Kavanaugh

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:41 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:04 pm
No matter what happens, I think we can all come together as Americans and agree that everything is shitty and people who don't agree with my side are dumbasses.
I don't remember where I saw it but some article I was reading talked about how Americans no longer agree on a "shared version of reality" or something like that.

Probably never saw that more clearly than listening to Schumer saying that this nomination will go down as the saddest chapter in the history of the U.S. senate. Funny thing is McConnell was saying the exact same thing but for completely opposite reasons.

I have no doubt that on the left the narrative will continue that the Republicans put an attempted rapist on the high court by covering up the evidence against him and not allowing women to speak "their truth". The right will continue to believe that the Dems used dishonest smear tactics.

I happen to agree with the right on this one but I don't see those on the left as "dumbasses". I think it's a lot more sinister than that and find it rather scary.
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2021
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Benko » Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:02 am

jacksonM wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:41 am
.

I have no doubt that on the left the narrative will continue that the Republicans put an attempted rapist on the high court by covering up the evidence against him and not allowing women to speak "their truth". The right will continue to believe that the Dems used dishonest smear tactics.

I happen to agree with the right on this one but I don't see those on the left as "dumbasses". I think it's a lot more sinister than that and find it rather scary.
Everyone is entitled to their own ideas, but what methods do you use to get them implemented? Only one side has said “by any means necessary”, only one side has Congress critters advocating harassing their political adversaries eg in restaraunts, only one side has a group (antifa) routinely using violence.

Hardball politics e.g. Merick garland besides following the “Biden rule” ain’t the same as what happened to Kavanaugh.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8147
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 am

Maddy wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:58 am
moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:26 pm

Diversity and globalization don't help these people. But neither do corporate tax cuts and the military industrial complex. And free healthcare, tax-credits, and other safety nets sure as f'k DO help them, yet they eschew those options in favor of a bombastic clown because they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires rather than the working-class that they (and most of us) are.

But I really don't care for the culture war. I'm from a blue family in a red-as-fk county in a blue state. I shoot guns and drive a Prius. I sit in both city and rural culture a bit and I see what many others seem not to... that there IS general anxiety about the economy, because our version of capitalism is a flawed system leaving folks feel stressed as hell even when they're successful... this anxiety and alienation leads (yes) to some actual economic analysis but more-so (IMO) to them settling into their cultural resentments. It's city vs rural. Nativist vs Cosmopolitan. If we really want to get reunited around economic grounds, we'd leave that framework behind, AND align on our true battle-lines that matter of Labor Vs. Capital.

You don't even have to be for socialist or even liberal policies to see that THIS is nature of the economic dilemma we have, and when every college grad with some stock in a Roth IRA and a redneck with a towing business think they're owners of the means of production in any meaningful sense, then get in a pissing match over gun policy or religion or immigration, we're never going to get anywhere. We'll keep rearranging the deck-chairs on the titanic while the REAL owners of the world rake in more and more wealth while the world turns into ever-more a warming pile of garbage and angry cultural resentments.

Our world economy and domestic economy have both grown SO much... exponential growth into perpetuity is probably impossible on a planet with limited resources. Even if tax cuts DID work for these saps, it would be because the economy actually has to grow in size for these rural, hard-working-but-underpaid folks to have anything close to a decent life. That's unsustainable, and even if it weren't, it still says a TON more about the nature of labor interests vs capital interests than it does about the "success" of tax cuts and regulation cuts.
I doubt the "redneck with a towing business" gives much thought to whether or not he's a meaningful owner of the means of production. His very real accomplishments in life are not a pitiful joke, as they apparently are to you. His choice of job and lifestyle may well represent considered decisions about how best to spend his 90-some years on this planet. His rejection of free health care and social safety nets just might reflect a principled set of values, and not ignorance or stupidity. In fact, I'll give you ten-to-one odds he's a lot happier with his life than you are with yours. Just sayin' (as one of those fuzzy-headed women who are too oppressed to understand how bad they have it).
I used the term redneck here as a somewhat snarky placeholder to illustrate the culture war. I should have come up with something similarly snarky for the city-living college grad or just not used those terms at all. I didn't really mean it as a pejorative to owners of towing companies or country folks. And I suppose I should probably clarify that I absolutely do not think that those people are a "pitiful joke." Their political opinions may be, but so are many shrill liberals on the left, and most of the source of this is the disguised culture war we are fighting, where we pretend to defend laws or institutions or people but what folks are really trying to do is "own" someone of a different culture.

