The left has gone full retard

[Raev]

Alarti, go back and read your own sentence. It deals with percentage of GDP. In other words, economic growth is already factored in. Also, you have yet to provide any facts at all on this issue.

It's just amazing to me how someone who spends all of their time nitpicking other people for not providing facts or perfect use of English . . . . can't provide facts or use English correctly.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am not sure that it is fair to saddle the internet with responsibility for the rigidity of human thought. I think we have the American perversion of individualism to thank for exacerbating it though. When everyone is entitled to their own opinions, how can any be wrong? I do agree that the internet fosters a greater sense of security (and openness by extension) than we find in the physical world. I am not so sure that is necessarily a bad thing though. As repugnant, uninformed or obtuse as they may be, none of my thoughts would find reception and none of my questions, answers. I do not practice it, I do not like marks. I can see the appeal though. I generally detest being in control, it frustrates me. Suffering also brings a unique perspective to life allowing us to know happiness. I would expect you are quite the opposite?

Not putting all of it on the internet, just a theory of correlation. There's also, as Lune and I have said, the baby boomer influence that props up the cartesian ego in the culture. As for an outlet, I agree that there's positives and negatives to that. The main negative being that people do not understand rhetoric and how it works, so they fall steadfastly to their opinions. I'm more sadistic than masochistic and highly suggest De Sade and Masoch for reading. I'm a biter too. Tho' tongue flicks on the nipple and a little bit of teeth have gotten my partners pretty aroused. Oral is favorite of mine. Do you enjoy oral sex?

[Jorgam]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think the relevant question is, why do we need more social programs? It seems to me that social welfare programs all contribute to degradation of the family unit upon which every society is built. Social security affords the elderly independence, but dilutes parental bonds and removes them from the household when historically they played an integral role in helping raise children. Welfare allows men and families to avoid responsibility for premature procreation and fosters increased single motherhood. Not because it incentivizes it, but because it helps to de-stigmatize it. You can be damn sure that if most fathers or families thought their children/mothers/sisters were actually going to starve to death, thy would help take care of them and through that shared suffering would be more likely to learn from the mistake rather than rolling the dice and hoping it doesn't happen again. Who's into feathers?

One word: Votes

The more dependency you can create on the government, the more votes you attract to retain and grow the power and control of the government. You create dependency by stripping people of their responsibilities and feeding them. Ever seen those signs in parks about not feeding the animals because they will forget how to feed themselves? Same thing. The government model of the left requires as many people to be dependent on it, in as many facets of life as possible. The final goal of course is to create a single party system whereby they will persecute their ideological enemies as has been seen through out history.

And remember, when someone else is paying your way, that is not Freedom.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Not putting all of it on the internet, just a theory of correlation. There's also, as Lune and I have said, the baby boomer influence that props up the cartesian ego in the culture. As for an outlet, I agree that there's positives and negatives to that. The main negative being that people do not understand rhetoric and how it works, so they fall steadfastly to their opinions. I'm more sadistic than masochistic and highly suggest De Sade and Masoch for reading. I'm a biter too. Tho' tongue flicks on the nipple and a little bit of teeth have gotten my partners pretty aroused. Oral is favorite of mine. Do you enjoy oral sex?

Well, of course. I am going to need to have you explain what you mean by Cartesian ego though to ensure we are on the same page going forward. Given context and google it seems you are using it to describe the inability to doubt oneself. Is that right? If so, we are good. I wonder though if the internet really does impair peoples' understanding or rhetoric or if it is just that it really isn't all that well understood by the population at large. Well, you know what they say opinions are like, right? Assholes, everybody has one. What do you think about that?

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Alarti, go back and read your own sentence. It deals with percentage of GDP. In other words, economic growth is already factored in. Also, you have yet to provide any facts at all on this issue.

It's just amazing to me how someone who spends all of their time nitpicking other people for not providing facts or perfect use of English . . . . can't provide facts or use English correctly.

Omg what is amazing is you think the growing elderly pool collecting social security some how contribute in any typical way to GDP.

Please learn the terms before you try to correct me. You end up just looking more like a fool when you rush to correct me(incorrectly).

