Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(09-08-2020, 12:41 PM)Mikebert Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2020, 11:16 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Dude, I've never had an interest in your personal property, your personal income/ wealth or your family related issues that may grow beyond family related  and become much more troublesome with time either.

That is what I thought. So why is your nose out of joint about the stuff going in Portland and other cities? Surely you personally feel no threat from these 'rioters", being well-armed. As for the larger situation, the old adage "this too shall pass" applies. We are clearly in what Samuel Huntington called a "creedal passion period", predicted for 2020 (see link). Turchin just focused on the social unrest aspect of these periods, but they although involve cultural instability, which Huntington touched upon with the "creedal" descriptor for these periods. As a fan of S&H you are familiar with the phenomena of perodic "social moments"that involve both political (crises) and cultural (awakenings) instability.

All of these are aspects of a cycle, which Turchin suggests can be modeled as a kind of epidemic of radicalism. I implemented his model some years ago and fit it to past outbursts of radicalism, most recently in the period around 1970. Just like back then this outburst will largely go away.  I expect it to largely burn itself out, perhaps as early as next year. Since it is far less violent than the last cycle (the c1970 episode), which was less violent than the one before it (c 1920) and the one before that (Civil War), it's really nothing to get all worked up about.

https://bigthink.com/politics-current-af...redictions

That's what you thought but you still had to ask? Well, I'd still leave you hanging from a limb and I'd still leave you to fend for yourself or leave you to mercy of some group of Democrats.

Classic X'er, I hope that what you said to Mikebert is strictly a figure of speech.

The best way to deal with a lynching is to deter it or thwart it. I'm not citing what was said, but all in all, lynching is evidence of the breakdown of law and order. Let none be confused: law and order is essential to a civil society, and without it any enumerated rights are pipe dreams. Law and order means that people trust law enforcement, courts, and (for the worst deeds that people can do to each other that cash settlements could never mitigate) prisons and in perhaps some extremely-rare cases, executions (treason, piracy, serial killers, mass killings, human trafficking*). Maybe we are better off if we believe that a just God would send such people as Holocaust perpetrators and their victims to very different places in Eternity. Should people not be moral, then they might be given the fear of Hell as a substitute.

If possible, I would cut someone down someone still struggling for life from the rope, and I would certainly report any lynching to law enforcement for arrest and prosecution. Lynching is a violation of civil liberties, and I would remind you that is a capital crime if it results in a death.

* I consider human trafficking the worst thing that anyone could do to another. Victims' lives become a veritable Hell on Earth. The suffering ends for a murder victim, but not for someone trafficked until that person dies or is liberated. I have no problem with China executing those who commit this crime, my only questions being about the legal process.

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

(09-09-2020, 03:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Classic X'er, I hope that what you said to Mikebert is strictly a figure of speech.

The best way to deal with a lynching is to deter it or thwart it. I'm not citing what was said, but all in all, lynching is evidence of the breakdown of law and order. Let none be confused: law and order is essential to a civil society, and without it any enumerated rights are pipe dreams. Law and order means that people trust law enforcement, courts, and (for the worst deeds that people can do to each other that cash settlements could never mitigate) prisons and in perhaps some extremely-rare cases, executions (treason, piracy, serial killers, mass killings, human trafficking*). Maybe we are better off if we believe that a just God would send such people as Holocaust perpetrators and their victims to very different places in Eternity. Should people not be moral, then they might be given the fear of Hell as a substitute.

If possible, I would cut someone down someone still struggling for life from the rope, and I would certainly report any lynching to law enforcement for arrest and prosecution. Lynching is a violation of civil liberties, and I would remind you that is a capital crime if it results in a death.  

* I consider human trafficking the worst thing that anyone could do to another. Victims' lives become a veritable Hell on Earth. The suffering ends for a murder victim, but not for someone trafficked until that person dies or is liberated.  I have no problem with China executing those who commit this crime, my only questions being about the legal process.

