Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I've reached the decision that if you start any discussion with "Both parties.....," you are no longer a serious person. The last time the "Both parties......" thing was remotely true was possibly during the Reagan/Tip O'Neill years. That changed dramatically in 1994 and has only gotten worse over times. And that's under quote-unquote normal circumstances. Right now, I am on a political war footing. Steve Bannon is running the goddamn country. A confessed ally of the white nationalist movement is literally the most powerful man in the world right now. (Do you think Trump is writing any of these orders?) We aren't arguing about tax rates any longer. The question at this point is who we are as a people. In the last month, I've changed my family budget, my evening activities, and some friendships to accomodate this new reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, Springfield said: Compromise is something that we are sorely missing in today's politics. A white nationalist is running the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 27 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: A white nationalist is running the government. I suppose this would support the consensus that Trump shouldn't be compromised with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Springfield said: I suppose this would support the consensus that Trump shouldn't be compromised with? What does compromise with a white nationalist look like? I'm treating the next four years as an occupation. (And I know I sound like a conspiracy theory nut here. But I think I've spent the last 20 years shooting down conspiracy theories and downplaying political panic so that when the moment was right, I could panic with credibility). Again, we have a white nationalist running the country. Steve Bannon is setting domestic and foreign policy without consulting with cabinet members or Congress. I despise Ted Cruz. But if Cruz would consistently stand up to Trump during the next four years, I would not only vote for him as president, but financially support the cause in the spirit of alumni magnanimity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: What does compromise with a white nationalist look like? I'm treating the next four years as an occupation. (And I know I sound like a conspiracy theory nut here. But I think I've spent the last 20 years shooting down conspiracy theories and downplaying political panic so that when the moment was right, I could panic with credibility). Again, we have a white nationalist running the country. Steve Bannon is setting domestic and foreign policy without consulting with cabinet members or Congress. That's fine, and I'm not going to argue the point or even say that I think you're wrong. I will offer that the same sentiment was held by the right wing when Obama was in power. That same sentiment is what has led us to a point where neither side will offer a compromise with each other. It's a straight vote, right down party lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Please. White nationalism shouldn't be embraced by either party. Bannon is a white nationalist and he has been given power to run the country his way these past 10 days. How does one compromise with someone like that? You don't. Otherwise you are okaying their viewpoint that there are too many jews..immigrants..whatever and his (and Sessions among others) ridiculous notion of soulless globalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 6 minutes ago, Springfield said: That's fine, and I'm not going to argue the point or even say that I think you're wrong. I will offer that the same sentiment was held by the right wing when Obama was in power. That same sentiment is what has led us to a point where neither side will offer a compromise with each other. It's a straight vote, right down party lines. How am I wrong? Steve Bannon is the most powerful person in Trump's inner circle. Steve Bannon is a white nationalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 i'm' not sure this thread is going as brandy had anticipated. ('expected', possibly, but not 'hoped') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 There are some issues you can't compromise on. Neocons wanted to invade Iraq (and had their eyes on other countries down the road). I couldn't compromise with them? (You can invade 20 percent of Iraq? Or maybe just Yemen?) Steve Bannon is a white nationalist. Do I agree that those under the Curse of Ham shall not be allowed to immigrate but that Orientals may? 3 minutes ago, grego said: i'm' not sure this thread is going as brandy had anticipated. ('expected', possibly, but not 'hoped') Here is the question: I want this to be a thread were we can all be honest, voice our opinions, and explain WHY we feel the way we do about political issues At the moment, my political life revolves around the fact that a white nationalist is the most powerful man in Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 6 hours ago, Weganator said: Individuals are only able to invest money that doesn't go towards expenses today, surplus money. Increases in taxes disproportionately affect the ability of an individual to increase their personal wealth because expenses are mostly fixed / growing. By increasing taxes, the time it takes for you to save enough money to become a truly free individual is increased. This has several issues. First, let's consider taking it to the extreme. Does ALL taxation negatively affect the ability to increase their personal wealth? This is clearly false. (Obama's point about you didn't really do it by yourself). Basic things like security/law enforcement and roads are important for the consistent building of wealth for essentially everybody. Realistically, that's why people formed governments in the first place, Wealthy people saw it as a means to protect their wealth gains. With no taxes (and no government), situations are too much in a flux and the consistent growth of wealth is difficult at best. Okay so we need things like police, national security, roads, etc. But what about other things. Health care for the poor superficially seems like something that might not help certain individuals gain wealth. I'll tell you that you are wrong. Healthy people are more productive. More