Giuliani 08

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by amber

Just like in the 20's before the Crash.
Good god, economic history is so simple, yet, few of our presidents care about it or understand it, apparently.

Markets have crashed many times and for generally different reasons - though the comp. age greatly increased the flow of info. So, its not that simple?

http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/...epression.html

http://www.lowrisk.com/crash/

http://stocks.about.com/od/whatmoves...rash102904.htm

Essentially, the margain (investing by borrowing money) was the cause of the 29 crash.

The most recent crash was less severe than the 29 crash and was spawned by the inflated stock prices of the IPO's and the loss of consumer confidence in fraudulent activities resulting in the bankruptcy of several of the largest corp.'s in the US.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

The homeless problem in this country started in earnest when then governor of California Ronald Reagan decided to close mental institions and continued that on a grand scale when he took the office in the presidency. Let's also not forget how our veterans have been treated from the Vietnam era onward.

Well, they had many homeless before then - but that certainly did not help - in fact, it greatly exacerbated the problem

[amber]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, then stop telling me I cannot think outside the box, etc. when I cannot produce one

It just irks me when people bitch about things, tell people they cannot see the forest for the trees, and then offer no viable solution

Fair enough. But I actually do have a good bulk of some stuff worked out. A bunch of solutions, and/or theories of possible solutions. And some varied knowledge to go with it. About how everything impacts everything else.
And you have to admit, if you are still talking about your personal income, and what you should and should not have the right to buy, you are thinking a bit more personally, and micro, and typically capitalistic. Moreso than I am for this particular argument.
You are thinking within the rules of the current system. Very, very well, I might add. Your attention to detail is unparallelled. I appreciate that.
So, I concede that you have a good point, with respect to some certain aspects of the whole. As do I. Who among us can truly see the whole?
The rare person.

I try, but goodness knows it's hard, if not impossible. But perhaps.... attainable? I hope so, but I doubt it. And that's fine. My strategy is "Gather knowledge wherever you can, and in whatever forms it presents itself to you."

*discuss*

[strandinthewind]

^^^^

LOL - I say I should be Pres.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

True for the most part, but then there is the problem of once you put someone on the public tit, they do not want to get off of it; or, they get put in govt. housing, turn to drugs and get thrown out'or, they are mentally ill, get put in meds, get released, stop taking the meds, etc. I fully realize not everyone on welfare thinks that way or is in this situation, but clearly that problem exists and it is part of welfare that has to be fixed. Yet, when any politician has the sand to say that, they are branded an uncaring racist and when any person not on welfare ever in their lives says it, they are told they have no clue whay they are talking about and are an elitist.

What a bunch of pull yourself up by your own bootstraps dreck. Heaven forbid that anyone in this country should have to think about anyone but their god damned selves for a minute. That's just what we need, a less caring, less kind America. Really, your first sentence is just disgusting. I'm apalled.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by amber

I was thinking of more intensive rehabilitation. What you said is the danger that everyone always brings up. But, last I read a statistic, welfare was about.....01% of the national budget, whereas defense was like....20%
I think there's room to spread it out there, even if some people do have to be "on the tit" their whole life. And when I'm saying that I'm thinking more in terms of mentally ill homeless people, and not so much of Welfare recipients.

How about education? Is that on the tit too? Shouldn't we encourage our citizens to get their education? And what about healthcare?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

What a bunch of pull yourself up by your own bootstraps dreck. Heaven forbid that anyone in this country should have to think about anyone but their god damned selves for a minute. That's just what we need, a less caring, less kind America. Really, your first sentence is just disgusting. I'm apalled.

So, no one on welfare does this Or are you just apalled because I said it and you know its true.

Again, I have repreatedly said not all welfare rec. are like this, to wit "I fully realize not everyone on welfare thinks that way or is in this situation . . . ." But, some are and that is part of the problem. I fail to see how that makes me a bad person

Moreover, I repeatedly said people should give to charities and the govt. should cut the wasteful spending and help the people who need it. Again, I fail to see how that makes me a bad person

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

How about education? Is that on the tit too? Shouldn't we encourage our citizens to get their education? And what about healthcare?

Of course we should - and I never said anything to the contrary.

I think you are just angry because you are assuming I am talking about all welfare rec., which I have repeatedly said is not the case.

[amber]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Markets have crashed many times and for generally different reasons - though the comp. age greatly increased the flow of info. So, its not that simple?

http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/...epression.html

http://www.lowrisk.com/crash/

http://stocks.about.com/od/whatmoves...rash102904.htm

Essentially, the margain (investing by borrowing money) was the cause of the 29 crash.

