Originally posted by Starlight
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
The Bernie Gimme Gimme Gimme Crowd
Collapse
X
-
"The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostChanging their mentality is difficult.
On the whole, I think changing people's mentality is close to impossible. So, yes, obviously people like this will exist at every level of society, and there's basically nothing we can do to change that.
But a mistake I think people commonly make is that they imagine that people's mentality is easy to change, and that welfare in particular changes it. So they imagine that government welfare makes these people lazy. It's as if they think government welfare is a giant factory that takes in productive members of society and churns out lazy ones.
In reality, it's simply not that easy to change people's psychologies, and its vastly beyond the power of government welfare to make people lazy. The most that can be said is that a small segment of the lazy people in the population - ie those who happen to be poor - will receive government welfare, and due to their complete lack of ambition in life they will just mindlessly live out their lives on it. Their laziness is not very useful for society, but it's no better or worse than the lazy trust-fund kid down the block who's speeding in his parent's flash car and doing drugs in parties with his rich friends. In neither case does the government have the power to reach into their minds and make them want to succeed at life. Just as all that money is being wasted on the lazy rich kid, so too a (much lesser) amount of money is being wasted on the lazy poor kid.
But when considering a question like "Should we let poor people starve to death?" I don't consider an answer of "there are lazy people in the world, and it's so important that we never give any help whatsoever to a lazy person, that it's better to let all the poor people starve to death in case one of them happens to be lazy" to be acceptable. As a society, we've got to help the people who are in need, because, well, civilization. That's what separates us from the barbarians. Helping other people is what makes us good people. It's inevitable that some percentage of the poor people we end up helping will also be people who are lazy. So be it."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostThere's a small number of people who just aren't interested in putting any effort whatsoever into life, who will always do the absolute least possible.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostBut, in order to provide all the FREE STUFF, America needs a bunch of really stupid really rich people.Unfortunately, most people don't get rich by being stupid.
"The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThis seems a bit odd Starlight, that an otherwise democratic socialist country would have a "right wing government". How does that happen if the people appreciate a government that works for them rather than no government, or as little government as possible, as the "right wing" in the U.S. advocates for. I'm guessing that maybe the "right wing" is defined a bit differently, less conservative, in New Zealand than it is in the U.S, no?"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostUS DOES provide inexpensive housing to low income people. It also provides a myriad number of free shelters, though on a state by state level. It now provides free healthcare. As far as college, I honestly don't really know what's NOT free about it. I went to college essentially for free, and even attended when I was homeless. I just wasn't dumb enough to actually take any loans. The grants, tuition exemption programs and work programs were enough for me. I didn't pay a dime.
My husband now works for the post office and were really struggling through to pay off debts or come to a point where our debts have good agreements so we can be debt free. Is it easy? No, especially not when you only make what we make but its totally worth it. And we don't have a whole lot of assistance other than some insurance.A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Originally posted by Catholicity View PostI went to college with grants and loans that we still owe on. I worked like crazy though. I probably would have qualified for free or cheap housing but it really wasn't safe. We kind of used the minimums and I provided the rest.
My husband now works for the post office and were really struggling through to pay off debts or come to a point where our debts have good agreements so we can be debt free. Is it easy? No, especially not when you only make what we make but its totally worth it. And we don't have a whole lot of assistance other than some insurance.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostYou've obviously never visited an American Section 8 project. You'd see quite a few people who are content to have what little the Government will give them. And they will demand more from the government instead of themselves. Not all are like that, but a substantial amount are. You are right though. Changing their mentality is difficult."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostCurrently the most right-wing of our four largest parties has majority-control of the government (in coalition with a couple of smaller parties), and is led by an guy who used to work as a currency trader for Merrill Lynch. That right-wing party is in a similar place on the global political spectrum to Obama/Hillary Clinton (according to politicalcompass.com who attempt to use the same scale for everyone, and also according to my own opinion). The leader of that party is a personal friend of Obama and enjoys playing golf with him, and overall the two of them appear to have very similar political views.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostPersonally, I think Obama's and Bernie's "college should be free to all" is a political sham just to appeal to the younger crowd. I'm not sure why they get away with it though since most people that attended college must at least be familiar with the myriad number of programs that government provides, whether they accepted those programs or not."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostInterestingly enough, most of these countries are allies of the US and the US spends billions defending them, so they don't have to defend themselves.
