Originality Rating for this thread: 2.0/5 (4 votes cast) |
Interest Rating for this thread: 3.8/5 (5 votes cast) |
Scholarship/Prose Rating for this thread: 2.8/5 (4 votes cast) |
Big Brother
Administrator
Post #58074
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 3003
Total Words: 1,168,808
Average words per post: 389.21
PoliMatch: n/a
   
    
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-10 06:00
|
 |
| Politics: Libertarian-Syndicalist |
Country: American Empire |
|
| My Governor got arrested today. |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| From CNN |
Illinois governor taken into custody
-- Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is in federal custody on corruption charges, a law enforcement official said Tuesday.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, are charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery, according to a statement from the U.S. Attorney's office for the Northern District of Illinois.
Both men are expected in U.S. District Court in Chicago later Tuesday.
A news conference is expected at noon ET.
Federal prosecutors say Blagojevich, Harris and others conspired to gain financial benefits in appointing President-elect Barack Obama's Senate replacement, according to the statement.
"The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering," U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in a statement. "They allege that Blagojevich put a 'for sale' sign on the naming of a United States Senator; involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target; and corruptly used his office in an effort to trample editorial voices of criticism."
According to the statement, Blagojevich is alleged to have discussed obtaining:
- a substantial salary for himself at either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions;
- a spot for his wife on paid corporate boards, where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year;
- promises of campaign funds -- including cash up front;
- a Cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.
The Obama transition team is aware that Blagojevich is in federal custody, but has no comment, according to a senior Democratic source.
The statement also alleges that Blagojevich and others tried to illegally obtain campaign contributions.
Blagojevich, Harris and others are also alleged to have withheld state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field. The statement says this was done to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members who were critical of Blagojevich.
Blagojevich, who turns 52 on Wednesday, is in his second four-year term as Illinois governor. His term ends in January 2011.
Before being elected governor, he served as a U.S. congressman for Illinois' 5th district from 1997 until 2003, according to his online biography. He and his wife, Patti, have two daughters.
Blagojevich announced last month that he was forming a panel to review candidates to fill Obama's Senate seat.
Several Illinois Democrats -- including Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. and Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth, a former congressional candidate who now serves in Blagojevich's administration -- have been mentioned as possible Senate replacements for Obama.
|
This comes one year after our last Governor ( George Ryan ) started a six-year prison term for corruption. lol.
_________________
"The Aim of an Argument ... should not be victory, but progress." - Joseph Joubert (1754-1824)
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca the Younger
"It is often argued that religion is valuable because it makes men good, but even if this were true it would not be a proof that religion is true. That would be an extension of pragmatism beyond endurance. Santa Claus makes children good in precisely the same way, and yet no one would argue seriously that the fact proves his existence. The defense of religion is full of such logical imbecilities." - H. L. Mencken
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58081
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-10 14:50
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| I'm no longer living in Illinois, but I'm familiar with Chicago politics and I had the honor of voting against that bastard once and the President Elect twice. I only have one emotional statement to make about this: I hope you Obama voters get a cruel awakening to the kind of politics you've imported to Washington. You bought it all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erethemeus
Outer Party
Post #58086
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 185
Total Words: 75,663
Average words per post: 408.99
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-10 19:23
|
|
| Politics: Atheist |
Country: United Nations |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I hope you Obama voters get a cruel awakening to the kind of politics you've imported to Washington. You bought it all. |
What an insane, generalization to make. "Look, this guy is corrupt and is from the Chicago political machine, and Obama is from there too. THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME."
The Chicago political machine is best known for it's ability to mobilize, organize and fight. It is not best known for its corruption. Any other blatantly stupid generalizations you would like to make while we're here? I could say, "Look, Tristan wears his republicanism like a badge of courage, he must be a moron like the rest of them," but I won't because I don't believe it. I like to at least think that individual people, no matter what their affiliation, are not necessarily 100% representative of any good or bad faction within that party.
Seriously, Tristan. At least try harder.
_________________
I really want to hear one more person say, "Throw 'x' under the bus." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58087
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-10 20:31
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
I'm not generalizing. You truncated my sentence but I DID say that this was emotional. Consider yourself well-advised to take it as such. I stand by what I said though, and it's not a generalization. Chicago stands abreast of Miami and New Orleans as the definitive corrupt cities of the land. There's absolutely no denying this; it's been this way for a century. Today Chicago has a thoroughly corrupt Mayor-for-life, and the Cook County Board of Commissioners is laden with thuggish ward bosses. I cannot help it that the mayor and board are overwhelmingly Democrat. We are fortunate that in addition to being corrupt, Mayor Daley is also a highly competent and level-headed man, or the entire city would just sink to hell. A pity that his admirable talents and restraint are nowhere to be found among the drones on the Board.
The only one putting party over principle is Barack Obama. If he really drank his own Hope-and-Change swill, he should have glowingly endorsed the Democrat maverick, Forest Claypool, for Commissioner rather than the party boss, John Stroger. The deal breaker: Claypool was white, and Obama was not yet in a position to transcend Hyde Park's racial issues. He had to side with Senator Dick Durbin and endorse the "accepted" Democrat incumbent rather than a reformer. John Stroger was the top of the heap on Cook County's board, and you didn't cross him and his purchased allies.
Earlier, Obama had also thrown three rivals off the Democrat ticket for an Illinois senate seat by invalidating their signatures. This was effectively a political double-cross against Alice Palmer, the incumbent and one of people thrown off, because she was a community organizer just like Obama and supposedly shared the mission of registering new voters and allowing them some participation through these candidacy petitions. Rather than "Party versus principle," this raises deeper questions of power versus ethics.
Regardless, Obama's rise bears the mark of Chicago's methods. Many say that Obama is pristine and that all his ties to Chicago politics are just guilt by association smears. Heh, they should consider getting more acquainted with the sheer number and strength of those ties, and maybe learn what the man himself has done to get where he is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erethemeus
Outer Party
Post #58091
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 185
Total Words: 75,663
Average words per post: 408.99
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-10 22:33
|
|
| Politics: Atheist |
Country: United Nations |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
You did say it was emotional. So what? You still said it, being aware yourself it was emotional, and then made a generalization that you are defending as not being a generalization. Emotional or not, it was still an insane connection to make emotional or otherwise. Saying that you're about to make an emotional statement does not a defense of the subject matter make.