I shouldn't have to tell a teacher like yourself that it was a figure of speech.

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Many of those tech giants hire large numbers of Asian-Americans.  From my experience, most are rather conservative in culture if not in politics. We often do not have so much a conflict of reactionary "white American" culture (as if white people were am monolith) and avant-garde "liberal" culture as we have a political conflict between your idea of what (conservative, white) culture and different manifestations of traditionalism. Asian-Americans make some concession to non-Asian culture -- such as listening to or even participating in Western Classical music. Beethoven may be more popular in Japan and South Korea than in Germany now.

But what am I to say? I prefer culture of elder vintage to stuff that seems unlikely to withstand a test of time.

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Past experience argues the opposite.  The last 1T had strong Unions, very high taxes and minimal inequality. It was the highest growth period in the Nation's history, bar none.

(09-10-2020, 09:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Past experience argues the opposite.  The last 1T had strong Unions, very high taxes and minimal inequality.  It was the highest growth period in the Nation's history, bar none.

I can easily imagine that if America becomes a dream like that of Classic X'er in which a culture like his prevails and absolute plutocracy stifles any talent not from among itself, then much of the creative talent and technical expertise will go somewhere in which it will be welcome. People who love the paradise climate of California would love the paradise climates of Portugal, New Zealand, and some coastal areas in Australia, Chile, Croatia, France, and South Africa. As someone who considers the Monterey Bay area a paradise of climate and scenery that resembles my image of the South of France...  

Lose the talent because you don't appreciate it, and you might end up with a great brain drain as Russia had after the Bolshevik Revolution, Germany as Hitler turned what was once one of the brightest lights of Western civilization into an intellectual and moral cesspool, and Spain after the Franco takeover.

China has been building large numbers of new cities that look well suited for people more characteristic of the American middle class than to people born and raised in China. If an American government makes life unpleasant for Asian-Americans, then such places might seem just right for Chinese-Americans who have assimilated some American ways, like more admiration for Abraham Lincoln than for Mao Zedong.

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Classic Gen Xers grew up under Reagan and absorbed the propaganda that those were boom times and that trickle-down economics works. It was never true; it only worked for the wealthy.

(09-09-2020, 01:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 06:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 01:40 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-05-2020, 01:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-05-2020, 12:41 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]So, are you using your own tax dollars to purchase and trade for their votes or are you using our tax dollars as well? I don't mind if liberal Democrats and progressive use their own money (tax dollars) to purchase the votes and sustain the votes that they need sustain themselves and keep themselves in power. Yes, its a natural trade off that the country ( the Americans outside the liberal Democratic/ progressive bubble ) are becoming more and more aware of these days.

Yes, it needs to be a policy to which all Americans contribute, in the renewed sense that Wade Davis talked about in this interview I posted before.





Of course it would mean that some of you Republicans would pay more in taxes, as well as some of the Democrats (including now likely myself too). Unless we are forever to expand our national debt beyond all recognition, the upper middle class and the oligarchy has to pay more. We need to spend less on the military and needless wars. And we all need to contribute to a society that works for all, and not just for the few or for one race. This is what Wade Davis calls a sense of solidarity when we know that everyone in our country counts and is supported. How much more in taxes you personally Classic Xer would need to pay, I am not privy to, since I don't know what your wealth status and tax bracket is. But such taxation would not, in my choice, be unreasonable or debilitating; it would only be irritating to your ideology and your prejudice against providing tax money to non-whites and liberals who are poor.

We do need more socialism in our society, as Davis describes it. I am in agreement with him. That does not mean we need the kind of socialism that puts private enterprise out of business, especially small business. Even corporations would still exist. They just would not be in the position they are in now of controlling our politics and squeezing out all reform and progress and keeping our nation in decline, and evading their proper responsibility to the commonweal. 

