Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....II

[DVD Burner]

Teabag. ha ha ha. I like that.



What's a Bund?

[gyre]

The Bund was the american branch of the european NSDAP political party.
They were not limited to german americans in membership or support.
They had real issues with marxism, ie anyone not supporting them.
NSDAP was known for being soft on democracy, and using national security as justification for restricting freedom.

[youtube][/youtube]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund
http://www.germanamericanbund.org/

[ygmir]

So ummmm, do you guys still think I'm racist?

And what year is this again?

yes

2010, but, not again, "still".



*edit for clarity*

[DVD Burner]

Ah yes. I remember the Bund. Wasn't Walt Disney a part of their group?

[gyre]

And Ford, among others.

[DVD Burner]

Ok, I had heard Ford was and Disney was a rumor.

[can't sit still]

I'm going to play the "devil's advocate".
If ALL democracies have always failed, why should we have universal suffrage? The feds reformed welfare back in Clinton's days , if I recall correctly. It was projected that welfare would take all of the budget in so many years. Historically, democracies fail when the PEOPLE vote for themselves more than is being produced. Should the people who are not contributing to the system / wealth be allowed to determine how much they can take out? Should the people who have never contributed,,, live off the system without limitations?

All biological organisms have a natural tendency to "conservation of energy" They don't expend energy unless they have to. California has very high and very easy welfare laws. Ca has 12% of the pop and 36% of the welfare cases,, in the country. That right there is a pretty good condemnation of democracy. When the Feds reformed welfare, Ca abstained.
Even the people who were working demanded expensive retirement programs. These programs are no longer sustainable.
Yes, GOV and banks wasted a lot of wealth but, other countries without a military have social costs that are not sustainable. Ca has a history of; property owners voting against expensive bond issues and renters voting FOR them. Now, the Jarvis foundation says that the total debt load in Ca is $ 200 billion.
Far many, many years, only property owners were allowed to vote in GB.
Universal suffrage has always been a failure.
I'm only addressing the economic problems. The political problems,,,, WELL, politiocs are for suckers.

[gyre]

Welfare reform here consisted of throwing 40% of the people on food stamps off abruptly.
There was no reform.
And no jobs.
All bullshit.

Crime skyrocketed.
The tax base continues to crumble.
Guess what?
People still want to eat, even when they can't find jobs.

Training for a few consists of minimum wage bedpan jobs.
Seriously.

Infant mortality is climbing.
Long term disability due to children growing up malnourished will show up soon enough.

It's hard to get upset about the costs, when the system is rigged to keep people on welfare.

Meanwhile, tuition costs for the state university climb faster than health care.
And nobody wants more people competing for jobs.
Not really.

And it's still illegal to try to go to school while on food stamps.
Jail time for welfare fraud.

[gyre]

Real welfare reform means people qualified for real pay.

Can you think of anyone that might not want to pay fair wages?
Low unemployment is bad business for some people.

[can't sit still]

gyre, I do make a distinction between food stamps and "full support" for able bodied people that goes on open-ended for years.
Allow me to get in even deeper. What is the rationalization for allowing people to have any number of children when they have no possibility of supporting them?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne ... es-29.html
Why should millions be wards of the state because 2 people wanted to fuck with NO consideration of the outcome?
The original post from DVD was about voting rights. What about reproduction rights,,,, responsibilities???
In "Starship Troopers", only a veteran could vote or have kids. .They had proved that they cared a great deal about their country. Universal suffrage is no less a disaster than unlimited reproduction.

[gyre]

The military is an interesting reference.

A primary reason to deny education to the poor is to force them to volunteer for the military, if they want any opportunity at all.

[ygmir]

The military is an interesting reference.

A primary reason to deny education to the poor is to force them to volunteer for the military, if they want any opportunity at all.

................

[gyre]

................

What does ................ mean?

[ygmir]

................

What does ................ mean?

in this case, it means, I wrote something snarky, and, probably not so complimentary, and, when I saw it, realized it's not nice to be so "like that", so, I erased it.........
but, you gotta put something there, so............there it is.

[can't sit still]

Here's a page of international predictions. Whether true or false, the guy rules out an attack on Iran. I'm happy to see that. He also mentions our "entitlement" society.
"Managing the now-overwhelming sense of entitlement in what we call modern democracies has become, because of the power of a comprehensive, but ill-informed electorate, an exercise in mob control, and an opportunity for populist demagoguery."

"the cumulative impact of ever-broadening the electoral franchise — which creates an automatic disposition of an electorate to demand increasing benefits without attendant increases in productivity"

http://www.oilprice.com/article-10-geop ... tlook.html
Pretty interesting.

[gyre]

What do you have to be snarky about?


Compare tuition and tuition subsidies before the draft ended, and now.
The real opportunities, in other words.

And the tendency to require certification for jobs has increased, for no particular reason.
Watch colleges take take short programs and stretch them to four years for profit.
Some professions are responsible for doing this, just for job protection.
(Check out any job requirement in florida.)

So the number of jobs requiring degrees, for no real reason, has increased as the chance to qualify has become more limited.

The marketing wouldn't be nearly so compelling if most people had any other real options for college.

From the Goarmy site

ACTIVE DUTY BENEFIT

* Up to $65,000 for Soldiers who enlist full time in the Army for three or more years

MONTGOMERY GI BILL (MGIB) & ARMY COLLEGE FUND (ACF)

As a Soldier, you can take advantage of the Montgomery GI Bill and the Army College Fund to pay for your college education. Depending on how long you enlist with the Army and the job you choose, you can get up to $83,448 to help pay for college. All you have to do is give $100 a month during your first year of service. If you select the Army College Fund, the total amount is combined with the MGIB.

ACTIVE DUTY BENEFIT

* Up to $83,448 to help pay for college with the MGIB and Army College Fund

COLLEGE LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM

The Army College Loan Repayment Program makes paying off your student loans easier.

[gyre]

Here's a page of international predictions. Whether true or false, the guy rules out an attack on Iran. I'm happy to see that. He also mentions our "entitlement" society.
"Managing the now-overwhelming sense of entitlement in what we call modern democracies has become, because of the power of a comprehensive, but ill-informed electorate, an exercise in mob control, and an opportunity for populist demagoguery."

"the cumulative impact of ever-broadening the electoral franchise — which creates an automatic disposition of an electorate to demand increasing benefits without attendant increases in productivity"

http://www.oilprice.com/article-10-geop ... tlook.html
Pretty interesting.

You'll have to define entitlement.

I see it as one of those passive aggressive buzzwords.
Republicans use it to denigrate anyone wanting a fair shake in life.
Most people I know use it to refer to republicans.

Poor people use it to refer to arrogant people that make a lot of money without really contributing anything, and thinking that's just normal.
And some rich people use the term the same way, for the same people and for the same reason.

[ygmir]

Pretty interesting
You'll have to define entitlement.

I see it as one of those passive aggressive buzzwords.
Republicans use it to denigrate anyone wanting a fair shake in life.
Most people I know use it to refer to republicans.

Poor people use it to refer to arrogant people that make a lot of money without really contributing anything, and thinking that's just normal.
And some rich people use the term the same way, for the same people and for the same reason.

that is all so subjective...........totally POV based............

and,
who said life is, or should be, fair?
"fair" is even subjective......

play your cards the best you can, quit bitching and resenting others for what they do, get, or have.

*edit 'cause I screwed up the quote thingys*

[can't sit still]

Can't define it.
It could be Pelosi's jet. It could be crop subsidies. It could be forced vaccinations [big pharma]. It could be the benefit package that congress receives.
Over-generous salaries and retirement is what sinks most systems. Vallejo is a good example. http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-03-10/n ... -city-hall
Payroll stuffing is another problem.
The L.A.U.S.D has 117 administrators for every 100 teachers. In the private system, it's 29 admin for every 100 teachers.
The soon-to-be-apparent reality is that the US doesn't earn enough money to pay everybody a decent wage. Taxing the rich might sound like the answer but, it doesn't work out in the long run. Taxing the multi-national corporations would be a lot more effective. Corps paid 30 % of the tax load many years ago. Today it's less than 3 %

The corporate entities have a lot to answer for in the very-uneven wealth distribution.
I'm drifting and unfocused,,, bye

[gyre]

No, you can adjust for inflation or anything else and the difference is dramatic.

And guess what?
We all live with the consequences of wasted talent.

No one is trying to make life even.
How about fair in our own self interest?

Letting people rise to their best skill level or not, is a stupidity contest and as a society, we're pushing the stupid button.


Personally, I have some imagination.
But what of those that don't?
Some companies require a four year degree to be a janitor.
Any idea how many jobs I'm over-qualified for, but can't apply for, because I don't have a four year degree?

I was once rejected for a job doing security for a state university, because they require a four year degree.
(Police officers didn't have that requirement.)
I wanted the tuition discount for school.
Worst thing is, they really wanted to hire me,
Most of their applicants are Barney Fife sociopaths rejected as psychologically unfit by the police force.
They couldn't find a way around the rules.

Does that make sense?

[gyre]

Pretty interesting
You'll have to define entitlement.

I see it as one of those passive aggressive buzzwords.
Republicans use it to denigrate anyone wanting a fair shake in life.
Most people I know use it to refer to republicans.

Poor people use it to refer to arrogant people that make a lot of money without really contributing anything, and thinking that's just normal.
And some rich people use the term the same way, for the same people and for the same reason.

that is all so subjective...........totally POV based............

and,
who said life is, or should be, fair?
"fair" is even subjective......

play your cards the best you can, quit bitching and resenting others for what they do, get, or have.

*edit 'cause I screwed up the quote thingys*

Sorry.
I thought you were responding to what I wrote about college.
Take note that what I wrote about entitlement isn't opinion.
It's just what I see on a regular basis.
It is pov.
You've got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

If I'm bitching, it's about stupidity.

And I don't use the word myself.
I still don't know what it means.

Some people are ignorant about how easy life will always be.
Not my problem.

The only people I see that fit the definition are the crooked political appointees around here.
We have a lot of people that belong in prison making a lot of money, and can't even do the job.
And people have been seriously hurt due to this.
I could give examples, but they would make you sick.


Entitlement is a non-word to me.
Using it says more about the person using it.
And I almost never hear it refer to what people have, just their attitude about others.

I think some people are just assholes.
Having money isn't the cause.

[gyre]

Can't define it.
It could be Pelosi's jet. It could be crop subsidies. It could be forced vaccinations [big pharma]. It could be the benefit package that congress receives.
Over-generous salaries and retirement is what sinks most systems. Vallejo is a good example. http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-03-10/n ... -city-hall
Payroll stuffing is another problem.
The L.A.U.S.D has 117 administrators for every 100 teachers. In the private system, it's 29 admin for every 100 teachers.
The soon-to-be-apparent reality is that the US doesn't earn enough money to pay everybody a decent wage. Taxing the rich might sound like the answer but, it doesn't work out in the long run. Taxing the multi-national corporations would be a lot more effective. Corps paid 30 % of the tax load many years ago. Today it's less than 3 %

The corporate entities have a lot to answer for in the very-uneven wealth distribution.
I'm drifting and unfocused,,, bye

Got it.
I just seldom see it used by the dictionary definition anymore.

I went to a lecture by a quaker economist once.
He calculated that the waste is much worse than we believe and our country much richer than we know.
He says we have enough wealth that if we quit giving away resources to corporations by the trillions, we could quit charging taxes and allocate a base income to everyone here,... and break even.

We do have serious issues with the loss of manufacturing.
Very serious.

[magicmarty]

Very impressive, Gyre.

The amazing thing to me is how so many folks enthusiastically vote in favor of what (or who) is so clearly not in their own best interests based upon ideologies that are sold to them by very powerful and well financed resources with simplistic short term jingoistic slognaneering.

Democracy is such a messy way to run a railroad (or anything else for that matter) So far, I haven't thought of a better way, unless we could be certain to select a dictator with the character of an arcangel. Sadly, those guys are in rather short supply. They could start out that way, but as Lord Acton once said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely"

Night all ....

[gyre]

Thanks, Marty.

No rule that says we can't have a democracy and still be smart though.
Another reason it's in our best interest to educate people as far as they want to go.


I was very amused by the revocable monarchy that Bhutan had for a time.
An absolute dictatorship, that could be changed.
That doesn't happen often.

They were fond of pointing out that they weren't a democracy.
But they really were, just very different.

[magicmarty]

Hey, Gyre, I do very well recall the benevolent regent of Buthan. A true exception to the rule.

Happens, that he was married to an American girl (Hope?) who had been the college room mate of the now ex wife of an ex brother in law of mine. The brother in law went on to become the State Department's lawyer in the Reagan Administration and in recent years a reasonably well known neocon. (The only one in the family I might add, including his current wife)

I had been to India and Nepal around that time (the early 70s) and longed to go to Buthan all my life since. I have known folks that have gone to Buthan and know that they have done a remarkable job of preserving the culture in that little enclave of ancient civilization.

So much for an insomniac ramble.

Raining here and so no tennis today. Sunday looks promising. (Whoops, wrong thread for those comments)

Later Gator

[gyre]

I want to go there myself, very much.
Some monks from Dharamsala told me if I wanted to see what Tibet used to be like, go to Bhutan.

A country where the traffic signs say please and they talk of gross national happiness without irony.
They have so much they need to do, but they are trying harder than anywhere I know of to get it right.

[can't sit still]

The Princeton professor, Martin Armstrong worked up a "program"? that used 23,000 variables to predict the economy. He is astoundingly accurate. He got lots of jail time for his efforts.
I hope that this biggest-blowout-of-them-all will finally drive a stake through the ghost of Keynes.
Imagine a political/economic system that was monitored by a massively-informed computer. Every time the populace voted for an action, the computer would immediately broadcast what the expected results would be.
We already gather statistics on EVERYTHING. If power corrupts humans, get humans out of the decision making process. Start by having a computer project the outcome of every important action. If it was accurate, people would come to rely on it more and more. After it was used for just observation and prediction, it could be phased in to decision making.

Eventually, people tend to avoid actions that were guaranteed to have negative results. There are, of course, still avenues for manipulation of a system like this. But, it would take out many opportunities for gross malfeasance.

[magicmarty]

Not familiar with Armstrong. Why did he wind up in jail?

Keynes was not the problem. More likely Von Hayek and Adam Smith

Being governed by computers is so not Burning Man and sounds so very uninteresting not to mention so easy to manipulate. No, democracy with warts and all is the best. But Gyre is absolutely correct, it works better the better the populace is educated. Then the populace can see through the simplistic jingoists and recognize that governance of human interrelationsips is complex and that actions have consequences often not apparent at first (or even second or third) glance. It's hard work, this "thinking" thing.

[can't sit still]

Martin Armstrong;
http://www.topix.com/forum/business/TS8IHELKS6G8FDV65
I didn't say governed by computers. Since so many of the electorate are lazy and uneducated in all things political, a computer could be used to provide them with the probable outcome of a given action.
I believe that Google is providing a voting record for any given politician. They also give his expected vote on any given issue. Not sure on this though.
How many people would have supported NAFTA if they knew for sure that the "giant sucking sound" would be the end of their job?
The system is far too complicated for the average person,,, like modern cars.
Just have a computer project what the likely outcome is for a given action, or politician.

Sure, it could be tampered with. The current system is so manipulated that, any alternative would be better.

[can't sit still]

As I mentioned before, the "CORPORATION" has a lot to answer for. Thanks to the supreme court, corporations have "personhood". I believe that this ruling is all bad. A "person" who never dies, has no conscience, exists only for profit and is immune to many laws, is NOT fit company for human society. The banks have proved many times that they will destroy themselves and everything around them in their mindless quest for profit. Why should any other corporation be any different? Good article;
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e24604.htm