productive people generate more good (increase supply) and more diverse goods (more competition for your dollar in terms of determining what you buy). The net effect is that you pay less for the things that you want, which means you save money and can accumulate more wealth. There is an added benefit that medical care for the poor helps control infectious disease and the evolution of infectious diseases, which makes it less likely you will get an infectious disease, which aids in you growing your wealth From there, similar arguments can be made with respect to a large number of government actions/programs. Now, I wouldn't claim that all government policies affect the gains of wealth of everybody equally. There might be some government policies that don't positively affect your gain of wealth at all, but they might positively affect somebody else's. If everybody is being affected somewhat equally (with respect to their true benefit of government where the wealthy have the most to lose if government fails), then it should be okay. The other aspect of this is the government is not burning the money they are collecting. It is going back out into the system, which increases people's wealth. What you are really saying if you are claiming that taxes (and the corresponding government spending) are negatively affecting your inability to acquire wealth is that you are too stupid or lazy to figure out ways to use government spending to increase your wealth. And if that's the case, then I'd strongly suspect that your limiting factor to increasing your wealth is not government taxes, but your stupidity and laziness. (Realistically, I doubt that's true for anybody. I suspect for most people wealth accumulation is not really that important and the prioritize other things (friends and families, which I think is a good thing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I feel like I should make a positive statement of my beliefs. If perfection was possible, I'd be a Christian anarchist. However, I recognize that we are all flawed by nature and as such perfection is not possible. In that context, I generally believe that most people are good and that representative government will result in good most of the time accordingly. I am honestly starting to doubt the underlying logic there more recently. Not that I doubt that most people are good, but even good people will do bad things in ignorance. A representative government with good, but ignorant people might not be better than a representative government where there are just a majority of bad people, and if you have a majority of bad people, then I'm not sure supporting representative government makes much sense. From there, my belief is to do the most good or the least harm. Going from there, I don't have much in terms of real simple beliefs about what the government should do or how it should do it. The scope and depth of the issues present in the world make such statements overly simplistic (IMO). I think in some cases the most good would be accomplished by the government doing less, but there are other places where I think the most good would be accomplished by the government doing more. For many issues, I do not know which path leads to the most good and I regularly change my mind based on the evidence, time, and current circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 53 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: Here is the question: At the moment, my political life revolves around the fact that a white nationalist is the most powerful man in Washington. I get that. While Im not sure I'd say bannon is an actual white nationalist, he hasn't done much to renounce them either. I would love to see the conversation stay open and productive though and not melt down into political bickering. It's a fine line, admittedly, but I think if everyone makes an attempt to honestly say where they're coming from, and try to understand where others are coming from, even if we don't end up at the same place ideologically, it can be a great exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 46 minutes ago, grego said: I get that. While Im not sure I'd say bannon is an actual white nationalist, he hasn't done much to renounce them either. Bannon's site (Breitbart) has praised White Supremecists like Richard Spencer. His own past is sordid and full of race based white nationalism. Labeling him anything other than a white nationalist does a disservice to everyone. Sure, it's uncomfortable to think of him having the power that he does in the White House. But it doesn't change the fact that he supports (and praised) white power figures, is in favor of severely limiting some immigrants because you know..they aren't white christians. Granted, Mother Jones is left...but this is an interesting five paragraphs... http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/why-its-fair-and-necessary-call-trumps-chief-strategist-stephen-bannon-white-nationalist In July, Bannon, who soon would leave Breitbart to become a top campaign aide to Trump, was interviewed by journalist Sarah Posner. He proudly declared of Breitbart, "We're the platform for the alt-right." The alt-right is an extreme but not well-defined wing of the conservative movement that rants against immigrants, Muslims, the globalist agenda, and multiculturalism and that generally advocates white nationalism (if not white supremacism—in this world, there is a difference). The alt-right also generates a hefty amount of anti-Semitism. (For more on the alt-right, see here and here.) In that interview, Bannon did claim that not all alt-righters were racists and anti-Semites. "Look, are there some people that are white nationalists that are attracted to some of the philosophies of the alt-right?" he said. "Maybe. Are there some people that are anti-Semitic that are attracted? Maybe. Right? Maybe some people are attracted to the alt-right that are homophobes, right? But that's just like, there are certain elements of the progressive left and the hard left that attract certain elements." But that was whitewashing. How do we know? Because of Breitbart's own coverage. In March, the website published an article headlined "An Establishment Conservative's Guide to the Alt-Right," which was co-written by Milo Yiannopoulos, a prominent figure in the movement. It