Crossroads, (1 Viewer)

[conception_native_0123]

despite the claims of one of them

which one?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The best freedom we have ever had in this country is when the people got together and literally destroyed their ships, and killed the representatives of the Crown.
Another time of great increases (in freedom) is when they burned their houses and killed the slave owners,
Let us not forget the time they tore apart the the Oil and Steel industries.

Oh yeah, don't forget the break apart of AT&T.

Capitalism in not freedom.

Breaking apart AT&T? I'm an AT&T stock holder and can tell you, Ma Bell is back together again and just as persnickety as ever. In fact, because of Ma Bell and her journey through wall street, I know own pieces of NCR, Teradata, Nokia, Comcast, Warner Brothers, ... AND I did nothing. It all just happened after I inherited my mother's AT&T stock that she got from the Employee Purchase Plan after 35+ years of service to one of the Baby Bells - Southern Bell at the time. Now BellSouth. A rose by any other name...

And sorry to break your chops here, but capitalism IS freedom - but you have to be willing to take risks. Opening your own business, if you make it a good one, leads to freedom from "the wolf at the door." Entrepreneurship is foundational to the American system. But you have to believe you can make it work. Perhaps the freedom is to get rid of the gloom-and-doom types who want to hold the hands of the underprivileged because they so obviously cannot do things for themselves. That's why Big Government has to step in.

You want freedom? Let's get rid of the oppressive regulatory oversight and reduce the penalties associated with taking risks. That's why the dissolution of the Chevron Deference Doctrine was so important. We have yet to see where that will lead, but it CAN lead to the dismantling of the regulatory bureaucracy. And to me, that's a good thing.

Tearing apart the Oil and Steel industries? But they still exist, just in different forms.

Your examples are all about violence - from the American Revolution, from the Civil War, from some of the union violence that broke apart some businesses... do you have a secret violence fetish or something? Just asking.

 

[GaP42]

If the view that the age of AI and adaptable robotics is coming, which it sure is, then obviously jobs are at risk. It seems there are few jobs that won't be affected - from the most menial to many of the highly professional (accounting, legal, engineering, medical, IT). Which will be least affected... ?
Do you see the "jobs" of politicians being affected? (at least in the first/coming wave?), Entrepreneurs? others?
AI learning and tapping into huge datasets to produce output that replaces the time-consuming tasks of many jobs, being able to (successfully) analyse and propose solutions to well-formulated problems posed to them, then will those in the "professional" jobs become more productive, allowing more professionals to be engaged and greater output or will the cost of these services reduce to the public using them or to the corporates utilizing AI? Not either or, of course.
Will unemployed be the norm? Or does the game change to simply redirect the potentially unemployed to other jobs, new jobs, supplementary jobs to the AI/Robotic industry? Will it lead to chaotic disruption or an orderly transition?
Will we need to move to the "social wage" or do we let the rich become richer, the corporation becoming more powerful?
Given some discussion in other threads about who is eligible to vote (eg taxpayers only), what implications does that have for changes in the political leanings amongst the voting population?
The dis-affected are likely to blame others - the other party (those in office at the time), the foreigners, the other country, and perhaps AI/Robotics latching onto views promoted by those who give simple solutions ...

 

[Thales750]

Breaking apart AT&T? I'm an AT&T stock holder and can tell you, Ma Bell is back together again and just as persnickety as ever. In fact, because of Ma Bell and her journey through wall street, I know own pieces of NCR, Teradata, Nokia, Comcast, Warner Brothers, ... AND I did nothing. It all just happened after I inherited my mother's AT&T stock that she got from the Employee Purchase Plan after 35+ years of service to one of the Baby Bells - Southern Bell at the time. Now BellSouth. A rose by any other name...

And sorry to break your chops here, but capitalism IS freedom - but you have to be willing to take risks. Opening your own business, if you make it a good one, leads to freedom from "the wolf at the door." Entrepreneurship is foundational to the American system. But you have to believe you can make it work. Perhaps the freedom is to get rid of the gloom-and-doom types who want to hold the hands of the underprivileged because they so obviously cannot do things for themselves. That's why Big Government has to step in.

You want freedom? Let's get rid of the oppressive regulatory oversight and reduce the penalties associated with taking risks. That's why the dissolution of the Chevron Deference Doctrine was so important. We have yet to see where that will lead, but it CAN lead to the dismantling of the regulatory bureaucracy. And to me, that's a good thing.

Tearing apart the Oil and Steel industries? But they still exist, just in different forms.

