It's not about the money. by 1kiki

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

It's not about the money.

POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Sunday, April 24, 2011 06:49
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3381
PAGE 2 of 2

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:41 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I think it would take a lot more than 5-10k to make all the poor people in the country into middle-class people.

ETA: This "End the wars, hack the defense budget" is a sentiment I can get behind.

I love military hardware, used to own books of tanks and jets and helicopters and small arms as a child. Shiny, impressive, weapons of war.

And I don't think we need half of what we've got. Life is not a blockbuster movie. We can survive with less cool stuff.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:19 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
How about just eliminate the blue collar worker altogether? Super rich, and sub poor citizens.
That's what republicans are striving for. No more middle class.

Amen. Ayn Rand on steroids.

DT, please explain:

Quote:
You win the strawman award. You just created an argument, and then argued against it.

I snaked that if Clinton’s lowering of the debt was just because of “luck”, then supposedly the state in which Bush left the country was just “bad” luck. It wasn’t. By a LONG shot. So how does that kill the argument?

Quote:
I find this graph fascinating. Looks like the problem really took off in 1982. Who was President then-- I forget his name?

The Great God Reagan...

DT,

Quote:
his sale of our ports and our military infrastructure to corporations and foreign govts.

confuses me. The sales of ports and military land around HERE was done because of lack of need for same, and was done very carefully, with no foreign governments allowed. Unless you mean something else, or it was done differently elsewhere, I’m not sure what you’re saying. The Presidio in SF and Mare Island in the East Bay were dealt with that way...AND all the toxic waste resulting from the Presidio was cleaned up before corporations were allowed to even bid on it.

Quote:
Reagan was a big spender, but they all have been, since the fed started shifting monetary policy. One way to put that is no one has spent like Obama

That falls apart in a couple of ways. You’re bitching about the debt, yet it was during the Reagan years (remember, trickle-down, which works so well??) that the debt really took off, so to say “Reagan was a big spender, but they all have been” is to minimize that fact. As to Obama, as we’ve been over again and again and again, Obama came into a horrendous situation...quite possibly, all combined, worse than and more costly than any President ever, and I still believe he had to do a lot of what he did just to get OUT of that mess. Things went almost universally DOWNHILL during Bush’s term; they’ve been going (way too slowly) back UPHILL since Obama’s. Bush left us with not only horrendous debt, but without the means to be a viable nation to pay it OFF.

Quote:
Actually, it was the topic. Not a threadjack

No, it definitely was NOT. It was about how the Republicans are SAYING it’s about the money, when in reality it’s not: Read Kiki’s post starting the topic:

They’re saying “Luxurious public pension plans are sinking the states”. They’re not, and it’s an excuse to go after unions and the middle class/poorer classes, especially as the governors doing it have given enormous amounts to corporations while crying poor and going after the unions.

They’re saying “Social Security is a black hole”. It’s not, for both the reasons Kiki gave and because it is purely the desire of the right to privatize SS, thus giving corporations and Wall Street control of the money.

They’re saying “Medicare is an economic hole”. It’s not, PRIVATE health insurance has been, is and will become far more of an economic hole, and harm people worse and worse. AND see above; it’s the second thing the right has been trying desperately to find ANY way to get rid of, so Wall Street can “protect” our old age.

In other words, her point was that while they’re SAYING it’s about the money, it’s really about social issues and the right’s long-standing desire to do away with safety nets and give more to the rich. Get it? The discussion has BECOME about the debt, and her point has been completely forgotten, but that’s how it started out. Or as she herself put it

Quote:
it's pretty obvious that the moves made in Wisconsin and elsewhere have ZERO to with with the deficit - since the targets of those moves did not cause the deficit in the first place, and aiming at them will not get rid of it.

Get it?

Oops, I see Mike not only explained the point, but added some important stuff to it. What he said. I’[m not even going to bother to respond to Raptor, it’s not possible to communicate with him.

