Politics

[phgreek]

And they all do. They're OIL COMPANIES. And the ones that don't would go out of business regardless...

I don't believe that those unable to pay for cleanup would necessarily go out of business ...can't really argue this point other than to say we bailed out Detroit, the banking industry...why wouldn't we bail out an oil company if it represented some politically critical mass of people, or some economist said we'd be in trouble if we didn't bail them out.

 

[phgreek]

Try being the politician to tell Exxon's 83k emloyees they out of a job, not to mention its partners

Yup, politicians catering to segments...they are the ones keeping crap alive for all the wrong reasons...

AS for me...I'd put it to those 83K employees like this...

three groups of people got injured here...1) people whose property and quality of life is impacted w/o an apparent benefit to them...all risk and all loss to them; 2) employees of the spiller; 3) investors in the spiller. Exactly who do all of you think has the overwhelming right to come out whole here?

 

[GoIrish41]

GOP shows openness to Obama budget plan | Federal Times | federaltimes.com

 

[Black Irish]

...the entire point really...capitalism is HEAVY on the Risk side of the continuum of Risk and Security...ALWAYS HAS BEEN, is supposed to be.


We gave it this a cool word "OPPORTUNITY"...but on a percentage basis, the system is likely to lead to any given individual's failure...so more Opportunity to fail than succeed wildly. The difference maker is work, intelect, and balls.

On a macro scale this leads to a nation of competitive Mfers...all good.

Not only are there casualties...there are SUPPOSED to be alot of them...

oh, and yea...spilling **** sucks...they should be pummeled to oblivion so someone else can come take up the business who will do it w/o effing it up ....I'm that odd duck who thinks Fracking is frickin STUPID, and when you spill **** you are over...done...next contestant. Ever think the reason we have a GIANT EPA is because we try to regulate and mediate with them...screw it...you spill...you end. Don't need an EPA for that.

What many people ignore about the casualties is that those people, except in certain extreme instances, are not totally obliterated by their failures. They have the opportunity to have another crack at success. I've had my share of failures in life and I'm sure I'll face plenty more in the future. But I've learned something valuable from every failure and keep marching forward. Too many people out there think that opportunity = instant success. No, it just means you get your fair shot, and if you are talented and lucky enough to make it, the federal behemoth shouldn't come along with its grasping mitts out demanding you pay your (un)fair share because you had the audacity to be successful.

 

[chicago51]

GOP shows openness to Obama budget plan | Federal Times | federaltimes.com

I am still not sure if there is going to be a big deal. The GOP calls Obama's deal a good open act but don't think it goes far enough on earned benefits. The problem is President's party isn't comfortable with President deal as it is and I can't see the Democrats being willing to go much further.

Then there is the whole Grove Norquiest factor which says you raise taxes even if aren't really raising taxes.

 

[irishpat183]

...the entire point really...capitalism is HEAVY on the Risk side of the continuum of Risk and Security...ALWAYS HAS BEEN, is supposed to be.


We gave it this a cool word "OPPORTUNITY"...but on a percentage basis, the system is likely to lead to any given individual's failure...so more Opportunity to fail than succeed wildly. The difference maker is work, intelect, and balls.

On a macro scale this leads to a nation of competitive Mfers...all good.

Not only are there casualties...there are SUPPOSED to be alot of them...

oh, and yea...spilling **** sucks...they should be pummeled to oblivion so someone else can come take up the business who will do it w/o effing it up ....I'm that odd duck who thinks Fracking is frickin STUPID, and when you spill **** you are over...done...next contestant. Ever think the reason we have a GIANT EPA is because we try to regulate and mediate with them...screw it...you spill...you end. Don't need an EPA for that.

This country still creates more wealth and opportunity than anyother nation in the world. Our "poor" have cell phones, cable, and make about 40k a year. So the system does work, not only that, it works fantastically.

There is nothing wrong with fracking (watch "Fracknation" and how the producer confronts issues that were wildly exaggerated on the liberal fantasy "gasland"). And companies that spill do get fined and punished.


When you take the same attitude towards a government that cannot balance a budget, despite the TRILLIONS that they rob the tax payer of....I'll take you seriously.

 

[irishpat183]

What many people ignore about the casualties is that those people, except in certain extreme instances, not totally obliterated by their failures. They have the opportunity to have another crack at success. I've had my share of failures in life and I'm sure I'll face plenty more in the future. But I've learned something valuable from every failure and keep marching forward. Too many people out there think that opportunity = instant success. No, it just means you get your fair shot, and if you are talented and lucky enough to make it, the federal behemoth shouldn't come along with its grasping mitts out demanding you pay your (un)fair share because you had the audacity to be successful.

