Surly Megathread of destruction and doom. [BEWARE VERY DOOMY]

[fattyflattie 4638]

5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Hey poor you don't have to be poor anymore.

Don't worry, B_T has a plan!

 

6 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Let that man be denied some legit Mexican food for 1 month and then give him access again.

At least for a week or two his posts would be all happy shiny people holding hands.

Denying some one Mex food for a month is cruel and unusual punishment.  We don't do that here. 

[BabaYaga 15328]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Denying some one Mex food for a month is cruel and unusual punishment.

Learn to cook pendejos.  Shit ain't all that hard and you have the time.  Start with beans.  Every self respecting, dick wagging, Texan can make a pot of amazing beans and knows to keep them the fuck away from the chili pot.

[fattyflattie 4638]

5 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Learn to cook pendejos.  Shit ain't all that hard and you have the time.  Start with beans.  Every self respecting, dick wagging, Texan can make a pot of amazing beans and knows to keep them the fuck away from the chili pot.

I’m going to pretend this post is not meant for me. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

11 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Back the Burrito Ban on Brisket

(Not that a burrito is legit Mexican, but it rhymes so...)

Bisteca Ban 

Pastor probation

Edited September 4, 2020 by fattyflattie

[BabaYaga 15328]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

I’m going to pretend this post is not meant for me. 

LOL, no - all the whiners complaining about being inside, not getting what they want, etc.  

[BabaYaga 15328]

2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I don't have any lard in my house

You are dead to me......

[BabaYaga 15328]

3 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Great show.. and relevant to the thread

 

Next you'll tell me you don't have an old metal coffee can full of bacon grease.....

[workswithseed 2120]

17 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I’m going to pretend this post is not meant for me. 

You got some learnin'

[BabaYaga 15328]

5 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

You got some learnin'

[52-80 19264]

5 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

Sounds like it was a mostly peaceful arrest.

Should've sent a counselor to talk him into submission

[clapclapclap 9000]

Brat Lives Matters once again chose to illegally shut down a freeway.  But this time they were held accountable (perhaps for the first time in their lives for many):

 

Note the difference in compliance:

 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by clapclapclap

[Celery Man 21003]

There are always going to be poor people, but we do a really bad things about that when we could do very good things about that. Lots of other places do a much better job than we do. I don't buy into the American unexceptionalism argument that seems to boil down to "we can't succeed in social areas where other industrialized countries succeed because we have lots of blacks and mexicans". Maybe we should took a close look at the types of things that cause people to become felons and figure out if some of that stuff doesn't need to virtually ruin a person's lifetime earning potential. If black and brown people struggle more on average than other people, maybe we should aggressively stop doing things to target them punitively in ways that other groups are not. I think America has the capacity to be a leader in this area, but it may fuck up our ability to change if we just prefer to either hate other Americans or use poor broken people as a way to feel good about how good we are doing.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, Celery Man said:

Maybe we should took a close look at the types of things that cause people to become felons

[52-80 19264]

9 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

Brat Lives Matters once again chose to illegally shut down a freeway.  But this time they were held accountable (perhaps for the first time in their lives for many):

 

Note the difference in compliance:

 

 

Nelsonmuntz.gif

[Celery Man 21003]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

right, obviously people make choices, we don't have the dial set right on not ruining people's lives forever vs having consequences for breaches of the social contract

[fattyflattie 4638]

5 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

right, obviously people make choices, we don't have the dial set right on not ruining people's lives forever vs having consequences for breaches of the social contract

The VAST majority of Americans seem to make it thru life just fine.  

[Celery Man 21003]

a much higher percentage do not compared to other similar countries

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

4 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

a much higher percentage do not compared to other similar countries

Freedom isn’t free. Hell we have a million dollar fundraiser for a rapist who was in the process of intimidating his victim. What a country!

[Celery Man 21003]

6 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I've said it thousands of times.

War. On. Drugs.

= War On Poverty

It's not a fucking racist issue it's a fucking class issue.

We come together as a people, WE THe PEOPLE, or we continue to let identity politics and Tribalism split us Red and Blue.

It fucking simple, but everyone is too fucking stupid to accept it. 

Machiavelli out front should have told you.

we're on the same page re:war on drugs

we should change the laws, which is not a race thing.

enforcement of the law is different along racial lines, which is a separate issue

[52-80 19264]

8 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I've said it thousands of times.

War. On. Drugs.