Quote:
On paying the debt, I'm with Ron Paul, who seems to be slated to end up as the actual GOP candidate

WHERE you get that is beyond me, given they’ve turned on Ron Paul completely and embrace his idiot son, and he doesn’t even come into the running when people are asked...

Quote:
Equally obviously, it undermines the economy, and reduces future revenues by destroying jobs, businesses and reducing the price competitiveness of American products and services sat home and abroad

Okay, I’m gonna give up on you DT after this. Can you actually say trickle-down and tax cuts for the rich haven’t undermined the economy or reduced future revenues, haven’t destroyed jobs, business and reduced the price competitiveness of American products?? Tax cuts don’t stop corporations from outsourcing, which has cost jobs destroyed businesses, our economy has been VASTLY undermined by the Bush fiscal policies, as have our future revenues. Tax cuts have NOT encouraged corporations to increase hiring and hasn’t encouraged banks to increase lending, so where you get that idea is beyond me.

Your graph in that post is interesting. Spending and revenue diverged about the time Bush took office, and kept getting further apart during his entire term. Revenue was going UP during the Clinton years.

Quote:
Never assume yourself to be more knowledgeable, or older, than your audience.

Yet that’s what you do with virtually everything you post, DT....??

The argument keeps going back and forth, but the original concept remains; it’s not about the debt, or the money, for the right, it’s about social issues.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:24 AM

HARDWARE

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I think it would take a lot more than 5-10k to make all the poor people in the country into middle-class people.

ETA: This "End the wars, hack the defense budget" is a sentiment I can get behind.

I love military hardware, used to own books of tanks and jets and helicopters and small arms as a child. Shiny, impressive, weapons of war.

And I don't think we need half of what we've got. Life is not a blockbuster movie. We can survive with less cool stuff.

Well, we did that once. The huge budget surplus under Clinton was "the peace dividend". It was a one-time benefit from slashing the military, principally by cutting the army in half. The plan was to keep a large enough military to field enough force to fight two significant military actions in two different theaters a the same time. Good luck. Germany couldn't do it with their manpower levels and geographically connected fronts. By my count we have 3 major commitments and two minor ones, globally.

And that budget surplus? Spent. The budget increased as soon as the hogs lined up at the trough and the surplus was erased.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:50 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Every time I hear from planners that we should be able to fight two wars simultaneously (or a two front conflict) I shake my head.

The military is supposed to defend the country, not project power. There is no way for someone to launch a conventional military assault on the U.S. without us becoming aware of it long in advance.

Our immediate neighbors do not have the ability or inclination to invade us militarily.

Our distant potential enemies do not have the amphibious landing capability, beach-head support capability, or airborne drop capability to land in sufficient quantity to threaten us.

No potential adversary has the ability to gain air superiority, which is an essential factor in a battle.

There can simply be no viable conventional attack on the U.S. The new Red Dawn movie will be fun, but not realistic.

So what is the point of fielding a military capable of fighting two overseas simultaneous conventional wars? Who are we 'defending' if not ourselves? And why are we doing it?

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 1:39 PM

DREAMTROVE

Anthony,

$5-$10k per poor person. We're not making them middle class. If your social welfare system makes the unemployed middle class, what's the incentive to work?

But keeping them from starving, dying, etc. I actually thought $5-$10k was high, I was assuming they had an income of $0, but in most cases they probably have some income, they just have a shortfall.

Think about it. $10k is 1000 manhours of relatively skilled labor. Consider that to be 1000 hours of charity, or 20 hours a week. If each poor person had someone working 20 hours a week building them shelter, feeding them, etc. they would make it even if they were an imbecile beating their head against the wall.

Niki,

I'm sorry, we're living on different planets. I didn't say that Clinton was "lucky" I said he was "crooked" there's a difference. Obama could balance the budget by selling Alaska to China.

Since I think Clinton is a genocidal racist, and have made the point many times here, my patience for his apologists is rather on the short side. In fact, I feel as if it sinks the credibility of anyone who wants to attack Qaddafi or most world leaders when they defend someone who openly and intentionally starved one million people to death.