Not to mention, when one biz fails...another steps up with an even better idea. It demands innovation.

 

[irishpat183]

Don't get me wrong. I love me some wall street and big oil companies...I am tickled when they make absolutely "obscene" profits...and it is utterly stupid to think thy somehow don't deserve them...but when they lose, yes the market should beat the hell out of them... and uncle sugar should STFU and sit down....same case with Wall street.

If they engage in conduct that is criminal or negligent...and it bankrupts them to make it right...SO FREAKING WHAT ...I want the shot to be, or invest in, the replacement company or technology...markets may pile on a bad actor...but not always. And markets don't decide when is good enough for cleanup of spills. I hate the EPA, but one of the FEW things they need to deal with is when is it cleaned up regardless of the cost (in terms of money or market place). The sad part is the EPA is used like a shotgun hindering alot of industry, not a like a rifle to kill the bad actors.

I agree with these points. Too bad our government doesn't. Let them fail. That includes the Auto industry and banking.

You can't pick and choose.

 

[ACamp1900]

I agree with these points. Too bad our government doesn't. Let them fail. That includes the Auto industry and banking.

You can't pick and choose.

Sure you can... you must have missed the part where we 'change'd that...

 

[irishpat183]

Sure you can... you must have missed the part where we 'change'd that...

Ahhh yes!


I forgot. Change we can believe in. Or like Hitler said...."Forward"

 

[Buster Bluth]

This country still creates more wealth

True.

and opportunity than anyother nation in the world.

Not true.

Our "poor" have cell phones, cable,

True.

and make about 40k a year. So the system does work, not only that, it works fantastically.

Not true.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I agree with these points. Too bad our government doesn't. Let them fail. That includes the Auto industry and banking.

You can't pick and choose.

Agreed.

 

[irishpat183]

True.



Not true.



True.



Not true.

I disagree with the "not true" on opportunity. How do we not have more opportunity here than anywhere else? ANYONE can start their own biz, own their own property, you can win the damn lotto!...the sky is the limit.

And when it comes to what poor really is in this country, I like to use this from the Bureau of Labor:

In 2008, the “poorest” one fifth of Americans households spent on average $12,955 per person for goods and services (other than taxes), the second quintile spent $14,168, the third $16,255, the fourth $19,695, while the “richest” fifth spent $26,644. The disparity of expenditures is much less than the disparity of income.


What we THINK is poor in this country is a joke. Go drive through a village in Africa then tell me that the 30 year old making 30k a year is "poor"....

 

[GoIrish41]

I disagree with the "not true" on opportunity. How do we not have more opportunity here than anywhere else? ANYONE can start their own biz, own their own property, you can win the damn lotto!...the sky is the limit.

And when it comes to what poor really is in this country, I like to use this from the Bureau of Labor:

In 2008, the “poorest” one fifth of Americans households spent on average $12,955 per person for goods and services (other than taxes), the second quintile spent $14,168, the third $16,255, the fourth $19,695, while the “richest” fifth spent $26,644. The disparity of expenditures is much less than the disparity of income.


What we THINK is poor in this country is a joke. Go drive through a village in Africa then tell me that the 30 year old making 30k a year is "poor"....

That 30-year-old is poor by American standards. Is the benchmark you want to compare this country by a village in Africa? We are what Ronald Reagan described as "the shining city on the Hill." We are supposed to be better than that. Because their is someone who is even more poor in Haiti or Zambia does not make the person in the US any better off. I don't suppose you are advocating doing nothing to help a person unless they are as poor as a person who lives in a village in Africa.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I disagree with the "not true" on opportunity. How do we not have more opportunity here than anywhere else? ANYONE can start their own biz, own their own property, you can win the damn lotto!...the sky is the limit!

You're now the second person I've seen in the last week tout winning the lottery as proof of the "land of opportunity." I think that's pretty silly.

I think there's a huge difference between what is possible and what actually happens within the system. In other words, the theory and the reality aren't at all lining up these days. The answer certainly isn't what the feds want to do, as they are half the problem within corporatism. Corporations and banks own this country, install regulations that hamper small businesses, and generally squash the American Dream. A generation ago , high-wage medium-skill jobs weren't too hard to find. Today fewer and fewer good jobs exist, as automation and globalization chip away every day at the pool. New jobs and markets are created, but the jobs aren't there.