If I said, "I have an emotional statement to make: black people have been stealing my job and I hate them all," I would be making a defenseless argument that I would expect people to attack.
Consider yourself, sir, well advised that saying you are making an emotional statement does not mean you are suddenly immune to criticism for making it.
You made a generalizable statement - a logical fallacy - and now are backtracking in an effort to make sense out of it. If it was emotional statement and I am so advised to take it as such, why are you even trying to defend it? Why are you trying to explain why it wasn't a generalization?
You made a statement about Chicago politics, which doesn't apply to every Chicago politician, and then said,
| Quote: |
| I hope you Obama voters get a cruel awakening to the kind of politics you've imported to Washington. You bought it all. |
This statement generalized to political mechanisms of a specific aspect of Chicago politics to a politician without offering any explanation as to why. You made a logical leap by saying, "All politicians in Chicago are part of this mechanism. Obama came from Chicago, therefore he is part of this mechanism." That is the very definition of a generalization. I don't have to defend it beyond this point - I don't care what kind of statements you make, emotional or otherwise, I am going to call you on making shitty remarks without backing them up and then defending them.
| Quote: |
| The only one putting party over principle is Barack Obama. If he really drank his own Hope-and-Change swill, he should have glowingly endorsed the Democrat maverick, Forest Claypool, for Commissioner rather than the party boss, John Stroger. The deal breaker: Claypool was white, and Obama was not yet in a position to transcend Hyde Park's racial issues. He had to side with Senator Dick Durbin and endorse the "accepted" Democrat incumbent rather than a reformer. John Stroger was the top of the heap on Cook County's board, and you didn't cross him and his purchased allies. |
Can you back that up? Or are we playing the biased opinions game? Even so - Obama supported somebody that was politically useful to him... suddenly his progressive policies and campaign based on hope (whatever the hell that is) is swill? You are making connections that sound great on paper until somebody looks through it looking to make sense of things.
| Quote: |
| Earlier, Obama had also thrown three rivals off the Democrat ticket for an Illinois senate seat by invalidating their signatures. |
Invalidating their signatures? Does that mean they had invalid signatures? If so, then how is this corrupt or necessarily bad? I guess I would like to hear a clarification of the matter.
| Quote: |
| Heh, they should consider getting more acquainted with the sheer number and strength of those ties, and maybe learn what the man himself has done to get where he is. |
Argument via implication is as bad as argument via generalization, try again.
_________________
I really want to hear one more person say, "Throw 'x' under the bus." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58093
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Thu 2008-12-11 00:00
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
I already explained why I wasn't generalizing. It's not a matter of "backing up" events with weblinks; those events aren't my opinions-- they all really happened. I was living in Chicago the whole time, in college first, and then working in the South Loop, and in the corner of my vision there was widespread confusion over the way Barack Obama suddenly appeared as the sole runner for a local senate seat, having apparently backstabbed the incumbent, a former political ally. And then Stroger passes on his position to his son in the grand traditions of primogeniture and divine right. And Bishop Obama is right there for the coronation. Being a witness in real-time, it didn't cross my mind just now to post weblinks corroborating my personal experiences, quite in the same way that you can relate first-person about ACORN without being expected (online) to cite a reference in every sentence since we can all use google anyway. Your own tone, accompanied with your dismissal of my recollections as falsehood and defamation, recommends no further discussion here.
Chicago was a great city to live in in a great many ways, but I just hope Washington DC chokes on its first taste of it. If it doesn't, capitalism is fucked and we may as well just go back to guilds and gold currency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erethemeus
Outer Party
Post #58095
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 185
Total Words: 75,663
Average words per post: 408.99
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Thu 2008-12-11 00:12
|
|
| Politics: Atheist |
Country: United Nations |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
And I explained why your statement was a generalization by breaking it down to the logical basics. I can put it in A and B, symbolic format if you'd like. You made a generalization, plain and simple, and then continued to add to it in your subsequent post.
My assertions about ACORN can be backed up with information I gathered in order to write my various pieces on the organization. I do my very best to form as few opinions as possible without understanding as much as I can about them. Obviously this does not always work - but first hand experience is useless and anecdotal without anything to back it up with. Had you actually asked me any questions about my statements and understanding of ACORN, I would have been happy to cite my source material as I generally file most things in various places around my residence.
Look Tristan - when if comes right down to it, I don't think you're that bad of a fellow, though I've disagreed with you almost the entire time I've seen you on the boards. However, because I think you're a good poster does not mean I am not going to criticize something you say, as I have here. You are making remarks that, yes, I do expect you to back up. My personal philosophy in life is that if I have an opinion or understanding of something, I damn well better have a good reason for it. If I don't, then I am not going to state my opinion on the matter until I have a better perspective on it.
I expect the same out of everybody around me. Certainly, they do not have to adhere to the same standards, but to be honest and frank, your opinion is meaningless if you cannot back it up beyond anecdote and logically fallible arguments. If you continue to hold the opinion, then I am going to attack it mercilessly until it is discredited so that people reading it will hopefully think, "Eh, how ineffective and terrible." That's the least I can do for anybody stumbling across poor arguments.
I have said for a long time, and continue to say - I do not care what your position is on the matter.. so long as you have good reason or cause for why you think that way. If you don't, and I am around, you can expect I am going to say, wtf?
_________________
I really want to hear one more person say, "Throw 'x' under the bus." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58099
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Thu 2008-12-11 04:43
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| Erethemeus wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I hope you Obama voters get a cruel awakening to the kind of politics you've imported to Washington. You bought it all. |
What an insane, generalization to make. "Look, this guy is corrupt and is from the Chicago political machine, and Obama is from there too. THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME."
The Chicago political machine is best known for it's ability to mobilize, organize and fight. It is not best known for its corruption.
