The difference between Liberals, Conservatives, and Southerners...

[ben.]

Let's all play a game of beer-pong and forget about all this worthwhile discourse.

[ben.]

Like this

[Marvel]

I think the reason they don't all quit and walk out at Wal-Mart is because they really need the money and there are no other jobs where they live, so they put up with it. It happens at WM stores all over the country. ....now where is that book with the documentation I read . . .

This guy IS a friend of mine, and this is a great article (I don't know how much of a Libertarian he is. He is a very traditional Catholic ):

http://www.lewrockwell.com/tucker/tucker42.html

THis is the most serious piece I have read of his. He is usually adding something funny on the end, but not this one.

Marvelhttp://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=viewThis&etMailToID=1405234633'>

[3dzapper]

Stupid snobbery. The man with his writing talents shows between the yellow lines in his essay that His cause is fading fast and has resorted to childish name calling to try to stem the tide. Preaching all the time to the already converted with no new thoughts to bring forth. At least Al Franken is funny.

Rick

[boomac]

I wish I could find out who the heck keeps sending me all the darn e-mails about increasing the size of "my member". I'd vist them with my Anaconda in hand. I forget whether it has a six or eight inch barrel? MA!

[Marvel]

I don't think he is saying much different than what we have been saying here. Don't think he was trying to be funny either. Most people don't want to know what is really going on in this world, this nation.

There have been great responses of forum members -- helping folks out, building houses, helping the poor. Not through big programs (Habitat is, but not like it is a big guv'ment run one). I bet most here could get together and have a few beers and not even get into a tussle. I learned more about some folks here through this thread than in months of music posts.

And there's all kinds here. All faiths, no faith, big hearts. That's not to be sappy, but I think it is the way it is. Even when we don't agree.

Hope Tom has a great time tonight.

Marvel

[gunman45]

----------------

On 1/8/2004 7:16:53 PM Allan Songer wrote:

I have PERSONALLY worked on over a DOZEN Habitat For Humanuty projects over the last dozen years (even if the overtly Christian overtones tend to creep me out a little bit) and I give them money every year. I have done landscaping, taped and mudded sheetrock, installed plumbing fixtures, installed flooring, etc. I have also written more than a few reference letters for people I have found deserving. One deserving and VERY lucky woman I know now owns her own home in North Long Beach because of Habitat for Humanity. It's a REAL charity!

----------------

We do not have HH but I agree, it is a great charity

We do have some decent programs though. One is paint the town which volunteers spend time painting the homes of the elderly or infirm. All of the materials are donated and there is a waiting list to volunteer. I dont know if we are just not big enough for Habitat for Humanity or its because we have as fairly strong local economy with low unemployment or ??

Still, I think Jimmy C. is a great ex-president, the best and he and you should be proud of this program but I still would not want him as president.

[minn_male42]

for the record....

i consider myself conservative.... even though i am currently working from paycheck to paycheck.....

one of my former coworkers was of the opposite political view...very liberal......

he was the one who suggested that i read the national review..... a very conservative magazine and web news magazine...

he said he wanted to "know his enemy - the conservatives".....

i find the alot of the articles interesting....

and very different from what you hear on the evening news or in the local paper.....

mdeneen.... i almost laughed my a** off earlier in this thread when you declared that the media was trying to brainwash us all in the conservative viewpoint....

read a little on the national review website for a different outlook....

http://nationalreview.com/

[NOSValves]

Paint the Town !!

We did that here for a few years it was actually a great time. I took a few guys and went ahead of all the paint crews fixing damaged wood surfaces before they painted. But the program and non profit origination that was running it petered out and closed. The lady that ran the place was a real card ! She enjoyed helping people that helped themselves.

Craig

[coda]

[AndyKubicki]

Just to clear up a point in my diatribe. I am not suggesting that all "haves" should have the same in terms of value. I am suggesting that once a foot is on the ladder any individual in society has more to lose from committing a violent crime than they have to gain.

I imagine that if you surveyed your prison population yo would find that an enormous proportion of them would be classed firmly as "have-nots", specifically having not that most important of all items - hope for the future outside of crime.

Max, I'm not so sure that this survey would necessarily show what you say. I am sure the survey would show, however, that all perpetraitors of crimes have a lack of values. Not all "have-nots" see crime as the solution.

[AndyKubicki]

<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

This software!!!

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[AndyKubicki]

It seems AndyK and 3DZ are pretty upset about "socialism"<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Nahhhhhh! Just amazed that despite falling flat on its face, people still want to prop it up.But judging from your rant, Mark, I believe you are upset about this more so than I am.

I joked in a previous post about anyone to the right of Al Gore not reading beyond a certain point. I worry that in the US that does indeed exclude most whilst here in Europe it would include most.

