You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 08, 2016, 04:06:35 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Not another lame lefty thread  (Read 10547 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Schwarzepard

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2008, 04:04:33 AM »
Are you seriously suggesting this?

No, I mean it. We have laws in the United States to prosecute this sort of activity, so it's not like my opinion is just a sole voice in the crowd here.

If you hired a person and that person committed a crime and no one could prove you knew about it or were involved with it, you are innocent until proven guilty.

Quote
Err, it's pretty clear on that to me - they were misled. That's how human trafficking generally works. They don't kidnap people.

Your response doesn't address my statement, the point of which was that the conclusion that KBR is somehow responsible for human trafficking is totally unsupportable with the information given in the article.

Quote
Which suggests it ought to be looked into, in my opinion.

Only if you subscribe to tarring KBR with guilt by association without a shred of evidence that they are guilty of anything.  There is not nearly enough info in that article to accuse either company of human trafficking.

Quote
If I were arguing the technical legalities, this would not be a debate at all. Likewise, employment clauses in contracts were recently found to be unenforceable. The presence or lack of something in a contract does not mean it can be forced or ignored. And even if it is, it does not make it 'right'.

This doesn't show any support for the conclusion that KBR is in any way responsible for the fate of the victims.

Quote
People have oversight responsibility for who they hire. We're talking about people's lives here, not how well painted road stripes are.

That's correct, and the Jordanian company failed in its responsibility.  KBR could not oversee the workers hired by its subcontractor.


Quote
But this point is simply entirely extraneous - you're acting as if present actions and guilt stretch back into past ones, or should if my argument holds, which makes absolutely no sense.

I'm not acting in the way you're saying I am and I didn't mention guilt.  I was disproving your statement that the Republican party is defined by slavery because the administration of a Republican president hired KBR by pointing out that Democratic presidents have hired KBR multiple times.


Quote
Perhaps it was far too facetious. I'll admit that. And certainly every elected democrat who did not stand against it shares blame - Obama included.

It was mean, especially after you jumped on Methos for saying something as mundane as a particular candidate sucks.  You made a similar statement to Inkidu in the Obama-Biden thread then told him that you were losing patience with him and that wasn't a good spot for him to be in.

Quote
I do concede debates on occasion, if that's what your asking.  Usually what happens is some sort of middle ground is reached.

I was asking you to confirm your statement that learning something from discussion was more important that being right.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2008, 01:59:59 PM »
If you hired a person and that person committed a crime and no one could prove you knew about it or were involved with it, you are innocent until proven guilty.

RICO and new laws being drafted to cover indirect employers of illegal immigrants fall under this sort of domain. You are responsible for the work you have agreed to perform.

If this is an isolated incident, KBR is off the hook. If it is endemic to the subcontractors that KBR hires, then it becomes suspect.

Quote
Your response doesn't address my statement, the point of which was that the conclusion that KBR is somehow responsible for human trafficking is totally unsupportable with the information given in the article.

Only if you subscribe to tarring KBR with guilt by association without a shred of evidence that they are guilty of anything.  There is not nearly enough info in that article to accuse either company of human trafficking.

The article states that the Jordanian company misled the Nepalise, which fits the definition of human trafficking unless someone in the article is outright lying. The whole idea is to ship a victim to a place where they don't speak the local language.

Quote
This doesn't show any support for the conclusion that KBR is in any way responsible for the fate of the victims.

That's correct, and the Jordanian company failed in its responsibility.  KBR could not oversee the workers hired by its subcontractor.

An incident like this, to me, requires investigation. If it is commonplace amongst KBR's subcontractors, then KBR is most certainly liable.

Quote
I'm not acting in the way you're saying I am and I didn't mention guilt.  I was disproving your statement that the Republican party is defined by slavery because the administration of a Republican president hired KBR by pointing out that Democratic presidents have hired KBR multiple times.

It was one example of an injustice under the watch of the current administration out of over a thousand that are known about. Only a handful of which are getting any serious attention.

And that's a strawman, you are making the claim that since I am saying that KBR may be guilty of a crime now, that I must also infer that KBR has always been guilty of crimes.

Quote
It was mean, especially after you jumped on Methos for saying something as mundane as a particular candidate sucks.  You made a similar statement to Inkidu in the Obama-Biden thread then told him that you were losing patience with him and that wasn't a good spot for him to be in.

Regarding Methos, I responded to one attack with another when I shouldn't have.

Regarding Inkidu, it should not be the responsibility of the reader to double-check every last fact someone posts, and that was not the first time he had been nudged about that, and I was not the first person to do so.

Quote
I was asking you to confirm your statement that learning something from discussion was more important that being right.

Yes.

Offline Madalina

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2008, 02:48:22 PM »
~Does Risky Business slide into this thread too~

So, I do not really follow politics. But, there are a couple things I wanna see what Vekseid and others think about ^.^

I am very undecided about who I wish to cast my vote for in November. There are things about both candidates that scare me. Barack's health care plan is one huge one though. I am a health care worker, and I work closely with a fair number of physicians. I've have heard his ideas of change in this health care plan being termed as Universal Health Care. God.. I really hope not. : / (( And a side note, I've heard Barack say that part of his plan is to spend money converting the medical field into the digital age. Well, that is already required. All of our charts have to be electronic by 2010.))

