Archinect
anchor

Politics Central

4911
tduds

Petition to rename this thread "x-jla tries to dunk on libs in an empty room"

May 4, 21 12:34 pm  · 
2  · 

Granted. Also acceptable is 'x-jla talks to himself'

May 4, 21 1:07 pm  · 
5  · 

You need game to dunk.

May 4, 21 7:17 pm  · 
2  · 
proto

Empty room indeed

Jul 4, 21 12:41 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]


go ahead dummy.

May 4, 21 5:57 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

A masterclass in how to lie with statistics.

May 5, 21 12:55 pm  · 
 ·  1
BabbleBeautiful

I don't understand this tweet. Even if it were sarcasm I don't get it.

May 5, 21 1:40 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Naw it's a half- joke that clearly has merit seeing by the nerves it hit.

May 5, 21 2:32 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

It feels hyperbolic.

May 5, 21 2:43 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Therein lies the joke.

May 5, 21 2:50 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Babble, for me, the example as described in the tweet, best represents what fraudsters like xla, and others in the conservative echo chamber, like to do to challenge the movements for Black Lives. Especially when white people like me challenge the white supremacy, and capitalist narrative that has been destroying the country.

They want to use "woke" as an insult, instead of dealing with reality. I'm not offended, but Bree is correct.

May 5, 21 4:34 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"Capitalism has lifted more people from poverty than any system ever." 

I'm going to elaborate on this one and nothing else, simply for the sake of time. This is, to me, the "How to Lie With Statistics" archetype. The framing is not incorrect, just simplified. As an analogy, imagine poverty as drowning. You're not wrong to say that "Capitalism" (as you define it) has saved a huge proportion of the world from "drowning", more than any other system in the past. 

But what this "fact" ignores is that some people are clinging to a floating plank while others have 300' yachts and unlimited champagne. And whenever the people on the planks suggest that some of the champagne budget might help pay for, say, a rowboat, they're told "You should be thankful you're not drowning anymore!" Kinda rings hollow imo.

May 5, 21 5:32 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

There's also an entirely different argument which points out, rightly, that before we invented capitalism (and even for a while after capitalism's initial ascension) Feudalism was the system that lifted the most people out of poverty in human history. There's nothing to suggest something else far more successful might supplant capitalism in the future, and pointing to it's past success does nothing to counter the claim that capitalism as a system is starting to show its age. Things evolve.

May 5, 21 5:36 pm  · 
3  · 

The Planet Money people at NPR did a podcast recently on socialism and it pointed out that evolution of economic systems thing. For a 20-min overview of the history and critique of capitalism, it wasn't a bad episode. Worth a listen at any rate. https://www.npr.org/2021/03/26/981686254/socialism-101

May 5, 21 5:57 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Defend capitalism without talking about communism challenge go.

May 5, 21 6:43 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

EA - That planet money episode was great! I caught it a couple of weeks back. Very even-handed I thought.

May 5, 21 6:43 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Outliers skew averages. Perhaps we could discuss medians.

May 5, 21 6:44 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Facts without context are simply trivia.

May 5, 21 8:35 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

You've missed the point & I've lost interest. Ciao.

May 6, 21 12:20 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

everybody’s ignoring x-jla but can’t stop talking about him...he must hit a nerve here or there. Maybe this thread should be called: 


“X-jla is ignored by you-Central” 


For all that want to discuss the fact they’re ignoring x-jla but can’t shut up about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

May 5, 21 3:43 am  · 
5  · 
square.

ok buddy {-_) am i doing this right?

May 5, 21 1:32 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Not to throw more gasolene on the fire but I just saw this tweet and reminded me of this entire thread.


May 5, 21 3:38 pm  · 
3  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

This is good.

May 5, 21 4:30 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

*cracks knuckles* 

What's reductionist about it?

May 5, 21 5:25 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Who is saying this?

May 5, 21 6:42 pm  · 
3  ·  1
SneakyPete

Many of them.

May 6, 21 6:02 pm  · 
2  · 

tduds, does your twitter feed see into the future? No, it's not about critical race theory, but the back and forth of "who said that?" is uncanny.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/st...

May 8, 21 11:53 pm  · 
1  · 

Found a version I can embed here (skip to 0:21)

May 9, 21 12:14 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Psaki is a master at shooting down bad faith questions. I'm just catching up to her brilliance.

May 9, 21 2:06 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

"Who's saying this?"

"People are."

"Who specifically?"

"You hear it from people.."

"Ok, so it's just you that are saying this, aka it's your opinion."

Gold.

May 10, 21 11:40 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Who says it's legitmate?

May 10, 21 12:20 pm  · 
 · 

Way to pick a completely different playing field instead of just moving the goal posts there jla. I like that she didn't just take it at face value that "different people" "in the media" "say [this is the third term of Obama]," and challenged the reporter to cite some sources of that claim before she would respond to it. Context matters.

But don't let me get in the way of you taking the ball and running with it wherever you want to go to make a point that's completely unrelated to that.

May 10, 21 1:07 pm  · 
1  · 

I guess you liked it better when there were no press briefings and the world found out about things from random tweets at 2 am?

May 10, 21 1:13 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Not all questions are created equally. Responding to every question equally conveys the false impression that every question deserves to be asked.

May 10, 21 1:21 pm  · 
1  · 

FWIW, she was trying to answer the question which was, "What do you say to people who are saying that?"

"Who are saying that? Who's saying that?"

"You hear that a lot in the media."

"Who in the media?"

"Different people."

"Like ...?"

"Well there were lots of questions when [changes subject to the press conference when VP Kamala Harris was blah blah blah]"

Point is Jen Psaki was trying to figure out who said what exactly so she could respond appropriately and the reporter withdrew the question when she couldn't ask it with enough detail to get a response. It's not dodging anything other than an attempt at a bad faith question to get a sound bite or something.

---

"People are saying jla abuses puppies and kittens. What do you say to people who are saying that?"

"Who is saying that."

"People in the media."

You get the picture...

May 10, 21 1:24 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Depends on who's asking it. and who's answering.

May 10, 21 2:27 pm  · 
 · 

While the questions for the "lab leak theory" were included in the video I posted, my point was about the first half of the video as I explained and as was understood by everyone but you. Feel free to take the ball to another field with a different set of goal posts if you must.

May 10, 21 3:19 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Interesting points EA but have you considered this unrelated point, in which my stance is more easily defendable?

May 10, 21 3:31 pm  · 
2  · 

Yes, tduds. And while you may think it is easily defendable, here is another unrelated point as a counter point that in no way counters your first unrelated point.

May 10, 21 3:38 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Wow, no need to immediately turn to personal attacks.

May 10, 21 3:40 pm  · 
2  · 

That wasn't a personal attack, but why do you feel the need to defend this completely unrelated issue I'm just now bringing up, and that you in no way have tried to defend?

May 10, 21 3:43 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

You're missing the point, which is something else I just thought of and also exhaustively whined about at you nine months ago. If you don't have this argument with me again I'll accuse you of running away because you can't admit you lost.

May 10, 21 3:48 pm  · 
2  · 

No, the point is I'll just keep repeating the same annoying stuff until you ignore me and then I'll claim victory because all you know how to do is silence other people's views that don't align with your own. BTW, I don't even really believe the views I'm defending (wink wink), I'm only doing it because all you liberals need to see the real issue which is something I'm not even really going to get into other than to say you should watch some youtube video which I won't even link to.

May 10, 21 4:03 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

The people who are saying "people are saying" are the ones saying it. They're planting it by suggesting its already planted. They're *promoting* terrible ideas under the guise that they're just *reporting* them. How are you still taking that bait?

We are now, finally, back to the initial point of the original post.

May 10, 21 4:35 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Mostly I'm sad you didn't pounce on my very intentional use of the word 'master' in an earlier comment.

May 10, 21 4:38 pm  · 
 · 

"I just want to get your reaction to people who question that."

"Well, it's hard to react when I don't know what people you're talking about. [But I will say that the president's actions don't really show what you're alluding to, and it shouldn't be shocking that the VP is involved in governing the country]."