The most recent crash was less severe than the 29 crash and was spawned by the inflated stock prices of the IPO's and the loss of consumer confidence in fraudulent activities resulting in the bankruptcy of several of the largest corp.'s in the US.

No, it's not simple, it's just so predictable cyclicle.
ie:
These economic/social factors coupled with *insert..."war, depression, etc"*

IMO, the same factors, with small variation, have led to predictable results.

And money is not that cut and dried. Sadly. But in a way, it is. You just have to factor in a few social components and politicial tendendies.

Like "communism with no viable resources and corrupt despots leads to (fill in the blank/unprecedented atrocities/unparallelled famine)" (Der Magazine every century)
It's all been the same over Millenia, with important distinguishing details, but ever any variance in true human motives.


Money, Greed, Resources, Strength, Survival Mechanisms, and who has power over all things things - and who has power over education (in my mind the most important factor)

Etc, have always worked together in the same way - It's the happy enlightened anomoly that has allowed us to advance.

And, just as you *should* imagine, money and all these other factors mixed together works in PAINFULLY predictable, mathematical ways. It's almost EMBARRASSING how easy this all is to figure out. I shudder that there is as much debate as there is. I expected so much more of all of us.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

Liberals are going to have to accept at some point, that they are not responsible for civil rights and equality in this country. They are responsible for supporting the party who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and currently aid in the perseverance of patronizing racism that feeds a culture of entitlement which kills the incentive of the individual, white or black, to achieve.

Once again, your facts are wrong and if you can't get them straight, then you really need to just shut your pie hole.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by amber

No, it's not simple, it's just so predictable cyclicle.
ie:
These economic/social factors coupled with *insert..."war, depression, etc"*

IMO, the same factors, with small variation, have led to predictable results.

And money is not that cut and dried. Sadly. But in a way, it is. You just have to factor in a few social components and politicial tendendies.

Like "communism with no viable resources and corrupt despots leads to (fill in the blank/unprecedented atrocities/unparallelled famine)" (Der Magazine every century)
It's all been the same over Millenia, with important distinguishing details, but ever any variance in true human motives.


Money, Greed, Resources, Strength, Survival Mechanisms, and who has power over all things things - and who has power over education (in my mind the most important factor)

Etc, have always worked tothether in the same way - It's the happy enlightened anomoly that has allowed us to advance.

touche'

though, when you figure out that predictability to the point of an exact date, let me and no one else know

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, I am all for that - but what would that be? No one seems to be able to answer that outside of communism, which I submit the human spirit will never allow. For example, where would we be if everyone lived in the same box, ate the same foods, wore the same clothing, etc. Where would we be without the money to fund artists, etc.

Two words: Social democracy.

[amber]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Two words: Social democracy.

Thank you, but I stand by my 4000 words it took me to say that!

And Strand? No one believes more than you or I that the human is a .... very basic biological entity, in most cases. *le sigh*

*holy typing errors, Batman!*

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Two words: Social democracy.

For those who have no clue what that means go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

But, in a nutshell:

Social democracy is a political ideology emerging in the late 19th and early 20th centuries from supporters of Marxism who believed that the transition to a socialist society could be achieved through democratic evolutionary rather than revolutionary means. It emphasises a program of gradual legislative reform of the capitalist system in order to make it more equitable, usually with the theoretical end goal of building a socialist society.

The term social democracy can also refer to the particular kind of society that social democrats support. The Socialist International (SI) - the worldwide organization of social democratic and democratic socialist parties - defines social democracy as an ideal form of representative democracy, that may solve the problems found in a liberal democracy. The SI emphasizes the following principles for building a welfare state:

First, freedom that includes not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power, as well as the ability to determine one's own fate.

Second, equality and social justice, not only before the law but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well, and equal opportunities for all including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities.

Finally, solidarity - unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality.
______________________________________________________________

I think it sounds great - but the application is a little difficult when they realize the govt. wants to take half of what they make and then wastes it on crap like the war in Iraq.

[gldstwmn]

[QUOTE=Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

We don't exactly bitch about that. I bitch about the fact that half of the people getting "our tax dollars" don't NEED it, when so many other people do. Welfare started out as one thing...but ended up as something else.

The people who don't need our tax dollars are the top 3% that are getting huge tax breaks. Not to mention corporate wlefare.