3 of 4
3
Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice
Posted: 30 January 2012 11:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
Occam. - 29 January 2012 01:42 PM

One of the major problems is that MOST people, bright or not, have very surface ideas of which they haven’t dug into and examined the complexities. 

They get both words and concepts mixed up.  For example, political, social, and economic systems apply to all countries, but they are often confused.  We are a democratic republic by political structure.  We have a socialistic (government supplied services, not the old “communistic” meaning) social system, and we have a capitalistic economic system.

As I’ve posted before, these are a few of the services our federal and local governments provide: Military, Police, Fire Services, Local Roads, use, & maintenance, Highways, use, & maintenance, Street Signs & Traffic Control, Street Lights, Schools,  Elementary, High Schools, Universities, Postal Service, Libraries, Judicial Court System,  Patent Protection, Food Safety, Flight Safety, Penal System, Communication Control, Property Laws, Personal Laws, Program Name, Record Keeping, Public Parks, Health Care, Garbage Collection, Sewer System, Drainage System, Vocational Training, Utility Supply and Control, Minimum Wages, Worker Safety, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Humanitarian Assistance, Financial Regulations, Professional Licensing, Vehicle & Driver Licensing, Environmental Protection, Child Protection, Voting Regulation.

If you are against socialism, do you want all of these services to be canceled or privatized? 

If you are a fiscal conservative, are you willing to not have any of these services available to you unless you buy each of them from private companies so you don’t have to pay taxes?

One of the fundamental functions of an ethical, caring society, I believe, is to assure minimum adequate living conditions for all its citizens.  When parasites and predators manage to take funds from the citizenry so it trickles up, they are stealiing those funds.  It’s part of the government’s job to protect the citizenry, and that includes increasing taxes on those who have been draining funds from the citizens, that is, taking from those rich and giving back services to those the predators and parasites have made poor.

Occam

I am simply quoting and responding to this post because it is so good, it desrves to be repeated.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 January 2012 11:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
Sandy Price - 30 January 2012 02:40 PM

And I live in a world of right or wrong.  No shades of grey. 

But don’t you see, Sandy; This is exactly the same world that the Fundamentalist Christians live in; and exactly the same world that the Fundamentalist Muslims live in; and exactly the same world that the Nazis lived in; and exactly the same world that the Soviet Communists lived in; and exactly the same world that the Khmer Rouge lived in?

And the problem is; each of these groups knows, absolutely what is right and what is wrong; and all of their absolutely known rights and wrongs are wildly different.

This is precisely what I mean about being out of touch with reality.

Theflyingsorcerer.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 January 2012 11:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2676
Joined  2011-04-24
TimB - 30 January 2012 11:09 PM
Occam. - 29 January 2012 01:42 PM

One of the major problems is that MOST people, bright or not, have very surface ideas of which they haven’t dug into and examined the complexities. 

They get both words and concepts mixed up.  For example, political, social, and economic systems apply to all countries, but they are often confused.  We are a democratic republic by political structure.  We have a socialistic (government supplied services, not the old “communistic” meaning) social system, and we have a capitalistic economic system.

As I’ve posted before, these are a few of the services our federal and local governments provide: Military, Police, Fire Services, Local Roads, use, & maintenance, Highways, use, & maintenance, Street Signs & Traffic Control, Street Lights, Schools,  Elementary, High Schools, Universities, Postal Service, Libraries, Judicial Court System,  Patent Protection, Food Safety, Flight Safety, Penal System, Communication Control, Property Laws, Personal Laws, Program Name, Record Keeping, Public Parks, Health Care, Garbage Collection, Sewer System, Drainage System, Vocational Training, Utility Supply and Control, Minimum Wages, Worker Safety, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Humanitarian Assistance, Financial Regulations, Professional Licensing, Vehicle & Driver Licensing, Environmental Protection, Child Protection, Voting Regulation.

If you are against socialism, do you want all of these services to be canceled or privatized? 

If you are a fiscal conservative, are you willing to not have any of these services available to you unless you buy each of them from private companies so you don’t have to pay taxes?

One of the fundamental functions of an ethical, caring society, I believe, is to assure minimum adequate living conditions for all its citizens.  When parasites and predators manage to take funds from the citizenry so it trickles up, they are stealiing those funds.  It’s part of the government’s job to protect the citizenry, and that includes increasing taxes on those who have been draining funds from the citizens, that is, taking from those rich and giving back services to those the predators and parasites have made poor.

Occam

I am simply quoting and responding to this post because it is so good, it desrves to be repeated.

