America - The Official Thread

[PocketZeven]

I don't want or need it.
Just cause people go through hiccups in life doesn't mean they need government assistance. Situations like mine if I took assistance, are an abuse of the system IMO. Just like you suggested I could get mental health assistance cause of my situation, which I don't need.
On a positive note, I'm moving back to my old neighborhood at the end of the month. A high school friend is going to rent me his extra bedroom.
Some of us know how to get by without government help. I'm not saying if someone else got threw into my situation they would not need help. I'm saying I didn't/don't. Again, call it pride,which you called irrelevant. I disagree, a persons pride or lack of, affects their decisions.

That is the incorrect mentality where a lot of people with mental health, money or other problems also struggle with. People refusing help out of pride or other factors. There is no shame in asking for help. The first phase is to acknowledge you have a problem.

You have paid taxes most of your working life. Receiving help in return has nothing to do with pride. I really hope you will overcome these recent setbacks.

 

[ryzno]

That is the incorrect mentality where a lot of people with mental health, money or other problems also struggle with. People refusing help out of pride or other factors. There is no shame in asking for help. The first phase is to acknowledge you have a problem.

You have paid taxes most of your working life. Receiving help in return has nothing to do with pride. I really hope you will overcome these recent setbacks.

Maybe I should start voting Libertarian...

I'd prefer not to pay taxes/into something I don't want. I also don't think it would be a good idea to adjust the qualifications. That'd just raise taxes cause more people would take advantage of it.
There is blatant fraud in government assistance programs.

I don't why you think I should take something I don't want/need just cause it's there and I payed in.

 

[PocketZeven]

Maybe I should start voting Librarian...

I'd prefer not to pay taxes/into something I don't want. I also don't think it would be a good idea to adjust the qualifications. That'd just raise taxes cause more people would take advantage of it.
There is blatant fraud in government assistance programs.

I don't why you think I should take something I don't want/need just cause it's there and I payed in.

Librarian? I guess you mean libertarian?
While I admit there are instances of fraud in social assistance, I think the people they genuinely help far outweigh them.

You dont need to take anything if you dont need it. I am just saying refusing help out of principle is a common mistake many people make who actually do need help.

 

[ryzno]

Librarian? I guess you mean libertarian?

Lol yes! Fixed thanks, dang autocorrect.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Maybe I should start voting Libertarian...

I'd prefer not to pay taxes/into something I don't want. I also don't think it would be a good idea to adjust the qualifications. That'd just raise taxes cause more people would take advantage of it.
There is blatant fraud in government assistance programs.

I don't why you think I should take something I don't want/need just cause it's there and I payed in.

Well you certainly deserve....all Americans deserve...better representation than what the Republican party is (currently) offering, which seems to be a grab bag of cruel and disingenuous non-answers to most every issue. Libertarian is a good landing zone. 👍

 

[PocketZeven]

concerning the electoral college and how one can subvert it without amending the constitution:

 

[Danoff]

I wouldn't vote for any of these people before Trump came along - because I don't see enough difference between them and the Libertarian is a better fit. But my threshold for how good that fit has to be (in absolute terms) for me to vote for a person is apparently lower than I'd have expected. Because I'd vote for any of the following if they ran against Trump, and again, prior to Trump, none of these people get my vote:

- Bush Jr.
- Gore
- Kerry
- Obama
- Romney
- McCain


Keep in mind that if somehow 2020 were Obama vs. McCain, I would vote libertarian. But Obama vs. Trump or McCain vs. Trump, I'll reach across the aisle.

 

[mustafur]

Makes sense, all those elections were basically Neo Liberals up against Neo Conservatives, hardly a big difference.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I wouldn't vote for any of these people before Trump came along - because I don't see enough difference between them and the Libertarian is a better fit. But my threshold for how good that fit has to be (in absolute terms) for me to vote for a person is apparently lower than I'd have expected. Because I'd vote for any of the following if they ran against Trump, and again, prior to Trump, none of these people get my vote:

- Bush Jr.
- Gore
- Kerry
- Obama
- Romney
- McCain


Keep in mind that if somehow 2020 were Obama vs. McCain, I would vote libertarian. But Obama vs. Trump or McCain vs. Trump, I'll reach across the aisle.

