve
by NW Ponderer
12/04/18 04:26 PM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Jeffery J. Haas
12/04/18 12:52 AM
Our political elders
by Greger
12/03/18 02:52 AM
Round table NOVEMBER 2018
by pondering_it_all
12/01/18 07:59 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16432 Topics
283292 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#308950 - 10/17/18 09:36 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14420
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Trying to say that Jackass is representative of anything, other than himself, would be a huge mistake.

And not one that you and I are liable to make.
You, however, seem to think that some of the other politicians have got your best interests at heart.

I don't.

Quote:
I don't think his base is clever enough to realize that this isn't TV and WILL effect them in the end.

Republicans are just as clever as Democrats, they simply have a different philosophy regarding how government should operate. They fear the effects of a Democratic(socialist) takeover far worse than the effects of a smaller government.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken." Oscar Wilde

Top
#308955 - 10/17/18 11:20 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2200
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
OH, I think there are politicians with their hearts in the right place. I have known some that started out that way but then lost their way. I suspect its easy to do with a LOT of incentive along the way based, pretty much, and a belief that corporations are considered to be a single person and money is speech, both of which just seem wrong to me although I can understand the construction that has made it so it doesn't make it right.

I keep on saying it but I don't have all that many fellow travelers. The left believes humans need regulation and the right does not. I believe that its that simple. I know several conservatives which will argue, with vigor, Social Security and Medicare, for instance. They consider both to be taking the freedom of making their own decisions away from them. You might not consider either of those things to be regulations but serious conservatives do. I remember an ongoing arugment over Social Security with a friend of mine. He assured me that if SS didn't exist people would do the right thing and set aside for rainy days and retirement. I told him they would not and referred him to the passage of SS along with all that went with it. I can also remember going to Russia and seeing all the elderly on the streets begging and starving. The assumption of conservatives, that people will do the right thing if just allowed, is just wrong but they refuse to believe. Its like the religious argument over original sin set to a modern tune and its very strange to me. My friend also told me that if people didn't do the right thing then they deserved to starve, die, etc. He said that would set an example and others would not make the wrong decisions. He was wrong about that too and there are lots of examples to prove it.

However, to the point. I think classic socialism has ever worked out. Its been tried, and its failed every time. It simply does not work. However, socially funded state initiatives do work. I don't believe such qualify as socialism. That would mean that Police and Fire departments, Public schools and libraries would then be socialist but nobody thinks that. They all work but they both also need public interest to stay on an even keel. When the public becomes disinterested in this stuff bad things happen. We have seen this with all of these. To assume that healthcare is one that is special and won't work is just wrong but you need an aware public for any of them to work and the shame is that the public seems to take it all for granted and only gets involved with desperation sets in - again, schools and police are great examples of this.

A good example is the school district in Washington state where 83% of the parents of the children in that school district didn't vote and the district was a genuine mess. I betcha, if you were to ask any of those non-voting, and irresponsible, parents what they thought of their school system they would set off a horrible whine and blame it all on teachers and the administration. To function in a Democracy folks gotta take an interest, they don't have to all run for office but they sure as hell should VOTE!

Oh, I like to use two groups as non-voting, the poor and the young. If there were ever two groups that got screwed with alarming regularity its those two. What's good about it is that some of the youth get it and get involved and the same includes the poor. But they are few and far between. I can guarantee you, however, if they both did vote things would REALLY change. I also consider the education loans to be one of the worst things ever done to youth but it hasn't made them vote with any regularity as far as I can tell. They don't, I guess, have the time to think it through. There have been signs the young are starting to awake but who knows?

Anyway...................

Top
#308960 - 10/18/18 02:46 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
JGW,
As far as socialism having been tried and failed everywhere I would draw your attention to China? Not my cup of tea being harsh and authoritarian. Another aspect that you miss in the 'Failed everywhere' logic is that it is immediately attacked by the forces of capitalism. Wether it has been thru assassinations of it's leaders, manipulation of currency, or outright state violence imposed on it. That's my recollection western capitalism's jihad against it. Also, there is the fits and starts in capitalism's beginnings with failures as well. The Irish famine comes easily to mind. Yet it's now followed on a level of religion thru out the world. It may have been resisted by the entrenched fuedal order at the beginning but it hardly met the resistance and outright state violence that socialism has been attacked with.
There has never been political persecution of capitalists in this country as their has been against organized labor, socialists, communists or anarchists. Unless you think paying a progressive tax is on a par with getting treated to a Pinkerton bullet or a McCarthy trial...
My guess is the juries still out but I do believe that the choice of 'socialism or brutality' is valid.
Finally, regarding the poors, I'm reminded of a quote from somewhere that said 'nothing breaks the human spirit like poverty'. There has been little for the poor to celebrate by way of political victories and the politicians rarely, if ever, craft legislation to help reduce poverty. Heck, Democrats have been willing to slash social services to burnish their 'gittin tough on the poors' bona fides to moderate boomer voters. A nasty cycle that only socialists seem willing to address and speak directly too, now as in the past.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/18/18 02:49 PM)

Top
#308965 - 10/18/18 06:22 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14420
Loc: Florida
Quote:
started out that way but then lost their way
They didn't lose their way, they became politicians.

