Liberal free for all coming to an end

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

March 4th is the deadline for congress to agree on a budget. Neither side will give so we're headed for a government shut down. Of course, the solution is simple - represent your constituents and go with the budget that cuts spending the most. But the democratics will just stick to their agenda.

The good news is shutting down the government will save a lot of $$. The bad news is BO will get credit for slashing the deficit and will be known as a frugal president... like what happened with Clinton.

In the words of Tavis Smiley: "I believe budgets are moral documents."

The US now finds itself riddled with money problems and what is the solution the Tea Party and others like yourself prefer? To balance the budget "on the backs of the poor" as Smiley said. Never mind the assistance these people need given their poverty. Let us simply attack them and their families. Let us cut funding for education and break the already near-dead unions. They are evil after all. Any man or woman who demands a fair chance, who demands good pay, any group of people who band together into a union in order to better be able to fight against exploitation is evil. These things get in the way or profit, after all.

And never mind all the money given to corporations. God forbid the government start representing the needs and aspirations of the people. The unwashed masses undoubtedly are poor because they want to be and the rich are rich because they work all those tens of thousands of hours that it takes the average worker to make anything like a CEO makes in a year. The poor like being poor don't they? There's lots of them and they've been around for a long time. That they are poor cannot possibly be caused by socioeconomic factors beyond their control, right?

It's funny--not sitcom funny, but still--it is always the working people who get put on the chopping block when things go bad. But the rich always get away. They never get blamed. The Republicans skated scot free when the economy went up thanks to the Bush tax cuts--it's really tax spending: all the money the rich get is taken from the people--thanks to the tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Wall Street types lie to the people and sell them bad loans--loans the people would not have to take had private industry not moved elsewhere to the planet to exploit peoples in countries without worker's rights on the one hand and frozen wages on the other, but upper management kept reaping ever more obscene rewards--but do any of these assholes go to jail? No. Instead the problem gets blamed on workers leading ever more desperate lives--their work unsatisfying, the pay atrocious, personal lives crumbling because of the financial pressure and the long work hours which get longer. And does the Republican Party, the party of unapologetic greed, receive any of the blame it so richly deserves? No. More funny: the Republicans are always talking about preserving the family and family values yet their fiscal policies have largely chipped away at the middle class, which is the same as destroying one family after another. Reagan started it. Bush perfected it.

I wonder Tracy: you were against the stimulus but are you for corporate welfare? It would be quite the case of hypocrisy if you were for corporate welfare--which includes the military industrial complex--since the stimulus and welfare are ultimately the same thing.

[randolph]

Democrats--Lets make everybody happy, regardless the cost.

Republicans--fuck the poor, lets make the rich happy, regardless the cost.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Democrats--Lets make everybody happy, regardless the cost.

Republicans--fuck the poor, lets make the rich happy, regardless the cost.

So very wrong about the Democrats.

More accurate: let's serve our rich masters in a different way that recognizes that if you openly campaign for fucking the poor, they may vote for you sometimes (because Americans are notorious for voting against their interests), but they may also decide to fuck you (which is why we have Social Security, unemployment insurance, and other New Deal legislation rather than a Depression-era revolution). I've always thought Republicans were way more honest about whose interests they serve than are Democrats. In both cases, though, it's not my interests.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by smc

So very wrong about the Democrats.

More accurate: let's serve our rich masters in a different way that recognizes that if you openly campaign for fucking the poor, they may vote for you sometimes (because Americans are notorious for voting against their interests), but they may also decide to fuck you (which is why we have Social Security, unemployment insurance, and other New Deal legislation rather than a Depression-era revolution). I've always thought Republicans were way more honest about whose interests they serve than are Democrats. In both cases, though, it's not my interests.

Looks like the cost is starting to make everybody unhappy.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Democrats--Lets make everybody happy, regardless the cost.

Republicans--fuck the poor, lets make the rich happy, regardless the cost.

You can't make everybody happy, so that's going to be pretty damn expensive. And the republican's philosophy is more like teach a person to fish rather than giving them a handout.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

In the words of Tavis Smiley: "I believe budgets are moral documents."

The US now finds itself riddled with money problems and what is the solution the Tea Party and others like yourself prefer? To balance the budget "on the backs of the poor" as Smiley said.

I have said to you and others on this forum before, I admit capitalism isn't for everyone. But here in America, that's what we have. You never told me which country you would rather live in. So let's start with France.

Originally Posted by Tom Dibblee

How to Move to Paris with No Money
Paris is possible. You do not need a French relative or a dowry of millions. You only need ingenuity and thirst. If you?ve got those, this storied city, the matron saint of expatriation, will be yours.