= War On Poverty

It's not a fucking racist issue it's a fucking class issue.

We come together as a people, WE THe PEOPLE, or we continue to let identity politics and Tribalism split us Red and Blue.

It fucking simple, but everyone is too fucking stupid to accept it. 

Machiavelli out front should have told you.

That's exactly what an aryan nationalist would say.

[Celery Man 21003]

I disagree. I think that the portion of Americans who are triggered by race discussions is shrinking and will continue to do so, although it is a loud and long death rattle.

[Celery Man 21003]

I understand what you're saying, I just think you're wrong. You can't trivialize 500 years of oppression into star bellied sneetches, regardless of what Machiavelli said. It presents a problem in the dialogue, but only to the extent that people exist who are severely triggered or feel personally attacked at the notion that systemic racial discrimination exists, and I don't think the tradeoff of ignoring it is worth the payout of keeping the sand out of their vaginas.

[fattyflattie 4638]

23 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

I think that the portion of Americans who are triggered by race discussions is shrinking and will continue to do so,

On some issues, I agree. I've yet to meet (in person) a non-POC who believes in reparations.  So, we can tackle police brutality, judicial indiscretions, etc., but there will be race related issues until we all share the same skin.  And then, we will just continue our "class" bigotry. 

Not to derail - do we have a "War on drugs" thread somewhere?  Even in CR.  I'd like to wrap my head around the predominant views from the posters here.

[bad_teammate 13225]

If poverty wasn't addressable and was merely a fact of the human condition every country would have very similar rates of poverty and levels of poverty within countries would be relatively stable.

This isn't the case.

Anti-poverty initiatives can work extremely well, and direct payments are probably the most effective form. Social Security, for instance, almost completely eliminated elderly poverty in the US and is the program that keeps millions and millions of elderly Americans out of poverty. In the 1950s, more than 35% of America's elderly population was living in poverty. Social Security reduced that to below 10%. And that <10% level has held for decades completely independent of national recessions/depressions/booms.

So sure, if you handed a poor man $1M at once he would become poor once again. But social welfare programs don't work like that, luckily. Provide that man very basic, Soviet-level safe housing if he doesn't have it and a small amount of guaranteed money every two weeks and the return on that money will be tremendous, because a secure life isn't built on a single big payoff, but the security of having housing (meager but sufficient), food (healthful but not exclusive), and an income (very small). And a job guarantee, of course, to allow himself to move beyond that base-subsistence-level of modern existence.

The objection there is really a moralistic objection held by at least a few (possibly a majority) here: Poverty is a just punishment for morally inferior people.

Not only is this a mean-spirited and hateful view of the world, it doesn't even make sense or bear scrutiny.

We could dramatically reduce poverty by simply giving people financial security and, in doing so, dramatically lessen the social burden we carry due to the destructive symptoms of poverty (police, prison costs to say nothing of dozens of other things).

[bolverk 29729]

A couple of Boogaloo Bois are charged with trying to supply arms to Hamas in the wake of the George Floyd murder in a bid to violently overthrow the government.

“This case can only be understood as a disturbing example of the old adage, ‘The enemy of your enemy is your friend,’” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Demers for the National Security Division.  “As alleged in the complaint, these defendants sought to use violence against the police, other government officials and government property as part of their desire to overthrow the government.  While planning these activities, the defendants met individuals whom they believed to be members of the foreign terrorist group Hamas.  Thinking that they shared the same desire to harm the United States, they sought to join forces and provide support, including in the form of weapons accessories, to Hamas.  They failed.  No matter what witch’s brew of ideological motivations inspire those who seek to engage in terrorist activity and harm our country and our fellow citizens, the National Security Division is committed to identifying and holding them accountable.  I want to thank the agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this case and ensuring that these defendants could not carry out their deadly plans.”

<snip>

According to the allegations in the criminal complaint and law enforcement affidavit, in late May of 2020, the FBI initiated an investigation into Solomon and Teeter, two members of the “Boogaloo Bois,” and a sub-group called the “Boojahideen.”  The Boogaloo Bois are a loosely- connected group of individuals who espouse violent anti-government sentiments.  The term “Boogaloo” itself references a supposedly impending second civil war in the United States and is associated with violent uprisings against the government.

