Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Billy_TParticipant
Or to put that different, there is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in growth in jobs and wages.
The wealthy invest money to make money off of money.
This fantasy that they use it to invest or propel the economy is an old belief ranking right up there with fear of witches.
Very true. Again, if they could make their money without hiring a single worker, they would. They’ve been pushing for that dream since the Industrial Revolution and the first assembly lines. A lot of people never really think about it, but more people were employed before capitalism became economic hegemon. Almost everyone was their own boss, too. Capitalism came along and with automation, assembly lines and new technologies, could use ten people to do the work thousands once did, in their own local, separate, autonomous markets.
The inevitable math of capitalism has always been to radically reduce jobs by getting more and more work out of each individual worker, along with automating their work out of existence. And capitalists always want the largest possible army of the unemployed, to suppress wages and kill leverage for workers. They buy political systems to ensure this as well.
Where was the massive jobs program when the world economy collapsed in 2008? It never happened. Primarily because that would have given far too much leverage and power back to workers.
Trump represents the interests of Capital. He couldn’t care less about workers.
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Billy_T.
Billy_TParticipantIt is definitely the case that our current trade policies are toxic. But this has always been the American Way. It’s always been the American Way to screw over workers, because the American Way is the Capitalist Way, and the Capitalist Way is to screw workers, consumers and destroy the planet, and it’s set up to do this, and it’s set up to destroy jobs.
Democratic Party or GOP — they both do this. The Democrats did have a short period of time in which they at least put up some resistance to the same old same old — the Keynesian Golden Age, for lack of a better term. We had our one and only Middle Class boom from 1947-1973, with FDR’s New Deal policies at least somewhat embraced and protected during that period. But after that, the Dems abandoned the working class too. And since then, neither party has cared a lick about them. There is zero evidence to support the idea that Trump and the GOP cares about workers in the slightest, and tons of evidence showing they care only about the 1%. Roughly speaking, I think the Dems care only about the richest 10%, with an emphasis on that 1% as well.
Trump isn’t the answer. Nor is Clinton.
Billy_TParticipantBut why, bnw, would you think Trump has any intention of helping working people? He has absolutely no history of doing so. None. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. He’s made his fortune from screwing them over, and outsources the vast majority of his own manufacturing jobs.
He calls for steep tax cuts on the rich, which means he will make a fortune from his own government policies. He will personally be enriched by his actions. He calls for a top rate of 25%, which will net him millions of extra dollars a year. Plus, no more estate tax, which will net his children tens of millions extra.
There is no evidence in the history of American economics whereby tax cuts for the rich have ever — and I mean ever — helped working people. The rich have always just kept that money and increased the gap between themselves and their workers. There is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in a decrease in the gap between rich and poor.
Seriously, why do you have such faith in him? What has he ever done to earn your trust?
Billy_TParticipantBut it is possible we were put here for a purpose…just like it’s possible that 9/11 was carried out by Amish insurgents despite no evidence to support it and a ton of evidence to suggest otherwise. 🙂
Are you sure there isn’t any evidence?
Ohio Amish beard-cutting gang faces unfamiliar life behind bars
Billy_TParticipantIn the novel, Dune, Paul repeats, “Fear is the mind killer.” The full Bene Gesserit litany being:
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
One could also substitute “absolute certainty” for “fear.” If we were certain we knew all, we’d stop using a goodly bit of our minds. This is true for both the religious and the scientific. The best scientists don’t go for absolute certainty, and love mysteries. They know it gives them endless projects to work on. And the best religious minds, like Pascal and Kierkegaard, thought absolute certainty was a delusion. They struggled with their faith on a daily basis, and drew strength from that struggle.
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Billy_T.
Billy_TParticipantI would not agree with that. My own view is more ‘agnostic-ish.’