"It's more so than other vice presidents have."

"How so? I'd love to see the data ..."

[paraphrasing the rest of this now]

"I'll provide you with the data sometime and I'd like to get your reaction to it."

"Great, looking forward to it."

"Excellent"

I don't know man, seems like they figured it out just fine and the reporter got enough of a response to go on and follow up with more substance later. Personally, I think this is exactly the job of the WH press secretary and Jen Psaki is doing it wonderfully.

May 10, 21 4:39 pm  · 
1  · 

I'm imagining jla dealing with RFIs in this same sort of way.

Contractor: "Hey some people have been saying that the weather has been unusual and we should get an extension in contract time. What do you say to people who are saying that?"

jla: "Who's been saying that?"

"You hear it a lot."

"Who is saying it a lot?"

"People are."

"Ok, well it's hard to say if I don't know who is saying it ... but sure I'll just take your word that the weather has caused some delays and that you're only asking because of that, and not because you've mismanaged the project thus far and are simply looking for anything that might give you a life line so you can make some profit on this job. I'd say to those people that I'll just sign and approve the blank change order proposal and they can fill in the rest when it's convenient. We probably don't need to worry about the details if lots of people are saying it."

May 10, 21 4:45 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

The popular perception is based on the repeated amplification of the question. Again, it's surprising to me that you're still falling for this one.

May 10, 21 6:27 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"Many people are saying..." has been a twitter meme for like 5 years now. Come on, dude.

May 10, 21 6:29 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

When someone with a vested interest in planting a story plants it with "Many people are saying..." you believe them.

May 10, 21 6:42 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

To bring this back from the Psaki topic to the CRT topic: Every single point you've made to criticize critical race theory is something you heard from a critic. Your entire knowledge of the topic is from people who are arguing against it. I know this because you define it incorrectly. No critical race theorist would agree with your framing of it, which is the joke in the screenshot I originally posted. 

The point here is that who is saying something *does* matter, because in all discussion but especially in political discussions, why something is said matters more than what is said. You need to understand the motivations of the person making the claim to understand the context in which the claim is made and the goal it seeks to advance. 

For example, I have not heard anyone claiming Harris is running the show. You saying that is surprising to me because we're exposed to different media environments. To say "I know that the idea of Harris running the show is a popular narrative that’s been echoed a lot" what you're you're saying that you know its been echoed a lot. You don't know if its true and you don't know who started the story or why. For every thing that "many people are saying", someone had to say it first. Who were they? Why did they say it? Did they witness something? Or are they trying to discredit someone? Was it a journalist with an inside source? Was it an opposition politician? Those are very different motivations. I think a healthy skepticism is warranted there, and I'm surprised by how un-skeptical you are of this given your infinite questioning of ulterior motives and corruption when the political axes flipped.

May 10, 21 6:49 pm  · 
1  · 

Oh, but you do care. Otherwise you wouldn't keep talking about it.

May 10, 21 6:50 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Harris leading from behind? I don’t believe, disbelieve, or care. She could have just said “no”. 

That wasn't the question posed in the press conference. You brought that up. You don't seem very alert today. Maybe take a break until you can follow your own thread.

May 10, 21 6:55 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I joked years ago but I think this is more true than not: When Republicans do something, they go on TV to explain it. When Democrats do something, Republicans go on TV to explain it.

May 10, 21 6:57 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Again you say "Kendi says this" but you link to criticisms of him, not his own words. You say Kendi says x because other people told you. You didn't bother to listen to the man himself.

May 10, 21 8:37 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Ibrahim Kendi is a controversial and provocative figure (and I'd argue intentionally so), and one could easily debate the pros and cons of any one of his statements or his personal philosophies. But to dismiss an entire school of thought based on a third party's critical interpretation of one of its outliers is, well...

May 10, 21 8:40 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I clicked through a couple of links in that Coleman essay and found his summaries of their contents extremely slanted.

May 10, 21 8:41 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Well those are some words.

May 10, 21 9:43 pm  · 
 · 

"You're all fine to be thinking your thoughts, I don't give a crap about them. But don't you dare let me catch you acting on them. That's where you cross the line and we're gonna have a problem. Can't have you having ideas *and* implementing them."

Spoken like a true libertarian.

May 11, 21 11:32 am  · 
 · 
tduds

"The issue is when institutions begin to adopt these ideas and implement policies that affect people" 

What ideas are being adopted by which institutions? In what ways are these policies affecting people and which people are being affected?

May 11, 21 12:51 pm  · 
 · 

Some people are saying there are institutions that are doing this.

May 11, 21 1:34 pm  · 
 · 

To my knowledge, no one considered jla's feelings when the racist policies were put into place by racist institutions so we should just get rid of them. It was fine for them to have racist ideas, but they went to far when they got institutions to implement them without getting jla's take on them first.

May 11, 21 1:37 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"the Asian quota at Harvard." 

I assume you're referring to the lawsuit brought by SFFA that they lost, twice. The lawsuit in which the judge ruled that "while the system is "not perfect"...it nonetheless passes constitutional muster." and that "there were 'no quotas' in place at Harvard." 

Not the best example imo. Everything else you wrote is your own conjecture. I might get more into that if I'm feeling feisty tonight but I've got work now.

May 11, 21 1:55 pm  · 
 · 

.

May 5, 21 6:39 pm  · 
4  · 
bowling_ball

Same

May 5, 21 11:22 pm  · 
3  · 
randomised

Joe the Giant





May 6, 21 5:30 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Wide angle lenses are trippy.

May 6, 21 6:54 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Pretty good opinion piece in the Post today. The Cheneys and the Romneys of the world would like you to forget the thread and focus on the moment, but it's important to remember the thread: "Trump’s GOP is the GOP as it’s ever been."

The Republican Party playbook is the same as it ever was: Disguise worshipfully pro-big business, pro-wealthy policies with appeals to the resentments of President Richard M. Nixon’s “silent majority” or Sarah Palin’s “real Americans” or whatever label the party prefers for a specific type of White American. Every liberal project — from Social Security in the 1930s to Medicare and integration in the 1960s to the Affordable Care Act and same-sex marriage in the 2010s — is cast as a mortal threat to freedom pushed by the eggheads, the ivory tower or the coastal elites. The threat of “outside agitators” becomes the peril of “political correctness” becomes the menace of “ridiculous wokeness” — the term Cheney used in her Post op-ed last week. They’re all the same look.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

May 10, 21 1:33 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I know its difficult but try to stay on topic. This post is about the 50+ year characteristics of the Republican Party.

May 10, 21 3:30 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Trump's rhetoric rarely matched the policy that was implemented (or continued) during his administration. Aside from a few executive orders (lookin' at you, Tarrifs), the vast majority of government business that happened under the Trump admin was GOP-as-usual.

May 10, 21 3:36 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The essay says as much: "Yes, Trump has turned some of these traits up to 11. The dog whistles became bullhorns; the “executive time” administration plumbed new depths of incompetence. But for Republicans, as televangelist and later right-wing presidential candidate Pat Robertson said 40 years ago, “it’s better to have a stable government under a crook than turmoil under an honest man.” The threat of liberalism outweighs the risk of an inept, amoral or fascistic president. The Trump era — including its culmination in January’s attempted insurrection — was not out of step with that."

May 10, 21 6:52 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Lest I be accused of partisanship, let's acknowledge the impending Democratic fuckup hanging over our heads:

"It simply beggars belief to think these Democrats are earnestly concerned that modestly hiking taxes on corporations and ultra-wealthy heirs, or axing the filibuster, will doom their re-election campaigns. The only thing that could possibly explain why so many Democrats are dead-set on repealing Trump's cap on state and local tax deductions, 56 percent of the benefits of which will flow to the top one percent, is corruption. They are listening to rich donors and lobbyists, and/or keeping one eye on their future career prospects. Voting to raise taxes will infuriate the wealthy and well-connected, and cushy post-office buckraking careers doing consulting or speeches will not be forthcoming for lawmakers who do not toe the oligarch line.

