General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Straw Man
RuHo
And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin; If I only had a brain......
 
Straw Man's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
Wow....you're reading a lot of shit into my simple statement and bringing up things that have nothing to do with it at all...desperation much? I don't deny those bases are there to protect American interests and don't remember ever suggesting otherwise? As hard as it may be for you to comprehend, most Americans don't have a problem with that. Also, a big part of the defense budget IS based on being world police, but it isn't as simple as just one day deciding to stop all that. I'll give you another pass since you probably never even had the opportunity to sleep through an economics or polysci class...but modern capitalism means that there are no isolated economies that aren't dependent on other economies to be stable, and political unrest/violence etc..on the other side of the world has an effect on everyone that is a part of it. Of course, even if you do understand that..you won't admit it. And you also seem to have some deep seated American hate. (or possibly jealousy)

"here's me saying this thing, but I actually didn't mean what I said and you must be desperate to actually think that"

"most americans don't mind being world police but it's mostly what the military budget consists of and I expect others to be grateful for it all around the world though it's our interest, not anyone elses really"

"america is really great because I say so"

Anything else? Hot air as usual.
__________________
"dogs came to man to make friends and help us hunt and guard unlike pigs"
-lolergay
Old 09-21-2010, 08:48 PM Straw Man is offline  
Reply With Quote
#76  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

bingstudent
I am an idiot!
 
bingstudent's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RuHo View Post
These motives got old a few decades ago, similarly with japanese bases, and they exist SOLELY for US interests, to serve the needs of the US, and that alone. NOTHING else.

Who exactly would provide security in the Asia-Pacific region if the US left Japan?

Is Chinese regional hegemony in Asia an outcome that would benefit the other four fifth of the world more than the status quo?

edit: for the record, the US could clearly be an effective global sheriff with a far smaller defense budget (say 2.5% of GDP?), unfortunately, a huge chunk of defense spending in the US is essentially a southern states job stimulus program that politicians are loath to consider reducing the size of. We are all Keynesians now? Yup.
Old 09-29-2010, 10:31 PM bingstudent is offline  
Reply With Quote
#77  

chuckybob
Mario raped Peach in her fuzzy spot while twisting and twirling his mustache sexylike
 
chuckybob's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Of course the left will keep their heads in the sand and continue to deny that government intervention rarely leads to anything positive.


Found the wiki article on this guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell

Got some good stuff in there..

that really puts racist conservatives in a bind... do they trust the democratic president... who is black... or the economist saying that the democratic president's policies are wrong... who is black
Old 09-30-2010, 07:38 PM chuckybob is offline  
Reply With Quote
#78  

imzjustplayin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckybob View Post
that really puts racist conservatives in a bind... do they trust the democratic president... who is black... or the economist saying that the democratic president's policies are wrong... who is black

huh? Isn't it obvious? They'd obviously choose the economist that supports their views..
__________________
The answer to 1984 is 1776.
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmicist.
Is hindsight 20/20 for someone who is legally blind?
Old 09-30-2010, 08:39 PM imzjustplayin is offline  
Reply With Quote
#79  

chuckybob
Mario raped Peach in her fuzzy spot while twisting and twirling his mustache sexylike
 
chuckybob's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
huh? Isn't it obvious? They'd obviously choose the economist that supports their views..

i donno man, somehow, somewhere, i think theres a member of the KKK who's doing some soul searching
Old 09-30-2010, 08:42 PM chuckybob is offline  
Reply With Quote
#80  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckybob View Post
i donno man, somehow, somewhere, i think theres a member of the KKK who's doing some soul searching

__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 10-01-2010, 12:24 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#81  

imzjustplayin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckybob View Post
i donno man, somehow, somewhere, i think theres a member of the KKK who's doing some soul searching

why would a "ghost" (reference to their cloaks) be doing soul searching? Feeling lonely??
__________________
The answer to 1984 is 1776.
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmicist.
Is hindsight 20/20 for someone who is legally blind?
Old 10-04-2010, 01:39 AM imzjustplayin is offline  
Reply With Quote
#82  

Zangmonkey
3y3 4m t3h Gr4et gr4nD m0th4rfUxing mor4n! W4t<h //\y b33f kur+4nz F|4p!!# 4y4m 1e37!
 