Any other blatantly stupid generalizations you would like to make while we're here? I could say, "Look, Tristan wears his republicanism like a badge of courage, he must be a moron like the rest of them," but I won't because I don't believe it. I like to at least think that individual people, no matter what their affiliation, are not necessarily 100% representative of any good or bad faction within that party.
Seriously, Tristan. At least try harder. |
Well put. I like to dispense back nonsense when I see it though, a matter of style.
PS: some people get paid to post in internet forums to smog out the blogosphere's critics. 
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58101
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Thu 2008-12-11 04:43
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| propaganda tricks 101: guilty by association |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
I'm not generalizing. You truncated my sentence but I DID say that this was emotional. Consider yourself well-advised to take it as such.
I stand by what I said though, and it's not a generalization. +
Chicago stands abreast of Miami and New Orleans as the definitive corrupt cities of the land. There's absolutely no denying this; it's been this way for a century. Today Chicago has a thoroughly corrupt Mayor-for-life, and the Cook County Board of Commissioners is laden with thuggish ward bosses.
I cannot help it that the mayor and board are overwhelmingly Democrat.
We are fortunate that in addition to being corrupt, Mayor Daley is also a highly competent and level-headed man, or the entire city would just sink to hell.
A pity that his admirable talents and restraint are nowhere to be found among the drones on the Board.*
The only one putting party over principle is Barack Obama. If he really drank his own Hope-and-Change swill, he should have glowingly endorsed the Democrat maverick, Forest Claypool, for Commissioner rather than the party boss, John Stroger.
The deal breaker: Claypool was white,
and Obama was not yet in a position to transcend Hyde Park's racial issues.
He had to side with Senator Dick Durbin and endorse the "accepted" Democrat incumbent rather than a reformer.
John Stroger was the top of the heap on Cook County's board, and you didn't cross him and his purchased allies.
Earlier, Obama had also thrown three rivals off the Democrat ticket for an Illinois senate seat by invalidating their signatures.
This was effectively a political double-cross against Alice Palmer, the incumbent and one of people thrown off,
because she was a community organizer just like Obama and supposedly shared the mission of registering new voters and allowing them some participation through these candidacy petitions.
Rather than "Party versus principle," this raises deeper questions of power versus ethics.
Regardless, Obama's rise bears the mark of Chicago's methods. Many say that Obama is pristine and that all his ties to Chicago politics are just guilt by association smears. Heh,
they should consider getting more acquainted with the sheer number and strength of those ties, and maybe learn what the man himself has done to get where he is. |
Nifty example if worn-out into cliche, serves the purpose of creating talking points ab nauseum 
*Shame he is good because he's corrupt oh tripe!
+ if not working repeat again and again....and so on
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58103
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Thu 2008-12-11 04:50
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| Re: My Governor got arrested today. |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| Big Brother wrote: |
| From CNN |
Illinois governor taken into custody
-- Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is in federal custody on corruption charges, a law enforcement official said Tuesday.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, are charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery, according to a statement from the U.S. Attorney's office for the Northern District of Illinois.
Both men are expected in U.S. District Court in Chicago later Tuesday.
A news conference is expected at noon ET.
Federal prosecutors say Blagojevich, Harris and others conspired to gain financial benefits in appointing President-elect Barack Obama's Senate replacement, according to the statement.
"The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering," U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in a statement. "They allege that Blagojevich put a 'for sale' sign on the naming of a United States Senator; involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target; and corruptly used his office in an effort to trample editorial voices of criticism."
According to the statement, Blagojevich is alleged to have discussed obtaining:
- a substantial salary for himself at either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions;
- a spot for his wife on paid corporate boards, where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year;
- promises of campaign funds -- including cash up front;
- a Cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.
The Obama transition team is aware that Blagojevich is in federal custody, but has no comment, according to a senior Democratic source.
The statement also alleges that Blagojevich and others tried to illegally obtain campaign contributions.
Blagojevich, Harris and others are also alleged to have withheld state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field. The statement says this was done to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members who were critical of Blagojevich.
Blagojevich, who turns 52 on Wednesday, is in his second four-year term as Illinois governor. His term ends in January 2011.
Before being elected governor, he served as a U.S. congressman for Illinois' 5th district from 1997 until 2003, according to his online biography. He and his wife, Patti, have two daughters.
Blagojevich announced last month that he was forming a panel to review candidates to fill Obama's Senate seat.
Several Illinois Democrats -- including Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. and Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth, a former congressional candidate who now serves in Blagojevich's administration -- have been mentioned as possible Senate replacements for Obama.
|
This comes one year after our last Governor ( George Ryan ) started a six-year prison term for corruption. lol. |
"If only Bush and his henchmen had been caught earlier we wouldn't be in this sorry state we are in."
| Quote: |
They allege that Blagojevich put a 'for sale' sign
|
Hmm someone is very blase about this as if they want to be caught by advertising like House Sale....fishy, fishy fishy or stupid or foul play
PS: Must be a toupe or something. At least there is a brain at work there being kept warm 
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM
Last edited by carldiesturmer on Fri 2008-12-12 05:45; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58133
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Fri 2008-12-12 05:25
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| Discourse Analysis 101 |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
I already explained why I wasn't generalizing.-1
It's not a matter of "backing up" events with weblinks;-2
those events aren't my opinions-- they all really happened. -3
I was living in Chicago the whole time, in college first, and then working in the South Loop,-4
and in the corner of my vision there was widespread confusion over the way Barack Obama suddenly appeared as the sole runner for a local senate seat,-5
having apparently backstabbedWW the incumbent,-6
a former political ally. -7
And then Stroger passes on his position to his son in the grand traditions of primogeniture and divine right. -8
And Bishop Obama is right there for the coronation. -9
Being a witness in real-time,-10
it didn't cross my mind just now to post weblinks corroborating my personal experiences-11
quite in the same way that you can relate first-person about ACORN without being expected (online) to cite a reference in every sentence -12
since we can all use google anyway. 13*
Your own tone,
accompanied with your dismissal of my recollections as falsehood and defamation, -14
recommends no further discussion here.-15
Chicago was a great city to live in in a great many ways, but I just hope Washington DC chokes on its first taste of it.-16
If it doesn't, capitalism is fucked and we may as well just go back to guilds and gold currency-17. |
I am getting the impression that Tristan is scared of being taken to task for telling off nonsense and being debunked.
