Obama's Agenda (political, of course)

[Huckleman2000]

[...]There is a poblem with soaking the rich. Above a certain level, it no longer does any good to make more money. Why should people bust their asses when all it means is paying more money to the IRS. Everybody knows better than to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, but even crippling the goose will cut down on the flow of eggs.

Box, has your household (or anyone else's in this thread, for that matter) ever even grossed $250,000 in a year? Believe me, even a little bit into six figures and it gets hard to keep track anymore. A thousand here, a thousand there... Unless you're a total spendthrift in a huge house, money simply doesn't have the same meaning to you once your every conceivable need to live a comfortable life is well within your means. You start viewing luxuries as needs; in fact, some of them become needs, simply because of the sorts of job responsibilities that come with an income of that level preclude spending much time around the house.

If you're really that concerned about the welfare of the well-off, you shouldn't be. Believe me, most of them aren't concerned about yours.

 

[3113]

This is an extreme example of quoting out of context.

Oh, tsk, tsk. No irony intended but aren't we calling the kettle black with that excuse?

 

[rgraham666]

No but it should be workfare not welfare. Show them a way out instead of holding them down.That's all todays system does is hold them down.

Slavery is back, people. Anf that's good for business.

 

[rgraham666]

Double post.

 

[epiphany65]

Slavery is back, people. Anf that's good for business.

That's essentially what workfare ends up being -- indentured servitude. They tried it in NY City in the late '90s. 2000 people who were on welfare were given menial jobs picking up trash, leaves, etc. As a result of these 2000 people being put into forced labour, 5000 social workers lost their jobs. Also the unions hated it because it forced many people into early retirement and they had to be bought out. In one case a group of workfare people spent part of the morning raking leaves in a park and putting them into plastic bags. They finished early, so their supervisor, a social worker, dumped all of the bags and made them do it again. Workfare appeals to conservatives who want a pound of flesh and enjoy having others under their control as virtual slaves, but it does not work. It does more harm than good and does not provide people with meaningful jobs with any chance of improvement.

 

[john-the-author]

Box, has your household (or anyone else's in this thread, for that matter) ever even grossed $250,000 in a year? Believe me, even a little bit into six figures and it gets hard to keep track anymore. A thousand here, a thousand there... Unless you're a total spendthrift in a huge house, money simply doesn't have the same meaning to you once your every conceivable need to live a comfortable life is well within your means. You start viewing luxuries as needs; in fact, some of them become needs, simply because of the sorts of job responsibilities that come with an income of that level preclude spending much time around the house.

If you're really that concerned about the welfare of the well-off, you shouldn't be. Believe me, most of them aren't concerned about yours.

We made $235K/year last year and I'm pushing hard to make $250K this year. I probably won't know until the year ends; it's going to depend on when some of the checks come in, too. And we also happen to believe in the rich paying more taxes, too, which is really putting our money where our mouth is.

I'm really looking forward to 2009: I'm expecting us to make $450K-500K. (No, this doesn't suck at all. Not even a little bit.)

I'm not in the slightest put off the idea of making more money because I might have to pay another $10k, 20k, or 30k in taxes. Just because the gov't is taking a bite, I still am making money. And I like making money.

And you're right: we spend $300/month on having a cleaning service come in every two weeks to clean things up. We do a fair amount of dry cleaning & laundering. There's a landscaping service that shows up every Wednesday and does all sorts of things to our lawns and flower beds. There are other things that are time savers or conveniences that I'm sure we'd do on our own if we needed to save $$$ and had more time... but at this point it's both cheaper to pay someone else to do it vs. what it would cost us in our time and there's the satisfaction of NOT having to do some of these things, too. This may be living in luxury--and I wouldn't deny that parts of it are rather cushy--but it's also stimulating the economy by Keeping the Money Moving. This isn't "trickle down" money; we're employing a fair number of people through the things we pay them for directly.

Paying taxes to cover things like education, community services, Social Security, and municipal/state/Federal functions is part of my duty as a citizen. I take that seriously.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I'm really looking forward to 2009: I'm expecting us to make $450K-500K. (No, this doesn't suck at all. Not even a little bit.)

Even with the economy being what it is at the moment?? Really?

What sort of widgets do you make?

 

[rgraham666]

Nice to hear someone talking about duty. We don't hear it often enough.

 

[john-the-author]

If you're really that concerned about the welfare of the well-off, you shouldn't be. Believe me, most of them aren't concerned about yours.

