h a l f b a k e r y
Recalculations place it at 0.4999.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
||Power to the people baby!
||ok, so Putin and Medvedev voted, where's everyone
||"One Man, One Vote. The Patrician was the One Man, and he had the One Vote".
||I voted because as far as I can see the idea - which I am guessing is to be taken from a careful reading of the idea subtitle and the category choice, rather than from the main text - is "permit or encourage immigration to country X for those whose political ideology is Y", which is not a good idea for any values of X or Y. But maybe I'm a bit too laissez faire on the principle of free movement of persons. For the record, I am not Russian, have never been to Russia and on balance prefer Polish vodka.
||so I gather you'd be against the current
reform efforts in the US, calum, if the jurisdiction
||For the record, I was born in the USSR, was lucky
to immigrate to the US, and thank my parents, my
lucky stars, and the Jackson-Vanik amendment.
||It must be incredibly sad for freedom loving people
both there and in the neighboring states to watch
Russia inexorably slide into authoritarian rule,
perhaps past it, and drag them along with it. And
yes, I would want every single person that goes to
those demonstrations to have a chance to be in
the US, we could in fact use them.
||Two kinds of immigrants coming into the U.S. One is those seeking the promise of the welfare state with the stipulation that they mindlessly support the self-appointed permanent ruling class doling out the goodies.
||The second is people like theircompetitor's parents who have had enough of living in a state where Politburos rule over a permanently stratified society where you do what you're told, take what's given to you and keep your mouth shut accepting your permanent serf status.
||It's those in the latter category that make this country great. I live in a town where about half the parents I've met at my daughter's school have accents. They come from all over the world to work here in Silicon Valley in the high tech industry and they're very welcome. Of course when you disagree with the idea of low education workers being brought in for the benefit of the corporations so they can depress wages while taxpayers pay for their healthcare, welfare and housing you're called a xenophobe by the permanent ruling class who make a fine living in the poverty pimp business.
||I'm half Ukrainian. My grandparents came over here to escape the worker's paradise and its associated gulags so I'm always very moved by stories of people rising up against tyranny. Enthusiastic bun. I don't care if it's an invention or not.
||Well, if you give back Alaska, you get a porous border for those not happy to be living under a typical Russian state, and lose Sarah Palin at the same time.
||We were more likely to give Louisiana back to the
French, but the success of Duck Dynasty has made
that politically unfeasible. I think I'll keep both Sarah
||Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand that
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
||I read this idea as a gross modification of the
above towards a preference.
||Both 'types' of people are simply trying to escape
their current situations to what they perceive as a
better opportunity elsewhere. Some come from
more industrious cultures than others. In earlier
generations it was the Irish, the Jews, the Blacks,
the Slovaks, the Russians, etc that were out of
favor because they weren't 'worthy.'
||In my little corner of the world, immigration is
pretty high as well, legal and otherwise, and the
illegals I run across are busy beavers, usually doing
landscaping work or such.
||Bring in all who hunger for freedom and bring the
ethic of hard work.
||The ones who want to sit on their asses and collect
welfare can stay home. I'm fine with adding that to
the base of the Statue Of Liberty.
||As far as those busy yardworking folks, I think that's
great as long as I, as a taxpayer, don't have to
subsidize some rich man's gardening expenses by
covering the difference between what he pays and a
living wage. Let Thurston Howell the Third push his
own damn lawnmower. Better yet, let him put his
spoiled kids to work rather than sending them to the
Hamptons this summer. Either that or pay his
workers a living wage.
||And by the way, a living wage is simply determined
by this: "Do your workers need government
assistance? Then you're not paying them enough."
That's where I split from the Libertarian party. I'd be
fine with the free market determining wages if the
government, (meaning the taxpayers) didn't have
come in and make up the difference but it does, so
let's get real. You want a human to do something for
you 40 hours a week you need to pay for it's upkeep,
just like if you were to go rent any other labor saving
device. That being said, I know the free market CAN
provide a living wage without government
interference, it's government subsidies that allow
corporations to pay their workers crap.
||And the Democrat answer is to enslave generations
of the working population to the idle rich monied
class by taking out loans that can never be paid back
thus keeping the hated bourgeois middle class in
supporting the permanent ruling class and the
permanent ward-of-the-state class.
||I don't see blind tribalism as being much of a
solution. The only positive thing to say for a two
party system (aside from it being better than a 1
party system) is hopefully one group of morons
the other group of morons in check.