Annnd, there is an article that I read that I cannot really find a lot of background information for.
Sowell's Article Really? Oh, and the capital gains thing.. Is this really a good thing to tax capital gain? Like, I'm going to get taxed when I sell my house next year?

^.^ Okay! And McCain. Is he going to completely blow our economy to hell? I always vote for whoever is pro-life, but I don't want to send us into a depression for it!

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #28 on: September 08, 2008, 05:07:31 PM »
There are things about both candidates that scare me. Barack's health care plan is one huge one though. I am a health care worker, and I work closely with a fair number of physicians. I've have heard his ideas of change in this health care plan being termed as Universal Health Care. God.. I really hope not. : / (( And a side note, I've heard Barack say that part of his plan is to spend money converting the medical field into the digital age. Well, that is already required. All of our charts have to be electronic by 2010.))

I linked Barack's health care plan, it's rather specific on a lot of points. As I understand it it's not the blanket universal care that was Edward's plan, however, the goal really is to cover everyone.

And just because your charts are digital doesn't mean I can go look up my medical records safely on-line, for example. :-p

Quote
Annnd, there is an article that I read that I cannot really find a lot of background information for.
Sowell's Article Really? Oh, and the capital gains thing.. Is this really a good thing to tax capital gain? Like, I'm going to get taxed when I sell my house next year?

Holy simplification, batman! I wonder if this guy would abolish the FDIC or SEC just because they are New Deal programs. Nevermind that they're basically the only reason the American banking system is still in tact at the moment.

Some of FDR's plans were quite horrible. A few of them were brilliant and remain in effect to this day.

It also paints FDR as being solely responsible for the Depression from the getgo. By the same token, would he argue that Bill Clinton was responsible for eight years of uninterrupted growth? Somehow I doubt that. Unless he wants to blame FDR for the Dustbowl too, and explain why.

Capital Gains taxes basically operate under the assumption that it's a form of income. They can apply to your home if you sell it within two years of your purchase, and then if you only are making a profit on the sale - ie it has accumulated in value, which given the housing collapse isn't a garauntee.

Anyway, I've mentioned before that I don't believe Barack will follow through with his tax plan as is. Almost the entirety of the reason I support him is because he's more transparent than his opponent, and the same goes for the VP comparison. That nut needs to be cracked wide open, in my opinion - we can't afford four more years of Cheney's fourth branch status and liberal destruction of records. Worse, tolerating and expecting it.

Quote
^.^ Okay! And McCain. Is he going to completely blow our economy to hell? I always vote for whoever is pro-life, but I don't want to send us into a depression for it!

I guess I'd be more curious as to why you always vote pro-life. That's prolly best for another thread.

Roe versus Wade may get overturned if McCain becomes president, but it won't mean anything if few or no states take advantage of it.

Regardless, the presidency is supposed to be one of three branches, specifically, meant to enforce those decisions made by Congress as verified constitutional by the Judicial branch. He can influence policy decisions and be a barrier or enabler, but not directly draft them. McCain can't, on his own, trash things.

I wouldn't be worried at all if I were confident that the Democrats in Congress, as a rule, had balls, but I'm not so confident. Like I said, I'm voting for transparency in government, not economically.  I believe the latter will eventually follow the former.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #29 on: September 08, 2008, 05:44:29 PM »
I just noticed a quote from that article that should be addressed:

Quote
Although the Great Depression of the 1930s began under Herbert Hoover, unemployment during Hoover's last year in office was not as high as it became during each of the first five years under FDR.

From here:

1928    4.2
1930    8.7
1932    23.6 <- Hoover's last year
1934    21.7
1936    16.9
1938    19.0
1940    14.6
1942    4.7
1944    1.2
1946    3.9
1948    3.8

1933 had an unemployment rate of nearly 25% I believe, but other than that, Roosevelt's first year was the only one in which unemployment was worse than the last year of Hoover's.

It's important to note that unemployment statistics are a bit unreliable during the 20's and 30's, and even modern unemployment statistics are suspect for many reasons.

Still.

Offline Madalina

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2008, 06:25:27 PM »
I guess I'd be more curious as to why you always vote pro-life. That's prolly best for another thread.

Yeah, would sort of be straying topic I guess ^.^ I've only gotten to vote for one presidential election anyway, so its not like I've had very many candidates to consider. But I will throw in its just something that's very important to me. Don't get me started on abortion and funerals @_@

But anyway - You give me things to mull over. Especially to drag out the fact that we do have a checks and balances system, so one man can't stroll in and ruin us all, and of course I knew this, but I guess I get caught up and worry.


I wouldn't be worried at all if I were confident that the Democrats in Congress, as a rule, had balls, but I'm not so confident. Like I said, I'm voting for transparency in government, not economically.  I believe the latter will eventually follow the former.

I follow you on this one.


