World Politics

Page 414 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Feb 16, 2011
1,456
5
0
More old tricks.

Some people have a mortgage on good and rightful thought and action.

Everyone else is just an agitator, a punky dilletante.

If you can't 'win' the argument (to the degree they're there to be won at all), it must be because your interlocuter isn't following the rules.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
""First, let me make it plain that I did in fact see Wolf Blitzer's question and heard the full response. The question was clearly framed for deniability: "Oh, we weren't talking about those who can't afford health insurance, but only those who chose not to buy it.". Nonsense. We all know that this 30 year old, financially secure, healthy man would not refuse insurance at the bargain basement price mentioned. These are not the 49 million Americans without health insurance.

This was all about the ongoing war on the working poor. I, for one, am refusing to allow this sham to continue with my silence. We know who you were talking about Wolff Blitzer, we know who you meant when you yelled out Let him die"""

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/13/1016557/-That-was-my-brothers-death-you-were-cheering,-you-a$-Updated?via=siderec
 
Jul 28, 2009
333
0
0
Who says the american economy is not vibrant? Internationally more wealth is flowing to wealthy pockets from abroad than ever before. Investment controls the policies of foreign goversments and the US is completely unopposed in any action it decides to take, or any region of the world it decides to meddle with, with her 800+ military bases around the world. New conquered territories and populations that are ripe for private contractors to exploit and extreme protectionist policies like NAFTA, which should be renamed ICFM (Imperial Capital Flow Mandate, an infinitely more accurate name) do what they were designed to do from day one.

A brainwashed educated class and a braindead uneducated class. I don't think there's ever been a better time in history to be a wealthy north american.

"The poor complain
They always will
But that's just idle chatter
Our system brings rewards to all
At least to all who matter"

Gerry Helleiner (Professor Emeritus, Department of Economics, University of Toronto)
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
"""Who pays if a person doesn't have health insurance?

Many times, no one pays.

I recall when first I heard an old friend Linda had cancer. I'd lost touch for some years after she and her husband Bob divorced, but knew she had a decent job at a local rubber injection mold plant. She was doing alright holding her head above water for several years as she struggled to raise her two young sons.

The sad news that she had been on sick leave came to me when I heard the plant was shutting down and laying off the entire work force. I found that while she was on sick leave she was keeping the cancer at bay with regular chemo treatments, but when the factory closed she lost her health insurance. Faced with both a health and money crisis at the same time, she discovered that no insurance company would take on her problems. Linda had a terminal pre-existing condition that no company would touch.

Faced with the weighty decision to sell her home and continue the treatments that were at best just keeping her alive, she expressed concern that her illness would take from her sons the very things she worked all her 40 years to obtain. That may have been the depressive feelings of someone who felt she had been herded into a cul-de-sac of hopelessness, but she made what she felt was her only choice. Linda gave up and let the cancer win the fight.

It's been two years now since she left us and the two young teenage boys who loved her so, but while watching the debate a couple nights ago I wish the Republicans had a phone number for all those groups that love to take over when someone has no insurance. I wish Ron Paul had talked to her about personal responsibility and the risks she took when her insurance ran out.""

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1939366
 
Feb 16, 2011
1,456
5
0
redtreviso said:
"""Who pays if a person doesn't have health insurance?

Many times, no one pays.

I recall when first I heard an old friend Linda had cancer. I'd lost touch for some years after she and her husband Bob divorced, but knew she had a decent job at a local rubber injection mold plant. She was doing alright holding her head above water for several years as she struggled to raise her two young sons.

The sad news that she had been on sick leave came to me when I heard the plant was shutting down and laying off the entire work force. I found that while she was on sick leave she was keeping the cancer at bay with regular chemo treatments, but when the factory closed she lost her health insurance. Faced with both a health and money crisis at the same time, she discovered that no insurance company would take on her problems. Linda had a terminal pre-existing condition that no company would touch.

Faced with the weighty decision to sell her home and continue the treatments that were at best just keeping her alive, she expressed concern that her illness would take from her sons the very things she worked all her 40 years to obtain. That may have been the depressive feelings of someone who felt she had been herded into a cul-de-sac of hopelessness, but she made what she felt was her only choice. Linda gave up and let the cancer win the fight.