I don't know if he's that likely that much happier... I thought that the rural middle class was bitter about being screwed over by globalization? What happened to that narrative? But I didn't say he couldn't be happy... he's just a LOT closer to working class than he is "Capital Class." He's going to have a hard time just living off the dividends if he sold his business tomorrow (obviously this is a hypothetical middle-class business owner... not a hypothetical much-more-wealthy business owner).

I'm a pretty happy guy.. I just use aggressive language from time to time to shake the bullsh!t narrative foundations in peoples' heads (built not by logic but by culture and emotion). So if I have to use the term "knuckle-dragging" when pointing out that red states and red counties are far-more "on the government dole" than blue counties and states, I will. That-said, I say these things because I want to end the culture war, not perpetuate it. I want people to align themselves less on what they drive and whether they shoot guns than on how their economic foundations are rested. Sometimes to build a new identity you have to crush the one that's already there. And the identity that the rural poor have build around themselves and their well-being (similar to the SJW-left) is one that is utterly inconsistent, toxic and easily debunked for one that includes the urban poor/middle-class. And even the middle-and-upper/middle class that has to sell their labor for income rather than just living off of dividends.

I see little "principled" in what most folks (left and right) do as it pertains to the state and government benefits. Many folks on the right happily dive into the treasure troves of Social Security and Medicare, Both (especially the latter) of which they probably contributed far-far less than they might take, while simultaneously abhorring the use of food stamps by an urban single-mom. Folks in the country proudly look at their predecessors who took free/cheap land appropriated by the government as a massive welfare payment and criticize the urban poor who collect the Earned-Income-Tax Credit as they work 20-40 hours a week while raising children.

On the flip side, liberals want their subjective values taught in schools while criticizing traditional conservative values as almost illegal to teach in school. They say "my body my choice" on one topic but then ignore it on almost every other. They criticize gun ownership and hunting as backwards and immoral then eat meat from animals who were tortured their whole lives.

I see little consistency, nor (more troubling to me) the acknowledgement that it's downright difficult to be truly principled on big issues because they have limiting principles that we don't want to acknowledge.
User avatar
ochotona
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2567
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:54 am

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by ochotona » Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:31 pm

The worst example of socialism is that all the losses of the Great Financial Crisis were socialized, while all the gains since have been privatized. Great work if you can get it! And they can get It, because they own the Government at all levels, then rich people have the audacity and gall to complain about food stamps and Medicaid / Medicare. If they were in front of me, it's beat them with my Aiki-bokken.
jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:41 pm

Now that it's all over I'm thinking of the ending of the movie "The Truman Show". In the final scene a couple of guys in a bar said it was time to turn the channel to see what else they could find to watch.

I think that movie was a great metaphor for modern times. Sometimes you just have to stop and think just exactly what does what you are watching on TV have to do with your REAL life any way?

A nice pipe on the back porch can help put it all in perspective.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:04 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 am
I used the term redneck here as a somewhat snarky placeholder to illustrate the culture war. I should have come up with something similarly snarky for the city-living college grad or just not used those terms at all. I didn't really mean it as a pejorative to owners of towing companies or country folks. And I suppose I should probably clarify that I absolutely do not think that those people are a "pitiful joke." Their political opinions may be, but so are many shrill liberals on the left, and most of the source of this is the disguised culture war we are fighting, where we pretend to defend laws or institutions or people but what folks are really trying to do is "own" someone of a different culture.

