Credit to Trump on NK

13

Replies

  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member
    edited June 18 #62
    bisley said:
    bisley said:
    Obama's presidency was intended to create enough chaos to destroy the idea of a representative republic, for all time. It was almost completely successful in California and made huge gains in a few other places. Unfortunately for the left, it finally did awaken a long dormant American spirit in enough non-voters and 'wobbly' Democrats to allow the second worst candidate in our history to defeat the absolute worst candidate in history. A Clinton win would have consolidated those gains so that the 'soft tyranny' of Obama could have been transitioned into a genuine authoritarian, all-powerful central government that would have consumed the blue and purple states and forced a secessionist outcry by many of the red states.

    The election of Donald Trump was probably the last hope for the survival of American exceptionalism, which is really nothing more than the belief that the United States was the exception to the rule that a free society could survive, where others had failed. Many of us held our nose and voted for him, simply to attempt to save the courts, thereby also saving the Constitution for a while. Many more voted for him because he was neither Democrat nor Republican, neither liberal nor conservative, and most of all, because he was not a classic politician.

    The Democrat party had mostly succeeded in de-educating our children and grand children, replacing their pride and patriotism with the necessary amount of hopelessness to allow an authoritarian left wing government to swoop in with the 'bread and circuses' needed to distract them from the traditions that made the USA the wealthiest and most economically and militarily powerful nation in world history. The price for all that was that we got a loud-mouthed life-long liberal who had only recently seen the light, and was still very crude in the way that he governed, but did at least believe in American exceptionalism and has a work ethic that is second to none in the annals of American politics.

    Donald Trump is far from what my idea of a great president is, but he is probably the only person who can survive the massive hatred that is being directed at him by the Democrats, who are using Hollywood, the major media outlets, and most of the education system to spew their bile out at him 24-7, and towards anyone who supports him. If nothing else, he has courage, determination, and a work ethic that runs circles around every other politician. His mistakes are frequent and large, but he is saving the republic, at least for a little while. Hopefully, the electorate is waking up to the point where he can survive and continue for long enough to pave the way for a successor who has learned enough to finish the job.

    Both Obama and Trump are transformational characters in American politics. Fortunately for America, Obama was more interested in golf and the trappings of power than actually working, so there was something left for Trump to work with.
    I think this post confuses the diametrically opposed philosophies about government that's held by a portion of citizens with the mostly fictional philosophical rhetoric of self serving politicians that would gladly switch parties at the drop of a hat if they could keep their hands in the till. On a generous day I'm willing acknowledge noble aspersions on a portion of the voting public, but I don't see it on Pennsylvania Avenue. Far as I can see both parties are supported, bankrolled, and serve the same lobby with mostly the same policies spun what ever way thats needed to plagiarize whatever constituency they think they need.
    It took me a long time to digest that first sentence, early, but I think I understand it, now.

    I think that you are right, if you mean that the elite forces that control so much of politics don't give a rat's ass about ideology, as long as their interests are served, and I also believe that there are plenty of politicians who will carry the water for whoever wields the most power.

    However, I'm hoping that the winner will be the power that does not begrudge the average person an opportunity to be productive, and more or less free to engage in capitalistic endeavor. I think that many of the elites, Trump among them, like for productive people to have a chance for a nice life, based on developing their own abilities. I don't know how much ideology figures into the equation, but it is a big deal to people who have not yet achieved 'elite' status.

    It could just be that the whole thing is just a struggle between the forces of good and evil, and determining which is which requires a lot of trial and error. Meanwhile, the peons will just continue to fight the battles that they think they understand.
    The good vs evil battle is the illusion that blinds the general public to the motives and actions of those who pull the strings. If you'll notice "the establishment" of pretty much both parties are virtually the same. That's by design. 
    Spin it however you want, but that's how most people probably see it, if you break it down into basic terms. Sorting out the actual result of any political action is too complicated for most people, who are simply trying to prosper within whatever 'sphere of influence' they find themselves struggling within. Everybody is trying to influence 'the masses,' whether you assign the blame to some all-powerful elitist cabal, or just identify individuals who are united in some ideological pursuit. I think you and Alf [EDIT: woops, I meant you and Jerm] were probably influenced a little bit too much by 'The Matrix,' or whatever science fiction theory that poly-sci college classes attempt to insert into the heads of unrealistic college students, these days.