According to the allegations in the criminal complaint and law enforcement affidavit, during the civil unrest in the Twin Cities following the death of George Floyd, according to a witness, Solomon was openly carrying firearms in a residential neighborhood in Minneapolis.  Solomon and Teeter interacted with the witness over the course of several days.  The witness told FBI agents that Solomon and Teeter possessed firearms and substantial quantities of ammunition and that Solomon, Teeter, and other members of the Boogaloo Bois and Boojahideen discussed committing acts of violence against police officers and other targets in furtherance of the Boojahideen’s stated goal of overthrowing the government and replacing its police forces.

Link

[Rougarou 594]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

If poverty wasn't addressable and was merely a fact of the human condition every country would have very similar rates of poverty and levels of poverty within countries would be relatively stable.

This isn't the case.

Anti-poverty initiatives can work extremely well, and direct payments are probably the most effective form. Social Security, for instance, almost completely eliminated elderly poverty in the US and is the program that keeps millions and millions of elderly Americans out of poverty. In the 1950s, more than 35% of America's elderly population was living in poverty. Social Security reduced that to below 10%. And that <10% level has held for decades completely independent of national recessions/depressions/booms.

So sure, if you handed a poor man $1M at once he would become poor once again. But social welfare programs don't work like that, luckily. Provide that man very basic, Soviet-level safe housing if he doesn't have it and a small amount of guaranteed money every two weeks and the return on that money will be tremendous, because a secure life isn't built on a single big payoff, but the security of having housing (meager but sufficient), food (healthful but not exclusive), and an income (very small). And a job guarantee, of course, to allow himself to move beyond that base-subsistence-level of modern existence.

The objection there is really a moralistic objection held by at least a few (possibly a majority) here: Poverty is a just punishment for morally inferior people.

Not only is this a mean-spirited and hateful view of the world, it doesn't even make sense or bear scrutiny.

We could dramatically reduce poverty by simply giving people financial security and, in doing so, dramatically lessen the social burden we carry due to the destructive symptoms of poverty (police, prison costs to say nothing of dozens of other things).

I agree with this, but I do enjoy getting a pay raise that comes from not paying into SS every time I hit the 137k mark around mid-summer. I assume you enjoy that too, if not earlier in the fiscal year.

The problem is asking people to pay for this stuff. I think a pretty accurate generalization would be "we all, no matter who we are or what our jobs are, work hard and make sacrifices for our money." If we can paint the picture that giving more of it back to the government would help us make more in the future (CFO's these days want to see $2.50 for every $1 they spend, why are we different?) then why don't we attack that talk track, politically? 

Or maybe we just don't have the right minds in Washington.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Rougarou

[Celery Man 21003]

7 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I did not, in any way, trivialize the historic and current issues that blacks face.

I'm not attacked not triggered at all by any accusations nor personally attacked.

What I do feel is frustrated, because you essentially describe me as having both.

So there it is, because I see the police force issues in the US tied to the war on drugs and therefor a class issue which has to be addressed as such for meaningful change, I'm a triggered racist.

Thanks for fully proving my point. Nothing will change. Machiavelli and our "representatives" will keep on keeping on along the same path of Tribalism and identity politics because we will continue on our divided path.

Therefore I ask, why should I fucking care?  I'm clearly ill informed. If the police issues are a race issue and you are correct that it isn't not a class issue. I have money and I am white. Not my problem right? RIGHT? Or is it my problem? Why do you say so? 

I'm done debating it because you won't change your position. You and others will continue to make it about race, and nothing will change and Brisket will be correct. Congrats. You win.

Ah! Ok please (and this is not sarcastic or trying to be shitty or whatever) let me clarify - I am not saying that you are triggered or that you feel attacked by the concept of systemic racism. I was, in total honesty, not trying to antagonize you with those comments. I believe that you think that the war on drugs is the problem entirely, and without a racial component to it. I disagree on the latter part. If I did not disagree on the latter part, I would agree with you that framing things racially only serves to split people up. But I don't agree with you on that part. I think that the war on drugs and a lot of the way that we have our laws codified and enforced are bad for people of all colors and types, and I also think that there are specific things about that that are, either through purposeful or poor design, more punitive to black and brown people than to other groups. So I disagree with you on your main point, and I do think that people who are severely triggered at the concept of systemic racism have big gaping sandy vaginas, but I wasn't trying to lump you in with that group.