I don't know if he's that likely that much happier... I thought that the rural middle class was bitter about being screwed over by globalization? What happened to that narrative? But I didn't say he couldn't be happy... he's just a LOT closer to working class than he is "Capital Class." He's going to have a hard time just living off the dividends if he sold his business tomorrow (obviously this is a hypothetical middle-class business owner... not a hypothetical much-more-wealthy business owner).

I'm a pretty happy guy.. I just use aggressive language from time to time to shake the bullsh!t narrative foundations in peoples' heads (built not by logic but by culture and emotion). So if I have to use the term "knuckle-dragging" when pointing out that red states and red counties are far-more "on the government dole" than blue counties and states, I will. That-said, I say these things because I want to end the culture war, not perpetuate it. I want people to align themselves less on what they drive and whether they shoot guns than on how their economic foundations are rested. Sometimes to build a new identity you have to crush the one that's already there. And the identity that the rural poor have build around themselves and their well-being (similar to the SJW-left) is one that is utterly inconsistent, toxic and easily debunked for one that includes the urban poor/middle-class. And even the middle-and-upper/middle class that has to sell their labor for income rather than just living off of dividends.

I see little "principled" in what most folks (left and right) do as it pertains to the state and government benefits. Many folks on the right happily dive into the treasure troves of Social Security and Medicare, Both (especially the latter) of which they probably contributed far-far less than they might take, while simultaneously abhorring the use of food stamps by an urban single-mom. Folks in the country proudly look at their predecessors who took free/cheap land appropriated by the government as a massive welfare payment and criticize the urban poor who collect the Earned-Income-Tax Credit as they work 20-40 hours a week while raising children.

On the flip side, liberals want their subjective values taught in schools while criticizing traditional conservative values as almost illegal to teach in school. They say "my body my choice" on one topic but then ignore it on almost every other. They criticize gun ownership and hunting as backwards and immoral then eat meat from animals who were tortured their whole lives.

I see little consistency, nor (more troubling to me) the acknowledgement that it's downright difficult to be truly principled on big issues because they have limiting principles that we don't want to acknowledge.

Moda,

In broad strokes I could agree with your point about people on the right merely being on different doles from people on the left. But who exactly is it who gets more out of Social Security than they paid in, and how? I'm assuming we're talking about retirement and not disability. Also, just because they play the game that exists doesn't necessarily mean they think the game is right or fair.

It sounds like you're wanting everyone to jump into the "we are the 99%" bandwagon and take down the rich. Surely if there were a "Labor" party and a "Capital" party, the Labor party would always win everything based on sheer numbers, right? How would you not fall into Venezuelan-style socialism and thus flush everything down the commode? Would you say it's right for a majority of whatever size to just take what they like from whatever minority they've excluded?

Your takedown of the left's silliness was most enjoyable, and reinforces that you are certainly not any kind of unthinking, kneejerk leftist (or anything-ist). At least one other person on the board here seems to believe that you are, and that's sad, because both of you have such interesting perspectives. If there could be a "reset" I'm sure we would all learn a lot from a positive interaction between you.
D1984
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by D1984 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:49 pm

Xan wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:04 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 am
I used the term redneck here as a somewhat snarky placeholder to illustrate the culture war. I should have come up with something similarly snarky for the city-living college grad or just not used those terms at all. I didn't really mean it as a pejorative to owners of towing companies or country folks. And I suppose I should probably clarify that I absolutely do not think that those people are a "pitiful joke." Their political opinions may be, but so are many shrill liberals on the left, and most of the source of this is the disguised culture war we are fighting, where we pretend to defend laws or institutions or people but what folks are really trying to do is "own" someone of a different culture.

I don't know if he's that likely that much happier... I thought that the rural middle class was bitter about being screwed over by globalization? What happened to that narrative? But I didn't say he couldn't be happy... he's just a LOT closer to working class than he is "Capital Class." He's going to have a hard time just living off the dividends if he sold his business tomorrow (obviously this is a hypothetical middle-class business owner... not a hypothetical much-more-wealthy business owner).