Max, I think we (in the US) are fairly split. We do have our share of socialists (I did not say Communists), and they are in full power if you look at our mainstream media and our educational institutions. Most lean heavily to the left with very little tolerance to those who don't agree. Other timely issues as well as how well candidates "sell" themselves is probably what determines who is ultimately elected. It's easy to look at the poor and feel sorry for them and think that the "government", which is funded by its producing citizens, needs to take care of the poor. But the thinking man will, instead, want to first feed these needy, then train them. What was the saying about giving a hungry man a meal and he lives another day, teach him to fish and he lives a llifetime? This is one of the differences between liberals and conservatives. Yet the liberal party here is very succesful at making our point of view look like we are cold hearted, and that is not at all the case. If you look at what their solution is (feeding the hungry every day), you will see that their motive is not to end poverty, but rather to subsidize it, thus insuring votes for themselves. BTW, this is not even accounting for what we call "poor" vs what "poor" is in other countries.

It has been proven that the Marxist principle" From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs." results in lower productivity, self esteem, and equal poverty for all(except of course those with taxing ability). Our current economy with a mix seems to work very well. The talented are rewarded, the ambitious risk taker, if successful, is rewarded and the basic needs of all are availiable.

AMEN to that, Rick! Simple enough, yet something prevents people from seeing this.

What I also found funny was the use of the term "Democratic Socialism". Almost every single country in the former socialist block called themselves "democratic". Radio Havana Cuba calls itself the free voice of the Americas! Yet, in each of these so called democracies, people were oppressed and kept from leaving the country. Does that not give you a clue!!??

Although I may be a Conservative by today's standards, I consider myself a "Scoop Jackson" liberal. Slightly to the right of Newt Gingrich.

Many Conservatives today were Liberals from yesteryear, and many say that they have not left Liberalism, but that Liberalism has left them. Just read some of JFK's speaches. Did he sound like today's Democrats?

[AndyKubicki]

If you measure individual attitudes at a base level, the big majority of Americans - around 75% - would actually be classified as liberal.

I believe that if people looked at their values and the values for which the liberals stand for today your 75% would indeed be conservative.

They believe in most liberal underpinnings. However, from an election process viewpoint - which is to say how do people get elected - it is all media based all the time. "Ideas" are irrelevant. LOUDNESS and VOLUME are everything. Conservative interests bought thousands of radio stations. They own literally every outlet of media. And believe me, they PUMP THE LOUDNESS.

If you measure individual attitudes at a base level, the big majority of Americans - around 75% - would actually be classified as liberal. They believe in most liberal underpinnings. However, from an election process viewpoint - which is to say how do people get elected - it is all media based all the time. "Ideas" are irrelevant. LOUDNESS and VOLUME are everything. Conservative interests bought thousands of radio stations. They own literally every outlet of media. And believe me, they PUMP THE LOUDNESS.

It's interseting, this perpective you have. Looks real emotional to me. What are the FACTS behind this? ABC, NBC, CBS & PBS have most of the loudness (in terms of audience numbers) and are on your side. Admittedly, the loudness is diminishing to the likes of Fox News Channel, which, like in this forum, attempts to present ALL sides of an issue. Here is someone with facts on his side:

ALEXANDRIA, Va. --- Media Research Center President Brent Bozell is issuing a $1 million challenge to NBC and NBC Nightly News Anchor Tom Brokaw, calling Brokaw on his comments made in a recent interview with Columbia Journalism Review. In the interview, Brokaw directly took on Bozell and the Media Research Center while denying the credibility of their evidence of liberal bias in the press. Among other things, Brokaw said:

What I get tired of is Brent Bozell trying to make these fine legal points everywhere every day. A lot of it just doesnt hold up. So much of it is that bias like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Bozell responded: I know our evidence does hold up and well prove it. I issue this challenge to NBC and its anchor: lets assemble a mutually agreeable third-party panel and have them review a compilation of the Media Research Centers 16 years of evidence of liberal media bias. If this panel agrees with Brokaws contention, the Media Research Center will donate $1 million to the anchors favorite charity. If the panel agrees with us, NBC and Brokaw will donate $1 million to the Media Research Center.

Oh, and to sweeten the pot well do this: well limit our evidence only to Tom Brokaw and NBC. Frankly, thats all the evidence we need to prove the point.

Anyone think NBC or its anchor will take up the challenge?

[AndyKubicki]

Yeah, I know Union guys that vote Republican, I want to smash their heads in, rat bastards. Not many though, most Union guys, at least in the Building Trades, know the story. In Chicago anyway.

How unusual for a union member to think like this! Would a union member really behave this way? And how is it that Chicago is such a strong Democrat City? It wouldn't be that cops ignore the rule about campain signs within a certain range of a polling place, would it? Are votes REALLY counted fairly there?