Your examples are all about violence - from the American Revolution, from the Civil War, from some of the union violence that broke apart some businesses... do you have a secret violence fetish or something? Just asking.

I've been an entrepreneur my whole life. The beliefs you just stated serve one purpose, moving all the wealth to the crown. I think you actually know how false your assesments actually are.

 

[Pat Hartman]

which one?

The one that has no room for diversity of thought. You know. The one that tells big Tech to unperson or shadow ban people who think differently than the government wants them to think and declares all deviant thought as hate speech or misinformation. The one that insists on hiring people based on the boxes they check rather than the skills they bring to the table. Where they would hire a blind pilot if one sued an airline for discrimination. The one with a stranglehold on colleges where free speech is no longer tolerated and the children are taught to be anti-semitic and pro-terrorist.

 

[Thales750]

I've been an entrepreneur my whole life. The beliefs you just stated serve one purpose, moving all the wealth to the crown. I think you actually know how false your assertions actually are.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I've been an entrepreneur my whole life. The beliefs you just stated serve one purpose, moving all the wealth to the crown. I think you actually know how false your assesments actually are.

As have I. Capitalism has been corrupted in the US. We no longer support entrepreneurs. Big business spends a lot of money on K Street to influence members of Congress as well as by direct deposit to the elected officials as "campaign" contributions to get laws passed that make it very difficult for start-up companies to get through all the red tape. Big companies can afford a staff a lawyers as well as people devoted to navigating the rules that control their business. Small companies don't and that is the point of many regulations. Keep the new guys out.

 

[Isaac]

capitalism = freedom?

Yes. The freedom that your life's consequences arise from your own actions, thus you are in control.
This is the fair way to live - the honest way that avoids stealing from others.

 

[conception_native_0123]

the honest way that avoids stealing from others.

what about living off the government? wouldn't that be considered stealing from others?

 

[Pat Hartman]

what about living off the government? wouldn't that be considered stealing from others?

It is if you are gaming the system. Our welfare system is very complex and there are many programs and many ways to cheat. However, it is there for people who need help and their use is not stealing. The government by even having welfare programs is stealing from me to give to others they deem to be more worthy than I am. But, the recipient of the welfare is not stealing unless they are collecting payments they are not technically entitled to.

Welfare is theft. It is not charity but the recipient is not usually the thief - unless he is an illegal alien. EVERY benefit they get is theft since they broke our laws to be here. They are not "entitled" to ANY benefit. PERIOD.

 

[Isaac]

what about living off the government? wouldn't that be considered stealing from others?

if people have democratically "bought in" to the social contract, which involves a bit of compassion from the pool of taxed money for those in desperate straights, and if the people living off the government have "bought in" to the sometimes-unsaid assumption of making their honest efforts, then no. but if the people living off the government are milking the system, or being unduly picky with their job assignments (something we teach our teens not to do, much less an adult on the dole), then yes.

it depends, i'm sure there are plenty of people on both sides. (or should I say "fine people on both sides" ? LOL ROTF)

 

[Isaac]

It is if you are gaming the system. Our welfare system is very complex and there are many programs and many ways to cheat. However, it is there for people who need help and their use is not stealing. The government by even having welfare programs is stealing from me to give to others they deem to be more worthy than I am. But, the recipient of the welfare is not stealing unless they are collecting payments they are not technically entitled to.

Welfare is theft. It is not charity but the recipient is not usually the thief - unless he is an illegal alien. EVERY benefit they get is theft since they broke our laws to be here. They are not "entitled" to ANY benefit. PERIOD.

I'll never forget when my daughter, then about 10 years old, started taking violin lessons. We couldn't afford to buy her a violin, but the school had a program where you could rent one. Well we couldn't really very well afford to rent it either. At the time I was supplementing my full time income at a bank by more-or-less dumpster diving for usable cardboard boxes, then selling them as moving boxes on Craigslist. I was doing everything I could physically do to make money, and working on improving my skills in the process.

We went to line up for another program to help you financially if you couldn't afford to rent the violin (something like $78/mo).
I remember in the line seeing Cadillace Escillades and all sorts of >$75,000 vehicles in the line. My wife, bless her heart, said something that I myself would not say (I can't, because I'm not Hispanic - she can say it if she wants b/c she is) - she said "they're all Hispanic, gaming the system".

 

[conception_native_0123]

or being unduly picky with their job assignments

you mean when they're "searching for a job"?

 

[conception_native_0123]

The government by even having welfare programs is stealing from me to give to others they deem to be more worthy than I am.

then what's your position on communism where the state pays for everything. or should I say, YOU do?