1-This is how it goes if it is specific then it is not, if it is then it isn't to divert the discussion from the thread topic-"Darn meddling kids!"
2- Can you recommend other sources readily available online?
3- You know they have to be available on the web version of newspapers unless you like gossip Republican mags.
4- How long ago, like a couple of weeks ago or for the sake of the Thread topic like 15 minutes?
5- Must be terribly confusing to a dimwitted republican smogger.
WW: Weasel word warning "Apparently backstabbed".
6-7-Surely you have insider knowledge Tristan.
8-9Great christian allegory but are they Bush Sr and Bush Jr? Wait a minute we simply recycle the cabinet henchmen like like Dick and Donald.
10- Surely you must have some time of footage of your eyewitness events right?
11- So you're an opportunist poster right, what kept you then?
12- It is called producing evidence to fact in a professional manner, may be you want the opponent to do the work for you, think of the Adversarial Court System. Basic college refering 101 republican chump.
13- It is not the ROLE of the opposing debater to provide evidence you should be providing to back up your own assertion, you are either lazy or simply don't have the facts which means you're lying your arse off.
14- Surely you can refute nonsense with fact correct, what's to be afraid, you're making a retreat to save face in a less than abrupt way.
15- why stop now we are only warming up Tristan....
16- Karl Rove must be looking for work with his favorite lobbyists in Washington DC.
17- Old fashioned conservatism, what's the matter can't come to terms with Bush's massive damage to the US Economy, sooner you're gonna be pumping gas too...or scavenging garbage tips for food scraps and now feel free to cash your cheque.
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58146
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Sat 2008-12-13 05:13
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: American Empire |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
What do you think the bigger prisoners will call there new prison bitch/pet.
He gets what he deserves but I dont blame him for trying to profit of Obama's open seat... capitilism reaps what it sows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58162
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Sun 2008-12-14 16:24
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Blago is not a capitalist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58187
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Mon 2008-12-15 14:31
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: American Empire |
|
| |
Post Rating: 3.0/4 (3 votes cast) |
|
|
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| You mean, representative democracy reaps what it sows, since capitalism describes the economy, and unfortunately, it's the worst of all governments... except all the others. |
No, I mean the idea of trying to profit off of Obama's seat is capitalist. Capitalism being our main economic system teaches us to try to make a profit every where, that money is king. When people see a chance to make money they go for it, usually ignoring the risk. This is what capitalism has taught us: To make as much money as possible, disregarding what rules we break, what people we hurt.
I am not saying that Capitalism was intended to create this attitude. I'm saying that nothing has been done to stop this.[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58194
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Mon 2008-12-15 15:42
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Teimuraz Sakirovadze wrote: |
| Can you back that up instead of merely saying the "X is not a Y" subset fallacy? |
Fine, fine. Obviously Blago is Adam Smith's modern incarnate ideologue, so I could never dig up stuff in his recent history or record that would suggest he acts like a typical Chicago boss. Now what was this thread about again?
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| You could argue semantics, Trist, but, Blago as far as I know represents mixed-market interests, which play into a capitalist system where we can earn profit. I think maybe socialists and people whose political and economic ideologies are based in part on a socialist model in some respect might over-use the word, but since Blago supported mixed-market economic policies, it wouldn't be incorrect to label him a capitalist, just as virtually every single politician on Earth would be a capitalist (some notable exclusions would be North Korean leaders who would probably be best described as fascist overseers, for lack of a better term). |
If mixed market countries' politicians could simply be divided into #1- politicians who aim to limit the government's role to promote economic freedom, and #2- politicians who aim to extend government's role to promote economic security, Blago would be a big, steaming pile of #2. He pushed twice for universal health care in Illinois ("Illinois Covered"), pushed for the 2006 ban on big guns, supported public preschools so that the government can get its claws around your neck as soon as possible, raised the minimum wage to $7.50 so that fewer youths can get jobs (encouraging them to try out the public preschool, I imagine), and pushed the 1099 Employee Classification Act to force small businesses to become union shops. As we all know, small businesses have unlimited wealth to spare for union wages, and no right to employ whomever they want, so it's only right. Capitalism and socialism be damned, whatever gets Blago his power is what he stands up for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mephistopheles
Filthy Animal
Post #58196
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
   
|
|
Posted: Mon 2008-12-15 17:27
|
|
| Politics: Nazi |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 3.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| mars_evo wrote: |
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| You mean, representative democracy reaps what it sows, since capitalism describes the economy, and unfortunately, it's the worst of all governments... except all the others. |
No, I mean the idea of trying to profit off of Obama's seat is capitalist. Capitalism being our main economic system teaches us to try to make a profit every where, that money is king. When people see a chance to make money they go for it, usually ignoring the risk. This is what capitalism has taught us: To make as much money as possible, disregarding what rules we break, what people we hurt.
I am not saying that Capitalism was intended to create this attitude. I'm saying that nothing has been done to stop this. |
You're misapplying the word "capitalist". Capitalism describes an economic system, not politics or even political corruption. It would be like using "command economy" where you used capitalism, if the roles were reversed and Blago was part of an authoritarian regime like North Korea. It makes no sense and is a non sequitor.
You could make a profit in many fields, but capitalism isn't an entity, and doesn't teach us anything. Once you attend an economics class in high school, you learn how the economy works, and how more laissez-faire or even command policies work, but what you understand as a result is that economics is based on scarcity, and thus, supply and demand are crucial. There isn't a social policy or educational conspiracy to prop up a... conspiracy.
What you describe as rampant greed is something humans have always experienced, it's not unique to capitalism, or new.