I struggle to think of anyone I wouldn't vote for over Trump. There may be worse people out there for sure, but none of them have the charisma and ridiculous self-importance of Trump which makes him practically more dangerous than anyone.

 

[Biggles]

I struggle to think of anyone I wouldn't vote for over Trump.

I'd vote for rynzo over Trump!

I wouldn't vote for any of these people before Trump came along - because I don't see enough difference between them and the Libertarian is a better fit. But my threshold for how good that fit has to be (in absolute terms) for me to vote for a person is apparently lower than I'd have expected. Because I'd vote for any of the following if they ran against Trump, and again, prior to Trump, none of these people get my vote:

- Bush Jr.
- Gore
- Kerry
- Obama
- Romney
- McCain


Keep in mind that if somehow 2020 were Obama vs. McCain, I would vote libertarian. But Obama vs. Trump or McCain vs. Trump, I'll reach across the aisle.

Hallelujah! It's an epiphany for Danoff!

For better or for worse, the US has a two party system. In practical terms the Libertarian Party has no traction at all, so if you want to influence the outcome you're stuck with voting strategically "for the lesser of two evils". The policy differences between a Romney or a Hillary Clinton may be minimal (although a lot of Republicans seem to be of the (weird) opinion that HRC is a "communist" - you know like George Soros). It's hard to reason with that kind of viewpoint.



The GOP has gone off the deep-end with Trump - a horrible person whose policies ideas are a bizarre jumble of nationalist, racist, xenophobic & authoritarian ideas. What happened to the supposed "libertarian elements" of the Tea Party movement? Apparently just cover for nationalism, racism, xenophobia & authoritarianism.

 

[mustafur]

The way I see it if your a libertarian your best bet is someone that is an actual Libertarian getting the nomination of the Republicans(Like Ron Paul) rather then voting for the Libertarian party, the system is stacked against 3rd partys so the only path is to go through one of the 2 major parties to hope for anything.

 

[Danoff]

Hallelujah! It's an epiphany for Danoff!

Not so fast.

For better or for worse, the US has a two party system. In practical terms the Libertarian Party has no traction at all, so if you want to influence the outcome you're stuck with voting strategically "for the lesser of two evils".

I completely disagree. Not with the part where it has no traction, but with the part where you're stuck voting for Hitler or Stalin.

The policy differences between a Romney or a Hillary Clinton may be minimal (although a lot of Republicans seem to be of the (weird) opinion that HRC is a "communist" - you know like George Soros). It's hard to reason with that kind of viewpoint.

I honestly do not see much of a distinction between the politicians I listed. Not significant enough for me to actually cast a vote for one of them when they run against each other. But...

The GOP has gone off the deep-end with Trump - a horrible person whose policies ideas are a bizarre jumble of nationalist, racist, xenophobic & authoritarian ideas. What happened to the supposed "libertarian elements" of the Tea Party movement? Apparently just cover for nationalism, racism, xenophobia & authoritarianism.

I agree. Trump has really distinguished himself.

 

[ryzno]

I'd vote for rynzo over Trump!

Sadly I'm not gonna be 35 in time.

Edit: Actually I might be able to, do you have to be 35 to run? I'll be 35 in August the election isn't till November. Would I actually qualify? Just curious.

 

[Liquid]

It's quite incredible how lying actually strengthens Trump's base.

 

[Biggles]

I completely disagree. Not with the part where it has no traction, but with the part where you're stuck voting for Hitler or Stalin.

Well, the point is we're not talking about Hitler or Stalin here. Trump may be bad, but he's not Hitler or Stalin. More relevant is the choice between supporting a centrist, rather than a libertarian, in order to head off a Hitler or Stalin, or in this somewhat less extreme case, a Trump. You're fond of following a logical argument to its end point - the argument here is if your vote were to decide the outcome of a Presidential race, say between Trump & Joe Biden ... or Trump & Pete Buttigieg ... or Trump & Bernie Sanders in which scenario would you stick with voting for the libertarian candidate?

Most people don't expect the party, or candidate that they vote for to exactly reflect all their own values & concerns. Voting is always, to some extent, voting "for the lesser of two evils", or looking at it from the opposite perspective, the better of the two flawed options.

