Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure

[pbrower2a]

(12-18-2018, 06:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(12-18-2018, 03:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.

Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?

What are you doing posting  here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.

This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity.  You have it backwards.

Other sites can be different.

Obviously what passes as 'neutrality' can itself change. This is not the sort of site that attracts what Hillary Clinton calls a 'basket of deplorable(s)'. Such people are not the types who try to systematize reality in order to make sense of it.

We are in a 4T, and historical forces (the Hegelian dialectic?) operates with unusual ferocity in such times. Theses and antitheses collide, and the most adept people at working things out who get power succeed as others fail. It may have been difficult to predict whether the world of 1950 would more reflect FDR, Stalin, or Hitler. Now we know, and we have had it figured out since about 1990, only to realize that our world is going through analogous distress.

Will we have a New Feudalism in which a few get whatever they want and the rest find that even survival is a privilege to be denied or tolerated as elites desire, or will we have the bounty of ease and plenty that the End of Scarcity suggests if the political order is at all just? Those look like diametric alternatives. With Hitler (for Jews) or Stalin (for business owners) the fate for many was cold-blooded murder.

Technology will decide what is possible. Politics will decide what is available.

[pbrower2a]

(12-19-2018, 12:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-18-2018, 06:01 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: No, you are lying again.  I will report violations of rules, regardless of the political affiliation of the violator, and regardless of whether the violation targets me.  You are only making me inclined to be more persistent about it to be uniform.  This site should be about politics and history, not about vendettas.  The rules should be and as far as I know do apply to all equally.

If I had a personal vendetta, you're life here would be miserable because I would be a full time poster like Eric coming at you viciously like Devils Advocate. He had a vendetta. Me, I viewed it more as business and I approached it that way. At what point do come to gripes with reality and give up the fight/dream? The blue flag alone isn't powerful enough to replace our flag.

You used a particularly-vile, pointless insult using the infamous F-bomb. You will notice that I do not use such language in this forum. I wish that you would apologize for using it, as much for its pointlessness as for its offense. I have known of sites that expel posters for such. Surely you will remember what I did to kia 67 when he urged someone to commit suicide. Such is not a vendetta; such is basic decency. I may not be the nicest person in existence, but I recognize  the desirability of treating people humanely. It does more good and causes less pain.

The bold-faced you specifically means Classic X'er. I rarely discuss posters, but in this case such is necessary.

I have no desire to replace Old Glory. Forty-eight stars and thirteen stripes marched into Dachau and Mauthausen, signaling the end to some of the most shameful things that people have ever done to others. Old Glory marched with people who sought to end segregation in the South. That flag ideally stands for what is best in our character as a People. I simply want it to stand for such again, and I do not want it shamed with evil deeds of our leaders.

Quote:I watched a show the other evening on HBO about the financial crisis. I think Bush summed it up pretty well, as the nation stood on the brink of the next Great Depression, he had a choice between Hoover or Roosevelt, he chose Roosevelt. The guy wasn't that stupid after all. If you have HBO, you should watch it. I think you'd learn why things haven't turned out as planned and off as far as following to script.

I do not have HBO; I cannot afford it. Historical analysis has suggested  that FDR was right and Hoover was demonstrably wrong. Even Dubya knew this.

I look at the generational cycle, and I can conclude that it explains why the risk of another Great Depression would not emerge until the Double-Zero decade. Dubya promoted the real-estate bubble that would have been impossible in any decade from the 1930s to the 1990s, so he is in part culpable for the doomed boom.

As the conservative economist Friedrich Hayek (1898-1992) said of speculative booms, the devour capital, taking it away from investments in activities such as additions to plant and equipment in productive enterprise or in the formation of small businesses that could create more sustainable growth -- growth that does not depend upon people continuing to believe that something cannot be overpriced. The financial system fostered the idea that there never was a better investment than real estate even after the signs of instability began to appear.

