(10-04-2017, 12:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Would you vote to keep your subsidy if you were able to vote to keep it? Would you be upset if you lost it (it was taken away from you) or go broke if it were no longer available? The only interest that I have in the welfare state is the tax dollars that come from me to fund your interests and the interest of blues in general. Just so you are clear, I don't mind some welfare being available as a temporary safety net as it was intended at the time it was passed. I can see where an urban dweller like yourself would view it as social insurance or a means of social pacification to keep the beasts at bay. The blacks who rioted and burned down portions of blue cities acted like they were mean, uncaring, unlawful and largely uncivilized people.

(10-04-2017, 10:21 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(10-04-2017, 12:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Would you vote to keep your subsidy if you were able to vote to keep it? Would you be upset if you lost it (it was taken away from you) or go broke if it were no longer available? The only interest that I have in the welfare state is the tax dollars that come from me to fund your interests and the interest of blues in general. Just so you are clear, I don't mind some welfare being available as a temporary safety net as it was intended at the time it was passed. I can see where an urban dweller like yourself would view it as social insurance or a means of social pacification to keep the beasts at bay. The blacks who rioted and burned down portions of blue cities acted like they were mean, uncaring, unlawful and largely uncivilized people.

Hurricane Maria is beginning to show what is possible when the political, social, and technological orders break down at once, as in the wake of  a large-scale bombing raid. The most vulnerable people (such as those who need insulin or dialysis) die. Public health is at the peril of the germs, heat stress, or cold that a well-functioning social order normally suppresses. Government might even break down. This may not be a matter of 'culture'. An intact social order might foster some social norms.

Truth be told, government spending typically goes back into the economy. So it is with Social Security, welfare, military expenditures, or infrastructure spending -- or the usual payments to government employees from school janitors to judges.

People will usually do what they must do to survive. They will scavenge, if necessary. We are not trained for heroism or sainthood. But I expect Puerto Rico to rebuild, if with different infrastructure. That probably means with less reliance upon fossil fuels (ergo, solar panels and electric vehicles) and probably without landline telecommunications. You will see highways rebuilt to have more resiliency at places of vulnerability, especially bridges. Political institutions will likely be what they were before the Hurricane struck.

Business as usual is the norm until some harsh, unforeseen crisis disrupts it completely. Just do not expect revolutionary changes in human nature. Not even nuclear warfare will bring about some libertarian or Marxist-Leninist utopia. Ideologies inconsistent with human nature typically die suddenly and vanish forever.

(10-04-2017, 07:48 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-04-2017, 10:21 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(10-04-2017, 12:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Would you vote to keep your subsidy if you were able to vote to keep it? Would you be upset if you lost it (it was taken away from you) or go broke if it were no longer available? The only interest that I have in the welfare state is the tax dollars that come from me to fund your interests and the interest of blues in general. Just so you are clear, I don't mind some welfare being available as a temporary safety net as it was intended at the time it was passed. I can see where an urban dweller like yourself would view it as social insurance or a means of social pacification to keep the beasts at bay. The blacks who rioted and burned down portions of blue cities acted like they were mean, uncaring, unlawful and largely uncivilized people.

Hurricane Maria is beginning to show what is possible when the political, social, and technological orders break down at once, as in the wake of  a large-scale bombing raid. The most vulnerable people (such as those who need insulin or dialysis) die. Public health is at the peril of the germs, heat stress, or cold that a well-functioning social order normally suppresses. Government might even break down. This may not be a matter of 'culture'. An intact social order might foster some social norms.

Truth be told, government spending typically goes back into the economy. So it is with Social Security, welfare, military expenditures, or infrastructure spending -- or the usual payments to government employees from school janitors to judges.

People will usually do what they must do to survive. They will scavenge, if necessary. We are not trained for heroism or sainthood. But I expect Puerto Rico to rebuild, if with different infrastructure. That probably means with less reliance upon fossil fuels (ergo, solar panels and electric vehicles) and probably without landline telecommunications. You will see highways rebuilt to have more resiliency at places of vulnerability, especially bridges. Political institutions will likely be what they were before the Hurricane struck.

Business as usual is the norm until some harsh, unforeseen crisis disrupts it completely. Just do not expect revolutionary changes in human nature. Not even nuclear warfare will bring about some libertarian or Marxist-Leninist utopia. Ideologies inconsistent with human nature typically die suddenly and vanish forever.

The blue ideology isn't very consistent with human nature. I don't live in a heavenly world. I doubt there are very many people who believe that they do either.

