It's worth a try!

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Sorry, but that "by your own bootstraps" BS that right wing wonks love to bleat is a Joke....as the very people who talk such drivel are alive due to the very system they claim to be against.....or did you think that going to any store in America and picking up a foodstuff with a reasonable assumption that it's not spoiled or contaminated was just by happen stance of individualism? Puh-leeze! Or that FACT that you are immune to many diseases due to national health mandates (which is now rightfully being challenged regarding availability, content and frequency)?

If YOU and your friends and relatives are actively involved in local, federal and social care taking of each other to just the minimal requirement, then things will impove. It'll take hard work and time, but nothing worth while is easy.

Try not using a reductio ad absurdum fallacy as your argument.

Glad you found a dictionary....pity you can't logically or factually disprove what I posted. Try doing some honest research on the following and then tell me I'm wrong: The New Deal, creation of the FDA, creation of NHI.

Now don't come back with some opinion, supposition and conjecture....point to FACTS from the aforementioned and then tell the reading audience in detail why my previous post is unrealistic.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
1. No, that's making things worse....like the cretins who killed Arbery and Martin. True neighborhood watches work with the cops, and are very effective in crime prevention or stopping.

2. Just look at the number of prisons in the USA...the number of incarcerations....states revitalizing the death penalty. The hitch is making sure that the people jailed or executed are the right ones.

3. I got no problem with the death penalty for rapists....but good luck getting majority state consensus on that. The alternatives in the past have been decade long sentences, chemical castration. Yep, sometimes the system doesn't work and people take the law into their own hands. My grandma told me once of a creep that raped the wrong little girl who came from a tight (and large) family. That guy vanished, the cops couldn't find him and no one in the neighborhood gave up anyone. The problem is if people get the wrong guy, it's murder. There was a case in the 1990's about a guy in Conn. I believe, who did 15 years for a rape before the accuser had a moment of conscience and recanted her identification, saying she had to nail someone to cover up her sexual activity to family and community. That guy had always maintained his innocence. See my point?

I don't come from where morons like you live, dumbass.
We get it done 'round heanh.
Something tells me you would not be very welcome.

And there you have it, folks. People like Matty are the reasons for stereotypes of southerners flying the Confederate flag as being congenitally ignorant and proud of it. Faced with a rational response, Matty can't concede a point, so he lashes out like a petulant teenager. Once I reduce jokers like Matty to spewing the stupidity he just did, I just dump them in the IA bin for a month or so....watching them dog my threads and posts like a bitch in heat.

Adios Matty...when the feds come a knock'in on your flag drapped domain asking about January 6th, think of me and the intellectual ass whupping I always give you.

 

[Matt Dillon]

And there you have it, folks. People like Matty are the reasons for stereotypes of southerners flying the Confederate flag as being congenitally ignorant and proud of it. Faced with a rational response, Matty can't concede a point, so he lashes out like a petulant teenager. Once I reduce jokers like Matty to spewing the stupidity he just did, I just dump them in the IA bin for a month or so....watching them dog my threads and posts like a bitch in heat.

Adios Matty...when the feds come a knock'in on your flag drapped domain asking about January 6th, think of me and the intellectual ass whupping I always give you.

You had no point, moron, else you would have made it. Which you did not.

We are the reasons filth like you do not take over here. Fucktard.

Okay, maybe not "We" because all the people I was speaking of are now dead. I am inclined to hold the lines they drew, though.

I am thinking they set a good example for me. Just so you know, it was 40% white, 40% black, and the rest Spanish or Indian or Asian or something or some combo.

I ain't no racist, but I am a realist.

As for the latter, yeah, please roll with that. I'll have you in litigation b4 my settlement. Should I call John Morgan now or later?

 

[Matt Dillon]

Nope, I want MORE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED IN THEIR GOVERNMENT AND DO THE RIGHT THING!

I want more people to enact justice in their local area.
And the world will be a better place.