And the looking up medical records online safely ^.^ That would be nice if we could ever get to that point, but save me from patients of average intelligence! Most people are not going to know what their records mean and blow things way up and out of proportion, and drive me -insane-. I loathe the day that these types of people learned how to look up their diseases online! Or what they -think- they have XD

Offline Sherona

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2008, 06:31:08 PM »


And the looking up medical records online safely ^.^ That would be nice if we could ever get to that point, but save me from patients of average intelligence! Most people are not going to know what their records mean and blow things way up and out of proportion, and drive me -insane-. I loathe the day that these types of people learned how to look up their diseases online! Or what they -think- they have XD

Forgive me if I am wrong but can they not look up symptoms and such online? Places like Web MD, that are intended to give people peace of mind through knowledge..but end up being self diagnosis?

That being said, to bring this back on topic...a universal health care plan could eliminate a good many of people who do this because they can not afford to go to doctor unless it is VERY bad.

Offline Madalina

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #32 on: September 08, 2008, 06:44:07 PM »
My my Sherona ^.^

What you quoted was mostly just me whining about some of the more irrational patients I have to deal with, like ones who see "irritability" listed as a side effect on the medicine they are taking, then call us saying they are having an allergic reaction because they are in a bad mood.

And most of the time its not really their fault. I was reading in a magazine the other day about women's health, and it actually listed fatigue, irregular periods and cramping as signs of uterine cancer. Which would be something that someone would experience with uterine cancer, but also with every period that any woman has ever had in her life.

My biggest fear with Universal Health Care comes down to money. In order to cover everyone, profits will have to decrease. I know that in a perfect world, this shouldn't matter... but most people use doctors who own private clinics, and they cannot have these clinics if they are not turning a profit. I fear that in order to make money, their quality of care will go down due to staff cuts and lower budgets for supplies and equipment.

Offline Sherona

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #33 on: September 08, 2008, 06:50:31 PM »
Considering the hell I went through in an underfunded state hospital before I probably should be scared. But considering that was funded by a very poor state anyways, and I think obama's would be federally funded it might make a difference. And since doctors in many other parts of the world, Canada, Sweden being two manage to operate well under a universal healthcare, tehre should be no reason US doctors can not. But I will be the first to tell you I do not have a brain for economics.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #34 on: September 08, 2008, 06:52:56 PM »
Yeah, would sort of be straying topic I guess ^.^ I've only gotten to vote for one presidential election anyway, so its not like I've had very many candidates to consider. But I will throw in its just something that's very important to me. Don't get me started on abortion and funerals @_@

One needs to be careful about legislating perceived morality. Abortion is illegal in Brazil, yet the abortion rate is twice that of the US. Just because you say a person should or should not do something, even with the force of law behind it, does not mean they will comply.

Nor does it necessarily make them wrong to avoid compliance.

Being pro-choice does not mean someone believes abortion is right - I detest abortions as a general rule, but I'm pro-choice, myself.

Quote
But anyway - You give me things to mull over. Especially to drag out the fact that we do have a checks and balances system, so one man can't stroll in and ruin us all, and of course I knew this, but I guess I get caught up and worry.

What worries most is that the next president will be picking a few supreme court justices.

Quote
And the looking up medical records online safely ^.^ That would be nice if we could ever get to that point, but save me from patients of average intelligence! Most people are not going to know what their records mean and blow things way up and out of proportion, and drive me -insane-. I loathe the day that these types of people learned how to look up their diseases online! Or what they -think- they have XD

It's just an example - the entire pharmaceutical industry also comes to mind. Expert systems will probably be handling a great deal of that eventually.

Offline Sherona

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #35 on: September 08, 2008, 07:02:41 PM »
Quote
Being pro-choice does not mean someone believes abortion is right - I detest abortions as a general rule, but I'm pro-choice, myself.


Yay, someone else who has figured out this out. I am pretty much teh same way, Pro-choice, I won't trample on a person's right to the choice (though I would like to see a way to make it more fair on the male equivalent...) but it is not something I could choose to do myself.

Quote
What worries most is that the next president will be picking a few supreme court justices.

This is something that bothers me as well. However, I do hope the last four years or so of civil liberties being trampled on will have taught whoever else getsinto office that the price is not quite worth it.

Offline Schwarzepard

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #36 on: September 08, 2008, 11:06:32 PM »


Quote
If this is an isolated incident, KBR is off the hook. If it is endemic to the subcontractors that KBR hires, then it becomes suspect.

We agree.  And if the Bush Administration or any other organization knowingly and repeatedly hires contractors who do in FACT repeatedly engage in human trafficking, then that entity does represent slavery.

Quote
The article states that the Jordanian company misled the Nepalise, which fits the definition of human trafficking unless someone in the article is outright lying. The whole idea is to ship a victim to a place where they don't speak the local language.

The suspicious thing is that the article doesn't say that.  It says:
"A dozen men from Nepal had been hired by a U.S. defense subcontractor and taken against their will to work at a military base in Iraq. On the way, they were captured by insurgents, taken hostage and executed."

It says they were "taken against their will to work at a military base in Iraq." 