(10-04-2017, 07:48 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-04-2017, 10:21 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(10-04-2017, 12:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Would you vote to keep your subsidy if you were able to vote to keep it? Would you be upset if you lost it (it was taken away from you) or go broke if it were no longer available? The only interest that I have in the welfare state is the tax dollars that come from me to fund your interests and the interest of blues in general. Just so you are clear, I don't mind some welfare being available as a temporary safety net as it was intended at the time it was passed. I can see where an urban dweller like yourself would view it as social insurance or a means of social pacification to keep the beasts at bay. The blacks who rioted and burned down portions of blue cities acted like they were mean, uncaring, unlawful and largely uncivilized people.

Hurricane Maria is beginning to show what is possible when the political, social, and technological orders break down at once, as in the wake of  a large-scale bombing raid. The most vulnerable people (such as those who need insulin or dialysis) die. Public health is at the peril of the germs, heat stress, or cold that a well-functioning social order normally suppresses. Government might even break down. This may not be a matter of 'culture'. An intact social order might foster some social norms.

Truth be told, government spending typically goes back into the economy. So it is with Social Security, welfare, military expenditures, or infrastructure spending -- or the usual payments to government employees from school janitors to judges.

People will usually do what they must do to survive. They will scavenge, if necessary. We are not trained for heroism or sainthood. But I expect Puerto Rico to rebuild, if with different infrastructure. That probably means with less reliance upon fossil fuels (ergo, solar panels and electric vehicles) and probably without landline telecommunications. You will see highways rebuilt to have more resiliency at places of vulnerability, especially bridges. Political institutions will likely be what they were before the Hurricane struck.

Business as usual is the norm until some harsh, unforeseen crisis disrupts it completely. Just do not expect revolutionary changes in human nature. Not even nuclear warfare will bring about some libertarian or Marxist-Leninist utopia. Ideologies inconsistent with human nature typically die suddenly and vanish forever.

The blue ideology isn't very consistent with human nature. I don't live in a heavenly world. I doubt there are very many people who believe that they do either.

(10-04-2017, 12:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-02-2017, 11:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It's not an entitlement, though. I chose to take advantage of the discount, yes. There may be a federal program associated with it. I don't know if this is federal taxpayer-funded corporate welfare for sure, but am pretty sure it's not. Our electric company has its progressive aspects, since it serves northern CA, so it feels the need to appeal to the predominant attitudes here in the region that does more energy conservation than any other region in America. And CA is also the #1 welfare state in America.

My opinion is, that welfare and the social-insurance state serves your interest, but you don't realize it, since you think you can be self-reliant enough to avoid using it, and others should be too. Self-reliance is a key value for you, rather than reliance on the state. You consider it "the American way of life." Liberals and the majority within the blue states and the urban and many suburban regions do not consider self-reliance to be exclusively "the American way of life," as opposed also to the value of mutual help and interdependence as the need arises. Liberals and Democrats consider state welfare a prudent social insurance system which any of us may need at any time. These needs were not satisfied before the New Deal and Great Society, and so people suffered. So, it's a "blue" and "red" disagreement as to what constitutes "the American way of life." We liberals think we ought to catch up to the rest of the developed world in regard to such things as social insurance and green values, and not remain in a regressive condition as we have now for 40 years. And subject to the counter-awakening that dates from 1964, and triumphed in 1980.

btw I have as you know been a self-employed business owner for a number of years, although it's not the kind of business you might like. But it supports many independent businesses.

Would you vote to keep your subsidy if you were able to vote to keep it? Would you be upset if you lost it (it was taken away from you) or go broke if it were no longer available? The only interest that I have in the welfare state is the tax dollars that come from me to fund your interests and the interest of blues in general. Just so you are clear, I don't mind some welfare being available as a temporary safety net as it was intended at the time it was passed. I can see where an urban dweller like yourself would view it as social insurance or a means of social pacification to keep the beasts at bay. The blacks who rioted and burned down portions of blue cities acted like they were mean, uncaring, unlawful and largely uncivilized people.

(10-04-2017, 09:45 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: ... Judging from the past, a lot will be surprised by the future.  If the problem is to be too great a production, is the answer to seek ever higher productivity?

As an alleged Whig, I do not anticipate perfection.  You might take out one problem at a time though.  For America, it has bee Royalty, a land and people owning elite in the south, and robber barons too close to fascism.  There are some who have not studied where man came from who allege we might return to Utopia.  I'll leave that to the Marxist Leninist contingent.  I anticipate going forward, not back.  The answer lies with figuring out the post scarcity pattern, not daydreams of a past which never existed.

I do see the problem being an elite class wielding too much influence through both economic a political means.  They have fooled the people by various means.  A general distrust of the establishment by populists is a good sign.  The readiness of the blue to fight the red and vice versa is less good.