But the non-Union working class, oy-vey, the way many of them embrace the very people that screw them is amazing, no balls at all. I've come to the conclusion that some people are servile by nature and can no more stand-up and act the man than a worker bee can change it's nature.

As you said, tough talk and strutting, acting powerful and being a big Packers fan stand in for actually BEING tough and being powerful.

Wanna do something tough? Wanna be manly? Don't posture in a sports bar, take on your boss and DEMAND more money and better conditions. Yeah, that takes a little balls though.

Unions, another one of life's necessary evils. When I worked for an air freight forwarder, I had to pick up freight that came in to O'Hare from the airlines. It would usually be palletized, and an airline employee would fork-lift it to my truck. I can't tell you how many times I scratched my head wondering how they stay in business, because to get my freight, one person had to locate it and take care of the paperwork. Another drove the forklift. Many times we picked up our freight at night and many of these guys were sleeping on their forklifts while collecting their decent wage. Of course, handing the bill of lading to one of these guys was fruitless, it was not their job to locate the pallet. I had to wait for the locator and paperwork guy. You get the picture.

OTOH- I worked at UPS in the 70s (yes, I was a Teamster) and heard stories from old timers there who told me how the union got into UPS in the first place. Workers were expected to perform (work hard). If a worker was not performing to the standards of his manager, he would get a couple warnings. Next, the manager would be accompanied by another one or two managers and they would literally beat the crap out of the guy. Sound crazy? It's what they told me. Whatever the case, company greed led to the wildcat strikes in the 60s and UPS became a union shop.

Today I work for another freight company and have been there for almost 20 years. We are not a union shop. When I first started, we used to drive the union organizors off the premisis because the company treated us very well. Today, and as of the past 8-9 years or so, things are different. It seems that they forgot the principals of treating yor employees well will make profits of the past and just beat on us for more and more. Older employees were terminated for bogus reasons. We went without raises for years and were told at meetings that there will be no raises. Untill...people got fedup and attended union meetings by the droves all across the country. All of a sudden, they miraculously found enough money to give us a raise. Unions are not some sort of religion, like some union members would like to believe, but in my case, I have to choose between two evils. Whichever one gets too powerful (now the UPS guys say the union does nothing for them because they are in bed with management-unions want your money too, don't think otherwise), thats the one that needs to be beaten down. I am a very vocal proponent of establishing a union where I work. I now my rights to speak about this and hope that some of the younger less experienced and more fearful that I work with will follow suit.

When Rick swrote about controlling extremes, this situation came to mind. It's as true here as it is in government. Those with power will use it and are much more prone to becoming corrupt. Leftists fear big corporations, rightists fear big government. Both should be feared, for neither should get too powerful.

[AndyKubicki]

Mark, in your assesment of today's cost of living vs the 50s you left out an important factor, and that is the cost of frivolous lottery style law suits. You know the ones...someone buying a cup of coffee from McD, spills the hot coffee on her lap and whamo! Millions $$$$$! Instant winner. There are more examples...the tobacco companies and so on. What people don't realize is who pays for these lotto winnings...any guesses?

[AndyKubicki]

My hat's off to Allan and his charitable support for the needy. This is what America is about. It's not all evil and corporate. I do not wnat the government telling Allan where his charitable contributions should go. It's his money, he earned it (I assume you didn't rob a bank ) and it should be his decision. Once the government gets involved, well, go back and read the Milton Freedman post regarding the 4 ways we spend money. What I love about it is he nails human motivation down as to how we treat money.

[AndyKubicki]

OK, one last thing and I'm going to bed! Sorry for the bandwith, but these are really fun topics! Here is a great example of how the people on the left are lacking facts. They hear stories about Halliburton and get worked up into a frenzy. But let's look at how these stories are reported: http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040107.asp#1

[maxg]

16 pages!!

On a subject that is extremely contentious and not a vitriolic attack anywhere - CONGRATULATIONS one and all (whatever your political leaning)!!

Actually a major congrats is also owed to the Webmaster - a timely intervention seems to have calmed everyone down nicely.

Now of a couple of rather esoteric matters arising from the new contents of this thread (i.e. those added since I last logged in).

Congratulations to anyone who is retiring now on a full pension (especially at 55!!). It seems likely that you will be the last generation able to do so.

The situation in Europe (and I imagine in the US to a greater or lesser extent) is grim on the pension front. The combination of:

1. Medium term (tending now to long term) low interest rates are failing to provide the return on pension fund investments originally envisaged by the actuaries. Most Pension Funds in Europe worked on the assumption of a 7% annual return average over an extended (say 25 year) period. Actual average is currently running at around 4% for the last 25 years and is shrinking year on year.

Country wide strikes in many European Countries are going on continuously as Governments struggle to adjust legislation to cope with the shortfall.