 

[Pat Hartman]

Going back to #50. I would also add that we shouldn't be paying to educate them. Back in the 80's my half sister was living with our father and they were not getting along so I said she could come to live with my family. She was 14 at the time and definitely a problem child. I went to enroll her in school and got the 3rd degree. Probably because I wasn't old enough to be her actual mother and I didn't claim to be anyway. My town abuts Bridgeport which had a notoriously poor school system and so many Bridgeport residents tried to enroll their children in my town's schools. So, the school would only accept her if I was her legal guardian. I wasn't going down that road so I had to send her back to Daddy. Now, it appears, they can't turn away anyone who shows up at the door and so our schools are filled with illegal aliens as well as Bridgeport residents. All paid for by MY property taxes.

 

[Pat Hartman]

then what's your position on communism where the state pays for everything. or should I say, YOU do?

The state pays for nothing. The only way the state gets money is by taking it from me ag gunpoint. While I believe that taxes are necessary to support the things a federal government needs to do, my government thinks it's playing with Monopoly money and spends it thoughtlessly and without any regard whatsoever regarding wastage. Tunnels for turtles, the sex life of the Monarch butterfly, gain of function research, foreign aid to support tyrants around the globe. A floating dock so that Hamas can conveniently steal and sell the aid intended for the Gaza residents. And the list goes on and on and nothing seems to stop the spigot.

 

[Isaac]

you mean when they're "searching for a job"?

Yes - and that phrase made me laugh out loud a little bit, in this employment environment.

I think let's say, hmm, roughly about 100% of restaurants are understaffed for the last 4 years. Nobody is 'searching for a job' at this point.
You either want to work or you don't

 

[Pat Hartman]

if people have democratically "bought in" to the social contract, which involves a bit of compassion from the pool of taxed money for those in desperate straights,

I didn't buy into this. Nobody asked my opinion. This is just a way for the government to pick winners and losers. And the government is p*** poor at handling my money. No government employee has any incentive to spend wisely so I think conservatively, waste in these programs is probably 40% or more. Americans used to give, percentage wise, more money to their churches and charities than they do today. But as the feds take more and more of our tax dollars and spread them around to "welfare" programs, people are less inclined to donate to charities. I've cut back the number of charities I support although I probably give about the same percentage of my disposable income. These days, I'm giving a lot more time though and almost all my charities are local. I still like St Jude's and the Shriner's though. I really miss the Shriners in our summer holiday parades and the Mummers parade on New year's day.

 

[Isaac]

I didn't buy into this. Nobody asked my opinion. This is just a way for the government to pick winners and losers. And the government is p*** poor at handling my money. No government employee has any incentive to spend wisely so I think conservatively, waste in these programs is probably 40% or more. Americans used to give, percentage wise, more money to their churches and charities than they do today. But as the feds take more and more of our tax dollars and spread them around to "welfare" programs, people are less inclined to donate to charities. I've cut back the number of charities I support although I probably give about the same percentage of my disposable income. These days, I'm giving a lot more time though and almost all my charities are local. I still like St Jude's and the Shriner's though. I really miss the Shriners in our summer holiday parades and the Mummers parade on New year's day.

I understand what you mean, in that, you didn't specifically buy into it, and in fact, you may in actuality be voting against it every time and still losing to the majority.

However, I'm curious - are you saying that you think the government should provide absolutely ZERO of any type of social safety net?

Despite my voting/representation views, (which I think are perceived as very harsh), even I think we should provide a little emergency support to disabled, orphans, temporary poverty, etc. Only, nowhere near as much as we do and @Jon 's idea of requiring community service in exchange for the dole is a VERY good idea. Incentivize not staying poor.

 

[Pat Hartman]

are you saying that you think the government should provide absolutely ZERO of any type of social safety net?

Correct. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the government's job is to take care of us. In fact, just the opposite. The very foundation of America is being responsible for yourself. We take care of ourselves and our families. We donate or tithe to our churches and give generously to charities.

You are a very nice person with a big heart but it is simply not nice of you to decide that it is OK for the government to take money from me at gunpoint in order to give it to someone else they deem to be more worthy. You can run a refuge for illegal aliens. You can take in homeless people. You can give every spare penny you have to others. But, you cannot take money from me in order to make yourself feel virtuous. That is evil.

I have to confess to falling into progressive traps myself. They always sound so virtuous and good. But then I sit back and say, wait a minute, that sounds good on paper but it is impossible to implement and will be a total waste of money. All it does is transfer wealth from the generous to the greedy.

How many houses did the Clinton Global Initiative build in Haiti after the big earthquake a few years ago?