Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I found this funny.

http://news.yahoo.com/talk-show-host-offers-newt-gingrich-1-million-014908204.html

I figured Savage would be one of the Newtster's biggest cheerleaders. And if someone
wants to offer him money to drop out, they'll have to pony up more cash than that. He
gets that as his per diem being a Historian!

I really don't want to vote for any of the candidates. I'm thinking I might do a write-in for Captain America. If wanting Steve Rogers as a president is wrong, then I don't wanna be right.

And she wasn't the only one. Like the literacy rate isn't already low enough in parts of the US.

Principal 'mortified' by Gingrich remarks on poor kids
http://ed.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/12/9396624-principal-mortified-by-gingrich-remarks-on-poor-kids

Wow... just wow. And to think I already disliked Gingrich enough to vote for fictitious characters....

"Poor kids" and their parents aren't his natural constituency.

You might be surprised.

A fair number of poor parents are socially very conservative - i.e. anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-communist. And since there are not enough rich people to outvote the working class, the Republicans harp on exactly these issues to get the socially conservative to vote against their own best economic and political interests.

In other words, is hating on gays, outlawing abortion, and preventing poor people from getting government assistance in their hour of need really worth giving up any chance of economic sucess and political influence?

I laugh every time someone says poor people who don't vote Democratic are voting against their interests, as if you just "educate" them they would see the light.

They never actually say how Revolving Door Party #2 represents their interests. Here's a hint, most people don't want to be on the dole. They want a good job, a good life, and better opportunities for their children.

Frazzled wrote:I laugh every time someone says poor people who don't vote Democratic are voting against their interests, as if you just "educate" them they would see the light.

Well, obviously, workers of the world do tend to unite (when given no alternative).

Frazzled wrote:
They never actually say how Revolving Door Party #2 represents their interests. Here's a hint, most people don't want to be on the dole. They want a good job, a good life, and better opportunities for their children.

See, I disagree. Most people want a good life, sure, but if working is not part of that they won't object. In fact "not working" seems pretty fantastic.

dogma wrote:


See, I disagree. Most people want a good life, sure, but if working is not part of that they won't object. In fact "not working" seems pretty fantastic.

And you are correct. The British system went from being a safety net to being a fething fishing net. If you are pretty poorly paid you can have a ball of a time on wellfare, and thus we have people who are on the dole for 21 years. We have CAREER doleys. We have literally hundred of thousands of people who say "I am better off not working" because they say that they need a job that pays at least 18k a year to have the same quality of life, but they would rather stay at home all day than work than have a wee bit more money. If I was on £6 an hour, I would stay on the dole, feth it. Well, and if I had no integrity as well.

They have a slightly poorer standard of living than their mates, but they can still afford to eat, smoke, and get pissed a few times a week. So, why not? Ask most working class people what they would rather do.

If an eccentric millionaire offered to pay all of my utilities, mortgage/rent, council tax for me and give me a wage of £50 a week I would take it. Then I get to sit on my arse all day long, and Ill make that £50 stretch. I reckon I only do £20 a week in food as it stands, I do about £150 on going on the ale a week, but I would happily knock that back to twice a month instead of 3 days a week if it meant I don't have to do any work at all!

Well, obviously, workers of the world do tend to unite (when given no alternative).
***Thats the key. Unite for what is the essential crux.

See, I disagree. Most people want a good life, sure, but if working is not part of that they won't object. In fact "not working" seems pretty fantastic.
***I disagree, of the retirees I know, most like to do something. Of course that is the extremes of the spectrum. Not working and living off the dole is not nearly as exciting as more bank in the... er bank.

Its an overgeneralization but
The problem with the Democratic Party is:
1) That many of their social policies are, well, extreemely liberal. The general bent of this group is not.
2) Their tax policies generally involve increased taxes.
3) Their economic policies aren't substantially different than the Republican Party.

The problem with the Republican Party is:
1) That many of their social policies are, well, extremely conservative The general bent of this group is not.
2) Their tax policies generally involve reduced taxes for wealthier groups.
3) Their economic policies aren't substantially different than the Republican Party.

Neither party addresses crony capitalism. Neither party addresses the growth of government. Neither party is particularly better than a drunken addict when it concerns the governmental treasury. Neither party really addresses structural changes needed to make the US competitive 50 years from now.

dogma wrote:See, I disagree. Most people want a good life, sure, but if working is not part of that they won't object. In fact "not working" seems pretty fantastic.

