bnw wrote:

Reminds me of the junk bonds equity stripping in the ’80s. This is what you get when politicians are easily bought.

So it’s all on politicians and not on the capitalists actually doing this crap?

To me, this is yet another one of those huge differences between left and right. We leftists are against corruption and the concentration of wealth, power in privilege across the board — in the private sphere and in the public. The right, OTOH, seems incapable of ever holding the private sector responsible for their own venality, instead placing all the blame on the public sector. It’s never their fault, apparently. It’s always the “gubmint’s.”

In reality, it’s both/and. And it’s the capitalist system itself that encourages, incentivizes, enables and maximizes this. It’s capitalists who write our laws. It’s capitalists who control our government.

nittany ram wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

Restarting the series. Have watched the pilot and the second episode so far. It holds up really well on second viewing. Weird, but the killing of the direwolf “Lady” has impacted me more than several of the human deaths.

Beautiful animals. Not sure the breed, though I’m guessing WV would know. If I had a nice big yard with a fence, I’d definitely want to have one or more. The closest breed to an actual wolf would be preferable. Perhaps huskies or malamutes. Though I love golden retrievers too, as well as German shepherds.

As you know, all dogs are descended from wolves but the breed closest to the wolf genetically is the shi-tzu, followed by chows and other northern Asian breeds. So the dogs that look like wolves aren’t necessarily the closest related to them. I like all dogs but my wife and I prefer German Shepherds for many reasons with their wolf-like appearance being one of them.

BTW, the dire wolves in GOT did actually exist in the Pleistocene. They weren’t nearly as large as they are depicted to be on the show (they are about the same size as the modern grey wolf) but they had larger teeth and a stronger bite force.

You’re not alone in rooting for animals to live over humans. I’ll root for the animal every single time.

Thanks, Nittany. Will have to investigate those other breeds. But that confuses the issue for me a bit. I want the dog to look a lot like a wolf, cuz I think they’re beautiful animals. But another reason for wanting a wolf-like breed is because I read that wolves are really smart, smarter than dogs. May be wrong on that, but it’s just something I’ve read.

So to make a long story short, I want the smartest possible dog, and the one that looks the closest to “wolf-like.”

Apparently, “conceal carry rights” only apply to white guys. And it’s yet one more case where the existence of a gun escalates an encounter into a deadly one. The mere existence.

Conceal carry should be illegal, and there is no Constitutional grounds to protect it. “Keep and bear arms” — if we ignore the militia context. Keep and bear. Not keep and hide.

But the main issue here looks like police racism, which comes from societal racism, which is helped along via endless denial of that racism by all too many white people.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.
• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

Another one of those bottom lines: If you’re being consistent about unemployment, you would have been raging against high levels under every American president going back generations, at least. If this just started with Obama for you (as in, for Trump and his supporters), then you have zero credibility. I don’t remember hearing Trump complain about this during Bush’s presidency, for example. How convenient to say the stats just suddenly went bogus with Obama in the White House.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

So, yes. It’s just an estimate, and flawed as are all estimates. And, yes, it under-counts unemployment. But those shadowstats radically exaggerate that under-counting, and they, themselves, are subject to “bias” and a good bit of paranoia to boot. I haven’t investigated their methodology — which I don’t see on their site — but it looks like they consider retired people and students as a part of that under-count, which obviously shouldn’t be the case.

Bottom line for me? Yes, unemployment is a problem. We should have zero. They’re shouldn’t be any. It should be a government guarantee, under our system, that anyone who wants a job gets a job — again, by right. And, by right, everyone should at least make a living wage. No one who works should need government supplements to eat or seek medical care or stay out of tent cities. The pay itself should be sufficient to meet all necessities.

Does Trump address any of that? No. He’s actually said Americans are paid too much. And he’s never supported “living wage” legislation or guaranteed full employment. He wants to leave everything up to “the markets” which means capitalists, and that means high unemployment always, because it’s in ownership’s best interest to maintain that huge army of the unemployed. That scenario guarantees workers have no leverage and will take the crap they’re handed, year after year after year.

Trump has no answers for any of this. Just word salad and bluster.

bnw,

It should be obvious. Just look what I quoted. You say unemployment is low. You believe the unemployment data. I don’t. When people compare it to other times it means nothing since the methodology was changed. Thats why I use Shadow Stats to get as close to an apple to apple stat as possible.

The ShadowStats Alternate Unemployment Rate for May 2016 is 23.0%

I missed this comment the first time through.

The part in bold. No. The methodology hasn’t really changed, though the data collection has gotten better, and they look at U1 – U6 now. They’ve been using the Current Population Survey (CPS) method since 1940, when it was first instituted as a part of FDR’s WPA programs. Which is why I said if you compare apples to apples, it’s a very low unemployment figure. Far from perfect, and the government says as much. It’s an estimate, one that does let a lot of people slip through the cracks, especially those who have given up looking for work after a certain period of time.

From Wiki:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys[35] conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or “Household Survey”, conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition.[36]

The Current Employment Statistics survey (CES), or “Payroll Survey”, conducts a survey based on a sample of 160,000 businesses and government agencies that represent 400,000 individual employers.[37] This survey measures only civilian nonagricultural employment; thus, it does not calculate an unemployment rate, and it differs from the ILO unemployment rate definition. These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results. Additional data are also available from the government, such as the unemployment insurance weekly claims report available from the Office of Workforce Security, within the U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration.[38] The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides up-to-date numbers via a PDF linked here.[39] The BLS also provides a readable concise current Employment Situation Summary, updated monthly.[40]
U1–U6 since 1950, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics

The Bureau of Labor Statistics also calculates six alternate measures of unemployment, U1 through U6, that measure different aspects of unemployment:[41]

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

bnw wrote:

BS. Trump employs common sense not emotion.

Even if that is true, it is irrelevant.

Racism is about policy, not “feelings.”

And his policy proposals are racist. Clearly. Emphatically.

Wrong again. His proposals are common sense. Keep beating that racist drum. But it isn’t effective. People want solutions to problems.

bnw,

I feel sorry for his supporters. Trump has never given you any plans, just bumper sticker slogans and word salad. He’s given you so little to go on, all you can do when asked to describe his policies is to say something incredibly vague like “better trade deals.” That’s the extent of his policy. No details whatsoever. No specifics whatsoever. No actual plans. Just meaningless phrases he keeps repeating.

You must be seriously frustrated with the emptiness of his rhetoric, though you hide it well here. No government, no corporation, no non-profit organization, could possibly function on so little direction. He gives you nothing but the weakest of generalities and platitudes and asks you to trust him.

Oh, well. To each their own.

Money is not fictional. Money has intrinsic value. Federal Reserve Notes are not money and are quite fictional. Printing the $1 bill costs just as much as printing the $100 bill.

What do you mean by “money” then? It’s currency. And no currency has any intrinsic value other than what humans agree to. As in, it’s a fiction we agree to. Well, at least the rich and powerful agree to this, and then we go along with that.

___

Better trade deals. Bringing money back from abroad to create jobs here in the US. I’ve answered this many times.

Come on, bnw. Even you have to admit that’s incredibly vague. What exactly does “better trade deals” mean? Specifically? And how will Trump bring money back here from abroad? Details, please. And what policy would he implement to turn that money into jobs?

Seriously, you haven’t answered this. Nor has Trump. He’s far, far too vague about everything.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

bnw wrote:

Billy,

What is really funny is that you of all people are concerned about the national debt!

(Tried to respond multiple times over a half hour but keep getting 403 Forbidden message when quoting your post.)

Unlike most people on the right, I actually favor paying for the government we use, as we use it. Most on the right prefer steep tax cuts, which create massive deficits and debt.

I’d rather raise tax rates on the wealthy so we can balance the budget. Of course, that’s under our current system. I’ve also put forward ways to make it so we don’t need any taxation at all, and there is no debt.

Money is a fiction. It’s an agreed upon fiction. Like capitalism, nation-states and religion. We could very easily agree to a different kind of fiction, one that benefits 100% of us, instead of just the 1%.

But if we remain in our current fiction, yeah. I’d prefer we have no debt. Though it’s economic suicide to try to pay it down during a recession or a weak recovery. The time to do that is when the economy is doing well. The CBO, for instance, told Bush back in 2000/2001 that if he just left tax rates alone, we could pay off the entire debt by 2009. He cut rates for the rich twice — 2001 and 2003 — and doubled the debt instead.

And I’m still waiting for you to tell us how Trump would bring back jobs.

;>)

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

BS. Deleting emails is destroying government property. Extreme carelessness is a criminal offense for we but not for she. That includes all who participated in the email scandal which includes Obama.

This is kind of funny. In reality, no one in private life would be sent to jail for deleting emails. Or fined. Or even brought to trial. At worst, they’d be fired by their employer, and even that would be rare. Only government employees are held to such a standard — which, of course, has never been implemented for any previous SoS.

I think some people are getting a bit carried away due to hatred of Clinton. They’re losing all perspective. And I say that as someone who doesn’t like her either.

Interesting. So in a nation with an extremely high rate of unemployment, talking about the good ole USA here, you say-

Trump wouldn’t have a problem with rich foreigners coming to this country since they can pay their way and can create and finance jobs for other US citizens?

WELL DUH! It’s about the ECONOMY! JOBS. JOBS. JOBS. JOBS.

Actually, our rate of unemployment is rather low (4.7%), if we’re comparing apples with apples, and not using a different metric for the past than we use today. It’s pretty low. Though this is also a bit of a scam, foisted upon us by capitalists in general and the Fed in particular, who consider anything under 5% “full employment.” Of course, “full employment” would be 0% unemployment, not some number under 5%. But that’s another story and it has to do with capitalism’s desire for a standing army of the unemployed, at all times, to kill worker leverage and keep wages down. And that has absolutely nothing to do with refugees and immigrants.

But, again, you keep talking about jobs jobs jobs. And I keep asking you to post Trump’s plan for creating them. He doesn’t have one. He’s never put forward any plan to create them. All he does is demagogue about black and brown people, immigrants, refugees, undocumented workers, etc. who don’t impact our wages one iota or take away our jobs. Corporations, the rich and the capitalist system itself do that.

Bnw, can you please post Trump’s plan for “creating jobs”? I’ve asked several times now.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

Mexico IS sending people across the border. The Mexican government wants the US$$$$ sent back to Mexico to prop up their economy.

When the FBI states that they can’t vet these people then a timeout is justified until they can. Trump also asks why doesn’t the countries in that part of the world take in these refugees?

Keep up with the racism stuff because it doesn’t work any more.

No. Mexico isn’t “sending people across the border.” And net immigration from Mexico is less than zero and has been for years.

And, no. The FBI has never said they can’t “vet these people.” Our refugee process takes nearly two years. Yes, they’re “vetted.” Trump is lying once again, which is what he does endlessly. He is a serial liar, in fact. It’s also a lie that other nations don’t take in refugees. America takes in the least of any developed nation right now, and we should be ashamed about that. Instead, Trump wants to cut it all off.

As for calling out Trump’s racism, xenophobia and bigotry — and his constant exploitation of white fears of brown and black people. Of course it doesn’t “work” with his supporters. It never did. They’re in deep denial about it all, and have made up their minds to close their eyes, ears and hearts to what he’s doing. And for what? If Trump actually offered people anything of value, he wouldn’t need to stoke white rage and resentment. He could just win folks over with his actual policies. But he can’t. All he has is white identity politics to fall back on.

Also this: “…the American Left was on-record supporting slavery, segregation, lynching and, as noted by historians…”

Linking the so-called ‘left’ to slavery and lynching is kinda meaningless because it lacks any context. I mean in the 1850’s you had all kinds of mainstream people supporting slavery. It wasn’t a ‘left vs right’ thing. And in the 1910’s and 20’s you had plenty of Dems and plenty of Reps supporting lynching of minorities. It wasn’t a ‘left vs right’ thing. It was an American thing.

w
v

True. Again, and I’m guessing you see this, but perhaps don’t think it’s all that important . . . The author is conflating the Dems with the left. That’s something I bump into whenever I get into discussions with conservatives about things like racism, Jim Crow, the KKK, etc. They immediately jump for “Democrats are Leftists; Leftists are Democrats” card. They want to use the terms interchangeably.

Really good book, btw, about Lincoln and slavery: The Fiery Trial, by Eric Foner. Lincoln, while being against slavery, and a part of a movement against slavery, was like most in that movement. He wanted to “free the slaves” and then deport them. Most in that movement believed whites were superior, including Lincoln, which makes them “racists.” Few felt otherwise in the 1850s. Abolitionists and other “radicals” were generally the exceptions.

Foner does say that Lincoln appears to have changed his mind about blacks in the last two years of his life. Mostly due to seeing them fight in the Civil War and getting to know them. He then stopped wanting to deport them, and wanted them to stay in America instead. It was a minority position in America at the time. Fewer still wanted complete and total emancipation plus full rights — and, again, that was generally the preserve of full on abolitionists and other kinds of radicals. Quakers were often in that category as well.

And speaking of anti-semitism:

Trump recently sent out this ad about Clinton:

(The second one was a change from the first, after he was called on the obvious reference to Jews and money)

Even fellow right-winger Gary Johnson called it racist.

Trump comments ‘clearly’ racist, says Gary Johnson amid antisemitism furor

The Libertarian candidate for president, Gary Johnson, said on Sunday Donald Trump’s recent comments were “clearly” racist, a day after the presumptive Republican nominee faced accusations of antisemitism and in the same week that he said he would consider firing government employees who wear hijabs.

“He has said 100 things that would disqualify anyone else from running for president but it doesn’t seem to affect him,” Johnson told CNN’s State of the Union. “The stuff he’s saying is just incendiary. It’s racist.”

Earlier this week, a New Hampshire woman asked Trump at one of his rallies whether, as president, he would replace Transportation Security Administration workers who wear “heebeejabbies” – apparently a reference to Muslim headscarves called hijabs.

“We are looking at that,” Trump replied. “We’re looking at a lot of things.”

At the same rally, Trump pointed to a plane flying overhead and declared: “That could be a Mexican plane up there. They’re getting ready to attack.”

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Billy_T.

Jeffrey Lord is, to be generous, always, always wrong. And I’m doing my best to suppress what I really think about him.

;>)

He’s actually said on TV that the Nazis were “leftists,” and that the KKK is a “leftist” organization — which he alludes to above. He couldn’t be more wrong about that if he were paid to be. And he is. Again, to be far more generous than he deserves: His knowledge of history and his understanding of the political spectrum are non-existent. He is completely ignorant on those subjects.

He makes the usual “conservative” mistake of conflating the Democrats with “the left,” even though the Democrats once owned the South, politically (until roughly 1965), via ultra-conservative representatives. The Dems once were the party of the hard right in the South, with a mix of other political ideologies elsewhere. And the GOP once had “liberals” in its mix, too. Mostly in the North East, the Midwest and California.

Lord is engaging in broadbrush historical revisionism, that no knowledgeable, thinking adult buys.