The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

SAD
Which do you want?

[Annoyed]

So work it out rather than discarding it.
SOMEONE had to pay for you to go to the moon.
SOMEONE had to pay for the new deal.
SOMEONE had to do all of these things to create the better world you so desperately want to "restore"
But now that you might pay for it, it's too hard?
Come on man.
Is this REALLY the world you want to leave behind?
Is this the words of the KID, brain full of mush who fell in love with Star Trek, saw diversity, equality and acceptance and now want's none of those things?
What about the kid -now- who see's the same hope for humanity as you did then?
Screw them, they are not mine?
I hope the world I leave behind will be better, what do you hope for?

At its peak, the Apollo program accounted for about 4% of federal spending. A drop in the bucket compared to the percentage that we spend today on education, health care, etc.

As far as the expectations that kids today see, it's an entirely different society today than it was then. In the 1960's, the US was in ascendance; we were rising. The average standard of living was far higher than it is today.

Today, we are in a period of decline. In my opinion, in large part that is due to the changes that my generation wrought. I've said many times over that I don't expect the US to survive as the country that it is for much longer.
Remember the old saw that goes on about a democracy can only survive until the people discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury?

The current trend to socialism is just the latest expression of that, and may in fact be our path to the end. Yes, it's not gonna go anywhere right now, or in 2020. But 10-20 years out, it will very likely have become acceptable to the point where it does take hold. Trump is just a temporary reprieve from what I believe is our inevitable fate.

Socialism doesn't work in a free society. You can't pay for it. The minute you try, the people you want to pay for all these goodies leave. So you have to lock everyone in, you can't allow people to leave. So much for a free country.

Socialism does indeed result in a more level playing field, but that level is everyone is poor. The only people who do well are the party leaders and their friends & relatives.

[SoulReaver]

Socialism doesn't work in a free society. You can't pay for it.

and capitalism can't work in a free society. but you will pay for it

so might as well have socialism

[SGalisa]

Socialism does indeed result in a more level playing field, but that level is everyone is poor. The only people who do well are the party leaders and their friends & relatives.

yep... which leads to a dictatorship or in essence is very much like the feudal societies made up mostly of paupers ruled by a king (or queen) or emperor or whatever you want to call that persona at the very top of the list.

People in the middle class will soon drop out to the bottom pauper class. Been seeing that conversation elsewhere on the internet... The folks who think it's not going to be so bad, probably either have no clue what it is like waiting on lines for hours, just for food, water, other supplies. NO quality time to really work (in a job or home, if there is a "home" at all).. and the person's health deteriorates, too.

"Healthcare for all" is an ideal and wonderful (fantasy) dream, but getting there effectively and without vast portions of the populations getting sick might not happen at the speed the current leaders and supporters of such systems expect this to be put into action... (i.e., already have noticed massive digestive and bowel disorders... I can smell it in the "restrooms" wherever I go now during *healthier* times ... so, just imagine what it will be in the future under times of severe stress and massive *enforcement*s thereof). ugh...!

and capitalism can't work in a free society. but you will pay for it

so might as well have socialism

Which eventually leads into Dictatorship. And that is where our entire planet is heading... via a OWG system. Enjoy the few freedoms you all have now (if you even have it)... and that means anywhere in the current world. The future united-world system, as I've read it being predicted to become, will NOT be as pretty and ideal as some of you here seem to think.


There's an old saying... "Be careful what you wish for . . ." -- it just might come true! However, often times it will NOT ideally happen in the method or manner of which you desire(d)... bad things often happen with some of those "wishes".

[Annoyed]

and capitalism can't work in a free society. but you will pay for it

so might as well have socialism

Excuse me? The United States decisively proved it does work. In a scant 200 years, that capitalist free society declared and fought for its independence and rose to be the undisputed top dog on the planet. How can you say it doesn't work?

The wheels began to fall off when we strayed from those ideals the FF set this place up with.