2. Longevity. Again the original estimates are well off as people are living longer and longer on a pension. If you worked from 25 to 55 you worked 30 years. The problem is that with current trends there is no reason why you cannot expect to live the same timeframe retired. That is 30 years getting similar money to your salaries (adjusted for inflation in the better policies).

3. Falling birthrate. This is a huge problem over here. Italy has the lowest birthrate of any country in Europe and Greece is second. The average is something like 1.2 children per familly which means we are not even replacing ourselves. The net result is that an ever smaller proportion of the population is still working, attempting to support an ever larger retired population who are both living longer and costing more to maintain.

The bottom line on all that is that pensions are rapidly becoming the last legal pyramid scheme in existance. There is simply no way to allow people to retire at previous ages and to support them in the current work-based ecomonic environment.

For poor old Max, therefore, who is 38 it seems unlikely he will be able to retire until his 80th birthday (although that is based on my maths - unsurprisingly there is precious little coming out of the insurance companies on this).

work-based ecomonic environment??

One thing everyone who has posted on this thread shows (regardless of political leaning) is that we are all a product of our times. Work, it seems, is very much the activity that defines us and (excepting inheritance) the thing that definitely defines how well we live materially.

If we choose a well paying job (and are able to fulfil its needs) and work hard we SHOULD be able to provide adequately for us and ours. Choose badly, lose our ability to work, suffer material lose through other mishap (most usually divorce, sudden unexpected event like job loss, or simply being in a line of work that is replaced by new technologies and the like) and you risk becoming what is, to all intents and purposes, a ward of the state.

I wonder if this thread were to survive in tact for the next 50 or one hundred years would people of that time understand what we are talking about?

However society is structured the majority of the workforce perform low-skill jobs from manual labour to burger flipping. Here's the problem. These jobs are the most likely to be phased out to automation.

Imagine an enterprising salesman walks into McDonald's HQ and shows them a machine that is able to prepare, pack and wrap burgers fries and the rest. One machine then replaces, what, 5 jobs? Assume the burger point is introduced (similar to the cashpoint - so even the human interface goes), further assume the system keeps track of materials use and automatically re-orders stock, takes delivery, stores and maintains the foodstuffs - how many more jobs go?

The supplier to Mcdonalds is also further computerised and mechanised - hey this is a good thing - you eat a burger that has not been touched by a single human hand till yours - how much safer is that!!

OK - I wont take this example any further (although I can - all the way to the automated auditing software). The bottom line, as I see it, it that we are heading towards a society where ever greater numbers of people are jobless, and probably have never had a job in their entire lives. What are we going to do with all those people? How will they be fed, clothed and entertained?

Whilst this may seem like a very luddite view of the universe it does seem to be where we are heading. There are only so many people that can be employed in service industries (even those are under threat in the model).

Want a few more examples? You think there will be pilots in 50 years? Bus drivers? Train drivers? Toll booth operators? Accountants? Lawyers (well there is always hope on that one)? How about Doctors? Surgeons? Receptionists? Mechanics? You name it?

In fact the only person who could be in a job in 50 years time would be Craig's Son (or daughter) who has taken over Dad's NosValves business.

What, then, the work ethic?

BTW - Craig - your offsprings pension contribution will then be a couple of trillion dollars per hour and retirement age will be 1,453.

time to open the horns bar methinks...

[gunman45]

MAXG

You need to review these two statements. But than as you post Everything I believe today I will contradict tomorrow.

Falling birthrate. This is a huge problem over here. Italy has the lowest birthrate of any country in Europe and Greece is second. The average is something like 1.2 children per familly which means we are not even replacing ourselves. The net result is that an ever smaller proportion of the population is still working, attempting to support an ever larger retired population who are both living longer and costing more to maintain

The bottom line, as I see it, it that we are heading towards a society where ever greater numbers of people are jobless, and probably have never had a job in their entire lives.

The same is happening here in the states (falling birthrate). By (I believe) 2015 the number of people leaving the work force with 4 year degrees will be twice that of those that are entering. Is that to say that fewer people are willing to obtain a 4 year degree? Nope, just fewer people entering the workforce.

Granted, some jobs will be moved offshore but as this situation is happing everywhere there will soon be a time where there is no where to move them (jobs). What I believe we will see is employers going to great lengths to keep employees by offering semi-retirement plans that equate to longer paid vacations (2-5 months per year), better medical, dental, vision, etc. The employers that offer extended care medical will have the ability to keep their best employees indefinitely (by the employees choice).

I read yesterday that by the 4th quarter of 2001 our state is expecting the lowest unemployment rate in its history. Dont plan on packing you bags and moving here, be patient because every state will enjoy (?) this problem shortly.

Example: It took me 8 months to fill an entry level sales position with someone who wanted to come to work everyday. I am glad I found her because the competition for good employees has always been fierce but I am afraid that if I was looking for that person today or latter this year, I may have been SOL.