Never mistake an attack on Clinton as a defense of Bush anymore than a condemnation of Stalin is a defense of Mao. (If you think this through, it's a pretty direct parallel.)

Quote:
The sales of ports and military land around HERE was done because of lack of need for same, and was done very carefully, with no foreign governments allowed. Unless you mean something else, or it was done differently elsewhere, I’m not sure what you’re saying. The Presidio in SF and Mare Island in the East Bay were dealt with that way...AND all the toxic waste resulting from the Presidio was cleaned up before corporations were allowed to even bid on it.

Huh. Someone made up a reason and you accepted it.

Once it's sold to a private party, that private party can resell. Clinton sold the ports to a corporation in England which then sold them to a corporation in Dubai.

You do know that Obama whom you are defending says that Reagan was the greatest president and that Obama says his own economic model will work by stimulus and trickle down effect, right?

Do you even stop to examine the policies of those you support and oppose before picking up the party line? At times you make Auraptor look like a fence-sitter.

Stop and think about this for a second, your precious democrats who would fix everything if only they were in power. What is this, a dictatorship? I have worked for the democratic party for many years, and still do. You know why we can't stand this sort of nonsense? Because just picture what happens if we were to actually support you to office.

I'm serious. If I supported you to local office here, you'd be yelling across the aisle like George Allen. Do you think that actually gets anything accomplished at all? It's a democracy. The only thing that gets done is something that's a compromise between Mike and Rap. Who do you really want making those decisions, someone who can actually listen to the other side and come to a compromise, or someone who will stake "my way or the highway" until the floor is soaked with blood.[/rant]

ETA: On the not so off chance that you also work for the democratic party, I hope your meetings are a little more cordial than your board discussions. The heads of the Democratic Party here are more allied to the heads of the Republican Party here than to anyone else. It's the same everywhere. I used to think that was corruption. Now I know it's because they want to get things done, and nothing gets done unless the overwhelming majority agree.

Hardware

Good point on the peace dividend, I had forgotten about that. The end of cold war spending.

Anthony,

Of course. The US will collapse internally, and, sure, some day it will be invaded by visigoths, and when that day comes, we will welcome it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:23 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Would you please show me where Obama said he thought Reagan was the greatest President ever? I’d like to read that. The comparisons, in my opinion, have more to do with Obama CAVING to the Republicans, accepting their policies in the name of “compromise”, than anything to do with Reagan. Obama made a remark about, I don’t remember the wording specifically, Reagan having had a major impact and having had “new ideas” or somesuch—-he didn’t say they were GOOD ideas, just that they changed things. So I must have missed where he said that about “greatest President”, I’d like to see that. Just because Time put them together on the cover and said he “hearts” Reagan doesn’t make it fact.

I believe Obama has blasted trickle-down economics from day one. In fact he’s been accused of trickle-UP economic policy. I can see how you might have gotten the impression otherwise; however, to me that is yet another sign of his caving in to Republicans and being a woos, rather than his actual policies. What politicians think and what they DO are often very different, and for myriad reasons. Certainly he could have been lying all the time, but his actions have spoken louder to me that he’s a compromiser and not willing to stand on principle or fight for the principles he believes in than that he’s an actual believer in trickle-down economics.

You’re right, we can’t possibly communicate...your virulent hatred of Clinton makes that obviously impossible. I accept that. I’m not a big Obama OR Clinton fan, so I would be quite willing to discuss these issues, but given your rock-solid hatred of Clinton and that you view him as a "genocidal racist" (wow), I accept that it’s impossible.

Quote:
Huh. Someone made up a reason and you accepted it.

Once it's sold to a private party, that private party can resell.