I don't think being on the dole necessarily constitutes a "good life." I'm not sure what to think about someone with such low aspirations that they would consider it such. I mean, I would call it an "acceptable" life, maybe. And hell, you're right, not working does sound pretty awesome but I like expensive scotch and warhams so I don't think I'd be able to be quite so gangsta in my tastes if I wasn't willing to hold my nose and work for it.

Also, if we were ever putting forward nominees for the "King of the Trolls" award, I'd probably name Michael Savage.

Frazzled, you get so close to being correct and then veer off when it comes to the details.

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

I'm serious, what path is there to success for a poor kid in Appalachia or a poor kid in SE DC? I'm not saying there aren't people who don't succeed despite their backgrounds, but when there is no path for a middle class lifestyle without being exceptional we are doing something wrong.

All this talk of "crony capitalism" is so awful. I understand why people do it: they want to assert that real capitalism is different than the failed capitalism of today. The problem is that crony capitalism IS capitalism-capitalism. Can you imagine a company not trying to use every lever of influence available to maximize profits?

When you talk about the "growth of government" you are really talking about the growth of the influence of democracy. Only by phrasing it in such dubious ways can attacks against democracy be advanced, but most people are totally uncomfortable with the whims of the marketplace dictating every aspect of our life. They want a say in things and democracy is the only way to have that say.

I don't care, and I don't think most people, care about the United States being competitive. They care about having a good job, making ends meet, and having a world where their children can have a better life than they had. Globalization and the excesses of financial capitalism has destroyed those dreams.

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
***True Dat

I'm serious, what path is there to success for a poor kid in Appalachia or a poor kid in SE DC? I'm not saying there aren't people who don't succeed despite their backgrounds, but when there is no path for a middle class lifestyle without being exceptional we are doing something wrong.
***True Dat

All this talk of "crony capitalism" is so awful. I understand why people do it: they want to assert that real capitalism is different than the failed capitalism of today. The problem is that crony capitalism IS capitalism-capitalism. Can you imagine a company not trying to use every lever of influence available to maximize profits?
***No crony capitalism is the use or influence of the government to make money. I’d add the incredibly vast majority of government contracts to that as well, but it’s a tangential issue.

When you talk about the "growth of government" you are really talking about the growth of the influence of democracy.
***No. You’re not. Showing me government and I’ll show you something that’s the antithesis of democracy. Go to the DMV and come back and talk to me about democracy.

Only by phrasing it in such dubious ways can attacks against democracy be advanced, but most people are totally uncomfortable with the whims of the marketplace dictating every aspect of our life. ***I’d rather the market where you 1) have a voice; and 2) have the option of NOT doing something vs. the full weight of the government telling me what to do like some nerfherder mouth breather who couldn’t find his way out of a paper bag with a bic lighter actually knows whats better for me, than me.

I don't care, and I don't think most people, care about the United States being competitive.
They care about having a good job, making ends meet, and having a world where their children can have a better life than they had.
***You don’t get the ojobs without being competitive, but I see your point, and don’t necessarily disagree.

Globalization and the excesses of financial capitalism has destroyed those dreams.
***That’s part of it. Financial capitalism…no, that’s cover for whats really happening.

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please, elaborate on exactly how low cost textiles manufacturing was lost by our political leaders. Is the minimum wage seven dollars too high? If you're not paying your worker six dollars a day then no amount of tax law is going to keep the factory that makes the little carnival spider ring open.

This is a massive red herring. Moon sized.

Not to derail the thread here but...

alarmingrick wrote:I figured Savage would be one of the Newtster's biggest cheerleaders. And if someone
wants to offer him money to drop out, they'll have to pony up more cash than that. He
gets that as his per diem being a Historian!

(to highlighted bit) ... Excuse me?

ShumaGorath wrote:

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please, elaborate on exactly how low cost textiles manufacturing was lost by our political leaders. Is the minimum wage seven dollars too high? If you're not paying your worker six dollars a day then no amount of tax law is going to keep the factory that makes the little carnival spider ring open.

This is a massive red herring. Moon sized.

Permitting craptacular countries that sell the products of slave labor into this country in the first place.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please, elaborate on exactly how low cost textiles manufacturing was lost by our political leaders. Is the minimum wage seven dollars too high? If you're not paying your worker six dollars a day then no amount of tax law is going to keep the factory that makes the little carnival spider ring open.

This is a massive red herring. Moon sized.

Permitting craptacular countries that sell the products of slave labor into this country in the first place.