    Whatever is driving political agendas these days, whether it be a secret alien invasion or your elitist theories, doesn't really matter much to people who are just trying to be producers in a free society. People do what they do for their own reasons, and don't just throw in the towel when somebody who claims to know all the answers tells them they are just too stupid to understand the day-to-day politics that they see as having an immediate influence on their ability to raise their families the way they choose or make a living in whatever environment they find themselves in.

    To accept your elitist theory is to say that there is no hope for the individual, so don't bother to try.
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 27,476 Senior Member
    Alpha, your statement about Trump being lucky if he gets "half the deal" from NK as Obama got from Iran is among the most idiotic things you've ever posted. It kinda explains why your high paying government related jobs never last too long. Obama gifted around 1.8 billion in cash to Iran and got absolutely nothing in return but lip service and that money being used to finance terrorism and costing American lives. Only you and your ilk would consider that an acceptable "deal".
    Trump has given up military exercises and met face to face with Kim and hasn't gotten a single thing in return yet. Hopefully he will. But I am doubtful it will be complete, verifiable denuclearization with the level of access we had in Iran.

    And for the record the $1.8 B was owed to Iran based on money we had taken from them in 1979 and was being litigated in international court. It was basically a settlement of a lawsuit that we would have lost.
    Except for the promise of a nuclear free NK he got nothing...   yep, nothing...  I'm sorry did you figure out one meeting was going to resolve this CF that has been cooking since the late 50s?
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,319 Senior Member
    The $400 million was for airplanes that the Iranian government paid for before their 1979 revolution that we decided to not deliver after that revolution.
    The 400 million had been placed in a trust fund that was frozen as a result of Iran's revolution. Iran had a claim against the US for that money plus interest but there is no mention of the claim against Iran for 465 million by the US. With both claims paid, Iran would have owed us money. There were claims that the money was released as a ransom in exchange for the release of some American prisoners.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,120 Senior Member
    edited June 18 #65
    The $400 million was for airplanes that the Iranian government paid for before their 1979 revolution that we decided to not deliver after that revolution.
    And the remainder was interest owed for holding that money nearly 40 years. The payment was a settlement of an international lawsuit in the Hague. Anyway, I understand that from your (Steve) and most people who post in 2A's perspective that everything Obama did was terrible and evil and everything Trump does is great and patriotic, but don't expect me to  stop challenging your confirmation bias with facts.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 9,400 Senior Member
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 6,692 Senior Member
    .................don't expect me to  stop challenging your confirmation bias with facts.
    So says the unbiased purveyor of facts...... :#
    I HAVE HATED COMMUNISTS EVEN BEFORE THEY CHANGED THEIR NAME TO LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    bisley said:

    To accept your elitist theory is to say that there is no hope for the individual, so don't bother to try.
    What you are describing is Fatalism. But whatever. I try to explain a concept to you, then get mocked for it relentlessly. It isn't worth the bother.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    The $400 million was for airplanes that the Iranian government paid for before their 1979 revolution that we decided to not deliver after that revolution.
    The 400 million had been placed in a trust fund that was frozen as a result of Iran's revolution. Iran had a claim against the US for that money plus interest but there is no mention of the claim against Iran for 465 million by the US. With both claims paid, Iran would have owed us money. There were claims that the money was released as a ransom in exchange for the release of some American prisoners.
    I haven't heard of the $465 million. I did know about the $400 million though. There was no way in hell we were going to deliver those F-15's after that!
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 10,091 Senior Member
    bisley said:
    bisley said:
    Obama's presidency was intended to create enough chaos to destroy the idea of a representative republic, for all time. It was almost completely successful in California and made huge gains in a few other places. Unfortunately for the left, it finally did awaken a long dormant American spirit in enough non-voters and 'wobbly' Democrats to allow the second worst candidate in our history to defeat the absolute worst candidate in history. A Clinton win would have consolidated those gains so that the 'soft tyranny' of Obama could have been transitioned into a genuine authoritarian, all-powerful central government that would have consumed the blue and purple states and forced a secessionist outcry by many of the red states.