Cute; you got it all wrapped up, what someone said and that I swallowed it, eh? That also makes communication impossible. I don’t know about other places, but here, the Presidio has been partially sold off for RESIDENTIAL development only (zoned as such), and the rest was sold to the Presidio Trust, a US Government Corporation. They manage the property and lease what little commercial space there is to various companies, Lucasfilm among them. One of main objectives of Presidio Trust’s program was achieving financial self-sufficiency by 2013. Thanks to rents from residential and commercial tenants, this happened well ahead of schedule, in 2006. Immediately after its inception, the Trust began preparing rehabilitation plans for the park. Many areas had to be decontaminated before they could be prepared for public use. One of those is Crissy Field, where we take the dogs to the beach frequently. So no, it wasn’t sold to a private party.

As to Mare Island, I know far less about it, but after the shipyard decommissioning:

Quote:
In 1998, the city of Vallejo contracted with Lennar Mare Island LLC to redevelop the island’s 5,657 acres (22.89 km2) into a multi-use community. Lennar Corporation contracted the Sausalito-based SWA Group, to provide a Master Development Plan for Vallejo, additional historical research and landscape architectural services.

The final land-use plan SWA submitted to the city of Vallejo in 2005 divided Mare Island into 13 specific zones, including a university district, and industrial zone, historic core, and residential neighborhoods. In addition, 78% of the entire island was set aside for wildlife habitat and wetlands, parkland and open space, and dredge ponds.

Wiki

It’s now beautiful, was detoxified just like Crissy Field, and has a golf course and many other things on it. It’s not gonna be sold to Dubai.

I realize you’d love to tar Clinton as nastily as you can, but others might like to know he also created and expanded protection of some of our national lands, such as

The Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument is a 410,000-hectare (1.01 million-acre) area along the northern rim of the Grand Canyon

The Agua Fria National Monument is a 28,800-hectare (71,100-acre) area located 60 km (40 mi) from Phoenix, Arizona.

The California Coastal National Monument sets aside thousands of small islands, rocks, and exposed reefs along California’s 1,350-km (840-mi) Pacific coastline. The monument includes all such lands above the high tide mark and will extend 12 nautical miles (26 km/14 mi) out to sea.

He also added almost 8,000 acres to the existing Pinnacles National Monument, located 105 km (65 mi) from San Jose, California. The expansion, federal officials said, will help protect the existing monument lands. The Republicans fought him every step of the way on all of this.

I’m not defending Clinton’s environmental record: It stank, for the most part. There were some good things, but more bad things, certainly. I won’t even START on what he did where logging is concerned, or I’d be spitting fire. But then, I shouldn’t even be bothering to try to bring some perspective to the discussion, you’re right, given your feelings on the matter.

Quote:
The only thing that gets done is something that's a compromise.... Who do you really want making those decisions, someone who can actually listen to the other side and come to a compromise, or someone who will stake "my way or the highway" until the floor is soaked with blood.

I’m not going to touch “between Mike and Rap”, especially as what you described is PRECISELY Raptor, but the rest is just what I’ve been saying all along. You SEE me as something I’m not, partly because I keep trying to bring perspective to things, to compare all the asinine over-the-top statements to things done by those supported by the people who make the statements, usually to show that both sides are screwed up. I’m put in that position by some here, but I’ve also said quite clearly that I’m not a Democrat, I’m an Independent...but a liberal nonetheless.

As to you not saying it was luck that helped Clinton, I was speaking of Raptor’s crack

Quote:
Clinton benefited from a bit of good luck, incredible technological advances ( thank you, Bill Gates ), some crafty interest rate manipulation, and the dot com bubble.

Your entire response to me was virulent, rude and made false assumptions. I find it offensive. I know you don’t like me, but this reads like you’ve not been here as long as you have.

Quote:
Stop and think about this for a second, your precious democrats who would fix everything if only they were in power. What is this, a dictatorship?

That could be said of the Republicans just as easily, and they’ve NEVER been my “precious Democrats”. Where have you been all this time?

Quote:
I'm serious. If I supported you to local office here, you'd be yelling across the aisle like George Allen.