 

[Matt Dillon]

And there you have it, folks. People like Matty are the reasons for stereotypes of southerners flying the Confederate flag as being congenitally ignorant and proud of it. Faced with a rational response, Matty can't concede a point, so he lashes out like a petulant teenager. Once I reduce jokers like Matty to spewing the stupidity he just did, I just dump them in the IA bin for a month or so....watching them dog my threads and posts like a bitch in heat.

Adios Matty...when the feds come a knock'in on your flag drapped domain asking about January 6th, think of me and the intellectual ass whupping I always give you.

Let me know when you get done sucking donkey dicks.
I'll wait, you gotta do you.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Glad you found a dictionary....pity you can't logically or factually disprove what I posted. Try doing some honest research on the following and then tell me I'm wrong: The New Deal, creation of the FDA, creation of NHI.

Now don't come back with some opinion, supposition and conjecture....point to FACTS from the aforementioned and then tell the reading audience in detail why my previous post is unrealistic.

Sure I can. That's easy.

In the OP there are three statements of change.

Money for bombs & bullets, but not for decent housing and jobs.

Money for corporate & bank bailouts, but NOT for free education for our youth.

Money for Congress to vote themselves salary raises, but barely enough for decent medical care for the working poor.

The rest of the statements are nothing but platitudes, implorations to do something.

Now, let's look at the three that can be measured.

More money for decent jobs and housing. First, when did these become the business of the government to provide? In nations where the government provides them they do a really shitty job of it. Those nations are almost always autocratic Socialist states where the government runs everything. So, taking money from defense (it can be argued that less spending on this would be useful) and putting it to jobs and housing by the government would prove a failure.
Another great example of this is LBJ's Great Society. Public housing provided under that program was specifically what is suggested by the OP. That ended with the Watts riots and virtually all of that public housing is either now in private hands or abandoned.
Thus, what is asked for here by the OP is clearly from history a massive fail.

The next is a "free" education. The more government has gotten into education, the more fucked up it's become. The US outspends nearly every nation on the planet on education and our K-12 public schools turn out a mediocre product at best. Since there's no correlation between education outcomes and spending, and there's now plenty of evidence that massive spending on education rarely, if ever, improves outcomes significantly there is every reason not to let the government push cubic dollars into "free" (which it isn't--somebody's paying) education.

Then there's the idea that our health care should be publicly run. Quite obviously this one is hit and miss at best. There are some public health care systems that work, and there are many that are just short of a travesty. In the UK, the NHS is the largest employer in the nation and the care is average to mediocre overall. Same can be said for Canada's system, or for the VA here in the US. Let's get government out of most healthcare entirely rather than give those idiots more control.

In all three cases, government has historically made a hash of doing these things. The government is not very good at running services and businesses. There is a long and clear track record from around the world proving it. Sure, there have been successes to one degree or another here and there, but on the whole government is a poor provider of social and economic services.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Glad you found a dictionary....pity you can't logically or factually disprove what I posted. Try doing some honest research on the following and then tell me I'm wrong: The New Deal, creation of the FDA, creation of NHI.

Now don't come back with some opinion, supposition and conjecture....point to FACTS from the aforementioned and then tell the reading audience in detail why my previous post is unrealistic.

Sure I can. That's easy.

In the OP there are three statements of change.

Money for bombs & bullets, but not for decent housing and jobs.

Money for corporate & bank bailouts, but NOT for free education for our youth.

Money for Congress to vote themselves salary raises, but barely enough for decent medical care for the working poor.

The rest of the statements are nothing but platitudes, implorations to do something.

Now, let's look at the three that can be measured.

More money for decent jobs and housing. First, when did these become the business of the government to provide? In nations where the government provides them they do a really shitty job of it. Those nations are almost always autocratic Socialist states where the government runs everything. So, taking money from defense (it can be argued that less spending on this would be useful) and putting it to jobs and housing by the government would prove a failure.
Another great example of this is LBJ's Great Society. Public housing provided under that program was specifically what is suggested by the OP. That ended with the Watts riots and virtually all of that public housing is either now in private hands or abandoned.
Thus, what is asked for here by the OP is clearly from history a massive fail.

