US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1998

On May 23 2015 04:40 zlefin wrote:
So kwark, now that we have agreement on this particular problem, how shall we go about fixing it?

On May 23 2015 04:54 zlefin wrote:
Well I think we can agree on teaching financial literacy as a macro solution.

On May 23 2015 05:14 Introvert wrote:
While we are going off of stereotypes and gross mass media characterization, I would like to remind you that some people drive Chevys.

Though I don't drive either.

On May 23 2015 05:18 KwarK wrote:

Ford F-150 is the most popular vehicle in the US and has been for some time, despite being hugely impractical for the vast majority of motorists. Also Chevy is short for Chevrolet which has a silent t which is French so those guys are probably fags who should get a real truck. Also I live here now and I work in a sales office specializing in selling worthless shit to people who can't afford it, the abuse is real.

On May 23 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:


You've been listening to too many Ford people.

Seriouly though, this wide net criticism is obnoxious because the solution is just as nebulous as the problem.

"Darn all these sheeple consumers! So materialistic."

On May 23 2015 05:28 KwarK wrote:

I already proposed my personal solution to it and it wasn't just complaining about Sheeple on the internet. But if you don't think there is a sickness in American consumerism and the way it drives people on food stamps to take out payday loans for iphones then I'm not sure you've been paying attention. It's really not normal in other first world countries for people to make payments on everyday things the way people do here.

On May 23 2015 05:46 Introvert wrote:
Who said I was making a comparison?
Fine, Americans (all of them!) are quite materialistic. Better?

My phone is dying. Too bad, this was amusing.

On May 23 2015 05:06 Wolfstan wrote:
Yay smaller, closer to the individual focus instead of trying to get big bad fed to implement one size fits no-one solutions.

Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) on Friday rushed to the defense of Josh Duggar, the eldest child of the family made famous by TLC's "19 Kids and Counting" who is now publicly facing allegations that he molested young girls when he was a teenager.

"Josh’s actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn’t mean 'unforgivable,'" Huckabee wrote in a Facebook post. "He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities. No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story."

The Christian, ultra-conservative Duggar family endorsed Huckabee during the 2008 election cycle and did so again when he announced his 2016 campaign this month, after backing former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) in 2012. Endorsements from parents Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar currently have top billing on Huckabee's campaign website.

The allegations against Josh Duggar surfaced Thursday when tabloid magazine In Touch published a 2006 police report showing Duggar was investigated for sex offenses, including allegedly fondling five underage girls, that occurred from 2002-2003. Duggar, now 27, was 14 years old when he allegedly committed the offenses. He was never charged with any crime.

Duggar said that he "acted inexcusably," without elaborating, in a statement issued to People magazine later Thursday. He also resigned his position as executive director of the anti-gay Family Research Council's lobbying arm, FRC Action.

In his Facebook post, Huckabee repeatedly bashed the media for showing "insensitive bloodthirst" in dredging up things that occurred when Duggar was underage.

On May 23 2015 04:43 KwarK wrote:

At the moment my life plan involves going volunteer and teaching financial literacy to kids/people who need help at some point. It fits in pretty neatly with some of the other volunteer work I do. It's not a macro solution but whatever. Maybe I'll start some kind of advocacy group or write a book but at the moment I'm thinking micro solutions, not macro solutions.

On May 23 2015 05:06 Wolfstan wrote:
Yay smaller, closer to the individual focus instead of trying to get big bad fed to implement one size fits no-one solutions.

The California State Assembly on Friday passed the nation’s toughest ban on plastic microbeads, the gritty synthetic particles used in a slew of personal care products as an exfoliant.

The bill now heads to the state Senate where a similar measure was defeated by a single vote last year. A new ballot in the chamber could take place this summer.

Environmentalists have been lobbying for the ban, saying the minuscule beads — usually smaller than 1 millimeter in diameter — generate an estimated 38 tons of plastic pollution that goes through wastewater treatment plants and into rivers and oceans.

Californians Against Waste, a nonprofit group that is part of a coalition calling for the ban, says scientists estimate that 471 million plastic microbeads are released into San Francisco Bay every day, and that there can be more than 300,000 microbeads in one jar of facial cleanser.

That environmental group also cites studies that show that microplastics have been found in fish stomachs. Sea creatures can mistake beads for eggs and ingest them, as well as the toxins attached to them. People, in turn, eat the fish, passing on those chemicals all the way up the food chain.

“If a manufacturer tried to dump 40 tons of plastic pollution into the ocean, they would be arrested and fined for violating the Clean Water Act.” said Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste. “But these cosmetic and soap makers are doing the same thing on a daily basis with billions of plastic microbeads washed down millions of drains. Enough is enough.”

California also approved a ban on plastic bags that us scheduled to go into effect next year.

On May 23 2015 06:55 Danglars wrote:



That's one of the cruxes of this debate. In individual life, you can probably trust Kwark to teach financial planning to high school / college age people. In political policies, the backwards thinking on collective decisions and government largesse perverts sound thinking into the lands of 120 trillion dollar unfunded liabilities. It's easy to see people who are conservative with their own lives, but liberal when it comes to spending other people's money.

Moving on to the subject of "the people demanded it/its the wish of the people." That's the great socialist lie, and to the extent that it's believed, naturally flows into democratic majorities uniting behind it. The agitators and community organizers stoked opinion towards accepting government as the guarantor of income/benefits equal to your family and living decisions. It resonated among the poor, and even in classes above that, the sensibility permeated that we have wealth to spare and can't more be done for the sake of the children, the disabled, the deserving poor. What you got was increases in single parenthood and broken families, more poverty, and a higher debt burden on unborn American children.

I place equal blame on the public that was fooled into thinking these redistributionist policies were win-win: The rich didn't need the extra money anyways, the poor are better off for the higher welfare and related subsidies. The argument against such measures was a little harder to make. As the government programs fail to address the problem and create more, the heaping of more and more diminish the individual's will, disincentivizes making wise choices, hurt educational opportunities, and hold back families silly enough for taking advancement upon their own shoulders.

In the end, I have little hope of persuading people whose minds are made up or would need vast societal collapse for the necessary evidence (aka when it's too late). You get the society you deserve. This one increasingly has a child's level of personal responsibility; nanny state is a quite apt description.