_________________
Yippykiaye motherfucker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mephistopheles
Filthy Animal
Post #58198
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Mon 2008-12-15 17:29
|
|
| Politics: Nazi |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
| Teimuraz Sakirovadze wrote: |
| Can you back that up instead of merely saying the "X is not a Y" subset fallacy? |
Fine, fine. Obviously Blago is Adam Smith's modern incarnate ideologue, so I could never dig up stuff in his recent history or record that would suggest he acts like a typical Chicago boss. Now what was this thread about again?
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| You could argue semantics, Trist, but, Blago as far as I know represents mixed-market interests, which play into a capitalist system where we can earn profit. I think maybe socialists and people whose political and economic ideologies are based in part on a socialist model in some respect might over-use the word, but since Blago supported mixed-market economic policies, it wouldn't be incorrect to label him a capitalist, just as virtually every single politician on Earth would be a capitalist (some notable exclusions would be North Korean leaders who would probably be best described as fascist overseers, for lack of a better term). |
If mixed market countries' politicians could simply be divided into #1- politicians who aim to limit the government's role to promote economic freedom, and #2- politicians who aim to extend government's role to promote economic security, Blago would be a big, steaming pile of #2. He pushed twice for universal health care in Illinois ("Illinois Covered"), pushed for the 2006 ban on big guns, supported public preschools so that the government can get its claws around your neck as soon as possible, raised the minimum wage to $7.50 so that fewer youths can get jobs (encouraging them to try out the public preschool, I imagine), and pushed the 1099 Employee Classification Act to force small businesses to become union shops. As we all know, small businesses have unlimited wealth to spare for union wages, and no right to employ whomever they want, so it's only right. Capitalism and socialism be damned, whatever gets Blago his power is what he stands up for. |
Democrats typically support social democratic policies, and it is wholly inaccurate to apply the label "socialist" to him just because he supported quality-of-living improvements.
_________________
Yippykiaye motherfucker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58201
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Mon 2008-12-15 19:31
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Capitalism and socialism be damned, whatever gets Blago his power is what he stands up for. |
Democrats typically support social democratic policies, and it is wholly inaccurate to apply the label "socialist" to him just because he supported quality-of-living improvements. |
I should emphasize that i did not label him a socialist. Clearly the most accurate description of his creed would be "Blagoist," by my own words. But sure, we can go ahead and call him a socialist, too. The policies he's pushed as governor of Illinois have been socialistic moves, all the way down the list. While some will argue that a label needs to be worn proudly in order for it to be accurate, I am not so choosy. A is A. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58217
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 03:05
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| Not for the faint-hearted |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Fine, fine. Obviously Blago is Adam Smith's modern incarnate ideologue,
so I could never dig up stuff in his recent history or record that would suggest he acts like a typical Chicago boss.
Now what was this thread about again? |
pretty crude derailment attempt ie: Chicago Mafia Boss insinuation fits of a radio shock jock like Rush Limbaugh and he talks like a sewage processing plant.
| Quote: |
If mixed market countries' politicians could simply be divided into
#1- politicians who aim to limit the government's role to promote economic freedom-1, and
#2- politicians who aim to extend government's role to promote economic security-2 , Blago would be a big, steaming pile of #2.
He pushed twice for universal health care in Illinois - 3 ("Illinois Covered"),
pushed for the 2006 ban on big guns,-4
supported public preschools so that the government can get its claws around your neck -5 as soon as possible,
raised the minimum wage to $7.50 so that fewer youths can get jobs -6 (encouraging them to try out the public preschool-7, I imagine), and
pushed the 1099 Employee Classification Act to force small businesses to become union shops -8.
As we all know-9, small businesses have unlimited wealth to spare for union wages9.5, and no right to employ whomever they want-10 , so it's only right.
Capitalism and socialism be damned $,
whatever gets Blago his power is what he stands up for. |
-1This Republican Agitprop 101 propaganda: glittering generality sample; sounds good in theory however there have to be laws against shoddy practices, consumer rip off, predatory lending and so on, care to illustrate details and facts? Sorry to burst the "Free Market Fantasy Bubble".
-2 Talking about Dick Cheney's companies getting contracts from his own government is an abuse of public office for personal enrichment and providing contracts to military contracts through perpetual warmongering ideology is tantamount to Military Keynesianism under the umbrella of Patriotism, with borrowing+spend policy has the US Government in massive debt as it stands, plenty of economic security for Republican Associates, fuck your fake patriotism Tristan.
-3, Is universal just Illinois? Is Universal meant to cover those with private insurance as well, so Tristan agree those without government health insurance should just die off as they kicked out of hospitals like third world nation like Tanzania or Guatemala, "Sorry Pal no insurance, no life-saving medicine/surgery now get lost".
4- Nice ban Big Guns, care to give details? you know Charlton Heston must be turning on his grave but that's what he used to get paid for by the gun manufacturers and lobby to keep their market and livelihoods, screw the rest of those at the end of the bullet's trajectory, you don't give a shit for human life, as for those red necks, neo-nazis and other religious imbeciles building their paramilitary forces well...that's bonus in wiping out those pesky Democrat Presidents in pursuit of their anti-Washington Centralist/Communist Conspiracy Paranoia.
5-I like your figurative ' claws', is it mean tomean scare people and get an emotional reaction? Sounds better than christian fundamentalist Home Schooling can I join now? Southern Christian Rightists really hate that one baby, shows where you are coming from Tristan, ok ready to walk with Republican Dinosaurs Tristan?
6-The working poor wage levels so there are three jobs to pay for the standard of living of one, still trying to make ends meet to pay the rent, gas, food. Screw the Poor Republican Policies. This is the Republican Appeal to the Small Business Middle Class.
7- Is this a FACT or you "I imagine"?
8- Depending on the tone taken or mood of the reader, this is either good or bad, however the negative point is?
9- I like the "we all know" weasel word
9.5 "Unlimited Wealth" you assume a lot as a Republican Tristan, are you stupid or something?
10- If you exclude wetbacks and unfair racial and gender and whatever bigotry suits an employer to exclude people from the work force, this right is shaky as the passing of the next legislation to stamp it out with a bloody good reason.
$ Walking the Wild Side? Very obvious which way you walk and talk Tristan.
Welcome to 21st Century Civilization .
