Bullish or Bearish on America?

[Ivytalk]

It sounds like you're judging people on the Left based on their group identity and not valuing or respecting who they are as an individual.

All the Left believes in are group identities. Fail.

[Ibanez]

It sounds like you're judging people on the Left based on their group identity and not valuing or respecting who they are as an individual.

All the Left believes in are group identities. Fail.

They're separate but equal

[kalm]

FYP

Good fix. Kalmie's post would have you think we're on the verge of shanty towns popping up everywhere and Depression-era soup lines opening up. Income inequality has grown, there's no doubt about that, but that's happened every time there's an economic expansion, like what we've experienced for the past several decades. The only time that we manage to shrink income inequality is when there is an economic downturn or recession. I'm not sure how you get around this phenomenon - if the economy grows and everyone sees a 10% increase in income, the income inequality will grow - 10% of a bigger number is going to be 10% of a smaller number. Math and all. Seems odd to be rooting for an economic collapse just so we can get better income equality.

On the contrary I’m quite optimistic. That’s what I liked about the article too. Who’s rooting for an economic collapse? Why is that a requirement?

[kalm]

Good fix. Kalmie's post would have you think we're on the verge of shanty towns popping up everywhere and Depression-era soup lines opening up. Income inequality has grown, there's no doubt about that, but that's happened every time there's an economic expansion, like what we've experienced for the past several decades. The only time that we manage to shrink income inequality is when there is an economic downturn or recession. I'm not sure how you get around this phenomenon - if the economy grows and everyone sees a 10% increase in income, the income inequality will grow - 10% of a bigger number is going to be 10% of a smaller number. Math and all. Seems odd to be rooting for an economic collapse just so we can get better income equality.

The income gap might be greater but the poor are better off today than they were in the past.

Very true. Honest question, why is that? Federal income taxes are low, and I’ve been told time again that the poor are lazy and unaspiring so it can’t be due to their productivity.

[UNI88]

It sounds like you're judging people on the Left based on their group identity and not valuing or respecting who they are as an individual.

All the Left believes in are group identities. Fail.

You're just upset that they've grouped you in the grumpy old cis-male category with 89 ...

[kalm]

All the Left believes in are group identities. Fail.

You're just upset that they've grouped you in the grumpy old cis-male category with 89 ...

Maybe the LP should change their name GOC-M Party. Clearly a group without an identity.

[UNI88]

The income gap might be greater but the poor are better off today than they were in the past.

Very true. Honest question, why is that? Federal income taxes are low, and I’ve been told time again that the poor are lazy and unaspiring so it can’t be due to their productivity.

Why is what? That the income gap is greater or that the poor are better off today than in the past? The income gap is greater for a number of reasons including what Ganny laid out. The poor are better off today because American ingenuity and capitalism have made the vast majority of people's lives better. But lets just throw shitcan capitalism despite its benefits because equity is more important than overall quality of life.

[kalm]

Very true. Honest question, why is that? Federal income taxes are low, and I’ve been told time again that the poor are lazy and unaspiring so it can’t be due to their productivity.

Why is what? That the income gap is greater or that the poor are better off today than in the past? The income gap is greater for a number of reasons including what Ganny laid out. The poor are better off today because American ingenuity and capitalism have made the vast majority of people's lives better. But lets just throw shitcan capitalism despite its benefits because equity is more important than overall quality of life.

Who on here wants to shit-can capitalism?

So the poor are better off only through innovation? I’m not arguing the merits of equity. It doesn’t really matter what you and I think or whether or not the poor deserve a bigger slice. They will make that decision on their own. If they deem the system to be corrupt and unequal they will look to change it.

[AZGrizFan]

The income gap might be greater but the poor are better off today than they were in the past.

Very true. Honest question, why is that? Federal income taxes are low, and I’ve been told time again that the poor are lazy and unaspiring so it can’t be due to their productivity.

You are correct. The answer is wealth redistribution efforts by the left.

[houndawg]

I'm assuming it's the right that has "lost respect for the role of civil institutions, in favor of a misguided obsession with individualism". If that's so, hasn't the left lost respect for individualism, in favor of a misguided obsession with the role of civil institutions?

The author assumes that his beliefs are truth and his cause is just.

To be honest, the Left (especially the 'progressive' Left) has never valued or had respect for the individual, and that it is only being accelerated in today's world.

They look at your group identity instead of who you are as an individual.

Why change now?

[houndawg]

Math IS confusing to most folks. Remember, people wouldn't buy DQ's 1/3 lb burger because most people thought McDonalds' 1/4-lb burger was bigger. 1/4 bigger than 1/3. Makes total sense.

That is such a depressing fact. My 6 yr old understands that 1/4 is smaller.

Used to be that a solid grounding in the Calculus was considered to be part of a liberal arts education. Most people today don't have a clue what it is why it came to be or who invented it.

[houndawg]

The income gap might be greater but the poor are better off today than they were in the past.

Very true. Honest question, why is that? Federal income taxes are low, and I’ve been told time again that the poor are lazy and unaspiring so it can’t be due to their productivity.

You have to ask when everybody knows that the feds give away free stuff to poor people? You see them in their Cadillacs everywhere and everyone of them has a $1,000 phone, compliments of you and me. Same thing with illegals, as soon as they cross the border the gubmint starts giving them money and a pace to live and an Escalade.

[houndawg]

I fear we're going in the exact opposite direction we went when Sputnik was launched.

Serious countries don't self-flagellate about science and it's institutions being "systemically racist" and get rid of standardized tests and accelerated math and science options in schools.

Combine that with a corporate culture that cares less about innovation and you've got a gradual decline in the country.

Serious countries don't starve education to support a bloated military - they make those who benefit from an educated workforce contribute to the education of that workforce.

If our country was serious we'd be spending more time on climate change and the tipping point that were blowing right through. Within 20 years there are going to be millions of rugged individuals out west demanding that the gubmint find them some fresh water tout suite.

[AZGrizFan]

I fear we're going in the exact opposite direction we went when Sputnik was launched.

Serious countries don't self-flagellate about science and it's institutions being "systemically racist" and get rid of standardized tests and accelerated math and science options in schools.

Combine that with a corporate culture that cares less about innovation and you've got a gradual decline in the country.

Serious countries don't starve education to support a bloated military - they make those who benefit from an educated workforce contribute to the education of that workforce.

If our country was serious we'd be spending more time on climate change and the tipping point that were blowing right through. Within 20 years there are going to be millions of rugged individuals out west demanding that the gubmint find them some fresh water tout suite.

Tell me again why we have a "bloated" (your term, not mine) military?

Never mind, it's a rhetorical question. "Serious" countries have figured out how to play the US like a fool. The don't starve education to support a bloated military because they've convinced the US TO DO IT FOR THEM! WE are their defense. That allows THEM to be altruistic as fuck and "make those who benefit contribute to the education of that workforce..."

And regarding climate change: should we spend "more time" on it? Sure. But as long as the REAL violators of the world (China, India, developing nations) get a free fucking pass to pollute to their hearts' content, anything else that WE do is like pissing in the wind. Meanwhile, we're playing in the world economy with both hands tied behind our backs trying to look like the good guys while we get our fucking lunch handed to us by those same nations because we've willingly agreed to play by a different rulebook than anybody else.

[Baldy]

I fear we're going in the exact opposite direction we went when Sputnik was launched.

Serious countries don't self-flagellate about science and it's institutions being "systemically racist" and get rid of standardized tests and accelerated math and science options in schools.

Combine that with a corporate culture that cares less about innovation and you've got a gradual decline in the country.

Serious countries don't starve education to support a bloated military - they make those who benefit from an educated workforce contribute to the education of that workforce.

If our country was serious we'd be spending more time on climate change and the tipping point that were blowing right through. Within 20 years there are going to be millions of rugged individuals out west demanding that the gubmint find them some fresh water tout suite.

Only a confirmed dumbass would think the US "starves" education in favor of military spending.

[BDKJMU]

Serious countries don't starve education to support a bloated military - they make those who benefit from an educated workforce contribute to the education of that workforce.

If our country was serious we'd be spending more time on climate change and the tipping point that were blowing right through. Within 20 years there are going to be millions of rugged individuals out west demanding that the gubmint find them some fresh water tout suite.

Only a confirmed dumbass would think the US "starves" education in favor of military spending.

It’s not the 1st time he’s made the dumbass claim and had his ass handed to him..

[houndawg]

Serious countries don't starve education to support a bloated military - they make those who benefit from an educated workforce contribute to the education of that workforce.

If our country was serious we'd be spending more time on climate change and the tipping point that were blowing right through. Within 20 years there are going to be millions of rugged individuals out west demanding that the gubmint find them some fresh water tout suite.

Only a confirmed dumbass would think the US "starves" education in favor of military spending.

You're seriously offering that gibberish as some sort of proof.......of something? Where's the graph that shows the budget for the DOE is about 10% of the DOD budget?


Baldy

[Baldy]

Only a confirmed dumbass would think the US "starves" education in favor of military spending.

You're seriously offering that gibberish as some sort of proof.......of something?

Are all the fancy charts and graphs proving just how wrong you are too difficult to understand?

[houndawg]

You're seriously offering that gibberish as some sort of proof.......of something?

Are all the fancy charts and graphs proving just how wrong you are too difficult to understand?

Your graphs don't mention anything about the DOE budget being about 10% of the DOD budget. Speaking of graphs showing just how wrong you are.


Baldy

[UNI88]

Are all the fancy charts and graphs proving just how wrong you are too difficult to understand?

Your graphs don't mention anything about the DOE budget being about 10% of the DOD budget. Speaking of graphs showing just how wrong you are.

Baldy

Baldy's graphs might not show how much we're spending on education compared to defense but they clearly show that we're not starving "education to support a bloated military." Whether the military budget is bloated or not is a different debate.

[AZGrizFan]

Are all the fancy charts and graphs proving just how wrong you are too difficult to understand?

Your graphs don't mention anything about the DOE budget being about 10% of the DOD budget. Speaking of graphs showing just how wrong you are.


Baldy

And again, WHY is our DOD budget so bloated?

[Baldy]

Your graphs don't mention anything about the DOE budget being about 10% of the DOD budget. Speaking of graphs showing just how wrong you are.

Baldy

Baldy's graphs might not show how much we're spending on education compared to defense but they clearly show that we're not starving "education to support a bloated military." Whether the military budget is bloated or not is a different debate.

Shhhhhhhhhhhh...just let dementiadawg swim and bask in his ignorance.

[houndawg]

Your graphs don't mention anything about the DOE budget being about 10% of the DOD budget. Speaking of graphs showing just how wrong you are.

Baldy

Baldy's graphs might not show how much we're spending on education compared to defense but they clearly show that we're not starving "education to support a bloated military." Whether the military budget is bloated or not is a different debate.

A 5% increase over a ten year period ending six years ago is likely a decrease in real terms. And the whether the military budget is bloated or not is very much related because its the same pie..

[UNI88]

Baldy's graphs might not show how much we're spending on education compared to defense but they clearly show that we're not starving "education to support a bloated military." Whether the military budget is bloated or not is a different debate.

A 5% increase over a ten year period ending six years ago is likely a decrease in real terms. And the whether the military budget is bloated or not is very much related because its the same pie..

[AZGrizFan]

A 5% increase over a ten year period ending six years ago is likely a decrease in real terms. And the whether the military budget is bloated or not is very much related because its the same pie..

Mental gymnastics even JSO would be proud of.