Skynet is coming.

[ScottL]

Sometimes I look forward to a civil war. I fully believe my side will win it. The seeds of destruction for the other side are already contained within it.

Those who promote socialism should not object to the consequences of it's implementation. That they are jobless is somewhat their own fault for supporting Socialists in Government these many decades. They have a severe disconnect with the real world consequences of their politics.


Conservative thinking is that people ought to be able to create their own jobs when they can. Liberal thinking is to punish anyone who does so by taxing the fruits of their labor. (i.e. harnessing them to work for the State.)


I will be shocked if things do not get far worse for these people than they can currently imagine.

Liberal - The general populace works for the state.

Conservative - The general populace works for the corporation.

Same operating system, different shell.


As for a war, I don't want one, but I don't see how the conservatives could win. You're out numbered, out gunned, and surrounded.

[Diogenes]

Sometimes I look forward to a civil war. I fully believe my side will win it. The seeds of destruction for the other side are already contained within it.

Those who promote socialism should not object to the consequences of it's implementation. That they are jobless is somewhat their own fault for supporting Socialists in Government these many decades. They have a severe disconnect with the real world consequences of their politics.


Conservative thinking is that people ought to be able to create their own jobs when they can. Liberal thinking is to punish anyone who does so by taxing the fruits of their labor. (i.e. harnessing them to work for the State.)


I will be shocked if things do not get far worse for these people than they can currently imagine.

Liberal - The general populace works for the state.

Conservative - The general populace works for the corporation.

We all work for just one? or are there not thousands? (of corporations, and proprietors, and companies, etc.)

Same operating system, different shell.

As we move ever closer to fascism the distinction between the corporation (say General Electric, or General Motors) and the government, diminishes.

As for a war, I don't want one, but I don't see how the conservatives could win. You're out numbered, out gunned, and surrounded.

By whom? Liberal Urbanites that will not even be able to feed themselves? I don't think so. I count 80% + of the US Military and Law Enforcement as being on my side. Ever hear of a group called "Oath Keepers"?

If The Trillions of dollars (100 trillion or so) of US government debt stacked up by Democrats since Woodrow Wilson eventually collapse the economy, Cities will become desperate wastelands. This is not 1930. Modern Urbanites will fall to pieces, unlike their Great Depression brethren which were made of sterner stuff.

In 1930, 3/4ths of the population lived in the countryside. Nowadays, 3/4ths of the population live in the Cities, and they are not nearly so hardy as 1930 Americans. The dense concentration of bodies will result in rivers of blood running down the city streets. The First thing that will happen is the Cities will burn when the discontents get hungry.

I hope it can be avoided, but we have an idiot at the wheel pressing on the accelerator as hard as he can. A Soft landing would be better, but it looks like we're gonna crash...

[ScottL]

Diogenes, I simply don't agree with your mentaility. I don't think giving corporations all our support is the way to go as they've shown to be underhanded and oppressive. I also don't think giving away money is an ideal methodology. I"m a firm believe there are two parties in this nation to provide balance as neither is at all fit to run a country on their own.

You asked "Why should I pay for someone else?" and I ask, "why would you willfully walk past a starving child?" Would you not stop for a person in need or do you walk past because their "homeless for a reason and that reason is their own fault." The lack of compassion from our nation disgusts me.

Your link is all kinds of biased btw. They'll uphold the parts of the constitution that suits them and nothing more. Note the "like-minded" individuals, that's not a statement on their like-minded desire to uphold the constitution, but that you have to have the same values (non-partisan my ass).

[MSimon]

Well some folks wanted a war in this country. Evidently they are getting just what they wanted.

http://classicalvalues.com/2011/11/he-e ... twitching/

All roads lead to prohibition? eh? :)

I think it would happen anyway.

Prohibition was just the thin edge of the wedge. Now that the hole is wide open anything will do. It is why it is so dangerous to do any kind of prohibition. It gives the government ideas. In fact aggressive enforcement of tariffs (prohibition lite) got us the 4th Amendment. You know - limits on chasing contraband. But that is long forgotten. Now no one is safe even at home.

You can't just do one thing.

BTW you know the USE of this equipment currently is 90% to 95% prohibition enforcement. So I guess this road does lead to prohibition after all. You got your prohibition. And a few minor unfortunate side effects. Pay no attention to the man behind the drone.

[Diogenes]

OOOpppppsss.

[Diogenes]

Diogenes, I simply don't agree with your mentaility. I don't think giving corporations all our support is the way to go as they've shown to be underhanded and oppressive. I also don't think giving away money is an ideal methodology. I"m a firm believe there are two parties in this nation to provide balance as neither is at all fit to run a country on their own.

Who is talking about corporations? Why do you keep using that word? I do not think it means what you think it means.

You asked "Why should I pay for someone else?" and I ask, "why would you willfully walk past a starving child?" Would you not stop for a person in need or do you walk past because their "homeless for a reason and that reason is their own fault." The lack of compassion from our nation disgusts me.