I’d say we dont/cant ‘know’ if life/world/universe was ‘meant to be here.’My own view of fundamental questions like that is “its a mystery”
btw, fwiw, ayahuasca told me once,
that the Universe and the Rams were meant to be here. You gonna argue with ayahuasca?w
vThat has its own sense, too, WV. And it fits in with the “humility” part as well. We’re far too small to know with any certainty, in the grand scheme of things, if there is a grand scheme of things. And mysteries keep us searching, and searching is beautiful.
Pascal has a lot to say about the question(s):
“For after all what is man in nature? A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either. The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret. He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.”
and . . .
When I consider the short duration of my life, swallowed up in the eternity before and after, the small space which I fill, or even can see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of spaces whereof I know nothing, and which know nothing of me, I am terrified, and wonder that I am here rather than there, for there is no reason why here rather than there, or now rather than then. Who has set me here? By whose order and design have this place and time been destined for me?—Memoria hospitis unius diei prætereuntis.
Billy_TParticipantZN,
Thanks. I already knew I could just copy and paste and that would work somewhat. Was hoping, however, to use code to shrink it down to fit the space given, and maintain the (original) height/width ratio.
On my own site, I can do that — because I’m, well, god there. In the universal settings, and in individual posts. It’s difficult being a mere mortal sometimes.
;>)
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Billy_T.
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by nittany ram.
Billy_TParticipantBilly_TParticipantPA,
I’m looking forward to it. I think it hits HBO in October.
Here’s another one about the future, robots, genetic manipulation and such. Very good film.
Billy_TParticipantMany people assume humanity is the necessary end-product of evolution. The idea that evolution is directed towards something, instead of being the result of natural selection acting on randomly occurring mutations.
As Stephen Jay Gould once said, if you could rewind life’s tape to a time before humans and then press play, the likelihood that humans would evolve for a second time is incredibly low. We aren’t ‘meant’ to be here. Like every other species that has ever existed, we just got lucky.
Agreed with all the above.
We’re an accident, and we will be “surpassed” in time, or just wiped out, one way or another. I don’t see us having even a fraction of the “success” of the dinosaurs.
Science can teach us to be humble. Art can as well. It can, if we heed it. And while there are all kinds of counter-movements, a very strong pattern through history has been to puncture one mythic balloon after another, slowly but surely moving us away from viewing the earth as central to the universe, as its center, period, and humans as central to existence on earth. Lord and master over all he surveys, etc. etc.
We really need a huge dash of humility, especially given the tech we’ve created and its potential for destruction.
Billy_TParticipant(Note for our NSA monitors: that was just a joke. No one is proposing anything, just indulging dark humor.)
Laura Flanders Jeremy Scahill interview
Though it’s too short, good interview above. It’s all about the cell phones, apparently.
Billy_TParticipantThis part is pretty good, too:
“Asking why an archaic human isn’t evolving from gorillas today is like asking why the children of your cousins don’t look more like you,” said Matt Tocheri, an anthropology professor at Lakehead University and a researcher in the National Museum of Natural History’s Human Origins Program. “Those creatures have been on their own lineage for 10 million years. You can’t go back up that lineage and back down again.”
Billy_TParticipantAnd, why aren’t apes evolving into humans?
Pretty good article for lay persons (like me!!):
Dear Science: Why aren’t apes evolving into humans?
Dear Science: Why are there no hominins left on Earth? If evolution is ongoing and species are always changing and adapting, shouldn’t we see new human-like species evolving from apes, even if the old ones died out?
Here’s what science has to say:We hate to be the ones to break it to you, but you are an ape.
So were the Neanderthals, the Hobbits, Lucy the Australopithecus, the Taung child and Peking man. And while we’re at it, so are orangutans, gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees. All of us evolved from a common ancestor that lived about 14 million years ago, and together we make up the taxonomic family Hominidae. Also known as hominids. Also known as great apes.
Billy_TParticipantZN,
I get the Supreme Court part. The next president likely names three or more, plus umpteen lower-court justices. And for all of Trump’s populist rhetoric, I don’t see him ever naming a single “labor-friendly” judge. Though, frankly, I don’t see Clinton doing that, either. But it may happen accidentally, as a kind of side-effect to naming “pro-choice” judges. As in, it might come along as part of the package, but it won’t be something she seeks out. Same goes for the environment, the surveillance state, incarceration, drugs and so on. We may get lucky due to an emphasis on other issues.