The use of the passive voice makes it unnecessary to specify who exactly transported the men to Iraq.   I am very aware that this is splitting an extremely fine hair, but I'm not going to come to a conclusion that the subcontractor is guilty of human trafficking until I know who or what exactly trafficked the men.  It is very telling that the lawyer was not even able to get the Jordanian company charged with human trafficking.  That means there was not enough evidence.  If the judge decided the subcontractor should be tried on that charge, then I would be inclined to conclude the subcontractor was involved or knew about it.

Quote
An incident like this, to me, requires investigation. If it is commonplace amongst KBR's subcontractors, then KBR is most certainly liable.

The incident has been investigated.  If KBR knowingly hired a subcontractor who practiced human trafficking, then they have some responsibility.  To use my previous example, if you hired me to operate a coal mine for you and you knew I engaged in human trafficking, then someone could bring a case against you.  If you didn't have a reason to suspect me of any illegal practices, there's no way someone could point a finger at you.

Investigating KBR when there wasn't enough evidence to even charge the subcontractor with human trafficking simply and only because KBR hired other Nepalis directly is not reasonable.

Quote
It was one example of an injustice under the watch of the current administration out of over a thousand that are known about. Only a handful of which are getting any serious attention.

We disagree, but that is a different discussion.

Quote
And that's a strawman, you are making the claim that since I am saying that KBR may be guilty of a crime now, that I must also infer that KBR has always been guilty of crimes.

My argument isn't a straw man.  I'm not misrepresenting your position.  My argument was that the D-party was not defined by slavery because KBR was innocent when hired by a D-administration, KBR is innocent now because it wasn't even charged, and so the R-party hiring the innocent KBR just like the D-party administrations means the R-party isn't defined by slavery either.


Quote
Regarding Inkidu, it should not be the responsibility of the reader to double-check every last fact someone posts, and that was not the first time he had been nudged about that, and I was not the first person to do so.

As far as I know, nobody has any responsibility to make their posts factually accurate.  They should if they want to be taken seriously, but there's no requirement.  There is one HELL of alot of highly inaccurate posts on these boards.  The other things I have to say about this I'll write to you in a PM.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #37 on: September 08, 2008, 11:33:58 PM »
The suspicious thing is that the article doesn't say that.  It says:
"A dozen men from Nepal had been hired by a U.S. defense subcontractor and taken against their will to work at a military base in Iraq. On the way, they were captured by insurgents, taken hostage and executed."

It says they were "taken against their will to work at a military base in Iraq." 

It most certainly does:

Quote
In 2004, the Nepalis had been told they were going to work at a luxury hotel in Jordan. But there were no hotel jobs.

^^^

That's how human trafficking works.

Quote
My argument isn't a straw man.  I'm not misrepresenting your position.  My argument was that the D-party was not defined by slavery because KBR was innocent when hired by a D-administration, KBR is innocent now because it wasn't even charged, and so the R-party hiring the innocent KBR just like the D-party administrations means the R-party isn't defined by slavery either.

For me, it says what a lot of current Republican party members would be perfectly willing to let happen. Like I said, it's far from the only indiscretion.

Quote
As far as I know, nobody has any responsibility to make their posts factually accurate.  They should if they want to be taken seriously, but there's no requirement.  There is one HELL of alot of highly inaccurate posts on these boards.  The other things I have to say about this I'll write to you in a PM.

It was a part of the rules when you joined here, and was until we sliced the rules recently. As mentioned, it didn't mean they're no longer in effect, it just means that rather than forcing everyone to read 60+ rules, when someone fouls up on something, we let them know that way. Much less anal looking, because really, 98% of the people here are fine.

Do I expect everyone to be 100% accurate? No. No one is and no one can be. That's not the issue. When someone doesn't bother checking facts that would have taken them less time to research than to post, that's an issue.

As for the inaccurate posts, I know it happens a fair deal. Sometimes I have the time to weigh in, sometimes I don't. If you see something as a serious issue, feel free to point it out or weigh in on the discussion yourself.

Offline NightBird

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #38 on: September 09, 2008, 12:19:44 AM »
<snip>

My biggest fear with Universal Health Care comes down to money. In order to cover everyone, profits will have to decrease. I know that in a perfect world, this shouldn't matter... but most people use doctors who own private clinics, and they cannot have these clinics if they are not turning a profit. I fear that in order to make money, their quality of care will go down due to staff cuts and lower budgets for supplies and equipment.

I so swore that I wasn't going to jump in on a political discussion, but I'm just going to bring up a couple of angles to consider: When there are currently the number of people who cannot pay their bills, won't the health care providers actually be getting more overall if they get some reasonable proportion for everyone? Where I live, the numbers are 30% of patients served in ERs or admitted through ERs pay less than 10% of what they owe. Clinics would no longer have to charge paying patients an amount to cover services offered the indigent, and there are still many health care providers who do not refuse emergency services to those who cannot pay. The AMA has come out in favor of universal health coverage on that basis: there is every chance that there will be more money overall going into the health care system when all services receive some moderately reasonable sort of remuneration.

