For The Devil

[patfromlogan]

In my youth, spanning the birth of the Civil Rights Movement through to the end of the Vietnam War, I could never imagine that our nation would be so stupid as to invade more countries with out good cause. I never imagined some moron like Bush, with Darth Vader Cheney pulling the strings.

Now I'm equally surprised that we have a moderate Republican for president. Though he calls himself a demo, he's actually, when analysed and compared to 20th century history, somewhere to the right of (Rent Control, Clean Air Act, EPA) Nixon, perhaps more like his fellow assassin, Dwight Eisenhower (Patrice Lumumba) and their mutual circumvention of the Constitution and law.

That said, the Repubicans, now an unholy alliance of Tea Party and the Oligarchy, are mud wrestling, or should I call it wrestling in (bull)****?

Goblins v. Orcs

The Republican Party, particularly in the House of Representatives, is so blinded by greed and stupidity that factions are turning on each other.

One group, let’s call them the Goblins, is just plain greedy, but not completely crazy. These are the folks who favored Mitt Romney for president and simply want to continue shovelling money toward the one percent as they have been doing very successfully for the past three decades. They are willing to make a deal because they know that any deal, particularly one that will shred the social safety net with cuts like those Obama has proposed to make to Social Security (the widely condemned chained CPI adjustment), will work out very nicely to their advantage. They are thrilled that instead of focusing on the jobs crisis, the country has been railroaded into premature deficit-reduction deals that serve as a cover for conservative wealth redistribution schemes. They also know that many Americans are catching on to their scam, and so they tend to rely on subterfuge and the appearance of moderation or “centrism” to get what they want, which is, in essence, more of your money.

President Obama is comfortable with Goblins, and is often secretly thought to be one of them, as Bruce Barlett recently explained in the Fiscal Times. They like him okay, too.http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Author...-Bartlett.aspx

Then there are the Orcs. These are the lunatics who favored your Santorums, Gingrichs, Bachmanns, Herman Cains and so on -- the assorted nuts in the GOP who are willing to fight ideological warfare with the battle cry “no taxes” and the battering rams of bad math and Ayn Rand-style social theory to send the land into total chaos. It's not enough for them to cut Social Security at a time when the retirement of hard-working Americans has not been so vulnerable since before the Great Depression. These monstrous right-wingers would rather see every American’s taxes rise than increase taxes on a single millionaire by a nickel. The orcs have got the upper hand in the House and it is they who have blocked a deal on the fiscal cliff. They were last seen dancing around a bonfire made from Econ 101 textbooks and an effigy of John Boehner.

[jnp]

Pat, you do realize that Social Security goes against the idea of the independent spirit this country was founded upon, right? Furthermore, it was intended as a temporary measure after the Great Depression and was never meant to be a permanent fixture of our fiscal existence.

Bear in mind, I have no interest in arguing over which faction of the Republican party is the most evil. I just want you to add that to your perspective on the issue.

In the American dream that I was raised to believe in, people take care of themselves rather than social programs doing the job for them.

[mike321]

What countries have we invaded since Vietnam? If I recall, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Grenada. Of these which are you objecting to and why? Of these two are current and one is typically questioned by a large group of Americans. So is the whole rant about Iraq or do you object to Afghanistan also. If so on what basis? Who are the elves and men in your analogy? Are the good denizens of the rest of the world Gondor? Are we Mordor? Where is Mt Doom? Did Han fire first? Oops wrong fictional world.

[adskibullus]

In the American dream that I was raised to believe in, people take care of themselves rather than social programs doing the job for them.

And a fine dream it is, I admire the sentiment. But what happens to the people who can't look after themselves, the disabled, mentally ill or elderly? They perhapse can't work through no fault of their own how does the American dream cater for them?

This isn't an attack its a honest question.

[submessenger]

And a fine dream it is, I admire the sentiment. But what happens to the people who can't look after themselves, the disabled, mentally ill or elderly? They perhapse can't work through no fault of their own how does the American dream cater for them?

This isn't an attack its a honest question.

I feel nothing but sympathy for the sick and poor in sector zed zed 9 plural zed alpha, however if you start down the road of universal care, you have to draw the line somewhere. I draw the line at my extended family.

[jnp]

And a fine dream it is, I admire the sentiment. But what happens to the people who can't look after themselves, the disabled, mentally ill or elderly? They perhapse can't work through no fault of their own how does the American dream cater for them?

This isn't an attack its a honest question.

I'm not condemning all social programs. There is no doubt aid and assistance programs need to exist for the mentally or physically challenged. My post referenced Social Security because the program cannot be fiscally maintained over the long haul. This has been discussed since the late 80's, early 90's.

Support programs for families that have mentally or physically challenged members are a necessity.