It's been two years now since she left us and the two young teenage boys who loved her so, but while watching the debate a couple nights ago I wish the Republicans had a phone number for all those groups that love to take over when someone has no insurance. I wish Ron Paul had talked to her about personal responsibility and the risks she took when her insurance ran out.""

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1939366

A believable, unsurprising and therefore heartbreaking story. Issues like this were examined in an excellent, recent novel by Lionel Shriver. Highly recommended

http://www.amazon.com/So-Much-That-Lionel-Shriver/dp/0061458589
 
Stingray34 said:
Scott is a typical idealogue; everything fits together in an idealised, but patently error-prone, system. A type of anti-state fetishism.

Health care is only expensive because the underserving poor refuse to pay their way.

The poor only exist because there's too much big-government that's stifling free-trade.

Fairness is secondary to opportunity.

The huge rewards to executives are an inducement for men of such talent; without them, there's no motivation to get off one's arse.

And on and on...

He's seduced by a b'stardised version of Smith's, 'The Wealth of Nations,' the same man who wrote extensively on moral sentiments that's anathema to what's claimed in his name today.

It's also patently self-congratulatory: I'm a self-made man, if you can't do it, it's because you don't have any talent or grit. There is no such thing as life-crushing disappointments in Scott's world.

He's the John Wayne of brewers, hair-piece and all.

But whatever: God made him this way. The worldviews of all of us are fixed.

Yes but between Stalin and Jay Gould, there must be a happy middle ground.
 
Feb 16, 2011
1,456
5
0
cromagnon said:
Who says the american economy is not vibrant? Internationally more wealth is flowing to wealthy pockets from abroad than ever before. Investment controls the policies of foreign goversments and the US is completely unopposed in any action it decides to take, or any region of the world it decides to meddle with, with her 800+ military bases around the world. New conquered territories and populations that are ripe for private contractors to exploit and extreme protectionist policies like NAFTA, which should be renamed ICFM (Imperial Capital Flow Mandate, an infinitely more accurate name) do what they were designed to do from day one.

A brainwashed educated class and a braindead uneducated class. I don't think there's ever been a better time in history to be a wealthy north american.

"The poor complain
They always will
But that's just idle chatter
Our system brings rewards to all
At least to all who matter"

Gerry Helleiner (Professor Emeritus, Department of Economics, University of Toronto)

Also reminds me of a quotation by J.K. Galbraith: The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Stingray34 said:
Also reminds me of a quotation by J.K. Galbraith: The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

Ayn Rand is the author of their bible.. modern conservative="I deserve my disregard of others"
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
"""The Texas governor offered a candid description of a time when he “wrestled with God,” saying that at age 27 after serving as an officer in the Air Force he felt “lost spiritually and emotionally… and I didn’t know how to fix it.”

“My faith journey is not the story of someone who turned to God because I wanted to,” he said. “It was because I had nowhere else to turn.”""

Sounds like someone is setting the stage for the "youthful indiscretion" defense
 
May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
rhubroma said:
....

Your cynical remark, callous as it was, actually strikes upon a current trend in human reproduction: namely, those with less education and less wealth make more babies, by contrast the more instructed and financially affluent socities have become signifies seeing their offspring diminish, in some cases precipitously.

In other words those who could afford more children are having less, while, vice versa, those of less economic means, if not to say the abject poor, are reproducing in significantly greater quantities. This in itself means that the world is literally becoming poorer in the sheer quantitative analysis.

All of which suggests to me simply that if we invest in the poor and provide them with an opportunity to have better wages and schools, then the demographic problem, which is perhaps the greatest problem for civilization and nature of them all, will auto-correct itself.

I fear, however, that the neo-liberal capitalist regime that is currently in effect, for which even in post-Mao China and post-colonial India the population levels continue to rise, means that none of this will happen any time soon.

LOL. I gotta hand it to you rhubarb....just when I think you couldn't crack me up any more you outdo yourself.

