Trump is winning

[GonZo_626]

A hundred years ago, when political mentalities were so far off from where we're at today that it might as well be in another reality altogether. Those were the times where the mentally handicaped were shoved into asylums to die, prisons were barely livable, poor people died in droves and/or eked out miserable lives in rubber baron owned factories or were at the mercy of any drought or famine in the countryside, and women were told to shut up, stay in the kitchen and make moar babies if they knew what was good for them.

Yeah, good ol' America. Why did you guys, and the world, move on from this I'll never know. Fuck all these people and their problems, some other people now have to pay a different kind of tax than they did previously. The horror, nay, the humanity! Poor them. Poor victims of the system.

It's also funny you mention incompetence and corruption as unique to today's government, when in ye good old times the kind of stuff that has people ripping their shirts off (the Clinton Foundation, to use one example) was not only commonplace, but an accepted parts of politics. Even guys like Lincoln transparently paid for Congress's votes, for pete's sake.

And before you start, yes I pay income tax. I'm Canadian, so in fact I pay a fucking shitload of it compared to most americans. And you know what? I'm OK with that. Taxes keep my society's infrastructure (such it is, sometimes) running. Taxes kept my father in relatively good health as he died of cancer. Taxes helped me while I was in a down in between jobs, and helped keep my mother afloat financially as she underwent a depression. It pays for my autistic brother's basic needs, as I pay his luxuries. It's kept the social shelter where I (briefly) worked alive. It's done a ton of good for many, many people I've met. Could charities take over some of that? Sure. All of that? Not in a million years.

So excuse me if I don't shed a tear because some guy who makes 300 000$ needs to give a portion of that to the state, and buy himself a new Audi instead of a Ferrari this year.

As I am Canadian I can call this one out. How do you feel knowing that a native living on a reserve who has 7 children and no job keeps getting your taxes? Oh and she doesn't even raise her own children because that is the grandparents responsibility? There is a ton of waste and bullshit in our own government, but you probably voted for the TURD who has put our country 34 billion in debt when Harper ran a surplus? Yeah those taxes are just gonna go higher for that pissant.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Nice straw man, dude.
"Look! There are lazy fucks out there! So how do you feel about helping them!"

Studies show, that most poor people actually have jobs and are not lazy.

I don't see how this makes the forced redistribution of wealth moral, or even efficient.

In the sense, that you can not simply eliminate poverity with the idea that "Those guys made it out of it, so everyone can". Just beacuse some people become succesfull for example, doesn't mean that everyone can, regardless how much they work or how skilled they are.

"Survivorship bias, or survival bias, is the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that did not because of their lack of visibility."

Since you're blaming poverty pretty much entirely on the poor, this is your logical error.

The underlying issue is that people are paying for products they don't want or need. You want an affordable school? Go to an affordable school, then. There'd be plenty of those if the state just got its paws out of education. And they'd be affordable without being financed through theft.

Strange that almost every service that leaves the 'paws' of the governemnts is seeing a tremendious increase in price. So much, that you even see those services returning into public hands. Like water supply in Paris, France.

There are simply certain goods, to speak so, that remain in public hands trough the government simply because a purely profit oriented company isn't always making the best decisions.

Why water is a public service :
exposing the myths of privatization
​

4. Efficiency and performance

Supporters of privatisation claim that private companies are more efficient than the public
sector, and many people believe this. But the empirical evidence shows this is not true. There have been many studies comparing the efficiency of public sector and private water companies in various countries, and a comprehensive review by academics in 2008 concluded that “most studies found no significant differences in costs or efficiency between public and private”. A detailed study in the UK - the biggest water privatisation - showed that, 11 years after privatisation, the private water companies had actually become less efficient than the public sector had been, despite having access to better technology.

http://www.right2water.eu/sites/water/files/u/u4/20022012-epsuwater.pdf

Not everything becomes inherently better, just beacuse it's out of public hand.

How is a businessman choosing to pay his workers more by his own free will somehow in support of the idea that we need a welfare state? Businessmen today do the same thing, although mostly by decreasing the price of the product rather than increasing wages. Poor people in the west have access to a lot more than they need to survive.

It's just as a side note, to show that if you want to fight poverity, then you have to increase low wages, at least so much that people can actually get out of poverity, trough work. As I said, most 'poor' people in the US, actually do have a job.

Yes, we do need better education. But your idea of better education seems to be more education, and cheaper education.

