US Politics

[Luftwaffles]

when you have 47% of the country not contributing a dime and always demanding more.

 

Oh boy do I have a story for you. Last night, I went to go feed my dog, and he ate the entire bowl of food and drank a whole dish of water. I then go to give him some more food, and he eats that too and just stares at me, obviously wanting more. Little fucker never does anything for me, and he just expects me to feed him all the goddamn time, even though he gives me nothing. THAT is the problem with our country.

 

Seriously, though, where is that 47% number coming from? I can't say I've heard it before.

[TheMightyEthan]

I'm immune to the "sad sack" stories about people who are sick and dying in the street. What then of the man and wife who worked hard and saved.

 

Life trumps property. Period.

[Johnny]

I'm immune to the "sad sack" stories about people who are sick and dying in the street. What then of the man and wife who worked hard and saved. They paid their way through school and made risks on the future and would forgo luxuries to save for a rainy day. Why is it fair that the people who make the right choices should see a third or more of their income taken away by the government (Federal, State, possibly County and Local) when you have 47% of the country not contributing a dime and always demanding more. You get really annoyed when you hear some politician saying that you can afford to cut out a little more for your budget or work a little more overtime to pay for the student loans of some snot-nosed ironic kid who got themselves $50,000 in college debt by studying Nineteenth Century Feminist Literature.

 

I'm immune to the sad stories of the privileged families living in houses, driving their cars to their steady workplaces. What of the men and women sick and dying in the street? They paid their way through school, taking the same risks and making the choices they believed were right. Why is it fair that people who were dealt the wrong cards at the wrong moment should be neglected aid because those whom fortune smiled upon wants a new swimming pool? You get really annoyed when you hear some guy who's gone through all the risks and come up on top act like he couldn't just as well have had the misfortune of losing their job or having a medical crisis when their finances weren't in a position to handle it.

[deanb]

Private roads in the UK are generally residential. They're pretty much just fancy drive ways. My grandma has about 40 yards or so of "private road" leading up to hers and her neighbours house. It's not really what I was talking about when I said leaving it up to private entities. I'm talking something like a hundred mile stretch of the A1 being built and owned by Walter Thompson or something.

 

I don't think I've ever personally made any particular opinion for or against the founding fathers btw. I think at most I've highlighted the suggestion the US constitution be rewrote frequently.

 

As far as "sad sack" stories go and people making the wrong choices you know stuff like kidney failure, old age, cancer, etc aren't "choices" right? These are things that happen and people have pretty much zero control over it. If folks did have the choice them I'm sure they'd choose not to get ill. Heck just because people have a job and paid their school fees themselves doesn't mean they're immune to becoming ill either and they're just as likely to get fucked over by the system too. If not more so since depending on the severity of their illness they'll likely be laid off from that job they worked hard at school to be qualified for and many hours working up promotions only to be put back to square one again. Those student loan debts wouldn't be so high if there was government control and regulation on the fees, but hey; free market is awesome right?

 

@Sprok: 47% unemployment rate? I dunno, it does sound astronomically high to be true.

[TheMightyEthan]

To explain the 47% thing: in 2009 47% of US households paid no federal income tax.

 

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm

 

However, that doesn't mean they don't still pay taxes. From the article:

 

Of course, income taxes don't tell the whole story. Workers are also subject to payroll taxes, which support Social Security and Medicare.

 

When considering federal income taxes in combination with payroll taxes, the percent of households with a net liability of zero or less is estimated to be 24% this year, according to the Tax Policy Center's estimates.

[Chronixal]

Private roads in the UK are generally residential. They're pretty much just fancy drive ways. My grandma has about 40 yards or so of "private road" leading up to hers and her neighbours house. It's not really what I was talking about when I said leaving it up to private entities. I'm talking something like a hundred mile stretch of the A1 being built and owned by Walter Thompson or something.

 

And those that are privately owned are sinking faster than a lead stone. http://www.guardian....lue?INTCMP=SRCH

 

I would guess that 47% figure is those claiming any form of government benefit/assistance, a huge portion of that being pensions. Something good wage-slaves always seem to forget or purposely factor out of their rage. "Boo, let's kill all handouts! Except pensions, I worked for that!".

 

EDIT: NVM, reading the above. Still, point stands.

Edited May 20, 2012 by Chronixal

[Battra92]

As far as "sad sack" stories go and people making the wrong choices you know stuff like kidney failure, old age, cancer, etc aren't "choices" right?

 

You could get hit by a bus tomorrow. Yet I assume you cross the street. Life is a journey full of risk and reward. If you try to eliminate the risk you lessen the reward. When government encroaches into people's lives to such an extent that there is no gain to be found they will either move elsewhere or live mediocre lives.

[Johnny]

You would find your own life less meaningful because some other people would no longer live in misery?

[deanb]

What reward is to be gained from minimizing the risk by crossing at traffic lights instead of making a "risk" and dashing across the road in front of a bus? The only reward is I might not get hit by a bus. But that "reward" is also there if I just cross like a sane person.