||// The only positive thing to say for a two party
system (aside from it being better than a 1 party
||And yet the utility of parties rapidly decreases after
2. There's got to be some Newtonian way to
represent this -- more parties introduce more angular
momentum, or simply put, more spin.
||Well, the party I support the most, the Libertarian
guys do have some pull. What happens is their
ideas sometimes get enough grass roots support to
be adopted by a Republicrat here and there. More
discussion from different viewpoints can be good.
||But here's the main problem I see with democracy
itself. Let's say me and you were running for office
and you propose sound fiscal policies that will insure
a good balance of funding our social programs with
economic growth. Then I come out and promise a 3
hour work week with full benefits and free pizza on
Tuesdays, then to top it off I call you a racist whose
only motivation is to deny pizza to our native Inuit.
Guess who's going to win.
||The solution? Dhunno. We struggle on with a
political discourse made up of stuff like "People! We
must band together or George Bush will break into
your home and pee on your carpet!"
||I feel like our country has two instruction manuals
our politicians work from, the Bible and the
Communist Manifesto. It might be nice to have some
new perspective here. I would propose that instead
of referring to a very ancient text or a ranting
manual on how to do everything written by some
brooding, angry German huckster, that we look
what's worked in the past and what hasn't. The good
news is this is pretty well documented if you take
the time to look.
||But tribalist slogans are more fun, so there you are.
||But the problem I see is the largest amount of
tribalism coming from the far right, usually
libertarian-leaning end of the conservative party.
Let's have both parties move back to the middle,
||Hyperbolics deriding one party as beholden to the
Bible and the other to the Communist Manifesto
aren't going to help.
||And why does every Libertarian I run into feel the
need to start a grandstand lecture?
||The whole system breaks down when you no longer need human
labor. When farm machinery, mining apparatus, milling machinery,
casting gangs, the whole apparatus of human productivity can be
operated by .01 percent of the former labor force, and that fraction
looks set to migrate into the .001 range within a few generations the
whole "get a job" concept becomes quite ridiculous. If even service
sector jobs, the fall back of human labor, can be mechanized then
what work is there for most people?
||//But the problem I see is the largest amount of
blind tribalism coming from the far right, usually
libertarian-leaning end of the conservative party.//
||//The whole system breaks down when you no
longer need human labor.//
||No doubting that we're on our way to a labor free
society where robots do everything, but in the mean
time the concept of having a job is still valid. I'm
just looking at real numbers in terms of real time I
spend during my day working to pay for other
people's upkeep, and I'm not talking about the poor,
I'm talking about rich people who hold these loans
our government is taking out to the tunes of
hundreds of billions of dollars a year. I believe there
is balance to be
struck between a nanny state and a free for all.
Tough to discuss solutions when you're dealing with
people who have loyalty to a certain party that
should be reserved for their local football team.
||I think that there's way too much discussion of
legislation of sex in our society, who puts their
whatever in whomever's whatever. I really don't care
myself, but I think these hot-button issues keep
people riled up while their pockets are being picked.
||Anyway, I've made my point for whatever it's worth
but political discussions get boring pretty quick.
People think what they think and it quickly becomes
a test of who can make the other person look more
stupid in an argument.
||I'm finding the discussion over at "Pants For Wiener
Dogs Shaped Like Balls" to be more interesting than
this political stuff.
||Given the state of the far right sector of the media,
I'd say the statement is right on.
||Witness WorldNetDaily, Glenn Beck's continuous
melodrama, the 'colorful' world of Alex Jones, etc.
||Well, best to listen to all sides, dull and
ignorant or brilliant or somewhere in between .
There are very few people that don't have
at least some valid points and even fewer that are
right all the time about everything. And I'll be the
first to admit I in no way fit into that latter category
any more than anybody else.
||I don't find much value in listening to rabid
conspiracy theorists and the like and prefer to
to folk smarter than myself; not enough signal-to-
noise with the former.
||// I believe there is balance to be struck between
a nanny state and a free for all. Tough to discuss
solutions when you're dealing with people who
have loyalty to a certain party that should be
reserved for their local football team.//
||There's probably more that we agree on than we
disagree on Ray. (hand shake, pat on back)
||//But the problem I see is the largest amount of
blind tribalism coming from the far right//
||Ray, take it from a 3D programmer -- it all depends
on your camera angle :)
||The balance of the nanny state is actually a straw
man, here. The real balance is the balance, i.e.
