If I Were To Consider Becoming A Democrat...

[barfo]

Jesus wept.

barfo laughed.

barfo

 

[julius]

barfo laughed.

barfo

Leon's getting laaaaaaarger

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Democrat or Republican... does it really matter anymore?
I'm in the middle.

 

[BlazerWookee]

...what might you tell me to help sway me in that direction?

I'm at least curious.

Thanks.

Lobotomies are covered in the new health care bill...

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Democrat or Republican... does it really matter anymore?
I'm in the middle of The's wife's legs.

Fixed!

 

[boatsandstars]

I started as a democrat. Just couldn't take the lies and hatred they have for every point of view other than their own

bahahahaha. are you out of your fucking mind?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

bahahahaha. are you out of your fucking mind?

See. That's why I switched. I also have to admit, it's a lot nicer not having to support wrong ideals (or being told to) just because I may belong to a certain political party. I support certain ideas and certain politicians (to a certain degree). As an example, I voted for Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith and Kitzhaber as I felt they all had a fair amount of integrity and to me people of integrity usually do a better job of bringing fairness to their jobs.

 

[boatsandstars]

See. That's why I switched. I also have to admit, it's a lot nicer not having to support wrong ideals (or being told to) just because I may belong to a certain political party. I support certain ideas and certain politicians (to a certain degree). As an example, I voted for Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith and Kitzhaber as I felt they all had a fair amount of integrity and to me people of integrity usually do a better job of bringing fairness to their jobs.

who gives a shit?

 

[Sug]

That there really isn't any difference.

 

[mook]

...what might you tell me to help sway me in that direction?

I'm at least curious.

Thanks.

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like if you like a paternalistic government focused on punishment and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps, be a Republican.

If you want a maternalistic government focused on caring for the larger group, be a Democrat.

At their core, I've always viewed it as a balance between justice and equality. Republicans think of government as a means of ensuring people get what they deserve, for good or ill (justice).

Democrats are more concerned about using government to ensure fairness for disadvantaged groups (equality).

People get really wound up about portraying the other side in really horrible lights, but the truth is that there's a lot of merit to both outlooks. We'd have a pretty rotten country if one wasn't constantly counter balancing the other.

 

[Denny Crane]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like if you like a paternalistic government focused on punishment and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps, be a Republican.

If you want a maternalistic government focused on caring for the larger group, be a Democrat.

At their core, I've always viewed it as a balance between justice and equality. Republicans think of government as a means of ensuring people get what they deserve, for good or ill (justice).

Democrats are more concerned about using government to ensure fairness for disadvantaged groups (equality).

People get really wound up about portraying the other side in really horrible lights, but the truth is that there's a lot of merit to both outlooks. We'd have a pretty rotten country if one wasn't constantly counter balancing the other.

The balancing doesn't work like it should, though. There are three sure things in life: death, taxes, and the continued existence of a govt. program once enacted. So when the Dems get in power, they enact Medicare which is destined to bankrupt the nation. And when the Republicans get in power, they don't repeal it but kick the can down the road. In the end, those govt. programs are here to stay. The real positives to come from republicans in power are lower taxes across the board, and no taxes on an ever increasing number of people at or below the median income.

 

[mook]

The balancing doesn't work like it should, though. There are three sure things in life: death, taxes, and the continued existence of a govt. program once enacted. So when the Dems get in power, they enact Medicare which is destined to bankrupt the nation.

I'm always amazed at the incredible lack of faith "patriotic Americans" have in the American way of life. America defeated the British Empire, Nazis, the Soviets, put a man on the moon, cured any number of diseases, but must inevitably meet its downfall because....of a couple of government health programs?

Jeez.

 

[barfo]

I'm always amazed at the incredible lack of faith "patriotic Americans" have in the American way of life. America defeated the British Empire, Nazis, the Soviets, put a man on the moon, cured any number of diseases, but must inevitably meet its downfall because....of a couple of government health programs?

Jeez.

Socialism is apparently a force more powerful than capitalism. I guess that's the message.

