|
|
| Post Number: 31
|
Darth Liberus 
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
 |
Posted on: Jul. 03 2002,01:10 |
|
   |
::sigh::
you're right. the Industrial Revolution was a roaring great time for everyone.
idiot.
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 32
|
demonk
The other white meat
Group: Members
Posts: 800
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 03 2002,01:16 |
|
 |
| Quote (CatKnight @ 02 July 2002,16:22) | | lol are you comparing the industrial age to the information age and with perfect 20-20 hindsight saying "wow things really sucked back then!" ? |
<sarcasim>Ya CK, that's exactly what he is doing. He is comparing two drasticly different time periods and saying that since one isn't like the other, one of them must have sucked.</sarcasim>
He is saying exactly what every historian has been saying for 50 years. Things were very hard back then, but they weren't hard because of lack of reasources or because of other factors outside of human control. Things were bad BECAUSE of humans and the decisions they made. Come on CK, how can you seriously expect us to think that your uneducated views are better than the collective brain power of a generation or two of educated historians?
--------------
I'm just two people short of a threesome!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 33
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 03 2002,01:29 |
|
|
"what say you, my Lords, to a continuity of toil, in a standing posture, in a poisonous atmosphere, during 13 hours, with 15 minutes of rest?"
Historians have said it sucked for a lot longer than 50 years. They've been saying it ever since it happened.
Here are just a few primary sources:
The Peterloo Massacre
Women Miners in the Coal Pits
The Life of the Industrial Worker in Ninteenth-Century England
Lowell Mill Girls
Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844
Charles Dickens, Hard Times
Edited by Darth Liberus on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 34
|
Wiley
©0®ÞØ®4+3 whØ®3
Group: Members
Posts: 1268
Joined: Oct. 2001
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 03 2002,04:06 |
|
|
| Quote (BlackFlag @ 02 July 2002,16:47) | | I used to listen to Rush religiously. ...He doesn't claim to be unbiased. He just claims to be informative. |
Yes, I can sleep so much better knowing that he thinks Euro-Feminists do things with phallic shaped fruit.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 35
|
Pravus Angelus
Codito Ergo Sum
Group: Members
Posts: 81
Joined: May 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 04 2002,23:06 |
|
|
| Quote | | /me resists urge to smack this troll into next week. must... keep... thread... on... topic... |
okay. DSL I think you need to calm down before you read wix's post. Just because you don't like that he's disagreeing with you doesn't a) make him a troll or b) mean that he's insulting you. Did it ever occur to you that just maybe this sort of knee-jerk defensive reaction is the kind of thing that starts flame wars?
You kinda missed at least two key points he was making there, one with regards to inherent government inefficiency and one with regards to the cause of the 16th amendment.
First, on gov. inefficiency. The private secter, in an open economic environment (think about this before you reply, b/c I know you're gonna ignore it...), typically performs far better than the government program would. The DMV would be run a lot better if it's administration were simply outsourced (the same way the gov. builds stuff..., you just define a set of requirements and hand out to the lowest bidder). The free market environment works, it really does. Government beurocracies fail because of a series of problems, largely due to a lack of competition, but also because of a serious lack of accountability. There are very few areas of the government were you would really want that much redundant control that beurocracy creates, but some exist (such as the military).
| Quote | You also seem to miss the point of the Government when you talk about services. I don't get good service at the DMV because the DMV is a monopoly, run by the government. If I complain, no one cares, because JOB SECURITY and ECONOMIC SECTOR CONTROL. If I don't like the DMV, or the IRS, too bad. If I don't like welfare, I can't just pull my money out of the system (like I could with private charities). Hence the republican's trying to make things open to competiton. I'm talking about positive competion-- not fraud and deception (clearly the government has the right to stop this ) Why can't the government just stick to stopping fraud, since you even say bussiness is good unless it degrades into these things. Personally, I'd rather have my shitty HMO than a government healthcare program run like the DMV.
|
This is an excellent argument that you never respond to. Dude, simply dismissing someone's post as "trolling" when they present real arguments to your position really kills your credibility (adios ethos).