available resources. It is basically impossible to
have a rational discussion when available resources
are defined as what is printable, versus what
||You missed the whole point
that I was saying people should be paid a living wage.
||The opinion that I made perfectly clear is that if you
hire somebody to work for your company you should
pay an adequate wage that covers their food,
clothing, housing, healthcare, insurance and
||Read the post and understand it before you start
||Don't forget the football teams. Now there's a promising form of government.
||I just can't decide whether the players should govern or the politicians should have to play.
||WcW makes an excellent point about the dialectical
nature of industrial capialism. It changes the mode of
production from labour intensive to capital intensive so
the worker, or the people, don't own anything or have
any skills from preindustrialsm, and the means of
production are controlled by the capitalist creating a
dialectic conflict. Despite the comparative politics
between capitalism and sovietism, the Soviet Union
represented a massive front of resistance against right-
wing ideology when the hyperindustrial capitalism of
nazi germany pushed the globe to a pivotal position
where the future existence of the united people of the
world hanged in the balance. Today the united people
of the world number seven billions despite continued
global conflicts between them. Despite the disharmony
an equality between them prevails despite the wealth of
some and the poverty of others. The fact remains that
if the wealth of the capitalist countries was enjoyed by
all the billions that system would soon break down. The
main difference between western capitalism and eastern
communism, is capitalism reviles the poor and in eastern
communism poverty is the standard of humanity. It
indeed is the worldwide standard of humanity where the
person in nature has little but the food they eat. I will
never condemn eastern communists when western
capitalism has created immense global problems,
descended into World War 2, and continues to
dehumanize the poor. The fact that capitalism is a
system for just a relative few greedy pigs and not for
everyone in the world who would soon deplete the
planet in a consumer frenzy, justfies the soviet
resistance. The '68 resistance in France which soon
spread globally, was a liberal revolution against right-
wing conservativisms found in important western
religious institutions that are supposedly important to
the basis of capitalism and influenced the Nazis and
South Africans and white segregationists in southen USA
and in the UK (NI)(in other words a link between
capitalism and fascism
namely in semiotic hermeneutics).
Max Weber discusses this in the Spirit of Capitalism, and
Baudrillard discusses these semiotics in his early radical
writings during the height of the sixties revolution on
this illiberal capitalist communitarianism.
||yup... read it as "...Topless" again.
||But who is responsible for paragraph breaks?
||//I will never condemn eastern communists when
western capitalism has created immense global
problems, descended into World War 2, and
continues to dehumanize the poor.//
||So you don't condemn Stalin and Mao's genocide of
millions of innocent people? Almost all of whom
were dirt poor by the way.
||The free market pays people a living wage every day.
Anybody who's not receiving government assistance
and is getting a paycheck, medical, dental and life
plan etc is getting paid a living wage. I believe this
should be mandatory.
||If you want to fight about something you might want
to pick a subject on which we disagree.
||I condemn the social process of mass sytematic
slaughter. I don't fully understand what happens in
those events and without proof that the ideology and
event are connected cannot condemn both. For
example I can condemn Nazis for the mass
communitarianism that led to the mass slaughter of
WW2 and the holocaust. The communitarian system of
the nazis that was dependent on strict conformity and
obedience to authority directly facilited the genocide of
millions of jews in a systematic fashion. Militarism in
general usually features strong communitarianism so
perhaps it was the same phenomena that caused the
holocausts you mention. I would argue
communitarianism is the problem in those catastrophes
and not communism, but I could be wrong. Extreme
right wing and left wing ideologies manifest similairly in
communitarianism in political ideologial continuum
models. Because right wing paramilitaries and left wing
paramilitaries have comitted similar atrocities globally in
the modern period I can't make an ideological decision.
||Can I just ask what communitarianism is?
||//without proof that the ideology and event are
connected cannot condemn both.//
||So it wasn't Communism that caused the genocides,
it was just the Communists?
||//Can I just ask what communitarianism is?//
||It's like Communism but better. Now with 10% fewer
||Thanks. Can we also tackle //right wing and left
wing ideologies manifest similairly in
communitarianism in political ideologial continuum
||I'm guessing it means...actually no, I can't guess.
||Cambridge dictionary philosophy: communitarianism
derives from Hegel, rejects individualism, and that
collective rights exist and individual rights do not.