An unequal country divided between rich and poor and between white and people of color, and thus in stagnation and stalemate, is not sustainable. It is not in the interest of any American of any Party. The policies of the Democratic Party needs to become again the new consensus if we are to survive as a prosperous nation, rather than a banana republic. Trickle-down, self-reliance-meme individualism and opposition to any collective action needs to be defeated at the polls from now on.

Nope. An unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism  is not sustainable and will eventually fail. ....

Why do you always vote for it then?

Why would I vote for what you got now? That's a good to ask yourself

Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

(09-10-2020, 03:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 06:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 01:40 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-05-2020, 01:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, it needs to be a policy to which all Americans contribute, in the renewed sense that Wade Davis talked about in this interview I posted before.





Of course it would mean that some of you Republicans would pay more in taxes, as well as some of the Democrats (including now likely myself too). Unless we are forever to expand our national debt beyond all recognition, the upper middle class and the oligarchy has to pay more. We need to spend less on the military and needless wars. And we all need to contribute to a society that works for all, and not just for the few or for one race. This is what Wade Davis calls a sense of solidarity when we know that everyone in our country counts and is supported. How much more in taxes you personally Classic Xer would need to pay, I am not privy to, since I don't know what your wealth status and tax bracket is. But such taxation would not, in my choice, be unreasonable or debilitating; it would only be irritating to your ideology and your prejudice against providing tax money to non-whites and liberals who are poor.

We do need more socialism in our society, as Davis describes it. I am in agreement with him. That does not mean we need the kind of socialism that puts private enterprise out of business, especially small business. Even corporations would still exist. They just would not be in the position they are in now of controlling our politics and squeezing out all reform and progress and keeping our nation in decline, and evading their proper responsibility to the commonweal. 

An unequal country divided between rich and poor and between white and people of color, and thus in stagnation and stalemate, is not sustainable. It is not in the interest of any American of any Party. The policies of the Democratic Party needs to become again the new consensus if we are to survive as a prosperous nation, rather than a banana republic. Trickle-down, self-reliance-meme individualism and opposition to any collective action needs to be defeated at the polls from now on.

Nope. An unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism  is not sustainable and will eventually fail. ....

Why do you always vote for it then?

Why would I vote for what you got now? That's a good to ask yourself

Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Do you know what happened the last time the nation split and resolved an age old problem and split the time before to resolve an age old problem? So, who represents my interests on the Democratic side? I saw one Democratic candidate who sort of did who I pointed out as the best prospect I saw for a national candidate? I mean, she's the one who took out your vice presidential candidate who was picked strictly on the basis of race and gender vs her merits and integrity/character. I know this isn't politically correct or proper to say about a woman of color these days but I have a Democratic friend who refers to her as heels up Harris. Evidently, it's pretty well known that she f-d her way to the position that's she's today.

(09-10-2020, 03:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 04:36 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Right now, the tech giants in Silicone Valley are worth more than the entire European stock market, and the rest of the US markets too.  We'll be fine.

How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Classic Gen Xers grew up under Reagan and absorbed the propaganda that those were boom times and that trickle-down economics works. It was never true; it only worked for the wealthy.

We didn't grow up under Reagan. We grew up under Ford and Carter and came of age with Reagan in office. We didn't have to fight the war that we were raised and prepared to fight with the Soviet Union. Peace through strength and the use of containment and economic warfare worked to spare us from the misery of war.

(09-10-2020, 06:08 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]We didn't have to fight the war that we were raised and prepared to fight with the Soviet Union. Peace through strength and the use of containment and economic warfare worked to spare us from the misery of war.

Or maybe the anti war movement caused the politicians to think they could do containment without hot wars? The Domino Theory could be toned down a little bit? Typical for a conservative to try to take credit for something a whole bunch of progressives fought for.

(09-10-2020, 05:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 03:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 06:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 01:40 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Nope. An unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism  is not sustainable and will eventually fail. ....

Why do you always vote for it then?