(10-03-2017, 08:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-02-2017, 01:59 PM)David Horn Wrote: I left your response intact, though it misses a major point.  The plural of anecdote is not data.  Anecdotes are always self selected to make a point, but the point may be lost in making it. 

Welfare rarely works the way either side thinks it does, because the economy is not a morality play.  It's a numbers game.  Welfare works best where it provides benefits to the community in general.  It tends to fail when it doesn't.  Cultures that harbor resentment tend to see it as a morality play, so the likelihood that a general benefit is achieved is very low.  If the society tends to be less judgmental, then benefits tend to be greater.

Appalachia is uniformly poor with a culture high on resentment.  Welfare has done poorly there.  Yet poor areas in Greece, for example, see net gains since resentment is low. 

It's the hardest obstacle to overcome, since changing culture is nearly impossible from the outside, and rarely popular from the inside.

That's an interesting perspective, but people who need help still need help, and those resentful will just resent something else.  I'm from a blue place where the community seems helped overall.  I can see how you'd get greed and manipulation sometimes.  Resentment?  At what point does one refuse to feed the mouth that bites you?

(10-05-2017, 12:34 PM)David Horn Wrote: I live on the edge of Appalachia.  We have a dual culture here with plenty of resentment of "the other", and a more open minded minority that tries to avoid judging.  The split doesn't fall along economic lines either.  In the resentment culture, the well-off resent the lazy poor and the poor resent the greedy rich.  All tend to vote Republican by wide margins.  It's a mystery how that can be, though religion plays a huge role.  Needless to say that welfare in any form is universally deemed unacceptable -- even by those who truly need it.

FWIW, I don't see the open minded culture growing into a majority.  Most of us that try to be less judgmental are imports from other places who brought our attitudes with us.

(10-04-2017, 09:45 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are varied visions of the failed future.  The red distrust the government and anticipate a failed government policy.  The blue distrusts the economic elites, and anticipate the problems of putting too much wealth in the hands of too few who care little for the many.  The red can ignore problems which have not gone critical in the past.  Some blue fear problems like global warming and a hypothetical post scarcity economy which haven't developed yet.

The other side, sometimes, has a point. 

Judging from the past, a lot will be surprised by the future.  If the problem is to be too great a production, is the answer to seek ever higher productivity?

As an alleged Whig, I do not anticipate perfection.  You might take out one problem at a time though.  For America, it has been Royalty, a land and people owning elite in the south, and robber barons too close to fascism.  There are some who have not studied where man came from who allege we might return to Utopia.  I'll leave that to the Marxist Leninist contingent.  I anticipate going forward, not back.  The answer lies with figuring out the post scarcity pattern, not daydreams of a past which never existed.

I do see the problem being an elite class wielding too much influence through both economic a political means.  They have fooled the people by various means.  A general distrust of the establishment by populists is a good sign.  The readiness of the blue to fight the red and vice versa is less good.

Quote:It was about 10 a.m. on Aug. 12 when the melee erupted just north of Emancipation Park in Charlottesville, Virginia.
About two dozen white supremacists — many equipped with helmets and wooden shields — were battling with a handful of counter-protesters, most of them African American. One white man dove into the violence with particular zeal. Using his fists and feet, the man attacked one person after another.

The street fighter was in Virginia on that August morning for the “Unite the Right” rally, the largest public gathering of white supremacists in a generation, a chaotic and bloody event that would culminate, a few hours later, in the killing of 32-year-old Heather Heyer, who was there to protest the racist rally.

The violence in Charlottesville became national news. President Donald Trump’s response to it — he asserted there were “some very fine people on both sides” of the events that day — set off a wave of condemnations, from his allies as well as his critics.
But for many Americans, conservatives as well as liberals, there was shock and confusion at the sight of bands of white men bearing torches, chanting racist slogans and embracing the heroes of the Confederacy: Who were they? What are their numbers and aims?
There is, of course, no single answer. Some who were there that weekend in Charlottesville are hardened racists involved with long-running organizations like the League of the South. Many are fresh converts to white supremacist organizing, young people attracted to nativist and anti-Muslim ideas circulated on social media by leaders of the so-called alt-right, the newest branch of the white power movement. Some are paranoid characters thrilled to traffic in the symbols and coded language of vast global conspiracy theories. Others are sophisticated provocateurs who see the current political moment as a chance to push a “white agenda,” with angry positions on immigration, diversity and economic isolationism.

ProPublica spent weeks examining one distinctive group at the center of the violence in Charlottesville: an organization called the Rise Above Movement, one of whose members was the white man dispensing beatings near Emancipation Park Aug. 12.
The group, based in Southern California, claims more than 50 members and a singular purpose: physically attacking its ideological foes. RAM’s members spend weekends training in boxing and other martial arts, and they have boasted publicly of their violence during protests in Huntington Beach, San Bernardino and Berkeley. Many of the altercations have been captured on video, and its members are not hard to spot.