So unless something changes, the swing vote Democrats who will decide whether the party can pass anything so long as it holds the majority in Congress — which could vanish at any time if one of the nine senators in states where they would be replaced by Republican governors dies — aren't going to allow voting rights protections to pass, or tax hikes on the rich, or popular programs to be paid for with borrowing. They're facing the biggest threat to America's democratic institutions since 1860, and they are still wringing their handkerchiefs and trying to save the pet loopholes of their paymasters."

https://theweek.com/articles/9...

May 12, 21 3:52 pm  · 
3  · 

I've been limited in my deductions twice now by the SALT cap, but I'm still ok with them not repealing it. I'd rather have them spend their political will elsewhere. Problem is there is no political will elsewhere because elsewhere wouldn't benefit their donor base.

May 12, 21 4:09 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Kind of a bummer we can't actually talk politics in here. "Cherry Picked Headlines and Palace Intrigue Central" isn't as catchy, I guess.

Jun 4, 21 3:53 pm  · 
3  · 

Maybe it's palace intrigue, but let's play a game of "What's going to happen first?" 

  1. Justice Breyer announcing his retirement
  2. Democrats losing control of the Senate
  3. Republican president being inaugurated
Jun 4, 21 4:30 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

1

Jun 4, 21 5:14 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

I read point 1 as “Justin Bieber” and got unreasonably excited.

Jun 4, 21 7:06 pm  · 
3  · 
BabbleBeautiful
tduds

It's not surprising because the last few times this sort of information has made public nothing has come of it.

Jun 9, 21 11:13 am  · 
 · 

IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig said, “I share the concerns of every American for the sensitive and private nature and confidential nature of the information the IRS receives. Trust and confidence in the Internal Revenue Service is sort of the bedrock of asking people and requiring people to provide financial information.”

Trust and confidence? NOT in taxing the rich. Trust and confidence in the IRS facilitating and perpetuating vast wealth accumulation by the rich while penalizing people who actually work. 

U$A Inc., the world's largest Banana Republic.

Jun 9, 21 12:05 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

x, where's your source on those stats?

Also, this isn't about whether the gov't is "getting enough" or not. 

Jun 9, 21 12:41 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Income != Wealth

Jun 9, 21 12:43 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

It's a bad statistic, even if true. The data is based on reported income, which the ProPublica article indicates is the way to avoid paying taxes (minimize reported income). It ignores the vast amount of wealth not accounted for. Moreso, focusing on the "Top 1%" ignores the staggering inequality within even that top percentile. Take the bottom .9% of that 1% out and then re-run the numbers and see how it stacks up. 

Finally, I simply disagree with the premise that "a fair share" is a tax burden somehow equal to a cohort's income share. Redistribution is - at least in part - a goal of progressive taxation. That's more of an opinion so I get that people can & do disagree, but you can disagree with the conclusions without employing a bullshit premise.

Jun 9, 21 12:50 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Wrong question.

Jun 9, 21 1:02 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

My gawd, those are some infuriatingly deliberate, misleading stats.

Jun 9, 21 1:05 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

No.

Jun 9, 21 1:10 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

(this is a canned response I wrote months ago but it applies here)

I'm not going to do that for you. That's not the conversation I'm having. I'm not going to take the bait that allows you to poke easy holes in the inevitably undercooked ideas I had an hour ago. I'm not going to go on the defensive because you misunderstood my demand. It's not my job to solve the crisis of income inequality. It's not my job to create policy. 

 My job is to hold accountable the people who were elected to create policy. They put a ton of effort into getting a job whose primary responsibility is to solve problems, or at least try, through policy. If they want their job so bad, they need to listen to problems and try to solve them.

Jun 9, 21 1:11 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

I tossed it in there as an opinion that I admitted was an opinion. I don't really care to litigate it. That you chose to harp on this instead of the other 2/3rd of my post questioning the premise you opened with is curious.

I could spend a few hours and several thousand words elucidating my stance. It would be difficult to present a reasonable case in less. But I've got a job and my stance isn't the point of this thread.

Jun 9, 21 1:19 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

As I said above, our role in the system is exactly to talk about why. How is for legislators. I have no power to enact things, so why waste energy thinking about how I might do it? For me it's about interrogating the what & why, to develop an internally consistent set of beliefs from which I can advocate, donate, and vote.

Why shouldn't taxation be at least somewhat progressive? Why should a few dozen people hoard billions while paying less than 1% effective tax rate? You answer some questions first.

Jun 9, 21 1:21 pm  · 
1  · 
BabbleBeautiful

x, how is it an "inconvenient truth" when it's blatantly bending and massaging information to convey their (false) narrative?

You're the reason why every high school and college curriculum requires a basic stat class.

I mean, you're not even trying at this point. 

Jun 9, 21 1:28 pm  · 
 · 

The US is a giant pyramid scheme. Benefits accrue at the very top at the expense of everyone else.

Jun 9, 21 1:28 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

An Amazon warehouse worker's quality of life is very much effected by how much Jeff Bezos spends trying to go to space. In the long term the sum is variable, but in the short term resource availability is very much a zero sum game. 

I also reject the framing (that seems like a billionaire invented) that progressive economic policy is somehow a "punishment." A system in which people were actually compensated relative to their value wouldn't produce people with the largesse of Warren Buffet or Jeff Bezos. I don't begrudge either of them for taking advantage of a bad system. I begrudge the system for allowing such a disproportionate advantage in the first place. 

I'm not even going to bother responding to your kneejerk "but communism!" response. We've been over this so many times: there are infinite options in between "unfettered exploitative capitalism" and "authoritarian Stalinism." Don't use one extreme to defend the other, they're both bad and a huge gulf of middle ground exists where I think you & I would both find satisfaction.

Jun 9, 21 1:54 pm  · 
4  · 
BabbleBeautiful

x, you're obviously very passionate about this, but completely missing the point of the article I posted. It's not about quality of life (albeit an affect of) , nor about how much the government receives, nor what the gov't does with the money it receives. It's about how the current system, whether it's deliberate or not, has allowed a certain few to not be accountable for the actual money they make while most have no choice. It's as if you reach a certain threshold and you're invincible. I personally believe this to be problematic and unjust.

Jun 9, 21 1:55 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

We're not, but we are way off topic.

Jun 9, 21 2:06 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"but deal with the specific offenses that they do" 

That's what the ProPublica article is about and, ostensibly, what the topic at hand should be. 

Jun 9, 21 3:28 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I'm fine with blaming Miles for derailing the topic just pointing out that the topic immediately derailed. I guess the larger point is: Whatever your idea of a "fair" tax system, we have a current set of rules and the wealthiest Americans are using their means to skirt those rules. That's a problem.

Jun 9, 21 3:46 pm  · 
 · 
RJ87

The concept is that unrealized gains are not considered income, so they don't pay taxes on it. When they sell a stock, they pay capital gains taxes on the profit. If you had to pay taxes on unrealized gains than long term investment would be nearly impossible, it would blead a lot of people dry in the process.

Jun 9, 21 3:47 pm  · 
1  · 

I derailed the topic? It's the Pro Publica article, and I posted the IRS commissioner's response to that. LOL

Jun 9, 21 5:35 pm  · 
1  · 
BabbleBeautiful

RJ87 - you're correct, but are you suggesting the only variable in calculating someone's wealth is stock holdings?

Jun 10, 21 2:39 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Pretty good opinion piece in the Times today related to this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/09/opinion/politics/irs-tax-evasion-geithner-lew-paulson-summers-rubin.html

Jun 10, 21 5:06 pm  · 
 · 

That article completely ignores tax breaks enshrined into law that only benefit the rich. Beefing up the IRS will not create a "fairer" system for all.

To accomplish that we need truly progressive tax rates (like those in place in the 50's, 60's and 70's when the top rate never fell below 70%) and an aggressive wealth tax to remove the political influence associated with financial wealth.

As Buddha said, 'the wealth of a few is founded on the poverty of many'.