Capitalism can't be expected to keep up. Capitalism needs welfare and food stamps. Boo hoo, poor poor capitalism, wants everything handed to it on a platter.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

The real positives to come from republicans in power are lower taxes across the board, and no taxes on an ever increasing number of people at or below the median income.

Is this some sort of absurd prediction of the future, because it doesn't resemble anything the Reps have ever done or even campaigned for.

 

[MARIS61]

Oh, your words just got jumbled a bit. You probably meant to say this:

The real positives to come from republicans in power are lower taxes for those in the boardroom, subsidized by ever increasing taxes on all people at or below the median income.

 

[jlprk]

The balancing doesn't work like it should, though. There are three sure things in life: death, taxes, and the continued existence of WAR once STARTED. So when the REPs get in power, they START A WAR which is destined to bankrupt the nation. And when the DEMOCRATS get in power, they don't repeal it but kick the can down the road. In the end, those WARS are here to stay.

Fixed.

 

[Eastoff]

...what might you tell me to help sway me in that direction?

I'm at least curious.

Thanks.

I would say the biggest reason right now, is that they are actually the least extreme party at the moment. The republicans have been embracing faux new's push for "anything to get ratings" tea party.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm always amazed at the incredible lack of faith "patriotic Americans" have in the American way of life. America defeated the British Empire, Nazis, the Soviets, put a man on the moon, cured any number of diseases, but must inevitably meet its downfall because....of a couple of government health programs?

Jeez.

Polio was cured by Jonas Salk, funded by the March of Dimes, with help from the Mellon family. He also discovered the influenza virus while working for the Rockefeller Foundation. Last time I checked, neither of those organizations are govt. entities.

We've been wealthy enough to spend a small (4%-ish) fraction of our GDP on military and over decades that's been good enough to give us a mighty military. Are you really proud to pin the American Way as military success?

But yeah, the govt. will meet its downfall by taking on too much in the way of unfunded liabilities, and the shit is going to hit the fan with us already 90% of GDP in debt.

You mentioned the moon landing as well. There's a not-too-expensive program that I'll admit only the govt. could do by 1969. Though it's odd you bring it up since: 1) we haven't gone back in 40 years, or really any human hasn't gone outside of low earth orbit since, and 2) one of the first thing the Democratic Party president did in office was to cancel most of the manned space program, including plans to revisit the Moon and prepare for trips to Mars. Apparently it costs too much.

Finally, what's the "American Way" about emulating France or Canada or whatever socialist nation du jour?

 

[Denny Crane]

Fixed.

Yeah, right. We're still at war with Korea and Vietnam. Who ended those wars, btw? We know who started them.

 

[julius]

Yeah, right. We're still at war with Korea and Vietnam. Who ended those wars, btw? We know who started them.

Well, two problems with that question.

The American people got sick of those wars, and what was probably the biggest group of people who were sick of the Vietnam war? Citizens who were D or R?

Also, the people in charge of those wars, if they were D or R, would not recognize the groups today. The R's of the 50's and 70's is nothing at all like the R's of the 00's and 10's. Same with D's.

 

[Denny Crane]

Well, two problems with that question.

The American people got sick of those wars, and what was probably the biggest group of people who were sick of the Vietnam war? Citizens who were D or R?

Also, the people in charge of those wars, if they were D or R, would not recognize the groups today. The R's of the 50's and 70's is nothing at all like the R's of the 00's and 10's. Same with D's.

Well, until the first Bush (Gulf War), there were no republican Vietnam type wars, so the change isn't as long ago as you make it out to be.

And I would suggest that Reagan was very much like the R's of the 00's and 10's.

 

[julius]

Well, until the first Bush (Gulf War), there were no republican Vietnam type wars, so the change isn't as long ago as you make it out to be.

Those R's were small government, and government out of people's lives. This eras R's say they're small government and want G's out of people's lives, but they sure come up with laws contradicting that.

And I would suggest that Reagan was very much like the R's of the 00's and 10's.

Reagan was nothing like the R's of today. He was a phony, but he didn't over moralize everything and just blindly go against whatever the other side said (even if he once said it, proposed it and believed in it).