Zangmonkey's Avatar
 
Why was this dropped into EL?
__________________
09 F9
Old 10-04-2010, 09:41 AM Zangmonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
#83  

Gibonius
 
Some random thread from Automay was moved to the BC too, some mod is fucking around would be my guess.
Old 10-04-2010, 10:51 AM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#84  

Slacker
 
Slacker's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid View Post

New Mexico may have voted for Bush in 2004 but this state has always leaned Democratic. We currently have a Democratic Governor (King Bill Richardson) and our entire congressional delegation is Democratic. I'm not suprised we're #1 this state has a serious entitlement problem. Plus we employ about 50% more government workers than the national average. About 22 per 100 private sector jobs compared to around 16 for the nation as a whole. That's just at the state and local level. Between Los Alamos and Sandia Labs plus multuple millitary bases there's a huge federal government presence. New Mexico's economy is basically government and oil/gas.
__________________
[M]ilitary [M]ayhem
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy
Old 10-04-2010, 09:05 PM Slacker is offline  
Reply With Quote
#85  

Patriotic Eagle
 
Patriotic Eagle's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
Oh, hell no... This sounds just like the chants from democrats about how the "free market" handled heath care so poorly that it was time the government stepped in. This is , simply because the government enabled a socialist idea around health care then said, "let the free market handle the rest". It's not a "free market" if the government is dictating minimum standards and who gets what, because when that happens, it distorts the market. The manufacturing jobs disappeared because people in the US don't want to spend $50,000 on a fucking corolla because of some corrupt unions in Detroit think their employees deserve more money. Free market is people buying what they want, it also means who gets hired at a given wage and who doesn't, but when you start fucking around with the numbers on one side of the table, things on the other side of the table also get fucked up thanks to them being interrelated.
Why should I care at all about enabling a "free market" when the result for myself and many other people is quite shitty?

Manufacturing jobs disappeared because it became much more profitable for retailers to avoid paying for a product produced with decent wages, safety regulations, or working with strong unions. This was incredibly damaging to the middle and lower class in the US and slightly cheaper goods is a terrible and shortsighted tradeoff supported by people who have no direct connection to the welfare of the working class.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
To give you an example, if you have two children and you give toys to both of them, alright this is fine.. But what if you start playing favorites (setting minimum standards, etc.), what exactly do you think the other child is going to think when they see this? They're going to start getting prissy and combative when you ask them to do something because they're mad you favored the other child, they don't feel they're equally being burdened with a given task.
This is a pretty confused and worthless theoretical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
The only thing I can see the government setting in a minimum standard is a general basic safety and other OSHA requirements that protect the individual from pollutants and chemicals that are known to kill or severely injure. But to start intervening and saying "this is how much you should get paid, this is the minimum quality of life you should have" then that results in a distortion in the market's way of valuing labor. Think about it, you have two people, one making $10 an hour and another making $20 an hour. As an FYI, $10 an hour is the minimum wage.. The person making $10 an hour needs to shovel dirt and the person making $20 an hour is an electrician.. You need the job of shoveling dirt to get done but, thanks to minimum wage, you have to pay someone $10 an hour to do it. Now, tell me, do you really think that being an electrician or automobile technician, in this scenario is really worth only double the value of a guy who shovels dirt? I don't think so.. Since this is a job that can't be sent overseas, it gets done by illegal aliens for less than minimum wage, but otherwise is done at minimum wage. So thanks to minimum wage, the market is already distorted.. I know this scenario sounds awesome for those on the bottom rung, that they're given a minimum standard of living but it fucks it up for everyone else because in effect what happens is the most worthless "work" is paid at a rate very close to work that is several times more valuable..
The free market does not produce anything close to a fair distribution of income relative to work down however. The upper class (and much of the "middle") has an income far in excess of any actual valuable labour produced, much of which revolves around simply moving or managing wealth.

You're also seriously underestimating the difficulty and value of many jobs done for minimum or near minimum wage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
If you can't see what the problem with this, let me help you.. The people who don't work or who work jobs that serve little value get to ride the backs of those who not only work hard, but their labor is actually valuable. If there is no government welfare for those who are unemployed, then what you have is a bunch of unemployed people wandering around, but if there is govt. welfare, then what you have are a bunch of people sitting pretty while collecting a paycheck, simply because they exist! In order to pay for this paycheck, what do you think happens..? That's right, they get to ride on the backs of those who actually work..