Also, the broader the overall risk pool for any sort of insurance, the lower the benefit per insured averages out to be. A national health care system is honestly the best averaging there is when considered from that perspective. And, as far as that goes, another thought ot ponder would be whether the sort of profit percentages and executive salaries that have come to be expected from health care and pharmaceuticals are viable, sustainable numbers. We would have a lot more money for staff, supplies and equipment if we paid higher executives something closer to the multiplier of the average worker's pay that's the standard in other industrialized countries or if more money was reinvested rather than siphoned off into profits. Just because any firm has every right to make decisions that favor executives and profits over reinvestment doesn't mean that it's the best long-run strategy to do so.

Like I said, those are just some things to consider. I'm not going to tell anybody they're wrong in this thread, just suggest that there are more angles from which one can view the health care crisis.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #39 on: September 09, 2008, 12:27:30 AM »
Before flying to India became a viable health care choice, people would instead come to the US to get suitable health care for situations that may potentially be an emergency - I've known Canadians who, faced with a six month waiting list to get checked for cancer, came down to the US instead.

Edit: That is to say, a blanket universal healthcare system is not necessarily the answer. You need to have a balance between making sure everyone is okay, and not allowing the system to become overloaded.

Offline NightBird

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #40 on: September 09, 2008, 12:42:50 AM »
I won't argue that that's happened, since it's readily documentable that it has.

Again, I would suggest, though, that the problems in the systems as created thus far are not necessarily inherent in every conceivable system. I have great faith in human ingenuity to solve as well as to screw up, even if the latter tends to be far more common and arguably far more easy to achieve.

Offline MethosTopic starter

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #41 on: September 09, 2008, 12:57:53 AM »
Considering the hell I went through in an underfunded state hospital before I probably should be scared. But considering that was funded by a very poor state anyways, and I think obama's would be federally funded it might make a difference. And since doctors in many other parts of the world, Canada, Sweden being two manage to operate well under a universal healthcare, tehre should be no reason US doctors can not. But I will be the first to tell you I do not have a brain for economics.

Actually Sherona that's something of a fairytale claiming that Canada's system manages fairly well. All our hospitals are generally underfunded, understaffed and lacking in diagnostic equipement. You wait a terribly long time to see any medical personal and if you need non-critical surgery good luck with that! MRIs are hard to come by and patients have very few if any rights. If that's an ideal system to emulate you're kidding your self. Bad medical care for everyone is a silly idea and pretty much what we have..

Offline MethosTopic starter

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #42 on: September 09, 2008, 01:08:29 AM »
Obama's health care plan is quite detailed, and addresses a lot of issues - both well-known and not - about the modern healthcare system. Addressing ballooning malpractice insurance costs (especially with OB/GYN), doctors being paid by the number of patients cared for rather than quality of said care (a friend of mine had a doctor visit that consisted of a jab in the back and one sentence), etc.

I have to wonder, sometimes, if I'm too tolerant nonsense that pops up in general, by people who don't bother researching things. This is a role playing forum, however, so I try not to be too heavy handed.

And I'm sure you'll be happy to point out exactly where and why these people are wrong?

Put up a real argument, or drop it. Address specific points. Tear apart his health care plan. Whatever. But this is just trolling.

Are you claiming that the right wing has promoted capitalism or a free market economy?

The free market requires several things that are absent from many facets of the current American economy.

1: The absence of fraud. Not just in the legal sense, but also in the moral sense. Frequently in the American economy, one or both parties to a trade does not fully reveal proper information about their product or service, even initiating lawsuits in order to suppress such information. More recently, news agencies face the threat of a loss of revenue when reporting negative information about a high-profile client.
2: The above may also be terms as both parties to a trade being fully informed and mentally capable of making such decisions. This goes a great deal further than truth in advertising, it also means a proper education, which many Americans lack.
3: The free market implies that one party is not inherently advantaged over another, whether by means of monopoly or government intervention. That is, one party should not be coerced - via financial or whatever means - into doing business with another specific party.
4: Capitalism and the free market in their own right do not prohibit the existence of social programs. The reasoning for this ought to be patently obvious - people naturally want to survive. If someone does not have the means or knowledge to acquire a need lawfully they will do so unlawfully.

There are not any truly free markets in the United States. Food comes close - and if a number of lobbies fail, it may return to that, but at the moment the corn lobby is busy driving up diabetes and obesity in America with its corn syrup via sugar tariffs. Always, at some point, in almost every trade in America, at one step or another the government or some informing party plays a hand. Whether it is to withhold information, provide subsidies, or indefinite copyright extensions.

But the right-wing has almost entirely been about making these matters worse.

...of all the examples I could list, of the vast abuses of power that have occurred under the republican watch in this country, I'm just going to put out one.

Because it represents the republican party in such a nutshell.

Slavery.

See Vekseid statements like 'the Republican Party is represented by slavery' - are exactly why I created this thread. I knew the moment I put a post in the political forum of this nature that some people would show up slavering at the fact I made statements that weren't found in their Michael Moore handbook and go off on ridiculous tangents like that. I won't bother to reiterate HeretiCat's critique of your bizarre interpretation of the contents of the link, but really your getting into Kevin Bacon's Five Degrees of seperation there and its just silly.