The next is a "free" education. The more government has gotten into education, the more fucked up it's become. The US outspends nearly every nation on the planet on education and our K-12 public schools turn out a mediocre product at best. Since there's no correlation between education outcomes and spending, and there's now plenty of evidence that massive spending on education rarely, if ever, improves outcomes significantly there is every reason not to let the government push cubic dollars into "free" (which it isn't--somebody's paying) education.

Then there's the idea that our health care should be publicly run. Quite obviously this one is hit and miss at best. There are some public health care systems that work, and there are many that are just short of a travesty. In the UK, the NHS is the largest employer in the nation and the care is average to mediocre overall. Same can be said for Canada's system, or for the VA here in the US. Let's get government out of most healthcare entirely rather than give those idiots more control.

In all three cases, government has historically made a hash of doing these things. The government is not very good at running services and businesses. There is a long and clear track record from around the world proving it. Sure, there have been successes to one degree or another here and there, but on the whole government is a poor provider of social and economic services.

1. In response to your first paragraph; from the Constitution's preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Here's a good argument to suss this out: https://lawliberty.org/the-relevance-of-the-preamble-to-constitutional-interpretation/

You opinion of the causes of the Watt's riots greatly varies from reality: https://time.com/3974595/watts-riot-1965-history/
https://www.history.com/topics/1960s/watts-riots

The rest of the paragraph is to absurd to waste time on: your usual attempt to pass off your opinion, supposition and conjecture as fact.


2. Stop and think: if the rest of the world is doing academically better than America despite the fact that America spends more on the kids, then the fault lies NOT with gov't spending per se, but with the action between administration, gov't guidelines and actual enacting of policies with students and parents. Check this out:

https://www.insider.com/how-much-co...overnment-recently-started-paying-for-books-1

Once again, you made a blanket statement that was wrong on one major point.

3. the constantly used lie regarding the health care systems in Canada and the UK just don't fly in the face of facts: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...care-quality-and-access-haq-index-rating-2016

In all three cases, you have consistently misrepresented or just plain got things wrong. the OP stands as a valid suggestion.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

1. In response to your first paragraph; from the Constitution's preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Here's a good argument to suss this out: https://lawliberty.org/the-relevance-of-the-preamble-to-constitutional-interpretation/

Promote is far different from provide. That is what you are calling for. Promote could be as simple as the government ensuring a reasonably safe and fair marketplace.[/i]

You opinion of the causes of the Watt's riots greatly varies from reality: https://time.com/3974595/watts-riot-1965-history/
https://www.history.com/topics/1960s/watts-riots

Wrong. You only discuss the direct cause. The deeper underlying cause was the awful conditions in the public housing units, Black's inability to move out of these due to a combination of racist California laws and the cost. Those reasons led to the burning down of the government owned public housing units.

In Great Society: A New History, Amity Shlaes argues that Lyndon Johnson's bold makeover of the government was a massive failure despite the good intentions of its architects and implementers.

https://reason.com/video/2020/01/16...ciety-and-what-it-means-for-the-21st-century/
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/the-forgotten-failures-of-the-great-society
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/07/opinion/in-the-nation-lbj-s-great-society.html

LBJ's Great Society, Watts being part of that, was an unmitigated disaster. It wrecked the core of cities coast-to-coast and did irreparable harm mostly to minorities, particularly Blacks.

2. Stop and think: if the rest of the world is doing academically better than America despite the fact that America spends more on the kids, then the fault lies NOT with gov't spending per se, but with the action between administration, gov't guidelines and actual enacting of policies with students and parents. Check this out:

https://www.insider.com/how-much-co...overnment-recently-started-paying-for-books-1

The problem in the US is two-fold with education. Parents aren't participating at home, particularly lower income parents, and schools aren't challenging their students. Instead, lessons are being dumbed down.