Quote:
The left believes humans need regulation and the right does not.
That's quite a hat you keep drawing all these simple facts from.
The left believes that capitalism needs to be regulated.
The right believes that people need to be regulated.
You hear all about environmental regulations being rolled back, because they cost capitalists/donors money.

You don't hear much about abortion regulations being rolled back.
Because people can't be allowed to make their own decisions.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken." Oscar Wilde

Top
#308969 - 10/18/18 10:12 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2200
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Chunk;
I travel to China on a regular basis and I can tell you that China does not own all sources of production. That is a simple fact and there are a LOT of American owned companies there to prove it. I really don't care why it fails, it just does and has everytime its been tried. That is a simple fact. There are lots of these pie in the sky things that look real good on paper but absolutely fail. The reason, I think, is that they leave out the human need for greed and everything that means. Russia, for instance, tried Communism, yet another pipe dream of the thoughtless. I believe that we need gov to regulate but the kind of stuff you are talking about are excellent examples of simply going too far (which both sides regularly demonstrate).

When you say capitalism I always wonder. The other side, for instance, doesn't actually seem to believe that private ownership is a good thing. I believe its a reality. Hell, even my dog knows what is her's, such as her collar and her bed.

Gregor;
Now as far as regulation goes. The Right/Republicans/Conservatives believe, absolutely, in the right of people to live regulation free and should be allowed to make their own mistakes and pay for the same. They make no distinction between any kind of regulation. If you talked to a good, old fashioned conservative he/she would explain it to you. Incidentally, regulation takes many forms but it boils down to simplicity, ie. "This is what you can do and this is what you can't" If you don't mind society will stomp on you to one degree or another. Regulation is necessary because, basically, many humans are offensive jerks who tend to harm others and that is, I think, what its really about. The problem, again, is that sometimes the left/Democrats tend to go too far just as the right/Republicans are doing right now (going too far).

Its really quite strange. The Republicans will, if asked, tell you that Police and Fire Departments are ok (although one of the red states actually tried to privatize Fire Departments a few years ago (and failed)). These are socially supported agencies and could actually be called "socialist". It would seem to me that might be a place to start a discussion but then, obviously, what do I know? These socially supported agencies are just another way to 'regulate' but most don't think those two (and a pile of others) are wrong or evil.

This is, again, why a two party system can be REALLY functional. This will only happen when those running things have open minds and need to find common ground to get anything done. Its that common ground thing that regulates BOTH sides from going too far. The mess we have now is because the Republicans (who started this one) decided they would no longer play the two sides common ground thing which I believe to be the basis for our entire nation. The Dems are now playing the same game to punish the Republicans for starting it in the first place. BOTH sides, if we are to survive are going to have to stop the word service (and little else) and start listening to each other. I have no idea if this is even possible but I remain convinced that its what will save us from ourselves.

The abortion thing is pesky. It used to be, a very long time ago, that even the Catholics allowed Abortions when Incest and Rape were involved. No more, now everything that might stop a pregnancy, include using rubbers is a great sin and is actually thought of as killing something that doesn't even exist! I am not for abortion if those against will stand up and take the unwanted children and, humanely, be responsible for them through college. I really don't think most others would feel much differently. That, however, is never going to happen. Those against take, absolutely, no responsibility for the results in their so called pro-life stance, they just want to stop abortions/safe sex/protected sex, etc. no matter what because God told them to. Hell, we have a vice president who is unable to be alone in a room, with a woman not his wife, because he fears his urges. Muslims make the same claims against a woman showing their hair as it forces them to do bad things due to the lust incurred. They certainly have a right to their belief but they don't have a right to tell everybody else what to do without taking one iota of responsibility for their actions.

If the sides are ever to start talking to one another they must start to bring a bit of common decency and regulate their offensive speech crap and both sides have to start doing that before they can ever start talking to one another again. I also suspect that it wouldn't hurt of the seats in both the house and the senate staggered parties amongst the seats (no more this is our side and that is yours because we are all here to do the nation's work and not the parties or personal druthers).

Sorry - I get waaaaaaaay too wordy!!

