Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Tue May 02, 2017 10:53 am

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
Daryl wrote:Thanks Peter. Sounds like there is hope then of a more equal society eventually.


You are starting to sound like an American conservative/libertarian, Daryl. :)
Equality is best achieved with the free flow of capital and labor. Government governs best when it regulates capital and labor to flow at their freest. Of course a libertarian would insist that level be just above anarchy and a conservative would insist on enough government to be able to protect society from external hostile forces as well as prevent anarchy.



And history refutes that idea at every turn. Free markets are efficient generators and distributors of resources but they do *not* trend to equality. Once certain actors in the market accumulate sufficient wealth it becomes a self reinforcing cycle where that wealth can be leveraged to acquire ever increasing shares of the total for the richest because they wield all the power in the market.

Which is why the period of greatest economic equality in US history was the post WW2 era generated by the New Deal... .and why inequality skyrocketed again when Reagan started sabotaging it by cutting tax rates on the rich, undermining labor unions, and deregulating.

Image
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by PeterZ   » Tue May 02, 2017 12:01 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6253
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
PeterZ wrote:
You are starting to sound like an American conservative/libertarian, Daryl. :)
Equality is best achieved with the free flow of capital and labor. Government governs best when it regulates capital and labor to flow at their freest. Of course a libertarian would insist that level be just above anarchy and a conservative would insist on enough government to be able to protect society from external hostile forces as well as prevent anarchy.



And history refutes that idea at every turn. Free markets are efficient generators and distributors of resources but they do *not* trend to equality. Once certain actors in the market accumulate sufficient wealth it becomes a self reinforcing cycle where that wealth can be leveraged to acquire ever increasing shares of the total for the richest because they wield all the power in the market.

Which is why the period of greatest economic equality in US history was the post WW2 era generated by the New Deal... .and why inequality skyrocketed again when Reagan started sabotaging it by cutting tax rates on the rich, undermining labor unions, and deregulating.


Free markets don't remain free once wealth aggregates or perhaps better to say condenses into too few hands. Just as this is true, government intrusion doesn't facilitate the free flow of capital and labor once that intrusion reaches a certain level. We range from the robber barons of antebellum USA to the USSR at its worst.

Best practices are a government just powerful enough to counter the wealthy individuals and just weak enough that it cannot be coopted by those wealthy individuals to work for their oligarchy rather than the people's democratic republic. To ensure that end, our society needs people like you to fight against aggregated wealth and people like me to fight against aggregated governmental power.

Our Constitution is the best means of allowing those varied points of view to thrive indefinitely.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by PeterZ   » Tue May 02, 2017 3:02 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6253
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
PeterZ wrote:
You are starting to sound like an American conservative/libertarian, Daryl. :)
Equality is best achieved with the free flow of capital and labor. Government governs best when it regulates capital and labor to flow at their freest. Of course a libertarian would insist that level be just above anarchy and a conservative would insist on enough government to be able to protect society from external hostile forces as well as prevent anarchy.



And history refutes that idea at every turn. Free markets are efficient generators and distributors of resources but they do *not* trend to equality. Once certain actors in the market accumulate sufficient wealth it becomes a self reinforcing cycle where that wealth can be leveraged to acquire ever increasing shares of the total for the richest because they wield all the power in the market.

Which is why the period of greatest economic equality in US history was the post WW2 era generated by the New Deal... .and why inequality skyrocketed again when Reagan started sabotaging it by cutting tax rates on the rich, undermining labor unions, and deregulating.

Image


It actually doesn't. The Market crash of 1929 wiped out everyone. It began wiping out the middle class who invested on margin and then worked its way up the wealth ladder until everyone was hammered broke. There was no investment income to speak of. No one had anything saved.

Of course incomes were not dispersed. There were very few large companies with high paying executives. Sports stars had to have second jobs in the off season, even the second tier mega stars of the day. As savings increased and people began to invest, more companies could grow through borrowing and equity sales. By the time Johnson was President, incomes began to disperse again. It grew more so under Ford and Carter and continued under Reagan. If you look at the chart, Reagan did not begin that growing disparity but continued what began before him. That was the growing disparity brought on by investment income and the increased intrusion by government. Can you say War on Poverty and Great Society? That was when starting your own business became increasingly more difficult and more large companies began growing massively large.

Elder Bush and his no new taxes broken pledge really spiked the growing disparity. Tax increases tend to do that. Bush's surprise tax increase hammered investments unevenly. Guess who escaped for the most part? Guess who escaped all the economic turbulence since 1990?