I object to the sense of entitlement that perfectly healthy people espouse these days. I have paid into SS my entire working career which started when I was 15. It will not be there for me when I'm old enough to retire in 25 years. I don't even have a problem that. My point is that SS is untenable. It's time to let it go and start concentrating on paying into our own, self-maintained retirement plans.

[patfromlogan]

Pat, you do realize that Social Security goes against the idea of the independent spirit this country was founded upon, right? Furthermore, it was intended as a temporary measure after the Great Depression and was never meant to be a permanent fixture of our fiscal existence.

Bear in mind, I have no interest in arguing over which faction of the Republican party is the most evil. I just want you to add that to your perspective on the issue.

In the American dream that I was raised to believe in, people take care of themselves rather than social programs doing the job for them.

True, but not relevant. With the onslaught of industrialism by the late 1800s revolution was in the air. Different countries took various actions, for instance Germany (Bismark) took preemptive measures with making changes from the top, rather than face increasing pressure from the bottom, introduced a state system of social security involving accident and disability insurance , sickness/health, old age pensions and housing. Russia had a revolution. The US went through lots of labor strife and bloodshed, with some gains for the workers and moderate social programs were enacted during the pressure of the depression. But it was long overdue - look at Western Europe today, taxes high and social programs intact for the most part. I remember traveling in Europe forty years ago and seeing no homeless living in boxes or mentally ill wondering the streets.

On one issue I'd be thrilled to go back to the intent of the founding fathers; no standing army! Somehow that on gets ignored by the constitutionalists.

What you say sounds libertarian and like most of that persuasion sounds good until one is faced with modern capitalism in the real world of the US in this era. Unfortunately we live in an oligarchy with ever increasing disparity of wealth and power. It sounds wonderful to pull oneself up by one's bootstraps, early to bed early to rise makes a man wealthy and wise and that stuff. But I'm afraid it's fairytales and propaganda. An indication of where the US is can be seen in the stats. I was of a generation that expected to do better than our parents. You guys aren't.




Inflation adjusted percentage increase in after-tax household income for the top 1% and the four quintiles, between 1979 and 2005 (gains by top 1% are reflected by bottom bar; bottom quintile by top bar)


Income gains in the recovery:
"In 2010, as the nation continued to recover from the recession, a dizzying 93 percent of the additional income created in the country that year, compared to 2009 — $288 billion — went to the top 1 percent of taxpayers, those with at least $352,000 in income. That delivered an average single-year pay increase of 11.6 percent to each of these households.

Still more astonishing was the extent to which the super rich got rich faster than the merely rich. In 2010, 37 percent of these additional earnings went to just the top 0.01 percent, a teaspoon-size collection of about 15,000 households with average incomes of $23.8 million. These fortunate few saw their incomes rise by 21.5 percent.

The bottom 99 percent received a microscopic $80 increase in pay per person in 2010, after adjusting for inflation. The top 1 percent, whose average income is $1,019,089, had an 11.6 percent increase in income."http://blogs.lclark.edu/hart-landsberg/2012/03/

[Cullion]

Comparing relative wealth like that doesn't tell you whether a system is unjust or not, it depends on how the wealth was obtained.

I can assure you that there are mentally ill and homeless people wandering the streets in Europe, btw.

[adskibullus]

I object to the sense of entitlement that perfectly healthy people espouse these days. I have paid into SS my entire working career which started when I was 15. It will not be there for me when I'm old enough to retire in 25 years. I don't even have a problem that. My point is that SS is untenable. It's time to let it go and start concentrating on paying into our own, self-maintained retirement plans.

we have the same sense of entitlement over hear in the UK. When I left school many other kids decided it was totally fine to leave school and go straight onto benefits. Young girls got pregnant beta cause they knew they would get free social housing if the were a single parent. But where did this mentality come from? Why do people feel the need not to better them selfs and just let the state care for them?

[doofaloofa]

we have the same sense of entitlement over hear in the UK. When I left school many other kids decided it was totally fine to leave school and go straight onto benefits. Young girls got pregnant beta cause they knew they would get free social housing if the were a single parent. But where did this mentality come from? Why do people feel the need not to better them selfs and just let the state care for them?

We're into the 3rd or 4th generation of the welfare state. In some households there are 3 generation who have never worked a day in thier lives

Add to this people who work for cash and sign on and there is a sizable proportion of UK and Irish population that are sucking all the life out

The welfare state has also, by unintened consiquence, removed the 'father' figure from the family structure and not replaced it. This has led to all manner of social problems. When familys looked after themselves and neighbors there was way more value placed in Family and neighborhood. Now regardless of how they behave young people learn that the teat of the state is still flowing with milk