Individuals are constituted by institutions and practices
and their rights correspond solely to those institutions
|| Right and left wing ideologies converge in
communitarianism usually through militarism. In
continuum models liberalism is usually the centre with
conservatism and socialism flanking the right and left.
Right of conservatism is fascism. And left of socialism is
communism. Fascism and communism theoretically
converge in communitarianism which is the polar
opposite of liberalism.
||//Can I just ask what communitarianism is?//
||For the love of Gawd NO! you can't ask. Please.
||I look at political philosophies as what they are, a
product made by people just like, say, shampoo.
They purport to be better than all those other
products which is why they should be the only
product out there. It can have all sorts of fancy
words on the label like "zinc pyrithione" or "manifest
similairly in communitarianism in political ideologial
continuum models" which can get confusing.
||So I might not be an expert on shampoo but if one
brand of shampoo has left tens of millions of people
piled up in mass graves, I'm thinking that's some
||That's my point right wing and left wing armies have
mass graves. Why do people have selective memories? I
just mentioned right wing nazis. Left wing communists
tended towards the same erroneousness.
||Despite the fact I'm left leaning, I'm a liberal and would
never be militantly more than a liberal. Apparently as
politics moves away from liberalism people become mass
slaughtering robots. But the conflict between capital
the social is not invalidated.
||//right wing and left wing armies have both filled
mass graves. Why do people have selective
||Like forgetting that the National Socialists were,
||Totalitarian statism is totalitarian statism. When a
man decides he has the right to kill another man
because he doesn't want to play by his philosophy, I
don't care what stupid little button they have on
their cap. They're the bad guys.
||Please, just because it's called National Socialism doesn't
make it socialism. It's a historical fact Germany was
wing at the time. There are some socialist parallels but
let's not obscure historically important facts like the
political orientation of nazi germany. Right wing
paramilitaries in Latin America , Asia and Africa have
graves of their own. The West also has to take some
responsibilty for Eastern mass murders because they
were actively trying to create resistance in those
countries. Global conflict between capitalism and
communism was the ultimate context of the killing not
just communism. That doesn"t make it right obviously,
but the world is a politically FUCKED place so
understanding should be the goal and not just blame.
||Well I don't disagree with you. Basically I think everyone
is entitled to basic housing and food. That's what any
human animal could produce for himself in nature.
Using homelessness and starvation as an inducement to
work is against my liberal and socialist values. That
would be a right-wing policy. Currently the right-wing
refuses to build low rent units for the poor in western
economies because it will negatively affect the housing
market. Fuck the housing market. As a liberal I'm
against systemic coercion to make people work, and a
socialist, I'm against the housing market regulating
||[doc] how is guaranteeing a living wage different than guaranteeing a job, long a hallmark of communism?
||[bigsleep] the free market has never yet failed. Though I believe that saying that bubbles are a failure is like
saying supernovas are a failure (meaning, they are a law of the universe), but regardless, if you can point to a
case of regulation actually preventing a bubble, I would be much obliged. e.g. during the banking crisis, it
became fashionable to blame deregulation in part. During that entire time, have you noticed that credit card
disclaimer got smaller? Bank statements? # of papers you had to sign to buy a car? A house?
||The reason to oppose regulation is not that it either prevents bubbles or exacerbates them (though it does).
The reason to oppose it is that it is simply a pointless tax that typically just feeds a lobbying class and doesn't
||As to the value of human capital: Nothing -- not food, not water, not land, not sex, not views, not real estate,
not status, not jewelry, not art, nothing -- nothing is worth even one more penny than what someone is willing
to pay for it. All else is illusion. Buildings falling down? Do you think they weren't falling down during the Industrial Revolution? How do you think the West got its wealth?
The incredible wealth that distanced us from the rest to a degree unprecedented even in Roman times was achieved at a time of little regulation. And it eliminated more starvation and
poverty than 2,000 years of praying did, or ever will, in just over 100 years.
