Re: Kavanaugh
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:46 pm
Voting right now....
Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9700
Well usually names do carry some actual weight of how people actually think of others. My conservative friends who've used the n-word certainly don't have egalitarian views towards race. But like I said, only one group has decided to lash out by voting for a bombastic clown.MangoMan wrote: ↑Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:01 pmI'm pretty sure is not being called deplorables that pissed off middle America, it that the Elite, particularly to the left of the aisle, actually thinks of them in this way, and that they were tired of no one caring about their plight. Diversity and globalization just don't rank real high on an out of work small town laborer's list of priorities.moda0306 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pmThat's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.
Many types of people get called names.
Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.
BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them.
As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
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).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 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.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.
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.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.
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.Maddy wrote: ↑Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:58 amI 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).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.
moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 amI 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.
I'll let moda respond to the rest of this but as far as Venezuela goes:Xan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:04 pmmoda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:57 amI 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.
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???
?Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pmHow 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 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:31 pm?Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pmHow 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.
Interesting point.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.
Well, I'm on the front-end of the baby boomer generation (1949) so thanks for the "positive vision" you are putting forth.Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:38 pm I spent most of my professional life in the military, and personally I am pretty positive on the younger generation. I've spent a lot of time with the younger crowd in that environment and a church environment. They are more team and group oriented than the baby boomers and to me hearken back to a more community oriented perspective that existed in generations previous to the boomers. What I think we are seeing right now is the last narcissistic thrashing of the outgoing boomer generation (left and right) since they have taken over all the major levers of power from the WW 2 generation. The boomers have always been very "it's all about me." I think it will be good in may ways when they leave the scene. (And I'm right on the tail end of the boomers.)
Whether you like FDRs all we have to fear is fear itself or Reagan's it's morning in America again, being positive has always been a winning political approach in the US. The first party to get out of attack mode and back to laying out a positive vision for America is going to do very well I think. Most everyone I know is really getting sick of this stuff.
J.M.,jacksonM wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:53 pmWell, I'm on the front-end of the baby boomer generation (1949) so thanks for the "positive vision" you are putting forth.Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:38 pm I spent most of my professional life in the military, and personally I am pretty positive on the younger generation. I've spent a lot of time with the younger crowd in that environment and a church environment. They are more team and group oriented than the baby boomers and to me hearken back to a more community oriented perspective that existed in generations previous to the boomers. What I think we are seeing right now is the last narcissistic thrashing of the outgoing boomer generation (left and right) since they have taken over all the major levers of power from the WW 2 generation. The boomers have always been very "it's all about me." I think it will be good in may ways when they leave the scene. (And I'm right on the tail end of the boomers.)
Whether you like FDRs all we have to fear is fear itself or Reagan's it's morning in America again, being positive has always been a winning political approach in the US. The first party to get out of attack mode and back to laying out a positive vision for America is going to do very well I think. Most everyone I know is really getting sick of this stuff.
I know this will sound narcissistic but I plan on disappointing you by living to be 100.
And for the record, as a late baby boomer you must have missed the hippie movement with its emphasis on communal living.
Or because there are cameras in every aisle and all the merchandise that has any appeal to young people is now contained in theft-proof packaging. Gee, wonder why.
I try to not be negative in life and clearly what I have posted is. Ultimately the above may be interesting at some level (or not) but what matters most is what we do and who we are as a person.
That, and Trumpist MAGA-hatters complaining about powerless shrieking libs, brown people and "thu librul Mediuh" while the country is robbed out from under them by the uber-wealthy.Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:06 pm https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/12/prot ... apologize/
On one hand:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
And on the other:
If you want a vision of the future, imagine feminist pussyhatters shrieking in your face- forever.