I think it's also silly to say "anyone can," because tens of millions of children in this country grow up so far behind that only rare exceptions "start their own business." Our inner cities were abandoned, the schools plummeted, the gangs took over, the prisons expanded exponentially, and trillions of dollars of potential went with it. It's not the land of opportunity if you grow up in Detroit, south Chicago, east Cleveland, Harlem, etc etc. The statistics don't back that up.

That said, the ideas coming out of both sides of the federal government suck, but to not acknowledge the shrinking middle class and the 1% that is in some cases stacking the cards against them is disingenuous in my opinion.

 

[GoIrish41]

You're now the second person I've seen in the last week tout winning the lottery as proof of the "land of opportunity." I think that's pretty silly.

I think there's a huge difference between what is possible and what actually happens within the system. In other words, the theory and the reality aren't at all lining up these days. The answer certainly isn't what the feds want to do, as they are half the problem within corporatism. Corporations and banks own this country, install regulations that hamper small businesses, and generally squash the American Dream. A generation ago , high-wage medium-skill jobs weren't too hard to find. Today fewer and fewer good jobs exist, as automation and globalization chip away every day at the pool. New jobs and markets are created, but the jobs aren't there.

I think it's also silly to say "anyone can," because tens of millions of children in this country grow up so far behind that only rare exceptions "start their own business." Our inner cities were abandoned, the schools plummeted, the gangs took over, the prisons expanded exponentially, and trillions of dollars of potential went with it. It's not the land of opportunity if you grow up in Detroit, south Chicago, east Cleveland, Harlem, etc etc. The statistics don't back that up.

That said, the ideas coming out of both sides of the federal government suck, but to not acknowledge the shrinking middle class and the 1% that is in some cases stacking the cards against them is disingenuous in my opinion.

Great post Buster.

 

[Buster Bluth]

What we THINK is poor in this country is a joke. Go drive through a village in Africa then tell me that the 30 year old making 30k a year is "poor"....

It's pretty damn difficult to make $30,000, pay off your $25,000 (average) student loan, your mortgage, and raise a family. I wouldn't want to base my country off that.

Besides, it's the tens of millions making $12,000 that are the urban poor. I'm working on food access plans right now where literally that's the average income in the zip code. It's not something that should happen as much as it does.

 

[Black Irish]

You're now the second person I've seen in the last week tout winning the lottery as proof of the "land of opportunity." I think that's pretty silly.

I think there's a huge difference between what is possible and what actually happens within the system. In other words, the theory and the reality aren't at all lining up these days. The answer certainly isn't what the feds want to do, as they are half the problem within corporatism. Corporations and banks own this country, install regulations that hamper small businesses, and generally squash the American Dream. A generation ago , high-wage medium-skill jobs weren't too hard to find. Today fewer and fewer good jobs exist, as automation and globalization chip away every day at the pool. New jobs and markets are created, but the jobs aren't there.

I think it's also silly to say "anyone can," because tens of millions of children in this country grow up so far behind that only rare exceptions "start their own business." Our inner cities were abandoned, the schools plummeted, the gangs took over, the prisons expanded exponentially, and trillions of dollars of potential went with it. It's not the land of opportunity if you grow up in Detroit, south Chicago, east Cleveland, Harlem, etc etc. The statistics don't back that up.

That said, the ideas coming out of both sides of the federal government suck, but to not acknowledge the shrinking middle class and the 1% that is in some cases stacking the cards against them is disingenuous in my opinion.

All strongholds of liberal, quasi-statist Democrats. I see a pattern here.

I can't argue with some of the 1% stacking the deck against the little guys. Between big business and big government it's any wonder the self-made man still has half a shot in this country.

 

[Buster Bluth]

All strongholds of liberal, quasi-statist Democrats. I see a pattern here.

Yeah, that's the patten. Get a clue.

 

[chicago51]

L

It's pretty damn difficult to make $30,000, pay off your $25,000 (average) student loan, your mortgage, and raise a family. I wouldn't want to base my country off that.

Besides, it's the tens of millions making $12,000 that are the urban poor. I'm working on food access plans right now where literally that's the average income in the zip code. It's not something that should happen as much as it does.

Have been on as much been interning. Some good post today.

In terms of student loans, mortgage goes it part of the crazy debt spiral the nation is. Credit car debt is also a big part of it. Part of it is certainly consumer responsibility but this post is not meant to be a blame game.