I’m glad you think you know more about me than I do, (expletive deleted). Yup. The only political event (besides demonstrations, where I joined in chants and carried a sign, nothing else) I’ve been involved in was a protest at a Meg Whitman rally. I got to see a sample of “Republican civility” there...we stood around holding signs quietly. The opposition arrived and began harassing us LOUDLY and taunting us. Most of us held our ground and continued to be civil...a couple of times people let them get to them and said something, and I immediately went to them and said “don’t let them get to you, let them show their colors by themselves”. Yeah, I’m a real George Allen all right.

RWED is tough, you have to be tough to hold your own here; but I’m far less nasty than many I have encountered here. I don’t call people vicious names or make crude remarks about people here like some do. I snark, yes, as does everyone. I’m disgusted with some of those who are here for no reason but to cause trouble and trigger others. But I TRY to present facts and make my points as civilly as I can, so I’m not sure where you get your opinion of me, unless it’s something personal. Either way, I reject your entire response; if you’d choose to be more civil about it, maybe we could debate, but that doesn’t appear to be anything you're interested in.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:40 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I would like to read about this selling off of American land by Clinton. I can't find anything on the internet, so in the interest of fairness, I'd like to read the facts for myself regarding what you're ranting about (although obviously by your own indication, the "ranting" was about me). I know about some of it, but not to the extent you indicate.

If you could manage to post JUST some links, or some links and any civil comments you care to share.

Lastly, it would be nice if you could manage to get back on topic, which is that, although they've been making a lot of noise about "jobs" and that it's about the deficit (money), what the Republicans have been and are DOING is actually about social warfare. That WAS the initial topic, if you'd care to address it.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 11:14 AM

BYTEMITE

Oof. Well, I think we're having a thing here where DT is not meaning to offend. The conflict between you is primarily because you're both coming from different angles with the research you've done, and when that research can't reconcile, you have trouble seeing eye-to-eye.

DT calls Clinton genocidal because his sanctions against Iraq and some of his authorized attacks in the Middle East and military aid sent to Israel resulted in a number of civilian casualties and careless military intelligence leading to the destruction of some schools, hospitals, and notably, an aspirin plant. Not nearly as bad as Bush, but I don't disagree with DT when he says Clinton's hands had blood on them.

I can't see anything on Clinton selling US assets to balance the budget, and FactCheck.org says nothing about it. However, you seemed to come up with an example yourself about the US selling military bases to corporations. Even if DT is wrong about the buyers being foreign powers, isn't that still kinda a bad thing? It would be like the US Government borrowing from the corporations.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administratio
n_was_the_federal.html

I think one or both of you may be mixing up liquidated assets during Clinton's presidency versus this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Ports_World_controversy

Bill was for it, which might suggest he'd done similar deals during his own presidency, though I haven't found them yet. Hillary decided to be part of the out cry against it. Eventually DPW sold back to Halliburton, which was probably the end goal in the first place. The Clintons, the Bushes, and Cheney are actually close from what I understand, so a scheme to help out Cheney's company seems right up their alley. Classic Problem/Crisis/Solution model.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:44 PM

DREAMTROVE

Niki

You can be very tiresome.

Did I once say that Republicans were civil?

I said that only rational people who seek compromise with the other side will ever achieve the majority necessary to affect change. We're ruled by very greedy people who understand this. We need to understand it too if we want to get anywhere.

Congrats on protesting Meg Whitman. She's a twit who doesn't belong in politics.

If you cannot see that Clinton who deliberately targeted civilian populations to slaughter them on several occasions and supported door to door warfare across Africa is a racist even by any random act or appearance, dach. phooey. It would be like saying G.W. Bush was dumb. Or Cheney was Greedy.

As for RWED. I've been here a long time. You are still shouting across the table. Actually, your shouting on your own side of the table. Take a moment to consider the effect your rants have on your audience. Do they pull them closer to compromise with you? Or push them away. Just think about it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:53 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Oof. Well, I think we're having a thing here where DT is not meaning to offend. The conflict between you is primarily because you're both coming from different angles with the research you've done, and when that research can't reconcile, you have trouble seeing eye-to-eye.