The richest few, that's who. Government regulations protects established wealth far better than it protects lower incomes. The harsher the tax regime, the greater are those with the most wealth end up being protected. That's why Wall Street loves democrats. those regulations protect their clients so well.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by PeterZ   » Wed May 03, 2017 9:14 am

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6253
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

noblehunter wrote:
PeterZ wrote:You are starting to sound like an American conservative/libertarian, Daryl. :)
Equality is best achieved with the free flow of capital and labor. Government governs best when it regulates capital and labor to flow at their freest. Of course a libertarian would insist that level be just above anarchy and a conservative would insist on enough government to be able to protect society from external hostile forces as well as prevent anarchy.
Another species of conservative would insist on enough government to protect society from moral threats.


Indeed some people would. Yet, moral threats are often by our own choices. Limiting those choices is by its very nature a reduction of liberty. How can anyone claim to be conservative if they wish to accelerate a totalitarian agenda?

Whether by the Moral Majority, the Antifa or BLM, limiting free speech or the pursuit of happiness within the limits of our Constitution is advocating a more totalitarian policy. That conserves nothing and progresses towards decreased liberties.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Annachie   » Thu May 04, 2017 8:59 am

Annachie
Admiral

Posts: 2710
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:36 pm

Peter you amaze me.

Totalitarian governments are inherintly conservative.

They don't want things to change. Why would they? They have all the power and the freedom to do whatever they want at the personal level.

And that's where the conservative libertarian goes totalitarian. They have their freedoms and don't really want other groups to get theirs. As if it would somehow diminish freedoms if too many peoole had it.
Best way to achieve that is by gaining total control.

A progressive libertarian is one who wants everybody to have the same freedoms.
Which usually leads to nanny state as conservatives have to be forced to accept others having the same freedoms

If you doubt me then ask yourself why equality is seen as leftist, and opposed by conservatives?

After all in a true libertarian society, everybody would be equal wouldn't they?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by PeterZ   » Thu May 04, 2017 9:41 am

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6253
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

You truly are ignorant of American conservatives, aren't you?

Do you know what it is we try to conserve? Do you care? I believe you don't and simply ascribe some perceived motive to us that fits your prejudice.

Let me enlighten you, no matter how useless the gesture may end up being. Conservatives in the US are constitutional conservatives. We believe in the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that it is the best document for ensuring our liberties as it exists now. Libertarians tend to believe the current interpretation of the Constitution allows too much power to our agents in government. Progressives believe that the current interpretation of our Constitution is simply a stage in an ongoing process of societal evolution.

I do not ascribe malicious motives to Progressives, even though they want to fundamentally change our liberties over time. Those folks tend to believe such change is for the best. Progressive politicians are another breed of animal. They see the aggregation of power as an end in itself and liberty is a thing that would limit the power they can gather to themselves. I perhaps shouldn't say progressive politicians, since all politicians will want to aggregate power to themselves.

You on the other hand seem to always assume as you did in this post that those that disagree with you must have base and selfish motives for their views. That's pure prejudice.

Leftist philosophies led us to Communism and the massive inequalities found in that system. Those with political power could and did do things to those without the power that couldn't have happened in the most conservative parts of the US. Conservative US citizens donate massive amounts to charitable organizations around the world. Conservative donate more that liberals year after year.

The left talks a good game about equality, but just as you did in your post, they assume that those they disagree with are fundamentally unequal in virtue. Those that disagree with them are so morally corrupt and lacking in virtue that it is just to deny them freedom of speech. If we disagree with same sex unions, it must be because we are intolerant bigots and not for any other justifiable reason. The list goes on and on.

Bottom line is that no, conservatives tend to agree with the Constitution as it is and resist changes to it. We would conserve that document as much as we can. Denying its benefits to others? You can peddle that crap elsewhere. We value that document too highly to shit on it that way.

Annachie wrote:Peter you amaze me.

Totalitarian governments are inherintly conservative.

They don't want things to change. Why would they? They have all the power and the freedom to do whatever they want at the personal level.

And that's where the conservative libertarian goes totalitarian. They have their freedoms and don't really want other groups to get theirs. As if it would somehow diminish freedoms if too many peoole had it.
Best way to achieve that is by gaining total control.

A progressive libertarian is one who wants everybody to have the same freedoms.
Which usually leads to nanny state as conservatives have to be forced to accept others having the same freedoms

If you doubt me then ask yourself why equality is seen as leftist, and opposed by conservatives?

After all in a true libertarian society, everybody would be equal wouldn't they?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by The E   » Thu May 04, 2017 11:41 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

PeterZ wrote:Let me enlighten you, no matter how useless the gesture may end up being. Conservatives in the US are constitutional conservatives. We believe in the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that it is the best document for ensuring our liberties as it exists now. Libertarians tend to believe the current interpretation of the Constitution allows too much power to our agents in government. Progressives believe that the current interpretation of our Constitution is simply a stage in an ongoing process of societal evolution.


And yet, conservatives elected a president who is decidedly vague (one might also say "catastrophically misinformed") about the constitution.