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM
Last edited by carldiesturmer on Tue 2008-12-16 04:09; edited 6 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58218
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 03:26
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| Deconstructing Tristan's Republican Discourse... |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Capitalism and socialism be damned, whatever gets Blago his power is what he stands up for. |
Democrats typically support social democratic policies, and it is wholly inaccurate to apply the label "socialist" to him just because he supported quality-of-living improvements. |
I should emphasize that i did not label him a socialist -1. Clearly-WW the most accurate description of his creed would be "Blagoist," by my own words*.
But sure, we can go ahead and call him a socialist$$$, too2.
The policies he's pushed as governor of Illinois have been socialistic moves,3
all the way down the list.
While some will argue that a label needs to be worn proudly -WW in order for it to be accurate,
I am not so choosy. A is A. |
1- You called him Socialist, the next post you don't then in the next post you do then retract, so it is spinning the wheel with epithets, you are not serious, it is name-calling exercises with you, screw ideological accuracy.
2- Of course 'Socialist', Mother Teresa, Ghandi, Patton, Hinkley, Reagan, Clinton ,Hitler, Stalin were socialist too, whatever fuckhead.
* Can you tell me when "Blagoist" like Maoist gets added to the Political Dictionary because you are making crap as you post along with political labels. Mind you Obama rhymes with Osama thus Obama must be a terrorist muslim according to Republican Thought Processes, hence unfit to stand for election.
3- Republican Ignoramuses for Propagandistic purposes confuse Socialism with Liberalism, lack of education runs deep among the sanctimonious ranks of the Republican Party, you know the sticky note approach to political labels and terminology, toss 'em and hope it gets repeated and if they stick on the target 
$$$ Shows the propagandistic intention of your post, which is to mislead arsehole.
WW- Weasel Word
Now Tristan if you are done with insulting intelligence, hope you enjoy having your dishonesty humiliated for Christmas. Hohohohohho
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58234
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 13:50
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: American Empire |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
What you describe as rampant greed is something humans have always experienced, it's not unique to capitalism, or new. |
My theory that I am explaining is simply this: capitalism makes this rampant greed ten times as worse. That is my theory and I believe it.
The reason is in socialism people have what they need. Therefore insatiable greed isn't common.
In capitalism some people aren't taken care of or are taken care of too much. This could cause people to be gluttonous and greedy when they have the right opportunity.
I also think that jealousy has a play in it. In socialism people basically have the same thing. In capitalism some have better things than others. This jealousy would make people do anything fro a dollar, so that they can "keep up with the jones".
This is an idea not a proven fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58236
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 15:42
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| mars_evo wrote: |
My theory that I am explaining is simply this: capitalism makes this rampant greed ten times as worse. That is my theory and I believe it.
The reason is in socialism people have what they need. Therefore insatiable greed isn't common.
In capitalism some people aren't taken care of or are taken care of too much. This could cause people to be gluttonous and greedy when they have the right opportunity.
I also think that jealousy has a play in it. In socialism people basically have the same thing. In capitalism some have better things than others. This jealousy would make people do anything fro a dollar, so that they can "keep up with the jones".
This is an idea not a proven fact. |
You are herein comparing real-life capitalism with idealized socialism. In reality, socialism is an economy of power just as capitalism is an economy of money. In reality, socialist governments reward political power to the people with the capability, willingness, friends, and greed necessary to acquire it. There are always people and groups who are left out in the cold, "not taken care of," because they lacked these things or just didn't care. If you are looking for a system which engenders jealousy and class-envy, you'd do well with the quarreling political interest groups which comprise the socialist political landscape. Professionals and guildsmen have secure jobs under these politics, but the cost of their protection is limited opportunities for entry-level workers and upstart firms. As for real-life gluttony: all politicians are known for a certain level of gluttony when it comes to projecting power, and socialism gives politicians the moral sanction to project powers that tend to be forbidden under capitalism. Some examples would controls on wages, prices, employment, contract negotiations, standards of quality, licensing, banned goods, medicine, education, charity, and tort law. Capitalism leaves these issues more in the hands of the market, an invisible mechanism which lacks the personal touch of a gluttonous political boss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carldiesturmer
Filthy Animal
Post #58238
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 18:05
|
|
| Politics: Oligarchical Collectivist |
Country: United States |
|
| Tristan loves political generalizations but Why? |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (1 vote cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
| mars_evo wrote: |
My theory that I am explaining is simply this: capitalism makes this rampant greed ten times as worse 101.
That is my theory and I believe it 101.
The reason is in socialism people have what they need%%.
Therefore insatiable greed isn't common. %%%
In capitalism some people aren't taken care of or are taken care of too much.^
This could cause people to be gluttonous and greedy when they have the right opportunity.
I also think that jealousy has a play in it.#
In socialism people basicallyWW have the same thing+
In capitalism some have better things than others.++
This jealousy would make people do anything fro a dollar, so that they can "keep up with the jones"2.
This is an idea not a proven fact. |
You are herein comparing real-life capitalism with idealized socialism &.
In reality, WW
socialism is an economy of power just as capitalism is an economy of money$.
In reality,WW
socialist governments reward political power to the people with the capability, willingness, friends, and greed necessary to acquire it$$.
There are always people and groups who are left out in the cold, "not taken care of," because they lacked these things or just didn't care.
If you are looking for a system which engenders jealousy and class-envy, you'd do well with the quarreling political interest groups which comprise the socialist political landscape @.
Professionals and guildsmen5 have secure jobs % under these politics,
but the cost of their protection is limited opportunities for entry-level workers and upstart firms 6 .
As for real-life gluttony $$ %%:
all politiciansX are known for a [b]certain level of gluttony when it comes to projecting power[/b], and socialism*1 gives politicians the moral sanction to project powers that tend to be forbidden under capitalism4.
Some examples would controls on wages, prices, employment, contract negotiations, standards of quality, licensing, banned goods, medicine, education, charity, and tort law.
