From the Economist: Sighing for paradise to come

[eohrnberger]

And if they can't do that, because they don't have the resources to improve their marketable skills, apparently they should just ****ing starve to death.

Your compassion is noted.

There should be, and there is, help in doing exactly that. So no "****ing starve to death". Nice strawman.

 

[countryboy]

When has it been debunked? What was the top marginal tax rate in the 1950s? What was the corporate tax rate? You are full of ****. Do not accuse me of lying when you're ignoring the facts.

Nobody paid those marginal rates, nobody. Revenue, as a percentage of GDP has remained constant throughout history.

 

[Frank Apisa]

And if they can't do that, because they don't have the resources to improve their marketable skills, apparently they should just ****ing starve to death.

Your compassion is noted.

One really cannot expect more.

The conservative credo: I've got mine; screw you. Or the other version: Hooray for me...screw you.

 

[Lafayette]

We can do it. Some of the suggestions mentioned in the OP are a start...but just a start.
I would not be surprised to see it happen in large fashion during the life times of people now alive.

It can be done, and it will likely be done. But not quickly. (We have a long way to go. See the infographic below.)

It takes time for people to renew their faith with with the political process. I find it a damn shame that only 9 states in America require that you take and pass a course of Civics.

I don't think people have the slightest notion of how functions are tripartite governance consisting of an Executive, a Legislature and a Judiciary.

Some still think that electing a PotUS changes everything. It doesn't, and Obama's tenure is proof-positive of that fact. He was undermined from the get-go when the HoR fell into the hands of the Replicants in 2010. To punish Obama because, during the worst recession since the Depression, he could not "walk on water" and make it go away.

To me in terms of understanding political evolution, the Europeans are bogged down by their attachment to history, and the Yanks only look into the future. What's new, what's different ... and to hell with how it happened.

Nostalgia aint what it used to be ... at present we are starting to recover.

Our Employment-to-population ratio is (finally) improving, but will it get back to the heydey of the last decade of the 20th and first decade of the 21st century?

I wonder ...
___________

 

[eohrnberger]

A SEA OF HUMANITY



Why should it not be for "free", if what we are talking about is "basic survival needs".

The reality is that there's nothing in life that's free. Plastering Maslow's hierarchy of needs is an ineffectual diversion.

It is evident that you have a greatly restricted notion of human aspiration. Which was explained aptly enough by a psychologist called Maslow's Hierachy of Needs in the early 1940s. It depicts well how we are motivated to move from top-to-bottom, regardless of birthplace:

Those below the Poverty Threshold, and they are close to 50 million in the US, are concerned primarily with the first two rungs on the triangle. They have very little desire for "self-actualization" beyond nourishment and a roof over their heads.

This is the bit "programmed genetically" along with procreation. It is instinctual in our species.

And in your tidy, well-organized but Tiny World, all that matters is what you have been able to "earn" - and therefore "what is yours". And, in perfect simplicity, "What is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours. Don't bother me with the sharing claptrap."

Nice strawman, but inaccurate. There's a difference between voluntary contribution and forced contribution by the barrel of the government gun.

You live on a tiny island, all alone - but in a sea of humanity.

The problem is that you cannot survive all alone. You were not bred to do so. You need a culture, a language, community, order, things and family/friends/associates. Most of all, moreover, you need a Market-economy. Because you are sharing an Ordered Society that was built long before you arrived that consists of people working to provide the goods/services that they need for a living.

Selfish people refuse to accept the principle that they are just one clog in a huge system of wheels that turn, and turn, and turn. But that system (aka a "market-economy") is what provides you the Accouterments of a Life-style: A home, a car, a job, goods, services, objects, things, etc., etc.

Whether you like it or not, you are "sharing" a market-economy along with a great, great many other people. Get used to it. Learn to be less selfish. When done right, there's more than enough to go around. When not, there is societal conflict.

And that machine works best if everyone takes care of themselves, supports themselves with their work, with a very few notable exceptions who are unable. Voluntary 'sharing' yes. Involuntary, mandated, forced by the barrel of the government gun, no, that's not sharing.

You are NOT God's unique gift to humanity ...
____________________

I never said that I was. Where did you pull this ridiculous assertion from? Out of your ass?

 

[Lafayette]

Where did you pull this ridiculous assertion from? Out of your ass?

Drivel and sarcasm, drivel and sarcasm.

That's all your good for - moving right along ...
__________________________

 

[eohrnberger]

Drivel and sarcasm, drivel and sarcasm.

That's all your good for - moving right along ...
__________________________

OK. You got nothing. Got it.

 

[James972]

The conservative credo: I've got mine; screw you. Or the other version: Hooray for me...screw you.

of course thats a horrible illiterate liberals lie that you've learned about 6 times before. Conservatives give more charity because they care more. They may not be stupid enough to want to give to crippling near genocidal federal govt welfare programs but that shows their intelligence and genuine compassion. Want to go for 7 times with your childlike lies?????

 

[Frank Apisa]

of course thats a horrible illiterate liberals lie that you've learned about 6 times before. Conservatives give more charity because they care more. They may not be stupid enough to want to give to crippling near genocidal federal govt welfare programs but that shows their intelligence and genuine compassion. Want to go for 7 times with your childlike lies?????

Illiterate?

My posts are of a "literate" quality ten times better than yours.

And I do not have to resort to the name-calling you use to call others "childlike."

So...go somewhere and be intelligent and compassionate. You obviously cannot be either here.