 

*edit* - it is fair and reasonable for you to have assumed that I was. I wasn't - as Matchabelli would say - mea culpa

Edited September 4, 2020 by Celery Man

[Brisketexan 105440]

Heheh fucking Brisket.. 
Let that man be denied some legit Mexican food for 1 month and then give him access again.
At least for a week or two his posts would be all happy shiny people holding hands.

Dude....by definition everything I cook is Mexican food. Except when it’s coonass food.

I have a hypothesis about “peace through tacos” that I’m working on, too. It could use some more workshopping....but why in the fuck would I discuss it with SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T KEEP BACON GREASE ON HAND??

[fattyflattie 4638]

19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

And that <10% level has held for decades completely independent of national recessions/depressions/booms.

Why is this?

24 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Provide that man very basic, Soviet-level safe housing if he doesn't have it and a small amount of guaranteed money every two weeks and the return on that money will be tremendous, because a secure life isn't built on a single big payoff, but the security of having housing (meager but sufficient), food (healthful but not exclusive), and an income (very small).

Or, you provide an addict a schedule.  I don't, and shouldn't have to, work to support addicts.   You've also just created a blight within a community (who tf wants to live next to projects)  Put it in town and you've crushed property values, put it out of town and where are they going to work/eat/spend?

25 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

And a job guarantee, of course, to allow himself to move beyond that base-subsistence-level of modern existence.

This country is full of people who don't want to work.  You think giving them free money would give them incentive to want to work?

Feeding fucking trolls again.  

[bad_teammate 13225]

11 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

I agree with this, but I do enjoy getting a pay raise that comes from not paying into SS every time I hit the 137k mark around mid-summer. I assume you enjoy that too, if not earlier in the fiscal year.

Of course. I love it. I would love nothing more than a life that enriches me endlessly while always protecting me from the consequences of all decisions.

But it's not about me and my personal luxury, if we're thinking about poverty we're thinking about the ordering and structure of society.

Also, there is no free lunch. There is a cost for all things, including the life of comfortable luxury you and I enjoy.

Quote

The problem is asking people to pay for this stuff.

Someone is paying for everything, for sure. That's usually just someone with money thinking about their money/capital, but the social and environmental costs for our lives are very high and also abstracted away from us.

Not saying YOU don't understand that, it's just commonly misunderstood.

Quote

I think a pretty accurate generalization would be "we all, no matter who we are or what our jobs are, work hard and make sacrifices for our money."

That's a common generalization, but not accurate. There is no real correlation between "hard work" and "sacrifices" and income. That is, again, a moralistic understanding more than a rational one. In fact, shifting work away from oneself is generally how many wealthy people make money. It is actually a feature of climbing business ladders, finding ways to get paid for someone else's labor. Then we build a moralistic narrative around it to make it seem like it is actually us doing super hard work and not the guy we're paying.

Not to even mention the ultimate mainstream American wealth dream: Passive income.

Not saying YOU think this way, but it's a common way of thinking.

Quote

If we can paint the picture that giving more of it back to the government would help us make more in the future (CFO's these days want to see $2.50 for every $1 they spend, why are we different?) then why don't we attack that talk track, politically? 

I'd like to talk the politics of it, but that's CR stuff and I don't want to do CR stuff here. Shortcut is to say that there is actually no tension between the business class and the duopoly of political powers. Again, let's do that rabbit hole in CR. I would enjoy a thoughtful conversation there.

[workswithseed 2120]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude....by definition everything I cook is Mexican food. Except when it’s coonass food.

I have a hypothesis about “peace through tacos” that I’m working on, too. It could use some more workshopping....but why in the fuck would I discuss it with SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T KEEP BACON GREASE ON HAND??

I'd like some Mexican food.

What kind?

Thai.

[fattyflattie 4638]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There is no real correlation between "hard work" and "sacrifices" and income.

This tells me all I need to know.   IT work, I'm guessing?

[bad_teammate 13225]

9 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Why is this?

Because we give them a structured amount of money regardless of the economy's success. It's pretty simple.

Quote

Or, you provide an addict a schedule.  I don't, and shouldn't have to, work to support addicts.   

Useless emotional moralistic metaphors.

Quote

You've also just created a blight within a community (who tf wants to live next to projects)  Put it in town and you've crushed property values, put it out of town and where are they going to work/eat/spend?

It would only be a blight if left to become a blight. Public housing can be just fine if tended and supported.

Also, these morally inferior humans have to be somewhere. It is not merely public housing that will turn off the middle class; there are plenty of poor areas of cities that have no public housing and that your realtor wouldn't touch with a 1000 ft pole.