Jun 10, 21 5:41 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Incidentally there's another opinion piece in the same newspaper about that: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/08/opinion/income-tax-billionaires.html

Jun 10, 21 7:07 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

In short, yes and also yes. I favor more progressive taxation, and closing loopholes that favor the wealthiest, and beefing up enforcement to raise compliance. It's important not to mistake a step in the right direction for the entire solution, or to let perfection be the enemy of the good.. I want all three, but I'd be happy if even one became reality.

Jun 10, 21 7:09 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

"If higher taxes were the answer to everything" They aren't. Next question.

Jun 11, 21 12:39 am  · 
1  · 
randomised

it's not necessarily about how high or low taxes should be (although it is) it is about what you choose to spend those taxes on...

Jun 11, 21 4:48 am  · 
2  · 
BabbleBeautiful

Even Steve Bannon is upset!
https://www.newsweek.com/steve-bannon-demands-higher-taxes-rich-youre-being-scammed-1599779

Jun 12, 21 10:54 am  · 
 · 

To continue the above:

At the federal level taxes have two purposes: regulating the economy and influencing behavior. The government does not require tax revenue to fund spending. The "national debt" is one side of a balance sheet, the other side ("surplus") is money in circulation. Pay off the "debt" and the economy would cease to exist.

The federal government, as the creator of currency, can never run out. Money is not borrowed, it is created with a few keystrokes.

But but but inflation! Inflation is too much money in circulation. The fix for that is not raising interest rates - which just benefits banksters and the investment class - but raising taxes, which drains money from the economy. One of the reasons that the "debt" has soared over the last decade or so without inflarion is that QE and bailouts went directly to Wall Street where they are socked away in private investment - money that is not circulating in the economy. 

Tax policy influences behavior by reward and  punishment. Raising the tax on cigarettes lowers the number of smokers. Lower taxes on investment income benefits those who shuffle money while higher taxes on labor penalize actual work and effectively serve to hold the working man down.

Note that states can not create currency and are dependent on tax revenue (which could easily be repaced with federal funding, and in many cases is heavily subsidized already).

The game here is to make you believe that the federal government has the same kind of houshold budget that individuals do. We have income and expenses, and when our expenses exceed our income we are in trouble. If we could print our own money that would never be a problem.

The government never has a problem paying for corporate subsidies, a grossly overbloated military and wars of misadventure, tax breaks for corporations and the rich (which if you subscribe to the household budget con are lost revenue) - but when it comes to infrastructure, education, health care, or socially beneficial programs like Medicare or Medicaid "we can't afford it!" because of "the debt".

Jun 11, 21 10:21 am  · 
1  · 
square.

The fix for that is not raising interest rates - which just benefits banksters and the investment class -

low interest rates act as a give away for the investment class, no? it's what allows firms like blackrock to borrow cheap money and buy middle class homes at an alarming rate, often 5 digits above asking price. also higher interest rates are better for my savings account, the rate of which is pathetic right now.

at the same time lower interest rates = lower mortgages... catch 22?

Jun 11, 21 10:56 am  · 
 · 

As noted, low interest rates have decimated working class savings and retirement accounts. Mortgages are bundled together and sold as investment vehicles where everything is leveraged, shorted, insured, traded, and speculated on. The underlying thing itself is irrelevant and can be anything (crytpo, SPACS, WeWork, etc.).

Jun 11, 21 11:19 am  · 
2  · 
BabbleBeautiful

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0CWDcCmRzTLODrulr0JcD9?si=-y1JMZmOTdC7ZGpqxs_4lQ&dl_branch=1



This episode had some interesting tidbits on the history of the government’s attitude toward the extremely wealthy. 

Jun 25, 21 3:02 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

.

Jun 27, 21 4:29 pm  · 
4  · 
Non Sequitur

so… did a bunch of stuff get nuked? I have many notifications but no dumpster

Jul 3, 21 6:50 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

Seems like it

Jul 3, 21 10:05 pm  · 
 · 
proto

Looking at this thread…xjla is gone, not just ignored

Jul 4, 21 12:40 am  · 
 · 
z1111

Better for everyone including xjla. All he did was doom scroll and shit post looking for a reaction.

Jul 4, 21 9:16 am  · 
 · 

Maybe the militia called him up.

Jul 4, 21 10:12 am  · 
 · 
randomised

Don’t know which remarks specifically sparked the politburo into action, just thought it was pretty harmless anti-vax stuff, last time I read it. Getting axed from your own thread...isn’t that ironic?

Jul 4, 21 5:28 pm  · 
1  · 

Not just his own thread ...

Jul 4, 21 7:53 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

And was there a thread called b3tadine[sutures] or is that the name of the mod that axed all his comments? that’s what I could see in x-jla’s posting history...maybe the forum should be renamed into wokenect or something, just to make it clear to all involved ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Jul 5, 21 2:10 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

I'm sorry, what did I miss?! I was busy this weekend [MACA] Making America Communist Again, and couldn't follow everything. There was a thread aboot moi?? Where is this monument to greatness?

Jul 5, 21 10:49 am  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

The American right wing is so good at murdering buzzwords dead that they manage to kill them in every single country.

Jul 5, 21 10:49 am  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

Must have set off a firework too close to his ammo cache or something... I guess.

Jul 5, 21 11:04 am  · 
1  · 
proto

apparently x-jla still has posting privileges?

is he self-editing his posting history? or mods did? ...it seems the Comment History button still has the old posts of his

not mention balkins is still posting despite swearing the forum off...

Jul 5, 21 1:28 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I'm seeing both their posts all around...

Jul 6, 21 1:52 pm  · 
 · 

Must have been a temporary thing, or moderator's regret?

Jul 6, 21 2:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

bummer

Jul 6, 21 3:43 pm  · 
 · 
z1111

Imo they are professional trolls. Any reaction including using the ignore button only enables them.

Jul 6, 21 6:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Petition to re-nuke whatever was nuked.

Jul 6, 21 9:07 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Almost literally every discussion in this thread ends with either jla quietly ignoring a challenge he doesn't want to / can't respond to, or jla posting ad infinitum until everyone gives up. That's trollish behavior. It has nothing to do with disagreement. There's no desire to have an actual discussion or learn anything, and I really ought to have learned better by now. It's a dumb but effective outlet when I need it I suppose.

Jul 6, 21 10:28 pm  · 
2  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Let America Be America Again

 - 1902-1967

Let America be America again.

Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed—
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There’s never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this “homeland of the free.”)

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery’s scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek—
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one’s own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean—
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today—O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I’m the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That’s made America the land it has become.
O, I’m the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home—
For I’m the one who left dark Ireland’s shore,
And Poland’s plain, and England’s grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa’s strand I came
To build a “homeland of the free.”

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we’ve dreamed
And all the songs we’ve sung
And all the hopes we’ve held
And all the flags we’ve hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay—
Except the dream that’s almost dead today.

O, let America be America again—
The land that never has been yet—
And yet must be—the land where every man is free.
The land that’s mine—the poor man’s, Indian’s, Negro’s, ME—
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose—
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people’s lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath—
America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain—
All, all the stretch of these great green states—
And make America again!

Jul 5, 21 10:49 am  · 
 · 

America was founded by rich white slave owners who didn't want to pay taxes. Mission Accomplished!

Jul 5, 21 11:35 am  · 
 · 
randomised

Great idea...on stolen land

Jul 6, 21 4:44 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

Window was already broken, I just snagged a TV for my family. ;)

Jul 6, 21 6:46 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

"at some point" doing the heavy lifting there.

Jul 6, 21 8:42 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

The whataboutism is strong in this one.

Jul 6, 21 8:55 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

The rules of acceptability with respect to colonization and conquest have evolved over time. It seems useless to compare, say, the Sacking of Constantinople or intra-tribal war in pre-Columbian America or late 19th Century Indian boarding schools, because you're comparing different times with vastly different ethos. If we can agree that the Peace of Westphalia, the Reconstruction Amendments, and the Geneva Conventions are useful constructions of a global ethics, then it seems to follow that much of the American occupation of Native land which occurred *after* those three documents (among others) is, ya know, unethical.