Are my comments about Obama vauge? Yes actually - I'm guessing you don't grasp the irony there. But a vauge criticizism of Obama its ironic because the man speaks vaguely. You just need to say "Yes we can!" make jokes about the Obamamessiah.

And nowhere in my post did I say that the American economy per say was perfect. I simply said capitalism is preferable to all other systems of wealth generation. You've offered nothing to disprove that, aside from venting your spleen regarding some aspects of the American economy.

Offline kongming

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #43 on: September 09, 2008, 01:35:35 AM »
some people would show up slavering at the fact I made statements that weren't found in their Michael Moore handbook

Michael Moore is a complete tool. Most left-wing people know that. Yes, he's probably good at getting teenage rebels on his side, the ones that are sure that their parents are to blame for the state of the world, but in general, he talks a load of shit, makes things up to suit his agenda (much like any politician in that regard), and is generally annoying. Seriously. Don't compare us to him, unless you want to be heaped in with such pillars of right-wing as Bush or (ooh! Ooh! I'm going to invoke Godwin here!) Hitler.

Quote
capitalism is preferable to all other systems of wealth generation. You've offered nothing to disprove that, aside from venting your spleen regarding some aspects of the American economy.

You are wrong on so many levels there. Just about every country that is a little bit more socialist is considered a lot better than America - Western Europe tends to have less poverty, infant mortality and the like, and people don't hate their own governments quite so much. Socialism as its ideal is really the perfect system, it's just that greedy people, who want to be able to have more than other people and use their possessions as a means to get away with breaking laws, won't ever work with socialism.

We can't have the perfect system as long as greedy people exist, as they demand to have a system where they can be rich. So instead we make do with Capitalism, and as a result, far more people end up suffering than otherwise. I can totally justify Lenin deciding an important factor of communism was to round up and kill all the people who were too attached to their wealth. I don't condone his decision to actually go ahead and do that, and he did many other things wrong, but I can see where he was getting at.

Remember, Capitalism is pretty much designed so that it's a crime to live in the slums, but not to own them, and the reason why there are "rich/white drugs" and "poor/black drugs" with different penalties applied, and why there is so much poverty in general.

tl;dr? Capitalism is shit, but because we don't just exile/shoot greedy people who can't play by the rules, we have to put up with it and just try to allow in as much socialism as we can.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #44 on: September 09, 2008, 01:57:20 AM »
See Vekseid statements like 'the Republican Party is represented by slavery' - are exactly why I created this thread. I knew the moment I put a post in the political forum of this nature that some people would show up slavering at the fact I made statements that weren't found in their Michael Moore handbook and go off on ridiculous tangents like that. I won't bother to reiterate HeretiCat's critique of your bizarre interpretation of the contents of the link, but really your getting into Kevin Bacon's Five Degrees of seperation there and its just silly.

Are my comments about Obama vauge? Yes actually - I'm guessing you don't grasp the irony there. But a vauge criticizism of Obama its ironic because the man speaks vaguely. You just need to say "Yes we can!" make jokes about the Obamamessiah.

Oh, how cute, I bet you're proud of yourself.

So you have no intention of discussion, reason, or debate, just trying to rile people up when people on these forums are watching friends and family suffer and die before their eyes?

You wonder why discussion here might get a little heated, or a little left leaning?

When I read your post I thought of one of them in particular. This person is a light to my life and one of the reasons Elliquiy exists, but they can't afford basic medical care. The world has given them nothing but suffering. My heart breaks every moment that I can do nothing for them.

But you don't care. You don't even know them. As far as you know, they don't exist. You haven't experienced a thousandth of the torment they have gone through, nor do yo have a thousandth of their cares, reading your posts.

You just come on, spit in their faces and make empty posts like that one. You haven't bothered to address a single point that I've made, and Heritikat is only seriously contesting one. And you know what? I was pissed off.

I still am. A lot of people are. People are dying, people are suffering, and people are starving. The economy has grown but most Americans are making less than they did eight years ago, and that's with two years of growth since the Democrats retook the House and Senate.

It's only natural for me to be a bit surprised and incensed when someone does not care. Don't you think?

And you, apparently, think I've read or watched something by Michael Moore. No idea where you got that idea.

Quote
And nowhere in my post did I say that the American economy per say was perfect. I simply said capitalism is preferable to all other systems of wealth generation. You've offered nothing to disprove that, aside from venting your spleen regarding some aspects of the American economy.

...what?

Do you have something to say?

----

And I'm going to split off Heritikat's last post there. Definitely needs its own thread.

Offline MethosTopic starter

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #45 on: September 09, 2008, 01:58:02 AM »
Michael Moore is a complete tool. Most left-wing people know that. Yes, he's probably good at getting teenage rebels on his side, the ones that are sure that their parents are to blame for the state of the world, but in general, he talks a load of shit, makes things up to suit his agenda (much like any politician in that regard), and is generally annoying. Seriously. Don't compare us to him, unless you want to be heaped in with such pillars of right-wing as Bush or (ooh! Ooh! I'm going to invoke Godwin here!) Hitler.