Enjoy your 47 dollar made in america Tshirts and four hundred dollar cell phones. The American (and at this point world) way of life is based on low cost consumerism, that is only viable in the modern world with low cost assembly and textile labor. Automation is still too expensive and static. That's also intensely anti capitalist and prohibiting that kind of manufacturing (other then being impossible) would result in significant retaliatory protectionism. If foreign workers rights were enforced in america through protectionism tomorrow our cost of living would jump a thousand percent the next day.

This is one of those whiny red herrings that implies a massive lack of perspective on just what an economy is and just what it isn't and exactly what ours is composed of. Untrained labor isn't coming back. It's never coming back. People that got used to lacing up shoes all day for fifteen dollars an hour should move to a boxing factory or start taking some classes. There are other things an economy can manufacture then cheap gak.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please, elaborate on exactly how low cost textiles manufacturing was lost by our political leaders. Is the minimum wage seven dollars too high? If you're not paying your worker six dollars a day then no amount of tax law is going to keep the factory that makes the little carnival spider ring open.

This is a massive red herring. Moon sized.

Permitting craptacular countries that sell the products of slave labor into this country in the first place.

Enjoy your 47 dollar made in america Tshirts and four hundred dollar cell phones. The American (and at this point world) way of life is based on low cost consumerism, that is only viable in the modern world with low cost assembly and textile labor. Automation is still too expensive and static. That's also intensely anti capitalist and prohibiting that kind of manufacturing (other then being impossible) would result in significant retaliatory protectionism. If foreign workers rights were enforced in america through protectionism tomorrow our cost of living would jump a thousand percent the next day.

This is one of those whiny red herrings that implies a massive lack of perspective on just what an economy is and just what it isn't and exactly what ours is composed of. Untrained labor isn't coming back. It's never coming back. People that got used to lacing up shoes all day for fifteen dollars an hour should move to a boxing factory or start taking some classes. There are other things an economy can manufacture then cheap gak.

Mmm... so you're ok with all this, how unliberal of you.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

The problem with both parties, and why neither is a friend of the lower class in this country, is that they have both done all they could to ship manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please, elaborate on exactly how low cost textiles manufacturing was lost by our political leaders. Is the minimum wage seven dollars too high? If you're not paying your worker six dollars a day then no amount of tax law is going to keep the factory that makes the little carnival spider ring open.

This is a massive red herring. Moon sized.

Permitting craptacular countries that sell the products of slave labor into this country in the first place.

Enjoy your 47 dollar made in america Tshirts and four hundred dollar cell phones. The American (and at this point world) way of life is based on low cost consumerism, that is only viable in the modern world with low cost assembly and textile labor. Automation is still too expensive and static. That's also intensely anti capitalist and prohibiting that kind of manufacturing (other then being impossible) would result in significant retaliatory protectionism. If foreign workers rights were enforced in america through protectionism tomorrow our cost of living would jump a thousand percent the next day.

This is one of those whiny red herrings that implies a massive lack of perspective on just what an economy is and just what it isn't and exactly what ours is composed of. Untrained labor isn't coming back. It's never coming back. People that got used to lacing up shoes all day for fifteen dollars an hour should move to a boxing factory or start taking some classes. There are other things an economy can manufacture then cheap gak.

Mmm... so you're ok with all this, how unliberal of you.

I think I've pretty solidly stated a couple of times that:
A. You don't know what a liberal is
and
B. I'm not one anyway

Trade protectionism conditioned on foreign workers rights isn't really a liberal boondoggle anyway, except insofar as conservatives tend to care less about human rights in a general sense and bleeding hearts tend to be liberal minded (though weirdly one would think christian morals would prohibit profiting from foreign low wage factory work but that's never been a big issue either).

Lets be real here Fraz, you've never identified with or shown sympathy to a group of people outside of our (or certain European countries) borders on this forum. Whatever this "foreign slave wurk is baaad" thing your on is, it's either a devils advocate position or you're just arguing for the sake of hating the government without having your own ducks in order concerning why.

I don't give a (*&^*% about them. I care about mine. The argument that free trade is somehow supportive of our workers competing against slave labor is crazed, at best. The argument that free trade is supportive of trade with countries that have non existent environmental and employee standards is in any beneficial to the US employment is misplaced and, in the words fo the immortal bard: "well then, we get what we had here last night."


This is why the notion that the democrats are somehow better than republicans in this area is likewise ludicrous.

So how would Democrats run a free trade? How would the Republicans run it? Just curious being I'm just a trigger puller

edit
Besides being a trigger puller I also make sure Mattrym keeps off the crew serve weapons. Be fun to watch but I deny everything.....everything

Jihadin wrote:So how would Democrats run a free trade? How would the Republicans run it? Just curious being I'm just a trigger puller

edit
Besides being a trigger puller I also make sure Mattrym keeps off the crew serve weapons. Be fun to watch but I deny everything.....everything

**I don't think there's enough ammo in the America's if Matty gets ahold of such.

I don't see how either would run it differently. They both have supported how it is.

