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
What you and many people here don't seem to grasp is that you don't get to HAVE an opinion on how much someone's personal possessions being used, or not, harms society. That is why more and more people are becoming disgusted with the progressive liberal mindset.
If I buy a bottle of champagne for my birthday, you might say it's a not as good a use of money as donating to a soup kitchen. That may be true, but it's not your fucking business (general 'your'). I paid my taxes, I didn't steal to earn the money, therefore, how I use it is how I deem fit, and my opinion alone is what matters.
The money the government extracts from my endeavors via taxes, that's the money that has an obligation to benefit society. That and the money each person themselves make.
This model where it seems at no point my money becomes my own to do with as I see fit is exactly why, for all this bs talk about how the Democrats "drubbed" the Republicans, there is a significant, nearly half, portion of the country that gets sick and tired of being told they have a never ending duty to the State.
Living in New York, my whole life, the problem I see with this, is that "emergency measures" tend to last long after the actual emergency.
The government cries poverty now, we all chip in, and mysteriously, like the steadily rising transit fares, it stays stuck there and it just becomes more profit for the government.
And let's debunk this bs about "We're spending it all on social programs." Bullshit. Newspapers have destroyed whole forests writing about all the crap the government blows money on for no good reason at all.
No, I totally get the right-wing ideal of "How about you stop feeding yourself Paul Krugman rhetoric and start being responsible with how you actually spend taxpayer money and then we'll be more than happy to kick in what's needed?"
edited 5th Apr '13 5:58:40 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor
I might be more sympathetic to that argument if
a) The GOP practiced anything that they preached (give me one example of the GOP being more efficient than democrats in the past 10 years with budget, or allocation of funds)
b) Some degree of pork is kinda necessary to make our government function. It's sad, but true.
And you do get to have an opinion, and pass laws, on how other people use their money. That's why bribery isn't legal, and fraud, and insider trading, and a whole bunch of other things. We've already proven that we can restrict how people use money if it's actively harming society.
Money isn't some magic private sacred thing. It represents a series of debts and obligations. Nothing more. Without a functioning society to quantify those debts and obligations, to commonly accept them, money is meaningless. Therefore, it's in the interests of everyone how money is used.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:04:33 AM by DrTentacles
I have had it brought it to my attention that the Republicans whoring themselves to the Tea Whores has made them a laughingstock at best, a menace at worst. You won't hear me argue that.
I'm saying this because the majority of this forum is Democrat/liberal. If this was a Fox Snooze site, I'd be cursing that lot of unpatriotic, cowardly, parasitic, un-American, ungrateful, dishonorable fucking thieves for thinking the country has a duty to make them rich, but then they have no obligation to give back.
Liberals annoy me, but right-wingers (the insane ones) disgust me.
No argument here, as everything you said makes total sense. But there IS a limit to how far you can go with that "national interest" shtick.
Yes, there are laws on how I use my body. I can't smuggle 10 keys of coke in it, I can't spread STD's with it, I can't use it choke someone to death. But it's my body and neither you nor the State is going to tell me who I should sleep with, or how much sleep I should get, or what TV shows I should watch.
There is a limit to how far I will and should go for the almighty State.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:08:06 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorGetting people to pay a fair share in taxes and how those taxes are used is a different thing. I'll readily admit that, although I questioned the plateau of progressive taxation you proposed, Starship, you still pushed it higher than we have currently.
As for how the taxes are used, well... I'm all for basic science research, good schools for ALL, and needed infrastructure improvements, and sifting out unneeded pork. It should also be mentioned, though, I think, that if unemployment would skyrocket because the government lays off a lot of workers, that's not good for the economy and not necessarily that good for the government's bottom line either, as they have to pay unemployment, food stamps, etc. without getting any taxes from all those people.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:19:46 AM by TheGirlWithPointyEars
She of Short Stature & Impeccable Logic My Skating Liveblog
Thing is... if you don't pay tax, you shouldn't use the system at all. <_< Good luck driving around without roads or actually buying food that is safe to eat (yes: in a world without a government to oversee standards, even high-end, luxury foods would get contaminated very quickly to maximise profits). And, you'd certainly have no right complaining when the infrastructure starts falling down around your ears and you can't find a doctor to help your intestinal distress.
Social contract, Maxima. It actually means that people don't have "their own" money until they've paid their tax on it.