    The election of Donald Trump was probably the last hope for the survival of American exceptionalism, which is really nothing more than the belief that the United States was the exception to the rule that a free society could survive, where others had failed. Many of us held our nose and voted for him, simply to attempt to save the courts, thereby also saving the Constitution for a while. Many more voted for him because he was neither Democrat nor Republican, neither liberal nor conservative, and most of all, because he was not a classic politician.

    The Democrat party had mostly succeeded in de-educating our children and grand children, replacing their pride and patriotism with the necessary amount of hopelessness to allow an authoritarian left wing government to swoop in with the 'bread and circuses' needed to distract them from the traditions that made the USA the wealthiest and most economically and militarily powerful nation in world history. The price for all that was that we got a loud-mouthed life-long liberal who had only recently seen the light, and was still very crude in the way that he governed, but did at least believe in American exceptionalism and has a work ethic that is second to none in the annals of American politics.

    Donald Trump is far from what my idea of a great president is, but he is probably the only person who can survive the massive hatred that is being directed at him by the Democrats, who are using Hollywood, the major media outlets, and most of the education system to spew their bile out at him 24-7, and towards anyone who supports him. If nothing else, he has courage, determination, and a work ethic that runs circles around every other politician. His mistakes are frequent and large, but he is saving the republic, at least for a little while. Hopefully, the electorate is waking up to the point where he can survive and continue for long enough to pave the way for a successor who has learned enough to finish the job.

    Both Obama and Trump are transformational characters in American politics. Fortunately for America, Obama was more interested in golf and the trappings of power than actually working, so there was something left for Trump to work with.
    I think this post confuses the diametrically opposed philosophies about government that's held by a portion of citizens with the mostly fictional philosophical rhetoric of self serving politicians that would gladly switch parties at the drop of a hat if they could keep their hands in the till. On a generous day I'm willing acknowledge noble aspersions on a portion of the voting public, but I don't see it on Pennsylvania Avenue. Far as I can see both parties are supported, bankrolled, and serve the same lobby with mostly the same policies spun what ever way thats needed to plagiarize whatever constituency they think they need.
    It took me a long time to digest that first sentence, early, but I think I understand it, now.

    I think that you are right, if you mean that the elite forces that control so much of politics don't give a rat's ass about ideology, as long as their interests are served, and I also believe that there are plenty of politicians who will carry the water for whoever wields the most power.

    However, I'm hoping that the winner will be the power that does not begrudge the average person an opportunity to be productive, and more or less free to engage in capitalistic endeavor. I think that many of the elites, Trump among them, like for productive people to have a chance for a nice life, based on developing their own abilities. I don't know how much ideology figures into the equation, but it is a big deal to people who have not yet achieved 'elite' status.

    It could just be that the whole thing is just a struggle between the forces of good and evil, and determining which is which requires a lot of trial and error. Meanwhile, the peons will just continue to fight the battles that they think they understand.
    The good vs evil battle is the illusion that blinds the general public to the motives and actions of those who pull the strings. If you'll notice "the establishment" of pretty much both parties are virtually the same. That's by design. 
    I know several missionaries that work in equatorial Africa that would appreciate a tag along if you want to get your good vs evil battle in focus, I can see when someone is trying pull some strings eventually, not everyone on here is in lock step with President Trump, time will tell, this incessant armchair quarterbacking from the left in the media is skewing the whole process, Rome was not built in a day, burned down pretty quick though, I will take Trumps building over Obamas any day at this time

    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member

    bisley said:

    To accept your elitist theory is to say that there is no hope for the individual, so don't bother to try.
    What you are describing is Fatalism. But whatever. I try to explain a concept to you, then get mocked for it relentlessly. It isn't worth the bother.
    Sorry to frustrate you so, but I didn't ask for your explanation of elite theory. I have run across numerous versions of it in the past, and have considered both the occasional truths found within in it and the extrapolations that have sprung from it, over the years. Mostly, I reject it as just another progressive theory that attempts to overwhelm simple (but not stupid)  folks.

    Having a theory and letting it define the 'lens' through which you view politics has the effect of putting yourself 'above the fray.' That may work for you, but for me, it just says, "I know what the final answer is, so the anecdotal trivia is irrelevant." Leftists have been using that as a ploy for a hundred years, and have yet to sell it to anybody except each other, and a few opportunists who can sell their own wares with it.

    Elite theory is just another philosophical position that people find interesting, but don't sell the family farm because of it - that would be Fatalism.

