Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Its like I said on the Israel seems to be relying too much on its victimization past Thread
The third most controversial topic after abortion and Hiroshima & Nagasaki.
edited 16th Nov '12 4:39:12 AM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Oh, come on, the nuke aren't controv-
Ah.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.
I see what you did there.
And yes, I went to sleep it off. I now notice that my behaviour last night was... well, not unacceptable, but barely acceptable. I wasn't mocking Perry, though, I was just pointing out the possibility of an Insult Backfire.
As for "backwaters" not being interesting for companies to service, couldn't there be government grants or other such regulation that would make it interesting? I mean, if access to information becomes so hugely different between cities and the countryside, no wonder values would evolve at dramatically different speeds.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.A lot of the problems about healthcare and such seem to be about who "deserves" it. Veterans definitely deserve it, and seniors have paid their dues to society so they deserve it, sort of, but they're becoming less worthy.
The real problem with this debate is that we're looking at what people deserve and not what actually seems to work in reigning in the exploding cost of these things.
Both very good thought-provoking points. And one that sums up the difficulty with getting things done.
The left (although I have no idea what that even means, since depending on who you ask, I'm either a classic rightie, or a classic leftie) argues "Just give people what they need dammit!"
But, I ask, is it fair that someone who worked hard and did what they had to get a job that paid them a nice severance and retirement package isn't entitled to that hard work? Is it fair that someone who settled for relatively low-risk, low-effort retail work should be rewarded the same as someone who actually sat through the decade plus of schooling necessary to be a top-flight attorney?
It was an honorIs someone being rewarded the same by having the same healthcare, when the one who worked really hard probably has a huge house and eats lavish dinners, while the one who got a retail job rents a small apartment with two or three roommates and eats maybe one proper meal a day, when he or she is lucky?
![]()
That you actually think Retail work is low risk or low effort is funny. An attorney worked hard for his degree, sure. But he'll never have to risk repetitive strain injuries from his day to day work activities, lack of healthcare for conditions that will be ignored until they can no longer be ignored, or having stress related disorders due to trying desperately to hold on to an apartment and enough food to eat between paychecks.
edited 16th Nov '12 8:30:32 AM by Midgetsnowman
Well dp, I think my counter-question to you is, did the person eating lavish dinners and living in a nice house do something wrong by virtue of having those things??
@Midget - I gave the wrong impression. I currently work retail.
Let me better explain. I have a degree and I'm getting paid the same as people without. I don't find anything wrong with this as we're doing the same job.
I got promoted earlier this year. I got the promotion because everytime someone had to stay late, I did. I got promoted because inventory was actually done properly when it was my turn to do it. I didn't poach from the storeroom.
As a result, I get sick time and vacation leave. Did I do something wrong?
edited 16th Nov '12 8:30:22 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor
No. But by the same token. why on earth would I want to work hard for a company that believes I dont deserve time off when I'm sick or be afforded basic human dignity? Y'now why I slacked off when I worked in fast Food? Because I knew full well I could work my ass off and receive no reward for it.
Some people do it anyhiw. For a lot of us, its a simple equation of "well, yes, I could put my heart and soul into this job. But they dont give a shit about me unless I do so and even then they likely wont, so why should I give a shit about them?"
edited 16th Nov '12 8:39:44 AM by Midgetsnowman
No, but is it wrong to ask them to pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes when they can still maintain about the same lifestyle with the money deducted as without so that those who are poorer can have basic stuff like healthcare, shelter, food, or water when they might not be able to afford any of those, even on their own?
@Max: No, but the question here is, are people who need assistance doing something wrong?
I have friends who are currently trying to make the hard decision between going to college and eating, for example, because food stamps aren't offered to college students. Should they be punished for trying to better themselves?
"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -DrunkscriblerianI'd be willing to do it.
I get your point Midget, but surely you can appreciate that some people would rather not incentivize people for doing less.
College students don't get food stamps?? Seriously? What if they're single parents?
edited 16th Nov '12 8:49:03 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorpigeon, we tend to agree on a lot. Like I said, true capitalists like myself want people to have more not less. The more people there are gainfully employed and with full bellies means fewer criminals and more people to buy more stuff.
Honestly, controlled socialism is a capitalist's dream!
It was an honor
Don't complain dude. You don't get stuck trying to explain away the like of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
![]()
That may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Clearly we have work to do.
It was an honor

West Virginia's Jay Rockefeller and Tom Harkin of Iowa are circulating a letter among their Democratic colleagues that calls on the president to stand firm on revenue, entitlement programs and spending cuts. They're hoping to get as many as 30 Senate Democrats to sign on, Rockefeller said.
The letter, which was obtained by POLITICO, says the president should insist on $1 in revenue for each $1 in spending cuts. It also says that the $917 billion in spending cuts (enacted under last year's agreement to increase the debt ceiling) should be counted toward the next round of deficit reduction.
That's a balanced approach. That's a rational approach. Yet Politico calls that plan "DRAMATIC".
edited 16th Nov '12 1:23:11 AM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.