You are wrong on so many levels there. Just about every country that is a little bit more socialist is considered a lot better than America - Western Europe tends to have less poverty, infant mortality and the like, and people don't hate their own governments quite so much. Socialism as its ideal is really the perfect system, it's just that greedy people, who want to be able to have more than other people and use their possessions as a means to get away with breaking laws, won't ever work with socialism.

We can't have the perfect system as long as greedy people exist, as they demand to have a system where they can be rich. So instead we make do with Capitalism, and as a result, far more people end up suffering than otherwise. I can totally justify Lenin deciding an important factor of communism was to round up and kill all the people who were too attached to their wealth. I don't condone his decision to actually go ahead and do that, and he did many other things wrong, but I can see where he was getting at.

Remember, Capitalism is pretty much designed so that it's a crime to live in the slums, but not to own them, and the reason why there are "rich/white drugs" and "poor/black drugs" with different penalties applied, and why there is so much poverty in general.

tl;dr? Capitalism is shit, but because we don't just exile/shoot greedy people who can't play by the rules, we have to put up with it and just try to allow in as much socialism as we can.

Well regarding Michael Moore it wasn't so long ago that he was seated in a place of honour at the Democratic National Convention - so its not like I'm just pulling some obscure figure that no one on the left choses to associate with out of thin air. Secondly, Hitler wasn't even right wing. His party was the National Socialists, and they were statists. Its nothing more than a leftist slur to try and throw him on the right side of the political spectrum to begin with.

Although if Western Europe is such a great place to live why are the people of Holland leaving in rather large numbers? Why didn't all those happy residents of Western Europe bring children into their socialist paradise? Instead their countries are shrinking, fading away and/or being over run by Muslim immigrants. Their style of government is in a demographic death spiral.

And the idea that greedy people are the problem with the world? Damn you just don't care much for human nature do you? A good system is a system that deals with the parts it has. You don't build an airplane saying "Now this plane would fly if I had a hyperdrive" you put in the sort of engine you have to work with. The idea that we can all hold hands and share alike while sitting around the fire singing Kumbaya is nothing more than a stupid immature fantasy that has no basis in relatity. People are quasi-ego centric, they care about themselves, their family and their friends. The rest of the world by and large can go hang itself.

If you think the problem with capitalism is greedy people, you fail entirely to realize that any system that guarantees people an equal result is simply designed to benifet the stupid or the lazy. Why those sort of people should benefit at the expect of the hardworking, the talented or the ingenius is something that will always baffle me about the left. A free market assigns wealth principly on the basis of demand at least on the theoretical level. Its simply wrong headed and ignorant to suggest that all people contribute equally, they don't. A grade three student doing a group work project can figure that out pretty quickly. Benifet should mirror contribution and its never equal.

You could just as easily make a counter argument that we should kill all the stupid and lazy people. That way capitalism would function much better. We'd all have relatively equal levels of income as we'd have weeded out all the people who pose a drag on the system, and createda more level playing field. Eugenics anyone? Hell it would make a great deal more sense than getting rid of all the smart and ambitious people because they're too fond of being sucessful.

Offline MethosTopic starter

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #46 on: September 09, 2008, 02:08:13 AM »
Oh, how cute, I bet you're proud of yourself.

So you have no intention of discussion, reason, or debate, just trying to rile people up when people on these forums are watching friends and family suffer and die before their eyes?

You wonder why discussion here might get a little heated, or a little left leaning?

When I read your post I thought of one of them in particular. This person is a light to my life and one of the reasons Elliquiy exists, but they can't afford basic medical care. The world has given them nothing but suffering. My heart breaks every moment that I can do nothing for them.

But you don't care. You don't even know them. As far as you know, they don't exist. You haven't experienced a thousandth of the torment they have gone through, nor do yo have a thousandth of their cares, reading your posts.

You just come on, spit in their faces and make empty posts like that one. You haven't bothered to address a single point that I've made, and Heritikat is only seriously contesting one. And you know what? I was pissed off.

I still am. A lot of people are. People are dying, people are suffering, and people are starving. The economy has grown but most Americans are making less than they did eight years ago, and that's with two years of growth since the Democrats retook the House and Senate.

It's only natural for me to be a bit surprised and incensed when someone does not care. Don't you think?

And you, apparently, think I've read or watched something by Michael Moore. No idea where you got that idea.

...what?

Do you have something to say?

----

And I'm going to split off Heritikat's last post there. Definitely needs its own thread.

That's really the problem with a debate per say with most people of a left wing persuasion. Nothing is really about a strictly logical argument it all boils down to some *feeling* you have. Your unhappy with the whole health care system in place because someone you know personally is ill and you were rather they were well. Fair enough your entitled to wishing your friend/loved one was well. On the other hand that really doesn't create any sort of moral obligation for everyone else in your country to shell out for that person's health. Illness and death are an unavoidable part of the human condition. There will always be those with access to better services, better goods and the like its been that way for the entire course of human history. I expect nothing different to transpire tomorrow. Nor even assuming some vast pile of money that could be ploughed into health care could all the illness and suffering even be eliminated. Cancer kills lots of people whatever treatments are administerd, many diseases can be managed but are ultimately fatal. Our current obsession with abnormally prolonging human life is really a futile attempt to stave off the inevitable.