Look, what's wrong with a loose, central regulatory government that does some checks on things like fraud, and then letting the free market, with it's profit-driven competition and accountability, drive the economy. The free market is evolutionary, and if you let people get hurt the process works. Let people (and businesses) make bad decisions. Over time, people will learn not to make the same mistakes..., competition drives out the weaker producer and in the end the group (nation) benefits. Babysitting small interests for the sake of politics is exactly how you screw things up (and btw, conservatives do this too...., thank Bush for steel tarrifs that give the American steel industry an incentive not to improve).
You don't need to worry about jobs leaving the country. You really don't. The jobs that leave the country are low-skill blue collar jobs, and over time you force the citizens of your nation to simply adapt. America provides an environment where you are able to do this, and so you move people into higher skill jobs (other nations, fortunately, are less able to do this and so you protect your high-skill jobs). In fact, the environment is so favorable, that we draw in a great many high-skilled foreign workers that drains other nations pool of workers. It's more significant tho', because we drain high-skill workers and lose jobs for low-skill..., this is pretty much the environment you would want. (I realize I'm asserting here, but I think if we're mostly techies of a sort we can probably attest to the large number of Indian & Asian immigrants who come to America for tech jobs...or maybe that's just every company I've ever worked at.)
Bah, this post was pretty disorganized. Oh well. Bottom line, free market works. Have the government a) subsidize education (note the diff. between subsidizing and running it), b) give out science grants, c) build infrastructure (roads & such), d) regulate, e) provide defense & law enforcement, and f) contract out anything else (maybe with a couple exceptions that i missed, obviously the legistlative and judicial aspects of the gov. remain intact, although much of the admin can probably be outsourced) to private firms who can do it better.
Hmm...This is in the wrong place but bear with me...append to arg. regarding beaurocracy. Beaurocracy's are also slow to change and fail to utilize latest technologies and techniques. If the gov. were handing out 5-year DMV management contracts (obviously, where the centralized data was mainted by the gov. for use with the next contracting firm), then the firms that received it would either a) have to change with the times to be able to provide the same or superior service at best cost or b) be newer firms (new businesses help stimulate the economy, yay! who start up based on the new technologies and techniques and drive the competition that brings about positive productive change.
As for taxes. Christ. You only need taxes b/c the gov. wants to do too much. Cut the gov to just what I suggested above, eliminate personal income tax (if you care that much about the little guy), reduce biz. taxes and simplify the tax code. Don't give people tax breaks for kids and stuff (these exceptions are a big part of why the tax code is 10,000 pages long), just let them adapt to their economic environment.
Last (man, I'm really sorry about the total dis-org here. This is quite unlike me....), back on America provides an environment where everyone can better themselves. There is always the availability of some low level job, that, were a person sufficiently motivated, would support them through maintaining a residence, food & school and thus providing them with enough to improve. People who say they can't afford to go to school are lying or lazy. Junior colleges are practically free (in many cases, if you research scholarships properly they are free. And not just bad ones..., Santa Rosa Junior College has a doyl grant that pays for all your tuitin and some of your books. It's also something like the 2nd best JC in the state of California). If you say you can't work & go to school you're lying or lazy. You can get a mall job. You just don't want to. If you have to support six kids and that's why you can't go then it's your fault for having kids. I'll be damned if my tax dollars are gonna pay for you to have a tax break just b/c you're too fiscally irresponsible to have kids when you can afford to.
Uh oh...approaching rant...will stop.
As always..., my humble 2c. Maybe 3c at this point.
--------------
"Lately, the only thing keeping me from being a serial killer is my distaste for manual labor"
--Dilbert
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 36
|
wix
politically unstable
Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: Jun. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 05 2002,02:57 |
|
|
[quote=Darth Liberus,02 July 2002,14 9][/quote]
QUOTE DL.
| Quote | | CK, I am not mad at Wix for "turning" on me. I flamed him for insinuating that I've been brainwashed by demagogues and bad college professors, as well as for telling me that my love for people is "false." |
Of course your love for people is false. Your system has a fundamental problem with it: You don't trust people. You trust neither those with money to help the poorer members of society, and you don't trust those in need of being able to get themselves out of the trouble without long term government aid (notice, I'm not talking about basic needs aid such as shelter). You decide that the government MUST force those with money to HELP the less privilidged. Unfortuantley when you do it in this process no body is really helped. I was saying demogogue because you blame the rich for having GREED, but the real issue of who is greedy are the masses (I dare you to respond to this).
