Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Guard Dog

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    644

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    206

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Guard Dog

  1. Guard Dog
    And I didn't forget my homework assignment. I'm doing some work around the house. Trying to get it all done before the sun sets
  2. Guard Dog
    We have great Universities and great Health Care and while none of it is free there are many, and many more forms of public and private assistance to help pay for it. Many of those do require some form of sacrifice on the part of the recipient. For example I attended a community college and then a public university and the US Government paid for about 75% of it. I paid for the rest myself. How? I served in the US Marines for 5 years. There are many such opportunities. In the state of Georgia if you attended K-12 in the state you get your first two years of community college free courtesy of the Georgia Lottery. Right here in TN is you agree to two years of part time community service and maintain a 3.0 GPA the State will pay 100% of tuition for Community College or Trade School or Adult Education if someone wants to get a GED. There are national groups like Calvary Chapel who will help with tuition in return for a year of missionary work. The Peace Corps, Amnesty International, Merchant Marines, all have tuition assistance. Many business will pay employees tuition in return for an agreement to work at that company for a period of time. The opportunities are limitless and while it is never free and clear it is all attainable IF someone is wiling to do what is required to have it.
  3. Guard Dog
    Now THAT would be a torch in the hay barn.
  4. Guard Dog
    No way. If Hillary won he'd have that New York mansion to himself for at least four years. Can you even imagine the debauchery that guy would have gotten into?
  5. Guard Dog
  6. Guard Dog
    wait, what? You lost me there... Are you seriously saying that Marx and Mussolini both followed the same ideology only in different times? No. As the etymology of the word describes, it is the voicing of an opinion that goes against the current political dogma. In the 80's and 90's it was fit to call it a form of fascism because of the conservatives in the US enforcing moral purity everywhere. Today it is political incorrect to go against equality. Isn't going against equality against the very foundation of the US? "That all men are created equal, that they have been endowed by their creator with with certain unalienable rights" and so on.... Going against equality is a much more serious issue than the overuse of political correctness What you think qualifies for equality has nothing to do with what political correctness is. I think "equality" in this context means that all humans regardless of gender, race, social class, religion, personal beliefs, past, sexual orientation and identity and whatever other differences there might be should be considered equal, but please do explain to me what your definition is You are confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. The former is freedom, the latter is oppression. In the US we have true equality of opportunity. Anyone can go to college. Anyone can start a business, anyone can become anything the want to be, or at least try as hard as they wish to. Not everyone is willing to do what it takes, and even doing it is no guarantee of success. The latter by necessity reduces everyone to the lowest common denominator. There is no motivation to work harder, innovate, invent, or anything. It will get you nothing the guy sweeping the floor doesn't get and he didn't had ve to work near as hard for it. As you an Marx pointed out we need superior human being who don't want. We're humans, not ants. It's a great system but it's not for humans. YES!!! But it is no binary choice... It's not either communism or capitalism. We should combine the best of two worlds. Wouldn't you say? A free market, but with enogh regulations to disable the creation of an extreme two class system. laws that protect workers. Equality of education as in free schools and universities. Free healthcare. Welfare for those who lost their jobs. And again, all of this embedded in a free market. OK, you do realize the US has about 85% of what you are asking for here right?
