Democracy

Thomas Rogers · Dec 20, 2011

From my experience it seems that most that complain about those less fortunate than them that are living in poverty wouldn't give $100 to help solve that situation, but they feel that it is warranted that those economically above them give 5% more in taxes (for example) to address the problem.

It's really easy when in the middle or upper-middle (or lower-upper) to claim to be generous.

TJR

H D · Dec 20, 2011

I just read what I had posted last night in my last paragraph. I'm not proud of it but I will not remove it, either. It's not the way discussions should occur and it seems to only follow this course when one person in particular posts (under either alias). I have had many civil and thought-provoking discussions with many on this board but recently every discussion gets hijacked into wild conspiracy and extreme theoretical debates. Serious adult discussions are just impossible. This thread in itself is not so bad, but others have been ridiculous and serve no intellectual good.

Since I don't feel like serious, mature, name-calling-free discussions can occur in this board any longer concerning truly important and thought provoking matters, I feel like I need to ban myself from any topics that may incite the childish and/or provoke childish reactions from myself.

I promise to no longer discuss anything besides automotive, trivial humor or other non-sense related topics on the off-topic board.

Sorry for the rant...it's my last.

<object width='464' height='300' id='1996935' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' classid='clsid

27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000' alt='The Most Ridiculous Wrestling Video You Will Ever See in http://sports.break.com/'><param name='allowFullScreen' value='true' /></param><param name='flashvars' value='playerversion=12'></param><param name='movie' value='http://embed.break.com/MTk5NjkzNQ=='></param><param name='allowScriptAccess' value='always'></param><embed flashvars='playerversion=12' src='http://embed.break.com/MTk5NjkzNQ==' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' allowFullScreen='true' allowScriptAccess='always' width='464' height='300'></embed></object>
<font size=1><a href='http://sports.break.com/the-most-ridiculous-wrestling-video-you-will-ever-see' target='_blank'>The Most Ridiculous Wrestling Video You Will Ever See</a> - Watch More<a href="http://www.break.com">Funny Videos</a></font>

Robert Thomas · Dec 20, 2011

Hugh

An interesting approach you have undertaken a, "Self-Ban". It's sort of like every time you dog does something bad you roll up a newspaper and hit yourself over the head while chanting "I will train my dog".

As a alternative you may consider my approach. I have deemed certain individuals on this board as ones that do not exist in my cyber world. I simply treat their post as non existent and ignore them.

H D · Dec 20, 2011

t's sort of like every time you dog does something bad you roll up a newspaper and hit yourself over the head while chanting "I will train my dog".

If the dog is too ignorant to learn, you stop feeding him and let him find a new home to s*** in.

TrainTrac · Dec 23, 2011

This is just too much fun to ignore, so here we go. First of all, if you're going to cut/paste something from elsewhere, cite your source correctly.

Heres a copy and paste...from the U.S. Government no less. Enjoy Trac

This didn't come from the "U.S. Gov't no less". A quick search reveals that Frank's true source for his cut/paste passage is in fact: <A HREF="http://rt.com/usa/news/america-class-study-middle-521/">http://rt.com/usa/news/america-class-study-middle-521/</A>. And a little further investigation reveals that RT.com is in fact a Russian, state-owned TV news network.

RT, previously known as Russia Today, is a global multilingual television news network based in the Russian Federation run by the state-owned[1] state-run[2] RIA Novosti.

<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_%28TV_network%29">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_%28TV_network%29</A>

So citing a a Russian, state-owned TV news network's story about a Standford study isn't very credible, in my opinion. I could care less about a Russian gov't-owned media outlet's far-Left slanted take on a study from an American university.

And the fact that you rely on Russian state-owned television for information speaks volumes about you, Frank.

Courtesy of George W. Bush and his "Ownership Society"

Seriously? :bwahaha: That tired, lame excuse is getting really, really old.:btddhorse:

Did you take the time to read the actual publication from Professors Reardon and Bischoff? I seriously doubt it. But y'know what? Since you took to time to post a portion of it, I took the time to seek out the actual report and read it. First of all, the study looked at data over a 39 year period from 1970-2009. Newsflash: GWB was not the President from 1970-2000. So blaming him for the results of this study is ludicrous.

Also, the paper defines "affluent" as families/households with a total income greater than $112,500 dollars, and "poor" families/households as those with a total income of than $50,000. Yet, the authors don't clearly explain/define how they arrived at these figures for both "affluent" and "poor". Nor are the terms "affluent" and "poor" defined very clearly in this study. Many two-income families in America make close to $112,500 in total, combined income. But I'd hardly consider them affluent. More like solidly middle-class.

Moreover, the study ignores many other relevant factors: The ratio of single vs. two-parent families in all of the income level categories, the level of education in each category, etc. It's a pretty safe assumption that there's a significant difference in the level of education between those in the "poor" vs. those in the "affluent" categories in this study. And it's a no-brainer that education has a direct impact on an individual's income level. And I don't just mean a college education. Unless you have a college degree, some sort of vocational/technical training, or work in the construction/building trades, or some sort of training beyond a high-school education, your chances for a decent-paying job aren't very good, and haven't been that way for the last 40 years as our economy has evolved from largely agricultural & manufacturing to more technical and service-oriented economy. Also, I don't have the statistics readily available, but I'm sure that Census data from the last 40 years would also show a significant increase in the number of single-family households. Not only that, but the study doesn't discuss how many in the "poor" category might be on some sort of gov't assistance, whether it's public housing, welfare, food stamps, etc. Again, I'm sure that data over last 40 years (more than that actually, basically since the beginning of LBJ's "War on Poverty" & "Great Society" programs) would show a remarkable increase in recipients of public assistance (i.e. income redistribution by gov't at gun point). And I'm sure that there's a direct correlation between this increase and the Stanford study's information regarding a supposed "increase" in "income segregation". I believe that the study simply shows that as people's income levels increase (usually via better education), they move to more desirable geographic locations in an effort to achieve a better quality of life for themselves and their families.

Now, as for:

I have to also add that I think almost all of what Trac has posted is complete &*%%$&^T

Now there's a well-thought-out, reasoned, rational, mature response.:bwahaha: But seriously, though: Explain what parts of my previous posts you disagree with.

EddieS'04 · Dec 24, 2011

What Democracy Means to Me

by Johnny Carson

To me, democracy means placing trust in the little guy, giving the fruits of nationhood to those who built the nation. Democracy means anyone can grow up to be president, and anyone who doesn't grow up can be vice president.

Democracy is people of all races, colors, and creeds united by a single dream: to get rich and move to the suburbs away from people of all races, colors, and creeds. Democracy is having time set aside to worship -- 18 years if you're Jim Bakker.

Democracy is buying a big house you can't afford with money you don't have to impress people you wish were dead. And, unlike communism, democracy does not mean having just one ineffective political party; it means having two ineffective political parties.

Democracy means freedom of sexual choice between any two consenting adults; Utopia means freedom of choice between three or more consenting adults. But I digress. Democracy is welcoming people from other lands, and giving them something to hold onto -- usually a mop or a leaf blower. It means that with proper timing and scrupulous bookkeeping, anyone can die owing the government a huge amount of money.

Democracy means a thriving heartland with rolling fields of Alfalfa, Buckwheat, Spanky, and Wheezer. Democracy means our elected officials bow to the will of the people, but more often they bow to the big butts of campaign contributors.

Yes, democracy means fighting every day for what you deserve, and fighting even harder to keep other weaker people from getting what they deserve. Democracy means never having the Secret Police show up at your door. Of course, it also means never having the cable guy show up at your door. It's a tradeoff. Democracy means free television. Not good television, but free.

Democracy is being able to pick up the phone and, within a minute, be talking to anyone in the country, and, within two minutes, be interrupted by call waiting.

Democracy means no taxation without representation, and god knows, we've just about had the hell represented out of us. It means the freedom to bear arms so you can blow the "o" out of any rural stop sign you want.

And finally, democracy is the eagle on the back of a dollar bill, with 13 arrows in one claw, 13 leaves on a branch, 13 tail feathers, and 13 stars over its head. This signifies that when the white man came to this country, it was bad luck for the Indians, bad luck for the trees, bad luck for the wildlife, and lights out for the American eagle.

I thank you.