Why would I vote for what you got now? That's a good to ask yourself

Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Do you know what happened the last time the nation split and resolved an age old problem and split the time before to resolve an age old problem? So, who represents my interests on the Democratic side? I saw one Democratic candidate who sort of did who I pointed out as the best prospect I saw for a national candidate? I mean, she's the one who took out your vice presidential candidate who was picked strictly on the basis of race and gender vs her merits and integrity/character. I know this isn't politically correct or proper to say about a woman of color these days but I have a Democratic friend who refers to her as heels up Harris. Evidently, it's pretty well known that she f-d her way to the position that's she's today.

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail? You can't seem to face up to this.

Harris is a weak candidate. You already know that I say that. She had some ability to get things done as a district attorney and AG, and she did sleep around. I don't know that I should hold that against her or not. But she doesn't have the candidate skills or likability to help Biden or win the presidency herself. Tulsi Gabbard did take her out. But Tulsi blew her natural talent with her ridiculous ideas on Syria and other foreign policy matters. I have said all that before too.

(09-10-2020, 07:08 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 06:08 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]We didn't have to fight the war that we were raised and prepared to fight with the Soviet Union. Peace through strength and the use of containment and economic warfare worked to spare us from the misery of war.

Or maybe the anti war movement caused the politicians to think they could do containment without hot wars?  The Domino Theory could be toned down a little bit?  Typical for a conservative to try to take credit for something a whole bunch of progressives fought for. 

I can't help it that the whole lot of progressives spent decades fighting for peace the wrong way with Americans with little to no success.

(09-10-2020, 10:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 05:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 03:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-08-2020, 06:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you always vote for it then?

Why would I vote for what you got now? That's a good to ask yourself

Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Do you know what happened the last time the nation split and resolved an age old problem and split the time before to resolve an age old problem? So, who represents my interests on the Democratic side? I saw one Democratic candidate who sort of did who I pointed out as the best prospect I saw for a national candidate? I mean, she's the one who took out your vice presidential candidate who was picked strictly on the basis of race and gender vs her merits and integrity/character. I know this isn't politically correct or proper to say about a woman of color these days but I have a Democratic friend who refers to her as heels up Harris. Evidently, it's pretty well known that she f-d her way to the position that's she's today.

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail? You can't seem to face up to this.

So, who represents our/my interests on the Democratic side today?

(09-10-2020, 10:33 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 09:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]How many American tech giants would you lose to an American Country like ours? I think the vast majority of them would opt to move and remain with America and side with America against the Left myself.

Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Past experience argues the opposite.  The last 1T had strong Unions, very high taxes and minimal inequality.  It was the highest growth period in the Nation's history, bar none.

I can easily imagine that if America becomes a dream like that of Classic X'er in which a culture like his prevails and absolute plutocracy stifles any talent not from among itself, then much of the creative talent and technical expertise will go somewhere in which it will be welcome. People who love the paradise climate of California would love the paradise climates of Portugal, New Zealand, and some coastal areas in Australia, Chile, Croatia, France, and South Africa. As someone who considers the Monterey Bay area a paradise of climate and scenery that resembles my image of the South of France...  

Lose the talent because you don't appreciate it, and you might end up with a great brain drain as Russia had after the Bolshevik Revolution, Germany as Hitler turned what was once one of the brightest lights of Western civilization into an intellectual and moral cesspool, and Spain after the Franco takeover.

China has been building large numbers of new cities that look well suited for people more characteristic of the American middle class than to people born and raised in China. If an American government makes life unpleasant for Asian-Americans, then such places might seem just right for Chinese-Americans who have assimilated some American ways, like more admiration for Abraham Lincoln than for Mao Zedong.

How do you not see the plutocracy that mainly exists on the Democratic side today? How do you not see the obvious morons and imbeciles who represent your interests?