DT calls Clinton genocidal because his sanctions against Iraq and some of his authorized attacks in the Middle East and military aid sent to Israel resulted in a number of civilian casualties and careless military intelligence leading to the destruction of some schools, hospitals, and notably, an aspirin plant. Not nearly as bad as Bush, but I don't disagree with DT when he says Clinton's hands had blood on them.

I can't see anything on Clinton selling US assets to balance the budget, and FactCheck.org says nothing about it. However, you seemed to come up with an example yourself about the US selling military bases to corporations. Even if DT is wrong about the buyers being foreign powers, isn't that still kinda a bad thing? It would be like the US Government borrowing from the corporations.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administratio
n_was_the_federal.html

I think one or both of you may be mixing up liquidated assets during Clinton's presidency versus this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Ports_World_controversy

Bill was for it, which might suggest he'd done similar deals during his own presidency, though I haven't found them yet. Hillary decided to be part of the out cry against it. Eventually DPW sold back to Halliburton, which was probably the end goal in the first place. The Clintons, the Bushes, and Cheney are actually close from what I understand, so a scheme to help out Cheney's company seems right up their alley. Classic Problem/Crisis/Solution model.

Byte,

I was merely trying to point out to Niki that her strategy was not how politics was won.

On the Dubai deal, it wouldn't have been possible if Clinton hadn't already sold the ports to a UK company. It's been argued that this was always a transitional move to Dubai, but it hardly matters. It broke the trust that the US belongs to the US.

As for the killings, you left out Yugoslavia, Haiti, Somali and Rwanda.

Sure, every president is worse than the last because every president does exactly what the last one does, and then pushes the envelop with more new evil.

Obama has added:

Escalating war to possible world war
Killer robots
Assassinations
a new doctrine of policy-driven pre-emption
etc. etc.

Bush added a lot, so did Clinton.

Behind the scenes, nothing is changing, the gnomes are always pushing the envelop.

Anyone who sees one side as good and the other as evil has at least one eye closed.

That wasn't really my point. My point was that no one can get anywhere near a consensus if they treat 1/2 the population as evil.

Anyone who thinks half the population can dominate the other half is just delusional.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:54 PM

DREAMTROVE

I just put a router in a birdhouse, and now there's a monsoon from beyond. I guess that will test it ;)

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:59 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Niki

You can be very tiresome.

Truer words have not been posted here.....ever.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:28 PM

BYTEMITE

Okay, so now it's not just research irreconcilability.

Armies try to defend the high grounds. The valley draws settlers. The best way to be is the valley.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 4:16 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

Selling assets: My dad says that Clinton sold a bunch of our weapons and secrets to China, those are assets are they not?

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:05 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Hardware

It's truly hopeless no matter how you look at it.

What I find interesting, DT, is that you keep portraying social security/ medicare /medicaid as if they are bankrupt and deeply in debt, without a single fact backing it up. In fact, they are not, and you are wrong.

Again, I ask you for your facts. Cite some sources.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html
2010 Trustees Report for SS, Medicare and related funds.

But in general, what are 'assets'? Your 'fiat money'? It's just an idea. The 'money' you keep in the bank? Mere electronic digits. Your home? It's only 'worth' as much as whatever you can sell it for - clearly, by recent experience, an uncertain amount. Gold? It has the exact same drawback as real estate. I don't think you can come up with anything GUARANTEED to hold ALL of its value indefinitely, under any condition. Such is life.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:17 PM

DREAMTROVE

This discussion has taken a rather zen turn.

I guess I'd say knowledge is power and power is an asset. Land is an asset as it is limited. Weapons are an asset in that they control land.

The basic unit of human economy is the manhour. Fiat currency is on the edge of collapse because of the inability to track derivatives through dark pools. This problem is so serious that it makes who did what with the US budget just about completely moot.

I'll side with Byte on this one.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:23 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

DT

"Clinton sold the ports to a corporation in England which then sold them to a corporation in Dubai."