 

[mook]

Polio was cured by Jonas Salk, funded by the March of Dimes, with help from the Mellon family. He also discovered the influenza virus while working for the Rockefeller Foundation. Last time I checked, neither of those organizations are govt. entities.

We've been wealthy enough to spend a small (4%-ish) fraction of our GDP on military and over decades that's been good enough to give us a mighty military. Are you really proud to pin the American Way as military success?

But yeah, the govt. will meet its downfall by taking on too much in the way of unfunded liabilities, and the shit is going to hit the fan with us already 90% of GDP in debt.

You mentioned the moon landing as well. There's a not-too-expensive program that I'll admit only the govt. could do by 1969. Though it's odd you bring it up since: 1) we haven't gone back in 40 years, or really any human hasn't gone outside of low earth orbit since, and 2) one of the first thing the Democratic Party president did in office was to cancel most of the manned space program, including plans to revisit the Moon and prepare for trips to Mars. Apparently it costs too much.

Finally, what's the "American Way" about emulating France or Canada or whatever socialist nation du jour?

The government also produced the rover missions, the Hubble telescope, all those satellites that give us GPS, etc. So it's a little disingenuous to pretend our space program is a complete failure since we last put a man on the moon. Or that putting a man on the moon was cheap (it cost the US as much as 2% of total GDP at the time.)

So Salk, the March of Dimes and the Mellon family developed and tested the polio vaccine without any help from public universities and grade schools? Because that's not what I understand. Pretty much every major medical advance in the US has had some level of government involvement (public research universities, public hospitals, US patent law, etc).

These and so much more are great achievements that result from the collaboration of citizens, corporations and government, or as I like to call it, "America." I've got a lot of faith, based on centuries of successful collaboration, that we can somehow survive (and maybe even benefit) from a few new government programs.

Anyway, I'm always curious when I hear "the shit will hit the fan" and "the govt. will meet its downfall" and other such really vague certainties of impending doom.

What does that exactly mean? Will there be rioting in the streets? Will we descend into African-style rape and ethnic cleansing purges? Will the country just dissolve like Czechoslovakia, rebuilt into separate new republics that seem pretty happy with the outcome?

I always hear about how "the US will fall apart", but I rarely hear predictions about what life will be like two days after it all falls apart. Please do tell. Because I'm having a really hard time imagining what a country that generates 1/4 of the world's GDP would look like in such a state.

My own belief is that there's just too much money at stake for it to be anything but a massive re-shuffling of bureaucracy. We are the ultimate "too big to fail." There will be the sound of one billion Chinese people collectively shitting their pants as they realized they lent far too much money to the wrong debtor, and probably a nasty recession for a year or two. But we'll come out the other end ok, because that's what America does.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

The government also produced the rover missions, the Hubble telescope, all those satellites that give us GPS, etc. So it's a little disingenuous to pretend our space program is a complete failure since we last put a man on the moon. Or that putting a man on the moon was cheap (it cost the US as much as 2% of total GDP at the time.)

So Salk, the March of Dimes and the Mellon family developed and tested the polio vaccine without any help from public universities and grade schools? Because that's not what I understand. Pretty much every major medical advance in the US has had some level of government involvement (public research universities, public hospitals, US patent law, etc).

These and so much more are great achievements that result from the collaboration of citizens, corporations and government, or as I like to call it, "America." I've got a lot of faith, based on centuries of successful collaboration, that we can somehow survive (and maybe even benefit) from a few new government programs.

Anyway, I'm always curious when I hear "the shit will hit the fan" and "the govt. will meet its downfall" and other such really vague certainties of impending doom.

What does that exactly mean? Will there be rioting in the streets? Will we descend into African-style rape and ethnic cleansing purges? Will the country just dissolve like Czechoslovakia, rebuilt into separate new republics that seem pretty happy with the outcome?

I always hear about how "the US will fall apart", but I rarely hear predictions about what life will be like two days after it all falls apart. Please do tell. Because I'm having a really hard time imagining what a country that generates 1/4 of the world's GDP would look like in such a state.

My own belief is that there's just too much money at stake for it to be anything but a massive re-shuffling of bureaucracy. We are the ultimate "too big to fail." There will be the sound of one billion Chinese people collectively shitting their pants as they realized they lent far too much money to the wrong debtor, and probably a nasty recession for a year or two. But we'll come out the other end ok, because that's what America does.

However, there are some real concerns. We are indeed very near being insolvent. This makes certain exchanges of money very difficult and also could be the precursor to hyper inflation. In addion, the dems now are planning on a national sales tax, which will further erode public confidence and may cause a new layer of widespread unemployment and forclosures as so many people live at the edge of their income now. And that will cause its own set of problems. We're not facing armaggedon, but potentially a hyper inflation led depression that may take decades to break out of.

 

[Minstrel]

Finally, what's the "American Way" about emulating France or Canada or whatever socialist nation du jour?

Well, Thomas Jefferson (one of those Founding Fathers that conservatives enjoy deifying) modeled a great deal of the United States' government and legal system on ideas he got from France.

So, apparently, it's very American.

 

[Eastoff]

Well, until the first Bush (Gulf War), there were no republican Vietnam type wars, so the change isn't as long ago as you make it out to be.

And I would suggest that Reagan was very much like the R's of the 00's and 10's.

you mean wanting to reduce nukes by 30%?

 

[Eastoff]

However, there are some real concerns. We are indeed very near being insolvent. This makes certain exchanges of money very difficult and also could be the precursor to hyper inflation. In addion, the dems now are planning on a national sales tax, which will further erode public confidence and may cause a new layer of widespread unemployment and forclosures as so many people live at the edge of their income now. And that will cause its own set of problems. We're not facing armaggedon, but potentially a hyper inflation led depression that may take decades to break out of.

FYI the Dems also want to give the people living at the edge of their income more help.

 

[Denny Crane]

The government also produced the rover missions, the Hubble telescope, all those satellites that give us GPS, etc. So it's a little disingenuous to pretend our space program is a complete failure since we last put a man on the moon. Or that putting a man on the moon was cheap (it cost the US as much as 2% of total GDP at the time.)

Did you read my post? Really?

So Salk, the March of Dimes and the Mellon family developed and tested the polio vaccine without any help from public universities and grade schools? Because that's not what I understand. Pretty much every major medical advance in the US has had some level of government involvement (public research universities, public hospitals, US patent law, etc).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/7687.php

The March of Dimes, formerly known as the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, funded Dr. Jonas Salk's groundbreaking work on the Salk polio vaccine and then, through its volunteers and health networks, organized the vaccination clinics, record keeping, parents' meetings, blood samplings, stand-by transportation, and make-up clinics for absentees at each of the clinical trial sites.

These and so much more are great achievements that result from the collaboration of citizens, corporations and government, or as I like to call it, "America." I've got a lot of faith, based on centuries of successful collaboration, that we can somehow survive (and maybe even benefit) from a few new government programs.

A collaboration of citizens, which is why the 1st amendment right to freedom of association is a biggie.

Anyway, I'm always curious when I hear "the shit will hit the fan" and "the govt. will meet its downfall" and other such really vague certainties of impending doom.

What does that exactly mean? Will there be rioting in the streets? Will we descend into African-style rape and ethnic cleansing purges? Will the country just dissolve like Czechoslovakia, rebuilt into separate new republics that seem pretty happy with the outcome?

I always hear about how "the US will fall apart", but I rarely hear predictions about what life will be like two days after it all falls apart. Please do tell. Because I'm having a really hard time imagining what a country that generates 1/4 of the world's GDP would look like in such a state.

My own belief is that there's just too much money at stake for it to be anything but a massive re-shuffling of bureaucracy. We are the ultimate "too big to fail." There will be the sound of one billion Chinese people collectively shitting their pants as they realized they lent far too much money to the wrong debtor, and probably a nasty recession for a year or two. But we'll come out the other end ok, because that's what America does.

You ask a very good question. I asked it myself in a thread a few weeks ago, but people didn't seem to get what the question was about.

My take is that it's not going to happen overnight as you suggest (with the 2 days later bit). Gradually over the next 10 years we'll see a need for ever increasing deficits, yet the appetite for our debt vehicles will be ever decreasing. The effect will be selling less debt than the bills cost and at increasing interest rates. Increasing interest rates mean we have to borrow more just to pay the interest payments on the entire debt (those old T-Bills do expire, you know).

There's only so much money to be loaned, and those who loan it have less appetite for low yield investments. The former means govt. will be starving out the private sector for the money it needs to borrow to fuel growth. The latter means spending on just interest on the debt will crowd out your precious govt.'s ability to spend on your favorite programs.

The govt. has been writing checks it can't be cashing forever. Social Security is an outright ponzi scheme, relying on the current generation (of investors) to pay the benefits of the previous generation. It all seemed fine when it started because there were 30+ current generation paying a share of one person in the previous generation. The numbers are now like 2:1 and getting worse. Good thing the govt. ran a surplus in the trust fund! To pay back the IOUs in the trust fund, the govt. will be taxing us like usual and using a pretty huge chunk of it to pay back those IOUs. $5T of IOUs paid back over 10 years is $500B/year. On top of $1T in interest payments (at really low interest rates, a rosey scenario).

Your govt. is hooked on spending the surplus, but now it's all gone and there won't be any surplus to spend. So not only do we have a need to replace those funds from the surplus (to maintain our standard of living), but we need to pay back the IOUs. By standard of living, I mean having a strong military, maintaining our roads and bridges, having a top notch CDC, and those sorts of things.

Medicare is perhaps a worse fiscal mess on top of all that.

At some point, you can't tax people enough to pay all the promised expenses. I'm talking about after you've cut the military to $0 along with most discretionary spending. Then the govt. either prints more money (like it is now!), or it will default on those IOUs.

What happens if it prints more money? Inflation is too many dollars chasing after too few goods. It will wipe out people on fixed incomes (your Social Security and Medicare recipients), and jack up the price of everything. You do get that China won't take $1 for a T-shirt sold at WalMart if that $1 is worth $.1. Hence the exchange rate...

I am thinking default is pretty likely. This puts us in the realm of 3rd world nations like Brazil in recent decades, and now Greece. Brazil saw inflation over 100% for years.

Too big to fail? Hardly. I can see China wanting hard assets in return for the IOUs we gave them (and default on). They'll have us over a barrel, and I don't see any reason why they'd want to let us off the hook - they earned what we owe them. They might demand a good chunk of Texas (for the oil) or something like that. We saw it before when the Japanese were buying our T-Bills (1980s) and ended up buying things like Universal Studios...


The end isn't going to happen in one day, then two days later we can say, "what happened?" It's happening at a continual but increasing pace.

What is it all going to look like? Like Soylent Green. Go rent the movie if you don't remember it. Very few very rich people, and everyone else living in slums or in the hallways of slums (homeless).

EDIT: Raise income taxes!

That would be your rallying cry, I suppose.

Yet, govt. revenues from income taxes are currently $987B. To balance the budget, they'd have to raise an additional $1.5T in taxes. Or about 2.5x everyone's income tax. Considering the rich pay an effective rate of 40%, you can't raise their taxes 2.5x because that'd be more than 100% tax...

 

[Denny Crane]

Well, Thomas Jefferson (one of those Founding Fathers that conservatives enjoy deifying) modeled a great deal of the United States' government and legal system on ideas he got from France.

So, apparently, it's very American.

Wow. For starters, it was Madison who designed the government (the virginia plan), and every state but Louisiana has laws based in British Common Law.

 

[Minstrel]

Wow. For starters, it was Madison who designed the government (the virginia plan), and every state but Louisiana has laws based in British Common Law.

Sorry, I should have said the judicial system, not legal system. That is, not the actual laws, but the system of courts and due process, etc.

And I hardly see what your point is with Madison. Madison drafted (with others) the Virginia Plan which set up some of the structures, like three branches and a legislature to represent states based on population. Jefferson was one of the most influential in terms of the philosophy of the new government ("Jeffersonian democracy") and how it should work. A great deal of his ideals came from France (and Britain).