| Quote | | note that my area of concentration was Victorian literature, so I am quite familiar with the Industrial Revolution and laissez-faire economics. It was NOT a grand ol' time by any means, not unless you like choking pollution, abject poverty, miserable working conditions, and your country constantly being on the brink of revolution. |
Someone as familiar with victorian literatoure (which means dick to me), and the industrial revolution, and hands off economics should KNOW that the industrial revolution certianly wasn't laissez-faire now was it? If you READ those two source cites I gave you, both of them present perfectly legitimate arguments proving this.
| Quote | on the economic issue, it seems to me that trickle-down mostly encourages a bunch of shell games and smoke and mirrors. ... trickle-down policies encourage investors put their money into the stock and money markets, and the rapid acquisition, breakup, and sale of companies. the money doesn't trickle down, it just moves around between investors.
to create wealth, you actually have to PRODUCE something. this means you need to have policies that encourage investment in production rather than just moving money around. |
I'm unclear as to what specific policies you are refering to. Trickle-Down economics tried in the 1980's did exactly this. Cutting taxes at top brackets not only MOVES money between the top members of social classes but also creates new companies and hires new workers. You give us no reason why trickle down economics doesn't work!
1. Give money to investors, they invest (you agree with this don't you?)
2. When money is invested in a sector, the sector expirences growth.
3. Growth == Producing something (which you say is good), and hires more workers
4. Everyone is happy, economy is working
There are some points to trickle down economics that people don't seem to care much because they don't put forethought into it.
1. People have this notion that the rich should pay for everything and shouldn't be able to make money off it. They say that stimulating the economy while making the rich richer is bad.
2. People subject themselves to greed. They don't want to the rich to make money, they see the rich as causing their failure.
3. Trickle down economics takes time. It takes times for the money to head down. You don't see tax break today, and 1000 new jobs tomorrow. It takes time.
4. Other factors can mitigate desired results. If you want to point to hoover in the 1920's for his faults in dealing with the great depression, the main problem here is actually that the Fed Reserve wasn't controlling things correctly. They actually reduced the supply of money and hiked the interest rates at the nadir peek of the depression (only furthering the problems).
The Real problem with economics isn't the trickle up or down factors. It's GOVERNMENT AS A LEECH. DL thinks the government can produce, when it really can't.
The first important thing about the government is the lack of Money Multiplication Factors. Money inside of the government is virtually worthless, it doesn't replicate, it doesn't produce, and it doesn't stimulate.
No incentive to save. A program which doesn't use all of it's alloted funds is then cut by congress. Eg. if the DMV is alloted 22 million dollars and only uses 12, it is punished by removing 10 million dollars from it's budget. Hence, it causes WASTE.
Government programs serve as a leech. These programs all have enormous overhead and management. If you read Pravus's post he makes excellent points about the benefits of the private sector over the governments. An LA Youth work program that took $80,000 to administrate per student, actually only paid into the economy $15,000 to the student who did all the work.
| Quote | | on the tax issue - a lot of loopholes including the one that allows companies to move their headquarters to the Bahamas to evade taxes are about to close. they don't move because we tax the holy fuck out of them. they move because they can get away with it... they just have to get a P.O. box in the Bahamas, move their "headquarters" there, and then kick back & do business in the United States without paying a single dime in taxes. |
You take the wrong perspective with taxes as well. You want to close loopholes so that you can get the big corporations even more. Did you ever think to REDUCE taxes, make your programs effiecient and make government COST LESS. Then there is no insentive to drive even more money outside of the country.
--------------
"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session."--Judge Gideon J. Tucker, 1866.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 37
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 05 2002,03:40 |
|
|
PA, wix : you both seem to be bright people who are capable of making intelligent posts, but you need to take the time to lurk a little more and learn the culture here.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that CK loves to call people close-minded and act as if they are out to oppress his rights. That doesn't mean it's true.
He also thinks he knows people's viewpoints so well that he doesn't bother to pay attention to what they write. Instead he attacks his own grossly distorted ideas of what their beliefs are, and he attacks their character as well.