Never said that. I said that high quality education has to be affordable and available to all of the public. I didn't specificy about what kind of education or system we're talking about. I mean education in general. Access to good education should not be a question of how much money/wealth you possess. If anything it should depend on your abilities, if you have what it takes to study a certain topic, like physics, math or what ever. This is what we're should be looking for, in recognizing, promoting and developing the individual talents and preferences people have. Because a healthy society needs artists, as much as it needs scientists, engineers and craftsman.

 

[Ilosar]

As I am Canadian I can call this one out. How do you feel knowing that a native living on a reserve who has 7 children and no job keeps getting your taxes? Oh and she doesn't even raise her own children because that is the grandparents responsibility? There is a ton of waste and bullshit in our own government, but you probably voted for the TURD who has put our country 34 billion in debt when Harper ran a surplus? Yeah those taxes are just gonna go higher for that pissant.

Quote the part where I said everything was going on perfectly? Because I didn't. That some people abuse the system is not a reason to tear it all down. And in the case of the Natives, well, that's a generally much bigger problem than people abusing welfare.

It's fucking easy to run a surplus at the federal government. Their expenses are way lower than the province's. I'd rather see that money actually invested in various programs (especially while interest rates are at an all time low) than sit around doing nothing so the Prime Minister can pretend it takes a genius to have a good cashflow when you have almost as much income as the provinces and much less expenses, proportionally.

And no, I didn't vote for ''the turd''. I actually voted NDP instead, so come at me.

 

[CT Phipps]

Its the nature of a representative democracy that everyone gets a vote to throw in on the expenditure of taxes. Perhaps it's the fact I made my money the old fashioned way (I inherited it from my self-made father) that I think the rich should pay their way to help others up. Life was good to me and it's important I try and make it less hard for other people.

Which was the nature of a lot of early conflicts with my wife who had to fight for everything yet had those issues with government authority.

Because it's a better US that there is a safety net for people. Everyone in the Objectivist Utopia thinks they're going to be John Gault but for the majority, it's the people dead on the ground.

Like I told my friend who believed taxes=Theft.

"If the government were to suddenly become tiny without taxes, that just means you'll be paying public toilets, tolls, and gouged at vital necessities because nature abhors a vacuum. Corporations and banks have proven willing to fill the robbery you describe when the government isn't there--and you don't have a recrimination against them come election time."

 

[SarcasticGoodGuy]

"If the government were to suddenly become tiny without taxes, that just means you'll be paying public toilets, tolls, and gouged at vital necessities because nature abhors a vacuum. Corporations and banks have proven willing to fill the robbery you describe when the government isn't there--and you don't have a recrimination against them come election time."

Nerd.

Yeah I don't see why Vergil has suddenly gone against taxes. He was such an accepting person before.

But good points were made. Well done Phippy.

 

[Hassknecht]

"If the government were to suddenly become tiny without taxes, that just means you'll be paying public toilets, tolls, and gouged at vital necessities because nature abhors a vacuum. Corporations and banks have proven willing to fill the robbery you describe when the government isn't there--and you don't have a recrimination against them come election time."

Any good american knows the answer to this:
Arm everyone to the teeth so the robber barons can't exploit you. The company that owns the streets won't dare to increase the tolls randomly if proper red-blooded americans can shoot them for it! That is, until the company gets a security force that's heavier armed, but two can play that, obviously! That's the invisible hand of the market at work right there! AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

 

[GonZo_626]

Quote the part where I said everything was going on perfectly? Because I didn't. That some people abuse the system is not a reason to tear it all down. And in the case of the Natives, well, that's a generally much bigger problem than people abusing welfare.

It's fucking easy to run a surplus at the federal government. Their expenses are way lower than the province's. I'd rather see that money actually invested in various programs (especially while interest rates are at an all time low) than sit around doing nothing so the Prime Minister can pretend it takes a genius to have a good cashflow when you have almost as much income as the provinces and much less expenses, proportionally.

And no, I didn't vote for ''the turd''. I actually voted NDP instead, so come at me.