[Raev]

What's amazing is how you try to rewrite your post dealing with population growth to one about demographic change. And Social Security should not even be included in the data I've posted, as it is not means tested. Again, you simply aren't precise in your language or thought processes, and you still have posted 0.0 evidence.

So . . . prove it

[maskedmelon]

Raev,

You just need to learn to ask the right questions. He hasn't argued that the programs work or that he even likes them. In fact he's indicated quite the contrary. The two of you are debating different things. You are arguing that what he wants has failed. He is arguing that is not what he wanted. It seems to me you both agree that the programs are shit and ought to be scrapped. The difference is what you each think should be done instead of what we have. Why not ask what he thinks should be done? Right now you are debating phantoms.

Alarti,

Do you have examples of social programs that you think work, or that you would like to see? What do you think needs to be done and how? It seems to m that you would like to see some form of basic income. What about price controls, tax, personal property and social reparations? You've previously indicated a preference for socialism or even communism, but have yet to define those terms as you understand them. Given your unconventional (at least in the us and on these boards) view of left/right, expanding on your views might help.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Raev,

You just need to learn to ask the right questions. He hasn't argued that the programs work or that he even likes them. In fact he's indicated quite the contrary. The two of you are debating different things. You are arguing that what he wants has failed. He is arguing that is not what he wanted. It seems to me you both agree that the programs are shit and ought to be scrapped. The difference is what you each think should be done instead of what we have. Why not ask what he thinks should be done? Right now you are debating phantoms.

Alarti,

Do you have examples of social programs that you think work, or that you would like to see? What do you think needs to be done and how? It seems to m that you would like to see some form of basic income. What about price controls, tax, personal property and social reparations? You've previously indicated a preference for socialism or even communism, but have yet to define those terms as you understand them. Given your unconventional (at least in the us and on these boards) view of left/right, expanding on your views might help.

I think the programs as they are implemented are crap not the idea of social programs.

Socialism is a very very very broad term. However, the window-lickers on this forum just label socialism as one bad thing to constantly guard against. The USA is a socialist country. Just about every country is a socialist country to some degree. It's a spectrum... and I'm not talking about the autism spectrum that Santa, Raev, and Daywolf are clearly deep into.

To say I like socialism is akin to saying yes, I like humanity and its ability to better itself through cooperative effort.

I never expressed a like for communism however. Communism is not a system designed for humans who are slaves to biological function. Just like Ayn Rand's version of libertarian doesn't take into account basic humanity.

Taxation is necessary it just needs to be put to better use. Taxation is best served improving the lives of the taxpayer, meaning education, infrastructure, health, and retirement. We don't need 600 billion dollars spent on the military especially since no sovereign country is going to attack us.

If you mean price controls as is preventing price gouging by companies with monopolies or near monopolies than yes that is necessary... Take pharmaceutical companies as an example.

Social reparations... assuming you mean racial reparations etc. I think its an idiotic term. Yes the USA did a bad thing... No I'm not responsible for that bad thing.
However, the end goal of the government should be the betterment of citizens lives. The solution to years of racism and slavery plus lack of societal and economic integration is not handing out a check. This solution isn't about race though its about all the disenfranchised or impoverished, education and reduction of poverty are the best means for the upward mobility of a social class.
The idea that everyone has equal chance to climb the socioeconomic ladder is a lame myth. People who grow up in poverty have very very limited resources to improve their lives.
An often un-thought of fact: If you want to save money on good a person who has access to cash can buy goods in bulk. I poor person living paycheck to paycheck has to buy at top prices always. Being poor is expensive.
In any case Companies are not job creators. Consumers are job creators, purchasing power is what makes jobs, and removing poverty is the best way to create jobs, increase wages, and improve quality of life for every citizen across economic classes.

[Ahldagor]

Purchasing power, demand, symbiotic relationship in a market economy. That's what most people miss. Kant's merchant and buyer parable in a deontological ethic.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well, of course. I am going to need to have you explain what you mean by Cartesian ego though to ensure we are on the same page going forward. Given context and google it seems you are using it to describe the inability to doubt oneself. Is that right? If so, we are good. I wonder though if the internet really does impair peoples' understanding or rhetoric or if it is just that it really isn't all that well understood by the population at large. Well, you know what they say opinions are like, right? Assholes, everybody has one. What do you think about that?

Bingo, the doubt. Does it lead to angst?