I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

As for starving children, if more people were required by our society to take their responsibilities seriously, there would be fewer starving children for the responsible among us to deal with. I am a firm believer that the state needs to pursue these people and make them Pay for their foolishness, and thereby discourage the creation of such misery.

I knew a man with 13 children from 7 different women, all on welfare. Should I worry over his children at the expense of my own? That is unnatural.

Your link is all kinds of biased btw. They'll uphold the parts of the constitution that suits them and nothing more. Note the "like-minded" individuals, that's not a statement on their like-minded desire to uphold the constitution, but that you have to have the same values (non-partisan my ass).

What part did they say they would not uphold?

[Diogenes]

Well some folks wanted a war in this country. Evidently they are getting just what they wanted.

http://classicalvalues.com/2011/11/he-e ... twitching/

All roads lead to prohibition? eh?

I think it would happen anyway.

Prohibition was just the thin edge of the wedge. Now that the hole is wide open anything will do. It is why it is so dangerous to do any kind of prohibition. It gives the government ideas. In fact aggressive enforcement of tariffs (prohibition lite) got us the 4th Amendment. You know - limits on chasing contraband. But that is long forgotten. Now no one is safe even at home.

You can't just do one thing.

BTW you know the USE of this equipment currently is 90% to 95% prohibition enforcement. So I guess this road does lead to prohibition after all. You got your prohibition. And a few minor unfortunate side effects. Pay no attention to the man behind the drone.

If we go your way, we get a Dictatorship anyway, same as happened to China.

My purpose in creating this thread is to demonstrate that technology is going to evolve until it forges an unbeatable chain of slavery on the rest of us. The Machines won't rule us, but they will enable other humans to do so.




Ant-like robots poised to invade the marketplace

The deal between Harvard University and K-Team Corporation, a Swiss manufacturer of mobile robots, will allow educators and researchers to develop and test sophisticated algorithms that control thousands of robots in a physically-grounded setting.

http://futureoftech.msnbc.msn.com/_news ... =cosmiclog

[ScottL]

Corporations run Washington (both sides, but we're discussing conservatives right now).

Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for eternity. Stick a man in the desert and expect him to fish, good luck.

The unemployed populace outnumbers the available jobs, so "Get a Job" is kind of not an option. Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly? At least give the man a chance.

As for not wanting to pay for other's problems (children...etc.) fund SOCIAL programs to educate the populace on birth control and other valuable lessons. Do it for a few generations and I'm sure it will stick. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than the current method, but of course you'd have to get conservatives to clear sex education which rarely if ever happens.

[MSimon]

Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly?

I dunno. I taught myself electronics by reading books at the public library. In the 1950s. They still had a LOT of old radio magazines from the 30s and 40s in stock. And of course back editions of the Radio Amateurs Handbook.

I taught myself computers by reading magazines. Joining a computer club. Reading mfgs manuals and building stuff. That would have been mid and late 70s. I started writing back then.

That stuff is ALL online now and better. You don't need school. You need motivation.

[ScottL]

Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly?

I dunno. I taught myself electronics by reading books at the public library. In the 1950s. They still had a LOT of old radio magazines from the 30s and 40s in stock. And of course back editions of the Radio Amateurs Handbook.

I taught myself computers by reading magazines. Joining a computer club. Reading mfgs manuals and building stuff. That would have been mid and late 70s. I started writing back then.

That stuff is ALL online now and better. You don't need school. You need motivation.

Assuming one has the time to do it and doesn't have to focus on providing for ones family or survival. I have trouble having enough time keeping up in my field let alone learning a new one while still providing for my own survival. I'm willing to bet you were a boy at the start of your learning without the need to provide. I'd support work while you learn programs though, which could fix this issue, but once again another social program so we can't have that....

[Diogenes]

Corporations run Washington (both sides, but we're discussing conservatives right now).

If corporations have undue influence it is the consequence of allowing our nation's governance to become so corrupt.

I believe some if not a large part of this is due to the passage of the 26th and 24th amendments, and to some extent the 19th amendment. Each one of these Amendments changed the character of the people being sent to Washington towards the worse.

Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for eternity. Stick a man in the desert and expect him to fish, good luck.

Restrict access to the pier, and only allow him to catch fish of a certain size (minimum wage) and he will surely starve but for the fish you give him. Minimum wage KILLS jobs for people with no skills.

The unemployed populace outnumbers the available jobs, so "Get a Job" is kind of not an option. Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly? At least give the man a chance.

Unh unh unh! (Wagging my finger) You can't violate the laws of economics. They are like the laws of physics. If you decree that no one may have a job unless it pays "X" , then all work that is worth less than "X" will not occur.

Liberals want to chop off the bottom steps of the economic ladder and then complain that no one can climb for some reason!

As for not wanting to pay for other's problems (children...etc.) fund SOCIAL programs to educate the populace on birth control and other valuable lessons.

