Are democrats really better than conservatives?

[theeedude]

According Trumpists, everyone is equally bad, anti-fascists and neo-nazis. Civil rights and Jim Crow. Remember, these are party of so called personal responsibility that loves lecturing others about moral relativism.

 

[pmv]

According Trumpists, everyone is equally bad, anti-fascists and neo-nazis. Civil rights and Jim Crow. Remember, these are party of so called personal responsibility that loves lecturing others about moral relativism.

It does seem that those who are most opposed to any sort of moral relativism based on geography or culture, are often the most determined defenders of the idea if the difference is about time rather than space.

 

[Zaap]

Right now in America if you want to have wealth that has real value you need to stop trying to create anything and start looking for ways to take it from those that do. There is almost no way to generate wealth through work anymore and that is the problem.

But real MEANINGFUL wealth (the kind of wealth that allows you to buy the political system of an entire country and thwart the will of your citizens) usually comes about when you strip the humanity from the people around you.

Let's take it at face value that "wealth" really were ONLY the gloom and doom you two just mentioned. (It's part of it- the shaky dark side I mentioned, but by no means ALL of it- that's going a bit overboard to say the least)...

... then how EVEN MORE ridiculous is the idea that anyone is going to 'redistribute' what's actually nothing more than greed and large scale fraud??

It illustrates my point in even starker contrast.

In 1929 when masses of people did a run on the banks, they discovered that their money WASN'T actually sitting around in vast Uncle Scrooge piles. The curtain as it were, was pulled back and they discovered the hard way... their money.. everyone else's money WASN'T actually there. The banks failed, markets crashed, businesses went under, all the shady schemes exploded...

People didn't get utopia. They got bread lines, shanty towns, and years of misery.

The imagination that doing the biggest "run on the banks" of all time in some ridiculous 'redistribution' scheme actually put to life wouldn't achieve an explosive, collapsing effect orders of magnitude worse (b-but our intentions are sooooo goood!) is such an obvious stretch.

It just amazes me why people sometimes present these fantasy "what-ifs" about it- not only like it would ever somehow be possible but that even in an alternate universe where it would be, wouldn't actually just cause massive ruin, not utopia.

No one would be paying their fucking mortgages.... they'd be losing their homes in droves and WISHING for breadlines.

 

[jmagg]

Income redistribution is a dumb figment of the imagination, although I would like to see mnuchin living under a bridge. My figment.

 

[SMOGZINN]

... then how EVEN MORE ridiculous is the idea that anyone is going to 'redistribute' what's actually nothing more than greed and large scale fraud??

You keep trying to make wealth = money, but that is not what we are talking about. Most of us know that you can't just hand a million dollars to everyone and expect it to buy a good lifestyle.

We are talking about Wealth = opportunity. That is what needs to be redistributed. Opportunity is what has been stolen and need to be returned to the common people. There are a number of ways to do this, giving value back to labor is one way, a universal income can also help by allowing people to have time to develop skills, removing barriers to education is another.

 

[Jhhnn]

Income redistribution is a dumb figment of the imagination, although I would like to see mnuchin living under a bridge. My figment.

Happens all the time. We once had more effective ways of accomplishing it, New Deal ways, but those went out the window with Reagan, trickle down economics & technological advancement.

 

[Jhhnn]

You keep trying to make wealth = money, but that is not what we are talking about. Most of us know that you can't just hand a million dollars to everyone and expect it to buy a good lifestyle.

We are talking about Wealth = opportunity. That is what needs to be redistributed. Opportunity is what has been stolen and need to be returned to the common people. There are a number of ways to do this, giving value back to labor is one way, a universal income can also help by allowing people to have time to develop skills, removing barriers to education is another.

Wealth is ownership. Wealth is positive net worth vs life on the installment plan. Wealth is the ability to weather economic storms beyond the control of the individual.

When wealth is extremely concentrated, it becomes the ability to create economic storms & to profit from them.

 

[jmagg]

Happens all the time. We once had more effective ways of accomplishing it, New Deal ways, but those went out the window with Reagan, trickle down economics & technological advancement.

The way I see it, is that a fraction of every cent "trickles up" to to the very top. The trickle down in theory is supposed to be offset with import tax and outsource penalties. His words.

 

[Jhhnn]

The way I see it, is that a fraction of every cent "trickles up" to to the very top. The trickle down in theory is supposed to be offset with import tax and outsource penalties. His words.

Import taxes aren't redistributional but rather regressive. Outsourcing penalties won't slow automation one teensy little bit.

 

[jmagg]

Import taxes aren't redistributional but rather regressive. Outsourcing penalties won't slow automation one teensy little bit.