(09-11-2020, 02:09 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 10:33 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 09:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 04:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 12:33 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe Facebook, and that's only a maybe.  If it happened, Mark Zuckerberg would rue the day.  Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Amazon aren't going anywhere, and most of the others won't go either.  They may fear serious oversight and even antitrust action, but they can't operate without the tech weenies -- and those folks aren't joining "your America", period.

Oh well, whoever/whatever you get or end up with as a result won't be worth shit when the Left is done milking them for whatever they're worth today.

Past experience argues the opposite.  The last 1T had strong Unions, very high taxes and minimal inequality.  It was the highest growth period in the Nation's history, bar none.

I can easily imagine that if America becomes a dream like that of Classic X'er in which a culture like his prevails and absolute plutocracy stifles any talent not from among itself, then much of the creative talent and technical expertise will go somewhere in which it will be welcome. People who love the paradise climate of California would love the paradise climates of Portugal, New Zealand, and some coastal areas in Australia, Chile, Croatia, France, and South Africa. As someone who considers the Monterey Bay area a paradise of climate and scenery that resembles my image of the South of France...  

Lose the talent because you don't appreciate it, and you might end up with a great brain drain as Russia had after the Bolshevik Revolution, Germany as Hitler turned what was once one of the brightest lights of Western civilization into an intellectual and moral cesspool, and Spain after the Franco takeover.

China has been building large numbers of new cities that look well suited for people more characteristic of the American middle class than to people born and raised in China. If an American government makes life unpleasant for Asian-Americans, then such places might seem just right for Chinese-Americans who have assimilated some American ways, like more admiration for Abraham Lincoln than for Mao Zedong.

How do you not see the plutocracy that mainly exists on the Democratic side today? How do you not see the obvious morons and imbeciles who represent your interests?

How do you not see the plutocracy that mainly exists on the Republican side today? How do you not see the obvious morons and imbeciles who represent your interests?

(09-11-2020, 01:51 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 10:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 05:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 03:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2020, 01:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Why would I vote for what you got now? That's a good to ask yourself

Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Do you know what happened the last time the nation split and resolved an age old problem and split the time before to resolve an age old problem? So, who represents my interests on the Democratic side? I saw one Democratic candidate who sort of did who I pointed out as the best prospect I saw for a national candidate? I mean, she's the one who took out your vice presidential candidate who was picked strictly on the basis of race and gender vs her merits and integrity/character. I know this isn't politically correct or proper to say about a woman of color these days but I have a Democratic friend who refers to her as heels up Harris. Evidently, it's pretty well known that she f-d her way to the position that's she's today.

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail? You can't seem to face up to this.

So, who represents our/my interests on the Democratic side today?

All Democrats represent the interests of working people and those of average income. Democrats represent those interested in greater equality and less of a wealth and education gap between rich and poor and between black/brown and white.

I don't know how rich you are, so I don't know which party really represents you. But the Republicans are the Party that seeks to preserve the power and wealth of rich people. That could not be clearer, and if you don't see that, you must be living in your own world.

Some authors and pundits note that less-educated and "credentialed" people who are frustrated with an economy of diminishing opportunity and much unemployment, are resentful of college-educated people, and vote for Republicans and Trump who appeal to their frustration at these supposed elitists. But Republicans and Trump do nothing for them at all, so voting for these strong-man autocrat phony-populists does nothing but make their situation much worse, because the actual Republican and Trump policies benefit only rich people.

Their only pitch is to lower taxes on the rich and upper middle class, lift regulations on business and dirty, outdated industries, and give permission for big financiers to speculate. They claim that giving breaks to rich people will cause benefits to trickle down to the middle class and the poor. It is a false claim; the rich simply pocket the extra dough, buy out companies, automate, ship jobs overseas, fire employees, speculate, pollute, and buy influence. They don't raise wages or benefits with these breaks that Republicans give them. Republican "jobs programs" amount to nothing more than this trickle-down economics nonsense. Trump offered tariffs, which might protect USA workers, but he hasn't delivered much except a trade war. 