I do not ascribe malicious motives to Progressives, even though they want to fundamentally change our liberties over time. Those folks tend to believe such change is for the best. Progressive politicians are another breed of animal. They see the aggregation of power as an end in itself and liberty is a thing that would limit the power they can gather to themselves. I perhaps shouldn't say progressive politicians, since all politicians will want to aggregate power to themselves.


Ah, yes, those evil progressives, always looking to remove liberties from people.

So, are the conservatives who do their best to disenfranchise minority voters actually progressives?

You on the other hand seem to always assume as you did in this post that those that disagree with you must have base and selfish motives for their views. That's pure prejudice.


Please. Not gonna claim that Progressives are always angels and can do no wrong, but are you seriously claiming that conservatives are above such considerations?

Leftist philosophies led us to Communism and the massive inequalities found in that system. Those with political power could and did do things to those without the power that couldn't have happened in the most conservative parts of the US. Conservative US citizens donate massive amounts to charitable organizations around the world. Conservative donate more that liberals year after year.


...and conservatives are overwhelmingly in favour of legislation that makes inequalities worse (see all the hilarity surrounding the AHCA repeal), are consistently arguing that welfare through the state is an inexcusable wrong.

Oh, and that "conservatives donate more than liberals" bit? As this study[/i] shows and [url=http://www.gospelpolitics.com/debunking-the-conservatives-give-more-to-charity-myth.html]this article explains, conservatives outspend liberals only in one aspect: Church donations. Liberals generally donate to non-religious charities, Conservatives donate to their church. Both donate roughly equal amounts.

The left talks a good game about equality, but just as you did in your post, they assume that those they disagree with are fundamentally unequal in virtue. Those that disagree with them are so morally corrupt and lacking in virtue that it is just to deny them freedom of speech. If we disagree with same sex unions, it must be because we are intolerant bigots and not for any other justifiable reason. The list goes on and on.


When you try to deny LGBTQ people their rights, you are being morally corrupt and lacking in virtue. If your sole justification for doing so is some ancient bible claptrap, your reasoning is unjustifiable, and your bigotry is intolerable.

Bottom line is that no, conservatives tend to agree with the Constitution as it is and resist changes to it. We would conserve that document as much as we can. Denying its benefits to others? You can peddle that crap elsewhere. We value that document too highly to shit on it that way.


And yet, you are denying its benefits to others.

(Also, while constitutional conservatism is a branch of conservative politics in the US, it is not the entirety of the conservative movement.)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by noblehunter   » Thu May 04, 2017 1:01 pm

noblehunter
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:49 pm

Let me enlighten you, no matter how useless the gesture may end up being. Conservatives in the US are constitutional conservatives. We believe in the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that it is the best document for ensuring our liberties as it exists now. Libertarians tend to believe the current interpretation of the Constitution allows too much power to our agents in government. Progressives believe that the current interpretation of our Constitution is simply a stage in an ongoing process of societal evolution.
I'd have a lot more sympathy for "constitutional conservatives" if they hadn't spent the last forty years or so sucking up to social conservatives. Or being social conservatives for that matter. They say they're interested in protecting and promoting freedom but they spend an awful lot of time with people whose dominant interest is in restricting freedom.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by PeterZ   » Thu May 04, 2017 3:08 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6253
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

noblehunter wrote:
Let me enlighten you, no matter how useless the gesture may end up being. Conservatives in the US are constitutional conservatives. We believe in the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that it is the best document for ensuring our liberties as it exists now. Libertarians tend to believe the current interpretation of the Constitution allows too much power to our agents in government. Progressives believe that the current interpretation of our Constitution is simply a stage in an ongoing process of societal evolution.
I'd have a lot more sympathy for "constitutional conservatives" if they hadn't spent the last forty years or so sucking up to social conservatives. Or being social conservatives for that matter. They say they're interested in protecting and promoting freedom but they spend an awful lot of time with people whose dominant interest is in restricting freedom.


Did I disagree with you the last time you made this distinction? I don't recall that I did.

Agreeing that the Bible's moral teaching is the proper one doesn't automatically lead one to believe that the Bible should replace the Constitution. As for the restrictions on freedom, I see a much greater love for such restrictions from the left. Tell those antifa bozos in Berkeley all about restricting freedom.

Bottom line is that using Meade's essay for definitions, both Progressives and Religious conservatives who want to impose their views are largely Wilsonian in outlook. They believe in the moral rectitude of using the power of governmentto promote moral justice. Constitutional conservatives and Libertarian are degrees of Jeffersonaian and perhaps Jacksonaian. I would agree that what has been called the Uni-Party or Political Elites are flat out Hamiltonain.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Annachie   » Fri May 05, 2017 12:44 am

Annachie
Admiral

Posts: 2710
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:36 pm

PeterZ wrote:You truly are ignorant of American conservatives, aren't you?