Jul 6, 21 9:03 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"For people who care so deeply about injustice, why is it they they seemingly ignore the greatest most extreme injustices that are currently occurring" 

Because we're having a conversation about a specific thing now. It doesn't mean I'm/we're not aware of or outraged by other things, just that conversations require topics, and the topic here is American imperialism. Either defend it or don't.

Jul 6, 21 9:06 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Should've been the end of the thread:

Jul 6, 21 9:12 pm  · 
2  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

It's almost like people can't walk and chew gum simultaneously...

Jul 6, 21 9:29 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Classic capitalist agenda, avoid the problems that exist at home - Jim Crow, let's go bomb Vietnam, 9/11, let's go bomb Iraq - and go practice global interventionism...classically anti-libertarian thinking. Stop intervening in other peoples problems; we got 99 problems, and your "bitching" ain't one.

Jul 6, 21 9:33 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"the narrative is being sold as some all encompassing omnipresent reality." No it isn't.

Jul 6, 21 10:25 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

educate us. fully. we will wait. be exhaustive. leave nothing out. bring education to the ignorant. i am so excited to hear about the truth.

Jul 6, 21 11:35 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I already answered that one next question.

Jul 7, 21 1:32 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

My answer was about when, not who. Thought that was obvious, sorry.

Jul 7, 21 2:00 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Events that occur prior to the establishment of certain global ethical norms are not equivalent to events that occur after the establishment of those norms when the events in question violate those norms. Pretty straightforward, to me.

Jul 7, 21 2:01 am  · 
 · 
tduds

That's kinda my point... we (i.e. white folks) broke our own rules.

Jul 7, 21 12:23 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Because I still exist within, and continue to benefit from, white hegemony. It would seem disingenuous to place myself outside of it.

Jul 7, 21 1:24 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

*eyeroll* This is going nowhere. Once again, I'm exhausted.

Jul 7, 21 1:26 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

You seem suspiciously incapable of understanding the difference between individual behavior and structural inertia. Not sure if you're doing it on purpose to score points or if you're just not as smart as you think you are.

Jul 7, 21 1:41 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

I'm done trying to explain things to you. If you actually care to learn things, there's plenty of books about this.

Jul 7, 21 1:43 pm  · 
1  · 

"Not sure if you're doing it on purpose to score points or if you're just not as smart as you think you are."

I used to think it was the former. Now I'm believing more and more that it has always been the latter.

Jul 7, 21 1:44 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Out of steam, yes.

Jul 7, 21 1:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Look here we are, yet again. So fucking predictable.

Jul 7, 21 1:50 pm  · 
3  · 
Non Sequitur

Weaseling behind words and definitions instead of addressing the onslaught of criticism your "ideas" face is a sign your ideas were shit to begin with.

Jul 7, 21 1:51 pm  · 
1  · 
proto

There is such a huge amount of time spent trying to rationalize one view of the world within the constraints of facts to the contrary. It must be tiring to keep twisting around in syllogistic knots like that...

Jul 7, 21 1:53 pm  · 
 · 
Bench

"x-jla is ignored by you"

Jul 7, 21 1:56 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I said no such thing. Again either you're being disingenuous by deliberately misinterpreting me despite several attempts to clarify or stupid by accidentally misinterpreting me. Don't really care which at this point.

Jul 7, 21 2:06 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I'm sorry the three things I pulled out of my head in 5 seconds didn't include any African or Asian or Pre-Columbian American examples, which definitely exist, but with which I'm simply not as familiar. Pretty annoying that you latched onto my failure to include these examples as evidence that I'm suggesting they don't exist in order to accuse me of a conclusion I'm not making. Real, real annoying.

Jul 7, 21 2:15 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

If you have to entirely re-phrase what someone says in order to make a point against it, you have a weak argument.

Jul 7, 21 2:17 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

You're going back on ignore for a few weeks. I obviously can't be trusted to leave it alone.

Jul 7, 21 2:17 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

jesus fucking christ. You are the ur-example of arguing in bad faith, x-lax. 

PEOPLE. STOP.

You're pissing into the wind and wondering why you're wet and stinky.

Jul 7, 21 2:20 pm  · 
3  · 
SneakyPete

THAT MEANS YOU TOO, SNEAKYPETE!

Jul 7, 21 2:20 pm  · 
9  · 
randomised

“ What it seems that you are really saying is that western culture ought to be held to higher standards.” Makes sense to me to hold the most superior culture to higher standards...e.g. we in “the west” can afford to live a meatless life, there are plenty of healthy and affordable alternatives with new ones being developed every day, so in my opinion it is totally unnecessary to kill animals in our society for human consumption. But in other parts of the world, this is not (yet) the case where people still need to rely on meat for their diet.

Jul 7, 21 3:51 pm  · 
 ·  1
randomised

Dead serious...we’re the only ones that can live up to the universal declaration of human rights, which means we are the best, numero uno...

Jul 8, 21 4:58 am  · 
 · 
tduds

"We" frequently violate human rights. That's been my point throughout this whole thread.

Jul 8, 21 11:03 am  · 
 · 
randomised

Cultures where gay people are executed just for being gay are inferior no matter how you try to spin it...but that doesn’t excuse for gay people being mistreated or discriminated against in our society, as one could argue ‘at least we don’t hang them on cranes or throw them off tall buildings’.
you should always be your own worst critic, try harder and hold yourself to higher (moral) standards then anyone else, that’s the only way...

Jul 8, 21 3:42 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Again I made no assertion of *who* constructed norms, merely *when* they were constructed. I've *explicitly* said it several times now, so there is no room to imply. That you can't seem to get past this is, at this point, entirely deliberate on your part. So I guess you're being disingenuous *and* dumb.

Jul 8, 21 4:49 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Enjoy your xenophobia. I'm done.

Jul 8, 21 4:49 pm  · 
2  · 
Burrrrrton

On the one hand, ethical norms limit us, but on the other hand, they help us to remain human.

Jul 7, 21 8:46 am  · 
 · 

This thread is a perfect metaphor for the US, where a tiny minority fucks up everything for everyone else.

Jul 7, 21 4:27 pm  · 
10  · 
BabbleBeautiful

It applies to everything

Jul 8, 21 12:28 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]


go ahead, respond with your setting, out yourself. Hell, even if it's you, ignoring me.

Jul 8, 21 6:03 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

*Tom Hardy Fury Road that's bait gif*

Jul 15, 21 5:19 pm  · 
1  · 

New page. Let's get it right this time.


Sorry, at this point it's obligatory to post this.

Jul 15, 21 6:05 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

barely made it two posts.

Jul 16, 21 12:56 am  · 
1  · 
square.

if you reply to the shit, it will stick around

Jul 16, 21 11:42 am  · 
1  · 

Well, we made a valiant attempt, lol

Jul 16, 21 2:46 pm  · 
 · 

von Claueswitz: "War is a continuation of politics by other means."

von Jaffe: "Politics is a continuation of economics by other means."

Jul 15, 21 6:46 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Could we just do this for jla and save the server space? 


Jul 16, 21 4:02 pm  · 
4  · 
tduds

I am very upfront about my lack of self-control.

Jul 16, 21 5:18 pm  · 
 · 
square.

is xlax still posting news articles exclusively through google links? makes this even more appropriate..

Jul 20, 21 2:35 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Yep.

Jul 20, 21 3:40 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

This essay resonated with me in a way I think people on both sides of recent arguments might appreciate. 