Well I quoted your whole statement, and NDP? wow really wanted to live in a broke socialist state did you? You can see the one NDP government in Canada pissing off everyone in that province and still voted for them? I have to give you one thing though at least you voted for the party you wanted and not the "strategic voting". We had one of the best run governments charging Canadians the least amount of taxes in years and now because we have to give money to everyone we have a surplus. But more government will not bring us back to those surpluses, giving away more money will not bring us back to those surpluses, giving in to every special interest group will not bring back the surpluses. And the NDP and LIBs can not seem to even figure out what a surplus is. Hell I'm not even against a government borrowing money, but it should not be more, and more, and more every year. And pissing it away like they do will not help us, our children, or our grandchildren.

We have to help people who help themselves, a hand up is better than a hand out. It is better to teach a man to fish then to share your fish. By giving handouts we only allow these people who should not get them to continue in there ignorance of what everyone else has to do to pay for their broke, lazy, stupid, asses. And yes LAZY I have met many of these people and had friends who decided to keep acting like they were teenagers well into adulthood. They are the broke welfare bums that abuse the money (and no longer friends).

 

[Vergil]

Businesses are all evil parasites that want to suck you dry and thd government is always trustworthy and looking out for your best interests.

There do I fit in now?

 

[CT Phipps]

Any good american knows the answer to this:
Arm everyone to the teeth so the robber barons can't exploit you. The company that owns the streets won't dare to increase the tolls randomly if proper red-blooded americans can shoot them for it! That is, until the company gets a security force that's heavier armed, but two can play that, obviously! That's the invisible hand of the market at work right there! AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

I recall that was actually tried in my part of West Virginia. The result of such being that the Robber Barons got pissy the workers were shooting back at the people they were paying to shoot at them so they appealed to the Federal government who bombed the workers.

Which goes to show you the Randian ubermensch are whiny dirtbags.

 

[Hassknecht]

I recall that was actually tried in my part of West Virginia. The result of such being that the Robber Barons got pissy the workers were shooting back at the people they were paying to shoot at them so they appealed to the Federal government who bombed the workers.

Which goes to show you the Randian ubermensch are whiny dirtbags.

So abolish the federal government, obviously.
I've said it before, Murrca finally needs to embrace its inner Somalia.

 

[CT Phipps]

Businesses are all evil parasites that want to suck you dry and thd government is always trustworthy and looking out for your best interests.

There do I fit in now?

I actually support the law suggestion that businesses be de-recognized as legal entities. That would prevent people from suing Phillip Morris for a billion dollars but would allow them to sue the people actually involved in their case. The government needs to be constantly under scrutiny and checked so it can't steamroll its citizens.

Which ironically I think will be helped by businesses not able to just prop it up over the people who vote for it.

So abolish the federal government, obviously.
I've said it before, Murrca finally needs to embrace its inner Somalia.

That's another thing my crazy libertarian friend was all about and I was like, "The state government is more of an asshole to what we can do than the Federal government ever was!"

 

[Vergil]

Clearly there is no middle ground. If you say you want to remove a little power from the federal government and give somebof it back to the people/states you want to completely dissolve it and end all regulation and oversight and live in total anarchy.

 

[CT Phipps]

Clearly there is no middle ground. If you say you want to remove a little power from the federal government and give somebof it back to the people/states you want to completely dissolve it and end all regulation and oversight and live in total anarchy.

I love government agencies and bureaucracy providing services. America built the US government to help Americans and it does a lot of good. It just needs to shocked like a tame Deathclaw or Paradise Falls slave.

 

[SarcasticGoodGuy]

I love government agencies and bureaucracy providing services. America built the US government to help Americans and it does a lot of good. It just needs to shocked like a tame Deathclaw or Paradise Falls slave.

Please elaborate.

 

[Vergil]

I love government agencies and bureaucracy providing services. America built the US government to help Americans and it does a lot of good.

The Founding Fathers did not build the US Government to have such a huge amount of power centralized to it as it does now and as far as things like the welfare state and trying to give the government control of healthcare whether either of those things are doing a lot of good is debatable.

 

[CT Phipps]

Please elaborate.

I don't subscribe to the "government is the enemy" school of thought. I think of the United States government as a machine which is designed to maximize the good of its citizens by providing cash, protections, and services. When there's a problem, the US government should be able to be like an ATM to go up to and get help for it or the guy you can call to remove a stump in your lawn. You have to pay for the privilege but at its worst, you're kind of its family and it has to help anyway.

However, the problem with the US government is the general sense of treating it as more than just a machine which provides services and allowing it run wild. Checks and balances to keep it in place is the best thing we can do for it and limit the individual power of its members and branches whenever possible. I favor a relatively large but weak government versus trying to make States or the Federal government massively powerful juggernauts.