I suppose a redistributing robot tax may work. moonbeam(?)

 

[Jhhnn]

I suppose a redistributing robot tax may work. moonbeam(?)

Do it the simple way by making federal income taxes a lot more progressive.

 

[jmagg]

The fox has been guarding the hen house for a long while. (Can't say both sides both sides pander to the elites because nazi.)

 

[agent00f]

What, "dumb Democrats" are the ones wanting to make people's lives better? What a paragon of enlightenment you are...
Are you sure you wouldn't feel more comfortable in the Trump administration? I mean, if haters gonna hate... you'd be in good company.

They can start by winning elections instead of getting played by degenerates.

He said we could have won & you injected your usual projection of domestic racist motives. You fail to show that the defense industry follows racist HR practices.

You know just as well as anyone where rural bases and factories are located, and why politicians choose to fund such endeavors far better than means-tested welfare. Of course you can also play dumb like the best of them.

 

[Jhhnn]

They can start by winning elections instead of getting played by degenerates.



You know just as well as anyone where rural bases and factories are located, and why politicians choose to fund such endeavors far better than means-tested welfare. Of course you can also play dumb like the best of them.

Scurrilous attribution & innuendo, as usual. You can't show that either the defense industry or the military is racist in their hiring practices. Govt contractors are routinely held to higher standards than private industry-

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/hiring/affirmativeact

 

[agent00f]

Scurrilous attribution & innuendo, as usual. You can't show that either the defense industry or the military is racist in their hiring practices. Govt contractors are routinely held to higher standards than private industry-

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/hiring/affirmativeact

Would you say you're better at comprehending simple english than the buckshots? Because even they understand what's being said.

 

[Jhhnn]

Would you say you're better at comprehending simple english than the buckshots? Because even they understand what's being said.

I understand it completely. It's bullshit. St Louis & St Louis county aren't exactly white, for example, but that's where Boeing does a lot of their defense work-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Defense,_Space_&_Security

 

[pmv]

I understand it completely. It's bullshit. St Louis & St Louis county aren't exactly white, for example, but that's where Boeing does a lot of their defense work-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Defense,_Space_&_Security

I don't know which of you is right, sans actual solid statistics. My google skills failed me, but it has to be something someone has looked at rigorously - does employment related to defense spending benefit disproportionately areas inhabited disproportionately by white people? Surely that has to be something that can be quantified and answered 'yes' or 'no'?

(It sounds entirely plausible as a claim, but would be in any case interesting to know how strong the effect is)

 

[ivwshane]

I don't know which of you is right, sans actual solid statistics. My google skills failed me, but it has to be something someone has looked at rigorously - does employment related to defense spending benefit disproportionately areas inhabited disproportionately by white people? Surely that has to be something that can be quantified and answered 'yes' or 'no'?

(It sounds entirely plausible as a claim, but would be in any case interesting to know how strong the effect is)

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-m...f-female-members-the-marines-had-the-lowest-6

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...e-u-s-military-and-its-changing-demographics/

 

[pmv]

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-m...f-female-members-the-marines-had-the-lowest-6

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...e-u-s-military-and-its-changing-demographics/

Good start, though that seems to be only about people actually _in_ military service. I was also wondering about who works in armaments factories and associated tech, and aerospace and the like, where a great deal of the money goes. I would assume that's what agent00f is referring to.

I suppose what proportion of the money goes to paying actual military personnel vs what goes to certain tech industries is another question I don't know the answer to.

Edit - my instinct is the answer to the whole argument between agent00f and jhhn is 'somewhere in-between the two'. But I've come to realise I really don't know enough about the whole topic, and at least some of it could be clarified with actual data.

 

[Jhhnn]

I don't know which of you is right, sans actual solid statistics. My google skills failed me, but it has to be something someone has looked at rigorously - does employment related to defense spending benefit disproportionately areas inhabited disproportionately by white people? Surely that has to be something that can be quantified and answered 'yes' or 'no'?

(It sounds entirely plausible as a claim, but would be in any case interesting to know how strong the effect is)

It's agent's accusation & his obligation to back it up. He failed. Simple enough, isn't it?

 

[pmv]

It's agent's accusation & his obligation to back it up. He failed. Simple enough, isn't it?

Well, I don't mind which of you does. Or if I could succeed in finding more information myself. I'm just trying to figure out what I think about it. It just makes me aware of the gaps in my understanding of US poltiics in particular.

I am aware it's very naive of me to think it's a pity that this particular argument is so polarised. But there are plenty of others on this forum who seem far more clearly 'the enemy' to me than either side of this one.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well, I don't mind which of you does. Or if I could succeed in finding more information myself. I'm just trying to figure out what I think about it. It just makes me aware of the gaps in my understanding of US poltiics in particular.