In exchange for his lack of support for their real interests, Trump offers less-educated whites xenophobia, white identity, patriotic slogans, opposition to abortion, support for guns, conspiracy theory, lies, magical thinking, pep talks, entertainment, and other nostrums and irrelevancies that appeal to their emotions, fears and prejudices.

(09-11-2020, 05:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2020, 01:51 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 10:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 05:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020, 03:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail?

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Do you know what happened the last time the nation split and resolved an age old problem and split the time before to resolve an age old problem? So, who represents my interests on the Democratic side? I saw one Democratic candidate who sort of did who I pointed out as the best prospect I saw for a national candidate? I mean, she's the one who took out your vice presidential candidate who was picked strictly on the basis of race and gender vs her merits and integrity/character. I know this isn't politically correct or proper to say about a woman of color these days but I have a Democratic friend who refers to her as heels up Harris. Evidently, it's pretty well known that she f-d her way to the position that's she's today.

I'm not but you've been doing it for many years and you're still doing it as far as I can see. Why do you vote for an unequal country or state that's mainly divided between rich and poor, race and gender, capitalism and socialism that is not sustainable and will eventually fail? You can't seem to face up to this.

So, who represents our/my interests on the Democratic side today?

All Democrats represent the interests of working people and those of average income. Democrats represent those interested in greater equality and less of a wealth and education gap between rich and poor and between black/brown and white.

I don't know how rich you are, so I don't know which party really represents you. But the Republicans are the Party that seeks to preserve the power and wealth of rich people. That could not be clearer, and if you don't see that, you must be living in your own world.

Some authors and pundits note that less-educated and "credentialed" people who are frustrated with an economy of diminishing opportunity and much unemployment, are resentful of college-educated people, and vote for Republicans and Trump who appeal to their frustration at these supposed elitists. But Republicans and Trump do nothing for them at all, so voting for these strong-man autocrat phony-populists does nothing but make their situation much worse, because the actual Republican and Trump policies benefit only rich people.

Their only pitch is to lower taxes on the rich and upper middle class, lift regulations on business and dirty, outdated industries, and give permission for big financiers to speculate. They claim that giving breaks to rich people will cause benefits to trickle down to the middle class and the poor. It is a false claim; the rich simply pocket the extra dough, buy out companies, automate, ship jobs overseas, fire employees, speculate, pollute, and buy influence. They don't raise wages or benefits with these breaks that Republicans give them. Republican "jobs programs" amount to nothing more than this trickle-down economics nonsense. Trump offered tariffs, which might protect USA workers, but he hasn't delivered much except a trade war. 

In exchange for his lack of support for their real interests, Trump offers less-educated whites xenophobia, white identity, patriotic slogans, opposition to abortion, support for guns, conspiracy theory, lies, magical thinking, pep talks, entertainment, and other nostrums and irrelevancies that appeal to their emotions, fears and prejudices.

The Democrats mainly represent the rich Liberals/ upper middle class Liberals and poorer workers ( low income people and retiree's living on fixed income ) and welfare recipients  (mainly single moms) and Democratic voters/ supporters mainly related to them and a group of union government workers, a group of Liberal academics and a group of Liberal activists related to them and their followers where as the Republicans pretty much represent America, the bulk of it's national defense and it's private sector economy, it's landowners and the bulk of its middle class workers, it's higher skilled workers, it's self employed workers, it's smaller union workers and it's upper end workers/ taxpayers these days.

(09-11-2020, 02:09 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]How do you not see the plutocracy that mainly exists on the Democratic side today? How do you not see the obvious morons and imbeciles who represent your interests?

If there has ever been a greater case for "the pot calling the kettle black", I can't think of one. The shear mendacity of the entire Republican Party mated to the most officious POTUS in history makes any counter arguments about poor behavior and performance by the Dems moot by definition. And yes, the Dems and their many followers have shown us little to be proud of either. It's just the shear magnitude difference that makes their trespasses so unimportant at this point.