This guide is for Americans with insufficient funds and little tolerance for endless preparation (or any preparation), for those who rely on that special brand of luck crossed with tenacity and patience. Here?s how to begin: Save no money. Make no plans. Just get on the plane.

Once you get there, as an American passport-holder you?ll have 90 days before your tourist visa expires, so you?d better hit the ground running.

Read the rest here: http://matadornetwork.com/notebook/destination-guides/how-to-move-to-paris-with-no-money
Bon voyage.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I wonder Tracy: you were against the stimulus but are you for corporate welfare? It would be quite the case of hypocrisy if you were for corporate welfare--which includes the military industrial complex--since the stimulus and welfare are ultimately the same thing.

When did I ever say I was for corporate welfare? I think bailing out car companies and financial institutions is ok, as long as it's in the form of a loan, and they don't try and take over the company's operations. As for funding the military industry, it's not welfare if it's paying for goods and services.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

When did I ever say I was for corporate welfare? I think bailing out car companies and financial institutions is ok, as long as it's in the form of a loan, and they don't try and take over the company's operations. As for funding the military industry, it's not welfare if it's paying for goods and services.

TLB Forum Members, you must read very carefully to uncover the Tracy Coxx method of deflecting a point that Tracy can't really answer. I started the questioning about corporate welfare, specifically putting it in the Tracy context: Tracy writing baseless things about indolent people who are presumably on welfare and a major cause of the condition of the U.S. government's finances. I posed a question: will Tracy state unequivocally that all corporate welfare must end? All the subsidies, special tax loopholes, etc., all of which exist because the corporations buy these laws via the politicans they own -- of BOTH parties.

Tracy doesn't answer. As his Tracy's wont, Tracy answers questions with questions: "When did I ever say __________?" (fill in the blank).

This method is meant to dissemble, not enlighten. It is meant to avoid, not discuss. It is meant to hide, not defend one's views.

Review all of Tracy's posts, and you will find this method running like a thread through them.

[Enoch Root]

Tracy,

You wrote: “I have said to you and others on this forum before, I admit capitalism isn't for everyone. But here in America, that's what we have. You never told me which country you would rather live in. So let's start with France.” To deal with stupid issues first: you are diverting attention from the issue at hand by brushing me off because I don’t live in a fair country. Stating that accomplishes nothing, Tracy. But I’ll answer anyway and the answer is in two parts. 1) I would prefer to live in my homeland of Puerto Rico, but I would like this country to belong to its people. For it to belong to me and my compatriots it is necessary that the American Empire leave us alone. Further, it is necessary for private industry to stop exploiting my brothers. My country is a colony of the American Empire. How ironic! The 13 colonies that rebelled against empire and became a nation is now an empire itself! 2) I shouldn’t have to move somewhere else—and neither should anybody else have to move—because no country has the right to exploit its people.

To expand further on the quote provided: the attitude expressed by the quote is easily summarized as “fuck the poor.” “It’s not for everyone. It’s poor people’s fault they are poor. They like being poor. What other explanation is there for it?” Do you think people should just accept their exploitation? Capitalism isn’t for everyone but it still depends on a pool of easily exploited people. Capitalism is only for the ruling class. Everyone else is treated like an object, like a tool, like an inferior. You are telling people to be quiet because, after all, “in America, [capitalism is] what we have.” You shrug your shoulders and you shrug off any responsibility for the well-being of your compatriots.

Further, your directing me to France is part of the childish and ridiculous disdain people like you have for social democracies. Sending me off to France in no way addresses the inequalities of my homeland and the inequalities of the US.

And Tracy, stop it with these ridiculous tricks. I never said you were for corporate welfare. I asked you if you were for corporate welfare. I wanted an answer from you.

The military industrial complex is a beast fed by corporate welfare. It is a perpetual war machine. Why should companies receive money but not people in need? Does it all really come down to “people don’t make goods and services”? “Never mind them because they don’t make me rich”? Which is all to say: is it an attitude that dehumanizes people and objectifies them as cogs in the corporate machine and when said cogs can’t work anymore we throw them out?

Smc, Enoch, Randolph and others… You really aren’t going to be able to “win” this one. I have been monitoring this thread (and similar ones) for quite a while now. Tracy has the game down pat and no matter how well thought out, logical or well presented your arguments are you will never get her to admit you are right. Any more than Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh would.

This “discussion” is not political discourse--there is no debate of “ideas.” And no attempt at resolution or understanding. There is only name calling, “I didn’t say that,” and recitation of right wing partisan “talking points” and dubious facts that any 12 year old could learn from listening to Rush Limbaugh. False choices are often presented as well: “where would you rather live than the US?” is not really a valid question. It completely omits the fact that the person objecting to capitalist greed, lack of universal health care, racism, homophobia, etc. may want to STAY in the US--indeed they have a RIGHT to live in the US as a citizen--only to want to make things better.