  7. Guard Dog
    wait, what? You lost me there... Are you seriously saying that Marx and Mussolini both followed the same ideology only in different times? No. As the etymology of the word describes, it is the voicing of an opinion that goes against the current political dogma. In the 80's and 90's it was fit to call it a form of fascism because of the conservatives in the US enforcing moral purity everywhere. Today it is political incorrect to go against equality. Isn't going against equality against the very foundation of the US? "That all men are created equal, that they have been endowed by their creator with with certain unalienable rights" and so on.... Going against equality is a much more serious issue than the overuse of political correctness What you think qualifies for equality has nothing to do with what political correctness is. I think "equality" in this context means that all humans regardless of gender, race, social class, religion, personal beliefs, past, sexual orientation and identity and whatever other differences there might be should be considered equal, but please do explain to me what your definition is You are confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. The former is freedom, the latter is oppression. In the US we have true equality of opportunity. Anyone can go to college. Anyone can start a business, anyone can become anything the want to be, or at least try as hard as they wish to. Not everyone is willing to do what it takes, and even doing it is no guarantee of success. The latter by necessity reduces everyone to the lowest common denominator. There is no motivation to work harder, innovate, invent, or anything. It will get you nothing the guy sweeping the floor doesn't get and he didn't have to work near as hard for it. As you an Marx pointed out we need superior human being who don't want. We're humans, not ants. It's a great system but it's not for humans.
  8. Guard Dog
    I'm happy that we can have a civilised debate on this subject As a person that is generally more in favour than against Marx, let me try to answer that. First of all, some historical background: Marx created his theory during the time of the industrial revolution. It was a time of extreme class division between wealthy and poor, an extreme injustice towards the poor. 16 work hours a day with little pay and no security whatsoever was common. Insurance or workers rights were unheard of. So, in this situation there comes Marx. And he is against this injustice and comes up with something he considers a better system. Now, extreme circumstances create extreme opinions, and so he created the idea of communism and the absence of such things as say private property. Now, I agree with you that Marx concrete ideas are not viable. They are to extreme, and for them to work they'd require "better" humans (and Marx even admits pretty much exactly this) without any sense of egotistical motivations. But that doesn't mean that the underlying thought is bad. Now, I like to refer to "everyone according to his abilities, to everyone according to his needs". It basically means that everyone contributes as much as he can to society, and everyone is given as much as he needs by society. And to be honest, if Marx would have been around in for example today's Germany, I think he probably would be quite happy and would not have come up with similarly extreme thoughts. BUT as I said, I still support the underlying thought. And to realise especially the second part (everyone is given as much as he needs), you need government intervention to protect workers rights or society. I'm not saying all capitals is bad (that's a ridiculous claim), but I'm saying a fusion of the two is great, something we in Germany would refer to as "social market economy". Free market is great! But society should do two things: 1. Give everyone as much as he needs, so I heavily support such things as free healthcare, free education (both school and university), good welfare and so on (I'm also a supporter of guaranteed basic income, an idea where everyone gets a small number of money every month regardless of everything; the money is to assure a certain standard of living for everyone) 2. Every member of society needs to contribute as it is necessary to support the system in place: basically means high taxes I'll come back to this... pressed for time right now
  9. Guard Dog
    Ben this whole "cultural Marxism" sounds like a made up term to me. Marxism is an economic theory. It doesn't really translate to social mores. The countries that practices the economics of Marx were just garden variety totalitarian states. But then they would have to be because who in their right minds would practice Marxist economics voluntarily.
  10. Guard Dog
    Wow. That's certainly not something I'd expect from you, though perhaps I'm simply not fully understanding your meaning. What you're saying is if a sufficient* amount of your fellow Americans agreed to impose a social transformation that is anathema to you, on everyone including yourself, you'd just shrug and bend over? Why not simply ask for, nay, demand the right to opt out of a social contract whose terms are being radically redefined? Seems to me that you either undervalue your own core beliefs, or place an undue importance on "legality". Laws, like markets, money and all that, are man-made things, meant to serve humans. Not the other way around. *remember: governance 101 is about making sure you have the necessary "majority" to get away with whatever. Jurisdictions, voting calendars, quorum, judicial obstructionism, and so on and so forth. It doesn't take legitimacy, just political savvy. No I'd probably move elsewhere. But we are being really hypothetical here. It's easy for me to say how I'd react over something so unlikely to ever happen. I probably have better chance of becoming Pope... and I'm not catholic. Plus remember in the US it would take a 3/4 majority to do something like that.