That's why he constantly gets his ass flamed off. It has nothing to do with his beliefs and everything to do with the fact that he's obnoxious.
If I was close-minded or totally mislead, the other detvets would happily flame my ass off as well.
(looks around)
Don't see it happening.
What I do see happening is two people joining CK in attacking a very unrealistic and prejudiced view of what people who call themselves liberals think, feel, and believe.
If you don't even read what I write because you think you already know what I believe in, you are damn straight that I'm going to call you trolls and tell you to stfu kthx
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 38
|
Wiley
©0®ÞØ®4+3 whØ®3
Group: Members
Posts: 1268
Joined: Oct. 2001
|
 |
Posted on: Jul. 05 2002,04:07 |
|
|
I just want to point out that nobody posted any specific intelligent political insights made by Rush durring his Broadcast Exellence.
I might actually win this one
/me wipes a tear away from his eyes
And since I'm not well read about the Industrial Revolution I would like to give a statement of pure opinion. There is no way workers of that time period had it as good as the dot comer of the late 90's ...the company I was at actually had a Las Vegas beer & hooker slush fund ...Industrial Revolution workers had dirty coal mines to look forward to. The 90's kicked ass!!! (I'm sorry to any of you who invested in my company that died a horrible death ...after taking all of your money)
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 39
|
wix
politically unstable
Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: Jun. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 05 2002,08:03 |
|
|
| Quote (Darth Liberus @ 04 July 2002,19:40) | PA, wix : you both seem to be bright people who are capable of making intelligent posts, but you need to take the time to lurk a little more and learn the culture here.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that CK loves to call people close-minded and act as if they are out to oppress his rights. That doesn't mean it's true.
He also thinks he knows people's viewpoints so well that he doesn't bother to pay attention to what they write. Instead he attacks his own grossly distorted ideas of what their beliefs are, and he attacks their character as well.
That's why he constantly gets his ass flamed off. It has nothing to do with his beliefs and everything to do with the fact that he's obnoxious.
If I was close-minded or totally mislead, the other detvets would happily flame my ass off as well.
(looks around)
Don't see it happening.
What I do see happening is two people joining CK in attacking a very unrealistic and prejudiced view of what people who call themselves liberals think, feel, and believe.
If you don't even read what I write because you think you already know what I believe in, you are damn straight that I'm going to call you trolls and tell you to stfu kthx |
DL, I wasn't saying anything about the culture, nor was I trying to flame you. I was just posting my opinions on government run programs.
As for siding with CK and calling people close-minded, I have no intention of doing either one. I consider myself to be rational in all aspects. Given a compelling reason, I'm willing to change my political views on just about anything. You'll find that I disagree with CK on far more issues than I agree with. If you need proof read my strict consitutionalist post and count the number of times I disagree with CK, um, just about everything. It so happens I agree with fiscal conservative policies. You'll notice that at no time did I advocate being close minded.
You accuse CK of ignoring the issue, but ignore the arguements that I make in favor of saying that I'm flaming you. I was in no way attacking you. I like to touch upon the arguments that you made one by one. I think that your fiscal policies don't make sense, that doesn't mean anything about what I feel about your personality. But the fact that you haven't once responded to an issue that I have posted but instead just telling me that I'm flaming you might mention something.
I'm happy to be confronted about my ideas, stupid as they may be, but to ignore my arguments and call me a flamer becuase I disagree is to be guilty of the same thing you accuse CK of.
I've never claimed to know what you stand for. If you READ my posts you'll see that the only issues I comment on are direct quotes posted by YOU. In essance, I don't assume you believe anything. Since I happen to be all over the political spectrum (depending on the issue), I would never assume you could classify someones ideology based on one post.
--------------
"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session."--Judge Gideon J. Tucker, 1866.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 40
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jul. 05 2002,09:56 |
|
|
It's possible that I misread your intent.
Unfortunately, when you've been arguing with CK as long as I have, you start to take insults as being yet another lame attempt at WINNING an argument instead of discussing an issue.
I'm also very, very sick of the implication that I'm brainwashed, especially when I see the leaders of my country jacking off every time God, Guns, the American flag, or the Free Market gets mentioned.
Think I'm just gonna avoid the Politics Forum for awhile.
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