That's what it all comes down to.. If you create so many rules that it's impossible to make it worthwhile to hire a person, then that person is not hired and when you couple that with a welfare state, what you end up with is a fucking mess because now half of the population is doing nothing while collecting money off of those who actually do useful things, then they figure it out that it's not worth it to work and finally everything collapses since nobody is working anymore yet everyone is collecting a paycheck..
Every economics undergrad spews this shit and it has no actual basis in reality or history.
Old 10-19-2010, 05:38 PM Patriotic Eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
#86  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
New Mexico may have voted for Bush in 2004 but this state has always leaned Democratic. We currently have a Democratic Governor (King Bill Richardson) and our entire congressional delegation is Democratic. I'm not suprised we're #1 this state has a serious entitlement problem. Plus we employ about 50% more government workers than the national average. About 22 per 100 private sector jobs compared to around 16 for the nation as a whole. That's just at the state and local level. Between Los Alamos and Sandia Labs plus multuple millitary bases there's a huge federal government presence. New Mexico's economy is basically government and oil/gas.

Indeed. I went to school there (NMT) and much of the schools funding was government research grants and such as well. It made it pretty cheap to attend, even from out of state.

Also the VLA, white sands missile test range, etc etc. Bunch of fucking socialists.

Gary Johnson seemed pretty cool, for a republican.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 10-19-2010, 05:53 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#87  

imzjustplayin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
Why should I care at all about enabling a "free market" when the result for myself and many other people is quite shitty?
You're right, that's why you should pack your bags and GTFO. I totally believe people should live where they want to live under the political regime they want to be under, whether capitalist, communist, socialist, fascist, etc.. However the U.S is one of very few countries that is capitalist and not socialist, but that has been eroding fast thanks to fuck tards like you. I fucking hate Lyndon B. Johnson, that mother fucker has saddled my generation with debts we'll never be able to pay off thanks to fucking medicaid and medicare BULLSHIT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
Manufacturing jobs disappeared because it became much more profitable for retailers to avoid paying for a product produced with decent wages, safety regulations, or working with strong unions. This was incredibly damaging to the middle and lower class in the US and slightly cheaper goods is a terrible and shortsighted tradeoff supported by people who have no direct connection to the welfare of the working class.
You call it more profitable, I call it more cost effective.. You use "profits" as a point of attack so to counter it, I'll call it cost effective. It's more cost effective for people to conserve energy and not run the HVAC system in their house and turn off lights they're not using. However, if you're a little fuck face, you could call it "more profitable" since "profit" would be the money you get to keep in your wallet..


Animals, Water, Heat, and Electricity all have one thing in common...




They all look for the path of least resistance.. The path of least resistance for people is to STAY on welfare assuming they grew up with it. The path of least resistance for companies is not to ask for a pay cut of its employees even though economic times calls for it, instead it's to fire the unionized assholes and move operations to china. Michael Moore may call the failure of GM and Chrysler the failure of capitalism, I call it a success. Too bad the govt. works too hard to interfere with creative destruction thanks to lobbyist assholes. I'm annoyed that you attack corporations and capitalism for things it and they do when it's really just people who are assholes. People are naturally "greedy" (negative term) or "looking out for their best interests" (positive term). The fact that you attack people who are successful for playing by the rules just shows that you have an innate bias against winners even though nearly every person participating would jump at the opportunity to be in the position of those who they deride. (Poor libtards attacking rich people)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
The free market does not produce anything close to a fair distribution of income relative to work down however. The upper class (and much of the "middle") has an income far in excess of any actual valuable labour produced, much of which revolves around simply moving or managing wealth.
The problem you have is that you determine value by how "difficult" a job appears to be. Problem is, you're wrong. Value has several determining factors and one of them just so happens to be difficulty. Your anticapitalist attitude reaffirms this belief, by purely pointing out that people who have "easy", "cushy", jobs are actually worthless jobs while those who clean toilets and pick berries in fields are actually more valuable. Thing is, you're wrong. If I spend 30 years of my life making very detailed trinkets that are not only hideous, but noone wants to buy, that wouldn't make my work "more valuable" than some consultant whose job is to find ways for how a particular company or entity is able to save several hundred thousand dollars per year. With your idea of how society should compensate people, a whole bunch of useless crap would be made and doing things that have any value would be stifled because the will to do what people want to do is higher than what needs to be done. What it comes down to is that you want most people to be on welfare who can do what ever the fuck they want and a limited few to carry them. This idea is unjust and it's unsustainable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
You're also seriously underestimating the difficulty and value of many jobs done for minimum or near minimum wage.
Difficulty != value. There are a LOT of VERY difficult jobs at the border line of minimum wage but those jobs pay so little because they're of low value. In fact, minimum wage is such a problem, a job simply won't get done even though it needs to be done because to do the job at minimum wage wouldn't be cost effective.
__________________
The answer to 1984 is 1776.
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmicist.
Is hindsight 20/20 for someone who is legally blind?
Old 10-19-2010, 08:14 PM imzjustplayin is offline  
Reply With Quote
#88  