Capitalism leaves these issues more in the hands of the market3, an invisible mechanism which lacks the personal touch of a gluttonous political boss. |
I think it is time to end the democratic farce and have a Wall Street led Business Plot on Obama and the Presidency, this should siphon off any remaining funds to the said interests that buttress the Wall Street Business Elite.*
& Discover the wonders and choice outside the polar opposites of Capitalism and Socialism/Communism Axis, not what the ideologues tell you it is like.
# Can you qualify this assertion with a minimum fact at least?
X I love a juicy generalization "ALL" does it mean Republican Party bosses like Dick Cheney or Jr Bush or McCain? Please explain....
*A Historical Note "Business Plot.
% is the correct positions rather than jobs, swapping words does not make up for the specific terminology Tristan, we have elections in one you know.
++ I expect better than this down the track.
1 Are you talking about your "socialist now, then they not socialist now" Liberals or are you speaking of another country not the USA?
2. Gotta fly those corporate executives...to Miami and La Jolla and back from a Congressional Committee Hearing. People have more than one single motivation other than merely keeping up with the Joneses-GENERALIZATION!
3. More like the pocket of Wall Street...if you believe in invisible magical hands like God and other fictions and not people acting as actual agents wheeling and dealing business, perhaps the Tooth Fairy is more 'you'.
4. Capitalism has a set of Ten Commandment Tablets with directions and laws, sorry but have you found them Tristan? You know the Invisible Hand of the Market....just suspend belief for a sec there. Your statement is pure ideological disneyland best suited for gross political cartooning in the Soviet Union.
5 Are they still around? Thought they died out in the 18th Century in Europe..
6 Ever heard of barriers to entry into market in Economics 101 textbooks?
$$%% By now our 'Glutton' should be a fat American Tourist weighing half a tonne.
$ and $$ sounds like America, Power gives you money, money gives you power, so what's the difference..."Because they can.."
& Socialism and Liberalism, confusion is rampant in the USA....let's begin with Republicans and 'internet communists' from England..hey Tristan confusing "Blagoism" with Democrats' Liberalism is very dishonest, now you sent the newbie off the rails, gotta call you into account for misleading the thread topic.
WW Not a very elegant use of a weasel word Tristan..works on poorly educated young socialists and communists "In Reality" yours truly when making incorrect assertions borne out of propagandistic intentions.
@ Rich neighbors flaunting their wealth doesn't right?
%% No wonder communism and its variant of socialism was overthrown by popular revolt in the Eastern Bloc Tristan, who's side are you on? You sure you're republican?
%%% is this supposed to be logical reasoning through syllogism using passive language based on hackenyed propagandic fallacies? What a joke.
+ What basic thing are you referring to?
^ What is this supposed to mean ghetto dwelling african-americans and Beverly Hills 90210 whitebreads?
I am not finished Tristan... Hurry Tristan bury the thread by sending it off topic before the NS-resident commies and socialists start digging up Republican filth
101 Theories have to have empirical backing otherwise they are unfounded assertions based on very limited observation hence their ideological nature outside Scientific Thought and Thinking.
PS: Tristan you certainly drifted way-out off the original thread topic, intentional?
_________________
What is a Democratic Socialist?
It is a Communist who is cowardly
enough to call himself what he's not, for fear of backlash on the Semantics. It is about the "Speed" of the "Revolution".
Like Hitler said "get them persuaded and us elected"
Caveat Emptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Socialism
DO NOT USE BIG BROTHER'S LIBERTARIAN POLICIES AND BELIEFS AGAINST HIS HIMSELF AND HIS FORUM
Last edited by carldiesturmer on Tue 2008-12-16 18:14; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58239
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 18:10
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: Airstrip One |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
I have reached a conclusion, Tristan is a thread-thief, or a confused individual.
_________________
Myspace.cpm/thepinzrock |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mephistopheles
Filthy Animal
Post #58243
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Tue 2008-12-16 20:09
|
|
| Politics: Nazi |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| mars_evo wrote: |
My theory that I am explaining is simply this: capitalism makes this rampant greed ten times as worse. That is my theory and I believe it.
The reason is in socialism people have what they need. Therefore insatiable greed isn't common. |
There is no socialism. Tried, failed. There's a lot of reasons why people say it failed numerous times, from the movement itself being totalitarian, to whatever, but from an economic standpoint (since socialism plays on pseudo-economics to try to solve humanity's problems), it was pretty much doomed to failure. What socialism intends to do, in a nutshell, is to physically confiscate resources, capital, and profit, and have the government distribute it on a wide scale. Problem is, the government can't predict human needs to an accurate measure. Command economies simply do not work. Additionally, another problem is who does the distributing? That in itself opened it to extreme abuse, which was taken advantage of. Let's also consider how specific regions would overstate their needs, in order to stockpile resources selfishly, while other regions couldn't get enough because of a resource shortfall.
Socialism is just utopian idealism, and despite Soviet-wannabe-homeless-unemployed-losers (not saying you are one) who think it's cool and are so heavily biased and want to believe it so badly they ignore any argument against it, just like a Christian ignores arguments, it doesn't work, didn't work, won't work. You can't destroy your society and re-organize it into something better, just doesn't work like that, and it fails. No, the French Revolution doesn't count. Since you're talking about an idealistic ideology where economic and political natures of the society would be totally overthrown and re-arranged, it won't work. Let's say you try to reform it---won't work. People aren't going to allow their Constitutions or national/federal laws to take away rights and let the government take on extraordinary power for some vague future of being happy.
| mars_evo wrote: |
| In capitalism some people aren't taken care of or are taken care of too much. This could cause people to be gluttonous and greedy when they have the right opportunity. |
Scandinavia has a capitalist economy (albeit more social democratic mixed-market than most of the world) and their societies try to take care of its citizens.
| mars_evo wrote: |
I also think that jealousy has a play in it. In socialism people basically have the same thing. In capitalism some have better things than others. This jealousy would make people do anything fro a dollar, so that they can "keep up with the jones".
This is an idea not a proven fact. |
So, what, are you going to outlaw jealousy and greed with your super-duper awesome political protests that never make it into the news?