I am aware it's very naive of me to think it's a pity that this particular argument is so polarised. But there are plenty of others on this forum who seem far more clearly 'the enemy' to me than either side of this one.

What you need to understand about US politics is that way too many people believe in & promulgate inflammatory crap accusations for which they have no proof whatsoever. Agent's claim of white welfare is just that, utter crapola.

You can figure it out for yourself rather easily. Start here-

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-...erica-2016-5/#1-lockheed-martin-corporation-1

Then go to their respective websites, establish the location of their facilities. Lockheed Martin is a great example. Metro Atlanta isn't exactly White, and neither are Metro Denver or Baltimore.

Agent is just playing his divisive "racist degens!" routine for all it's worth.

 

[agent00f]

I understand it completely. It's bullshit. St Louis & St Louis county aren't exactly white, for example, but that's where Boeing does a lot of their defense work-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Defense,_Space_&_Security

So why were you going on about racism in military enrollment, as could be expected from buckshot? Are you now going to list everything anything defense related that isn't out in the sticks as if that proves anything?

I don't know which of you is right, sans actual solid statistics. My google skills failed me, but it has to be something someone has looked at rigorously - does employment related to defense spending benefit disproportionately areas inhabited disproportionately by white people? Surely that has to be something that can be quantified and answered 'yes' or 'no'?

(It sounds entirely plausible as a claim, but would be in any case interesting to know how strong the effect is)

Giant defense programs, eg trillion(s) spent on the f35, are well known to be spread across the country in such a way as to make congressional votes against them political suicide, including mostly-white flyover states which would otherwise be less than desirable locations. The vast majority of defense related facilities are in rural or at least non-metro areas, arguably for good reason, but the point is they're not exactly in the inner city where much of the ethnic poor are. Contrast that to the relative paucity of actual means-based welfare spending which more naturally benefits actual poors, who are disproportionately non-white, and it's impossible to argue the difference in ethnicity of recipients.

The fact is the US chooses to spend a shit-ton more on these rather good make-work jobs (to ultimately bomb expendable brown folks overseas) which go towards a different crowd than the actual poor, and that's hardly a coincidence. It's up to the reader to decide why people like Jhhnn make it their mission to deny this as much as trumpsters deny dear leader panders to racists.

 

[agent00f]

What you need to understand about US politics is that way too many people believe in & promulgate inflammatory crap accusations for which they have no proof whatsoever. Agent's claim of white welfare is just that, utter crapola.

You can figure it out for yourself rather easily. Start here-

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-...erica-2016-5/#1-lockheed-martin-corporation-1

Then go to their respective websites, establish the location of their facilities. Lockheed Martin is a great example. Metro Atlanta isn't exactly White, and neither are Metro Denver or Baltimore.

Agent is just playing his divisive "racist degens!" routine for all it's worth.

It's easy enough to find maps of defense related facilities, eg:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure...litary-Treatment-Facilities-providing-data-to

Jhhnn knows where good white welfare goes in contrast to shitty brown welfare, as well as buckshot knows the difference between biological evolution and shilling for the good book

 

[Jhhnn]

So why were you going on about racism in military enrollment, as could be expected from buckshot? Are you now going to list everything anything defense related that isn't out in the sticks as if that proves anything?



Giant defense programs, eg trillion(s) spent on the f35, are well known to be spread across the country in such a way as to make congressional votes against them political suicide, including mostly-white flyover states which would otherwise be less than desirable locations. The vast majority of defense related facilities are in rural or at least non-metro areas, arguably for good reason, but the point is they're not exactly in the inner city where much of the ethnic poor are. Contrast that to the relative paucity of actual means-based welfare spending which more naturally benefits actual poors, who are disproportionately non-white, and it's impossible to argue the difference in ethnicity of recipients.

The fact is the US chooses to spend a shit-ton more on these rather good make-work jobs (to ultimately bomb expendable brown folks overseas) which go towards a different crowd than the actual poor, and that's hardly a coincidence. It's up to the reader to decide why people like Jhhnn make it their mission to deny this as much as trumpsters deny dear leader panders to racists.

In no way does that support your assertion that defense spending is white welfare. Well, other than you doubling down on assertions you fail to prove.

While I generally agree that our defense spending does not address the needs of the people the assertion that contracting is racist by design doesn't pass the sniff test no matter how many times you repeat it.

Beyond that, all states other than DC & Hawaii are majority White with Mississippi, Georgia & Maryland being the least White.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States#Race_and_ethnicity