People should have faith in the system but it should also be out of sight, out of mind for the most part.

 

[CT Phipps]

The Founding Fathers did not build the US Government to have such a huge amount of power centralized to it as it does now and as far as things like the welfare state and trying to give the government control of healthcare whether either of those things are doing a lot of good is debatable.

Bizarrely, that's pretty much my belief. However, the irony is the Welfare State and Healthcare as government provided subsidiaries are things which I support. They should be services provided by the government along with free education versus cudgels used to control the populace. Basically, we need more regulation and weakened power in the government branches as well as more protected freedoms so the various branches are not so damned able to rampage like they please.

I see the best government as a diffused entity which the average Department head has as much power as the postmaster general.

 

[Vergil]

Bizarrely, that's pretty much my belief. However, the irony is the Welfare State and Healthcare as government provided subsidiaries are things which I support. They should be services provided by the government along with free education

How are you going to pay for all this? We don't even have """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'free"""""""""""""""""""""""""""' (it's not free, that money has to come from somewhere, mostly likely your soon to be increased taxes) education and our national debt is at 20 trillion. Even if you went and drained the bank account of every millionaire and billionaire right now it wouldn't even touch the debt so how are we going to be able to sustain yet another government program like that? Because the inevitable increased cost to taxes whether it be the retarded "lol let's tax the rich retardedly high" or just tax everyone much, much higher it still won't be sustainable.

Basically, we need more regulation and weakened power in the government branches

This is an oxymoron. So the government is going to have more government programs like centralized healthcare and """""""""""""""""free""""""""""""""" education while also imposing even more regulations.... but it's going to be weaker? You're asking to government to have even further control of the country and economy and then saying you want it to be weaker. That's not how things work.

 

[CT Phipps]

How are you going to pay for all this? We don't even have """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'free"""""""""""""""""""""""""""' (it's not free, that money has to come from somewhere, mostly likely your soon to be increased taxes) education and our national debt is at 20 trillion. Even if you went and drained the bank account of every millionaire and billionaire right now it wouldn't even touch the debt so how are we going to be able to sustain another government program like that? Because the inevitable increased cost to taxes whether it be the retarded "lol let's tax the rich retardedly high" or just tax everyone much, much higher it still won't be sustainable.

This is an oxymoron. So the government is going to have more government programs like centralized healthcare and """""""""""""""""free""""""""""""""" education while also imposing even more regulations.... but it's going to be weaker? You're asking to government to have even further control of the country and economy and then saying you want it to be weaker. That's not how things work.

The United States can produce a great deal more wealth with businesses that are incentivized. We're wasting vast amounts of money on various broken systems which don't serve our needs when centralized ones are better. The United States when properly taxed and its citizens being encouraged to make WEALTH can afford this. Certainly, it costs us more in the long term that we have people trapped in poverty and lack of education that can't escape to become contributing members of society.

As for being weaker, those services aren't things which politicians should be allowed to wield as a football between the Democratic and Republican Party. How to get it enshrined so they can't just threaten to remove them or give them as a bribe to the American people is a question I have no answer to, though.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Businesses are all evil parasites that want to suck you dry and thd government is always trustworthy and looking out for your best interests.

There do I fit in now?

Nice. See, you can learn.

In all seriousness. NMA is one of those places where you will see a lot of criticism for the government too. Lots of free thinkers are here, you know? The fact how fequent banns happen around here (like almost never) should tell you that much.

The point is, when you're dealing with very important matters, like water, education, and such it is better to have something that is at least SOMEWHAT in public hands. No one ever said that this is a perfect system, you know. But privatisation of those sectors have often lead to worse results in the end.

The Founding Fathers did not build the US Government to have such a huge amount of power centralized to it as it does now and as far as things like the welfare state and trying to give the government control of healthcare whether either of those things are doing a lot of good is debatable.

And I am pretty sure that the founding fathers dind't forsee nuclear weapons, global warming, polution or 318 milion citizens. It was a completely different time when the founding fathers build the nation, also a time when most of the American soil was still undeveloped. Was there a lot less to pay in 1750 for a citizen? Most probably. But people actually have been also a lot more self sufficient. Do you think it would be feasible to give 300 milion people their portion of land, tools and what ever is needed so that they can farm and work completely on their own?