I'm a pretty happy guy.. I just use aggressive language from time to time to shake the bullsh!t narrative foundations in peoples' heads (built not by logic but by culture and emotion). So if I have to use the term "knuckle-dragging" when pointing out that red states and red counties are far-more "on the government dole" than blue counties and states, I will. That-said, I say these things because I want to end the culture war, not perpetuate it. I want people to align themselves less on what they drive and whether they shoot guns than on how their economic foundations are rested. Sometimes to build a new identity you have to crush the one that's already there. And the identity that the rural poor have build around themselves and their well-being (similar to the SJW-left) is one that is utterly inconsistent, toxic and easily debunked for one that includes the urban poor/middle-class. And even the middle-and-upper/middle class that has to sell their labor for income rather than just living off of dividends.

I see little "principled" in what most folks (left and right) do as it pertains to the state and government benefits. Many folks on the right happily dive into the treasure troves of Social Security and Medicare, Both (especially the latter) of which they probably contributed far-far less than they might take, while simultaneously abhorring the use of food stamps by an urban single-mom. Folks in the country proudly look at their predecessors who took free/cheap land appropriated by the government as a massive welfare payment and criticize the urban poor who collect the Earned-Income-Tax Credit as they work 20-40 hours a week while raising children.

On the flip side, liberals want their subjective values taught in schools while criticizing traditional conservative values as almost illegal to teach in school. They say "my body my choice" on one topic but then ignore it on almost every other. They criticize gun ownership and hunting as backwards and immoral then eat meat from animals who were tortured their whole lives.

I see little consistency, nor (more troubling to me) the acknowledgement that it's downright difficult to be truly principled on big issues because they have limiting principles that we don't want to acknowledge.

Moda,

In broad strokes I could agree with your point about people on the right merely being on different doles from people on the left. But who exactly is it who gets more out of Social Security than they paid in, and how? I'm assuming we're talking about retirement and not disability. Also, just because they play the game that exists doesn't necessarily mean they think the game is right or fair.

It sounds like you're wanting everyone to jump into the "we are the 99%" bandwagon and take down the rich. Surely if there were a "Labor" party and a "Capital" party, the Labor party would always win everything based on sheer numbers, right? How would you not fall into Venezuelan-style socialism and thus flush everything down the commode? Would you say it's right for a majority of whatever size to just take what they like from whatever minority they've excluded?

Your takedown of the left's silliness was most enjoyable, and reinforces that you are certainly not any kind of unthinking, kneejerk leftist (or anything-ist). At least one other person on the board here seems to believe that you are, and that's sad, because both of you have such interesting perspectives. If there could be a "reset" I'm sure we would all learn a lot from a positive interaction between you.
I'll let moda respond to the rest of this but as far as Venezuela goes:

Not to apologize for Chavez (he was more or less an authoritarian populist thug--imagine a left-wing South American version of Trump but actually somewhat competent at following through on things....although in fairness most of his opposition were no saints either) but Venezuela seems to have done OK--not great, but OK, until Chavez died and Maduro took over; see https://www.worldeconomics.com/GrossDom ... ezuela.gdp which is in PPP dollars so it isn't rendered laughably incorrect by Venezuela's controlled exchange rate which is so far off the real free-market black market rate of USD to VEB it isn't even funny.

Chavez became leader just a bit before the bottom of the trough in 1999 (I can only assume some sort of economic crisis led to him getting elected; the graph shows a fairly sharp downturn right before the year he came to power) and then things did alright (with a brief blip for the Great Recession in 2008-09) until he died in 2013 and Maduro stepped in.

Maduro and his cronies indirectly and directly looted the country of around $300 billion USD equivalent (and counting) of its productive capacity and oil revenues and more or less printed money to replace what they stole; see https://www.opendemocracy.net/democraci ... s-for-left for more on this. When you loot what would be the equivalent of $13 or $14 trillion from an economy the size of the US, rather bad things tend to happen to your economy and to the population who depend on that economy being at least somewhat functional; see the graph at the above-mentioned World Economics site for what happened after Maduro and his wrecking crew got into power.