[jelgate]

Someone needs to go read a history book

[SoulReaver]

Excuse me? The United States decisively proved it does work.

I meant true capitalism

though even in your case it doesn't work all that well you're closer than ever to a police state plus both crime & wealth disparity are at all time highs not to mention population's sicker than ever

[Annoyed]

I meant true capitalism

though even in your case it doesn't work all that well you're closer than ever to a police state plus both crime & wealth disparity are at all time highs not to mention population's sicker than ever

Haven't I been saying that we are in a state of decline?

[jelgate]

That's just a excuse so you don't have to do any real thinking

[Annoyed]

That's just a excuse so you don't have to do any real thinking

I consider the 1940's through the 1960's to be the US's peak. Obviously I wasn't here for the 40's, but I can read. And my direct memories of the 60's were of the US being one of two superpowers in the world, and we had the edge in technology, particularly in the reliability area. Despite problems of the era, and there were problems; political unrest at home, questionable wars overseas and of course the cold war, the average working class stiff was fairly comfortable on one income, so the spouse could stay home and raise the young. I cannot overstate the importance of that last bit.

During al that, we still managed to pull off the Apollo program.

I don't have to think about it, I remember it. Most of you younglings weren't born for a few decades yet. So you have no idea.

[aretood2]

and capitalism can't work in a free society. but you will pay for it

so might as well have socialism

I disagree. Capitalism works best with small and medium sized businesses and (if necessary) large businesses with multiple competitors. As long as entry to any given market has a few barriers as possible, there's a healthy migration in place and with trade, Capitalism can work quite effectively providing all the needs in a society without sacrificing either price or quality. That's the system I prefer. Problem is that types like Annoyed don't really know what Capitalism is or how it works.

I consider the 1940's through the 1960's to be the US's peak. Obviously I wasn't here for the 40's, but I can read. And my direct memories of the 60's were of the US being one of two superpowers in the world, and we had the edge in technology, particularly in the reliability area. Despite problems of the era, and there were problems; political unrest at home, questionable wars overseas and of course the cold war, the average working class stiff was fairly comfortable on one income, so the spouse could stay home and raise the young. I cannot overstate the importance of that last bit.

During al that, we still managed to pull off the Apollo program.

I don't have to think about it, I remember it. Most of you younglings weren't born for a few decades yet. So you have no idea.

I challenge your premise. Appalachia was basically a third world country at that time and millions of Americans in the south lacked access to quality healthcare and education. The US was behind in several areas including space technology until the mid 60s. And one major reason for the US's ascendancy had to do with the fact that the other superpowers were bombed back to the stone age.

It's not that the US has been falling and lagging today, it's that the rest of the world has been catching up. It's not a zero sum game. There can be more than one "winner" and the fact that the US isn't the only "winner" does not spell certain doom....the sky, dear Chicken Little, is not falling.

[Gatefan1976]

I consider the 1940's through the 1960's to be the US's peak. Obviously I wasn't here for the 40's, but I can read.

You don't mean education?
How socialist of you.

And my direct memories of the 60's were of the US being one of two superpowers in the world, and we had the edge in technology, particularly in the reliability area.

Perhaps that's because you spent 4% of your GDP on SCIENCE, specifically space science and knowledge of the world, but now you spend around 0.5-0.7 now?
And you trusted your science rather than doing all you can to deny it?

Despite problems of the era, and there were problems; political unrest at home, questionable wars overseas and of course the cold war,

Lack of such severe partisanship would be more obvious.

the average working class stiff was fairly comfortable on one income, so the spouse could stay home and raise the young. I cannot overstate the importance of that last bit.

You know nothing of it, you have no knowledge and no experience of your supposedly most important point. You know, like you say about actors and talking heads.
So, your most important point is based on sheer ignorance.
Now, that does not mean that was not a better system to have a parent at home, I have lived that for 16 years, and in all that time, I have had a single payer medicare system, free public education till 18 and deferred university payments until a income threshold is reached.
All things you know nothing about because, "that's socialism".
It's not socialism, it's the federal government doing EXACTLY what you miss, putting the citizens of the nation first in the best way it can with the tools it's governmental system allows.
Is there a balance?
YES.