Offline Inerrant Lust

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #47 on: September 09, 2008, 02:23:53 AM »
And the idea that greedy people are the problem with the world? Damn you just don't care much for human nature do you? A good system is a system that deals with the parts it has. You don't build an airplane saying "Now this plane would fly if I had a hyperdrive" you put in the sort of engine you have to work with. The idea that we can all hold hands and share alike while sitting around the fire singing Kumbaya is nothing more than a stupid immature fantasy that has no basis in relatity. People are quasi-ego centric, they care about themselves, their family and their friends. The rest of the world by and large can go hang itself.

Instead of putting the engine into the plane and going "Well, I did my best. Let's hope it doesn't blow up in mid-air and kill 400 people." why don't we just take steps to make a better engine?

Quote
If you think the problem with capitalism is greedy people, you fail entirely to realize that any system that guarantees people an equal result is simply designed to benifet the stupid or the lazy. Why those sort of people should benefit at the expect of the hardworking, the talented or the ingenius is something that will always baffle me about the left. A free market assigns wealth principly on the basis of demand at least on the theoretical level. Its simply wrong headed and ignorant to suggest that all people contribute equally, they don't. A grade three student doing a group work project can figure that out pretty quickly. Benifet should mirror contribution and its never equal.

If by stupid and lazy, you mean those who find the idea of exploiting other human beings deplorable. Capitalism breeds greed and underhanded tactics before hard work and ingenuity. Because it works.

On a seperate note, is Paris Hilton truly talented, hardworking, or ingenius? No- her money should go to someone who needs it.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #48 on: September 09, 2008, 02:32:31 AM »
That's really the problem with a debate per say with most people of a left wing persuasion. Nothing is really about a strictly logical argument it all boils down to some *feeling* you have. Your unhappy with the whole health care system in place because someone you know personally is ill and you were rather they were well. Fair enough your entitled to wishing your friend/loved one was well. On the other hand that really doesn't create any sort of moral obligation for everyone else in your country to shell out for that person's health.

No, but it would be economically beneficial for everyone else in the country to do so, which is the great irony of it. Returning a productive worker to the economy enriches everyone, while trapping them in nonproductive agony does nothing.

It's similar to the reason behind public education - it's a right in the United States and other countries because an educated workforce is economically beneficial to everyone.

Not to say that they aren't horribly mismanaged - both education and health care, but the primary driver of an economy is a productive workforce.

...not to mention, it's absolutely silly. You pay for emergency care anyway, research into odd and new diseases is always beneficial to those who come later. It does not make sense to outright deny care to people.

Quote
Illness and death are an unavoidable part of the human condition. There will always be those with access to better services, better goods and the like its been that way for the entire course of human history. I expect nothing different to transpire tomorrow. Nor even assuming some vast pile of money that could be ploughed into health care could all the illness and suffering even be eliminated. Cancer kills lots of people whatever treatments are administerd, many diseases can be managed but are ultimately fatal. Our current obsession with abnormally prolonging human life is really a futile attempt to stave off the inevitable.

And yet cures for many forms of cancer have already been found, and one of my best friends just survived an episode of a very rare cancer. Alive today because of those who sought treatment before.

And everyone who doesn't, everyone who is forced to wait until it's too late, ends up depriving the world of someone who could have made something.



Please discuss Hitler / the Nazis in the new thread, thanks.

Offline MethosTopic starter

Re: Not another lame lefty thread
« Reply #49 on: September 09, 2008, 02:34:41 AM »
Instead of putting the engine into the plane and going "Well, I did my best. Let's hope it doesn't blow up in mid-air and kill 400 people." why don't we just take steps to make a better engine?

If by stupid and lazy, you mean those who find the idea of exploiting other human beings deplorable. Capitalism breeds greed and underhanded tactics before hard work and ingenuity. Because it works.

On a seperate note, is Paris Hilton truly talented, hardworking, or ingenius? No- her money should go to someone who needs it.

Your missing the point entirely Inerrant - the point being there is no sense wishing for a better engine. People are what they are and fundamentally haven't changed much over the course of thousands of years of human history. They are flawed creatures subject to greed, laziness, brilliance and insanity. Expecting them to be anything more than a mixed bag is simply wide eyed idealism that has no foundation in reality. If that's cynical fine, but cynicism most often closely resembles reality.

For whatever its worth Paris Hilton appears to be masterful at the art of self promotion. If she were truly the brainless idiot that she appears to be I doubt she'd have managed to capitalize on a bit of ameteur pornography to captapult a television and film career. Although I do take the point that I don't consider her to be particularly clever or talented in the conventional sense. On the other hand one of her ancestors clearly was, as he created a worldwide chain of hotels. I'm of a mind that having done so, he had every right to pass on the benifet of his talents and hard work to his family. People have a right to the fruits of their own labours and to pass them on as they see fit, generally to their loved ones.

As for saying capitalism is unfair that's generally the mark of someone whose really not interested in trying to advance their own place in the world and instead wants a handout.