Some of those services can be provided by private contractors,who will do a far superior job at a better price than whatever crap the government has going. Socialist services are very necessary to maintain a decent quality of life,but other options should always be on the table, since many parasites and predators are in the government as it is.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 12:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Interesting point, Mid-A.  However, the problem with privatizing services is that the more essential they are or the less competition there is, the higher the level of profit the supplier can and will demand.  This doesn’t happen with government supplied services.  Our job is to monitor the government supplied services and demand that any weaknesses be corrected immediately.  We can’t do that with privatized services.  If we are active, well-informed citizens, we can be sure we get the highest quality services at the lowest cost from the government.  If we aren’t, we’ll get screwed by the government agencies OR by the private companies.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 12:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6041
Joined  2009-02-26

Another problem with privatization is market distribution. For-profit companies will shy away from areas which are not profitable or will charge higher prices. Thus there will be an imbalance in fair costs and distribution of services. The job of federal and state services is to provide equal access to all qualified persons, even in the most remote areas.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 07:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3153
Joined  2011-08-15

Ok, let’s use social security as an example of privatization of services. Right now 1/6th of the citizens of the U.S. rely strictly on social secutiry to survive. The baby boomers, that’s us will swell the ranks of social security by 2015. As this will swamp the funds available, the government can shift funds from other accounts to close the gap. Privatizing the system will not allow this to happen. Also, privately funded programs will be at the whim of inflation and market fluctuations. Understandably the system needs to be cleaned up from both ends; weeding out the deadbeats and kicking the wealthy off the rolls, but watchdog agencies can be brought into play to accomplish this. BTW President Obama has created a bipartisan commission to to it. You baby boomers out there want to take a chance on your retirement on the open market? Want to work till your 70’s, or 80’s to get the pittance a company wants to grant you for 50 years of loyal service? Have you worked for a company for 30-40 years only to see your retirement money vanish? This is just one example;there are many others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_debate_in_the_United_States


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 07:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1191
Joined  2011-08-01

Very well put, Cap’t!

 Signature 

Free in Kentucky
—Humanist
“I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it.”—Edith Sitwell

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 11:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

We are a democratic republic by political structure. 
Occam

That is a good post. Clear and concise. BTW, I could never get Rocinante to accept the democratic republic idea of political structure. He always thought it had to be one or the other.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 11:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Right, Traveler.  Many can’t or won’t accept the subtlety of the combination concept.  However, my daughter pointed out to me that while we may be called that, we have really become an oligarchy.  Unfortunately, she’s right. (Thanks in part to our Supreme Court.)

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 01:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
Occam. - 31 January 2012 11:25 AM

Right, Traveler.  Many can’t or won’t accept the subtlety of the combination concept.  However, my daughter pointed out to me that while we may be called that, we have really become an oligarchy.  Unfortunately, she’s right. (Thanks in part to our Supreme Court.)

Occam

Yeah, I’m still fighting that one but since corporations are now people my fight is growing weak.  downer

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 01:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6041
Joined  2009-02-26
traveler - 31 January 2012 01:23 PM
Occam. - 31 January 2012 11:25 AM

Right, Traveler.  Many can’t or won’t accept the subtlety of the combination concept.  However, my daughter pointed out to me that while we may be called that, we have really become an oligarchy.  Unfortunately, she’s right. (Thanks in part to our Supreme Court.)

Occam

Yeah, I’m still fighting that one but since corporations are now people my fight is growing weak.  downer

The SC declaring that corporations have similar rights as persons has been applied in law forever.
The problem lies in the fact they completely overlooked the legal concept of personal liability. When an individual person speaks, he or she may be held accountable for their words (slander, defamation, incitement), but a corporation is exempt from such accountability. They can speak and lie and destroy another person’s reputation with total anonymity. The source could be a foreign government trying to undermine and subvert the US democracy.
IMO, by not addressing this potentially seditious threat to the nation, the Supreme Court was negligent in its due dilligence.

[ Edited: 31 January 2012 01:44 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 01:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

I agree W4U. I love the quote, “I’ll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.”  smile

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 01:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04

Just pick one thing to correct at a time, then move to the next thing:

Insider trading is legal for US congress members.
The Glass-Steagal act has not been re-implemented.
Money is free speech.
Corporations are people.

Then, before your grandchildren know it, we’ll be a functioning democratic republic again.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 03:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
TimB - 31 January 2012 01:48 PM

Just pick one thing to correct at a time, then move to the next thing:

Insider trading is legal for US congress members.
The Glass-Steagal act has not been re-implemented.
Money is free speech.
Corporations are people.

Then, before your grandchildren know it, we’ll be a functioning democratic republic again.

LOL I already have a grandchild. But I like the idea.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 08:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2676
Joined  2011-04-24
Thevillageatheist - 31 January 2012 07:15 AM

Ok, let’s use social security as an example of privatization of services. Right now 1/6th of the citizens of the U.S. rely strictly on social secutiry to survive. The baby boomers, that’s us will swell the ranks of social security by 2015. As this will swamp the funds available, the government can shift funds from other accounts to close the gap. Privatizing the system will not allow this to happen. Also, privately funded programs will be at the whim of inflation and market fluctuations. Understandably the system needs to be cleaned up from both ends; weeding out the deadbeats and kicking the wealthy off the rolls, but watchdog agencies can be brought into play to accomplish this. BTW President Obama has created a bipartisan commission to to it. You baby boomers out there want to take a chance on your retirement on the open market? Want to work till your 70’s, or 80’s to get the pittance a company wants to grant you for 50 years of loyal service? Have you worked for a company for 30-40 years only to see your retirement money vanish? This is just one example;there are many others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_debate_in_the_United_States


Cap’t Jack

I fully agree that privatizing social security would be disastrous.  I’m not too concerned with it for myself,because SS will likely not be around (or not be enough to live on) when my age group starts to reach 67. As long as it still exists however, “socialized” social security is the only workable way.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3