Patriotic Eagle
 
Patriotic Eagle's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
You're right, that's why you should pack your bags and GTFO. I totally believe people should live where they want to live under the political regime they want to be under, whether capitalist, communist, socialist, fascist, etc.. However the U.S is one of very few countries that is capitalist and not socialist, but that has been eroding fast thanks to fuck tards like you.
Every major Western country in the world is capitalist or at best is a mixed economy. The US has become increasingly controlled by capitalists in the last thirty years with huge cutbacks on welfare programs, lowering tax rates, de unionization, and huge privatization of formerly public property/services. Telling someone to leave behind their family, friends, home, and work so you can have things just the way you want is incredibly childish and unrealistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
I fucking hate Lyndon B. Johnson, that mother fucker has saddled my generation with debts we'll never be able to pay off thanks to fucking medicaid and medicare BULLSHIT.
So sorry people care about the lives of others instead of short term profits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
You call it more profitable, I call it more cost effective.. You use "profits" as a point of attack so to counter it, I'll call it cost effective. It's more cost effective for people to conserve energy and not run the HVAC system in their house and turn off lights they're not using. However, if you're a little fuck face, you could call it "more profitable" since "profit" would be the money you get to keep in your wallet..


Animals, Water, Heat, and Electricity all have one thing in common...




They all look for the path of least resistance.. The path of least resistance for people is to STAY on welfare assuming they grew up with it. The path of least resistance for companies is not to ask for a pay cut of its employees even though economic times calls for it, instead it's to fire the unionized assholes and move operations to china.
This has nothing at all to do with some natural law. The "path of least resistance" is not to build huge amounts of infrastructure along with adding the barriers of language/culture and distance, that was what was most profitable for a small group of people and was a disaster for the great majority of people who used to work in manufacturing.

Equating capitalist profit with nature is pure propaganda.


Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
Michael Moore may call the failure of GM and Chrysler the failure of capitalism, I call it a success. Too bad the govt. works too hard to interfere with creative destruction thanks to lobbyist assholes.
We've already seen the results of leaving manufacturing jobs at the mercy of capitalists and the result has been a disaster for the working class. "Creative destruction" has failed everyone who wasn't able to profit from the system of overseas manufacturing and big box retailers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
I'm annoyed that you attack corporations and capitalism for things it and they do when it's really just people who are assholes. People are naturally "greedy" (negative term) or "looking out for their best interests" (positive term).
Even if this was true (and most psychological studies of children show it's not), we should be analyzing the economic system, not the individual morals of people existing in that system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
The fact that you attack people who are successful for playing by the rules just shows that you have an innate bias against winners even though nearly every person participating would jump at the opportunity to be in the position of those who they deride. (Poor libtards attacking rich people)
This is a common deflection of anti capitalist arguments designed to appeal to the vanity of those who perceive themselves as "capitalists", foregoing any actual analysis. Again, just propaganda.



Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
The problem you have is that you determine value by how "difficult" a job appears to be. Problem is, you're wrong. Value has several determining factors and one of them just so happens to be difficulty. Your anticapitalist attitude reaffirms this belief, by purely pointing out that people who have "easy", "cushy", jobs are actually worthless jobs while those who clean toilets and pick berries in fields are actually more valuable. Thing is, you're wrong. If I spend 30 years of my life making very detailed trinkets that are not only hideous, but noone wants to buy, that wouldn't make my work "more valuable" than some consultant whose job is to find ways for how a particular company or entity is able to save several hundred thousand dollars per year. With your idea of how society should compensate people, a whole bunch of useless crap would be made and doing things that have any value would be stifled because the will to do what people want to do is higher than what needs to be done.
This is almost entirely speculation, though you are correct value has several determining factors. Actual material production (farming, mining, manufacturing, etc) have real measurable value based on labour required and "goods" produced (among other factors). Likewise services (doctors, management, artists, etc) can also be measured through various means. I never said management (which seems to be the crux of your argument here) was "easy" or worthless, and in fact can be quite valuable.

The "free market" distorts these values by exaggerating the value of some "labor" (owning capital, manipulating capital) and works tirelessly as a system to ensure it's own primacy by making sure the system values capital over anything else and devaluing the labor that reduces profit (the vast majority of work). The result is a system controlled by capital and a large distortion of actual labor value, supported by the propagandized people it victimizes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
What it comes down to is that you want most people to be on welfare who can do what ever the fuck they want and a limited few to carry them. This idea is unjust and it's unsustainable.
lmao

Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
Difficulty != value. There are a LOT of VERY difficult jobs at the border line of minimum wage but those jobs pay so little because they're of low value. In fact, minimum wage is such a problem, a job simply won't get done even though it needs to be done because to do the job at minimum wage wouldn't be cost effective.
Value as determined by capitalism.
Old 11-10-2010, 02:11 PM Patriotic Eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
#89  

LegendKiller
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
You're right, that's why you should pack your bags and GTFO. I totally believe people should live where they want to live under the political regime they want to be under, whether capitalist, communist, socialist, fascist, etc.. However the U.S is one of very few countries that is capitalist and not socialist, but that has been eroding fast thanks to fuck tards like you. I fucking hate Lyndon B. Johnson, that mother fucker has saddled my generation with debts we'll never be able to pay off thanks to fucking medicaid and medicare BULLSHIT.

This country was not founded on the basis of "love everything or leave it". It was founded on the basis of representation, which is why things aren't static. Those who scream "socialist" for things like universal healthcare are those who have no fucking idea what a socialist is.

The debts weren't caused by Johnson, they were caused by Reagan+ from the last 30 years because we decided that not taxing the rich would lead to massive economic growth. It has led to growth but not in the ways expected and has distorted the economic system by creating McJobs while outsourcing the real jobs. It has saddled us with 14tr in debt and no real way for growth. Meanwhile, the wealth disparity is the largest it has ever been in our country's history.

What is the end game for all of this? That so much wealth is aggregated to the top that we have a plutocracy? That the upper echelons of this country end up becoming Paris Hilton, a wastrel investing class that add no value? That eventually the lower classes raise up and revolt?

That is the natural progression of a society that values it's own individual wealth than the society's health. This is one main reason why the Roman Empire failed.

I am always amused by people who vociferously defend the rich and wealthy. It's like they think that if somebody making $20,000/month can't keep most of that, they will suddenly stop working. Bullshit.

America's "golden years" of manufacturing were during periods where the top marginal tax bracket was 90%. Somehow the wealth was built.

Which leads me to the final point. The problem with America now isn't leeches from welfare. It's leeches of the spoiled pieces of shit spewed forth from prior generations. Prior generations built and paid for this infrastructure of this country, they built and paid for the military, they built and paid for the schools, hospitals, bridges, roads, SS, and medical advances. Yet this generation doesn't want to continue to pay for them. It's "ME ME ME" now. They do not want to perpetuate the cycle.

And before you call me a "socialist", consider this. The two greatest capitalists this country has ever seen, Buffet and Gates, both believe the same thing. Gates' family firmly believes taxes on the rich need to be raised and they were wealthy far before Microsoft. Buffet was raised a conservative Republican. Yet, somehow, these guys, who have more capitalism in a toe nail than you have in your entire family, believe that taxes need to be raised.

The "free market" is a myth and a lie. It cannot and will not happen because it fails utterly to control itself, mainly because capital rich people can buy their way out of anything.
Old 11-11-2010, 07:03 AM LegendKiller is offline  
Reply With Quote
#90  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:58 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.