Forgot to mention: we are KEENLY interested in the well-being of people who aren't making a lot of money. The really big issue in this house is the need for universal health care in this country, but we're also strong proponents of spending on education and a number of other things.

The fear that people go through when the word "socialism" comes up makes no sense to me. But it is a good shibboleth: if someone is getting panicky at the sound of the word or is trying to instill a similar reaction in me, they're either stupid or trying to pull a fast one on me... which is definitely a fucking stupid idea. (I feel about the same about people who're waving "terrorist" around similarly. With those folks, there's this desire for them to meet up with a real terrorist act and then say "Okay, could you spot the difference? If not, I'm sure we can do this again to make it clearer to you....")

 

[john-the-author]

Even with the economy being what it is at the moment?? Really?

What sort of widgets do you make?

Really and for true. A chunk of that in 2009 is trust fund money, but shoot, bucks are bucks.

I write for a living for my half of the household income. I get to stay at home for the most part and bang the keys and periodically talk to Lit folks. And I have the kitties to pester the crap outa me while I'm working, too.

 

[john-the-author]

Even with the economy being what it is at the moment?? Really?

What sort of widgets do you make?

And can I nibble your pumpkin seeds when Liar's done touching the pumpkin?

 

[cloudy]

English is a living language, and meanings constantly change. What that means is that words mean what most people peceive them to mean. At one time, Socialism may have meant government (or community) ownership. However, the meaning has, by now, come to mean something more than that.

Ah, so you've branched out from making up facts to making up your own definitions for words.

C'mon, dude. It ain't that fucking hard: say it with me now: "I was wrong."

I won't hold my breath. I'm sure you've made up a new meaning for that word, too.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

And can I nibble your pumpkin seeds when Liar's done touching the pumpkin?

I write for a living for my half of the household income. I get to stay at home for the most part and bang the keys and periodically talk to Lit folks. And I have the kitties to pester the crap outa me while I'm working, too.

Not a bad gig if you can get it!

 

[Boxlicker101]

DP

Youre right.

Engineering schools dont re-invent their science; a post remains a post, and a beam remains a beam, regardless of what follows them.

But teacher schools take their stuff, put it in a bag, shake it up, dump it out, and exclaim Voila! WE HAVE A BREAKTHRU!

The science of Economics is much the same.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Box, has your household (or anyone else's in this thread, for that matter) ever even grossed $250,000 in a year? Believe me, even a little bit into six figures and it gets hard to keep track anymore. A thousand here, a thousand there... Unless you're a total spendthrift in a huge house, money simply doesn't have the same meaning to you once your every conceivable need to live a comfortable life is well within your means. You start viewing luxuries as needs; in fact, some of them become needs, simply because of the sorts of job responsibilities that come with an income of that level preclude spending much time around the house.

If you're really that concerned about the welfare of the well-off, you shouldn't be. Believe me, most of them aren't concerned about yours.

I have never been even close. During the last full year my wife and I worked, our gross income was just over 100.000. The year before that, it was about the same. By the way, Barack Obama and Joe Biden both make well over $250,000 per year, as does John McCain.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Oh, tsk, tsk. No irony intended but aren't we calling the kettle black with that excuse?

Can you tell me when I have ever quoted somebody out of context or misquoted them as badly as that clip does?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Ah, so you've branched out from making up facts to making up your own definitions for words.

C'mon, dude. It ain't that fucking hard: say it with me now: "I was wrong."

I won't hold my breath. I'm sure you've made up a new meaning for that word, too.

I don't make up facts and I don't make up definitions to existing words. People who speak a language, such as English, are the ones who define it. When a word is considered by enough people to mean something, then that's what it means.

Sometimes I express opinions, and I identify them as such. If I present something I consider to be a fact, it is either common knowledge, such as the dishonesty of most politicians or I have support for my statement.

I do make mistakes sometimes, and I own up to them. Sometimes I give a reason for the mistake and sometimes I don't.

 

[john-the-author]

Not a bad gig if you can get it!

Most truly!

 

[epiphany65]

I don't make up facts and I don't make up definitions to existing words. People who speak a language, such as English, are the ones who define it. When a word is considered by enough people to mean something, then that's what it means.

Sometimes I express opinions, and I identify them as such. If I present something I consider to be a fact, it is either common knowledge, such as the dishonesty of most politicians or I have support for my statement.

I do make mistakes sometimes, and I own up to them. Sometimes I give a reason for the mistake and sometimes I don't.