During al that, we still managed to pull off the Apollo program.

That's severely limited in understanding. You pulled off the Apollo program because you were willing to spend the money to beat the Russians, it was an ESSENATIAL part of the cold war. Now, the only thing you are willing to pay for is maintaining military and corporate dominance. Rather socialist actually.
So, how much do you REALLY hate socialism?
Best thing is, socialism isn't actually being pushed on you, it's a democratic socialism, which has all the room in the world for capitalism, or why are you so upset about what you don't want getting money, but everything you want was based on what you are afraid of?

I don't have to think about it, I remember it. Most of you younglings weren't born for a few decades yet. So you have no idea.

So, you can read what came before you and get an idea, but younglings cannot?
There is a reason why it is called "old-timers" syndrome.
It's because it's proven your mental faculties start to fail at a certain point, but hey, why support the science that actually made you great so you can live in the glory days.
It's like explaining things to an idiot with a head full of mush.
Good excuse eh?

[Annoyed]

You don't mean education?
How socialist of you.

An education system that does just that, educates the children is a fine thing, and something that I support.
However, that is not what we have in place today.

It has been perverted into a system with two primary goals; lining the pockets of its employees and political indoctrination of its students.

The rise in tuition has been roughly twice the rate of inflation for a very long time now. Is it any wonder that students have to go into debt for the rest of their lives these days?


So, of course the left's idea is the same as always, pour more taxpayer dollars into it, which is what allows the costs to rise in the first place.

What's wrong with forcing the costs into line to restore affordability?

Regarding financing, there is a large urban school district in a nearby city that I've referred to before; having the one of the highest spending per student stats in the country, but has at the same time, one of the most pathetic results in the country. It's graduation rate has been below 50% for most of its recent history, only recently getting above that mark.

This district is in financial hot water because it exceeded its budget, spending roughly 30 million dollars over and above what its budget allowed, with much of that spending going towards employee payroll & benefits of one sort or another. Just coincidentally, when the budget was being drawn up, there was a shortfall of 40 million that they couldn't seem to eliminate.

So in short, they wanted the money, and spent it anyway, expecting someone else, either the city or the state to just step in and bail them out.

I haven't referred to this scandal prior to this as the story is still being investigated, we don't have all the details yet.

And as far as the political indoctrination and so forth goes, We've beaten that horse till there isn't even a carcass left. I know it exists, you deny it, so we'll just leave that there.

Perhaps that's because you spent 4% of your GDP on SCIENCE, specifically space science and knowledge of the world, but now you spend around 0.5-0.7 now?
And you trusted your science rather than doing all you can to deny it?

I don't deny all aspects of science. However, when junk science is used to force a leftist political agenda, I will call it what it is. BS.

Lack of such severe partisanship would be more obvious.

You know nothing of it, you have no knowledge and no experience of your supposedly most important point. You know, like you say about actors and talking heads.
So, your most important point is based on sheer ignorance.
Now, that does not mean that was not a better system to have a parent at home, I have lived that for 16 years, and in all that time, I have had a single payer medicare system, free public education till 18 and deferred university payments until a income threshold is reached.

I don't have to have children in order to observe the results of what we are doing these days.

And might I point out that before the boomers screwed things up, most couples could afford that "one parent at home" way of doing things on their own, without need of freebies? (K-12 education has always been free)

[SoulReaver]

I disagree. Capitalism works best with small and medium sized businesses and (if necessary) large businesses with multiple competitors.

problem is true capitalism leads to coercive monopolies

[Annoyed]

problem is true capitalism leads to coercive monopolies

Which is why we have antitrust laws. But I will concede that enforcement of those laws has been lax for a few decades now, and they are applied unevenly, depending upon the political influence and power of the affected groups in any particular situation.