If it's a mediocre life to not be a road pancake then so be it.

 

Ultimately I think what you've just written is just irrelevant babble that's dodging the point. But I was curious on an expansion of your point on folks making right/wrong choices and I guess this was my reward.

[Hot Heart]

The government built those crossings with taxpayers' money, Dean. IT'S AN ENCROACHMENT.

[TheMightyEthan]

Obviously we should just abolish all laws and government entirely, and let every live or die, succeed or fail as fortune dictates.

[Hot Heart]

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2000-07-16/

[Luftwaffles]

Obviously we should just abolish all laws and government entirely, and let every live or die, succeed or fail as fortune dictates.

 

And suddenly, right before our eyes, Ethan became Ayn Rand.

[SomTervo]

[Thursday Next]

Battra, how can you say that they would never use food stamps when there were "times when the church food basket kept us fed"? Your parents clearly aren't above taking a freebie when it's offered.

 

Simple, it's not the government's job.

 

 

You said your parents would never dream of accepting welfare or food stamps, but they did take the church foodbasket. Your parents had a choice, take a welfare cheque or take from the church. They chose the church. Me, I'm not about encourage the church unless I have to so I'd take the welfare cheque. That said, if it was starving to death or setting aside my principles, I'd swallow my pride and take the church basket. If the choice was not there are you really trying to tell me that they would have starved rather than take a government handout? It is very much the government's job to keep their citizenry alive and kicking.

 

Also, have to say, I'm not Jonny's biggest fan and I've never made a secret of that. But what you said was bang out of order. There was absolutely no call for that sort of personal attack.

[Battra92]

Also, have to say, I'm not Jonny's biggest fan and I've never made a secret of that. But what you said was bang out of order. There was absolutely no call for that sort of personal attack.

 

I know no one believes me but I wasn't even talking about him. I stopped reading his posts a long time ago.

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

Apparently there are a ton of Super PAC ads on TV recently. Doesn't bother me; I don't watch TV. But now they're appearing on YouTube, and instead of voting against Obama, all I want to do is strangle the asshole that is putting attack ads before my kitten videos.

[TheMightyEthan]

Adblock is your friend (make sure to whitelist the forum though).

[Yantelope V2]

Adblock plus is the best plugin ever. I love it so much.

[TheMightyEthan]

I agree wholeheartedly. Though I'm surprised sites like Youtube don't detect that you're using it and block the actual video from playing too.

[deanb]

 

Just to highlight, but it is a possibility here btw. So yeah, if your'e running adblocker please add an exception for this place n the blog. It's only a simple square on the side of each site.

[Mr. GOH!]

I know I'm late to the party, but I just wanted to respond to Yant's description of the healthcare situation to Chronxial.

 

Buying and selling insurance policies across state lines is something we both agree on! Though it matters little if states retain their inconsistent hodge-podge of insurance regulations. For it to be effective in lowering premiums, there would need to be some sort of federal action beyond a law allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines. As it stands, health insurance is mainly regulated by each state, aside from a few provisions of Obamacare that have already gone into effect (adult child coverage and coverage for pre-existing conditions). If the state regulations are effective on out-of-state insurers, then the only efficiencies gained would be operational efficiencies (cheaper operating costs), which would not involve very big savings for the end consumer. If the regulations of each state are *not* binding on out of state insurers, then the market could work. But it would be federal action at the expense of states' autonomy. I have no issues with this at all. In fact, if buying and selling policies across state lines were to pass someday, I'd rather have federal regulation of basic health insurance if only to encourage a faster development of a national marketplace. I think insurance is one of the few markets where fewer sellers would be salutary (as my advocacy for single payer insurance no doubt attests), as insurance companies with larger customer bases would face less risk overall and be able to offer more affordable insurance for folks who are more risky; as the pool grows, each marginal risky customer would have less effect on the company's overall risk.

 

I'm always leery of tort reform. In my experience (I'm an attorney specializing in federal civil litigation and several of my cases involve health insurance companies, but no torts of the kind tort reform would affect), health care providers offer unnecessary tests not because they're afraid of getting sued, but primarily because they make more money that way. That behavior will always exist as long as the provider and the payer are different entities and would remain unaffected by tort reform. I'm a big believer in the concept of citizens attorneys-general and the corrective power of lawsuits when it comes to consumer protection, and a lot of tort reform would gut the ability of people to seek redress for harms inflicted upon them by powerful organizations. In some cases, legal reform amounts to a license for large companies to break the law because there are no ways to currently address certain types of wrongdoing.

[deanb]

Okay not exactly US politics but: Florida zombie, WTF?!?!

[CorgiShinobi]

Huh, everyone I mentioned the homeless cannibal to didn't know what I was talking about, so I didn't bother mentioning here.

 

But yeah, two naked dudes in a road divider and one of them is chewing off the face of the other.

 

There's video too. (SFW)

[Mal]

No idea on what to make of it either. Drugs be bad yo?