Quote

This country is full of people who don't want to work. 

There is no definition of "full" that would be accurate statistically, so again we're dealing with your feelings which aren't interesting or useful. 

Quote

You think giving them free money would give them incentive to want to work?

No, I didn't make that argument. What are you talking about?

Motivation to work is a lot more complicated and multifactorial than simply starving someone into being motivated. That's not how psychology works.

Quote

This tells me all I need to know.   IT work, I'm guessing?

No, just honesty and an ability to witness what I see in the real world.

Edited September 4, 2020 by bad_teammate

[Brisketexan 105440]

Wait wait, back the fucking train up.
Are you claiming brisket, with a rub, cooked on a offset smoker, if cooked by you is Mexican food? Or are you claiming you only purchase brisket or don't eat it at all? 
If your claiming brisket is Mexican food, that is cultural appropriation and I won't stand for it. It is Tejas food mother fucker. 
If you're claiming you don't purchase brisket nor eat brisket, you should really change your handle.
Finally... Bacon Grease talk not going away, I'm gonna report you if you don't take that shit to the food sub asshole.

Smoked brisket in a tortilla?
Slow roasted and shredded brisket in a tortilla (I did this on Wednesday)?

Face it, everything is Mexican food. ESPECIALLY if you’re eating at a restaurant in Texas (look back in the kitchen). You no-bacon-grease-having pendejo. I’d slap you if I could reach you.

[fattyflattie 4638]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Because we give them a structured amount of money regardless of the economy's success. It's pretty simple.

Maybe you misunderstood.  Why is it still 10%.  Why are they still in poverty?   Here, I'll help you.  Because some people WILL ALWAYS BE POOR.  And taxing everything in sight isnt going to change that, even in the fantasy land you want to live in.  

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Useless emotional moralistic metaphors.

How so.  Very simple.  If they don't care to contribute, I don't care to contribute to them.  IE: I will vote for anything and everything that makes that happen.  It isn't emotional.  And it isn't a metaphor.  

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Public housing can be just fine if tended and supported.

Sure.  It's pretty much what it's known for.  Producing exceptional members of society and being the highlight of a community.   I'm sure if they want to pop one up right there in Piney Point you are going to be cool with it?

 

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There is no definition of "full" that would be accurate statistically, so again we're dealing with your feelings which aren't interesting or useful. 

You are correct, not very quantitative.  How about this.  Mexican and south American citizens enter this country by the 10's of thousands and are able to find work.  No reason an American should ever be out of work, if they WANT to work.  No definition needed.

[fattyflattie 4638]

13 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

State worker, MAYBE union.

Pendejo, he's oilfield.  

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You no-bacon-grease-having pendejo. I’d slap you if I could reach you.

Lulz.  

Edited September 4, 2020 by fattyflattie
Bro? Pendejo

[Incredulity 11683]

Im sorry, but I have a real fucking hard time taking seriously anything regarding a news report that describes Boojahideen and Buggaloo BOIS. 

Maybe that shit is real, but sounds an awful lot like a troll job of a no-research newsroom.

[bad_teammate 13225]

40 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe you misunderstood.  Why is it still 10%.  Why are they still in poverty?   Here, I'll help you.  Because some people WILL ALWAYS BE POOR.  And taxing everything in sight isnt going to change that, even in the fantasy land you want to live in.  

I know your article of faith and mantra feels good, but no... no.

Elder poverty exists in America largely because they don't get SSI benefits.

Never-beneficiaries have a far higher poverty rate (about 44 percent) than current and future beneficiaries (about 4 percent). Ninety-five percent of never-beneficiaries are individuals whose earnings histories are insufficient to qualify for benefits. Late-arriving immigrants and infrequent workers comprise the vast majority of these insufficient earners. Late-arriving immigrants have a poverty rate of about 43 percent, and are particularly reliant on income from household coresidents. Infrequent workers have a poverty rate of about 57 percent, and are particularly reliant on Supplemental Security Income.

Quote

How so.  Very simple.  If they don't care to contribute, I don't care to contribute to them.  IE: I will vote for anything and everything that makes that happen.  It isn't emotional.  And it isn't a metaphor.  

"Don't care to" is emotional. That's literally what caring is. It's OK to be dominated by emotional reasoning, man, just embrace it.

Quote

Sure.  It's pretty much what it's known for.  Producing exceptional members of society and being the highlight of a community. 