    ...and I am not mocking you - I just don't agree with you.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,319 Senior Member
    The $400 million was for airplanes that the Iranian government paid for before their 1979 revolution that we decided to not deliver after that revolution.
    And the remainder was interest owed for holding that money nearly 40 years. The payment was a settlement of an international lawsuit in the Hague. Anyway, I understand that from your (Steve) and most people who post in 2A's perspective that everything Obama did was terrible and evil and everything Trump does is great and patriotic, but don't expect me to  stop challenging your confirmation bias with facts.

    Did you ever consider that most folks here are substantially smarter than you give them credit for and have a stronger concept of right and wrong than you do? Doing what's best for the Country isn't contingent on the party or the person, at least it shouldn't be. I'm not overly fond of President Trump but there is no denying that he has accomplished a lot of good in the short time that he's been in office and weather he's doing the right thing out of patriotism or to prove himself to nurture his ego, he's still working pretty hard to make things right for the Country  as a whole rather than a segment of it. There is no question for me to prefer Trump over Obama, Clinton, or Sanders.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    edited June 18 #73
    bisley said:

    bisley said:

    To accept your elitist theory is to say that there is no hope for the individual, so don't bother to try.
    What you are describing is Fatalism. But whatever. I try to explain a concept to you, then get mocked for it relentlessly. It isn't worth the bother.
    Sorry to frustrate you so, but I didn't ask for your explanation of elite theory. I have run across numerous versions of it in the past, and have considered both the occasional truths found within in it and the extrapolations that have sprung from it, over the years. Mostly, I reject it as just another progressive theory that attempts to overwhelm simple (but not stupid)  folks.

    Having a theory and letting it define the 'lens' through which you view politics has the effect of putting yourself 'above the fray.' That may work for you, but for me, it just says, "I know what the final answer is, so the anecdotal trivia is irrelevant." Leftists have been using that as a ploy for a hundred years, and have yet to sell it to anybody except each other, and a few opportunists who can sell their own wares with it.

    Elite theory is just another philosophical position that people find interesting, but don't sell the family farm because of it - that would be Fatalism.

    ...and I am not mocking you - I just don't agree with you.
    If that is what you took away from it, I must have done a piss poor job of articulating my position. I apologize that I failed to shed some light on the concept. Your understanding of it doesn't come anywhere near what I was trying to convey.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member
    I'm just saying that if you buy into elite theory, what is the point of getting up in the morning?

    I prefer to believe that as long as you continue the struggle, based on your own understanding, the elites don't have much power over you, and are for all practical purposes, as irrelevant to you as you are to them.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    You are taking an abstract concept and treating it like it is concrete. Of course you will have issues with the concept that way.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 8,863 Senior Member
    Actually, they should have delivered the F-15's. Without additional training, spare parts, and technical support, those planes would have been as useful as a cinder block sitting on the tarmac........
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,319 Senior Member
    jbp-ohio said:
    Actually, they should have delivered the F-15's. Without additional training, spare parts, and technical support, those planes would have been as useful as a cinder block sitting on the tarmac........
    I was crewing F-15's in the Air Force at that time and many of the systems were so state of the art that there was a huge concern about any of the technology getting into the wrong hands even if the aircraft wasn't operational. Even the paint and radar reflective coatings were classified and still are.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member
    You are taking an abstract concept and treating it like it is concrete. Of course you will have issues with the concept that way.
    I'm all for abstract concepts and thinking outside of the box, when everybody is starting with a clean slate. But when your political opponents are pressing an advantage to come in for the kill, it's time to ditch the abstract and make a very concrete decision to fight for your survival.

    This country broke the mold for how to succeed against all of the intellectual predictions that political scientists and philosophers had been making for centuries. Sure, some of the principles are still sound, and some of the philosophical strategies are still good. But the pure, unbridled energy of free individuals has not been fully measured yet, and the individual has not yet been stifled. The theories are still just theories, and the rules for governing civilization are still being written.



  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    To understand the truth, it is sometimes best to see things from another perspective. Wambli shared a story with us about that once. I hope he chimes in with it again.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,387 Senior Member
    Hey, Jerm can really cook good eats all that attended the SE Shoots can attest to that.