Frazzled wrote: I don't give a (*&^*% about them. I care about mine. The argument that free trade is somehow supportive of our workers competing against slave labor is crazed, at best. The argument that free trade is supportive of trade with countries that have non existent environmental and employee standards is in any beneficial to the US employment is misplaced and, in the words fo the immortal bard: "well then, we get what we had here last night."

Then in your theoretical world of national Islands I hope you enjoy having half the gak you have now because it's all significantly more expensive to produce. Low cost foreign labor are what has driven this economy for the last half century, before that it was spiraling quagmire. The scant few decades when manufacturing work was a viable path toward prosperity was an illusion. Unskilled factory labor started out as laborious and lowpaid and it existed that way in world for centuries. Ford didn't fundamentally alter what a factory is, he was simply part/the start of a few generations of altruistic businessmen buffeted by the raw exploitation of the untapped American continent and then the capacity vacume left after every factory in Europe was turned to dust. Hell, manufacturing in fords time was awful and he's credited with the mantra of paying as much as possible. You want well paying jobs for Americans then you had better put on your 99%er pants. As it is all you've ever advocated on this forum are priorities and policies that stratify wealth and push down the American middle and lower classes. The exact people you now pretend to care about (And the exact ones that trade protectionism immediately and irreparably damages).

This is why the notion that the democrats are somehow better than republicans in this area is likewise ludicrous.

Whats ludicrous is that you expect people to believe that the disillusionment with the system you're tossing around is genuine when it's clear by your posts that you're carrying the same football you always have.

Frazzled wrote:

Jihadin wrote:So how would Democrats run a free trade? How would the Republicans run it? Just curious being I'm just a trigger puller

edit
Besides being a trigger puller I also make sure Mattrym keeps off the crew serve weapons. Be fun to watch but I deny everything.....everything

**I don't think there's enough ammo in the America's if Matty gets ahold of such.

I don't see how either would run it differently. They both have supported how it is.

Eventually Matty will make ethereal ammo out of pure discontent and kill them with sadness. Its like killing with kindness, but different.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote: I don't give a (*&^*% about them. I care about mine. The argument that free trade is somehow supportive of our workers competing against slave labor is crazed, at best. The argument that free trade is supportive of trade with countries that have non existent environmental and employee standards is in any beneficial to the US employment is misplaced and, in the words fo the immortal bard: "well then, we get what we had here last night."

Then in your theoretical world of national Islands I hope you enjoy having half the gak you have now because it's all significantly more expensive to produce. The scant few decades when manufacturing work was a viable path toward prosperity was an illusion. Unskilled factory labor started out as laborious and lowpaid and it existed that way in world for centuries. Ford didn't fundamentally alter what a factory is, he was simply part of a few generations of altruistic businessmen buffeted by the raw exploitation of the untapped American continent and then the capacity vacume left after every factory in Europe was turned to dust. Hell, manufacturing in fords time was awful and he's credited with the mantra of paying as much as possible. You want well paying jobs for Americans then you had better put on your 99%er pants. As it is all you've ever advocated on this forum are priorities and policies that stratify wealth and push down the American middle class. The exact people you now pretend to care about.

This is why the notion that the democrats are somehow better than republicans in this area is likewise ludicrous.

Whats ludicrous is that you expect people to believe that the disillusionment with the system you're tossing around is genuine when it's clear by your posts that you're carrying the same football you always have.

Why if I didn't know better, I'd think you've got a burr in your bonnet about me. Thats ok. The Great Wienie commandeth us that all are equal at the fire hydrant.

I don't believe American made goods were priced out of the market before we started pushing for free trade.

Shuma, you talk of $47 tshirts because you don't understand capitalism. Outsourcing labor and jobs was done so they could sell goods at a higher margin of profit.

Or, are you trying to say that America had a problem with masses of people being unable to afford clothing in the 50s and 60s? No, instead we had people able to have decent paying factory jobs and were able to live a middle class lifestyle.

Sure, things may be cheaper now but we are also consuming far more than we did in the past. I come from a Mennonite background, so this may just be me, but having a much larger wardrobe or a much larger house doesn't matter as much to me as people having access to quality work.