noted that the alt-right opposed "full 'integration'" of racial groups: "The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved." This piece cited Richard Spencer, a 30-something Duke Ph.D. dropout, and his AlternativeRight.com website as "a center of alt-right thought." What does Spencer, the intellectual guru of the movement, advocate? He is quite explicit: an all-white United States. This is not a secret. In a recent interview with Mother Jones, Spencer explained his belief that America's white population is endangered, due to multiculturalism and immigration, and he advocated "a renewed Roman Empire," a dictatorship where only white people could be citizens. "You cannot view another white person as your enemy," he remarked. His goal is a white ethnostate. How to get there may be unclear. He added that he hoped America's nonwhites can be convinced to leave the country on their accord: "It's like presenting to an African that this hasn't worked out. We haven't made each other happier. We are going to have to take part in this paradigmatic shift together." During the campaign, Spencer declared, Trump "loves white people." Race is central to the alt-right. Ben Shapiro, a former Breitbart editor, notes, "The alt-right, in a nutshell, believes that Western culture is inseparable from European ethnicity." That is, being white. Whether its activists prefer white nationalism (saying that different races can't get along so nonwhites should somehow be separated from white America) or white supremacism (saying that whites are inherently superior to others), this is a racist movement. And its activists have also traded in anti-Semitism, often hurling anti-Semitic jabs at journalists who write about the alt-right or Trump. By the way, Bannon's ex-wife did once accuse him of making anti-Semitic remarks. (Bannon denied making the comments.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I'm still with her, the OP. We need to truly galvanize social programs, especially in educational areas. Good grief, some kids come in for an application, then ask me for a pen. I then remove the application from their hand, and explain where it all went wrong, and why, if they're not prepared to even apply for a job, they won't be prepared to actually WORK. Seriously? My parents did mock "sit-down" interviews. We had to know how to get out into the world, and our parents taught us how. Now, someone just hands 'em the keys to a new whatever and says "Have at it!" (I'm living in this world, so I absolutely know what I'm talking about.)...it wasn't me, hint. I'm still shocked at the stretch from boomer/X to YCare. It's a really far divide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I feel like the left is great at identifying problems, but terrible at coming up with solutions. I think they mean well, but I think they take some wrong turns. They seem to think everyone/thing is a victim. They think everyone is equal and it leads to explanations for things that I just don't agree with. I feel like the right is too attached to Christianity, and often tries to force morals derived from Christianity on us and I'm not cool with that. I feel like they cater to the wealthy, and are ok with it because they tend to not care about the people most likely to be hurt (mostly inner city people, I don't think it always and universally is about race, I honestly think they have something against cities at least in part.) The stuff around voting and gerrymandering really bothers me. Their inability to distinguis between Muslim and Islamic extremist bothers me. I don't take a stance on abortion. I can't stand militant feminism. I hate how discussion on the right seems to always be lacking in intelligence, or how they seem to fear/deamonize intelligence (their constant criticism and dismissal of academics bothers the hell out of me.) I often take the sissy stance of straddling the fence. I know that can seem annoying. I honestly feel like it's the best. Not always, but most times. I think 'torture' is a loaded word. I'm cool with sleep deprivation, loud music etc, so long as there is a legit purpose (I don't believe in it as punishment, I realize that makes my stance tricky.) I'm cool with waterboarding when they have a high ranking terrorist member. I think the torture debate is a loaded one, there is undeniable proof the received important information and you have to do some gymnastics to deny it, or just not understand how intelligence gathering works at all. I want stricter immigration. Not a fan of refugees or immigrants from countries that are hotbeds of jihadists, or with no government structure to get reliable info on people from. I want 'gun control' that actually works, not things that make people feel better, only burden responsible people, and don't actually solve anything. Healthcare: I fail to see how anything other than single payer can work at this point. When I hang out with liberals they call me a far right lunatic. When I hang out with conservatives they call me a ****ing liberal. One tried to throw me out of his house for it. Not joking. As far as I'm concerned, so long as the previous two statements remain true that means I'm doing it right. I cant trust a single thing the mainstream media says anymore. They've become reckless in reporting. Ultimately I try to balance utility of an idea, vs country's needs, vs trying to be compassionate; while keeping in mind it's likely I don't have all the information I should. It's hard, they often conflict. Sometimes my ideas conflict. Sometimes I'm just wrong, but don't find out until later. I'm this || close to not giving a **** about how any policy affects anyone else anymore because it seems like more and more that's all anyone else is voting for anyways. So why shouldn't I? Depending on who you catch in what situation, they'll admit it in a proud way like it's a badge. I think it sucks more people aren't willing to support something that might have a slight negative impact on them, but has a positive impact on others that really need it. It sucks a lot, and I feel like I see it often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Oh, I think the drug war is a failure of epic proportions and that we should legalize all drugs. This is based on experience, real world examples of places doing this in the face of serious drug epidemics and it working, etc. A 15 year old anywhere around here can buy most drugs in class tomorrow if they wanted. Its not working. It also fuels cartels and countless murders here and elsewhere. Complete and utter failure. Also I think most of the problems described as being a product of racism, can be described as a product of wealth disparity. The difference is you can't fix racism, people will think what they please. We can fix the wealth disparity. Wish we'd focus on the one we can actually fix... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 @grego, i've been meaning to ask you something I've asked a few others recently: Who did you support for president? What are your personal positions on some of the major topics being focused on lately? I find your posts show deliberation and are always interesting. I think the thread is a good experiment, even going into inevitable headwinds, and gives some members a little more air to know each other better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Party affiliation: Independent. Philosophy: Libertarian left (not to be confused with the libertarian right or the authoritarian left). Primary political concern: Ending corporatocracy and restoring democracy. Things I oppose: The military industrial complex, the police state, corporate welfare, regime change wars, warrantless domestic spying, militarized police, the war on drugs, the prison industry, torture, bank bailouts, gerrymandering, voter suppression, the billionaire class, etc. Things I support: Civil liberties, the Bill of Rights, New Deal-style social programs, public education, public healthcare, minimum wage, environmental protection, campaign finance reform, etc. Things I think get way too much attention: gun control, gay marriage, immigration, political correctness/identity politics, and abortion. How I voted in the last election (for @Jumbo): Straight Dem ticket, except I left the top of the ballot blank to protest the DNC screwing Bernie and the increasingly authoritarian right wing policies of mainstream Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinz4Life12 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 This thread is like group therapy lol....Anyways, I like where the OP's head is at...Carry on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I think it sucks someone like @Lombardi's_kid_brother feels the way he does. He's not a loon. He's not a conspiracy theorist. He feels that way and he's not alone. Furthermore, I've lost any ability to roll my eyes at such a feeling, it doesn't seem ridiculous anymore. That sucks. On the one hand I'm not proud of what we are as a country right now. I might disagree on which groups have what % of responsibility, but im not proud. On the other, the peaceful protests in the nation's capital after the election makes me proud. I do not agree with many of those people, but when we turned on the news that Saturday and saw it, and saw Fox News repeating seemingly every other sentence "this has been peaceful", I turned to my wife and said that was really cool. Can't do that everywhere, but you can here. And it was peaceful. It's a weird time right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Good thread @brandymac27, I've been registered Republican since I was 18 but voted for Bubba 2 times and for Obama both times, I did vote for Hillary but only because Trump is an idiot, the reality is I agree with more Republican policies than Democratic ones. I'm not big on religion interfering with politics, I believe a woman has a right to choose and Gay people should have the same rights as everyone else when it comes to marriage. I think all drugs should be legalized, prohibition doesn't work, we know that. I believe in Government healthcare, I think its our country's job to make sure those of us with preexisting conditions can get a somewhat decent rate if we dont have the ability to get healthcare through our employer. I believe in Corporate America, I scratch my head when I hear people trash big business. I've watched first hand how Corp America helps launch some of the best and brightest entrepreneurs, the reality is those who I see who haven't honed their skills in Corp America tend to not be as prepared for self-employment. There are other benefits to Corp America like pretax savings that can be used to start businesses, networking, etc. Corp America also employs mid-tier and lower-tier jobs so there is opportunity for everyone, not just the executive level candidates. I'm not crazy about building Mexico into an economic powerhouse when they are so corrupt, I don't like Nafta and I don't see it helping small and mid-cap businesses. Immigration is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Do we have a drug legalization thread? I can't get over people saying all drugs should be legal. I love pot as much as anyone but I don't want people being able to get heroin right next to the whiskey at the store. You ****ers are crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, TheGreatBuzz said: Do we have a drug legalization thread? I can't get over people saying all drugs should be legal. I love pot as much as anyone but I don't want people being able to get heroin right next to the whiskey at the store. You ****ers are crazy. I'm with ya there. Some drugs kill. One purely natural one hasn't killed anyone (other than from maybe the lung problems that occur--therefore, other means to non-lethal naturals should be encouraged, imho). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: Do we have a drug legalization thread? I can't get over people saying all drugs should be legal. I love pot as much as anyone but I don't want people being able to get heroin right next to the whiskey at the store. You ****ers are crazy. I was just thinking the same thing. No way heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines should be legal. I say that as a ol ganja smoking, psilocybin eating, LSD taking hippie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Guys think about the money we spend on inmates and the drug war, its never going to end, people who want drugs will always get them. Huge amounts of money are being wasted playing defense and then you have the people going to jail for selling and using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.