Not only are today’s activists enraged, they bemoan a state of constant fatigue (and in some instances, post-traumatic stress disorder) caused merely by existing in the world as it is currently constructed. Even privileged white journalists write (whether earnestly or cynically) of their “exhaustion” at the stream of psychic and spiritual assaults caused by racism, as well as by sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, fatphobia, ableism, capitalism, and myriad other “systems of oppression.” They profess to be tired in part from performing “emotional labor.” The term was coined to describe jobs, many done mostly by women, that require projecting or suppressing a particular feeling, the way a waitress offers warmth. It has come to be a vague catchall for the exasperating burden of being enlightened in a biased society. Until we reach a state of perfect social harmony, they suggest, anyone who is not blind to or willfully complicit in injustice—whether they like it or not—will be unable to escape this ever-growing weight. Defeatism has become a badge of righteousness. If you’re not despondent, you’re not paying attention.

https://harpers.org/archive/20...

Jul 21, 21 6:11 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

All too often, and especially in this thread, I sense people underplay the progress that's been made to highlight the work that still needs to be done. But also, people underplay the work that still needs to be done to highlight the progress that's been made. These aren't mutually exclusive realities. We *have* come a long way as a society, and we still have a long way to go. 

Quoting Williams again: The United States is not a perfect nation, but it has been powerfully altered since the days of Emmett Till, Rodney King, and even Eric Garner. Have we reached the summit? Not even close, and yet we would be deluded not to glance back from time to time to marvel at the plunging landscape.

Jul 21, 21 6:13 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

That's a fine analogy. 100% in nearly anything is impossible. The danger of that analogy, to me, is that it seems to imply we're approaching that 99.9% asymptote. In many respects, for the topic at hand (racial equity in the US) we are far from 99%. But we're also far from 0, and both are worth recognizing.

Jul 21, 21 6:43 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

If that was the only thing that was happening perhaps you'd have a point.

Jul 22, 21 11:29 am  · 
1  · 
square.

interested to read this. i think i hear you on race, but when it comes to environmental issues it's hard to celebrate any "progress" that has been made- the ozone example pales in comparison to the new reality that is quickly developing. my only hope is one day we can feel the same way, but i'm not sure how possible it will be to cool the planet.

Jul 22, 21 12:04 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I hear you there. The lack of action on decarbonizing our civilization is seriously worrying. I think, in part, there's this inertia because we don't have that "Ozone Hole" moment to galvanize support around. It's a slow inexorable slide into doom that's really only perceptible in retrospect. That + billions of dollars in lobbying money to convince those in power to simply ignore the signs. It's hard to stay hopeful, but despondence doesn't fix anything either, so I trudge along.

Jul 22, 21 12:12 pm  · 
2  · 
randomised

* Insert: This is Fine-meme of dog sitting in burning room *

Jul 23, 21 3:03 am  · 
2  · 
square.

not so much a meme anymore as much as it is reality..

Jul 23, 21 9:55 am  · 
 · 
randomised

life imitates meme

Jul 24, 21 8:22 am  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

While pollution in general is bad, carbon pollution is orders of magnitude more troubling than other types.

Jul 26, 21 9:12 am  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

It's not just humans in danger. We are in the middle of the sixth great extinction, which is occurring at a faster rate than any of the previous mass extinction events. This is a good book on the subject: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/elizabeth-kolbert. (The author is the sister of my friend Dan, who I'm writing a book with, about the Pretty Good House approach, but don't hold that against her.)

It does require CO2 to manufacture things to offset climate change. Such as PV panels, which repay their carbon debt in 2-3 years. After they "break even" they continue producing for 30-40 years. How does that compare to carbon-spewing electrical generation plants? When do they break even on carbon emissions?

Jul 26, 21 12:51 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

^^Anti-Facctser

Jul 28, 21 8:08 pm  · 
3  ·  1
z1111

Imbecilic delusion. Imo this level of disinformation is worthy of being banned. It

Jul 28, 21 8:59 pm  · 
4  ·  1
z1111

The reason we are still in this mess is because of the people who refuse to get a vaccination. Period. Imo you are intentionally spreading disinformation about a deadly disease.

Jul 28, 21 10:08 pm  · 
4  ·  1

Did jla get nuked or just another time-out and his posts will be back in a bit?

Jul 28, 21 11:34 pm  · 
2  · 
square.

seems the moderators have had enough of his paranoid delusions. that covid "thread" he posted was a worrisome string of unending logical fallacies. enough is enough.

Jul 30, 21 12:41 pm  · 
1  ·  1
b3tadine[sutures]

The absolute denial of reality, is not worth arguing about, shut it down I say.

Jul 30, 21 12:48 pm  · 
1  · 

So jla is perma-gone? Or is this more of the same timeout BS that will only result in a new username?

Jul 30, 21 1:59 pm  · 
 · 
proto

if that's what's happened... THANK YOU, MODS!!!

Jul 30, 21 5:15 pm  · 
 · 

Looks like he was banned from this thread only. He posted a comment on the Turkey-UNESCO-Hagia Sophia news thread earlier today.

Jul 30, 21 5:19 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Oh did I miss another regurgitated conspiratorial rant from the resident "free thinker"?

Jul 30, 21 5:20 pm  · 
 · 

tduds, you can see one of the last things he posted here in my post history (Politics Central, Jul 28, 21 10:32 pm). I copied it and inserted my own commentary. It's now nuked from the thread though. From his post history you can also see that he made some comment in one of the covid central threads and got that one shut down: https://archinect.com/forum/th...

Jul 30, 21 5:22 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

whooo boy.

Jul 30, 21 5:40 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I truly have no idea how to counter the problem of this type of behavior. To be so loudly and incessantly wrong that they all but beg to be shown the door, and then immediately use that exasperated rejection as evidence of their righteous bravery. I'm glad I don't moderate any online forums anymore, I'll say that much.

Jul 30, 21 5:59 pm  · 
 · 
proto

eh, disappoint...that character needs to be voted off the island

Jul 30, 21 6:05 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Pretty sure I've posted this before but this thread really reminds me of jla (and some other less profilic contrarians on archinect) https://mastodon.social/@ifixcoinops/105778289798706182

Jul 30, 21 6:18 pm  · 
1  · 

Stop feeding the troll. Responding is the recognition it seeks.

Jul 30, 21 7:41 pm  · 
4  · 

In the US economy as a whole, financial engineering replaced industrial engineering. Wealth was decreasingly made by building new means of production and hiring labour to produce new goods and services to sell at a profit. Instead, money was made purely by buying and selling financial securities and real estate. This is fundamentally contradictory because financial activities constrict and strangulate production even as they prey upon the very incomes it generates. This is the fundamental logic behind the regular financial and asset market bubbles and crashes and shrinking productive base of our time.

https://michael-hudson.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Hudson_Valdai116.pdf

Excellent historic overview.

Aug 1, 21 10:30 am  · 
3  · 

Economics of the new cold war and U.S. ‘super imperialism’ with economist Michael Hudson

A critical on-point summary of global finance capitalism. Well worth a read (transcript below video).

Aug 15, 21 10:19 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

"In other words, he says the Democratic Party, as always, won’t do anything that Republicans wouldn’t agree on. Because the Democrats are an arm of the Republican Party. Their role is to protect the Republican Party from left-wing criticism."

Aug 15, 21 10:26 am  · 
1  · 

.

Aug 15, 21 1:38 pm  · 
 · 
z1111

I disagree. I believe there is only one political party. The Democratic party believes in democracy, the rule of law, science and reality. The other is an authortarian cult of personality that is fundamentally undemocratic does not believe in the rule of law or science or reality. It is only interested in power. Imo you are making a very dangerous false equivalency.

Aug 15, 21 2:44 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

i'm sympathetic to some of this for sure, but it's too similar to xlax's constant "both sidesism," and a little too reductive imo. it's also pretty easy to refute with specific examples, such as how the biden admin just increased food stamp amounts, substantially (about 20%), and trump/republicans were constantly fighting to cut them. this might seem like it's not moving the needle much systemically, but it goes far to increase material well being for thousands of americans, and it's enough for me to see that while i don't love the democrats, they have done more than what this diagram is claiming. i'm also happy to have bernie driving the wheel behind the scenes, and to think that's not making a difference is to nihilistic to me.

Aug 15, 21 2:55 pm  · 
 · 
z1111

The problem is with gerrymandering, the electoral college, and with 15 states with a population less than California have 30 senators there is minority rule in this country.

