Thread: SO can we just throw the senate and congress out on their asses already?

That is a fact.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

You know what I consider theft? Working 40 hours a week to make some asshole rich who doesn't do shit but sits and bitches about social programs causing an entitlement class.

Someone will always have a disproportionate amount of power and resources. Which is better, a despot who holds those and uses "communism" as an excuse to ration as he sees fit, or an oligarchy who uses crony capitalism to keep as much of it as possible? I don't know the answer, you tell me.

You're not alone in being upset at this; pretty sure Marx wrote a lot about this; the entire history of civilization is class struggle (and a historian would be able to see that and relate very easily.)

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

Someone will always have a disproportionate amount of power and resources. Which is better, a despot who holds those and uses "communism" as an excuse to ration as he sees fit, or an oligarchy who uses crony capitalism to keep as much of it as possible? I don't know the answer, you tell me.

You're not alone in being upset at this; pretty sure Marx wrote a lot about this; the entire history of civilization is class struggle (and a historian would be able to see that and relate very easily.)

You don't need a socialist revolution to fix this problem. I'm saying that ever since the conception of the New Deal people have been working to destroy it and all the social programs it created. I'm saying as this country has become more powerful and more wealthy our private corporations have seen the rewards but our people have fought for every last dime and half of them act like it's supposed to be that way. If power naturally concentrates in the hands of the few then social programs such as public education are completely justified.

And Xei, you just fucked up my claim AGAIN. I would not stop private tutoring. School is required, tutoring is not. People are allowed to learn anything they want and pay whoever they want to learn it but if there's a law saying they have to learn shit in a certain building for 8 hours a day I want our public schools to have a fighting chance at getting funding and we all know money is power so why do we let all the people with money avoid the system? We bust our asses to make that asshole rich in the first place but they can't mix their kid with ours?

I don't recall calling for a socialist revolution... I'm saying Marx was correct in that society IS class struggle. I, personally, don't think you can SOLVE the problem... because we haven't been able to yet. It's one of those things that we have to live with... wealth and power will NEVER be evenly distributed or properly distributed.

Originally Posted by Xei

Tragic. Sweatshop workers making a dollar a day feel your pain.

What exactly is it that you are saying? It's not fair that you have to go to work if you want to live comfortably? You think it's a human right that somebody else should have to work for you? :/

How about it's not fair that people work for multi millionaires or billionaires and earn 10 dollars an hour or whatever the much too low minimum wage is.
Working is probably a good thing. It forces you to not be lazy. But I don't think you can seriously argue that the state we are in now is a good way to go about things.
If you're working ANY job, you should be able to pay for your basic needs (food, water, shelter, electricity). But some people work 2 or 3 jobs to be able to afford this.

As Omnis said "people have fought for every last dime and half of them act like it's supposed to be that way." People have been brainwashed in to thinking it's admirable or
something to basically kill yourself working, just to barely get by.

It's not. It's just fucking sad.

And I'm not against anyone who has built up a huge company. Not at all, I think that's great. Good for them. But I am against people who are greedy as fuck and think that just because they were lucky enough to have made this huge company, that they can say "fuck everybody else, I'm gonna make more money at the expense of the people who actually keep my company running" (the workers).

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

I don't recall calling for a socialist revolution... I'm saying Marx was correct in that society IS class struggle. I, personally, don't think you can SOLVE the problem... because we haven't been able to yet. It's one of those things that we have to live with... wealth and power will NEVER be evenly distributed or properly distributed.

If you think that it won't, it probably won't.

It's funny to see the range of extremism on both sides of the spectrum here. Hard to find common ground with anybody.

Originally Posted by tommo

If you think that it won't, it probably won't.

I'd really like to believe otherwise... but it hasn't worked yet and would take some seriously "good" people to make it work!

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm on the left and I don't want wealth or income to be identical for everybody... I just want everybody to get equal opportunities and access to essential goods and services. Everyone should start on a level playing field, where they end up is not my concern.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

I don't recall calling for a socialist revolution... I'm saying Marx was correct in that society IS class struggle. I, personally, don't think you can SOLVE the problem... because we haven't been able to yet. It's one of those things that we have to live with... wealth and power will NEVER be evenly distributed or properly distributed.

This, to me, is a good justification for more social spending.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

This, to me, is a good justification for more social spending.

Yup. With a deficit of over 1 trillion dollars, we definitely need more spending... 1 trillion is not enough!

In a free market, business owners invest in capital goods which increase productivity, lowering prices and raising real wages (the value of your money goes up) and the standard of living for everyone. We need to get government out of the economy so this can happen, not expand it.

Also, in a free market, "laborers" will have the opportunity to open their own businesses without excessive regulations and requirements; hence at very low cost. What problems arise should be dealt with locally, and not by a central power. In the United States, this would be simple.