You probably never heard of George Weiss and the Belmont 112. Weiss, a successful businessman and millionaire adopted the 6th grade class at Belmont school in Philadelphia back in the late 80's. He offered the entire class a free ride to any education they wanted including college through advanced degrees. All they had to do was not get pregnant prior to turning 18, stay out of gangs, drugs, and trouble. Yet, the class after they became adults performed no better than any of their peers did. All his money did nothing to improve results to any measurable degree.
https://sayyestoeducation.org/team/george-weiss-2/
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2...flects-on-college-promise-to-philly-students/
https://www.inquirer.com/philly/education/6TH-GRADE_CLASS_IS_OFFERED_A_GIFT_OF_COLLEGE_TUITION.html

Money isn't the issue with education. It's a combination of disinterested parents, uncaring society, and a government that accepts mediocrity from the education system. Money won't fix that.

3. the constantly used lie regarding the health care systems in Canada and the UK just don't fly in the face of facts: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...care-quality-and-access-haq-index-rating-2016

What does your link have to do with government run versus non-government run healthcare? It discusses outcomes but doesn't discuss wait times, and when it discusses access to care, the US is put at a distinct disadvantage due to their previous measure of "disease burden." Without those websites actually showing you their methodology and what they're measuring into their assessment you can't tell if whether their system is valid or not.
For example, many of these measure outcomes in terms of equity and fairness, that favors socialized medical systems where such outcomes are the same even when the system is mediocre giving that country a better score.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
1. In response to your first paragraph; from the Constitution's preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Here's a good argument to suss this out: https://lawliberty.org/the-relevance...nterpretation/

Promote is far different from provide. That is what you are calling for. Promote could be as simple as the government ensuring a reasonably safe and fair marketplace.[/i]

You opinion of the causes of the Watt's riots greatly varies from reality: https://time.com/3974595/watts-riot-1965-history/
https://www.history.com/topics/1960s/watts-riots

Wrong. You only discuss the direct cause. The deeper underlying cause was the awful conditions in the public housing units, Black's inability to move out of these due to a combination of racist California laws and the cost. Those reasons led to the burning down of the government owned public housing units.

In Great Society: A New History, Amity Shlaes argues that Lyndon Johnson's bold makeover of the government was a massive failure despite the good intentions of its architects and implementers.

https://reason.com/video/2020/01/16...ciety-and-what-it-means-for-the-21st-century/
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/the-forgotten-failures-of-the-great-society
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/07/opinion/in-the-nation-lbj-s-great-society.html

LBJ's Great Society, Watts being part of that, was an unmitigated disaster. It wrecked the core of cities coast-to-coast and did irreparable harm mostly to minorities, particularly Blacks.

2. Stop and think: if the rest of the world is doing academically better than America despite the fact that America spends more on the kids, then the fault lies NOT with gov't spending per se, but with the action between administration, gov't guidelines and actual enacting of policies with students and parents. Check this out:

https://www.insider.com/how-much-cou...ng-for-books-1

The problem in the US is two-fold with education. Parents aren't participating at home, particularly lower income parents, and schools aren't challenging their students. Instead, lessons are being dumbed down.

You probably never heard of George Weiss and the Belmont 112. Weiss, a successful businessman and millionaire adopted the 6th grade class at Belmont school in Philadelphia back in the late 80's. He offered the entire class a free ride to any education they wanted including college through advanced degrees. All they had to do was not get pregnant prior to turning 18, stay out of gangs, drugs, and trouble. Yet, the class after they became adults performed no better than any of their peers did. All his money did nothing to improve results to any measurable degree.
https://sayyestoeducation.org/team/george-weiss-2/
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2...flects-on-college-promise-to-philly-students/
https://www.inquirer.com/philly/education/6TH-GRADE_CLASS_IS_OFFERED_A_GIFT_OF_COLLEGE_TUITION.html

Money isn't the issue with education. It's a combination of disinterested parents, uncaring society, and a government that accepts mediocrity from the education system. Money won't fix that.