I disagree. The word(s) schizophrenia or schizophrenic is a good example. Many people use it to mean "split personaility" or something akin to that, when in fact the definition is nothing like that. Now, the common misconception by the general public of what schizophrenia (or, in this case, Socialism) is does not alter the meaning any more than the common belief that the world was flat made it so.

 

[Belegon]

No but it should be workfare not welfare. Show them a way out instead of holding them down.That's all todays system does is hold them down.

If you had actually READ The Audacity of Hope you would know that Obama is very critical of the current welfare system and wants a system where welfare is traded for national service... because he feels that the pride of working and earning is a necessary part of encouraging self-respect in people who have lost it.

But of course, that would require you to get your information the old fashioned way... from the actual source.

 

[Belegon]

I have never been even close. During the last full year my wife and I worked, our gross income was just over 100.000. The year before that, it was about the same. By the way, Barack Obama and Joe Biden both make well over $250,000 per year, as does John McCain.

Which means that Obama is proposing to raise taxes on himself. Gee... how does that play with your characterization of him?

And how did Obama get there? By following the American Dream. He earned it. Got there through the sweat of his brow and his own hard work.


How did McCain achieve his primary influence? By being the son and grandson of Admirals and marrying into a fortune.

Remind me, which of these two is being accused of "elitism" again? Who can relate better to the working class? The guy who used to work at Baskin-Robbins or the guy who might even own a couple? (he'll ask his staff and have them get back to you on it. I doubt he owns any... but if he does, he is as likely to know how many as he was about houses.)

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I don't make up facts and I don't make up definitions to existing words. People who speak a language, such as English, are the ones who define it. When a word is considered by enough people to mean something, then that's what it means.

I disagree. The word(s) schizophrenia or schizophrenic is a good example. Many people use it to mean "split personaility" or something akin to that, when in fact the definition is nothing like that. Now, the common misconception by the general public of what schizophrenia (or, in this case, Socialism) is does not alter the meaning any more than the common belief that the world was flat made it so.

There is a difference, you know, between common usage and scientific usage, which is why so many scientific terms are in Latin, which is a dead, or unchanging language. To the general population, "schizophenic means "split personality" or something similar. Except they usually say "schizo" or "shit so" or something else like that.

The shape of the Earth is a scientific fact, and it is a fact whether or not most people ae aware of it. It has nothing to do with definitions.

Here is an example: You probably know what a "hussy" is. Now, it's a put down or an insult, but it used to refer to a pefectly proper and respectable woman. The definition has changed over a period of time.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hussy

If you look hard enough, you can probably find many words that have changed meaning over time.

 

[epiphany65]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I don't make up facts and I don't make up definitions to existing words. People who speak a language, such as English, are the ones who define it. When a word is considered by enough people to mean something, then that's what it means.



There is a difference, you know, between common usage and scientific usage, which is why so many scientific terms are in Latin, which is a dead, or unchanging language. To the general population, "schizophenic means "split personality" or something similar. Except they usually say "schizo" or "shit so" or something else like that.

The shape of the Earth is a scientific fact, and it is a fact whether or not most people ae aware of it. It has nothing to do with definitions.

Here is an example: You probably know what a "hussy" is. Now, it's a put down or an insult, but it used to refer to a pefectly proper and respectable woman. The definition has changed over a period of time.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hussy

If you look hard enough, you can probably find many words that have changed meaning over time.

Yes, but we're talking about a system of belief or philosophy here. The whole point goes beyond the simple definition of the word itself. Those on the right -- especially in The US -- lump Socialism in with Communism, Marxism, Marxist-Lenist, Maoism, etc., either intentionally or simply out of ignorance, but they're still misrepresenting what socialism means to those who follow it. That makes it difficult to have an honest discussion with them because you have to cut through the misconceptions and intentional lies by some.

 

[Belegon]

The reason they are shouting "socialist" is because most people have no clue what real socialism is and in order to refute the accusation you have to explain it. And the majority of the voters who are willing to believe shut their minds down less than thirty seconds into the explanation.

 

[Liar]

English is a living language, and meanings constantly change. What that means is that words mean what most people peceive them to mean. At one time, Socialism may have meant government (or community) ownership. However, the meaning has, by now, come to mean something more than that.

...to you, and to those in your camp that thinks like you. However, you are adressing people here who do not think like you. If I ask any of my friends "hey dude, what's socialism"? They'll give pretty much the same definition I did.

Who are the "most people" you talk of?