Aug 15, 21 3:01 pm  · 
 · 

The points that Hudson makes about geopolitical economics in the form of rentier capitalism explains US foreign and domestic policy, which could not be achieved without the support of both political parties.

Aug 15, 21 5:44 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

I just read the Mullahs plan on inviting BIG to do a new stair at The Hamid Karzai Airport. Can we get someone to confirm?

Aug 16, 21 5:24 pm  · 
1  · 
BabbleBeautiful

Confirmed. It's a stair to the US.

Aug 16, 21 8:08 pm  · 
2  · 

Living with Price Above Value

An interview with Michael Hudson where he explains rentier capitalism, how it works, and what is necessary to change it.

Aug 26, 21 9:22 am  · 
1  · 

Apropos of nothing in particular, I thought this should be shared:

Online Trolls Actually Just Assholes All the Time, Study Finds; New research indicates the internet doesn't make people act like jerks, but it sure gives the jerks a big megaphone (source: Gizmodo ... not The Onion).

"The team considered the mismatch hypothesis, which in the context of online behavior refers to the theory that there is a conflict between human adaptation for face-to-face interpersonal interaction and the newer, impersonal online environment. That hypothesis more or less amounts to the idea that humans who would be nicer to each other in person might feel more inclined to get nasty when interacting with other pseudonymous internet users. The researchers found little evidence for that."

Aug 30, 21 1:49 pm  · 
4  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

GOOD god! Joe Rogan got the Rona! There is a Jesus!

Sep 1, 21 6:06 pm  · 
1  ·  1
tduds

He'll be fine, learn nothing, and publicize bad information further contribute to morons doing the wrong thing. Just like all the others...

Sep 1, 21 6:21 pm  · 
5  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Dean Wormer

Fucking Muppet
Sep 1, 21 6:16 pm  · 
3  · 
44arches

If you're in rural India and because of patents and shit, cannot get a vaccine soon enough then this may help somewhat as a line of defense if given more trials and studies. But for Americans? Just get the damn vaccine or don't bother with anything else. 

Can't Rogan just hit the gym and sweat it out? What's the use of all those muscles if he can't kick the "flu"?

Sep 1, 21 6:58 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

I look forward to the day I no longer have to hear about Joe Rogan.

Sep 2, 21 1:08 pm  · 
5  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

https://youtu.be/PloZ-GB9tzA

Dumb fuck sez he's not anti-facctser, sez young people shouldn't need to get it, doesn't get it himself. He's a fuckwit.

Sep 2, 21 7:02 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

Ivermectin is a medicine though...it even featured in a Dr. House episode(!) and has been used over 4 billion times or so by humans..., the people that developed it’s predecessor even won a Noble Prize for it. It is quite sad that people that don’t want to or can’t take the vaccine are ridiculed like this and have nowhere and no one to turn to but people like Joe Rogan.

Sep 3, 21 2:25 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Pointing out that Ivermectin is not exclusively horse paste and is sometimes used to treat illnesses that are not COVID does nothing to change the reality that people are eating horse paste to treat COVID.

Sep 7, 21 2:42 pm  · 
2  · 
z1111

What you don't understand is that not taking the vaccine effects everyone. They are endangering everyone's life. They are insane and they are idiots. Nowhere to turn? There are 3 proven vaccines. How simple could this be? Sad? Why does anyone need a sliderule to figure this out.

Sep 7, 21 4:24 pm  · 
1  · 

You know what? On second thought, I might be ok if people want to self-medicate with Ivermectin.

"From the results obtained, it is evident that ivermectin therapy has significant adverse effects on the sperm functions of male onchocerciasis patients so treated. There was a significant reduction or drop in the sperm counts of the patients after their treatment with ivermectin. Furthermore, the study showed a significant and remarkable drop in the sperm motility of the patients after their treatment with ivermectin. As for the morphology of the sperm, there was a rise in the abnormal sperms after treatment compared with the morphology before the commencement of treatment. These changes no doubt are as results of the effects of the drug on the sperm function of the patients." https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/articles/effects-of-ivermectin-therapy-on-the-sperm-functions-of-nigerian-onchocerciasis-patients.pdf

I'm telling you to not take "150µg/kg body wt of ivermectin for eleven months" ... do not do it.

Sep 7, 21 4:45 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

De Wormer

Don't go Rogan on Me
Sep 1, 21 6:21 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Animal House

Dean Wormer's Brand of De-wormer
Sep 1, 21 6:25 pm  · 
4  · 
tduds

ok this one's good.

Sep 1, 21 6:30 pm  · 
1  · 

hehehehehe, puns for the win!

Sep 2, 21 2:03 pm  · 
1  · 

Ok people, I'm bringing up the TX abortion ban thing because it absolutely enrages me and I have some things that I think need to be said. I'm *not* going to get into it further with anyone, but I want to share some experiences my wife and I have had as they might relate to it. I'm not looking for sympathy or anything (we really don't need it though you're welcome to express it if you want to), I'm just trying to illustrate that this effectively bans a person's right to abortion, by using personal, lived experiences, for those who might not understand why (myself potentially included before any of this happened even though I've always been pro-choice).

A number of years ago we were trying to conceive. The first time we got a positive at-home pregnancy test result we went to her OB to get it confirmed. When that happened they did an ultrasound and dated the pregnancy at 6 weeks, 2 days based on the size of the gestational sack. Now in our case, I don't think the TX law would have affected us because I believe it bans abortion as soon as there is cardiac activity, which this ultrasound didn't show for us. However, that doesn't really matter to my point which is that the soonest we were able to know and determine that we were successful in getting pregnant and then see a doctor about it, it was already at the point that a heartbeat *should have* been present. There would have been no option of a legal abortion (per this law) if we found ourselves in a situation where would have wanted one. And this is as we were trying to get pregnant and keeping a close watch on things (ovulation test strips, pregnancy tests, apps to track cycles, etc.). You can imagine it would be longer for anyone who wasn't actively trying to get pregnant. 

For us the doctor noted that there could still be a viable pregnancy if things continued to develop, but it was too early to tell. So we went back for a second ultrasound a week later. Still no heartbeat, but hormone levels continued to rise indicating that my wife's body did think it was pregnant. Pregnancy was 7 weeks along at this point. Even with all of this, the medical standard of care was to continue to wait and see if it continues to develop. There was still research that showed that viable pregnancies can develop at this point, but it was unlikely.

The next week we had a third ultrasound where they confirmed that the pregnancy was not viable. This was now at 8 weeks and fully following the medical standard of care for our situation (I know because I looked it up after the second ultrasound). This happens from time to time where a pregnancy simply doesn't take (for lack of a better phrase ... there is probably some medical term for this I've since forgotten, but this is how I understand it). It wasn't pointing to any ability for her not to get pregnant and carry it to term, it was just that this particular combination of cells wasn't going to develop into a viable pregnancy. Because her body still thought it was pregnant (evidenced by her hormone levels) we needed to terminate the pregnancy or risk other complications. Our options were The Pill, or a D&C. After consulting with her doctor we decided that a D&C would be our best option.

The D&C was performed at an abortion clinic by her OB. For reasons I'm not entirely clear on, this is the way it had to happen in my state at that time. I'm not sure whether this is currently correct. The whole process was traumatizing in a way that it didn't need to be. She had to sign waivers acknowledging that she was terminating the pregnancy that were filled with phrases that made it seem like she was murdering a person even though we knew from medical science that this embryo was not viable and could never be carried to term and be born alive. As I said before, it didn't even have a heartbeat. There was no legitimate reason for these waivers. There was no medical reason this procedure couldn't have been performed at a hospital or other outpatient clinic. The fact that she did have to do it this way was traumatic in itself even though it shouldn't have been. 

Anyway, the procedure went fine, she recovered quickly and we got pregnant for the second time a number of months later and now have our beautiful child. 