The problem of humans not having jobs is not going to be solved by laws on
wages, anymore than we can outlaw asteroids hitting the planet. It means drastic changes in both culture and
education. Luckily, the singularity and the post scarcity economy are around the corner, so no worries.
||And I don't know how liberal I woud
the Arab cultures, Iran, etc.
||The Nazis were totalitarian fascists, the Communists
were totalitarian fascists. The dead don't really give
a shit about any further distinction between the two
nor to I. Both groups were formed by a bunch of
intellectuals that decided smart people like them
should be able to kill anybody that disagrees with
||Any person can sit at their stone tablet, papyrus,
parchment, typewriter or computer and design a
great world where everything works as long as
everybody does things their way. If however for their
society to work, anybody who doesn't fall in line
needs to be stoned, sent to the mud pits,
concentration camps or gulags, it's a crappy society.
||//[doc] how is guaranteeing a living wage different
than guaranteeing a job, long a hallmark of
||Hey, you're absolutely right. Telling a business they
need to pay a particular wage IS Socialist, or at least
not a free market action. But it's the lesser of two
evils. Right now we have taxpayers paying for
worker's upkeep so some business don't feel they
have any incentive to provide everything that worker
needs to survive. It's almost like we have this un-
holy hybrid of the worst of capitalism and
communism. Underpaid workers and over burdened
tax payers indirectly subsidizing these companies by
providing social support for their workers.
||I completely understand the argument that it's
better to pay a worker something than nothing, but
when we swell the welfare rolls with underemployed
people brought in to make these businesses
prosperous, can't we just skip the middleman and
have the businesses pay everything for their
||Look, nobody says "Fuck communism" more than me,
but Henry Ford, nobody's idea of a left wing commie
was big on a living wage. He's not the only one. Lots
of evil capitalists believed in taking full and
complete care of their workers. I'm just not a fan of
welfare be it for people who don't need it or
businesses. Save the welfare for the old and sick. If a
business can't cut it, let it die. Good riddance. With
businesses, we should be all about sweeping the
week aside so the strong can take their place. Save
the kindness for the humans.
||So I agree with your point -- that certain business
benefit unfairly from the benefits to people at the
low end of the ladder. I'm not sure that this
problem would exist if the benefits wouldn't exist,
though. These policies distort the market in a
way that tends to achieve the opposite from
intended results. In other words, if there were no
food stamps, people would "shop" for a job that
would provide enough food, and not the other
way around. Are there some who would need
foodstamps? Sure. But nothing like what is
happening now. Hell, food would be cheaper if
not for food stamps, as is obvious. Rent lower if
not for rent controls -- it's just a law of nature
that cannot be repealed.
||I think the social safety net is simply a convenient
crutch that lets us kick the more difficult
problems down the road. As I said here elsewhere
-- a family in NYC with 3 kids in the public
schools -- $1M in taxpayer money through 12 years,
1/2 of that in Detroit -- and that's just for
school. We are incredibly wealthy, but not that
wealthy, not forever. We have to get at least
our money's worth for such extravagance --
instead, we are setting up people to be clients of
these programs for generations.
||99 weeks of unemployment insurance -- 2 years!
Meantime, Uber is fighting Lyft for drivers,
average revenue of a fully utlized Uber car is
exceeding 6 figures, Uber provides financing for
the car. WTF?
||Well, there you go. You've injected reality into the
situation. Reality and un-intended consequences
seldom have a place in political discussions.
||Unfortunately, like you've pointed out, reality and
un-intended consequences have a big place in what
really happens with these social systems we set up.
We start throwing welfare around to anybody who
wants it, businesses just start paying less and the
taxpayer gets screwed.
||As far as the 2 years of un-employment insurance, I
don't know about anybody else, but if I've got 2 years
of un-employment coming to me guess when I'm
going to really start looking for a job. Right before it
runs out which is from what I've heard when most
people magically get a job.
||I believe in the safety net not being turned into a
hammock. Let's apply some reality to our social
programs lest they do more harm than good.
||And hence we're back to the original point of this
idea :) The
reason I've always been very pro-immigration --
besides being an
immigrant myself :) -- is that you want the energy
of those who are
willing to do anything -- whether running the
border or toppling
statues -- you want the energy of those who are
not waking up
every morning and saying I guess this is it, and this
is what it is
going to be. You want those who wake up and
say I can do better. It is a key reason why the US
is still different from
many other places, and we can use as many of
those people as are
interested in coming.
||Right on brother. Wish I had more than one bun to
||Night all. Thanks to everybody, including ray, big and
carty for a spirited
||I've been on unemployment insurance in the past.
most certainly won't pay the bills; motivation to
work was not lacking. You'll find that keeping the
lights on and the water running so you can bathe
often a prerequisite to landing another well-paying
job, as nobody hires the homeless. I find a short-
term safety net to be a good thing. Maybe the
longer-term one could be coupled to some
prerequisites of conducting some migrant farm