Yes, if we just give the stupid some opportunities to exceed, they will start using condoms. Their stupidity will go away like a fart in the wind if somebody would give them the opportunity to obtain an engineering degree. Wait, something doesn't add up there. :rolleyes:

I could imagine if I was unemployed with no health insurance, the first thing I would want to do is go out and get somebody pregnant lol. And, only if those public schools were better. Ooops, I went to public schooling and mixed in a few condoms and other birth control before I was ready to have children, so there goes that red herring. Maybe it is because I am not a farking idiot.

Face it rhubarb. Some people are just stupid, and it is no coincidence that stupid people that don't have jobs keep having kids they have no business having.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Just think of the gasoline and groceries it will take for this brood and the brood of this brood to have christmas together..

duggars.png
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
ChrisE said:
LOL. I gotta hand it to you rhubarb....just when I think you couldn't crack me up any more you outdo yourself.

Yes, if we just give the stupid some opportunities to exceed, they will start using condoms. Their stupidity will go away like a fart in the wind if somebody would give them the opportunity to obtain an engineering degree. Wait, something doesn't add up there. :rolleyes:

I could imagine if I was unemployed with no health insurance, the first thing I would want to do is go out and get somebody pregnant lol. And, only if those public schools were better. Ooops, I went to public schooling and mixed in a few condoms and other birth control before I was ready to have children, so there goes that red herring. Maybe it is because I am not a farking idiot.

Face it rhubarb. Some people are just stupid, and it is no coincidence that stupid people that don't have jobs keep having kids they have no business having.

I'm confused. If I make more money and therefore have fewer children, is it because I am more responsible or is it because I **** less? It doesn't seem like much of a bargain if I **** less. I don't mind being responsible, but I don't want to **** less, if anything I want to **** more. And if it's because I **** less, is it because my interest level is lower, or is it a performance issue? I'm looking at a 40% increase in revenues this year and now I'm worried.
 
Jun 9, 2011
177
0
0
redtreviso said:
Just think of the gasoline and groceries it will take for this brood and the brood of this brood to have christmas together..

duggars.png

And the insane part is that this photo was taken four births ago. :eek:
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
patricknd said:
I'm confused. If I make more money and therefore have fewer children, is it because I am more responsible or is it because I **** less? It doesn't seem like much of a bargain if I **** less. I don't mind being responsible, but I don't want to **** less, if anything I want to **** more. And if it's because I **** less, is it because my interest level is lower, or is it a performance issue? I'm looking at a 40% increase in revenues this year and now I'm worried.

Typical republican.. children are proof that you **** a lot.. or at all..
"I don't really like show tunes---look I have children""
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
redtreviso said:
Typical republican.. children are proof that you **** a lot.. or at all..
"I don't really like show tunes---look I have children""

Children certainly aren't proof of celibacy, or do you not understand the process? :D
 
ChrisE said:
LOL. I gotta hand it to you rhubarb....just when I think you couldn't crack me up any more you outdo yourself.

Yes, if we just give the stupid some opportunities to exceed, they will start using condoms. Their stupidity will go away like a fart in the wind if somebody would give them the opportunity to obtain an engineering degree. Wait, something doesn't add up there. :rolleyes:

I could imagine if I was unemployed with no health insurance, the first thing I would want to do is go out and get somebody pregnant lol. And, only if those public schools were better. Ooops, I went to public schooling and mixed in a few condoms and other birth control before I was ready to have children, so there goes that red herring. Maybe it is because I am not a farking idiot.

Face it rhubarb. Some people are just stupid, and it is no coincidence that stupid people that don't have jobs keep having kids they have no business having.

I didn't say I knew how spreading the wealth and education is to be done, or that it even can be done (certainly not in our system, as Scott knows all too well), but all the evidence suggests that birthrates often drop off under certain economic and educational conditions. Conditions, which, however, don't exist throughout the pre-industrial cultures or in the ghettos.

Which means none of this has to do with intelligence or a lack there of, but environment and culture. My argument was that if these things were to change, even though I am under no illusions about it and am of course only speaking hypothetically, if thus a similar set of circumstances were to be found among the many peoples who are still living much more in a state of nature than we are, then perhaps similar behavior patterns would develop.