For the record, I am not rich. In fact I am usually homeless. I find it amusing that some of you would condone stealing from me at gunpoint, but I have guns too, and will use them if necessary. You only have the rights that you are willing to fight for. Nobody hates laboring for endless hours for nothing more than myself, but the answer is freedom, not more slavery.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

Yup. With a deficit of over 1 trillion dollars, we definitely need more spending... 1 trillion is not enough!

What caused the deficit?

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

What caused the deficit?

I'm going to go with answer A) The spending, of money, money that the government doesn't have. That's usually what causes deficits.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

What caused the deficit?

I always thought you were missing a crucial component of your third grade education.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

I'm going to go with answer A) The spending, of money, money that the government doesn't have. That's usually what causes deficits.

Spending on War and Bail-outs. Not social spending.

This deficit was caused by helping the rich, not the poor.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Spending on War and Bail-outs. Not social spending.

This deficit was caused by helping the rich, not the poor.

I already know you're going to somehow dodge the question, but are we to understand that your contention is that social spending has not significantly increased in the last few years?

I think you should read more about Patrick Henry; the guy you are quoting in your sig.

Originally Posted by cmind

I already know you're going to somehow dodge the question, but are we to understand that your contention is that social spending has not significantly increased in the last few years?

What, specifically, are you referring to? I see spending increase in ways that have helped the richest americans shield themselves from the recession. I've seen military spending helping to centralize energy and food into the hands of the few.

I have not seen veteran's benefits raised once since Obama took office. I watched Obama kill the health care bill. I watched the media pick apart social security based on a myth. But the worst victim of all has been our education system.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Spending on War and Bail-outs. Not social spending.

This deficit was caused by helping the rich, not the poor.

But then what about the fact that the OTHER half of the budget is Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which are all ballooning out of proportion?

Even if we ended our wars, we'd STILL have a deficit from social programs.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

And Xei, you just fucked up my claim AGAIN. I would not stop private tutoring. School is required, tutoring is not. People are allowed to learn anything they want and pay whoever they want to learn it but if there's a law saying they have to learn shit in a certain building for 8 hours a day I want our public schools to have a fighting chance at getting funding and we all know money is power so why do we let all the people with money avoid the system? We bust our asses to make that asshole rich in the first place but they can't mix their kid with ours?

I don't get how you find 'people are allowed to learn anything they want and pay whoever they want to learn it' compatible with 'ban private schools'. Private schools are just conglomerations of private tutors. If I were the sole source of education to a kid, I would be a private school.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm on the left and I don't want wealth or income to be identical for everybody... I just want everybody to get equal opportunities and access to essential goods and services. Everyone should start on a level playing field, where they end up is not my concern.

Don't know how this could be achieved. It'd mean zero inheritance. In fact it would mean zero private property; a child born parents with lots of material wealth won't have identical opportunities as one born to parents with less material wealth.

Originally Posted by tommo

How about it's not fair that people work for multi millionaires or billionaires and earn 10 dollars an hour or whatever the much too low minimum wage is.
Working is probably a good thing. It forces you to not be lazy. But I don't think you can seriously argue that the state we are in now is a good way to go about things.
If you're working ANY job, you should be able to pay for your basic needs (food, water, shelter, electricity). But some people work 2 or 3 jobs to be able to afford this.

You shouldn't have to work to pay for basic needs.

And I'm not against anyone who has built up a huge company. Not at all, I think that's great. Good for them. But I am against people who are greedy as fuck and think that just because they were lucky enough to have made this huge company, that they can say "fuck everybody else, I'm gonna make more money at the expense of the people who actually keep my company running" (the workers).

If the workers feel like they're not getting paid enough, they can form a union and strike.

If other members of the public are happy with the wage, they can take the place of those workers.

What needs to change here?

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm on the left and I don't want wealth or income to be identical for everybody... I just want everybody to get equal opportunities and access to essential goods and services. Everyone should start on a level playing field, where they end up is not my concern.

I can actually agree with this. If something like the Venus project were not possible for some reason. (No arguments about the merits and downfalls of it, please).
But, why don't you want people to stay equal? You want them to start of equal and let chance and genes determine their fate?

Originally Posted by tommo

But, why don't you want people to stay equal?

Short answer: no incentive to DO anything.

You need to define 'equal'. As far as I can tell the most sensible definition is 'equal opportunities'. If you work hard to take those opportunities, it would not be right to take negative action so as to maintain superficial 'equality', would it?

Originally Posted by Xei

You shouldn't have to work to pay for basic needs.

Oh wow, now you're talking sense!

Originally Posted by Xei

If the workers feel like they're not getting paid enough, they can form a union and strike.

If other members of the public are happy with the wage, they can take the place of those workers.

I was thinking this same thing yesterday, but I quickly realised the unworkability of it.
There's always someone desperate enough to take whatever you want to pay them.
Immigrants routinely work for less than minimum wage, a lot less.
Some people will suck your dick for 5 bucks.
There's always someone desperate enough.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I watched Obama kill the health care bill.

Obama????...... Obama killed it!????
Obama introduced it, everyone else killed it.
What planet do you live on?