I wanted to point out that private sector debt is about 38 trillion. This doesn't get talked about at all but it is a silent killer of the economy. Even when people get good middle class jobs the first thing are doing is paying off their debt. So when they a bank that money does absolutely nothing to create demand in the economy. So we are not getting the demand driven job creation like we would be if people didn't have this debt to pay off.

You reference this in another post but people used to get middle income jobs pretty easy even with a high school diploma but that has changed with automation and outsourcing. Now people basically go to school 6 more years of school than they did a generation ago just to get a middle class job.

Also it has essentially taken to 2 working people in many households to match what a single income household used to do.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

I don't give two sh!ts what you wanna-be poli-talking heads think.......The only thing I care about is the fact that in the past two days, 3 different people have voted on this poll which ended over 4 months ago. LMFAO.... These people must have crystal balls.

 

[chicago51]

You're now the second person I've seen in the last week tout winning the lottery as proof of the "land of opportunity." I think that's pretty silly.

I think there's a huge difference between what is possible and what actually happens within the system. In other words, the theory and the reality aren't at all lining up these days. The answer certainly isn't what the feds want to do, as they are half the problem within corporatism. Corporations and banks own this country, install regulations that hamper small businesses, and generally squash the American Dream. A generation ago , high-wage medium-skill jobs weren't too hard to find. Today fewer and fewer good jobs exist, as automation and globalization chip away every day at the pool. New jobs and markets are created, but the jobs aren't there.

I think it's also silly to say "anyone can," because tens of millions of children in this country grow up so far behind that only rare exceptions "start their own business." Our inner cities were abandoned, the schools plummeted, the gangs took over, the prisons expanded exponentially, and trillions of dollars of potential went with it. It's not the land of opportunity if you grow up in Detroit, south Chicago, east Cleveland, Harlem, etc etc. The statistics don't back that up.

That said, the ideas coming out of both sides of the federal government suck, but to not acknowledge the shrinking middle class and the 1% that is in some cases stacking the cards against them is disingenuous in my opinion.

Agree w comments about corporatism. This isn't a partisan thing it is all over the government.

There are some people working to change campaign financing. How? By trying to raise millions of dollars.

 

[Black Irish]

Yeah, that's the patten. Get a clue.

So go ahead and clue me in, smart aleck.

 

[autry_denson]

I disagree with the "not true" on opportunity. How do we not have more opportunity here than anywhere else? ANYONE can start their own biz, own their own property, you can win the damn lotto!...the sky is the limit.

And when it comes to what poor really is in this country, I like to use this from the Bureau of Labor:

In 2008, the “poorest” one fifth of Americans households spent on average $12,955 per person for goods and services (other than taxes), the second quintile spent $14,168, the third $16,255, the fourth $19,695, while the “richest” fifth spent $26,644. The disparity of expenditures is much less than the disparity of income.


What we THINK is poor in this country is a joke. Go drive through a village in Africa then tell me that the 30 year old making 30k a year is "poor"....

you've proven yourself to be completely immune to evidence time and time again, but I'm going to try once more. read some empirical work on economic mobility across the developed world. the US has lower rates of economic mobility than most developed nations, as has been demonstrated by every economist and and sociologist who studies mobility.

your "sense" of how the world works can sometimes be improved by data.

 

[PraetorianND]

you've proven yourself to be completely immune to evidence time and time again, but I'm going to try once more. read some empirical work on economic mobility across the developed world. the US has lower rates of economic mobility than most developed nations, as has been demonstrated by every economist and and sociologist who studies mobility.

your "sense" of how the world works can sometimes be improved by data.

I'm jumping into this debate having admittedly not read everything preceding these last posts, but aren't opportunity and economic mobility different things? Yes, changing one's economic status is more difficult than is often believed in America, but that doesn't change the fact that people can do what they want for employment, hobbies, lifestyle (economics permitting), place where they live, religion they follow, etc, etc.

Obviously it's difficult to go from being very poor to very rich, but it isn't that hard to open a business (example used in many posts). Yes it's difficult for that business to succeed enough to significantly change your economic status. However, I don't think it's so risky and difficult that people don't or can't open businesses to support themselves.

If I'm way off topic feel free to tell me!

 

[PraetorianND]

fair enough, good points. economists have always studied economic opportunity by measuring mobility, the degree to which advantaged economic position is passed on from one generation to the next. in fact it was this literature that initially led politicians to claim that the US had more opportunity than any other country in the world. the problem was that the initial data and methods used to study mobility were gradually improved upon, and the empirical story no longer matched with the narrative of the US as a land of opportunity. When the empirical story changed the discourse did not change.