We funded Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty" to the tune of a trillion dollars. Know what we got for it? MORE POVERTY! People found out that they could live for free off a welfare check and flipped millions of people from useful citizens to helpless dependency.

And if you think our government is going to "educate" them into not having children for a bigger check, then you simply do not comprehend the social dynamics at work.

Do it for a few generations and I'm sure it will stick. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than the current method, but of course you'd have to get conservatives to clear sex education which rarely if ever happens.

Absurd. Sex education will cure nothing. People must be taught (by life, not government) that they must behave responsibly or they will suffer the consequences of their foolishness. Lyndon Johnson allowed people to be foolish because the GOVERNMENT payed the costs of child rearing and providing housing and food in substitution of the absent (unnecessary) fathers.

As someone who ought to comprehend the concept of "negative feedback" for complex control systems, you ought to see the need for it in social systems as well.

[Diogenes]

Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly?

I dunno. I taught myself electronics by reading books at the public library. In the 1950s. They still had a LOT of old radio magazines from the 30s and 40s in stock. And of course back editions of the Radio Amateurs Handbook.

I taught myself computers by reading magazines. Joining a computer club. Reading mfgs manuals and building stuff. That would have been mid and late 70s. I started writing back then.

That stuff is ALL online now and better. You don't need school. You need motivation.

Amen!

[Diogenes]

Conservatives say let him make himself a job...with what education or funding exactly?

I dunno. I taught myself electronics by reading books at the public library. In the 1950s. They still had a LOT of old radio magazines from the 30s and 40s in stock. And of course back editions of the Radio Amateurs Handbook.

I taught myself computers by reading magazines. Joining a computer club. Reading mfgs manuals and building stuff. That would have been mid and late 70s. I started writing back then.

That stuff is ALL online now and better. You don't need school. You need motivation.

Assuming one has the time to do it and doesn't have to focus on providing for ones family or survival. I have trouble having enough time keeping up in my field let alone learning a new one while still providing for my own survival. I'm willing to bet you were a boy at the start of your learning without the need to provide. I'd support work while you learn programs though, which could fix this issue, but once again another social program so we can't have that....

Unless I am much mistaken, Simon has a lot more experience at being impoverished than you have. That is why his opinions on economics are sensible. People that grow up with little appreciate what it takes to get somewhere.

[ScottL]

Restrict access to the pier, and only allow him to catch fish of a certain size (minimum wage) and he will surely starve but for the fish you give him. Minimum wage KILLS jobs for people with no skills.

How is a minimum wage a restriction on how much a person can make? It's an absolute minimum, not a maximum.


Although I don't know SImon's experience, I grew up on welfare, Wic, free lunch, and subsidized loans for college. I can only put out my own experience whether others compare or not, although I don't feel people's experience can be compared. For a long time I was ashamed that I had to be on these programs and I didn't understand why. It's when I got older that I realized my mother was neither educated enough nor physically capable of many jobs, yet she worked to support her children as best she could.

It is here I learned that not everyone is equal when it comes to ability, that sometimes we have barriers that prevent our rise. It didn't take long for me to realize I was out pacing my mother in education. Imagine the realization that you could do what seemed like fairly simple math but when you explained it to your parent, they couldn't grasp it. This is both stunning and frustrating at the same time. I by no means am saying my mother is dumb, but her skillsets lay with surviving and getting by, not with education. As I got older, I had less shame for where I had been and more pride in where I had gone, but I am willing to recognize my own privilege in getting there.

I was given tools to survive, many subsidized by the government, and I made the most of them. I believe this is how social programs should work, by giving a person tools, not carrying out their survival for them, but not letting them fail either. Do I believe in reform of these programs? Certainly, but I believe there are logical steps to fiixing these issues.

I don't believe in social darwinism, it's a false idea that with a little hard work people can succeed. This is simply not the case. If hardwork is all it would take then why am I so far ahead of so many that have worked so much harder than I have? Why do I understand things explained to me faster? I know the answer, I was privileged to a decent education and nudged forward by the handful of teachers in my life. Not everyone gets that level of access though. Not everyone gets hired based on merit or capability. The world is not a meritocracy and likely never will be, and this of all things is sad.

[ladajo]

Opportunity is the key. In a competitive system, folks will rise to ability, only if they a.) can play, and b.) try.

I am all for opportunity. I am completely against free stuff.

It annoys the crap out of me, for example, that my tax money must pay for folks who make bad choices, and I postulate that many do so because they believe conciously or sub-conciously that there are safety nets sponsered at no cost or risk to them.

If you give folks free stuff, mostly, they want more free stuff after that. If you have any doubts, then look at entitlement obligations verses means to fund them.
It all makes me want to go live somewhere alone. If I do so, I will not expect anyone to bail me out, as it was my choice to do so, thus I take responsibility for my actions, and accept the consequence.
But, that is what lacks today, personal responsibilitly and accountability. As someone said, "too many kids are now of age that grew up getting trophies for losing."