On that list, Iceland is the middle of the ocean, and has completely disbanded its military because there is no aggressive countries remotely close to it and no one in particular wants to invade it. New Zealand, like Iceland is in the middle of the ocean not near any aggressive countries and our military spending is fairly negligible (3% of total government spending). I personally think we should copy Iceland and disband the military entirely. The Netherlands, Switzerland, and Norway are possibly well-positioned to also think about doing the same.
Some of the other countries on the list are not so well-positioned in the world. Finland, Sweden, and Australia, are all close to unstable countries (Russia, Indonesia) that are worth having a decent level of military defense against. So their military spending is actually not all that low. But the amount of military spending you actually need to counter a threat is to have a level approximately similar to what that threat is spending. If you look at my chart on the fist page of this thread, you'll see that the UK and France combined are spending more than Russia is. By the time you combine the EU countries, they're spending nearly 4 times more per year on military than Russia. They don't need the US's over-the-top military spending protecting them. What they're already spending themselves is more than enough."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostIf the US spent much less on military, it is possible that some of these countries would choose to spend more, yes.
YOU NEED US ON THAT WALL!!!!!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostIf the US spent much less on military, it is possible that some of these countries would choose to spend more, yes. Probably the US should therefore stop wasting so much of its taxpayer's money on military spending, and let other countries fend for themselves a bit more.
On that list, Iceland is the middle of the ocean, and has completely disbanded its military because there is no aggressive countries remotely close to it and no one in particular wants to invade it. New Zealand, like Iceland is in the middle of the ocean not near any aggressive countries and our military spending is fairly negligible (3% of total government spending). I personally think we should copy Iceland and disband the military entirely. The Netherlands, Switzerland, and Norway are possibly well-positioned to also think about doing the same.
Some of the other countries on the list are not so well-positioned in the world. Finland, Sweden, and Australia, are all close to unstable countries (Russia, Indonesia) that are worth having a decent level of military defense against. So their military spending is actually not all that low. But the amount of military spending you actually need to counter a threat is to have a level approximately similar to what that threat is spending. If you look at my chart on the fist page of this thread, you'll see that the UK and France combined are spending more than Russia is. By the time you combine the EU countries, they're spending nearly 4 times more per year on military than Russia. They don't need the US's over-the-top military spending protecting them. What they're already spending themselves is more than enough.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostIf the US spent much less on military, it is possible that some of these countries would choose to spend more, yes. Probably the US should therefore stop wasting so much of its taxpayer's money on military spending, and let other countries fend for themselves a bit more.
On that list, Iceland is the middle of the ocean, and has completely disbanded its military because there is no aggressive countries remotely close to it and no one in particular wants to invade it. New Zealand, like Iceland is in the middle of the ocean not near any aggressive countries and our military spending is fairly negligible (3% of total government spending). I personally think we should copy Iceland and disband the military entirely. The Netherlands, Switzerland, and Norway are possibly well-positioned to also think about doing the same.
Some of the other countries on the list are not so well-positioned in the world. Finland, Sweden, and Australia, are all close to unstable countries (Russia, Indonesia) that are worth having a decent level of military defense against. So their military spending is actually not all that low. But the amount of military spending you actually need to counter a threat is to have a level approximately similar to what that threat is spending. If you look at my chart on the fist page of this thread, you'll see that the UK and France combined are spending more than Russia is. By the time you combine the EU countries, they're spending nearly 4 times more per year on military than Russia. They don't need the US's over-the-top military spending protecting them. What they're already spending themselves is more than enough.Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 05-21-2016, 08:30 PM."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post"Choosing to" and being able to are two different things. And those countries being able to spend enough money on military to make any difference at all would be a whole 'nuther matter.
YOU NEED US ON THAT WALL!!!!!Likewise, getting rid of your military because 'nobody wants to invade you' is just silly. Norway, the Neatherlands, and Iceland were all invaded in the 20th century and New Zealand could have been one of Japan's targets if the war in the pacific turned out differently. Weird how history has to be ignored to make the dreams of socialism come true. More than likely, these people simply didn't talk to their grandparents or listened to them very well.
Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 05-21-2016, 08:20 PM."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 03:49 PM
|
18 responses
128 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Today, 02:31 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 06-28-2024, 11:42 AM
|
39 responses
201 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Stoic
Today, 02:57 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-28-2024, 10:24 AM
|
21 responses
150 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by NorrinRadd
Today, 05:42 PM
|
||
Started by VonTastrophe, 06-28-2024, 10:22 AM
|
31 responses
177 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by NorrinRadd
Today, 05:35 PM
|
||
Started by VonTastrophe, 06-27-2024, 01:08 PM
|
52 responses
324 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 10:03 AM
|
Comment