    He has a nice soft and comfy butt too, cpj can attest to that.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    edited June 19 #81
    Do you guys look out for your own interests? Like when you earn money, you do it to support yourself and loved ones instead of for the neighbors up the road? Do you go to the grocery store and buy food to feed yourself, or are you doing it instead for the food pantry or humanity in general? That is called looking out for your own self interests. Of course, everyone does that.

    Now imagine that the people with money and power do the same thing. They are humans like us, right? What are they going to do? Look out for their own self interests. And since they have the power and money, they have a disproportionate influence on society when they look out for their own self interests. This is called Elitism, or Elite Theory.

    Apparently Bisley believes that because people are rich and powerful, they no longer look out for their own interests and to suggest otherwise is some theoretical liberal academic mumbo jumbo used to blind susceptible students from "reality". And somehow, if the rich and powerful did look out for themselves, any lesser individuals in a society would have no control of their destiny or free will. 
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 6,692 Senior Member
    Big Chief said:
    Hey, Jerm can really cook good eats all that attended the SE Shoots can attest to that.

    He has a nice soft and comfy butt too, cpj can attest to that.
    I don't know about the soft comfy butt, but I do know he makes a hellofa' yee-row sammich.
    I HAVE HATED COMMUNISTS EVEN BEFORE THEY CHANGED THEIR NAME TO LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,120 Senior Member
    Do you guys look out for your own interests? Like when you earn money, you do it to support yourself and loved ones instead of for the neighbors up the road? Do you go to the grocery store and buy food to feed yourself, or are you doing it instead for the food pantry or humanity in general? That is called looking out for your own self interests. Of course, everyone does that.

    Now imagine that the people with money and power do the same thing. They are humans like us, right? What are they going to do? Look out for their own self interests. And since they have the power and money, they have a disproportionate influence on society when they look out for their own self interests. This is called Elitism, or Elite Theory.

    Apparently Bisley believes that because people are rich and powerful, they no longer look out for their own interests and to suggest otherwise is some theoretical liberal academic mumbo jumbo used to blind susceptible students from "reality". And somehow, if the rich and powerful did look out for themselves, any lesser individuals in a society would have no control of their destiny or free will. 
    Where liberals and conservatives (as opposed to Ds and Rs) tend to differ is that conservatives tend to generally fall on the side of what's good for the elite is good for the country and that liberals tend to fall on the side of what's good for elites is always bad for the country. In reality sometimes it's good and sometimes it's bad. That said, regardless what the voters think, politicians on both sides pretty much always implement policies that are good for the elite, because despite the greatest intentions of our founders to diffuse the power of the elite through the structure of our government, the elite still wield a massively disproportionate amount of power.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,120 Senior Member
    Bisley, I highly recommend doing some digging into Adam smiths original texts, specifically Wealth of Nations and some of his thoughts on Inequity, wages, high profits, and politicians. He essentially argues that in a well functioning economy profits should never be high and that countries with high profits are the least healthy and closest to ruin. He argues for high wages (because wages equal buying power) and for punitive taxes on inheritance and those who live on interest/profits of others labor alone (because they are unproductive and provide nothing useful to society).

    You frequently frame everything as if it is a choice between capitalism and socialism/communism, but often the real choice is between effectively functioning capitalism that works to maximize the wealth of nations (and the average worker) vs. crony capitalism that works to maximize only the wealth of the elite. 
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member
    edited June 19 #85

    Apparently Bisley believes that because people are rich and powerful, they no longer look out for their own interests and to suggest otherwise is some theoretical liberal academic mumbo jumbo used to blind susceptible students from "reality". And somehow, if the rich and powerful did look out for themselves, any lesser individuals in a society would have no control of their destiny or free will. 
    Speaking of mumbo jumbo, let's go back to when you first injected 'elite theory' into the discussion. If I remember correctly, you were scolding me for making partisan comments in response to Alf's multi-post condemnation of conservatism. ( http://forums.gunsandammo.com/discussion/36164/ryan-bites-the-dust/p2 )

    You explained to me that I wasn't being fair to Alf because I was looking through a partisan lens. He wasn't, of course, because his leftist viewpoint was being expressed while looking through an elite theory 'lens.' You suggested that if I would educate myself a little better by checking the Cliff's Notes on elite theory, I might just be able to understand enough of it to see things 'correctly.'