I was raised in a conservative Republican home and read Ayn Rand at a very early age. My degrees include an MBA and a minor in Economics so please, spare me your attempts at “educating” me. As I have gotten older and seen the failures of our socioeconomic system I have developed a much more inclusive view of the world that includes a greater role of government. At the same time I am a champion of individual rights and freedom. As you might expect, I have very complex views on many subjects and enjoy a friendly discussion of genuine “ideas” with people I know and respect.

Unfortunately, these threads are not the place for that. I for one am tired of logging on to TLB only to see “Ronald Reagan,” or “Liberal Free for All…” or whatever at the top of the page when it should say something like “Kelly Shore and Rakel Rodriguez Together” or “Support for Victims of Violence” or even “RU Gay 4 Liking Shemales.” Who knows, I could be totally wrong about all of this. I for the most part, have totally ignored these postings before and will continue to do so once again.

[smc]

Originally Posted by aw9725

Smc, Enoch, Randolph and others? You really aren?t going to be able to ?win? this one. I have been monitoring this thread (and similar ones) for quite a while now. Tracy has the game down pat and no matter how well thought out, logical or well presented your arguments are you will never get her to admit you are right. Any more than Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh would.

This ?discussion? is not political discourse--there is no debate of ?ideas.? And no attempt at resolution or understanding. There is only name calling, ?I didn?t say that,? and recitation of right wing partisan ?talking points? and dubious facts that any 12 year old could learn from listening to Rush Limbaugh. False choices are often presented as well: ?where would you rather live than the US?? is not really a valid question. It completely omits the fact that the person objecting to capitalist greed, lack of universal health care, racism, homophobia, etc. may want to STAY in the US--indeed they have a RIGHT to live in the US as a citizen--only to want to make things better.

I was raised in a conservative Republican home and read Ayn Rand at a very early age. My degrees include an MBA and a minor in Economics so please, spare me your attempts at ?educating? me. As I have gotten older and seen the failures of our socioeconomic system I have developed a much more inclusive view of the world that includes a greater role of government. At the same time I am a champion of individual rights and freedom. As you might expect, I have very complex views on many subjects and enjoy a friendly discussion of genuine ?ideas? with people I know and respect.

Unfortunately, these threads are not the place for that. I for one am tired of logging on to TLB only to see ?Ronald Reagan,? or ?Liberal Free for All?? or whatever at the top of the page when it should say something like ?Kelly Shore and Rakel Rodriguez Together? or ?Support for Victims of Violence? or even ?RU Gay 4 Liking Shemales.? Who knows, I could be totally wrong about all of this. I for the most part, have totally ignored these postings before and will continue to do so once again.

You are absolutely correct. The ONLY value of "engaging" Tracy (and I realize that using the word "engaging" is an insult to the real engagement that goes on in genuine discourse) is the value that accrues to those who read but do not post, and who may -- even if only a bit -- figure out that drivel such as that spewed in these threads again and again warrants at least a critical eye, not the fealty to ignorance that tends to accompany the statement of such drivel.

[randolph]

OK all you passionate political posters, let's see who can identify the author of the following passage.

The word ?We? is as lime poured over men, which sets and hardens to stone, and crushes all beneath it, and that which is white and that which is black are lost equally in the grey of it. It is the word by which the depraved steal the virtue of the good, by which the weak steal the might of the strong, by which the fools steal the wisdom of the sages.
What is my joy if all hands, even the unclean, can reach into it? What is my wisdom, if even the fools can dictate to me? What is my freedom, if all creatures, even the botched and impotent, are my masters? What is my life, if I am but to bow, to agree and to obey?
But I am done with this creed of corruption.
I am done with the monster ?We?, the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame.
And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god will grant them joy and peace and pride.
This god is one word: ?I?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by smc

You are absolutely correct. The ONLY value of "engaging" Tracy (and I realize that using the word "engaging" is an insult to the real engagement that goes on in genuine discourse) is the value that accrues to those who read but do not post, and who may -- even if only a bit -- figure out that drivel such as that spewed in these threads again and again warrants at least a critical eye, not the fealty to ignorance that tends to accompany the statement of such drivel.

Agreed.

aw9725: you are completely correct. There is no real substantive discussion going on here. There is no exciting exchange of ideas. But this is because Tracy brings no substance whatever to this thread or other threads, no substance whatever to the forum as a whole. You, smc, randolph and myself try our best to bring real ideas. Tracy only brings half-baked tirades about...everything. And when two--or however many people are involved in a discussion--people in a discussion do not both bring real ideas the discussion breaks down.