But if you want to use alternative criteria to define what you mean by opportunity then that's legitimate. by the standard definitions used in the economics literature the US has less opportunity than virtually every other developed nation, and has for a long time.

Ya I agree with your argument. I have this debate with Whiskey all the time regarding the difference between "quality of education" (of ND) and ROI. He likes to point out that ROI shows an ND degree is better than other degrees, which I obviously cannot disagree with based on that standard. However, I do think that "quality of education" is extremely subjective and can't be adequately measured by monetary ROI.

Similarly "opportunity" by its definition is pretty abundant in the U.S.; economic mobility is another animal.

Speaking as one of those people with student loans and mouths to feed, i can attest that it's tough to get ahead when you're paying down debt and paying for daycare.

 

[Ndaccountant]

fair enough, good points. economists have always studied economic opportunity by measuring mobility, the degree to which advantaged economic position is passed on from one generation to the next. in fact it was this literature that initially led politicians to claim that the US had more opportunity than any other country in the world. the problem was that the initial data and methods used to study mobility were gradually improved upon, and the empirical story no longer matched with the narrative of the US as a land of opportunity. When the empirical story changed the discourse did not change.

But if you want to use alternative criteria to define what you mean by opportunity then that's legitimate. by the standard definitions used in the economics literature the US has less opportunity than virtually every other developed nation, and has for a long time.

The problem I have is that most studies conclude that the economic state of parents in the US matters more than any other place in the world, at least in terms of mobility. While that may be true, I have never seen the answer to why that exists.

Do higher income parents spend more time teaching kids? Do they read to their kids more often? Do they better establish priorities, where education comes first and sports come second?

I would love to see studies of how much time the typcial kid spends watching TV and playing video games across the different income ranges. I would love to see how much time the typical family spends together across the different ranges. How much time do the parents spend on helping with homework? I have not come across anything to detail this out, but I would imagine the findings would be pretty consistant with what our gut tells us.

 

[GoIrish41]

The problem I have is that most studies conclude that the economic state of parents in the US matters more than any other place in the world, at least in terms of mobility. While that may be true, I have never seen the answer to why that exists.

Do higher income parents spend more time teaching kids? Do they read to their kids more often? Do they better establish priorities, where education comes first and sports come second?

I would love to see studies of how much time the typcial kid spends watching TV and playing video games across the different income ranges. I would love to see how much time the typical family spends together across the different ranges. How much time do the parents spend on helping with homework? I have not come across anything to detail this out, but I would imagine the findings would be pretty consistant with what our gut tells us.

what does our gut tell us? that is to say, what do you think we would find across the different ranges? and, whatever that is, why is it that way?

 

[Ndaccountant]

what does our gut tell us? that is to say, what do you think we would find across the different ranges? and, whatever that is, why is it that way?

I tend to believe that parents that are very active in their children's lives tend to raise kids that value education and development. I personally believe that parents who have a strong educational background tend to put education first for their kids above all else. I think that kids who have daily interaction with their parents in learning view education differently.

I also believe that some parents view education as the responsibility of the school and not as a partnership. I think some parents put themselves ahead of their kids. I believe some parents do not truly understand how to teach and think and are instead programmed to do a job, which inhibits them from teaching their kids.

I believe there are some parents that want to teach their kids, but can't find the time due to working multiple jobs, lack of a partner to share in household responsibilities or do not understand the material themselves.

These are the things that my gut tells me is going on. I think, sadly, more people end up in the second group above instead of the first and third. I believe there are truly people out there that wish they could do more but can't while some are willing to sacrifice everything for their kids.

 

[irishpat183]

I tend to believe that parents that are very active in their children's lives tend to raise kids that value education and development. I personally believe that parents who have a strong educational background tend to put education first for their kids above all else. I think that kids who have daily interaction with their parents in learning view education differently.

I also believe that some parents view education as the responsibility of the school and not as a partnership. I think some parents put themselves ahead of their kids. I believe some parents do not truly understand how to teach and think and are instead programmed to do a job, which inhibits them from teaching their kids.

I believe there are some parents that want to teach their kids, but can't find the time due to working multiple jobs, lack of a partner to share in household responsibilities or do not understand the material themselves.

These are the things that my gut tells me is going on. I think, sadly, more people end up in the second group above instead of the first and third. I believe there are truly people out there that wish they could do more but can't while some are willing to sacrifice everything for their kids.

Great post.