_________________
Yippykiaye motherfucker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58253
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-17 02:14
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: Airstrip One |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
So, what, are you going to outlaw jealousy and greed with your super-duper awesome political protests that never make it into the news? |
Don't patronize me. Obviously you can't outlaw jealousy and greed. I will say this for the final time. I believe that capitalism makes these worse. They are present everywhere, everyday. Only an ignorant person would try to protest an emotion... 
_________________
Myspace.cpm/thepinzrock |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mephistopheles
Filthy Animal
Post #58256
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-17 02:31
|
|
| Politics: Nazi |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 2.5/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| mars_evo wrote: |
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
So, what, are you going to outlaw jealousy and greed with your super-duper awesome political protests that never make it into the news? |
Don't patronize me. Obviously you can't outlaw jealousy and greed. I will say this for the final time. I believe that capitalism makes these worse. They are present everywhere, everyday. Only an ignorant person would try to protest an emotion... |
I'll do as I please. If you can't handle criticism or negative opinions, don't come online. Be less sensitive and I'm sure we'll get along.
I think you're somewhat valid in your opinion that capitalism makes greed worse. I'll have to guess a little, but I'm sure your opinion on capitalism is it allows for rampant profit and greed systems (limited only by individual restraint, which isn't ever enough, so the government helps regulate, right?). I think greed is a problem. The issue is what to do about it. You believe in an anarchist model, which will employ socialism in some form. I don't think that will work, for reasons I already explained, considering it never has worked.
So, since attempts to install socialism never lead to less greed and jealousy, how do you propose limiting the effects of a person's greed?
I'd go for economic/business regulations by the government to limit corporate executive bonuses, income, and provide oversight of large businesses, and less, of smaller ones. You can't eliminate human feelings, but you can do what is possible to limit the ability of a human being to exploit others for a quick buck.
_________________
Yippykiaye motherfucker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mars_evo
Junior Spy
Post #58268
Joined: 09 Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Total Words: 2,906
Average words per post: 66.05
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-17 13:49
|
|
| Politics: Anarchist |
Country: Airstrip One |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
I'll do as I please. If you can't handle criticism or negative opinions, don't come online. Be less sensitive and I'm sure we'll get along. |
My apologies, Meph. I was being quite petty.
| Quote: |
| So, since attempts to install socialism never lead to less greed and jealousy, how do you propose limiting the effects of a person's greed? |
I know that we can't stop these emotions. I would like it to be a small part of grade school literature. I think that it should be taught in the grades leading up to college. Although it wouldn't be as effective as I would like it would be a start. I think we should create more stringent human rights laws to protect people from corporations. I think we should also make it harder for big corporations to ship overseas(kill NAFTA).
_________________
Myspace.cpm/thepinzrock
Last edited by mars_evo on Thu 2008-12-18 14:24; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tristan
Committee Leader
Post #58270
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 553
Total Words: 124,320
Average words per post: 224.81
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-17 17:55
|
|
| Politics: Republican (U.S. Conservative) |
|
|
| |
Post Rating: 1.0/4 (2 votes cast) |
|
|
| mars_evo wrote: |
| Don't patronize me. Obviously you can't outlaw jealousy and greed. I will say this for the final time. I believe that capitalism makes these worse. They are present everywhere, everyday. Only an ignorant person would try to protest an emotion... |
| Mephistopheles wrote: |
| I think you're somewhat valid in your opinion that capitalism makes greed worse. I'll have to guess a little, but I'm sure your opinion on capitalism is it allows for rampant profit and greed systems (limited only by individual restraint, which isn't ever enough, so the government helps regulate, right?). I think greed is a problem. The issue is what to do about it. You believe in an anarchist model, which will employ socialism in some form. I don't think that will work, for reasons I already explained, considering it never has worked. |
Technically, capitalism does not lean on individual restraint (that would be foolish), but on the same thing any other system does: rule of law. There are three categories of crimes that threaten a capitalist system from within: theft, murder, and fraud. Fraud is more subtle and dangerous than the former two, and most regulations aim at preventing fraud. Frankly, any system is prone to these evils and the rule of law is always used to combat them. If courts could hold these crimes fully in check, a free market would channel human beings' natural greed into entirely productive channels. The market rewards labor and risk more efficiently than government.
Individual restraint--that is, your personal, unilateral decision not to be greedy-- comes more into play with collectivism. We are called on to work for the good of others, yet nothing but communal love and a sense, rather than an incentive, of responsibility restrains us from just kicking back and signing up for the dole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mephistopheles
Filthy Animal
Post #58272
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Total Words: 455
Average words per post: 455
PoliMatch: n/a
|
|
Posted: Wed 2008-12-17 21:44
|
|
| Politics: Nazi |
Country: United States |
|
| |
Post Rating: 0.0/4 (0 votes cast) |
|
|
| Tristan wrote: |
Technically, capitalism does not lean on individual restraint (that would be foolish), but on the same thing any other system does: rule of law. There are three categories of crimes that threaten a capitalist system from within: theft, murder, and fraud. Fraud is more subtle and dangerous than the former two, and most regulations aim at preventing fraud. Frankly, any system is prone to these evils and the rule of law is always used to combat them. If courts could hold these crimes fully in check, a free market would channel human beings' natural greed into entirely productive channels. The market rewards labor and risk more efficiently than government.
Individual restraint--that is, your personal, unilateral decision not to be greedy-- comes more into play with collectivism. We are called on to work for the good of others, yet nothing but communal love and a sense, rather than an incentive, of responsibility restrains us from just kicking back and signing up for the dole. |
While I was writing my previous post I noticed I could've explained how I feel personal restraint isn't something focused on in our economic system, but since I explained how regulation is necessary to prevent abuses by an individual, I thought maybe it would be clear; if it wasn't, my apologies.
Free markets don't work. I thought its policies were pretty much shown to require regulation during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, and even our current economic crisis? You can't trust businesses to regulate themselves or play by the rules. People keep doing that, and that policy keeps failing every single time.
_________________
Yippykiaye motherfucker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Search
Log in
FAQ
Usergroups
Memberlist
World War V
Medals
PoliMatch
Stats