  11. Guard Dog
  12. Guard Dog
    Totalitarian does not just mean you don't get to pick you leaders. And no, tolerance means you get you say your peace and no one stops you or shouts you down for doing it. If the majority of the USA votes to hold a convention of states and alters the US Constitution to something like Marxism I'd tolerate it in that I'd not take up arms to fight it if it was done legally by the proper majorities. If it were done by fiat by a political faction in power there would be a civil war and you can bet I'd fight in it. See the difference? I don't like abortion. I think it's cold blooded murder (after the 3rd trimester anyway) but I would never tell someone they can't have one because it's not my place to impose my morality on anyone else. They have to be free to choose for themselves. You mentioned guns. I have a lot of them. I won't tell anyone else they must have on and I won't suffer anyone else telling me I can't. Tolerance of behavior you disagree with is the price a free country demands of it's citizens. If you don't like guns you don't have to buy one but you don't get to tell someone else they can't. If you like communism you can talk about it, write about it, agitate about it and hell I'll even buy you poster board to make signs. And no one will stop you. But at the end of the day you can't make someone listen or agree or conform.
  13. Guard Dog
    I read through that... The first thing I noticed was simply a mistake: the article says "totalitarian aka police state". That is simply not true. A police state is a totalitarian system, but not all totalitarian systems are police states. The author is either intentionally or unintentionally working with placative yet wrong images, whatever it is, he does not exactly earn my favour. Anyway, here is the thing about free speech: In a society, you need to play by the rules. In the case of many western countries such as the US that rules are the constitution. And any speech that goes against that constitution will obviously be prohibited, because the constitution is the foundation of the society we live in. And let's say your view is technically not against the constitution but is very controversial: if you are contriversial, you can not not expect backlash. If I go on the streets in the US praising Marx, then I will have the right to do that, yes, but society will be against me. And that is because my view is against the common believe. It is not a question of right or wrong. If I rebel against a popular believe, I should expect nothing but backlash. Maybe I will find some agreement, and maybe I am even right, but I will still get that backlash because I go against common beliefs. I just made the same point several times, but that's okay. The only way a totalitarian state is not also a police state is is if everyone in it agrees 100% of the time. We are humans, not ants. We think for ourselves. Totalitarian by definition does not tolerate dissent. And dissent is often treated to bullet-in-the-head therapy in totalitarian countries. If you go on the streets praising Marx in the US half the people will have no idea what you are doing and the other half will avoid you because they they'll think you're asking for money or something. No one will stop you and no one give you any "backlash". You'll likely be ignored. We're pretty tolerant of opinions here. Except on college campuses. But if you go there spouting Marx you'll probably get laid.
  14. Guard Dog
    In and of itself? Nothing. Political correctness is a tool. It's terrible in that it's only function is dominate and suppress free speech. But like any tool the real evil is in the hands that use it.
  15. Guard Dog
    I found it! Since this topic started I remembered an excellent article on this very point. Found it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/the-emergence-of-orwellia_b_7688758.html
  16. Guard Dog
    So I haven't read any fantasy lately so I tried out Gardens of the Moon which is the first book in a series by Steven Erikson. Jesus what a steaming pile of mess this book it. I got about 3/4 of the way through and I've had enough. There is no plot. It's a book of subplots and enough characters to fill a Grizzly's games and not one of them are interesting. Maybe this will start to make sense in book 2 or 3 but I won't find out because I just remembered why I don't read much fantasy. I've read Elder Scrolls fan-fiction that was better than this.
  17. Guard Dog
    And Kelverin. And I saw one from Tarna. We've lost some good guys through the years.
  18. Guard Dog
    Another thing to consider about the "shy voter" PMP & Bruce mentioned. Unless you live here you can't imagine the sheer NUMBER of polls, phone calls, man-on-the-street interviews that go on during the Presidential election. A lot of folks stop answering their phones if they don't know the number or refuse to even discuss it when asked. You just get sick of it.