    My point, then, was the same as it is now. In order for you or Alf to sell your points to me, you have to set rules that automatically make all of my arguments irrelevant. I contend that, while interesting and not without some merit, elite theory is just another political theory, and not the 'end all, be all' of political discourse. I prefer to argue based on facts, or at least what I perceive to be facts. I get it that there is an elite class and that they look after their own interests. But they are not able to control everything, and all is not hopeless for us peons. We all need to remain engaged in the political process, go vote, serve on juries and teach our children to be good citizens. If we start to believe that we are simply insignificant ants being manipulated by pitiless gods, we will just waste away.

    Conservatives tend to be realists, and vice versa. Liberals tend to grab at unproven theories, and take from them whatever they need, to talk down to or stifle those who disagree with them. If I argue global warming, in return I get climate theory, based on a hundred years of data . If I argue evolution, I get Darwin's theory. All of that stuff is very interesting, but mostly beside the point, till proven.


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 23,675 Senior Member
    Bisley, I highly recommend doing some digging into Adam smiths original texts, specifically Wealth of Nations and some of his thoughts on Inequity, wages, high profits, and politicians. He essentially argues that in a well functioning economy profits should never be high and that countries with high profits are the least healthy and closest to ruin. He argues for high wages (because wages equal buying power) and for punitive taxes on inheritance and those who live on interest/profits of others labor alone (because they are unproductive and provide nothing useful to society).

    You frequently frame everything as if it is a choice between capitalism and socialism/communism, but often the real choice is between effectively functioning capitalism that works to maximize the wealth of nations (and the average worker) vs. crony capitalism that works to maximize only the wealth of the elite. 
    I bolded parts of your post that show where your sympathies lie. HIGH WAGES, as in wages not commensurate for the job performed, cause inflation, and tax bracket creep. That is a known fact. Punitive taxes on inheritance are the result of envy, and the people that espouse it are, generally, too tired and haven't got rested up enough to do what it takes to build that wealth. So they believe since they are too tired to work, that no one should build wealth, and if they do that it should be taken away from them when they die leaving the heirs with little to nothing. Interest/profits are what makes businesses grow. Without interest on investments no one would invest in business. Businesses would not grow and would soon go out of business if they operated at no profit. They would not be able to expand and hire more people.

    You and Adam Smith have a decidedly socialist bent on business, wages, and the free market. I would ask that you name every single poor person that has given you a job with high wages all out of proportion to the work performed. I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

    Like Winston Churchill said, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

    I may be a Deplorable, but at least I'm not a Liberal!!!



  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,120 Senior Member
    tennmike said:
    Bisley, I highly recommend doing some digging into Adam smiths original texts, specifically Wealth of Nations and some of his thoughts on Inequity, wages, high profits, and politicians. He essentially argues that in a well functioning economy profits should never be high and that countries with high profits are the least healthy and closest to ruin. He argues for high wages (because wages equal buying power) and for punitive taxes on inheritance and those who live on interest/profits of others labor alone (because they are unproductive and provide nothing useful to society).

    You frequently frame everything as if it is a choice between capitalism and socialism/communism, but often the real choice is between effectively functioning capitalism that works to maximize the wealth of nations (and the average worker) vs. crony capitalism that works to maximize only the wealth of the elite. 
    I bolded parts of your post that show where your sympathies lie. HIGH WAGES, as in wages not commensurate for the job performed, cause inflation, and tax bracket creep. That is a known fact. Punitive taxes on inheritance are the result of envy, and the people that espouse it are, generally, too tired and haven't got rested up enough to do what it takes to build that wealth. So they believe since they are too tired to work, that no one should build wealth, and if they do that it should be taken away from them when they die leaving the heirs with little to nothing. Interest/profits are what makes businesses grow. Without interest on investments no one would invest in business. Businesses would not grow and would soon go out of business if they operated at no profit. They would not be able to expand and hire more people.