Indeed, ProPublica has identified the group’s core members and interviewed one of its leaders at length. The man in the Charlottesville attacks — filmed by a documentary crew working with ProPublica — is 24-year-old Ben Daley, who runs a Southern California tree-trimming business.

Many of the organization’s core members, including Daley, have serious criminal histories, according to interviews and a review of court records. Before joining RAM, several members spent time in jail or state prison on serious felony charges including assault, robbery, and gun and knife offenses. Daley did seven days in jail for carrying a concealed snub-nosed revolver. Another RAM member served a prison term for stabbing a Latino man five times in a 2009 gang assault.

“Fundamentally, RAM operates like an alt-right street-fighting club,” said Oren Segal, director of the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism.

Quote:Four people were arrested on Friday over alleged plans to bomb a Muslim community in upstate New York, authorities announced Tuesday.

Investigators said they first heard of the plot after a student at Greece Odyssey Academy in Greece, New York, made an offhand remark during a lunch break, which prompted another student to report the comment to school officials. Greece Police Chief Patrick Phelan said authorities quickly responded to the report, conducting interviews and making arrests that same day.

The suspects allegedly planned to target the Muslim enclave of Islamberg, a small area in the Catskill Mountains about 150 miles from New York City, according to Reuters. Authorities later said they seized 23 weapons and three improvised explosive devices while carrying out search warrants. All of the firearms were legally owned by relatives of those arrested.

“If they had carried out this plot, which every indication is that they were going to, people would have died,” Phelan said. “I don’t know how many and who, but people would have died.”

The suspects were identified as Brian Colaneri, 20, Andrew Crysel, 18, and Vincent Vetromile, 19. They have each been charged with three felony counts of first-degree possession of a dangerous weapon and one felony count of fourth-degree conspiracy. An unidentified 16-year-old student was also charged with the same crimes but will be tried as a minor.

Phelan said school officials first became suspicious after a student reported the 16-year-old showing a photo on his phone to some friends in the school cafeteria. The student allegedly made a comment to the effect of “he looks like the next school shooter, doesn’t he?” which prompted the complaint.

“The kid who said something saved people’s lives,” the Greece police chief said. “Everything worked, and as a result, nobody’s dead, and that’s a good story.”

It’s unclear how the men and the student knew each other, but the three men were Boy Scouts together, according to the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.

Islamberg has been targeted before. In 2017, a man from Tennessee was sentenced to nearly 20 years in prison for plotting to burn down a mosque and other buildings in the enclave.

• Andrew Birge, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan
  
  
• Matthew Schneider, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan
  
  
• Josh Hauxhurst, Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge, F.B.I.
  
  
• Michigan State Police Col. Joseph Casper
  

(01-06-2021, 04:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Are you at the Capitol, Classic Xer? Your boys are doing what you say they are going to do.

(01-06-2021, 06:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The GOP is dead. The GOP hasn't come to that realization yet but its dead.

(01-06-2021, 06:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-06-2021, 04:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Are you at the Capitol, Classic Xer? Your boys are doing what you say they are going to do.

Nope. I just found out about it a little while ago. I hate to say it, I told you so. We can't have two sets of rules or double standard in this country. Oh, and all the other stuff that I've been warning you guys about is coming too. The ball is in your court. Welcome to the 4T. You people should reconsider the crazy shit you want them to do to keep power in their hands and the money flowing in your direction. You should be happy though. The GOP is dead. The GOP hasn't come to that realization yet but its dead.

(01-06-2021, 07:06 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-06-2021, 06:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-06-2021, 04:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Are you at the Capitol, Classic Xer? Your boys are doing what you say they are going to do.

Nope. I just found out about it a little while ago. I hate to say it, I told you so. We can't have two sets of rules or double standard in this country. Oh, and all the other stuff that I've been warning you guys about is coming too. The ball is in your court. Welcome to the 4T. You people should reconsider the crazy shit you want them to do to keep power in their hands and the money flowing in your direction. You should be happy though. The GOP is dead. The GOP hasn't come to that realization yet but its dead.

1. Do you consider the takeover the Capitol building anything other than disgusting?

2. Do you still believe that the President was cheated of a victory?

3. Do you consider the response of the President weak?

4. Do you recognize that the essence of democracy is that those who lose the election recognizing the validity of their losses?

5. Do you have any strong evidence other than some gut feeling to believe that Trump was cheated? 

6. Do you repudiate political violence including disruption of normal process?