Just FWIW Norway is one of the most equal nations in the world has more state ownership of the means of production/of capital (in terms of state owned domestic assets as a percent of GDP) than Venezuela has or had and Norway seems to be doing alright for itself.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1620
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pm

D1984 wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:49 pm
Just FWIW Norway is one of the most equal nations in the world has more state ownership of the means of production/of capital than Venezuela has or had and Norway seems to be doing alright for itself.
How absolutely dare you try to make a point that a country with such an unhealthy amount of white males is better than a diverse one???
D1984
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by D1984 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:31 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pm
D1984 wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:49 pm
Just FWIW Norway is one of the most equal nations in the world has more state ownership of the means of production/of capital than Venezuela has or had and Norway seems to be doing alright for itself.
How absolutely dare you try to make a point that a country with such an unhealthy amount of white males is better than a diverse one???
:-\ ????

I wasn't trying to make any point that had anything to do with the amount of white males Norway has vs Venezuela (or vs anywhere else). Did something in my post seem i was saying something about the racial makeup of either Norway or Venezuela vis-a-vis the states of their respective economies?

I am now confused.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:30 pm

D1984 wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:31 pm
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pm
D1984 wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:49 pm
Just FWIW Norway is one of the most equal nations in the world has more state ownership of the means of production/of capital than Venezuela has or had and Norway seems to be doing alright for itself.
How absolutely dare you try to make a point that a country with such an unhealthy amount of white males is better than a diverse one???
:-\ ????

I wasn't trying to make any point that had anything to do with the amount of white males Norway has vs Venezuela (or vs anywhere else). Did something in my post seem i was saying something about the racial makeup of either Norway or Venezuela vis-a-vis the states of their respective economies?

I am now confused.

I believe Krieg's tongue was firmly in his cheek. He took you to task in a faux way for inadvertently introducing the non-politically-correct idea that socialism works for homogeneous societies of certain racial (really, more likely cultural and historical) persuasions and not for others.
Lonestar
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:56 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Lonestar » Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:33 am

moda0306 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 am

I see little "principled" in what most folks (left and right) do as it pertains to the state and government benefits. Many folks on the right happily dive into the treasure troves of Social Security and Medicare, Both (especially the latter) of which they probably contributed far-far less than they might take, while simultaneously abhorring the use of food stamps by an urban single-mom.
Interesting point.

Personally, I live in a an area of the county that you would probably consider a "knuckle dragging redneck" environment. The vast majority of my friends that are reaping the rewards of receiving more from Social Security than they paid in would have gladly preferred to have been able to privatize their own retirements by investing their SS tax obligations. However, they had no choice, with SS tax being mandatory!

As far as Medicare, most would also prefer to utilize private medical insurance to guarantee they can "keep their own physician" (where did we hear that?). Unfortunately, this is out of the question cost-wise, partly caused by government's intrusion into health care.

Last, I don't feel that the use of food stamps is viewed as appalling when used by an urban single mom. I do feel the working class has become critical of this because of the impression of a series of bad decisions by these single moms. I'm old enough to remember when welfare entitlements were not out of favor by taxpayers. That has shifted because of welfare abuse.

The point I'm trying to make is maybe there really is "principled" in what most folks (left and right) do as it pertains to the state and government benefits
jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:08 am

Things could get a lot uglier. Given the current climate I would almost predict that they will......

https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... stitution/

Article III does not prescribe the size of the Supreme Court; Congress does. For decades, the number of justices fluctuated between six and 10, before coming to rest at nine in 1869. But a congressional majority could eliminate all but one justice to cripple the Supreme Court’s review of constitutional questions decided by 50 state judiciaries. Congress could further emasculate the Court by curtailing its appellate jurisdiction under Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 to cases in which the amount in controversy exceeds $100 million.
Post Reply