Top
#308970 - 10/18/18 11:00 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Originally Posted By: jgw
Chunk;
I travel to China on a regular basis and I can tell you that China does not own all sources of production. That is a simple fact and there are a LOT of American owned companies there to prove it. I really don't care why it fails, it just does and has everytime its been tried. That is a simple fact. There are lots of these pie in the sky things that look real good on paper but absolutely fail. The reason, I think, is that they leave out the human need for greed and everything that means. Russia, for instance, tried Communism, yet another pipe dream of the thoughtless. I believe that we need gov to regulate but the kind of stuff you are talking about are excellent examples of simply going too far (which both sides regularly demonstrate).

I don'y know where you keep getting the idea that the government owns the means of production (setting aside the other very important sharing of surplus product). My understanding is that the means of production are shared socially. I may be wrong on that point and wouldn't mind being corrected.

You have not addressed the fact that it has only been tried while under constant assault by capitalist government. I wonder how well a student of another village would do if he was constantly being punched while trying to study? I'm going to guess not well. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the student was hopeless and couldn't learn.
My understanding is that the Chinese government maintains rules of ownership with foriegn companies in China. Is that correct?

Top
#308972 - 10/19/18 04:44 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8081
Loc: North San Diego County
I think a planned economy is an essential element of communism, and that has always failed miserably compared to a market-driven economy. It is a problem of complexity: When you plan to produce X number of say bagels, what happens when you turn out to need X+10? Ten people have to go without bagels. Apply the attempt to plan all production of everything, and you end up with a lot of people going without, queues for staples, goods in the wrong part of the country, etc. Compare that to market-driving production of everything with things like discounts on over-produced goods, raised prices on items in shortage, producers entering the market when demand is high for something, and so forth and it all works automatically.

That is the main reason why communism always has failed: Planning everything becomes an N-squared problem. So we in America have simplified the problem. We do plan, but for a very limited subset of all goods. For example, we plan to educate everyone in public schools, plan to provide fire and police protection to all, plan to provide military protection for all, plan to regulate the stock market, plan to provide health care for most of the population, plan to provide social security for the elderly, etc.

Most Americans are unaware that all of these "planned" items are socialism plain and simple. We already are socialists! All the right and left are arguing about is exactly what should be planned or not. Our pie is cut at 50% and we are fighting about if it should be 49% or 51%.

Top
#308977 - 10/19/18 12:16 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Well we just jumped from socialism to communism PIA but even so, where do you get the idea that an economy must be planned under communism?
Quick note: Russia and China have earned the distinction of raising the most peoples standard of living in the shortest amount of time. Not advocating to live under their particular government systems. Just pointing out that fact in contradiction to the free market effeciency fable that so many believe in.
Case in point: China has gone all in on renewable energy and mass transportation by allocating resources and Capitol to persue a low carbon objective. The U.S. On the other hand has done the opposite. Apparantly the invisible hand of the free market doesn't want to believe in climate change and resists the need to pair resources and Capitol to the issue. Instead, it allocates resources to produce confusion and sow doubt among the population and buys politicians to look the other way. Much like the free market did over tobacco causing cancer.
So what's failing whom with deadly consequence?
Any who, though it's got nothing to do with voting, I'd be curious if you could point me to where its baked that communism has to have a centrally planned economy.

Top
#308978 - 10/19/18 12:49 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8914
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Apparantly the invisible hand of the free market doesn't want to believe in climate change and resists the need to pair resources and Capitol to the issue. Instead, it allocates resources to produce confusion and sow doubt among the population and buys politicians to look the other way. Much like the free market did over tobacco causing cancer.

The great failing of capitalism is that anything that is not monetized has no value and is of no consequence. Any expenditure on things that do not generate a profit is considered to be a waste of money. Even conservation (saving) is considered to be a waste of money. Capitalism is soulless, which is not necessarily a bad thing in a tool, but is is a very bad thing in a philosophy of life.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#308979 - 10/19/18 01:15 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Agreed Logtroll.
I would also add that capitalism and it's distribution of excess product (profit) gets decided by a minority of participants (board of directors). The result is that the Officers of the organization come first. Property owners (share holders) second and the labor last and very much least. Any attempts by labor to address this inequality is thwarted by boards of directors thru co-option of political systems, threats and intimidation to the workforce (think saint Alan, Ayn Rand's boy toy, Greenspans' worker insecurity delivering corporate profits) and co-option of legal frameworks.

All being accomplished currently. Trump, Clinton. Makes no difference. Capitalism gets what it wants whoever is pretending to run the show.

Worker co-op's are the opposite of that model and would be more accurate to compare to a socialist or communist organization, IMO.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/19/18 01:16 PM)

Top
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Who's Online
2 registered (rporter314, NW Ponderer), 36 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2