 

[James972]

Illiterate?

My posts are of a "literate" quality ten times better than yours.

And I do not have to resort to the name-calling you use to call others "childlike."

So...go somewhere and be intelligent and compassionate. You obviously cannot be either here.

give me a break!! You present yourself as morally superior because you support near genocidal welfare programs but you don't resort to name calling? Sad fact is conservatives give more to charity!! Want to read some books on it??? Or, perhaps the truth does not really interest you?

 

[Frank Apisa]

give me a break!! You present yourself as morally superior because you support near genocidal welfare programs but you don't resort to name calling? Sad fact is conservatives give more to charity!! Want to read some books on it??? Or, perhaps the truth does not really interest you?

James...try to stay focused.

I am not illiterate.

I am not addressing the topic of my moral standing...and I am NOT resorting to name-calling.

If you think it is sad that conservatives give more to charity...that is something you have to deal with. Perhaps the fact that religious people often identify themselves as conservative...and give more frequently to churches is the reason...but whatever "the reason" I personally do not find it sad.

I do not want to read books on it...and I do not care if it is a fact. It has nothing whatever to do with what I was addressing.

 

[James972]

I do not want to read books on it...and I do not care if it is a fact. It has nothing whatever to do with what I was addressing.

You don't want to read books to discover that conservatives care more and thus give more to charity? You said conservatives only care about themselves? So who brainwashed you into thinking liberals were morally superior??? If a person feels he is superior he is a bigot; if he thinks he is superior and is in fact not then he is worse than a bigot, he is a liberal.


"Hooray for me...screw you"-Frank Apisa

 

[Frank Apisa]

You don't want to read books to discover that conservatives care more and thus give more to charity?

What do books on conservative charity have to do with your charge that I am illiterate?

You said conservatives only care about themselves?

Quote what I actually said...and I will reply.

So who brainwashed you into thinking liberals were morally superior???

Where on Earth have I ever said "liberals" are morally superior???

What are you raving about?

Quote what I write...and then respond to that...rather than making stuff up and arguing against the nonsense you make up.

If a person feels he is superior he is a bigot; if he thinks he is superior and is in fact not then he is worse than a bigot, he is a liberal.

Sounds as though you just described yourself to be a bigot.

I'll take your word for it...although I hope I am misreading your thoughts.

"Hooray for me...screw you"-Frank Apisa

If you are going to quote me...actually quote me. Doing what you just did there is unethical. (Look "unethical" up if you do not understand what it means.)

 

[Helix]

The rest of the civilized world is rushing ahead with free Tertiary Education, and we in the US are not ...

i definitely agree with that part, as well as guaranteed health care.

 

[James972]

What do books on conservative charity have to do with your charge that I am illiterate?

books are on "Who Gives More." You have to be illiterate not to know that conservatives give more whether in a religions situation or not. Why else would you say the conservative philosophy is "screw you" when opposite is true??

 

[James972]

Where on Earth have I ever said "liberals" are morally superior???

you said conservative idea is "screw you". Does that make liberals morally superior since their attitude apparently is " I love you" Is I love you morally superior to screw you??? Busted Frank!!

 

[James972]

Sounds as though you just described yourself to be a bigot.

You said, in total ignorance, conservative idea was "screw you" and thus you were in effect morally superior. That is both illiterate and bigoted

 

[James972]

If you are going to quote me...actually quote me.

ok here it is for 3rd time!!! : "Hooray for me...screw you." [i.e., liberals are morally superior because they care; they don't say "screw you" like conservatives do ]

do you want to see a 3rd time??????????????????????

 

[James972]

i definitely agree with that part, as well as guaranteed health care.

but why stop with education and health? Why not more important stuff like food clothing and shelter too? We are only $20 trillion in debt or $200K per family in America.

 

[Helix]

but why stop with education and health? Why not more important stuff like food clothing and shelter too? We are only $20 trillion in debt or $200K per family in America.

then perhaps we should address those problems rather than diving deeper into Middle Eastern wars.

 

[James972]

then perhaps we should address those problems rather than diving deeper into Middle Eastern wars.

we are not diving deepen into wars. Obama has been pulling out for 8 years!! Don't you read the papers?

 

[Frank Apisa]

books are on "Who Gives More." You have to be illiterate not to know that conservatives give more whether in a religions situation or not. Why else would you say the conservative philosophy is "screw you" when opposite is true??

You apparently do not understand the meaning of the word "illiterate"...and that is becoming more and more apparent with each of your posts.

 

[Frank Apisa]

you said conservative idea is "screw you". Does that make liberals morally superior since their attitude apparently is " I love you" Is I love you morally superior to screw you??? Busted Frank!!

You have a long way to go before getting into, "I win" mode.

The American conservative credo is: "Hooray for me, screw you." Or at times, "I've got mine, screw you."

If you are an American conservative...be ashamed. BE VERY ASHAMED.

 

[Frank Apisa]

You said, in total ignorance, conservative idea was "screw you" and thus you were in effect morally superior. That is both illiterate and bigoted

You obviously do not know what the word "illiterate" means.

Work on it.

 

[Frank Apisa]

ok here it is for 3rd time!!! : "Hooray for me...screw you." [i.e., liberals are morally superior because they care; they don't say "screw you" like conservatives do ]

do you want to see a 3rd time??????????????????????

Give the quote...like I just did with your comment above.

Them we can both look at the words.

How long have you been participating in Internet forums...a week?