3. the constantly used lie regarding the health care systems in Canada and the UK just don't fly in the face of facts: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/...ex-rating-2016

What does your link have to do with government run versus non-government run healthcare? It discusses outcomes but doesn't discuss wait times, and when it discusses access to care, the US is put at a distinct disadvantage due to their previous measure of "disease burden." Without those websites actually showing you their methodology and what they're measuring into their assessment you can't tell if whether their system is valid or not.
For example, many of these measure outcomes in terms of equity and fairness, that favors socialized medical systems where such outcomes are the same even when the system is mediocre giving that country a better score.

1. Government is Congress, Congress is the people. Congress makes laws in conjunction with the state, who have representation. these laws can and do affect everything from commerce to quality control of goods to protection of property and the health of citizenry. A matte of fact & history, as the above subsequent link demonstrates. Here's the definition of Promote:

- further the progress of (something, especially a cause, venture, or aim); support or actively encourage.
"some regulation is still required to promote competition"
synonyms:
encourage · further · advance · assist · aid · help · contribute to · foster ·

- give publicity to (a product, organization, or venture) so as to increase sales or public awareness.
"they are using famous personalities to promote the library nationally"
synonyms:
advertise · publicize · give publicity to · beat/bang the drum for ·

2. Again, you promote your revisionist blinders to information. From my link: Fifty years ago, Watts was a potent combination of segregation, unemployment and racial tension. Though legally integrated, 99% of students at the high school that served Watts were black, and the school—like many of the services available to the neighborhood—was not serving them well. “Watts is the kind of community that cries out for urban renewal, poverty programs, job training. Almost anything would help. Two-thirds of its residents have less than a high school education; one-eighth of them are technically illiterate,” TIME noted in a cover story about the riots. “Only 13% of the homes have been built since 1939—the rest are decaying and dilapidated.”

Jobs, meanwhile, were scarce. The federal government’s Office of Economic Opportunity, run by John F. Kennedy’s brother-in-law Sargent Shriver, called out Los Angeles mayor Sam Yorty for running the only major city in the United States without an anti-poverty program, and for being one of only two big city mayors to refuse a confidential offer of federal money meant for job programs. TIME credited a federal program that created 4,000 jobs for helping keep Harlem calm that summer, despite unrest the year before. Yorty, in turn, accused Shriver’s agency of withholding funds.

Nor were tensions calmed by police, as TIME’s piece a week later —headlined “Who’s to Blame?”—made clear. L.A. police chief William Parker was a divisive figure who compared Watts rioters to “monkeys in a zoo.” Martin Luther King Jr. was quoted as saying that in Watts “[there] is a unanimous feeling that there has been police brutality” despite the fact that a 1962 Civil Rights Commission investigation was unable to pin down specific instances.

3. Amity Shales, a right wing hack with a ph.d and darling of Conservative think tanks who stupidly tries to defend reaganomic despite the factual, historic
evidence of it's failures. https://angrybearblog.com/2013/03/more-right-wing-lies-now-as-in-roaring

When they say that the New Deal "didn't work," conservatives almost always mean New Deal fiscal stimulus. (Other policies, such as Social Security or clearing the way for unions, clearly succeeded on their own terms, whatever their ideological merits.) And then, in turn, they confuse New Deal fiscal stimulus with Keynesian economics, which is also not exactly the same thing.

https://newrepublic.com/article/63351/wasting-away-hooverville

4. Vaguely remember this, so I did a little research. Your synopsis leaves out one hell of a detail .... POVERTY! No jobs, a LOT of problems come with that. NO comprehensive sex education: Nothing new on this throughout America, but poor people generally do NOT have access to abortion clinics, and that a 16 year old can get a junior drivers permit but NOT similar access to contraception is a problem. In part, this guy gets it https://thephiladelphiacitizen.org/coming-up-short-fight-poverty-in-philly/

5. You previously stated that public health care was a "hit and miss". I never stated it was perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than our "pay for play" system. Once again, you berate the readers with your "what if" list of supposition & conjecture....you do this because I gave you FACTS that belie your original contention. the convoluted logic you use to try and smoke screen the facts just doesn't cut it. You made a statement and the facts proved you wrong, so you make up your own list of what "probably is" and "should be". Revisionism at it's best, which is the last resort of the insipidly stubborn.