Billy_TParticipantLong story short: Wonder if they should have named the spider, Kankuamo García Márquezi.
Not possible to have three names. That would be against ICZN (International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature) rules. Three names can only be used for subspecies.
They could’ve named it Kankuamo garciamaquezi though.
Thanks, Nittany.
I am really bad when it comes to science rules and protocol.
Billy_TParticipantFrom Wiki:
Apposition is a grammatical construction in which two elements, normally noun phrases, are placed side by side, with one element serving to identify the other in a different way. The two elements are said to be in apposition. One of the elements is called the appositive, although its identification requires consideration of how the elements are used in a sentence.[citation needed]
For example, in the two sentences below, the phrases Alice Smith and my sister are in apposition, with the appositive identified with italics:
My sister, Alice Smith, likes jelly beans.
Alice Smith, my sister, likes jelly beans.Traditionally, appositions were called by their Latin name appositio, although the English form is now more commonly used. It is derived from Latin: ad (“near”) and positio (“placement”).
Billy_TParticipantTrump? Pick a day. Pick a moment. He has no real plan beyond looking for opportunities to enrich himself. I think he’ll like trade deals just fine as long as they work for him. I don’t believe a populist word that comes out of his mouth. I think he’ll just give the Republicans what they want on some things(Supreme Court Justices) and on others he’ll be at odds with them but I have no idea. Who is Trump? What is he? What does he want? All I can do is look at his con-man history and think that we won’t know until he does it. Will it be reckless? Sure. He isn’t a deep thinker about such things. Who knows what he’ll do or which direction he’ll go?
Trump, unlike Clinton, has an actual paper trail as far as owning companies with large numbers of employees. He has no history of treating them well, of caring about labor or Labor, of worrying about outsourcing jobs. He, in fact, has always outsourced most of his manufacturing jobs overseas. So all of that populist rhetoric he now expresses just isn’t backed up by his own business practices.
Clinton has a different kind of paper trail. She has signed on to terrible trade deals and will likely do so again. She also followed American tradition by using the State Department to help destroy “the Commons” in other countries, especially in Central and South America. Though she did not start this practice, she didn’t end it or fight against it or even talk about it. She followed precedent and used the hammer of American government to smash public ownership of goods and services to the degree possible.
To me, this should be illegal and the people who do it should be held legally responsible. But that’s not how things are done in America right now.
Bottom line for me: The two major-party candidates may be the most odious we’ve seen in decades. I’m beginning to think it’s not even a matter of “lesser of two evils” this time. Just different modes of evil.
Billy_TParticipantInteresting.
Some more of my (annoying) book snobbery: I worked in book stores at various times in my younger adulthood (into the 1990s), and in one store was given pretty much total control over a section I called the Avant Garde. They did that because they recognized my brilliance in matters literary.
;>)
I got really territorial about it. Didn’t necessarily stick with the usual time frame for that designation, though, putting books in there by authors from a fairly broad range of chronological time (and place), including Garcia Marquez. If co-workers tried to help out and put Garcia Marquez under M, I’d move it to G, cuz, well, technically, Spanish authors with those two surnames (paternal and maternal) are alphabetized by the paternal surname.
Stuffy, yeah. I know. But I think it’s right to go by the culture in question, as much as possible. Though, I make mistakes sometimes with other cultures, like Chinese or Japanese names, which typically should go surname and then personal name, with these often being reversed.
Long story short: Wonder if they should have named the spider, Kankuamo García Márquezi.
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Billy_T.
Billy_TParticipantWV,
As always, good, sensible words from you. Hope all is well.
Billy_TParticipantI like something in the garden that “takes care of” the pests, and/or trespassers.
I can understand that. Instead of “get off my lawn!!” It’s, “Hey, duya wanna see my garden?” Bwahahahaha!!
Billy_TParticipantBoiled down, if capitalists could get rich with robots doing everything, they would. If they could make their fortune without hiring a single worker, they would. We know this, because they’ve been pushing automation for more than a century, and it has, indeed led to massive job losses — here and around the world. And every day, we see the ravages of capitalism, as they do more and more via computers, and we deal with fewer and fewer actual humans. Call centers, ATMs, self-serve grocery stores, etc. etc.
The trend points to this: Companies which once had thousands, now have hundreds, or they go out of business entirely. Internet companies pop up and offer services with a staff of 25 which once were handled by companies with thousands. The math tells us this won’t end well. And it’s all quite “natural” to the economic system in place. It’s what it was designed to do.
Billy_TParticipantIs it okay to say bad stuff about that huge plant in the middle? I mean, it really, really needs to see a dentist. And I bet it needs a ton of mouthwash. Costco always has that on sale. You know, the family size pack with a hundred bottles the size of a keg?
Costco aka China OverSeas Trade COmpany
So much for sourcing the local economy.
bnw,
It was a joke, okay? Beyond that, I’m in favor of getting rid the system that destroys jobs as a matter of logic: capitalism. The internal logic of capitalism seeks job destruction, naturally, eternally, because it always seeks new ways to maximize profits. And that means reducing costs to the degree possible. And that means labor costs, primarily. And that means slashing wages, automating jobs out of existence, shipping them to cheaper and cheaper locations, and forever seeking to get more production out of fewer and fewer workers.
It’s baked in.
I want us to go back to the future and change all of that. I want us to exterminate the profit motive, which always kills jobs and drives down wages, and take away all incentives to slash wages, jobs and outsourcing. All of them. Wipe out these incentives by banishing the capitalist system altogether. And we replace it from the ground up, and change the funding stream from sales to publicly held banks instead . . . so we no longer have to be dependent upon the good will of a few capitalists, whose every incentive is to NOT pay us and to kill our jobs. We all become co-owners.
No employees. No employers. No bosses. No slaves. We self-govern, at work and in the community. We work together, cooperatively. Not competitively. Competition, which is baked into the capitalist system, invariably leads to massive loss of jobs, obscenely suppressed wages and “innovation” in the service of all of that.
Yes, this is about jobs. And the capitalist system was designed to kill them to the degree possible.
Billy_TParticipantIs it okay to say bad stuff about that huge plant in the middle? I mean, it really, really needs to see a dentist. And I bet it needs a ton of mouthwash. Costco always has that on sale. You know, the family size pack with a hundred bottles the size of a keg? That would probably do it. And those little guys look like they need some work, too. Like they’re all just bad breath wannabes. I think the entire garden needs an intervention.
Billy_TParticipantIf we timed out everyone who crossed the line, I would have to time myself out sometimes, which I think would be a physics paradox.
;>)
I think you could sell the rights for that to JJ Abrams. It could be, like, well, a sequel of sorts to, “Fringe” and “Lost,” about how a bulletin board moderator destroyed the space-time continuum by banning himself, and how the rest of us had to devote our lives to hunting down the moderator, finally discovering him on this island in the middle of Boston. And, it’s only real during dream-time, and when you wake up from the dream, you’re back in fantasy land, and you watch Vinatieri kick that winning field goal, which we all really know never happened.
Billy_TParticipantI hear ya, WV, about his being alone.
I’ve been there, done that, too.
Just saying, I don’t like being called a liar. And I think it’s important to say so. Prior to that, I was trying to go the ignore route. It didn’t work so well.
And, ZN,
I understand what you’re saying as well, and will adhere to board policies. I also would understand if you thought my comments were over the line — Maginot or otherwise — and deserved a board time out. I wouldn’t argue against that, and it’s perhaps even “deserved,” given their content.
You guys decide, and I’ll abide. Btw, whatever happened to the poster with “the Dude” as his avatar?
- This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Billy_T.
Billy_TParticipantIt is inbounds. His post wasn’t about proof. It was about baiting. Neverland is kid glove by comparison.
I missed this the first go round.
bnw, let’s clear the air. You and I don’t agree on political stuff. Our views clash. And that’s okay. That’s fine. It’s even fine if you hate my views or even me. That doesn’t bother me in the slightest. However, what I won’t tolerate is someone calling me a liar. Which you pretty much have from the start, though you used “nicer” language, like “insincerity” and now, “baiting.”
I don’t lie, bnw. When I say Obama has governed as a real conservative, that he’s governed from the center-right, I absolutely mean that. I am 100% speaking the truth as I see it — and I supplied all kinds of evidence to back that up. When I say what I say about Trump? It’s not to bait anyone. I actually feel that way about him. It’s my sincerest take on the issue. In fact, I was trying to suppress the anger he provokes in me, but was only partially successful.
As for “proof.” Please. You have never supplied any of that here, but you demand it in others. You make assertions and don’t back them up. Ever. And if someone counters that, you make it personal and call them a liar.
Again, let’s clear the air. If you don’t believe I’m telling the truth here, ignore me. Just ignore me. Or keep your suspicions to yourself. But if this were my site — it’s not, of course — next time you called someone a liar, you’d be banned.
Billy_TParticipantBilly_TParticipantAs mentioned before, I think some people just don’t read the context, skip four out of five words, or something, when they see the word “racist” in a sentence. Instead of seeing all of the modifiers and the names and the qualifiers, they just jump the shark and assume the accusation is aimed their way.
Perhaps no other word online provokes tunnel vision like the word “racism.” People lose their minds when it’s brought up. They really need to take a deep breath, reread, and stop assuming things. And they should also know what it looks like to others when they do react for no good reason. When no one is talking about them. It looks like they have a guilty conscience, and that’s likely not the look they were going for.
Billy_TParticipantZN,
In my view, there is a huge difference between expressing opinions about public figures, and insulting posters here. I did the former. Bnw keeps doing the latter.
One way to “keep it in bounds,” at least as I see it, is to always note the difference. Remember the difference. Remember that when someone refers directly to a politician, it’s about that politician. And if that politician is called a racist, that isn’t directed at his or her fans. If supporters at various events act in racist ways, and are called on it, that still isn’t an attack on posters here.
Again, it’s like someone being critical of Kobe online, and then posters in that thread go crazy and get personal with the critic. The comment wasn’t about them.
Billy_TParticipantI find the entire “Trump as victim” meme beyond offensive. In reality, his rallies weren’t disrupted, until Chicago, and that was outside or well before the event, which Trump ended up cancelling. They were never “disrupted” by protesters inside while he was there. Trump and his little fascist wannabes did the disrupting.
What invariably occurred was this:
Young, lone black woman or man, enters the arena with sign or T-Shirt. Tries to express their anger at Trump’s overt racist pleas. They have no amplification, and can not possibly derail a Trump (performance art) speech, unless he lets them. He has the mic. He can easily ignore them and keep talking. But he doesn’t. He hears the Beer-Hall-Putsch shouts around the lone protester, smells the blood in the water like a shark, and then plays Il Duce, or Al Capone, demanding they be thrown out. Early on, he okayed the violence that was inflicted on these lone protesters, who were often beaten. He praised it and said he would pay the doctors’ bills. After being exposed, he tried to tone down his glee, at least in front of the cameras.
There is no “disruption” of the event if his USA! USA! USA! Trump! Trump! Trump!!! brown shirts just leave the lone protester alone. There is no “disruption” if Trump ignores them and goes on with his word salad. There is no “disruption” if Trump doesn’t egg on his white supremacist fanboys in the audience.
And ya know somethin’ else? Those lone protesters are damn brave, because they know they are likely to be attacked, but they still show up.
Trump is a bully, and a fraud, and a racist piece of garbage. The truly horrible thing about this race is that Clinton isn’t the antidote to any of that. The Dems picked the wrong year — not that there is ever a good year for this — to run an Establishment drone, with all kinds of skeletons in her closet.
-
AuthorPosts