People born as late as the early 1920s still had memories of the promises of new and unending prosperity, the New Era economics that the GOP rode under Harding, Coolidge, and (for a few short months) Hoover. Prosperity for the economic elites of the time  would solve all problems of inequity, and the common man was a fool if he did not grasp onto the rear bumpers of limousines with V-12 engines. As long as people born as late as the early 1920s were around they made certain that pie-in-the-sky speculation was not the norm. I remember when bankers followed the dictum that people should spend no more than 35% of their disposable income on real-estate costs (including interest on mortgages). Today people may be obliged to spend 70% of their income on rent that is an investment in little more than the enrichment of real-estate barons like Donald Trump.

During a Crisis Era, the unsustainable tends to implode. The juxtaposition of economic plenty that prices people out of Silicon Valley and offers no prospects in places like Detroit that was the equivalent of Silicon Valley today in the 1920s is a gross imbalance. We need to revitalize places like Detroit and St. Louis if we are to have a prosperous society that doesn't simply funnel the bounty of technological miracles as easy money to people who did nothing to create the wealth that they enjoy now.

I see President Trump as thesis and antithesis, and almost the political equivalent of matter and antimatter. That is what one gets with a demagogue who promises everything to everyone without concerning himself with how he can make the logical contradictions meld harmoniously. Many Americans recognized what a disaster Trump would be and have since proved right. Many hoped that he would give them what they saw of his offering that they wanted without bringing about the harm possible.

Truth and falsehood are both possible as faith, but not together. Matter and antimatter cannot coexist; they destroy each other. I already see my prediction of Trump vindicated. I am still terribly unhappy. The fellow who drove away from the party after having had too many drinks and crashed his car into a tree, taking a couple of his buddies with him, might well have heeded my advice that he call a cab or call a reliable friend to pick him and his buddies up. Instead I get to attend the funeral.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-19-2018, 12:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-18-2018, 06:01 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: No, you are lying again.  I will report violations of rules, regardless of the political affiliation of the violator, and regardless of whether the violation targets me.  You are only making me inclined to be more persistent about it to be uniform.  This site should be about politics and history, not about vendettas.  The rules should be and as far as I know do apply to all equally.

If I had a personal vendetta, you're life here would be miserable because I would be a full time poster like Eric coming at you viciously like Devils Advocate. He had a vendetta. Me, I viewed it more as business and I approached it that way. At what point do come to gripes with reality and give up the fight/dream? The blue flag alone isn't powerful enough to replace our flag.

Why should I care about someone who from my perspective is far out crazy? Why should I care about what you feel about me? However, I do care about this site. I want it to be centered on history and politics. I do not want it centered on the personal attacks. We cannot lose one of the few red leaning posters left, and have only people who agree with the blue patten left. What would be the fun of that? Against who would we sharpen our arguments, make what is going on clear?

I have long thought that people who switch over to personal attacks have lost their partisan arguments. There was an old saying that the first person who mentioned Hitler had lost. I find people who switch to garbage vendetta patterns have lost. They are just covering their retreat, switching the focus from politics and history to the personal. The other guy has triumphed. Someone going personal is in a way a cause for celebration, a sign prior arguments have won. A red losing is fine, or a blue, but a site that is dominated by personal attacks is not fine. An honorable poster would just admit his loss and not ruin the site.

(12-19-2018, 12:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I watched a show the other evening on HBO about the financial crisis. I think Bush summed it up pretty well, as the nation stood on the brink of the next Great Depression, he had a choice between Hoover or Roosevelt, he chose Roosevelt. The guy wasn't that stupid after all. If you have HBO, you should watch it. I think you'd learn why things haven't turned out as planned and off as far as following to script.

A clear good choice. It does not hide that the now traditional red financial policies, then as now, got us into trouble, that the red economics is messed up. It just took far less time for Trump to do the same. Bush 43 still got us in as much trouble as anyone since Hoover. With two more years of Trump likely, we will see. That which does not kill us makes the regeneracy closer.

Bush 43 had his deer in the headlights look, but was not as unintelligent as all that.

I think I already know why the standard red script went bad. Stimulating the economy full time whether things are good or bad is good in the short term, but things blow up in the long term. I'll still keep an eye out for the HBO special.

[pbrower2a]

All in all, I see the hard-line Red side losing. I shall soon have a post about polling of approval of the President that expresses a cause for the Republicans losing the House majority and several Governorships in 2018 and likely further losses in 2020. Conservatism used to imply moderation, personal responsibility, and national loyalty; it will imply such again -- but probably a few years into the upcoming 1T. Conservatism has become a euphemism for economic polarization, irresponsibility of people who have all the advantages, contempt for intellectual progress, and politics best described as win-at-all-costs, even fascism.

[David Horn]

(12-18-2018, 06:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity.  You have it backwards.

Other sites can be different.

While agreeing with your immediate point, this may be  a thread that's live beyond its days.  No one's budging, and tempers are rising.  Time to move on.

The thread has been off-subject for a long time anyway.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-19-2018, 10:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: All in all, I see the hard-line Red side losing. I shall soon have a post about polling of approval of the President that expresses a cause for the Republicans losing the House majority and several Governorships in 2018 and likely further losses in 2020. Conservatism used to imply moderation, personal responsibility, and national loyalty; it will imply such again -- but probably a few years into the upcoming 1T. Conservatism has become a euphemism for economic polarization, irresponsibility of people who have all the advantages, contempt for intellectual progress, and politics best described as win-at-all-costs, even fascism.

My mother used to argue for mixed government. Neither party should be allowed to go hog wild, to run amok, implement as country wide a pattern which is disliked by half the country. That is what I see as driving the see saw. You can not let the party in power have too much power. You minimize extreme politics by putting those in power out.

So it depends on how you define winning. Flipping the see saw at this point is not winning. You have to succeed so spectacularly that the see saw doesn't stand the risk of flipping back. You have to win the opposite aspect of the country well enough to stick.

[pbrower2a]

(12-19-2018, 11:21 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(12-19-2018, 10:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: All in all, I see the hard-line Red side losing. I shall soon have a post about polling of approval of the President that expresses a cause for the Republicans losing the House majority and several Governorships in 2018 and likely further losses in 2020. Conservatism used to imply moderation, personal responsibility, and national loyalty; it will imply such again -- but probably a few years into the upcoming 1T. Conservatism has become a euphemism for economic polarization, irresponsibility of people who have all the advantages, contempt for intellectual progress, and politics best described as win-at-all-costs, even fascism.

My mother used to argue for mixed government.  Neither party should be allowed to go hog wild, to run amok, implement as country wide a pattern which is disliked by half the country.  That is what I see as driving the see saw.  You can not let the party in power have too much power.  You minimize extreme politics by putting those in power out.

So it depends on how you define winning.  Flipping the see saw at this point is not winning.  You have to succeed so spectacularly that the see saw doesn't stand the risk of flipping back.  You have to win the opposite aspect of the country well enough to stick.

We have had two instances in which one of the two main Parties went into oblivion: Federalists and Whigs. In both cases the Democratic Party got a short-lived monopoly only to split into factions, one becoming a major Party. In the 1930s, following the 1936 election, the Democrats got a 322-103 majority (with two minor parties having 10 House seats), about a 70-30 split in Congressional representation.

It is up to those in power to act with conscience and regard for the rights of the Other Side.

Obviously both Parties contain constituencies incompatible with each other unless the economy is in free-fall or the nation is at war with an enemy as loathsome and menacing as Nazi Germany. Southern agrarian interests and the "Rockefeller Republicans" could never be in the same Party for long, as demonstrated in the overlay of Eisenhower and Obama elections.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-19-2018, 11:12 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-18-2018, 06:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity.  You have it backwards.

Other sites can be different.

While agreeing with your immediate point, this may be  a thread that's live beyond its days.  No one's budging, and tempers are rising.  Time to move on.

The thread has been off-subject for a long time anyway.

If you want to start a general red v blue thread, I would be game. We seem to need a place to talk more than the gun issue.

The gun issue has been talked to death.

I don't see the believers in prohibition doing due process on the questionably sane. In principle, without amending the Constitution, it would take only two people to remove a constitutional right. One would likely be a judge, the other a psychiatrist. One of the early standard model cases made the point that a constitutional right could not be removed without due process, which is why the no fly list didn't fly and the suicide by cop and mass shooter trends have not been quashed by legal action.

I am not seeing an armed rebellion while the see saw keeps flipping. If power is going to switch every 4 to 8 years anyway, folks are not going to start an armed conflict these days. The red belief that arms can be used to to fight a tyrannical federal government is not apt to be tested. Meanwhile, gun ownership's merits does change with population density, the country is going to be divided, and if we are going to go with the Constitution, there will be no change in the base laws.

But every issue has been talked to death. Isn't that why we are here?

I think we have reset recently, people are behaving. The moderator just has to be active every once in a while.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-19-2018, 11:47 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: We have had two instances in which one of the two main Parties went into oblivion: Federalists and Whigs. In both cases the Democratic Party got a short-lived monopoly only to split into factions, one becoming a major Party. In the 1930s, following the 1936 election, the Democrats got a 322-103 majority (with two minor parties having 10 House seats), about a 70-30 split in Congressional representation.

It is up to those in power to act with conscience and regard for the rights of the Other Side.

Obviously both Parties contain constituencies incompatible with each other unless the economy is in free-fall or the nation is at war with an enemy as loathsome and menacing as Nazi Germany. Southern agrarian interests and the "Rockefeller Republicans" could never be in the same Party for long, as demonstrated in the overlay of Eisenhower and Obama elections.

Since Nixon launched the Southern Strategy, the rural deplorables and the Republican Washington elites have been working together. Granted, the Republicans have in that time knit many diverse groups and interests together. Neo cons. Evangelicals. Small government believers. There is currently a lot of stress between the populist rural vote and the Washington elites.

We'll see. I have been hoping that eventually those who hate the Establishment will reach across the isle.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 08:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: A clear good choice.  It does not hide that the now traditional red financial policies, then as now, got us into trouble, that the red economics is messed up.  It just took far less time for Trump to do the same.  Bush 43 still got us in as much trouble as anyone since Hoover.  With two more years of Trump likely, we will see.  That which does not kill us makes the regeneracy closer.

Bush 43 had his deer in the headlights look, but was not as unintelligent as all that.

I think I already know why the standard red script went bad.  Stimulating the economy full time whether things are good or bad is good in the short term, but things blow up in the long term.  I'll still keep an eye out for the HBO special.

It's a VICE documentary. My view, full time Keynesian as we see/ know of today is not good for the entire country. Keynesian is not running on script as far as it was originally intended to be used, Keynesian is supposed to be only used as a temporary fill in during crisis's and hard times. Right now, how many blues are employed or financially supported by Keynesian economics. How many blues are reliant on social programs associated with Keynesian economics? How many people lost homes and experienced financial set backs and hardship because of Keynesian economics? We have two economic systems operating in the country. We have an American system and a Keynesian system. What happened to "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your  country" and what happened to Martin Luther Kings vision along with his ideals for America? Where did they go and who is teaching them these days? In my opinion, we have a blue scourge that's larger and more powerful than the red scourge you're railing about all the time these days. However, I don't believe the blue scourge is powerful enough to overthrow America. I mean, we are just using words right now. I have more powerful things other than words that can be utilized and brought to bear. Think of it this way, I'm just one member of 60 some million members on the American right these days that are active. The 60 some million does not include those who are currently inactive or those who will eventually switch sides and join. Now, this is just my view. You're entitled to stick with your own view and promote your views if you so choose.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 11:21 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: My mother used to argue for mixed government.  Neither party should be allowed to go hog wild, to run amok, implement as country wide a pattern which is disliked by half the country.  That is what I see as driving the see saw.  You can not let the party in power have too much power.  You minimize extreme politics by putting those in power out.

So it depends on how you define winning.  Flipping the see saw at this point is not winning.  You have to succeed so spectacularly that the see saw doesn't stand the risk of flipping back.  You have to win the opposite aspect of the country well enough to stick.

I think you and I are on the same page as far as how we are viewing what's going on politically. I see the recent blue victory in the House as loss for the blue side and view it as win for the American side so to speak. By the way, I do not see the deplorable as you say as being on the American side. I view them as social/political outcasts that Americans on both sides want nothing to do with these day. But, they're people and people have the right to vote in America and how they vote, who they support and for what reasons are largely viewed as personal by Americans these days.

[David Horn]

(12-19-2018, 11:21 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(12-19-2018, 10:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: All in all, I see the hard-line Red side losing. I shall soon have a post about polling of approval of the President that expresses a cause for the Republicans losing the House majority and several Governorships in 2018 and likely further losses in 2020. Conservatism used to imply moderation, personal responsibility, and national loyalty; it will imply such again -- but probably a few years into the upcoming 1T. Conservatism has become a euphemism for economic polarization, irresponsibility of people who have all the advantages, contempt for intellectual progress, and politics best described as win-at-all-costs, even fascism.

My mother used to argue for mixed government.  Neither party should be allowed to go hog wild, to run amok, implement as country wide a pattern which is disliked by half the country.  That is what I see as driving the see saw.  You can not let the party in power have too much power.  You minimize extreme politics by putting those in power out.

So it depends on how you define winning.  Flipping the see saw at this point is not winning.  You have to succeed so spectacularly that the see saw doesn't stand the risk of flipping back.  You have to win the opposite aspect of the country well enough to stick.

Keeping everything Even-Steven is a recipe for inaction … which is essentially the conservative option.  With Trump now occupying that space, that's less true, but it still favors doing nothing rather than something.  We've had 45 years of doing nothing or doing something and reversing it soon after, which ha's left us with a massive infrastructure backlog, near record inequality and no viable response to AGW.  I think I'll pass.

[David Horn]

(12-19-2018, 01:18 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-19-2018, 08:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: A clear good choice.  It does not hide that the now traditional red financial policies, then as now, got us into trouble, that the red economics is messed up.  It just took far less time for Trump to do the same.  Bush 43 still got us in as much trouble as anyone since Hoover.  With two more years of Trump likely, we will see.  That which does not kill us makes the regeneracy closer.

Bush 43 had his deer in the headlights look, but was not as unintelligent as all that.

I think I already know why the standard red script went bad.  Stimulating the economy full time whether things are good or bad is good in the short term, but things blow up in the long term.  I'll still keep an eye out for the HBO special.

It's a VICE documentary. My view, full time Keynesian as we see/ know of today is not good for the entire country. Keynesian is not running on script as far as it was originally intended to be used, Keynesian is supposed to be only used as a temporary fill in during crisis's and hard times. Right now, how many blues are employed or financially supported by Keynesian economics. How many blues are reliant on social programs associated with Keynesian economics? How many people lost homes and experienced financial set backs and hardship because of Keynesian economics? We have two economic systems operating in the country. We have an American system and a Keynesian system. 

I think you misunderstand Keynes.  His argument was less about specific policy and more about keeping the ship on course and upright.  So when a recession occurs, using Keynesian arguments, the government should borrow and spend.  When the private sector is banging, the government should limit spending and raise taxes.  In the first case, public spending compensates for the loss of private activity.  In the second, the government keeps the economy from overheating.  Keynes plays both ways.

C-Xer Wrote:What happened to "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your  country" and what happened to Martin Luther Kings vision along with his ideals for America? Where did they go and who is teaching them these days? In my opinion, we have a blue scourge that's larger and more powerful than the red scourge you're railing about all the time these days. However, I don't believe the blue scourge is powerful enough to overthrow America. I mean, we are just using words right now. I have more powerful things other than words that can be utilized and brought to bear. Think of it this way, I'm just one member of 60 some million members on the American right these days that are active. The 60 some million does not include those who are currently inactive or those who will eventually switch sides and join. Now, this is just my view. You're entitled to stick with your own view and promote your views if you so choose.

What Blue Scourge exactly?  What is happening on the Left that has you so angry?  If it's Antifa, then give me a break.  They're a small disjointed group of zealots with no real power and not all that much activism.  If, on the other hand, its the general drift of society toward a more open acceptance of <insert the  subset of your choice>, then you're fighting against inevitable change.  Winning, even in the short term, is becoming less likely by the day.  If it's the urban/rural thing, then I'm totally baffled.

Here in Virginia, the recent changes in Federal tax law created an unexpected $500 Million state tax windfall.  A statewide survey was taken asking, 'what shall we do with this windfall?':  The options: allow refunds with the Earned Income Tax Credit exceeded the amount of owed tax, and a simple tax refund to all taxpayers.  The poorest counties in the state, where the credit would have had real impact, voted for the refund, which virtually none of them were qualified to get.  In the rich counties, the opposite result occurred.  When asked about it, the voters in the rich counties indicated that they didn't need the money as much as the poorer state residents.  Voters in the poor counties said, the tax refund was a Republican idea and credit was a Democratic idea, so they opposed the credit.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 08:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Why should I care about someone who from my perspective is far out crazy?  Why should I care about what you feel about me?  However, I do care about this site.  I want it to be centered on history and politics.  I do not want it centered on the personal attacks.  We cannot lose one of the few red leaning posters left, and have only people who agree with the blue patten left.  What would be the fun of that?  Against who would we sharpen our arguments, make what is going on clear?

I have long thought that people who switch over to personal attacks have lost their partisan arguments.  There was an old saying that the first person who mentioned Hitler had lost.  I find people who switch to garbage vendetta patterns have lost.  They are just covering their retreat, switching the focus from politics and history to the personal.  The other guy has triumphed.  Someone going personal is in a way a cause for celebration, a sign prior arguments have won.  A red losing is fine, or a blue, but a site that is dominated by personal attacks is not fine.  An honorable poster would just admit his loss and not ruin the site.

You should care if someone from your perspective has a perspective that's messing up or over shadowing your perspective. Is he part of your perspective or are you part of his perspective? He's paid to be be here. You're not, So, what does your perspective mean to me compared to the perspective of a blue who is funded by American tax dollars and private donations from blues and foreign interests abroad that are being funneled in illegally. My advice, keep an eye on your own and don't worry about us or the Evangelicals or the deplorable as say. If Eric lives to see the blue crisis, Eric will be swinging from his own rope.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 02:41 PM)David Horn Wrote: What Blue Scourge exactly?  What is happening on the Left that has you so angry?  If it's Antifa, then give me a break.  They're a small disjointed group of zealots with no real power and not all that much activism.  If, on the other hand, its the general drift of society toward a more open acceptance of <insert the  subset of your choice>, then you're fighting against inevitable change.  Winning, even in the short term, is becoming less likely by the day.  If it's the urban/rural thing, then I'm totally baffled.

I agree, the blue scourge is nothing compared to size of the American right. Antifa is a blue problem and as long as Antifa remains a blue city problem and does not stray then all's good with the American Right.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 02:18 PM)David Horn Wrote: Keeping everything Even-Steven is a recipe for inaction … which is essentially the conservative option.  With Trump now occupying that space, that's less true, but it still favors doing nothing rather than something.  We've had 45 years of doing nothing or doing something and reversing it soon after, which ha's left us with a massive infrastructure backlog, near record inequality and no viable response to AGW.  I think I'll pass.

The Republicans don't have option/luxury of doing nothing these days. The Republican inability and willingness to do nothing about relevant resulted in job losses.and forced retirements.

[Ragnarök_62]

(12-15-2018, 07:50 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-13-2018, 05:53 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: I have to go with C-Xer here but for different reasons. The US has a good thing going for it with a crashing birth rate. Now we need to close the border to get 0 or negative population growth.  The population's to damn high. I'd rather take a voluntary population reduction instead of mother earth smacking it down. Always remember and never forget, perpetual growth is the philosophy of a cancer cell. As far as the work done by illegal aliens, well, it the labor supply is shut off, meat packing plants etc. can improve wages and working conditions or just shut down as far as I'm concerned. With that in mind, any company that hires illegals needs a big fat fine and if the violation is too egregious , then the owners go off to jail. These companies really need to just automate their work anyway. That's the best option and they need a swift kick in the ass with a steel toed boot to get going.

We'll have to disagree on most of this.  

POPULATION: The carrying level of earth is not infinite, that's for sure, but the US in an underpopulated nation.  If we had India's landmass and population, I'd be with you 100%.

FOOD: I'm not a fan of the food industry, but I know that boutique food prepared by well paid workers is out of the question.  First, the cost is astronomical.  We can't function on bread that costs $8 to $20 a loaf, or meat that's $20 to $100 a pound.  More to the point, if we press that, the entire industry will immediately begin the transition to robots, which is inevitable in the long run but will starve a lot of people in the short run.  I don't have any answers here, but, for now, we need the corrupt system we have.

Yup We disagree, to wit.

1. Bread.  Grain and its products are pretty much automated, so I don't see any significant price rises there.

2. Veggies/fruities.  We have farmer's markets here and the blueberries I bought came from Chile. So there is room for the users of illicit labor to go cold turkey for a while until they can mechanize their stuff.

3. The US is stuffed with people compared to Russia and Canada. In addition , the US can't seem to take care of its own. We're a #shithole country you know.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017...nt-poverty
https://www.dailywire.com/news/12001/san...nk-berrien
https://gizmodo.com/reminder-amazon-trea...1792642652

4.  Uh, how would folks starve if we shut down illegal immigration and send the illegal aliens already here back home?  Methinks replacing illegal aliens with citizens would make citizens get more pay due to an engineered worker shortage.

5. Climate change is gonna make for lots of internal refugees.  Like what happens when the Colorado River runs dry, Florida becomes home to the fishes along with lots of beachfront property.

6. Now of course we need to exile Neocons from power so we can leave Latin America alone. The sanctions against Cuba and Valenzuela need to just go the fuck away. It's none of our business how other countries run themselves.

[Classic-Xer]

(12-19-2018, 03:58 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: You used a particularly-vile, pointless insult using the infamous F-bomb. You will notice that I do not use such language in this forum. I wish that you would apologize for using it, as much for its pointlessness as for its offense. I have known of sites that expel posters for such. Surely you will remember what I did to kia 67 when he urged someone to commit suicide. Such is not a vendetta; such is basic decency. I may not be the nicest person in existence, but I recognize  the desirability of treating people humanely. It does more good and causes less pain.

The bold-faced you specifically means Classic X'er. I rarely discuss posters, but in this case such is necessary.

I have no desire to replace Old Glory. Forty-eight stars and thirteen stripes marched into Dachau and Mauthausen, signaling the end to some of the most shameful things that people have ever done to others. Old Glory marched with people who sought to end segregation in the South. That flag ideally stands for what is best in our character as a People. I simply want it to stand for such again, and I do not want it shamed with evil deeds of our leaders.

I am KIA 67. So, I am aware of what you did to KIA 67 and so is the moderator of this site. The F-bomb was not pointless, the F-bomb was directed a Bob for a valid reason which most if not all regular folks would recognize/see and understand and not have an issue with the way it was used at all. Unless you're name is Bob, I suggest that you learn how to keep your nose in your own business.

You're special, you have illness that requires special treatment and special rules and a special environment for you to function in without being set off or hurt emotionally that results with you doing something foolish to yourself or others. Well, you are breaking rules or ignoring sound advice from your doctor or trained professionals associated with your care. What are you doing here?

If I owned this site, do you think you'd be able to remain posting here? Nope! I wouldn't want the liability of you being around here or places like these. So, we have an issue here. So, unless you're lying which is a possibility here as well. You should consider yourself as having been placed on notice and consider your time posting here as limited.

[Ragnarök_62]

(12-19-2018, 01:18 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-19-2018, 08:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: A clear good choice.  It does not hide that the now traditional red financial policies, then as now, got us into trouble, that the red economics is messed up.  It just took far less time for Trump to do the same.  Bush 43 still got us in as much trouble as anyone since Hoover.  With two more years of Trump likely, we will see.  That which does not kill us makes the regeneracy closer.

Bush 43 had his deer in the headlights look, but was not as unintelligent as all that.

I think I already know why the standard red script went bad.  Stimulating the economy full time whether things are good or bad is good in the short term, but things blow up in the long term.  I'll still keep an eye out for the HBO special.

It's a VICE documentary. My view, full time Keynesian as we see/ know of today is not good for the entire country. Keynesian is not running on script as far as it was originally intended to be used, Keynesian is supposed to be only used as a temporary fill in during crisis's and hard times. Right now, how many blues are employed or financially supported by Keynesian economics. How many blues are reliant on social programs associated with Keynesian economics? How many people lost homes and experienced financial set backs and hardship because of Keynesian economics? We have two economic systems operating in the country. We have an American system and a Keynesian system. What happened to "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your  country" and what happened to Martin Luther Kings vision along with his ideals for America? Where did they go and who is teaching them these days? In my opinion, we have a blue scourge that's larger and more powerful than the red scourge you're railing about all the time these days. However, I don't believe the blue scourge is powerful enough to overthrow America. I mean, we are just using words right now. I have more powerful things other than words that can be utilized and brought to bear. Think of it this way, I'm just one member of 60 some million members on the American right these days that are active. The 60 some million does not include those who are currently inactive or those who will eventually switch sides and join. Now, this is just my view. You're entitled to stick with your own view and promote your views if you so choose.

I think the transnational corporations, CEO's , and fatcats need to pay up first. Why should poor folk sacrifice anything when stuff like Trump's tax cuts are only for his cronies? Let's do this. Let's cut the defense budget by 90% , repeal/replace Trump's tax cuts,  make GM repay their subsidies, delete all tax breaks for everyone, sanction tax shelters, gut patent protections, and pop the cap on social security and Medicare. We also need to exile Neoliberals from power like those fucked up Neocons. I'll be all ears once the above is done. We're not really doing Kennesian stuff now, it's all Milton Friedman's moneterist economics. Zirp and Nirp are all moneterists trash. I hope the Fed raises interest rates back up to 18% so all of our stupid bubbles pop.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-19-2018, 02:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I think you and I are on the same page as far as how we are viewing what's going on politically. I see the recent blue victory in the House as loss for the blue side and view it as win for the American side so to speak.

Similar. As long as power in Congress is switching more blue I see it a to the bluish advantage, but we have not yet seen a regeneracy. Far to soon to say the see saw has stopped.

(12-19-2018, 02:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: By the way, I do not see the deplorable as you say as being on the American side. I view them as social/political outcasts that Americans on both sides want nothing to do with these day. But, they're people and people have the right to vote in America and how they vote, who they support and for what reasons are largely viewed as personal by Americans these days.

By may own schemes, the deplorables are closer to Agricultural Age tribal thinking, the violent anti fada into equality, so the usual labeling of the two groups as red and blue is about right. That is also how they vote, and indicates their political affiliation. That does not mean every red agrees with the deplorables, or every blue with the violent anti fada. If I were to list out my priorities and allies I would seek, the violent anti fada would not not be among them. I'm sure you feel the same way about the deplorables.

But if you are going with the red - blue divide rather than some personal wishlist, they unfortunately belong.