But wait, we're not done yet. Due to other medical issues that have happened since the birth of our child, my wife is on a drug that will likely cause severe birth defects in a child, if we were to get pregnant while she is taking it. We are using birth control to prevent a pregnancy. Birth control is not 100% effective. We've had at least one minor scare where we had to get an in-home test to see if it could explain her cycle being off schedule. Everything was fine, but it made us realize that we'd likely need to abort a pregnancy if it occurred (we'd of course consult with her docs to determine that though). We wouldn't be able to do that if we lived in TX right now. By the time we figured out if she was pregnant, it would be too late, and as I understand it, this would probably not fall into the medical emergencies exception the TX law allows. Even if it did, it wouldn't stop someone from potentially trying sue and get their payout for enforcement.

This is what people mean when they say that access to safe, legal abortion is a healthcare right. So yeah, the TX legislature, Gov. Abbott, 5 out of 9 SCOTUS justices, and anyone else that claims they want to impose their pro-life stance on anyone else with a uterus can kindly go fuck themselves.

Sep 2, 21 3:37 pm  · 
9  · 

I agree 100%. I also find it odd that these same people are are against vaccines are saying 'my body, my choice' and lamenting about 'medical freedom'. Fucking hypocritical wankers.

Sep 2, 21 3:48 pm  · 
3  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

That's horrible EA. Fuck.

Sep 2, 21 7:03 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Thanks for sharing EA. 

I've already made my position on this issue crystal clear (and it's likely buried in this thread somewhere). The follow-up is that further limitations and hurdles to safe and legal abortions leads to less other essential services. What really grinds my goat (hey, thread crossover!) are the cunts who play with the meaning of words and emotionally vulnerable parents to push their religious garbage and make the poor parents feel guilty.

The medical attention and screening we received likely would not have been available to us if my healthcare was run by clueless bible-clutching wankers and it is certain our son would not have survived either.

Sep 2, 21 7:50 pm  · 
3  · 

Thank you for sharing that, EA. I have heard many stories from people who have had to terminate wanted pregnancies about how invasive and traumatizing the bullshit government anti-abortion procedures were *on top of* what is already an unbearably traumatic loss. I’m so sorry you guys had to go through that.

Sep 2, 21 10:17 pm  · 
1  · 
z1111

I am sorry EA. That is sadistic what they put you all through.

Sep 2, 21 11:39 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

I find it weird that the people against aborting before birth are the same people aborting after birth: pro-gun, pro-death penalty, pro-invading other countries. Ones religious beliefs shouldn’t trample on others basic human rights, that’s exactly what groups like ISIS and Taliban are all about...

Sep 3, 21 2:31 am  · 
2  · 

The hypocrisy is astounding isn't it Rando. :(

Sep 3, 21 10:22 am  · 
 · 
tduds

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." (source

The hypocrisy is the point. Pointing it out just reinforces that they have the power to do it.

Sep 3, 21 11:28 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Thank you for sharing that EA, and I'm so so sorry that you & your partner had to go through such a traumatic experience. I think it's important to normalize sharing stories like this. There's such a stigma around talking about difficult pregnancies, genetic disorders, or miscarriages, despite all of them being relatively common, and it has the effect of mis-characterizing the type of person who gets an abortion as an irresponsible libertine caricature who is much easier to dismiss empathy towards. The more people talk about who needs this healthcare and why, the more we can work towards ensuring every person is allowed access to it.

Sep 3, 21 11:32 am  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

I was raised hardcore anti-abortion. It's still difficult for me to wrap by head around, and stories like yours are important for people like me who have trouble separating the propaganda from the people.

Thank you.

Sep 3, 21 11:48 am  · 
4  · 

Thank you all for your comments. I wasn't sure how it would go over to be honest. I do think we need to normalize sharing these types of experiences. I've been seeing a lot of them via social media this week and while depressing, also liberating. We've never really been shy about sharing our experiences and I hope they can help others understand these complex issues better.

Sep 3, 21 1:52 pm  · 
5  · 

I want to point out the reality of the Texas abortion ban. Six weeks is counted from the date of the last period. Which means I could have a period, meet a guy, fuck him two weeks later, and only have  three more weeks to both realize I’m pregnant *and* procure an abortion. 


If I lived in Texas I’d probably schedule an abortion every month, just to be safe. 


Donate here to help women get actual healthcare, which may mean getting the fuck out of Texas: https://www.lilithfund.org/

Sep 2, 21 10:44 pm  · 
7  · 
Wood Guy

Good idea, Donna. I just heard about another part of the law which bans abortion-inducing medication for any reason after seven weeks. The woman writing said she had a miscarriage at something like 8-9 weeks and by the letter of the law she would have had to carry it until her body decided to birth it, likely resulting in severe infection at best. I have not confirmed this but it seems quite plausible, considering how horrible the rest of the law is.

Sep 3, 21 11:53 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

I recently learned the "date of last period" fact and it floored me. I know six weeks is stupidly early, but six weeks *from your last period* is absurd. Without going into too much detail, my wife & I are currently, ahem, trying*, and we realized that even with counting days and taking ovulation tests and being extremely aware of our timeline it's possible for us to get to six weeks before we know she's pregnant. 

The lack of knowledge surrounding pregnancy and women's health by the people advocating for these restrictions is frankly sickening. 

(*is there any less-sexy word for sex than "trying"?)

Sep 3, 21 11:56 am  · 
4  · 
Wood Guy

Tduds, my cousin called it "the daily deposit" if that helps. The situation is indeed sickening. A large majority of Texans didn't even want the law, but R's have figured out how to work the system to their advantage.

I just realized that my story above is a lot like EA's, but I read it on Facebook, on a Rebecca Solnit post I believe. My photographer just went through something similar, twice. Ugh. And Fuck Texas Republicans. 

Sep 3, 21 12:11 pm  · 
3  · 
randomised

Nothing can kill the mood more than trying to get pregnant, keep it up tduds!

Sep 3, 21 12:30 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I got my wife to say "raw doggin it" among friends exactly one time and it's one of the funniest things I've ever heard. Maybe TMI...

Sep 3, 21 12:34 pm  · 
3  · 

Maybe TMI, but you can't necessarily schedule/control when the best time to conceive will be and if that happens to be the same night you are volunteering to chaperone a high school field trip ... well, sometimes you end up renting a hotel room in the city for the night only to use it for a couple hours after work before you end up meeting the kiddos at the event you're chaperoning. Sometimes that's just how it all works.

Narrator: And it did work.

Good luck tduds.

Sep 3, 21 2:00 pm  · 
3  · 

More TMI: In my experience reproductive sex was the sexiest sex ever. It just had this incredible sparkle to it. So I don’t think “trying” is unsexy *at all*.

Sep 3, 21 2:02 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Donna: I agree! It's the word that I object to, not the act.

Sep 3, 21 2:22 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

We have photos of the kiddo the day of conception. Kiddo is not visible, but we have the photos. It's awesome.

Sep 3, 21 2:40 pm  · 
2  · 
sameolddoctor

Wonder what all the hipsters/non-hipsters that moved from states like California to Texas think about all of this. Is low(ish) rent, zero state tax and a few more opportunities good enough reason to move to that hellhole?

Sep 3, 21 9:55 pm  · 
2  · 
z1111

This is just a preview. Over turning RvW is next.

Sep 3, 21 10:52 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

It is perhaps only a hellhole if it affects you, if you’re young, educated and mobile you will be able to survive and reaping the benefits will outweigh the negatives, no?

Sep 6, 21 2:03 am  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Yes, being a self-centered, selfish, navel-gazing asshole means you'll go where it benefits you at any given time in your life without consideration to anyone else or, indeed, yourself in the future. Ayn Rand would be so proud.

Sep 7, 21 3:03 pm  · 
3  · 

TikTokers Are Trading Stocks By Copying What Members Of Congress 

I predict prosecution of the amatuers for insider trading and modification or outright elimination of the disclosure laws.

Sep 22, 21 10:21 pm  · 
 · 
z1111

I am making a bet to myself for beer and pizza.

Sep 22, 21 11:39 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: