Will America recover?

[berlinerbaer 678]

7 hours ago, Parliament said:

A valid concern. But you gotta remember our Military spending dwarfs the rest of the World. I don't know what we have to counter such hacking, but I know we have it.

And hacking goes both ways. We can hack them too.

 

We have the most to lose, that's the bottom line, and we've demonstrated just how easily damage can be inflicted upon us.

Look, two countries far weaker than we are, as well as one non-state actor, gave us or are still giving us absolute fits for two decades, and one of those (Afghanistan) looks like a lost cause. They've done this using methods of asymmetric warfare not all that different than what the Vietnamese used on us forty years ago.

And then there's the Russians, who seem to have thrown our political system into chaos without firing a single shot.

But, yeah. We have the most ships and stuff. And really fucking expensive fighter jets.

[F250 28817]

1 hour ago, Smax said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/china-hacked-a-navy-contractor-and-secured-a-trove-of-highly-sensitive-data-on-submarine-warfare/2018/06/08/6cc396fa-68e6-11e8-bea7-c8eb28bc52b1_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dba6c9178d82

Chinese government hackers have compromised the computers of a Navy contractor, stealing massive amounts of highly sensitive data related to undersea warfare — including secret plans to develop a supersonic anti-ship missile for use on U.S. submarines by 2020, according to American officials. 

The breaches occurred in January and February, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. The hackers targeted a contractor who works for the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, a military organization headquartered in Newport, R.I., that conducts research and development for submarines and underwater weaponry.

The officials did not identify the contractor.

Taken were 614 gigabytes of material relating to a closely held project known as Sea Dragon, as well as signals and sensor data, submarine radio room information relating to cryptographic systems, and the Navy submarine development unit’s electronic warfare library.

The Washington Post agreed to withhold certain details about the compromised missile project at the request of the Navy, which argued that their release could harm national security.

The data stolen was of a highly sensitive nature despite being housed on the contractor’s unclassified network. The officials said the material, when aggregated, could be considered classified, a fact that raises concerns about the Navy’s ability to oversee contractors tasked with developing ­cutting-edge weapons.

The breach is part of China’s long-running effort to blunt the U.S. advantage in military technology and become the preeminent power in East Asia. The news comes as the Trump administration is seeking to secure Beijing’s support in persuading North Korea to give up nuclear weapons, even as tensions persist between the United States and China over trade and defense matters.

The Navy is leading the investigation into the breach with the assistance of the FBI, officials said. The FBI declined to comment.

On Friday, the Pentagon inspector general’s office said that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis had asked it to review contractor cybersecurity issues arising from The Post’s story.

Cmdr. Bill Speaks, a Navy spokesman, said, “There are measures in place that require companies to notify the government when a ‘cyber incident’ has occurred that has actual or potential adverse effects on their networks that contain controlled unclassified information.”

Speaks said that “it would be inappropriate to discuss further details at this time.”

Altogether, details on hundreds of mechanical and software systems were compromised — a significant breach in a critical area of warfare that China has identified as a priority, both for building its own capabilities and challenging those of the United States.

“It’s very disturbing,” said former senator James M. Talent (R-Mo.), who is a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. “But it’s of a piece with what the Chinese have been doing. They are completely focused on getting advanced weapons technology through all kinds of means. That includes stealing secrets from our defense contractors.” Talent had no independent knowledge of the breach.

Undersea priority

The Sea Dragon project is an initiative of a special Pentagon office stood up in 2012 to adapt existing U.S. military technologies to new applications. The Defense Department, citing classification levels, has released little information about Sea Dragon other than to say that it will introduce a “disruptive offensive capability” by “integrating an existing weapon system with an existing Navy platform.” The Pentagon has requested or used more than $300 million for the project since late 2015 and has said it plans to start underwater testing by September.

Military experts fear that China has developed capabilities that could complicate the Navy’s ability to defend U.S. allies in Asia in the event of a conflict with China.

The Chinese are investing in a range of platforms, including ­quieter submarines armed with increasingly sophisticated weapons and new sensors, Adm. Philip S. Davidson said during his April nomination hearing to lead U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. And what they cannot develop on their own, they steal — often through cyberspace, he said.

“One of the main concerns that we have,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee, “is ­cyber and penetration of the dot-com networks, exploiting technology from our defense contractors, in some instances.” 

In February, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats testified that most of the detected Chinese cyber operations against U.S. industry focus on defense contractors or tech firms supporting government networks.

In recent years, the United States has been scrambling to develop new weapons or systems that can counter a Chinese naval buildup that has targeted perceived weaknesses in the U.S. fleet. Key to the American advantage in any faceoff with China on the high seas in Asia will be its submarine fleet.

“U.S. naval forces are going to have a really hard time operating in that area, except for submarines, because the Chinese don’t have a lot of anti-submarine warfare capability,” said Bryan Clark, a naval analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “The idea is that we are going to rely heavily on submarines in the early effort of any conflict with the Chinese.”

China has made closing the gap in undersea warfare one of its three top military priorities, and although the United States still leads the field, China is making a concerted effort to diminish U.S. superiority.

“So anything that degrades our comparative advantage in undersea warfare is of extreme significance if we ever had to execute our war plans for dealing with China,” said James Stavridis, dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a retired admiral who served as supreme allied commander at NATO. 

The U.S. military let its anti-ship weaponry languish after the Cold War ended because with the Soviet Union’s collapse, the Navy no longer faced a peer competitor on the seas. But the rapid modernization and buildup of the Chinese navy in recent years, as well as Russia’s resurgent forces at sea, have prompted the Pentagon to renew heavy investment in technologies to sink enemy warships.

The introduction of a supersonic anti-ship missile on U.S. Navy submarines would make it more difficult for Chinese warships to maneuver. It also would augment a suite of other anti-ship weapons that the U.S. military has been developing in recent years. 

Ongoing breaches

For years, Chinese government hackers have siphoned information on the U.S. military, underscoring the challenge the Pentagon faces in safeguarding details of its technological advances. Over the years, the Chinese have snatched designs for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter; the advanced Patriot PAC-3 missile system; the Army system for shooting down ballistic missiles known as Terminal High Altitude Area Defense; and the Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship, a small surface vessel designed for near-shore operations, according to previous reports prepared for the Pentagon.

In some cases, suspected Chinese breaches appear to have resulted in copycat technologies, such as the drones China has produced that mimic U.S. unmanned aircraft.

[Chinese cyberspies stole a long list of U.S. weapons designs]

Speaks, the Navy spokesman, said: “We treat the broader issue of cyber-intrusion against our contractors very seriously. If such an intrusion were to occur, the appropriate parties would be looking at the specific incident, taking measures to protect current information, and mitigating the impacts that might result from any information that might have been compromised.”

The Pentagon’s Damage Assessment Management Office has conducted an assessment of the damage, according to the U.S. officials. The Office of the Secretary of Defense declined to comment.

Theft of an electronic warfare library, Stavridis said, could give the Chinese “a reasonable idea of what level of knowledge we have about their specific [radar] platforms, electronically and potentially acoustically, and that deeply reduces our level of comfort if we were in a close undersea combat situation with China.”

Signals and sensor data is also valuable in that it presents China with the opportunity to “know when we would know at what distance we would be able to detect their submarines,” he said — again a key factor in undersea battles.

Investigators say the hack was carried out by the Chinese Ministry of State Security, a civilian spy agency responsible for counterintelligence, foreign intelligence and domestic political security. The hackers operated out of an MSS division in the province of Guangdong, which houses a major foreign hacking department.

Although the Chinese People’s Liberation Army is far better-known than the MSS when it comes to hacking, the latter’s personnel are more skilled and much better at hiding their tracks, said Peter Mattis, a former analyst in the CIA counterintelligence center. The MSS, he said, hacks for all forms of intelligence: foreign, military and commercial.

In September 2015, in a bid to avert economic sanctions, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to President Barack Obama that China would refrain from conducting commercial cyberespionage against the United States. Following the pact, China appeared to have curtailed much, although not all, of its hacking activity against U.S. firms, including by the People’s Liberation Army.

Both China and the United States consider spying on military technology to fall outside the pact. “The distinction we’ve always made is there’s a difference between conducting espionage in order to protect national security and conduct military operations, and the theft of intellectual property for the benefit of companies inside your country,” said Michael Daniel, the White House cybersecurity coordinator under Obama.

 

This is all about the theft of information not Chicom hackers obliterating our infrastructure.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

11 minutes ago, berlinerbaer said:

We have the most to lose, that's the bottom line, and we've demonstrated just how easily damage can be inflicted upon us.

Look, two countries far weaker than we are, as well as one non-state actor, gave us or are still giving us absolute fits for two decades, and one of those (Afghanistan) looks like a lost cause. They've done this using methods of asymmetric warfare not all that different than what the Vietnamese used on us forty years ago.

And then there's the Russians, who seem to have thrown our political system into chaos without firing a single shot.

But, yeah. We have the most ships and stuff. And really fucking expensive fighter jets.

Shocking. People don't like to be ruled by outside powers. You'd think a country that invented the movie Red Dawn would know that.  It doesnt matter though. The military industrial complex isnt really about winning an actual war. It benefits from long quagmires. 

And the Russians know what they are doing. We beat them without firing a shot by finding the communist weakness and outspending them. They are doing the same to us by tearing at our seams, and they'll win without a shot. 

[F250 28817]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah, no it's not.

Yeah it is. I've worked in the industry for close to two decades, consulted for multiple federal agencies, military, state and local law enforcement, numerous critical infrastructure organizations and I am telling you that cyberwarfare in no way should be conflated with kinetic warfare. Cyberwarfare is information warfare, sure there can be disruption of services but that is in no way similar to the Iranians blocking access to the Straight of Hormuz. The threat is overblown because Most people assume it's something they've seen on a movie or Mr. Robot.

 

 

 

[Anastasis 23481]

Just now, F250 said:

Yeah it is. I've worked in the industry for close to two decades, consulted for multiple federal agencies, military, state and local law enforcement, numerous critical infrastructure organizations and I am telling you that cyberwarfare in no way should be conflated with kinetic warfare. Cyberwarfare is information warfare, sure there can be disruption of services but that is in no way similar to the Iranians blocking access to the Straight of Hormuz. The threat is overblown because Most people assume it's something they've seen on a movie or Mr. Robot.

But wait, has Hugo chimed in yet?

[F250 28817]

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

But wait, has Hugo chimed in yet?

LOL actually Hugo is on the right track regarding this being a war of information.

[Anastasis 23481]

other than the conflation with kinetic warfare, he's right on track. 

[RandomIdoit 657]

Dumb question amnesty: How much extra would each person be taxed to pay for single-payer healthcare? 

[WhatTheBuck 28797]

15 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Dumb question amnesty: How much extra would each person be taxed to pay for single-payer healthcare? 

'Bout tree fiddy. 

[bolverk 29716]

38 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Dumb question amnesty: How much extra would each person be taxed to pay for single-payer healthcare? 

It's pretty easy to figure the cost per capita if you just go by total healthcare spending divided by population. Without looking anything up, we know the US spends (direct payments + taxes) about twice the share of its GDP on healthcare than most comparable nations, who all happen to have "socialized medicine", and who all have better outcomes (measured by longevity) than the US.

[RandomIdoit 657]

5 minutes ago, bolverk said:

It's pretty easy to figure the cost per capita if you just go by total healthcare spending divided by population. Without looking anything up, we know the US spends (direct payments + taxes) about twice the share of its GDP on healthcare than most comparable nations, who all happen to have "socialized medicine", and who all have better outcomes (measured by longevity) than the US.

Is it wrong to assume that the middle and upper class are going to have to pay while lower class will not? Some of the lower class do not even pay taxes now and even get money back because of the tax credits. So it's not a straight division of spending and population, unless you propose that everyone pay the same amount regardless of income.

[bolverk 29716]

3 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Is it wrong to assume that the middle and upper class are going to have to pay while lower class will not? Some of the lower class do not even pay taxes now and even get money back because of the tax credits. So it's not a straight division of spending and population, unless you propose that everyone pay the same amount regardless of income.

"Lower classes" pay taxes today: payroll, social security, property, and sales. Sure, there's a bunch who get income tax refunds, but they do pay in many other ways. Moreover, there are studies showing that the inequities in the above taxing schemes mean that the poors spend a larger percentage of their take home in total taxes than the uber-rich who might have higher income tax rates but pay less (after tons of deductions).

If you're a flat-taxer, then I understand where you're coming from. I, however, am not. Progressive tax rates are based on two principles: 1) the ability to pay and 2) the "upper classes" have benefitted the most from our system. In both cases, the rationale is that they should pay more into the system.

[RandomIdoit 657]

6 minutes ago, bolverk said:

"Lower classes" pay taxes today: payroll, social security, property, and sales. Sure, there's a bunch who get income tax refunds, but they do pay in many other ways. Moreover, there are studies showing that the inequities in the above taxing schemes mean that the poors spend a larger percentage of their take home in total taxes than the uber-rich who might have higher income tax rates but pay less (after tons of deductions).

If you're a flat-taxer, then I understand where you're coming from. I, however, am not. Progressive tax rates are based on two principles: 1) the ability to pay and 2) the "upper classes" have benefitted the most from our system. In both cases, the rationale is that they should pay more into the system.

I was referring to income tax. I'm assuming that is where this would be funded from. I am not for taxing people more because they make more money. Why punish people for being successful? What about the middle class? How have they "benefited from our system"? 

[bernorange 8363]

On 6/9/2018 at 11:13 PM, Michael Knight said:

I think its safe to say the Age of American Hegemony is on a swift decline (good job Putin), ...

You think Putin is responsible for the waning of American Hegemony?  American Hegemony is secured through military power, but that military power rests on an economic foundation built upon the petrodollar.  The waning of American Hegemony is something I've been talking about in these forums since W was still President and Putin played a part, but he was no where close to being a linchpin.

On 6/9/2018 at 11:28 PM, RayDog said:

The US could easily have a Democratic president for 16 years or more starting in 2020. ...

Was it you who posted this exact same sentiment near the end of W's term?  You are way overestimating the American public's memory and way underestimating the pendulum nature of national elections.

On 6/10/2018 at 12:36 AM, bolverk said:

I think we can all agree that the era of American hegemony is now over. Sure, if we make the right choices, we'll recover to a large degree, but I'm pretty positive now that the EU will begin to strongly assert itself ...

I don't agree that American Hegemony is quite dead yet.  America can still impose it's will on the world, but the costs are adding up.  I think it's fairer to say that the limits of American Hegemony are becoming easier to see and it's now easier for the average Joe to see that it's waning.  Also, the EU has it's own problems/challenges.  It's as likely to fall apart as become a cohesive superpower within the next decade. 

[Jack Burton 35]

6 hours ago, RandomIdoit said:

I was referring to income tax. I'm assuming that is where this would be funded from. I am not for taxing people more because they make more money. Why punish people for being successful? What about the middle class? How have they "benefited from our system"? 

It's not a punishment

[Tennesseehorn 101]

6 hours ago, RandomIdoit said:

I was referring to income tax. I'm assuming that is where this would be funded from. I am not for taxing people more because they make more money. Why punish people for being successful? What about the middle class? How have they "benefited from our system"? 

Oh-no.  Now you’ve done it.  The progressive/commies/dems/lib mafia will come and shout you down for DARING to disagree with their orthodoxy. 

[Jack Burton 35]

Quit yelling at the screen.

[SKJ 1311]

7 hours ago, RandomIdoit said:

I was referring to income tax. I'm assuming that is where this would be funded from. I am not for taxing people more because they make more money. Why punish people for being successful? What about the middle class? How have they "benefited from our system"? 

Well, it's not a punishment for being successful... It's a tax

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 hours ago, RandomIdoit said:

I was referring to income tax. I'm assuming that is where this would be funded from. I am not for taxing people more because they make more money. Why punish people for being successful? What about the middle class? How have they "benefited from our system"? 

Your income tax already subsidizes Medicaid and Medicare.  Theoretically, you would just have your current insurance premiums shifted to a single payer tax.  Having everyone in one group should introduce some administrative efficiencies, but that doesn't pay for a G6 flight to Paris for the cabinet head, so you'll probably have a little bit more come out of your pocket at the outset until we decide to address healthcare delivery costs, administrative costs, and administrative corruption. 

[TreatyOak 16417]

10 hours ago, David Dennison said:

You might want to tell the president, because everything he does indicates that he doesn't believe any of that.

Well, I have to confess that I am not one of his biggest fans, but the hysteria (and media frenzy, which is what it is chiefly about) that surrounds him far outweighs his long-term impact. 

[GRHorn 105]

I scrolled over the 100th ACA/healthcare debate.  It looks like BernOrange touched on the biggest point.  As long as our currency is the global reserve currency then we are gonna be on top.  How long we stay there is up to debate.  10 years?  Less?  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I scrolled over the 100th ACA/healthcare debate.  It looks like BernOrange touched on the biggest point.  As long as our currency is the global reserve currency then we are gonna be on top.  How long we stay there is up to debate.  10 years?  Less?  

And what currency replaces it ?  

And what language replaces international aviation  ?

And what army and Navy is going to supplant the US in 10 years or less ?

[David Dennison 18945]

13 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And what currency replaces it ?  

And what language replaces international aviation  ?

And what army and Navy is going to supplant the US in 10 years or less ?

Whichever one China chooses.

English will remain the language of international aviation (way to go, England!).

Our army is nearly half the size of China's. They are working on their navy, but it will be more than ten years before they can challenge ours. Ours is shrinking, so the time it takes for them to become dominant on the high seas might not be as long as you think.

 

[Brisketexan 105280]

On 6/10/2018 at 8:06 AM, Assholehorn said:

America is Anthony Bourdain. For decades now always eats at the best restaurants, stays at best hotels, gets ass kissed constantly, and says fuck it while tying the noose around it's own neck. 

40 percent of this country sees the moron as a good president so there will be no revival. 

Short, to the point, dead-accurate.  Nobody can bring us down, except us -- and we've done it.  It's all over except the kicking and final gurgles.

23 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

First we have to bottom out before we can know what if any recovery is possible. 

Scary thought: intellectually and politically, we're at one of our low points

Scarier thought: we still have a long way to go to hit bottom.  But I think we can and will get there, and right quick.

21 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Ultimately, both parties need to focus on where we are similar as Americans and not what divides us.  The lack of civility in political discourse is absolutely astonishing.

Or -- here's a thought -- we are irrevocably divided and broken.  For example, I don't deal with my shallow, petty, racist piece of shit father-in-law anymore (neither does his daughter).  I don't need to be civil to him, or focus on where we are similar.  He's a toxic piece of shit, and he makes everything he touches worse.  I tried to get into the heads of Trumpkins, and understand them, and treat them with dignity and respect.  They don't want it.  They just want to lash out and see everyone else on earth suffer (sweet libtears!  Fuck our allies!).  Nope, we are divided, and divided we will stay.

20 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

They do focus on that fact, and use it to keep the natives restless.

Says the man whose single-minded devotion to hating a single individual has driven his politics for YEARS.

18 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

Ok, I am not really up on all this, and defer to your knowledge, 250.  But this seems to be in line with how the French viewed the Maginot Line before WW2.  Our navy won't help much if the telecommunications grid that supports it is shot to hell by a group of Russian or Chinese hackers.   

This.  But it won't need to get to that.  One way to destroy the enemy fleet is to bomb it.  Another way is to sneak into harbor, fix mines to them, and destroy it at the docks.  The OTHER way is to convince the enemy to sink his own fucking ships or destroy all the crews so the ships can't move.  That third option, metaphorically, is where we're headed.

18 hours ago, Parliament said:

 

 

A valid concern. But you gotta remember our Military spending dwarfs the rest of the World. I don't know what we have to counter such hacking, but I know we have it.

And hacking goes both ways. We can hack them too.

 

Interesting.  Of course, that takes a CINC that is interested in fighting back against our enemies that way.  We don't have that. We have the opposite of that.

15 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Bill Maher just quoted a poll that said 52% of republicans would support postponing the 2020 election if dotus proposed it.  Is that real?  

If that is true, holy living fuck.  That is something that would literally send me into the streets.  That is fucking full on dictator bullshit.

That's where we are.  Take heart....it's actually going to get worse.

11 hours ago, berlinerbaer said:

We have the most to lose, that's the bottom line, and we've demonstrated just how easily damage can be inflicted upon us.

Look, two countries far weaker than we are, as well as one non-state actor, gave us or are still giving us absolute fits for two decades, and one of those (Afghanistan) looks like a lost cause. They've done this using methods of asymmetric warfare not all that different than what the Vietnamese used on us forty years ago.

And then there's the Russians, who seem to have thrown our political system into chaos without firing a single shot.

But, yeah. We have the most ships and stuff. And really fucking expensive fighter jets.

This.  See my metaphor above.  You don't have to shoot down a single plane if you can cut off the fuel supply, or kill all the opposing pilots on the ground, etc.

10 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Shocking. People don't like to be ruled by outside powers. You'd think a country that invented the movie Red Dawn would know that.  It doesnt matter though. The military industrial complex isnt really about winning an actual war. It benefits from long quagmires. 

And the Russians know what they are doing. We beat them without firing a shot by finding the communist weakness and outspending them. They are doing the same to us by tearing at our seams, and they'll win without a shot. 

They have already won.  They've split NATO off from its largest member.  They've irrevocably broken our internal politics.  A great empire, and we'll be taken down because the Russians managed to convince us to blow our own dick clean off.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Whichever one China chooses.

English will remain the language of international aviation (way to go, England!).

Our army is nearly half the size of China's. They are working on their navy, but it will be more than ten years before they can challenge ours. Ours is shrinking, so the time it takes for them to become dominant on the high seas might not be as long as you think.

 

You're gonna need to show more work than just guesses on those issues.

 

[GhostOfTomJoad 9350]

I'm not quite as fatalistic as brisket but not too far behind. I become more & more thankful each day that my wife & I didn't have children. Can't imagine the challenge of explaining to them how we as a society fucked this whole thing up.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

I'm not quite as fatalistic as brisket but not too far behind. I become more & more thankful each day that my wife & I didn't have children. Can't imagine the challenge of explaining to them how we as a society fucked this whole thing up.

If you're not having kids for those reasons, you're much worse off than brisket. 

[David Dennison 18945]

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You're gonna need to show more work than just guesses on those issues.

https://www.mapsofworld.com/answers/defence/top-10-countries-with-largest-armies/

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2017/03/15/report-u-s-military-s-shrinking-size-and-growing-equipment-age-reflect-dod-policies/

[F250 28817]

1 minute ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

I'm not quite as fatalistic as brisket but not too far behind. I become more & more thankful each day that my wife & I didn't have children. Can't imagine the challenge of explaining to them how we as a society fucked this whole thing up.

LOL There are much tougher conversations parents have with their children than "America elected an idiot to be President." That conversation isn't even difficult.

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, David Dennison said:

https://www.mapsofworld.com/answers/defence/top-10-countries-with-largest-armies/

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2017/03/15/report-u-s-military-s-shrinking-size-and-growing-equipment-age-reflect-dod-policies/

Oh so size of army means they're gonna win ?   This isn't WWII where mass man power can turn the tide (SEE Stalins Russia).  

An army of mostly uneducated conscripts from the country with a navy who still can't build its own aircraft carrier, and has no real blue water navy. A nation that has to steal technology from us to build their fighter jets.

You'll be arguing for an increased military budget now that we're on the verge of being over taken ?  right ??  right ??

[GhostOfTomJoad 9350]

If you're not having kids for those reasons, you're much worse off than brisket. 

That's not the reason we didn't have kids. I've known since childhood I wasn't ever going to be a parent. Knew it in my bones. The cliff we're racing towards as a society does reinforce the fact we made the right choice for us.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, GhostOfTomJoad said:

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

If you're not having kids for those reasons, you're much worse off than brisket. 

That's not the reason we didn't have kids. I've known since childhood I wasn't ever going to be a parent. Knew it in my bones. The cliff we're racing towards as a society does reinforce the fact we made the right choice for us.

Well that's fair, but to use anything going on on America or the world as reason for not having kids... well those fuckers in WWII should all be arrested for post war child abuse.  

Cliff ?  how many miles away is it ?  I need to get my affairs in order....

[Biff Tannen 45714]

1 hour ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

If you're not having kids for those reasons, you're much worse off than brisket. 

That's not the reason we didn't have kids. I've known since childhood I wasn't ever going to be a parent. Knew it in my bones. The cliff we're racing towards as a society does reinforce the fact we made the right choice for us.

Same.  I often wonder how my friends with young kids are going to react if things go as badly as they are looking right now.  I'm not saying they would ever regret having them, but it certainly has to suck thinking that the world your child is growing up in might be a complete shit show compared to what you grew up in.

[sheeeit 129]

12 hours ago, SKJ said:

That's just the bullshit pricing book hospitals use.

It's a fucking price scam. They "charge' that upfront to show the insurance companies that they're getting a "discount"rate so that insurance companies can pay only 500 for the aspirin on their books. Meanwhile, the insurance company draws that amount out of their funds in payment, but then recovered the discount in their own books, passing the "savings" onto the premiums the customers pay, since there are "rules" as to how much they can collect.

The actual margin doesn't see the light of day.

It's a scam called "middling"

Good god this is some ignorant posting.  I would love to here an explanation for how a company "recovered the discount in their own books".  Would be fascinating to hear.  Equally fascinating would be how this "middling" practice actually has an impact on margins.

[WhatTheBuck 28797]

8 minutes ago, F250 said:

LOL There are much tougher conversations parents have with their children than "America elected an idiot to be President." That conversation isn't even difficult.

You left out "and you're fucked."

[F250 28817]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

You left out "and you're fucked."

Because I am not pessimistic.

[WhatTheBuck 28797]

4 minutes ago, F250 said:

Because I am not pessimistic.

You only need to be realistic. 

[RandomIdoit 657]

2 hours ago, Jack Burton said:

It's not a punishment

 

1 hour ago, SKJ said:

Well, it's not a punishment for being successful... It's a tax

Semantics. Why don't we just pool all of our money together and divide it equally between everyone? 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

Because I am not pessimistic.

Well if yer not having kids because you think the end is near, then you just might be fucked ....in the head.  They did an All In The Family episode about the precise topic, it was horrible concept then too.

[GSU&UT 1798]

For those thinking there won't be serious long lasting damage, the GOP obstructing Obama's SC nomination and Trump putting forth a nominee .

 

 

Reminder that Gorsuch sided with the trucking company in the 10th Circuit where the driver said the brakes on his trailer failed, waited for several hours for help from a repair truck, then felt he had to abandon his cargo because he felt his body was going to succumb to the freezing temperatures.

[Jack Burton 35]

8 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

 

Semantics. Why don't we just pool all of our money together and divide it equally between everyone? 

 

It's not semantics. You receive tangible benefits for paying taxes. That's not punishment

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

Quote

In 5-4 decision, US Supreme Court upholds Ohio's voter purge system that disproportionately removes low-income and minority voters.

I find it interesting how a seemingly neutral law always "disproportionately effects low-income / minorities" 

Just more rhetoric, I guess.

[RandomIdoit 657]

9 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:

It's not semantics. You receive tangible benefits for paying taxes. That's not punishment

While others receive the same benefits for paying nothing. More than 40% of filers do not pay anything.

[David Dennison 18945]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

While others receive the same benefits for paying nothing. More than 40% of filers do not pay anything.

They might not pay income tax, but hey most certainly pay something.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

They might not pay income tax, but hey most certainly pay something.

What ?  What do they pay ? If you're physically fit and can't find a job in this economy,  you're taking from everyone else.

[wildcat09 29377]

6 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

While others receive the same benefits for paying nothing. More than 40% of filers do not pay anything.

Which should tell you that a whole lot of people in this country don't make much money.

When income is heavily concentrated among a few people at the very top, those few people will be responsible for a huge share of total income tax revenue, because they make all of the income. It doesn't mean that everyone else is benefiting from the system; the system itself concentrates income at the top and it's the people at the top who benefit. It ensures and protects their status, while exploiting everyone who makes less. 

[F250 28817]

27 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

You only need to be realistic. 

My kids live in a lily white world of privledge which is why we insist they understand the importance of service to the less fortunate. They are pretty familiar with the costs of poverty. For me to tell them they are fucked because Donald Trump is President when there are actual people already living harsh lives is unrealistic. I spend a lot of my time trying to keep things in perspective for them. Upper-Middle-Class problems is a phrase I probably drop too much.

Anyways, didn't mean to go off on a tangent.

[Brisketexan 105280]

1 hour ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

I'm not quite as fatalistic as brisket but not too far behind. I become more & more thankful each day that my wife & I didn't have children. Can't imagine the challenge of explaining to them how we as a society fucked this whole thing up.

Meh.  Mine see clearly how we've fucked it all up.  We've also raised them to have a global perspective, travel, experience other people and cultures, etc.

As a result, at least one of my kids has little interest in living out her life in this country.  She'll most likely end up in the EU.  I'll hate the fact that she'll be that far away.  But I can't blame her.

We're a fading empire, almost entirely due to self-inflicted wounds.  We'll continue to be a "house divided" for decades to come.  The historical selling points of life in the good ole US of A ain't as persuasive as they once were.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

My kids live in a lily white world of privledge which is why we insist they understand the importance of service to the less fortunate. They are pretty familiar with the costs of poverty. For me to tell them they are fucked because Donald Trump is President when there are actual people already living harsh lives is unrealistic. I spend a lot of my time trying to keep things in perspective for them. Upper-Middle-Class problems is a phrase I probably drop too much.

Anyways, didn't mean to go off on a tangent.

Good point. Poverty will be here long after Trump is gone. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

27 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I find it interesting how a seemingly neutral law always "disproportionately effects low-income / minorities" 

Just more rhetoric, I guess.

This effects people who can't find time to vote and move a lot. Does that more often describe a white middle-class suburban voter or a minimum wage minority voter?