Just more classist moralism not rooted in statistical realities just the regurgitation of conventional doctrine.

The reality is that public housing is a massive social and economic benefit in no small part because its alternative is far worse. These people who are beneath your contempt will continue to exist and it costs as much, if not more, to imprison them than it would to provide them meager dignity regardless of how morally abhorrent and disgusting they are.

The reality, of course, is that they are equally as worthy humans as all the rest of us. 

Quote

You are correct, not very quantitative.  How about this.  Mexican and south American citizens enter this country by the 10's of thousands and are able to find work.  No reason an American should ever be out of work, if they WANT to work.  No definition needed.

There are a lot of reasons, and none of them seem terribly relevant to what we're discussing. I'd be interested for you to flesh out what you mean so we can have a productive dialogue about it.

Edited September 5, 2020 by bad_teammate

[Incredulity 11683]

i will stand down.

 

what a country 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Incredulity

[RDCanecutter 26476]

3 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

I don't have any lard in my house

the hell

[Incredulity 11683]

1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

State worker, MAYBE union. IT or not.

5000% gov’t union

[fattyflattie 4638]

27 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

lder poverty exists in America largely because they don't get SSI benefits.

Never-beneficiaries have a far higher poverty rate (about 44 percent) than current and future beneficiaries (about 4 percent). Ninety-five percent of never-beneficiaries are individuals whose earnings histories are insufficient to qualify for benefits. Late-arriving immigrants and infrequent workers comprise the vast majority of these insufficient earners. Late-arriving immigrants have a poverty rate of about 43 percent, and are particularly reliant on income from household coresidents. Infrequent workers have a poverty rate of about 57 percent, and are particularly reliant on Supplemental Security Income.

Thanks.

[Incredulity 11683]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Thanks.

He is not owned as...cornpop!??!!?

[bolverk 29729]

32 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Im sorry, but I have a real fucking hard time taking seriously anything regarding a news report that describes Boojahideen and Buggaloo BOIS. 

Maybe that shit is real, but sounds an awful lot like a troll job of a no-research newsroom.

It wasn't a news report. This is the link that you obviously didn't bother to even hover your cursor over:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-self-described-boogaloo-bois-charged-attempting-provide-material-support-hamas

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

9 hours ago, Cheeseweasel said:

You either hang out with shitty people or you are in an Echo Chamber that has convinced you of this. Get out more.

He lives one a ledge, what do you expect ??

[Rougarou 594]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Of course. I love it. I would love nothing more than a life that enriches me endlessly while always protecting me from the consequences of all decisions.

But it's not about me and my personal luxury, if we're thinking about poverty we're thinking about the ordering and structure of society.

Also, there is no free lunch. There is a cost for all things, including the life of comfortable luxury you and I enjoy.

Someone is paying for everything, for sure. That's usually just someone with money thinking about their money/capital, but the social and environmental costs for our lives are very high and also abstracted away from us.

Not saying YOU don't understand that, it's just commonly misunderstood.

That's a common generalization, but not accurate. There is no real correlation between "hard work" and "sacrifices" and income. That is, again, a moralistic understanding more than a rational one. In fact, shifting work away from oneself is generally how many wealthy people make money. It is actually a feature of climbing business ladders, finding ways to get paid for someone else's labor. Then we build a moralistic narrative around it to make it seem like it is actually us doing super hard work and not the guy we're paying.

Not to even mention the ultimate mainstream American wealth dream: Passive income.

Not saying YOU think this way, but it's a common way of thinking.

I'd like to talk the politics of it, but that's CR stuff and I don't want to do CR stuff here. Shortcut is to say that there is actually no tension between the business class and the duopoly of political powers. Again, let's do that rabbit hole in CR. I would enjoy a thoughtful conversation there.

I think it's reasonable to argue that no matter what you are doing, generally speaking, you are working hard and making a sacrifice to be doing it. The exceptions being if you are the company owner's son or something, sure, or on the payroll due to extortion or something. I don't mean this to be relativistic, but in the necessary way that it means to work. 

You are doing something to a level and ability that is maintaining your employment and the sacrifices you make aren't necessarily always "Oh that poor surgeon never sees his kids." but in the sense of a mandatory sacrifice via opportunity costs which is necessary in a world of scarcity and when trading finite resources, be they BTU's of your brain or horsepower of your brawn.