Well, no. Since the US government doesn't own the ports it can't sell them. And it was Bush who awarded the OPERATIONS contract to Dubai, not Clinton.

Long Beach CA
Who owns the Port?
Port lands are owned by the City of Long Beach in trust for the people of the State of California and cannot be sold to any private enterprises. In 1911, the California Legislature approved a Tidelands grant, giving the City of Long Beach the right to manage and develop the Harbor District for the sole purposes of commerce, navigation, fisheries and recreation.

Houston TX
The Port of Houston Authority owns and operates the public facilities located on the Houston Ship Channel ...

New York NY
The Port Authority is jointly headed by the governors of New York and New Jersey.

... and so on.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 2:10 AM

DREAMTROVE

Kiki

It was one of the 20 biggest news stories of the last decade. I find it impossible that you missed it. Assume the same about me.

Bush wanted to "Okay" the sale of ports to Dubai, but IIRC, congress wouldn't let them. It was the company in britain who was selling them. IIRC, the company was sold the ports in 1998, and it was part of the budget balance.

Obvious, not "all ports" 6 ports were sold to British firm Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company. That company was then bought by Dubai Ports World in a deal that had nothing to do with the US.

I tired of this. If you're going to be insistent on defending a man who has been accused of committing, aiding and being complicit to genocide in Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Burundi, the DRC, Haiti, Kosovo, Serbia and most notably Iraq where the UN hold his govt. directly responsible for roughly 1 million deaths including 500,000 children, then all you will succeed in doing is lowering my estimation of you.

I'm no more going to be impressed by someone's defense George W. Bush or, lately, Barack Obama, but I'm not convinced that the current president has quite as bad a record. Yet. (The previous one came close, but was probably too incompetent to match Clinton's accomplishments in exterminating the undesirables.) But there are irredeemable men. It's like discussing our favorite communist revolutionaries or fascist dictators on the grounds of "I like this guy because he's not quite as much a traitor as that guy."

On the ports issue, I believe you are incorrect, ie, you're overlooking prior deals and specifics, but neither president is anything worth defending.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:49 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Coming back after several days. Regarding the ports, etc., ours was a result of military ports being decomissioned, so they had to decide what to do with them. None are, as far as I know, actually in corporate hands; they’re in the hands of trusts, etc., which manage them, and they LEASE to some corporations.

As to Republicans being civil, without going back I think I was referring to the fact that your statement could apply to either side equally...I may have been referring to the righties here, but they’re not necessarily Republican, so if I noted them as so, I misspoke.

You’re pointed out how my “strategy” (of which I have none) wasn’t effective in the past. I responded that the strategy you were putting down was used by numerous people on this site, so I’m no different, and quite a bit less vicious, than some others. Would be nice if you were to take them to task as well.

As to tedious, that’s a personal judgment and I’m sure others here consider this or that person tedious. I find a number of people here tedious, but that’s MY personal judgment. It means no more than anyone else’s.

Riona, I believe DT was referring specifically to ports. I could be wrong. Certainly there are other assets than ports, so I’m guessing I got that idea from what he wrote.

Of course valleys attract more settlers. I haven’t seen a lot of “settlers” here, mostly antagonists. I’m glad to note that, with a couple of exceptions, we seem to have lost some of our more stringent posters, which is nice, as it allows for more real discussions and debates. I think DT’s remark that knowledge is power speaks more to an “army” than to “settlers”, as well.

I don’t get the idea that anyone here (with a couple of exceptions) is in any way “defending” Clinton. I certainly wasn’t. It’s your consistent use of “genocidal” whatever (I forget the rest) that irritated me, as I don’t think he was any more genocidal than any other President in the way you describe, and Bush far more so in starting a MAJOR war, an illegal one and for his own purposes. Given, as you say, virtually all Presidents have done much the same, singling out Clinton seems illogical to me.

I keep trying to bring this back to the original statement, which is that the Republicans have said over and over that it’s about the money, yet their actions have proven precisely that it’s NOT about the money for them, it’s about class warfare and social issues.

That’s all.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE