The Maelstrom of Violence

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-23-2017, 10:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 04:53 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 01:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Don't assume that because that's your method of assessment, that Kinser is doing the same thing.  He does have data for his assessments, though he is also making some

Well, first, Kinser is pretty unique.  I don't think anyone is doing the same thing as Kinser.

Oh please, you sound like you've never seen a black man who is conservative on some issues before.  Which if you've ever seen a black man at all, you've probably seen a black man who is conservative on some issues.

That would assume I have a bin labeled ‘conservative black’.  Everyone in the bin is considered alike.  I would supposedly act on that presumption freely.

Frankly, you are pretty unique.  If you really act on such stereotype, you miss a lot.  I’m pretty unique too, I think.  I hope my unwillingness to submit to stereotype isn’t part of my uniqueness.

But there is an assumption here of stereotype, that I do treat all conservative blacks alike.  Wrong.  Regarding human beings, figuring out values is part of it.  Thus, you are already more than a pigmentation level and position on the classic liberal - conservative continuum.  If all I am or all anyone is to you is a pigmentation level and a position of the liberal - conservative continuum, no wonder you are so far off in your judgements.  We are more than that.

There is a too often seen pattern on these forums.  Something real is turned into something else and stomped on.   Somehow, it is assumed that the something real is damaged in the process.  My way of thought has been badly misrepresented.  One comes to assume that if you do it often to me, you do it often to everyone.  I feel like this has happened.  As long as you are so obsessed on your stereotypes, can’t or won’t see the reality, it will continue to happen.

***

I proposed that a perspective that tries to encompass both sides of the story, a more nuanced view, will always be more complex than a nuanced perspective that sees only one side.  In the same way an attempt to be scientific rather than partisan political will often be more complex.  I’m feeling my current problem is simple world views that try to prove rather that describe.  They won’t accept nuance.

Not quite sure yet what to do with it.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-24-2017, 12:53 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Not much point in answering someone who fails to understand that goods and services which must be consumed for any quality of life must be produced somehow, and thus that quality of life is inherently about economics.  And even if he could understand that, he's admitted he doesn't understand economics, so he wouldn't be able to understand the explanations anyway.

Warren is into one obsolete and questionable school of economics. I'll let others better trained go after the nuances. The key is that his school has failed whenever tried. That makes much of what he says useless or worse. Touching foils with Just Passing Through taught the futility of going up against a true believer unless you are as much into his specialty as the true believer. Thus, I watch from the background and quietly smile.

But he is that values locked flavor of useless. He will not listen or change. He has found a system that tells him what he wants to hear. He will speak as if empowered. He is quite capable of convincing those already convinced.

But on a positive note, he is very much into political correctness. Oh. Except. Warren, what is the politically correct way to refer to members of the prominent German party during World War II? I wouldn't want to hurt your delicate sensibilities.

[Warren Dew]

(09-24-2017, 07:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 11:50 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 11:37 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

Quote:

Quote:It's a matter of perception, and I can think of two attributes of you to which you admit.

Perception matters, you've chosen to perceive yourself as a victim and thus you become one.  You're not prey, you're a predator, but instead of using strength or intellect or even cunning to achieve your ends you use pathetic-ness.  You are a vampire and your blood is the altruism of others.  Indeed I'd say that if you were a Rick and Morty character you'd be Jerry.    I recommend watching season 3 episode 5.

http://www.toonova.net/rick-and-morty-se...-episode-5

I'd rather not be a victim. My parents mishandled me because I didn't create any problems. The K-12 educational system saw me as a model student, and again I didn't create any problems. I was the sort to run away from fights, and I played by the rules. Be a conformist, but don't be perfect at it? I was a satisfying compromise.

But had I known I would have done many things differently.

What do you think your parents should have done differently?  What would you have done differently?

If you were a model student, did you go to college?  What degree did you get?

University of California, Berkeley. Economics.

In retrospect, yeah, not a great degree for aspies.  The natural follow on would be an MBA and a job that involved lots of human interaction - the kind of job aspies are worst at.

Still, my degree is not in what I'm now doing either.

[pbrower2a]

I wish that it had been psychology so that I would have been 'introduced' to the topic in Abnormal Psychology. I would have recognized myself.

Oh, so you can't stand rock concerts because they are just too loud? That would have been a tip-off.

[Warren Dew]

(09-24-2017, 04:20 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I wish that it had been psychology so that I would have been 'introduced' to the  topic in Abnormal Psychology. I would have recognized myself.  

Oh, so you can't stand rock concerts because they are just too loud? That would have been a tip-off.

Why do you think knowing about the issue would have been better?  What would you have done differently with your life?

[Kinser79]

(09-24-2017, 12:53 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 10:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

Quote:Your case, you might begin to understand where I'm coming from.  I see you as having strong if questionable financial values.  Most every argument you make is from economics.  That's make it your clear center.  You argue a lot with those who believe quality of life ought to be move valued, more central.  I am one of the later.  As usual, I'd like to see a floor protecting that which is truly important.  I'd like to see everyone contribute to sharing risks and costs.

When it comes to Warren, he can answer as he sees fit.

Not much point in answering someone who fails to understand that goods and services which must be consumed for any quality of life must be produced somehow, and thus that quality of life is inherently about economics.  And even if he could understand that, he's admitted he doesn't understand economics, so he wouldn't be able to understand the explanations anyway.

Ultimately everything boils down to acquisition of goods and services so failure to understand at least a basic level of economics really is a failure to really understand anything.

[Kinser79]

(09-24-2017, 06:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I really shouldn’t break into other’s people’s striped exchanges.

Then don't.  I find that if two other people are having an A to B conversation it is prudent for me to C my way out of the area.  It saves a lot of headaches.

I am familiar with the method.  Once upon a time, a 'teacher' would give two bad options and try to force each student to embrace a bad choice.  C was practically required.  I still wonder what would have happened if I had encounter Thoreau's Civil Disobedience before he so kindly invited me down to the office for taking a quite defensible choice C.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  But I will say this about Thoreau, I have always found his works to be rather insipid, but then again Fredrick Douglas has always resonated with me more strongly than any of the trancendentalists who mostly scribbled what looks like woo-woo on the level that Eric posts every day.

Quote:But if the choice is be tween speaking and silence, C is not an option, and guess which choice is the more likely?

Well knowing you Bob, you'd rather remove all doubt than not remove all doubt.  If the choice is between speaking and silence in a conversation between two other individuals to which I was not invited, I prefer to keep my silence.  It is far better to be silent and have people think you a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: But you have called his councilor unqualified,

The fact that his councilor is titled "councilor" indicates that he is not a psychologist and thus not qualified to diagnose anything.  Ergo he is unqualified and PBR taking the at best educated guess of a somewhat astute amateur would be just the same as me taking medical advice as to my own health from the local veterinarian.

I'm no great expert, but there is a different sorts of folks qualified to treat mental disease.  Some prescribe drugs.  There is in many states a link of titles to roles.  If it is like other professions, the better the degree, the more compensation.  I wouldn't expect too much more than you pay for.

I can respect a decision to stick with the top of the list, but it is a personal decision, and your personal decision.  You are not the pope to try to force your options on all.[/quote]

I don't think the Pope himself has the power to force his opinion on anyone, otherwise there would be no Protestants.  In any event, it does not take a doctorate degree to understand that title reflects one's education.  Given the choice between taking the mumbling of a drug addict councilor who may or may not deal with persons on the Spectrum in any professional capacity or desiring a diagnosis from a licensed specialist (and I assure you Michigan does require psychologists to be licensed) is not a matter of preference.

One is an at best educated guess, the other is an actual diagnosis.  What is telling is that PBR glommed onto this so-called diagnosis as soon as it was no longer reasonable for him to blame his parents for every single one of his failings.  Given his history I have every aspect that he was looking for a new excuse now that the old one was no longer feasible.

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: himself a liar-predator,

I've caught him in lies and he is a predator.  Unlike many stereotypical predators he uses pity rather than violence or psychological manipulation as his weapon of choice.

I won't say there aren't liars or predators out there.  People from different environments may have seem more or fewer.  Your jump is premature.[/quote]

If someone lies then they are a liar.  If someone actively seeks to take advantage of a weakness or weaknesses in others then they are a predator.  I try to avoid one of those behaviors.

My jump was not premature, it took me years to conclude that he is every bit exactly like the character Jerry from Rick and Morty.  The unfortunate aspect of this realization is that I'm essentially Rick.

I recommend watching the series if you can stomach adult cartoons.

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: and maligned the motives of politicians.

Really?  Who?  Where?  The proof of the pudding is in the eating.  If the eating results in controllable voting blocks that are kept at a minimal level of comfort on the verge of absolute destitution save they continue to elect their political masters then it becomes self-evident that even if the intent of the policy in question was morally positive the RESULT (which is what really matters) is morally negative.

In the case of welfare and entitlements we are far removed from when they were instated, and the politicians who created these programs are long out of office and in many cases long dead.

You describe well the Democrats of the Great Society era well, and point out that they were doing what politicians do... serve the people, and serve the people in an arguably harmful way that builds popularity and power.  Don't pretend you haven't advocated populist politicians. [/quote]

I did describe them accurately, and it also applies to the current crop of Dims too.  As for populist politicans, actually I haven't.  Daddy isn't a politician which is why the Swamp hates him.  

 

Quote:Banning or flaming against people who find politicians flawed would ban or flame a lot of people.

I'm going to "flame" whomever I choose to, for whatever reason I choose too.  If that hurts your fee fees I don't care.  Fuck your fee fees!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph...id=5749210

As for banning...I'm not interested in banning anyone unless they're up on the forum posting tons of spam or porn or something.  

Quote:I personally think, assuming the US remains recognizable, that there will be more people paying into the system than abusing it.

This is a failure to understand basic economics that I assume Warren will bring up at some point.  Let me put it simply.  More people have to be working and paying taxes to pay for what we have now.  Otherwise it will collapse.  Socialism is inherently unstable, eventually you always run out of other people's money.

Quote: I oppose welfare of the employable as a way of life.  Make as many helpful suggestions as you please.

Yeah it is called get a job or go to school.  If one is able bodied and doesn't do either, then he isn't ENTITLED to shit.  I have no problem with welfare for the actually disabled (and no PBR being on the autistic spectrum doesn't fucking count), the very young, the very old and the very sick.  If my desire to have able bodied people in education or employment for their livelihood makes me a monster, so be it.

Quote: I have trouble with the extreme partisan who is always ready to see one extreme or the other, in this case always seeing liar predators on one side or innocent victims needing help on the other.  Let's learn to tell the difference and act accordingly.

 I would say that it is you who needs to learn the difference, not myself.  My bullshit detector is in perfect working order, yours is suspect.

Quote:

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: To a great degree, you have done so without real evidence.  For the most part, you are running off stereotypes that come from your world view.  Rather than listen to the person who is at the center of the discussion, you assert your stereotypes as fact.  Your stereotypes become true because you assert them to be?

Great, we have another who can't come up with an original argument.  Back to your papal bull meme again.  When it comes to my view of PBR it is formed off of his statements and his actions.  Is my interpretation of those statements and actions influenced by my world view?  Yes, but whose isn't?  Certainly not yours.

You do dictate, confuse your opinions with objective reality more than most.  Yes, everyone's opinions will tend to follow their worldview.

This is merely projection.  Here you are doing precisely that and yet cliaming I'm doing so.  As I've said my views of other board members are based on their statements and posts through out the years.  It doesn't get more objective than that.

Quote:

(09-23-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 12:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: To a great degree, you have done so without real evidence. Some need a short period of help to get back in the game.  Some are fully and permanently disabled.  They can’t and won’t ever be in the game again.  With the latter sort of exception, welfare shouldn’t be a predator centered permanent way of life.  There is a definite difference between welfare providing a safety net, and a dole allowing lazy predators to live off others.  If I could make it so, promote the former, end the latter, I would.

In the former there is private and religious charity and social fraternities as there were in the 19th century.  In the latter there is of course the family.  After all, it is usually considered unconscionable to allow one's parents or children and so on starve.

Welfare as directed by the state must be a parasitic relationship though.  Why?  Because it is paid for by taking wealth from those who produce, by force (cause if you don't pay your taxes men with guns and blue uniforms show up and cart you off to a jail), and is given to those who do not.  As for those currently on the dole I would say that a large number of them are parasites living at the expense of the body politic, and furthermore have every reason to do so because a welfare mother with 3 children in section 8 housing and on SNAP would have to make around 68K/year to maintain the lifestyle that is provided by welfare.  Generally speaking such persons have neither the skills nor the resources to make that happen, otherwise they would.

Go back to the 19th century?  Really?  In this day and age, that is a non starter.

Yeah well there not being a Soviet Union was once thought to be a "non starter" too, and yet here we are a quarter century without the USSR.  Seriously the dissolution of the USSR took Washington completely by surprise.  Perhaps a total collapse  of the welfare state will take you by surprise.

Quote: I know Trump is intuitive and unconventional, but that's beyond even him.

No it isn't.  He simply needs to not do anything and it will come down on its own.  That is precisely his plan with Obamacare, he is actually using the inability of the "conservative" side of the Uniparty to do anything against them.

Quote:You are using the anarchy argument there.  If you don't obey, guys with guns will show up, yada yada yada.  If you are going to support the leader of the US Republican party, using the anarchy argument is inconsistent at best.

As Philip Johnson said:  The first complete sentence out of my mouth was probably that line about consistency being the hobgoblin of small minds.

Quote: Granted, there is a great deal of truth to it.  The basis of all government is force.  This doesn't mean humankind isn't a political animal who will form groups, claim territory, make laws, etc...  Stepping back all the way to the anarchy argument is not to my mind appropriate.  It pretends to make people into non people.

Are you stupid?  Government is force, it has always been force, and always will be force.  The main difference between a state's government and the mafia is that the government on occasion throws a public popularity contest where as the mafia has no need for such extravagances.

Man in his primordial state is in a state of anarchy.  Indeed I'd go so far as to say that anarchy is man's natural state, and wanting to have civilization yet remain as close to the natural state as possible I have slowly, accepted that minarchism is a requirement to maintain civilization.

As for your last question I don't think it possible for me to ever satisfactorily answer it for you.

[Kinser79]

(09-24-2017, 11:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 10:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 04:53 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 01:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Don't assume that because that's your method of assessment, that Kinser is doing the same thing.  He does have data for his assessments, though he is also making some

Well, first, Kinser is pretty unique.  I don't think anyone is doing the same thing as Kinser.

Oh please, you sound like you've never seen a black man who is conservative on some issues before.  Which if you've ever seen a black man at all, you've probably seen a black man who is conservative on some issues.

That would assume I have a bin labeled ‘conservative black’.  Everyone in the bin is considered alike.  I would supposedly act on that presumption freely.

So clearly you didn't understand my post at all.

[pbrower2a]

(09-24-2017, 05:19 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 04:20 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I wish that it had been psychology so that I would have been 'introduced' to the  topic in Abnormal Psychology. I would have recognized myself.  

Oh, so you can't stand rock concerts because they are just too loud? That would have been a tip-off.

Why do you think knowing about the issue would have been better?  What would you have done differently with your life?

Knowing about a problem can put one in a better position in which to deal with it. I would have realized that being smart enough to do the job is not enough.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-24-2017, 09:59 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 11:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 10:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 04:53 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 01:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Don't assume that because that's your method of assessment, that Kinser is doing the same thing.  He does have data for his assessments, though he is also making some

Well, first, Kinser is pretty unique.  I don't think anyone is doing the same thing as Kinser.

Oh please, you sound like you've never seen a black man who is conservative on some issues before.  Which if you've ever seen a black man at all, you've probably seen a black man who is conservative on some issues.

That would assume I have a bin labeled ‘conservative black’.  Everyone in the bin is considered alike.  I would supposedly act on that presumption freely.

So clearly you didn't understand my post at all.

Possibly not.  You are a rational sentient being, and should be treated as such, as unique, as judged by yourself rather than your skin pigmentation.  I live in the suburbs, and may have had different life experiences than you, different ideas on people.  Those I have seen have succeed at the economic games and don't play the victim card often.  You obsess on a different culture.

Unique was supposed to be a mutual complement saying I'm paying attention to a person who is worth paying attention to.

The people I have met have been software engineers, retired military, experienced role players, folks who have retired on a waterfront property, not professional leeches and victim card players.  Each in their own way have done well in messy environments.  It is not hard at all to treat them as equals.  Your obsession with skin pigmentation is fairly rare to me.  This would be part of why we see people so differently.

[pbrower2a]

(09-23-2017, 07:24 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 01:13 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: What's your opinion of PB? Who is PB? This may surprise you, I didn't form my opinion/view of PB. The Republicans didn't form them of PB or you or any other blue poster for that matter. PB formed my opinion of him and my feelings toward him. PB and I are different people who handle situations/things and approach things differently. You are pretty loose with your use/understanding/view of vile stereotype, world views and values to explain/define our differences and opinions of each other.

Pbrower likes classical stuff, apparently above my own highly selective tastes.  I'm really into a few well known classic pieces, but am otherwise more diverse.  Bach. Scott Joplin, Gershwin, Lennon.  All are cool from my perspective.  He leans heavily blue, likely heavier than I.  We disagree a lot on the Second Amendment and role of the Supreme Court.  I have no reason to go after him personally.  None.  Well, I'll be noisy when he repeats his opinions of the Second or the Supreme Court.  I'll let him speak on his own problems.

Maybe that is one way for me to deal with my inadequacies.

Quote:I didn't say all Republicans think anything of Pbrower.  I said Kinser did.  That's different.  Yes, smaller taxes, spending less on Americans and providing bad medical coverage to the poor are part of the Unraveling memes.  I certainly would not be surprised by a general opinion by a Republican in that vague direction.  Liar and predator are problematic, much more personal.  There comes with such an assumption that anyone who uses government services does so in a spirit of hunting, that lying is a presumed common tool.

I at least recognize deceitful and predatory behavior as destructive tendencies that first rend a social fabric and even family life of the trust necessary for economic functions. I know at least two sociopaths in my extended family. I'm not going into details on how I know this. For whatever successes they have had, they have had shabby lives (other than material indulgence) off their jobs. I would not pull some of the stunts that they have done.

At the least I do not have an evil personality. The only way in which I will ever get into prison is as a political offender (if the Trump Presidency should become the norm, then I might end up in a labor camp in which I do not last long). I have a conscience. The main religious values that I have are monotheism (if one defines God as a unifying reality from which come all mathematical and physical law and the dialectical reality) and the idea that that God will hold us accountable for what we do to and for others.

Quote:That is, at core, a stereotype.  Those from the other side supposedly think alike, it is fully assumed, and one can treat the opposition as if the stereotype is a universal truth.  No.  That degree of prejudice should not pass without firm comment.  I'm not saying that this doesn't go two ways.

Stereotypes are unreliable for making executive decisions.

Quote:In a way, I can see how Kinser comes from a place where he has seen many lying predators.  He can believe sincerely that his stereotype is true, even if it is not, even if his intense faith in this idea shapes his idea of the world.  I can also approve his rejection of the victim card, how one should burn it, be above it.  It often sets one back.  Some of Kinser's beliefs can be respected. honored, can certainly admired.

Beyond any question -- he has probably encountered far more horrible or even dangerous people than I have. Welfare does create a culture of hustles even in disability. Such is not good for supporting optimism about human nature, an optimism that one needs for coping with realities of American life. But it is probably too late for me to make a life that will satisfy me even economically unless it involves marrying a rich widow. It is hard to start over at my age. Had I known about Asperger's at an early age I would be  one who overcame instead of a victim.

My parents told me that whatever I do, avoid the mental health system. One might be branded as 'crazy' or face the horrors of confinement after some convenient diagnosis... paranoid schizophrenia, perhaps?... suitable for permanent institutionalization.

Quote:I'm often not thrilled by the way he chooses to express his ideas, but there is more than one way to speak and listen.

But I'll call out this stereotype.  Not everyone is as he believes.  Some have motivations which he doesn't respect or understand.

Much so.  That's not to say many of us know people who have abominable motivations.

[Warren Dew]

(09-24-2017, 11:06 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 05:19 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 04:20 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I wish that it had been psychology so that I would have been 'introduced' to the  topic in Abnormal Psychology. I would have recognized myself.  

Oh, so you can't stand rock concerts because they are just too loud? That would have been a tip-off.

Why do you think knowing about the issue would have been better?  What would you have done differently with your life?

Knowing about a problem can put one in a better position in which to deal with it. I would have realized that being smart enough to do the job is not enough.

What would you have done differently?  Gone for different jobs, done the same jobs differently?

[pbrower2a]

(09-25-2017, 09:04 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 11:06 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 05:19 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 04:20 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I wish that it had been psychology so that I would have been 'introduced' to the  topic in Abnormal Psychology. I would have recognized myself.  

Oh, so you can't stand rock concerts because they are just too loud? That would have been a tip-off.

Why do you think knowing about the issue would have been better?  What would you have done differently with your life?

Knowing about a problem can put one in a better position in which to deal with it. I would have realized that being smart enough to do the job is not enough.

What would you have done differently?  Gone for different jobs, done the same jobs differently?

Going for a teaching degree, maybe? Teachers can get away with following rules to the letter. They can get away with communication in spoken or written words.

Creative activity?

[Warren Dew]

(09-25-2017, 08:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: At the least I do not have an evil personality. The only way in which I will ever get into prison is as a political offender (if the Trump Presidency should become the norm, then I might end up in a labor camp in which I do not last long).

Actually, as an aspie, your most likely way of going to prison is falsely believing that obeying the law will keep you out of it, and inadvertently violating social norms in a way which sufficiently offends people in the criminal justice system.  It's not likely, but it's more likely that being jailed as a political offender.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-24-2017, 09:02 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-24-2017, 12:53 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-23-2017, 10:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

Quote:Your case, you might begin to understand where I'm coming from.  I see you as having strong if questionable financial values.  Most every argument you make is from economics.  That's make it your clear center.  You argue a lot with those who believe quality of life ought to be move valued, more central.  I am one of the later.  As usual, I'd like to see a floor protecting that which is truly important.  I'd like to see everyone contribute to sharing risks and costs.

When it comes to Warren, he can answer as he sees fit.

Not much point in answering someone who fails to understand that goods and services which must be consumed for any quality of life must be produced somehow, and thus that quality of life is inherently about economics.  And even if he could understand that, he's admitted he doesn't understand economics, so he wouldn't be able to understand the explanations anyway.

Ultimately everything boils down to acquisition of goods and services so failure to understand at least a basic level of economics really is a failure to really understand anything.

I fell into software engineering early.  I never had an economic problem.  I knew enough at a basic level to retire comfortably early.  There were other areas I focused attention on.  Money is something that you keep an eye on, but not the center of my life.  That is part of why I'm generally on the quality of life side of an argument, rather than economic values side.

Can I pretend to know what the pros do?  Probably not.  I do know the pros disagree a lot, that pretending at certainty is bogus.

But, sure, there are others with different values.  I just fell into a family where you put in your effort and expect to do OK as a result.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-25-2017, 08:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Beyond any question -- he has probably encountered far more horrible or even dangerous people than I have. Welfare does create a culture of hustles even in disability. Such is not good for supporting optimism about human nature, an optimism that one needs for coping with realities of American life. But it is probably too late for me to make a life that will satisfy me even economically unless it involves marrying a rich widow. It is hard to start over at my age. Had I known about Asperger's at an early age I would be one who overcame instead of a victim.

Arguably, welfare steers one towards different coping mechanisms. Same effect.

(09-25-2017, 08:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: My parents told me that whatever I do, avoid the mental health system. One might be branded as 'crazy' or face the horrors of confinement after some convenient diagnosis... paranoid schizophrenia, perhaps?... suitable for permanent institutionalization.  

I can easily understand decades old advice to avoid the mental health system. It was ugly a while back. My fairly recent brush with it, though, was pretty harmless.

[Bob Butler 54]

Cutting down as I can on the stripe count...

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  But I will say this about Thoreau, I have always found his works to be rather insipid, but then again Fredrick Douglas has always resonated with me more strongly than any of the trancendentalists who mostly scribbled what looks like woo-woo on the level that Eric posts every day.

That's a decent synopsis of how values work.  If an idea doesn't mesh with what you already believe, you find an excuse not to listen or understand.

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I did describe them accurately, and it also applies to the current crop of Dims too.  As for populist politicans, actually I haven't.  Daddy isn't a politician which is why the Swamp hates him.  

Of course he his a politician.  As soon as he declared himself and started entering primaries, he was a politician.  Hiring half the swamp was gravy.  

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I'm going to "flame" whomever I choose to, for whatever reason I choose too.  If that hurts your fee fees I don't care.  Fuck your fee fees!

As for banning...I'm not interested in banning anyone unless they're up on the forum posting tons of spam or porn or something.  

Obscenity?

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: This is a failure to understand basic economics that I assume Warren will bring up at some point.  Let me put it simply.  More people have to be working and paying taxes to pay for what we have now.  Otherwise it will collapse.  Socialism is inherently unstable, eventually you always run out of other people's money.

The unraveling memes include more for the military, less for Americans, more for the wealthy, and less taxes overall.  It is a mess involving several sorts of balancing values, which makes finding a balance worse than awkward.  While the wealthy are creating an extreme imbalance of wealth, running out of money isn't the foremost problem.

Of course, values will make it nigh on impossible for some to listen. Most nations work well with variations of what you call socialism. I've done well enough under both Romneycare and Obamacare. Reality does not seem capable of getting in the way of what you feel like saying, so I mostly expect you to keep saying it. I might be wrong. You are capable of throwing away failures. Trump will have to fail really convincingly first, though. That could take a while.

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Great, we have another who can't come up with an original argument.  Back to your papal bull meme again.  When it comes to my view of PBR it is formed off of his statements and his actions.  Is my interpretation of those statements and actions influenced by my world view?  Yes, but whose isn't?  Certainly not yours.

You do have strong values, which in many ways is great, but you do tend to try to project them absurdly.  Try to listen to yourself.

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As Philip Johnson said:  The first complete sentence out of my mouth was probably that line about consistency being the hobgoblin of small minds.

Still, utter inconsistency isn't the best part of your act.

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Are you stupid?  Government is force, it has always been force, and always will be force.  The main difference between a state's government and the mafia is that the government on occasion throws a public popularity contest where as the mafia has no need for such extravagances.

You really think that?  This is what I mean by having unusual values and trying to project them as truth.  We could stand more off the wall opinions, but people should know when they are off the wall.

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Man in his primordial state is in a state of anarchy.  Indeed I'd go so far as to say that anarchy is man's natural state, and wanting to have civilization yet remain as close to the natural state as possible I have slowly, accepted that minarchism is a requirement to maintain civilization.

You are closer to Thoreau than you know, if allergic to the trappings, thus unable to comprehend his ideas.  "That government is best which governs least..."

But I find the premise questionable.  I've looked enough at great apes and their governing structures to expect, leaders, territories, tribes, etc...  They lack the language needed to go as far with it as humans, but I seriously doubt mankind's primordial state was anarchy.  Basing a political system on a convenient lie is problematic.  Like it or not, we are a political species.  The question is how to force the elites to respect the needs and wants of every man.  

We will have to see...

[Warren Dew]

(09-24-2017, 09:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

Quote:I personally think, assuming the US remains recognizable, that there will be more people paying into the system than abusing it.

This is a failure to understand basic economics that I assume Warren will bring up at some point.  Let me put it simply.  More people have to be working and paying taxes to pay for what we have now.  Otherwise it will collapse.  Socialism is inherently unstable, eventually you always run out of other people's money.

To be honest, I'm only paying peripheral attention to this conversation.  Bob doesn't understand economics and is not interested in learning it, so I don't see much point to having a conversation on it with him, beyond pointing out an obvious inconsistency in his world view now and then.

I'm here mostly to try to understand more about what's going to happen in the upcoming crisis.  Most of the conversation relevant to that occurs on John Xenakis' thread.

[pbrower2a]

(09-25-2017, 03:20 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-25-2017, 08:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Beyond any question -- he has probably encountered far more horrible or even dangerous people than I have. Welfare does create a culture of hustles even in disability. Such is not good for supporting optimism about human nature, an optimism that one needs for coping with realities of American life. But it is probably too late for me to make a life that will satisfy me even economically unless it involves marrying a rich widow. It is hard to start over at my age. Had I known about Asperger's at an early age I would be one who overcame instead of a victim.

Arguably, welfare steers one towards different coping mechanisms.  Same effect.

Every world has its own hustles. It's human nature to finagle.

Quote:

(09-25-2017, 08:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: My parents told me that whatever I do, avoid the mental health system. One might be branded as 'crazy' or face the horrors of confinement after some convenient diagnosis... paranoid schizophrenia, perhaps?... suitable for permanent institutionalization.  

I can easily understand decades old advice to avoid the mental health system.  It was ugly a while back.  My fairly recent brush with it, though, was pretty harmless.

Yes, it was ugly; such a highly-praised and enjoyable a movie as One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest showed mental institutions as bureaucratic institutions that depended upon keeping people after they were competent to be released because such was the source of funding. Misdiagnoses intended to make people seem more troubled than they were and the use of drugs to keep people dependent upon the system was part of the problem.

But that was the mental ward, the infamous snake pit. There was also the infamous smear of psychology as the "Jewish Science". Most of my family members were horrible antisemites. What were they scared of?

[David Horn]

(09-25-2017, 05:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Cutting down as I can on the stripe count...

This is also an irritant to me.  I just skip long striped posts, unless they are directed specifically to me.  Even them, I try to whittle them down as best I can.