  19. Guard Dog
    Yes volo, in the US there are uninformed people on both sides of the political spectrum Whats your point? Should we all post hundreds of videos where they always interview people who don't understand much of politics and say things like " look everyone...look how stoooooopid the Americans all " . Its biased, inaccurate and childish and doesn't reflect the intellectual reality of the USA Plus a video showing a half dozen idiots isn't much of a sample size when nearly 130M votes were cast.
  20. Guard Dog
    It was the microwave oven. Good guess about the GFCI Azdeus, All the kitchen outlets have to have them by code. But the microwave is a overheard range mounted and it's on a circuit with the range fan & light. I put the inductive ampmeter on the power input and when the magnetron kicks on the current draw spikes and trips the breaker. A trip to HHGregg and two hours later and they have a brand new microwave. And I'm out $200 but thems the breaks.
  21. Guard Dog
    A little good news: http://ballot-access.org/2016/11/11/libertarian-party-becomes-first-nationally-organized-party-other-than-the-republican-and-democratic-parties-to-have-500000-registrants/
  22. Guard Dog
    Well it was bound to happen. I got a call from the tenant in my townhouse. They are nice folks by the way. Couldn't be happier with them. The problem is the microwave oven trips the circuit breaker every time they use it. All the breakers are 15A which is as high as the county will let me go. So either the breaker is weak, which I can test by just replacing it. There is something wrong with the microwave (it wasn't new anyway) or I will need to call an electrician. I'm hoping the first is true, can live with the second, dreading the third. I just changed the battery in my Fluke 902 Multimeter, packed my tools and away we go.
  23. Guard Dog
    If only that were true. While it is true that there are millions of people world wide that don't buy their BS anymore, the sad and scary truth is that many more millions still slurp it up, subconsciously if not consciously. On top of that, while there are millions who don't buy the mainstream media's BS anymore, many of these millions still do suffer from believing misinformation that they did buy from it before they woke up to the fact that it was a BS peddling store. Zing
  24. Guard Dog
    McMullin? What is wrong with them? Why not run some one with a shred of decency or credibility? Name recognition.
  25. Guard Dog
    In 2000 there were a total of 105,505,104 votes cast: Republicans: 50,456,002 Democrats: 50,999,897 Green: 2,882,995 Libertarian: 384,431 Others less than 200,00 combined In 2004 there were 122,294,846 votes: Republican: 52,040,610 Democrat: 51,028,444 Independent: 465,151 Libertarian: 397,265 Green 119,855 Misc < 180,000 In 2008 there were 131,313,820 votes cast Democrat: 69,498,516 Republican: 59,948,323 Independent: 739,034 Libertarian: 523,715 Green: 161,797 Misc < 200,000 In 2012 there were 129,085,410 votes cast Democrats: 65,917,795 Republicans: 60,933,504 Libertarian: 1,275,971 Green: 469,627 Constitution: 122,389 Misc < 150,000 And this year we had 127,738,693 Democrats: 60,751,170 Republicans: 60,175,470 Libertarians: 4,144,118 Green: 1,242493 Independent: 479,300 Constitution: 181,622. So, some observations. The Republicans get 47-50% of the vote every time. They have been doing that as far back as 1992. That appears to be the Republican ceiling. The Democrats are trending down at about the same rate and 3rd Party and independents are trending up. One might surmise the 3rd parties hurt the D more than the R. But Johnson got the most votes from Red States and Stein go her most from Blue States, particularly Oregon where she came in 3rd. So that doesn't really work. The Libertarians are growing. Every election since 1996 has been an improvement on the previous. It's hard not to be excited about that. Plus rumor has it they are pushing Evan McMullin to run as the Libertarian nominee in 2020. It would make a heck of a lot of sense to me, but there will be resistance. The LP has a lot of young faces lining up for a shot. The Green Party nearly died when Nader left to run as an independent. But this year they had a good run and I'd credit Stein's tenacity for that. Whatever you think of her politics she hustled this campaign. The Constitution party is stuck in neutral.
×
×
  • Create New...