The problem is that the lessons of Western colonialism and imperialism have only demonstrated that no such change would ever have been afforded by anything we brought or did, the dramatic consequences of which for the people of the ex-colonies are still terribly real. If anything we made the living conditions decidedly worse and, at the same time, annihilated the ethos of the indigenous cultures, while hypocritically claiming to have saved them from their heathen ways by bringing them the true religion and providing them with an infinitely superior civilization, when in fact it was all just about profit and exploitation. The racism alone is evidence of this fact. Consequently we need new models and paradigms, both internally in our world and externally in theirs, if any such population equilibrium is to be reached. Instead what we get is the same greedy and rapacious world of the strong exercising prepotency over the weak as always.

This is why I can not subscribe to your rather acrimonious and misguided view, because we are much more at fault for the deplorable living conditions of those who don't have much access to anything else besides reproduction, I've thought.
 
Mar 11, 2009
10,526
3,856
28,180
LOL! Everyone in America should see that movie. At least with those over the IQ of about 80. Those less than that may confuse it fora Nova episode. :D
 
redtreviso said:
who brought children into this thread anyway??

http://youtu.be/BXRjmyJFzrU


Yep, and it's only gonna get worse under the current regime, with the public education system the way it is and the obscurantism and backwardness that reigns supreme over the provincial hell of rural, redneck, Bible Belt, Wall Mart-shoppin America.

Thus Africa isn't the only continent were a primitive way of life exists, but at least theirs is a natural primitivism of the type found in the savanna, whereas the primitivism of our so called progressive world was ruthlessly constructed by liberal capitalism under the aegis of government and, as such, is depravity personified. It is the result of no less than a state sponsored and orchestrated program to dismantle social well-being and collective awareness, in the name of an anti-revolutionary cause, in all things but the country's hyper-materialism. And it has led to the appalling underdeveloped and cretinous, if not outright cromagnon, mental existence of such people, who are quite numerous and have dragged the stunning economic performance over the century down into the mire.

Kinda reminds me of a David Foster Wallace novel wrapped-up in the Darwin Awards.

It also demonstrates that a well being that is exclusively conceptualized within the capitalist framework that says if everyone is simply given greater access to buy more things at the market, then a better world is inevitably achieved, when all that really takes place is the middle and lower class becoming further debased and craven. Some believe that the quantitative gains the US model has fostered over the past century, the result of a rapacious industrial expansion overseas and a technological revolution at home, has merely resulted in a precipitous decline in the qualitative state of the citizenry as far as democracy goes. Unfortunately it is happening to a degree throughout the entire Western World.

That there is just more crapola on the commercial market to stuff and feed an increasingly bloated, less well instructed and underpaid population on is naturally scandalous, never mind how that consumer market and developing economy was actually built at home through the credit enslavement of the working class, or overseas through wars, the financing of dictators and contras militants to support US interests. All of which means that conservatives like Scott haven't learned a damn thing from the lessons of the past century, because it is a history only properly told, if we aren't to be hypocritical, through the eyes of the weak and exploited that is in no way congenial to his triumphalist unfettered business enterprise rhetoric. For him it is the only salvation, perhaps of the few, but it has meant the repression and further impoverishment (both materially and spiritually) of much more of humanity than it has benefited.

Economic growth is not the answer to the problems of our world, it is the problem. Education, culture, social awareness, the magnanimity of the privileged, and at least a modicum of reasonable collectivism, and not the savage individualism that prevails, will be much more useful to the future of humanity than the folly and madness of eternal growth at the markets. Rich markets can't eternally grow if poor ones don't eternally exist in their misery. Adams already stated as much 200 years or so ago. Making the markets we have run more ethically and with more principle is the way to go and in some cases actually decreasing them.

But the world in control is addicted to this state of affairs and probably can't live without it. Like the recidivism of the drug addict.

PS: In America under the sway of neo-liberalism and conservatism, there is no larger good than your own good and happiness. Kids are even taught this, that the most important thing is what you want, what's most important are your desires and that the job in life is to gratify them. This is an ideology there that's perpetrated by television advertisement and entertainment. The economy thrives on it. This is what is meant by liberty and freedom, but it is in reality enslaving the nation and, by proxy basis, all who come under its globalizing influence. Revolutionary socialism may have not succeeded, thought what has replaced it is far worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.