Everyone, for the most part, is working hard and making sacrifices. Just because you don't think, for arguments sake, I work hard in relation to yourself or the Howard Roark and his merry band of bricklayers or the McDonald's janitor who walked through cacti then rode under the belly of a donkey in 105 degree heat and then drowned twice in the Rio Grande before being beaten back to life by predator coyotes on the cartel payroll, because I wear a hypothetical Hermes tie for $400/hour to throw coffee and powerpoint decks at peoples heads, doesn't mean there isn't hard work and sacrifice. Hypothetically.

Joking aside, I think everyone who is working is working hard and making a sacrifice because work is work.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Rougarou

[dcar00 14378]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

I know your article of faith and mantra feels good, but no... no.

Elder poverty exists in America largely because they don't get SSI benefits.

Never-beneficiaries have a far higher poverty rate (about 44 percent) than current and future beneficiaries (about 4 percent). Ninety-five percent of never-beneficiaries are individuals whose earnings histories are insufficient to qualify for benefits. Late-arriving immigrants and infrequent workers comprise the vast majority of these insufficient earners. Late-arriving immigrants have a poverty rate of about 43 percent, and are particularly reliant on income from household coresidents. Infrequent workers have a poverty rate of about 57 percent, and are particularly reliant on Supplemental Security Income.

"Don't care to" is emotional. That's literally what caring is. It's OK to be dominated by emotional reasoning, man, just embrace it.

Just more classist moralism not rooted in statistical realities just the regurgitation of conventional doctrine.

The reality is that public housing is a massive social and economic benefit in no small part because its alternative is far worse. These people who are beneath your contempt will continue to exist and it costs as much, if not more, to imprison them than it would to provide them meager dignity regardless of how morally abhorrent and disgusting they are.

The reality, of course, is that they are equally as worthy humans as all the rest of us. 

There are a lot of reasons, and none of them seem terribly relevant to what we're discussing. I'd be interested for you to flesh out what you mean so we can have a productive dialogue about it.

so what is the amount of money everyone should be able to make such that we can eliminate the poor?  I'd like to see people like Bezos and  Zuckerberg live on 150K a year and give up all their capital gains.  that should do it. maybe limit those shitheads to one fucking house in cedar park or something like that.  no yachts, no planes, etc.

I'm sure you've run the numbers..

[bad_teammate 13225]

41 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Joking aside, I think everyone who is working is working hard and making a sacrifice because work is work.

Agree completely. I hope we're not talking past each other due to the nature of Internet debate. 

I think relying on "hard work" as an important element of this conversation is misguided in the first place, so trust me I don't have any allegiance to the Protestant work ethic being satisfied in relation to poverty policy. I think it's wrong-headed to spend so much effort determining who is worthy based on their "hard work".

At the end of the day, everyone deserves dignity. That's a moral statement on my part, but it's one I'm happy to be hung for.

35 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

so what is the amount of money everyone should be able to make such that we can eliminate the poor?

I think we should eliminate the extremes of wealth/income gaps for many reasons, but the elimination of poverty wouldn't require higher taxes. Taxation and spending aren't really correlated and haven't been for as long as most of us have been alive.

That might offend or upset you, but that's the plain and factual reality of government spending in America.

[bad_teammate 13225]

29 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Really? The answer from him is all of it. Individuals should have zero independent gains for their efforts. Rather all proceeds from all efforts are to be collected by the central authority for equal distribution to all parties.

Some of you should really read The Communist Manifesto because 100% of his posts are cribbing from that book and everyone can know his take with no further need to engage his Marxist propaganda.

A sign of how dumb you are is that this is all you can pull and you can't even do that right.

[dcar00 14378]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Agree completely. I hope we're not talking past each other due to the nature of Internet debate. 

I think relying on "hard work" as an important element of this conversation is misguided in the first place, so trust me I don't have any allegiance to the Protestant work ethic being satisfied in relation to poverty policy. I think it's wrong-headed to spend so much effort determining who is worthy based on their "hard work".

At the end of the day, everyone deserves dignity. That's a moral statement on my part, but it's one I'm happy to be hung for.

I think we should eliminate the extremes of wealth/income gaps for many reasons, but the elimination of poverty wouldn't require higher taxes. Taxation and spending aren't really correlated and haven't been for as long as most of us have been alive.

That might offend or upset you, but that's the plain and factual reality of government spending in America.

right, so what is the number?  given your knowledge I am sure you have run them.