But while this is by no means a real discussion as may be had by, say, biological evolutionists about the placement of a fossil in the evolutionary tree, it is precisely due to the vapid nature of Tracy's post that some of us counter her. I, for one, do not do this for her sake. I do it for the sake of the readers and members of this forum. To paraphrase Bill Maher: in America bullshit spreads real fast and you have to get in there quick to get rid of it before it reaches critical mass.

smc: Fealty to ignorance. Love that phrase. I'm stealing it for my short stories...

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

To deal with stupid issues first: you are diverting attention from the issue at hand by brushing me off because I don?t live in a fair country. Stating that accomplishes nothing, Tracy. But I?ll answer anyway and the answer is in two parts. 1) I would prefer to live in my homeland of Puerto Rico, but I would like this country to belong to its people. For it to belong to me and my compatriots it is necessary that the American Empire leave us alone.

I agree with you on that, and I do find it hypocritical that the US treats your country the way it was treated over 200 years ago by England. I do not have any firsthand knowledge about what things are like there, but I do know that Puerto Ricans are able to leave their country, but you want to stay in the hope that Puerto Rico will one day belong to it's people. Fine. More power to the people of Puerto Rico. Seriously. But who knows when or if this will ever happen. Knowing this, things are at least good enough for you to want to stay none the less.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

To expand further on the quote provided: the attitude expressed by the quote is easily summarized as ?fuck the poor.? ?It?s not for everyone. It?s poor people?s fault they are poor. They like being poor. What other explanation is there for it?? Do you think people should just accept their exploitation?

As I said in the Reagan thread, I think your views of life in America are tainted by your experiences in Puerto Rico. If not, are you saying things here are like they are there? The other explanation you asked for is there are obviously people in America who are all for socialism. I am not denying that, and my quote is my recognition that I'm not going to change their minds. There are several other countries they can go to where they will be as happy as frogs in a swamp. But here they are a square peg in a round hole. This is a capitalist country, and hopefully it will remain a capitalist country despite BO's promise to fundamentally change America. It not my recommendation that the poor find another country. It is my recommendation that people in a capitalist country who can't stand capitalism find another country. My link to the article about how to do that when you have no money was in response to an earlier comment you made that it is often cost prohibitive.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Capitalism isn?t for everyone but it still depends on a pool of easily exploited people. Capitalism is only for the ruling class. Everyone else is treated like an object, like a tool, like an inferior.

Let's stop speaking in generalities. Who in America is being exploited so we can at least talk about specific cases.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You are telling people to be quiet because, after all, ?in America, [capitalism is] what we have.? You shrug your shoulders and you shrug off any responsibility for the well-being of your compatriots.

Well it is in fact a capitalist country. If other countries want socialism fine. Let them have at it. But there is a place on Earth were we're capitalists - for all those who want to live in a capitalist country, there is a choice - the USA. There is no iron curtain. We don't keep people here against their will to live as capitalists.

Let's say there's a nudist colony of people living there and doing their thing. Then someone is raised in the colony, grows up and decides being a nudist isn't for her. She becomes a nun and has all her preconceptions about the evil nudists, spouting off how things should be in her eyes and how she feels like a 2nd class citizen in nudist land. Should the nudist colony change to accommodate the nun? No. She should admit that being a nudist isn't her thing and hey, there's a whole world of fully clothed bible thumpers out there. Why not go there?

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And Tracy, stop it with these ridiculous tricks. I never said you were for corporate welfare. I asked you if you were for corporate welfare.

No.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The military industrial complex is a beast fed by corporate welfare. It is a perpetual war machine. Why should companies receive money but not people in need?

Stop with these ridiculous tricks. I never said that people in need should not receive any aid. In fact, I said:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

but 60% for welfare programs for a country with as many opportunities as US has is quite excessive. I am certainly not saying welfare should be cut entirely, but a number that high is screaming for scrutiny to see where cuts can be made.

There are other avenues for people in need to get help. It doesn't always have to come from the government. In 2006, Americans have donated $295 billion to charities. The amount donated has been rising about 150% faster than the economy for more than 50 years. Americans have been much more generous than other countries to charities. Again, companies receive money for goods and services. If they received money as a charity, and not as a loan, then that would be welfare. Do you see the difference?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Does it all really come down to ?people don?t make goods and services??

lol no. Of course people make goods and services, and when they do they receive a salary. And as for the predictable response of why their salaries are so much lower than the CEOs? I explained it in the Reagan thread.