I think that's your problem: you see a payslip and think "all that is mine/ theirs". The answer to that is somewhere between yes and no. And, always has been since the first accountant set up shop under orders of a chief/ king... probably in Predynastic Egypt, if not before.
Since the '80s, the myth has been peddled that you can get away without contributing to the Social Contract if you have enough money, as "it's all yours". It's... so cock-eyed, it's unreal.
Somebody. Needs. To. Pay. For. The. Roads.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:28:14 AM by Euodiachloris
Going back to the link I posted/after reflecting on it a few moments, why would Obama take the massively unpopular stance of being the one to suggest cuts? I mean, it undermines everything he stood for last year. If you're to cut them, let the other party suggest the cuts.
Does Obama hate getting his way, or something?
This just frustrates me to no end. Medicare and Social Security aren't the giant cash-suckers the GOP make them out to be, especially next to things like the DOD. Furthermore, a hell of a lot of people have been paying into Social Security all of their lives, before Bush raided the fund to finance his wars.
It's just stupid beyond belief. Half of the reason people (such as myself) voted for Obama is because he promised to preserve those programs. He won the election, because people thought, unlike Mitt Romney, he'd actually preserve them.
EDIT+Note: Also, you know come 2014, the Republicans are going to running on platforms saying "save social security from Obama" and acting like they were in favor of preserving them all along. This just a fuck-up of massive scale.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:24:06 AM by DrTentacles
Apparently, the first known and recognised accounting records were found in Ancient Mesopotamia, over 7,000 year ago.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:26:07 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnI never drank it either. I want FDR. I want Teddy Roosevelt. I want even Eisenhower or Nixon for fuck's sake.
He was always firmly "better than the other guy."
He still is. Just...not as much better as even I thought.
EDIT: Well, at least we'll always have moderate social progressiveness.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:26:27 AM by DrTentacles
It still amazes everyone ('everyone' meaning mainly the Republidoofuses) want to cut every program, but they won't reduce defense spending by even a nickel.
You've got drones reading over people's shoulders in Antartica, I'm reasonably certain nobody is gonna blow us up out the clear blue.
It was an honor![]()
![]()
There is some argument that some findings from the Tasian culture could well point to accountancy: namely... some of the pottery seems to have gone through some form of inspection... or something. There are marks that could be stamps. Granted, it's not definitive proof, and there are other interpretations of the marks.
Stuff like that doesn't spring out of a vacuum.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:33:24 AM by Euodiachloris
I don't see what this has to do with anything else. You can use the money in your bank however you want, buy a helicopter and go skydiving go for it! The government just gets to decide how much of yours is yours simply because they don't have enough to pay for the government themselves and they need your help, that is why they need taxes. If they start being unreasonable like taking 90% of it away I can understand but if you make a hundred million a year I don't see the reason why 60 million a year is so bad.
Starship, you're looking at it backwards. You have $40 million to do whatever you want with. Whether your gross is $50 million, $100 million, or $1 billion, you still have more money than most people will earn in their lifetimes.
Wildcard, you're misunderstanding the debt. The debt is meaningless in the short term, and not very much of a problem in the long term.
Obama, what the hell are you doing?
Haven't we established that appealing to the centrist pundits isn't going to work?
edited 5th Apr '13 6:53:40 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You keep trying to obfuscate the issue. If I did the work to attain whatever I attained, using the same resources available to any citizen, I should not be taking home less than half of my own money. It's that simple.
As Fighteer already said, the government likes to go the Krugman route and say the debt is no big deal, so this idea the government needs to bleed me for my money to pay of its debt rings hollow.
edited 5th Apr '13 6:56:33 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorIt was never your money to begin with. It's that simple.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Look, the way I see it is this. Progressive taxation - higher percentage the more you earn - is how we make sure taxes are fairly allocated. As it currently stands, there is a cutoff to this and millionaires and billionaires, all else equal, pay the same percentage. Starship's scheme does better than currently with respect to this, yes. I have been arguing that any plateau, actually, gives an unfair advantage to upper incomes - because the rest of the system is based on a progressive model. It's not about taking deserved money away from the rich simply because we can. It's getting them to pay their fair share.
She of Short Stature & Impeccable Logic My Skating Liveblog@Starship: we can talk cuts. Did you see my suggestions for cuts in my last post?
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

Yeah. I'm not exactly thrilled either. He should stick it out, try to make some speeches, explain the consequences, and try to get the general population to put enough pressure on the GOP to get them to back down.
...Of course, that worked great with the Sequester.