    You and Adam Smith have a decidedly socialist bent on business, wages, and the free market. I would ask that you name every single poor person that has given you a job with high wages all out of proportion to the work performed. I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

    Like Winston Churchill said, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

    Ha! This might be my favorite post! I just got someone to call Adam Smith, the father of capitalism a socialist! Of course socialism didn't even exist for a century after his death. It also of course highlights how far current conservative economic thought has been perverted away from the source material.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 27,476 Senior Member
    To understand the truth, it is sometimes best to see things from another perspective. Wambli shared a story with us about that once. I hope he chimes in with it again.
    I'll be happy to tell the story again because it was one of the most important lessons in my life.  I was a college philosophy class and first day in the class the professor had a red vase on his desk.  The first thing he did was ask every student to give him a description of this vase and of course we all tediously had to listen to the whole class one by one describe that red vase.  

    At the end of the exercise the professor turned the vase around and it showed a patter of flowers.  No one except for him could have seen this because of the viewing angle.  He proceeded to explain to us that there is no reality, only perspective.  That if tomorrow he had encountered a group of us having lunch and he had said he had a vase with a flower pattern on it on his desk we would have all argued with him that it was plain red. And he extrapolated this very logically to make the point that if we refuse to even admit that there might be a completely different perspective, conflict arises, and that in extreme cases countries have gone to war over jut differences of perspective.  It was a sobering lesson.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 27,476 Senior Member

    Do you guys look out for your own interests? Like when you earn money, you do it to support yourself and loved ones instead of for the neighbors up the road? Do you go to the grocery store and buy food to feed yourself, or are you doing it instead for the food pantry or humanity in general? That is called looking out for your own self interests. Of course, everyone does that.

    Now imagine that the people with money and power do the same thing. They are humans like us, right? What are they going to do? Look out for their own self interests. And since they have the power and money, they have a disproportionate influence on society when they look out for their own self interests. This is called Elitism, or Elite Theory.

    Apparently Bisley believes that because people are rich and powerful, they no longer look out for their own interests and to suggest otherwise is some theoretical liberal academic mumbo jumbo used to blind susceptible students from "reality". And somehow, if the rich and powerful did look out for themselves, any lesser individuals in a society would have no control of their destiny or free will. 
    Very well put.  As Gordon Gekko said (Wall Street, 1987) , "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.".  It is what drives a man to serve his personal interests of those and his family's well being to the best of his abilities.  Good or Bad is strictly based on the effect and personal intentions as this greed is exercised, and BOTH are a matter of perspective.  

    That's why to some Trump is the devil and to others he is a saint, and NEITHER end of the spectrum is usually willing to look at the other's perspective.  To me he is nothing but an effective businessman that best serves my needs (as I perceive them and according to MY interests) when he performs the duties of leader of this country.  No Superman cape on him from my perspective.  And there is absolutely no emotion attached to this perception except for my own greed.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,296 Senior Member
    edited June 20 #90
    Big Chief said:
    Hey, Jerm can really cook good eats all that attended the SE Shoots can attest to that.

    He has a nice soft and comfy butt too, cpj can attest to that.
    I don't know about the soft comfy butt, but I do know he makes a hellofa' yee-row sammich.
    Cpj made those. Chris is one heck of a grill dude. It sounds silly, but it takes a bit of a knack to use a griddle right. He has it all figured out. I just brought the stuff. Heck... Zorba brought the sauce. I cooked french fries.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,127 Senior Member

    You frequently frame everything as if it is a choice between capitalism and socialism/communism, but often the real choice is between effectively functioning capitalism that works to maximize the wealth of nations (and the average worker) vs. crony capitalism that works to maximize only the wealth of the elite. 
    It is actually even simpler than that. I am more of a student of history than economics or politics, so I naturally use historical evidence to come to conclusions about economic or political subjects. Socialism fails, as soon as the government has spent all of the money that it can confiscate from whatever capitalistic endeavors that it has allowed to exist. Therefore, any trend towards socialism is dangerous to a nation built upon capitalistic endeavor - easy to understand, and irrefutable from a historic perspective. Capitalism and socialism may have approximately equal amounts of moral pitfalls, but the difference is that, under capitalism, the poor usually have something to eat.

    You, and most other liberals, favor intellectual theories that have achieved consensus among other intellectuals, but have no historical evidence to recommend them. Economics is a very complicated subject, and even the best economists are wrong about half the time. This is the reason that the US economy soars under conservatives and flattens out under liberals. American entrepreneurs don't follow economic theory to any great extent. They buy low and sell high, or they build a better mousetrap that other ignorant people want to buy. Simple.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.