It's simply unacceptable to ask people to work harder or be smarter when surviving continues to escalate in difficulty. We must have an economy that allows the average to succeed. We can't be a nation of MBAs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You fundamentally misunderstand reality, Frazzled.

The reason government, ie the people, dictate certain things is because all of our actions affect everyone else. There's very little that a person can do that doesn't influence the rest of the world.

If it was true that every man is an island I would become the biggest Ayn Rand humping libertarian you'd ever see. That's not the case, however.

I like knowing that other people have to have car insurance when they drive on the road. I like polluting chemicals are regulated. I like OSHA and other workplace regulations because without them we'd have a race to the bottom.

I've personally never had a problem at the DMV. I can do most of what I need to do online and the most I've ever had to wait is 15 minutes before talking to someone. I even live in a large metropolitan area.

I understand that it is easy to become jaded with liberal democracy. It's even easier to look at history and realize how terrible and undemocratic the marketplace becomes, though, and that while not perfect democracy is better than living in a factory town in the 1880s.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:Not to derail the thread here but...

alarmingrick wrote:I figured Savage would be one of the Newtster's biggest cheerleaders. And if someone
wants to offer him money to drop out, they'll have to pony up more cash than that. He
gets that as his per diem being a Historian!

(to highlighted bit) ... Excuse me?

Pony = give more , come up with more

I've never had a godawful wait at the DMV either. A few long ones, but that's why I bring a book.

I don't believe American made goods were priced out of the market before we started pushing for free trade.

In the 1800's? Are you talking NAFTA? Korean trade agreements? The opening of trade with china? America started with international trade. It's why it exists.

Clarify.

Shuma, you talk of $47 tshirts because you don't understand capitalism. Outsourcing labor and jobs was done so they could sell goods at a higher margin of profit.

Did you know that the profit margin on a flat panel television is typically between .025 and 2% for the seller and hovers around 5% as a generality for the producer? Did you know that they are the end product of manufacture in typically several dozen countries?

Laptop sales margins are even worse and take more international travel to be constructed.

Or, are you trying to say that America had a problem with masses of people being unable to afford clothing in the 50s and 60s?

We had little competition in the fifties and sixties. Europe was still recovering from the black eye it gave itself. Japan hadn't started buying all of our companies yet. We did not trade with China. South America was largely concerned with agrarian and domestic production. Our material needs were significantly simpler then in modern times.

It was a different era, and it's one that I noted. Were we somehow more globalized and free during the 1800s or great depression? Why weren't the factories our great benefactors then? (Here's a tip, factory labor sucked and we tried the protectionism gak during the depression (it made it worse)).

No, instead we had people able to have decent paying factory jobs and were able to live a middle class lifestyle.

Did you know that the (inflation adjusted) average pay for a U.S. factory worker in the sixties was about $20.50, it is currently about $20.67. The average CEO pay has (inflation adjusted) risen over nine thousand percent (9,000%) in that time period.

You gonna blame that one on china too?

Sure, things may be cheaper now but we are also consuming far more than we did in the past. I come from a Mennonite background, so this may just be me, but having a much larger wardrobe or a much larger house doesn't matter as much to me as people having access to quality work.

You do realize that that doesn't even make sense, right? If you don't want as much stuff then why do you need to be paid as much? Do you eat the money?

It's simply unacceptable to ask people to work harder or be smarter when surviving continues to escalate in difficulty. We must have an economy that allows the average to succeed. We can't be a nation of MBAs.

We're gonna have to be. Otherwise our standard of living is going to stagnate until the rest of the world catches up and we're competitive again.

In the 1800's? Are you talking NAFTA? Korean trade agreements? The opening of trade with china? America started with international trade. It's why it exists.

***Not free trade, international trade. Free trade as a concept is a new thing. Plus its not really free. Tariffs are a time honored tradition.

We had little competition in the fifties and sixties. Europe was still recovering from the black eye it gave itself. Japan hadn't started buying all of our companies yet. We did not trade with China. South America was largely concerned with agrarian and domestic production. Our material needs were significantly simpler then in modern times.
****We had plenty of competition before that. You’ll note the countries exporting themselves are not exporting on free trades terms.

Did you know that the (inflation adjusted) average pay for a U.S. factory worker in the sixties was about $20.50, it is currently about $20.67. The average CEO pay has (inflation adjusted) risen over nine thousand percent (9,000%) in that time period.
***. If you can’t control trade how on earth do you think you’ll control salaries of executive management? They’ll move. Ask Transocean.

We're gonna have to be. Otherwise our standard of living is going to stagnate until the rest of the world catches up and we're competitive again.
***And whats your solution hotstuff?