 

[Danoff]

Well, the point is we're not talking about Hitler or Stalin here. Trump may be bad, but he's not Hitler or Stalin. More relevant is the choice between supporting a centrist, rather than a libertarian, in order to head off a Hitler or Stalin, or in this somewhat less extreme case, a Trump. You're fond of following a logical argument to its end point - the argument here is if your vote were to decide the outcome of a Presidential race, say between Trump & Joe Biden ... or Trump & Pete Buttigieg ... or Trump & Bernie Sanders in which scenario would you stick with voting for the libertarian candidate?

Most people don't expect the party, or candidate that they vote for to exactly reflect all their own values & concerns. Voting is always, to some extent, voting "for the lesser of two evils", or looking at it from the opposite perspective, the better of the two flawed options.

Yea there are two criteria for me. One is how much of a difference is there between the two, in otherwords, how differently do they represent me. And the second is, am I willing to support this candidate at all. And I guess what I'm saying is that for the last few decades I've not seen very many candidates that could fall short of that second criterion. In other words, they're not Hitler or Stalin, as you put it. But Trump is really pushing on that first criterion.

 

[Biggles]

Yea there are two criteria for me. One is how much of a difference is there between the two, in otherwords, how differently do they represent me. And the second is, am I willing to support this candidate at all. And I guess what I'm saying is that for the last few decades I've not seen very many candidates that could fall short of that second criterion. In other words, they're not Hitler or Stalin, as you put it. But Trump is really pushing on that first criterion.

In your case you have fairly specific considerations ... which may be at odds with each other when it comes to voting for one of the two major parties. So, the Democrats are more likely to "tax & spend", but less likely to infringe on personal liberties (except when it comes to gun ownership). Republicans are more likely to reduce taxes, but more likely to favour restricting personal liberties (abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, drugs etc.). Of course, Trumpism represents many of the most un-libertarian positions across a wide range of issues.

In countries that have a form of proportional representation, or even those that don't but have more than two viable parties, the voter has more choice in term of choosing a party that comes closer to their own particular views. Under proportional representation it would be perfectly possible to have a libertarian party that, while having limited representation, might actually have the ability to directly influence policy through holding the balance of power in a minority government. In the US, the polarization of politics into two large, diametrically opposed power blocks, has made the influence of libertarian ideas on either of these two more tenuous than ever.

 

[Keef]

 

[Biggles]

Thanks for posting. Perhaps Dotini, GTPlanet's very own promoter of "it's all fake news/postmodernism" would care to watch the clip.

 

[Dotini]

Thanks for posting. Perhaps Dotini, GTPlanet's very own promoter of "it's all fake news/postmodernism" would care to watch the clip.

You exaggerate. Not a promoter of postmodernism, except as an unfortunate social phenomenon. Nor do I think all news is fake. But I agree antisemitism, violence, ignorance, social media etc. are problems. For the record, I actively participated in the civil rights movement of the 60's, marching and protesting, had a Jewish best friend as a youth in Abilene, Texas in the 50's, another in the 60's in Seattle, and a Jewish girlfriend for most of the past 35 years. I do agree SBC's "silicon valley six" have way too much influence. I also like his advice to slow down. Individuals and companies taking adult responsibility is bordering on obsolescence as a common virtue and practice. You know we are in deep trouble when the "ultimate aim of society" has to be stopping people from harassment and murder.

"Those who hate you don't win, unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself."

- the last words spoken by Richard M Nixon in public as serving President​

 

[Imari]

...had a Jewish best friend as a youth in Abilene, Texas in the 50's, another in the 60's in Seattle, and a Jewish girlfriend for most of the past 35 years.

Two Jewish friends and a Jewish girlfriend? You wild anti-conformist rebel, you. I'm surprised you haven't been tarred, feathered and lynched for these barbaric acts.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'm nearly convinced that @Dotini was one of the Seattle Seven.

 

[Biggles]

You exaggerate. Not a promoter of postmodernism, except as an unfortunate social phenomenon. Nor do I think all news is fake. But I agree antisemitism, violence, ignorance, social media etc. are problems. For the record, I actively participated in the civil rights movement of the 60's, marching and protesting, had a Jewish best friend as a youth in Abilene, Texas in the 50's, another in the 60's in Seattle, and a Jewish girlfriend for most of the past 35 years. I do agree SBC's "silicon valley six" have way too much influence. I also like his advice to slow down. Individuals and companies taking adult responsibility is bordering on obsolescence as a common virtue and practice. You know we are in deep trouble when the "ultimate aim of society" has to be stopping people from harassment and murder.

"Those who hate you don't win, unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself."

- the last words spoken by Richard M Nixon in public as serving President​

Dear Dotini - of course I don't think you're an anti-semite, or bigoted in general. However, I have been a bit dismayed by the apparent glee with which you have embraced the ascendence of Donald Trump. I think this is a time to stand up & be counted. You're either for the lies & BS being propagated on social media & the internet, or you're against it. It's not a time to flirt with cultural relativism or "post-modern" irony. There are basic values at stake & allowing Trumpism to be entrenched for a further 4 years would be a disaster for the US & the world.

 

[Dotini]

I'm nearly convinced that @Dotini was one of the Seattle Seven.

A decent question. No, I was not member of the Seattle Seven or any radical movement of the time. My family and social cohort were all liberals, and some were, believe it or not, actual communists and nudist atheists. When my family or friends protested, I did too. However, I as a young man, was mainly interested in girls, cars and mountain climbing. I pursued all with vigor and ignored politics as much as possible. Much later, in the late nineties, I started to become political aware, and still very much in the liberal vein. I participated in the Battle in Seattle, the 1999 WTO riots when 40,000 rioters including black clad anarchists shut down the WTO and thoroughly outmaneuvered police. I became interested enough to read their literature which turned out to be primitive anarchism. I journeyed by motorcycle to their base at Eugene, Oregon (Whiteaker district) and dwelled among them for a time, taking home notes, photographs, global solidarity tee-shirts and more books. Always a bit of an iconoclast, I became more so. I began to question whether modern society was headed in the wrong direction. I was engineering airplanes for a living, but I wondered for a time if I would be happier as a goat farmer.

@Biggles
It began to dawn on me that Trump is effectively an anarchist, inchoately and amorally tearing society apart in order that it be remade anew. To what end we know not. All that matters is change. Now, as a feeble old man enjoying a dwindling list of purposes and meanings, I'm a dead player in terms of politics, protest and activism. In the most liberal neighborhood of the most liberal city in the universe, my vote is an invisible mote. It's up to younger generations to work this out. It may indeed be unavoidable disaster that we're headed for. Or it may be we live in an engineered matrix, destined for universal love and cosmic consciousness. Either way, my conscious is clear and I feel no guilt.

 

[Danoff]

@Biggles
It began to dawn on me that Trump is effectively an anarchist, inchoately and amorally tearing society apart in order that it be remade anew. To what end we know not.

He's not an anarchist. He's an aspiring dictator. I know that sounds extreme, but his statements do support that conclusion.

 

[Dotini]

He's not an anarchist. He's an aspiring dictator. I know that sounds extreme, but his statements do support that conclusion.

You think democracy is too weak to defend itself from dictators? That would be a true joke, if so.

 

[Danoff]

You think democracy is too weak to defend itself from dictators? That would be a true joke, if so.

I said he's an aspiring dictator. I didn't say that democracy is too weak to defend itself.

 

[Dotini]

I said he's an aspiring dictator. I didn't say that democracy is too weak to defend itself.

Well then, neither of us has anything to worry about.

 

[Danoff]

Well then, neither of us has anything to worry about.

I also did not say that it was impossible for him to succeed.

 

[Biggles]

It began to dawn on me that Trump is effectively an anarchist, inchoately and amorally tearing society apart in order that it be remade anew.

He's not an anarchist. It's pretty clear what he is: an extreme narcissist who has, through a particular set of circumstances, found himself at head of the most powerful nation on earth. His fundamental (amoral) belief is that "might is right", whether in his personal life or the national life of the United States. He thinks he can use his power to bully those around him & the power of the US to bully everyone else on the global stage. The nationalism he espouses has been the most destructive force in the history of mankind. We've had about 70 years years in which nationalism has been largely discredited & held in check by an attempt at international co-operation. Making nationalism anew is a terrible idea.

It's up to younger generations to work this out.

The older generation is the one that has set this in motion & shouldn't be smug about that fact.

You think democracy is too weak to defend itself from dictators? That would be a true joke, if so.

Somewhat unexpectedly democracy has proved to be vulnerable to the misuse of modern technology ... which is the point that Sacha Baron Cohen was making.