Do you know what it is we try to conserve? Do you care? I believe you don't and simply ascribe some perceived motive to us that fits your prejudice.

Let me enlighten you, no matter how useless the gesture may end up being. Conservatives in the US are constitutional conservatives. We believe in the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that it is the best document for ensuring our liberties as it exists now. Libertarians tend to believe the current interpretation of the Constitution allows too much power to our agents in government. Progressives believe that the current interpretation of our Constitution is simply a stage in an ongoing process of societal evolution.


So the group that ignores the constitution, that tries the most to change it, is the conservative group?

Ignoring the requirement to vet judges, far right conservatives.

Wanting to limit all free speech, far right conservatives.

Wanting to bring in religious laws in violation of the constitution, Far right conservatives.

Ignoring the second amendment, every damn politician in the USA, but particularly bad in the case of far right conservatives who try to limit it for specific groups as opposed to everybody.

Ignoring the fourth amendment, far right conservatives again. Damn, what is it about due process that they don't like?

Likewise the due process inherent in the fifth amendment. Far right conservatives again.


The far right is not looking good for being the defenders of the US constitution are they. lets continue.

sixth amendment. Hmm, which political party has a history of limiting the rights of people to have a lawyer? Three guesses, first two don't count.

eighth amendment? Damn if it isn't far right conservatives violating the shit out of that one too.

ninth? Guess what? Yeppers. Today in fact. Right to health. Down the shitter.

Tenth? Well, OK every party fucks with that one to force through their political ideology.
(Side note: Kind of weird that the 9th and 10th clash like that. The fed only have the powers attributed to it, but the fed are supposed to be the protector of rights, including those rights not attributed to it. )


I do not ascribe malicious motives to Progressives, even though they want to fundamentally change our liberties over time. Those folks tend to believe such change is for the best. Progressive politicians are another breed of animal. They see the aggregation of power as an end in itself and liberty is a thing that would limit the power they can gather to themselves. I perhaps shouldn't say progressive politicians, since all politicians will want to aggregate power to themselves.


Personally, I don't ascribe malicious motives to conservatives. Far right evangelical types, yes. But they are a different beast.
But to say that progressives want to fundamentally change liberties over time is just flat out wrong.
Progressives want to expand access to liberties.
It was progressives who freed the slaves, expanding their liberties.
It was/is progressives advocating for equality of the sexes, expanding liberties there.
It's progressives who are advocating for equality of the races, to get minorities equal liberties.

It is far right evangelical conservatives who are fighting them tooth and nail.
To limit liberties for all who aren't far right wing evangelicals.

You are literally 100% wrong on what you are saying.

You on the other hand seem to always assume as you did in this post that those that disagree with you must have base and selfish motives for their views. That's pure prejudice.

No, just anyone who can be described as 'Far' or 'Extremist'.

Leftist philosophies led us to Communism and the massive inequalities found in that system.

Case in point, communism, or rather marxist/Lenninism, is an extreme political position.

I could equally point out that right philosophies led to nazism, fascism, pol pot, and a whole host of others.

Those with political power could and did do things to those without the power that couldn't have happened in the most conservative parts of the US. Conservative US citizens donate massive amounts to charitable organizations around the world. Conservative donate more that liberals year after year.


You've already been corrected on the donation part.
You'll also notice that those with political power in the far right conservative areas of the US do things that could not be done in the rest of the civilized world.

Case in point, and I'm sure you will appreciate the free speech elements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKcJ-0bAHB4

The left talks a good game about equality, but just as you did in your post, they assume that those they disagree with are fundamentally unequal in virtue. Those that disagree with them are so morally corrupt and lacking in virtue that it is just to deny them freedom of speech. If we disagree with same sex unions, it must be because we are intolerant bigots and not for any other justifiable reason. The list goes on and on.


To take up the same sex marriage point.
Firstly, most people against same sex marriage are against. it for religious reasons, and when I say most I suspect that that is around 90%.
So straight away that is a first amendment issue. Oh, wait, that would be the so called protectors of the constitution who are pushing for those unconstitutional laws. oops.
A for the rest, surely, surely, as a libertarian, no as a LIBERTARIAN, you consider banning someone from doing something that you personally don't like an anathema? Surely it goes against everything you believe in? Surely, anyone who believes that the government should but out and let people do what they want should let people marry someone of the same gender if they want?


Bottom line is that no, conservatives tend to agree with the Constitution as it is and resist changes to it. We would conserve that document as much as we can. Denying its benefits to others? You can peddle that crap elsewhere. We value that document too highly to shit on it that way.




Bottom line is that the far right conservatives currently in power what to change things, including the constitution, to suit themselves, and are the complete opposite of what you are claiming.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top

Return to Politics