A thread for Democrats Only by THGRRI

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

Thursday, September 28, 2017 3:58 PM

I don't know that I consider myself a democrat, but these days I am definitely anti-republican, I like science too much, I guess.

I wouldn't even bother with "Independant"
because there is no point to be a part of a perennially losing party that doesn't clearly stand for anything.

I think I am for sure a card carrying member of the "people of both parties piss me off".

I wish there were more options, I think it would be healthier for the country as well.

If there ever is a "Science and Education" party, let me know...

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

Thursday, September 28, 2017 5:39 PM

I am an independent myself, but I figured to many would make the same claim that are actually far right nuts. To tell the truth they are the ones I expected to post here first. Glad it's you guys.

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 1:44 PM

OONJERAH

I'm an actual, registered Democrat.

But I'm not sure what the topic is. Democrats can post in here,
and talk about themselves ... about why they are democrats ...
or what democrats believe in?

My parents were Republicans.
I was an adult in my 40's before I found out I was a democrat.
I didn't really know what the 2 parties stood for, so I asked a
friend who loves politics what I was.

Republicans tend to be conservative. Democrats tend to be liberal.
Can I even say what those words mean? Not very well.
Conservatives stand for law & order. i.e., Authority.
Democrats believe in human rights and equality. i.e., Freedom.
Anarchists believe in every man for himself?

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 7:49 PM

rezident owtsidr

I am a rejistered Democrat.

But I think the official party iz lost in the wilderness, wandering around confuzed. They dont no where they are or where they are going, not even where they shoud be going.

Just like the GoP wuz eazy prey to get hijacked by Trump last yir, the Dem can be now.

I hope to be the guy to do it, but expect it will be sum rich guy who haz the resoursez to broadcast hiz taylored to wut they want to hear salez pitch louder than anybody else.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 8:10 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
I'm an actual, registered Democrat.

But I'm not sure what the topic is. Democrats can post in here,
and talk about themselves ... about why they are democrats ...
or what democrats believe in?

My parents were Republicans.
I was an adult in my 40's before I found out I was a democrat.
I didn't really know what the 2 parties stood for, so I asked a
friend who loves politics what I was.

Republicans tend to be conservative. Democrats tend to be liberal.
Can I even say what those words mean? Not very well.
Conservatives stand for law & order. i.e., Authority.
Democrats believe in human rights and equality. i.e., Freedom.
Anarchists believe in every man for himself?

wow.
You still don't know what you are. Your friend misled you.

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 8:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:

Conservatives stand for law & order. i.e., Authority.
Democrats believe in human rights and equality. i.e., Freedom.

The truly annoying thing about Republicans and Freedom, is that when a Democrat says Freedom Repugs hear "You mean at the expense of MY well-established track record of bigotry and public persona? How dare you not tolerate my religious persecution??"

Yes, you have to treat all people like PEOPLE, even if you disagree with them. You have to allow people to do things you don't want them to do if they aren't physically hurting you. Your "for the public good" ideas still CANNOT infringe on my rights. Public business means ALL PUBLIC BUSINESS. You wanna bake cakes for straight X-tians, then open a straight X-tians ONLY bakery. You don't want to?? Then you admit it's just about money and NOT about religion at ALL.

That is the main issue I see with Republicans.

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 8:55 PM

LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down.

You don't even think before you type, do you Wishy?

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 9:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down.

Thanks to the SJW for keeping the shitty X-tians from discriminating.
Discriminating IS NOT A RIGHT.

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 10:17 PM

OONJERAH

The way I was taught, both in & out of school ...

The Founding Fathers* seriously wanted Freedom of Religion in this country.
Naturally, that includes freedom from religion.

I argued with a lay preacher about it once; he was certain that
they intended this to be a Christian nation. ...
An odd point of view, since he was much better educated than I was.

* Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jay, Jefferson, Madison, and Washington.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

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

Friday, September 29, 2017 11:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down.

Thanks to the SJW for keeping the shitty X-tians from discriminating.
Discriminating IS NOT A RIGHT.

What? Are you just contradicting your own points for the sake of nothing?

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
You wanna bake cakes for straight X-tians, then open a straight X-tians ONLY bakery. You don't want to?? Then you admit it's just about money and NOT about religion at ALL.

The correct answer to the question is No. You do not use your brain before typing something.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 12:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

The correct answer to the question is No. You do not use your brain before typing something.

Ok, then tell me how I am wrong, Stud.
Tell me how discriminating is the right thing to do or in any way beneficial for society.

I'd LOVE to hear this one...

People who are shitty to other people just for planning a wedding ARE SHITTY PEOPLE, in this case X-tians.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 1:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

The correct answer to the question is No. You do not use your brain before typing something.

Ok, then tell me how I am wrong, Stud.
Tell me how discriminating is the right thing to do or in any way beneficial for society.

I'd LOVE to hear this one...

People who are shitty to other people just for planning a wedding ARE SHITTY PEOPLE, in this case X-tians.

You really are thick.

I didn't say that discrimination was the right thing to do or beneficial to society.

YOU SAID THIS:

Quote:
You wanna bake cakes for straight X-tians, then open a straight X-tians ONLY bakery. You don't want to?? Then you admit it's just about money and NOT about religion at ALL.

I SAID THIS:

Quote:
LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down.

What you said was stupid bullshit. YOU said that people should open a bakery that only serves straight Christians, but they wouldn't BECAUSE it's all about money.

I said that they wouldn't BECAUSE it's illegal.

I called you on your bullshit, then you turned it into a discrimination issue and tried to paint me to be a bad guy because you lost the argument.

Typical SJW, Feminist dissembling argument.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 9:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

I said that they wouldn't BECAUSE it's illegal.

I called you on your bullshit, then you turned it into a discrimination issue and tried to paint me to be a bad guy because you lost the argument.

That's just it, beer for brains...all you said was "LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down." YOU DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT LEGAL. You implied your hated SJW would shut it down, and they do that on occasion.

And as for "legal", ever heard of a GAY BAR? You CAN open a business that caters to a specific clientele and even market that in an oblique way, but cannot refuse service to others. But you probably won't get a whole lot of straight people. SO yeah, they CAN open a bakery and "Serving the Conservative Christian since 1995" because you can make your slogan whatever you want. Probably would still get a gay couple or two, but it would limit the requests. They DON'T because they know they would lose the business of the marginal and non-religious. So it IS all about money.

.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 9:55 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

I saw this article that may make me change my mind about how wonderful it would be to join the GOP: Republican Tax Plan Literally Benefits Only Millionaires
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/09/republican-tax-plan-literally-b
enefits-only-millionaires/

I don't know that I can keep voting for Democrats when Republicans are the only ones protecting me and my wealth from the poor who want to steal it all: Trump slams Puerto Rico. ‘They want everything to be done for them’

San Juan mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz said, "I will do what I never thought I was going to do. I am begging, begging anyone who can hear us to save us from dying. If anybody out there is listening to us, we are dying, and you are killing us with the inefficiency."

Trump's response was: "Such poor leadership ability by the Mayor of San Juan" He continued: "What do they think I'm made of? Money? I have nothing to spare from my billions and billions!" Trump didn't actually say that. He only thought it.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-slams-puerto-rico-%E2%80%98they-
want-everything-to-be-done-for-them%E2%80%99/ar-AAsE1xP?li=BBmkt5R&oc

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 12:12 PM

I see we've attracted a couple of trolls, both with the first initial J. That said, the biggest problem with the Democratic Parties direction is that they are locked into identity politics.

That's a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics. This is good if you are a minority. Joining forces helps to expand your powers. It is however not right for a political party to do this. They are supposed to represent everyone not just minorities. This is why so many white voters feel disenfranchised from the party and why the party has lost a thousand legislative seats nation wide in the last decade.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 1:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

I said that they wouldn't BECAUSE it's illegal.

I called you on your bullshit, then you turned it into a discrimination issue and tried to paint me to be a bad guy because you lost the argument.

That's just it, beer for brains...all you said was "LOL... try opening a straight Christian only bakery in the US and see how quick that gets shut down." YOU DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT LEGAL. You implied your hated SJW would shut it down, and they do that on occasion.

And as for "legal", ever heard of a GAY BAR? You CAN open a business that caters to a specific clientele and even market that in an oblique way, but cannot refuse service to others. But you probably won't get a whole lot of straight people. SO yeah, they CAN open a bakery and "Serving the Conservative Christian since 1995" because you can make your slogan whatever you want. Probably would still get a gay couple or two, but it would limit the requests. They DON'T because they know they would lose the business of the marginal and non-religious. So it IS all about money.

.

A bakery would be shut down by law that advertised that it was only for straight Christians. Don't be stupid. It would immediately be viewed as discriminatory just by the advertising and they would either be forced by law to immediately change the advertising or face being shut down.

I didn't imply that a bakery that actively catered only to straight Christians would be shut down by SJWs. You inferred that.

Yeah. I've heard of gay bars. Big difference here is that they are a miniority so they are actively protected. Try opening a straight bar and see what happens. (Infer that however you want to). Either way, that gets shut down too.

Why did the democrats ban smoking from all bars instead of letting the market decide? I guaranty that if they repealed those laws that half of the establishments would go back to allowing smoking and their business would boom. The non-smoking establishments would also see a spike in business since non-smokers would tend to only go to the ones that still didn't allow smoking.

You need to take a page out of T's book. I don't agree with almost anything he says, but he gets the identity politics problem of the Democrats today. I don't like being lumped in with Republicans, and I've been against them most of my life. The identity politics have pushed me to the other side though.

Fix your fucking party.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 4:18 PM

rezident owtsidr

Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
I see we've attracted a couple of trolls, both with the first initial J.

Wu?

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 10:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:

Wu?

Joker and JSF, hon.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 10:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

I didn't imply that a bakery that actively catered only to straight Christians would be shut down by SJWs. You inferred that.

Either way, that gets shut down too.

Why did the democrats ban smoking from all bars instead of letting the market decide?

Maybe because you whine about them every thirty seconds?? Can't imagine why I thought that...

We have gay bars HERE.

Are you REALLY advocating for mass crowd poisoning to brought back? When you look in the mirror at your teeth, doesn't that tell you ANYTHING?? You wanna smoke DO IT ON YOUR OWN DUMBASS TIME. THE MARKET doesn't decide public health policy or we would have drive through opioid injectables.

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

Saturday, September 30, 2017 11:23 PM

It's called a pharmacy, kitten.

Don't be naive.

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

Sunday, October 1, 2017 10:11 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

There are no “adults in the room”

Retired General John Kelly's background and experience are unusual for a White House Chief of Staff, but as it happens his final military assignment was as commander of American military forces in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean basin — basically perfect preparation for the crisis that happens to have struck Puerto Rico.

It’s of course entirely possible that things would be going even worse if Reince Priebus were still in charge, but on its face Kelly’s experience does not seem to be doing any good. And that should be a stake through the heart of the notion that some stable of “adults in the room” are going to save the country from having picked a spectacularly inappropriate choice to serve as chief executive.

The one thing we can say for sure is that it’s essentially inconceivable that the next objectively difficult crisis that Trump fumbles will be more in Kelly’s wheelhouse than a disaster requiring a military response in the Caribbean. We’re witnessing the Trump administration at peak performance and it’s appalling. Bismarck supposedly said that God has a special providence for fools, drunks, and the United States of America. If we’re lucky he’ll be proven right and nothing much else bad will happen for the next three years. If not, buckle your seatbelts.

www.vox.com/2017/10/1/16390006/puerto-rico-trump

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

Sunday, October 1, 2017 1:50 PM

Well all we can hope for is that the Democrats fix their party and cast aside the vocal SJW minority and become a party of inclusion again instead of identity politics and they put forward a good candidate against Trump next time.

Trump would have lost to nearly any other Democrat that ran. No. Most people certainly were not with her.

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

Monday, October 2, 2017 3:40 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.

Oh goody! I'm a registered democrat who's totally disgusted by the corrupt deep-state corporatocracy the party has become.

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

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

Monday, October 2, 2017 4:35 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I was going to skip this thread entirely, but seeing as I've been a registered Democrat since I was old enough to vote (that would make it ... ummm ... 45 years) and have voted Democrat almost exclusively my entire life, and am DEFINITELY left-of-center, I guess I belong here.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

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

Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:55 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

I voted for a Democrat once, for President.
My only voting mistake.

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

Tuesday, October 3, 2017 10:19 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I voted for a Democrat once, for President.
My only voting mistake.

And having been a nearly pure Republican, how do you feel about the Republicans' tax plan? I find their plan typical of their governing style:

After a year of work, Republicans have decided nothing on corporate tax reform.

Congress needs to say what it wants the corporate income tax rate to be, and if it wants that tax rate to be 20 percent and it wants to limit the amount by which the deficit increases, then it needs to spell out which loopholes get closed. Doing this in the context of a big, bipartisan deal with Democrats would be challenging, but Republicans would not need almost every Republican Congressman to vote for every specific provision.

But doing it in a Republican only, hyperpartisan process where they’re trying to pass a giant tax cut for rich people that no Democrats will vote for leaves Republicans no room for mistakes. Any industry that wants to save a loophole provision only needs to find three GOP senators — or two dozen House members — to save it. This is presumably why Republican leaders keep not naming names as they go through different iterations of their plan. But unless they find some way to actually reach agreement on the crucial topic of which loopholes, exactly, are being closed, there’s just no way for their tax plan to move ahead. To pass a bill, Republicans will need, at some point, to actually commit some words to paper and spell something out. They have had since Mitt Romney ran for President to write it down so they could pass it. But they haven't started writing.

www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/3/16400412/corporate-tax-refor
m-details

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:36 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Editorial from today's Houston Chronicle blasts ex-governor Rick Perry, now Energy Secretary
www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Sins-of-oil-will-b
e-shouted-from-the-rooftops-12250744.php

. . . Battery costs are falling and renewable energy is becoming cheaper. China, Britain and France have plans to ban gasoline vehicles to help fight global warming. Following other automobile manufacturers, General Motors announced this week that it plans to phase out internal combustion cars and replace them with an electric future.

It doesn’t take a prophet to see that the writing’s on the wall. Houston is going to need all the help we can get as the world transitions to a clean energy future — but don’t expect it to come from Secretary of Energy Rick Perry.

The former governor of Texas has been focusing his efforts on a bizarre plan to subsidize the coal industry. Last week, he directed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to craft a new rule that gives extra compensation to power plants that can store 90 days worth of fuel on site, Bloomberg News reported. This regulation just so happens to specifically fit coal and nuclear plants. Wind turbines and solar panels can’t exactly store a stiff breeze or sunshine. Natural gas power plants rely on pipelines for fuel.

The rule’s stated premise is to reward resiliency — you want power plants ready to go during the worst disaster. It would also distort markets and hand out cash to an industry that simply can’t keep up with a world appropriately concerned about climate change and saturated with cheaper, cleaner natural gas.

“The proposal could essentially prevent coal and nuclear power plants from closing even if they’re not economic to run,” Catherine Traywick and Jim Polson wrote in Bloomberg. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-29/perry-moves-to-aid-coal-nuc
lear-generators-with-pricing-rule

And if Perry really cares about resiliency, then why not encourage more pipelines in Texas fracking fields, or invest in battery storage research? Perhaps Perry’s Department of Energy could even direct some of those research dollars toward Houston, planting the seed money for a future-proof industry.

Because the big storm that Houston needs to prepare for isn’t just the next Hurricane Harvey — it’s an economic storm that threatens to sweep away a century built on oil and gas. Our entire economic model lacks the resiliency we’ll need to survive, and Perry finds himself conveniently positioned to both bolster natural gas as a clean fuel and keep Houston at the center of everything energy.

Instead, he’s giving government handouts to coal country. Looking at his agenda, you can’t help but feel like Perry has all but forgotten about Texas. And in our book, there’s no bigger sin.

It doesn’t take a prophet to see that the writing’s on the wall. Houston is going to need all the help we can get as the world transitions to a clean energy future — but don’t expect it to come from Secretary of Energy Rick Perry.

Trump promises to end the war on coal. "We will have clean coal, really clean coal." Yeah. Nobody can clean coal better than Trump.

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

Wednesday, October 4, 2017 2:11 PM

Nobody in an area that makes money off of oil is going to invest in battery storage technology for 2 reasons.

1. Let somebody else spend that money because we have a long and expensive path to go to make it something that is actually better for the environment when you consider what goes in to making them and what you have to do to dispose of them in the end. (Recharge times and battery life aren't the only important things to improve upon at all).

2. Whenever somebody successfully figures out everything in the first issue, it would make demand for their product fall sharply almost overnight.

A mythical Texas Democrat wouldn't support it either. Don't kid yourself.

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

Thursday, October 5, 2017 8:17 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
Nobody in an area that makes money off of oil is going to invest in battery storage technology for 2 reasons.

You ain't right about "Nobody" investing. The 1% don't have economic control of everybody in Texas, it only seems like they do but they really only control the wage-slaves in the lower 99% who were born to follow their wealthy superiors. There is a professor who invented the lithium-ion battery and works at the University of Texas at Austin. If the oil barons of Texas had the control of everybody you imagine, the barons would have shut him down. And he has got another battery, better than lithium-ion. Give it twenty or thirty years for the new battery to go from laboratory to a consumer product (for electric cars), about the same amount of time as lithium-ion.
https://news.utexas.edu/2017/02/28/goodenough-introduces-new-battery-t
echnology

Off to another subject explained in a manner only Democrats would believe:

The world learned a counterintuitive but central insight about capitalism during the 20th century: It’s just too productive. It tends to create much more supply than there is effective demand.

This doesn’t mean that capitalist countries don’t have children who go hungry or people who need to buy a new car but can’t. Far from it. Rather, it means that capitalism is extraordinarily inventive and usually generates the physical ability to produce that food and those cars — but not enough customers who can afford to buy it all. Simultaneously, there will be a small number of billionaires at the top with far more money than they could ever spend.

These frequent gluts of supply are why capitalist economies often fall into slow growth and even long-term recessions and depressions. When there’s more stuff than can be bought, factories fire some of the workers making it, then the workers who were fired are forced to buy less, then the factories fire more people, in an ongoing vicious cycle.

One of the best weapons against this, as the U.S. and the rest of the world discovered by ending the Great Depression via World War II, is for the government to run deficits by cutting taxes or increasing spending or both. Well-designed deficits will put money in the pocket of people who don’t have much and will spend it.

But even if deficits generally make life better for most people, from the perspective of the 1 percent, they’re politically repellent. A fast-growing economy means low unemployment, which puts more power in the hands of workers and less in the hands of employers. It also may generate higher prices, which reduce the value of most kinds of bonds. (A classic explanation of why we have the ability to choose to create economic booms, and the intense resistance among the rich to their countries making such a choice, is the 1943 article, “Political Aspects of Full Employment” by Polish economist Michael Kalecki.)

Thus, Republicans pretend to care about deficits during Democratic administrations because they’re desperate to prevent their opponents from benefiting from deficits’ positive effects. Meanwhile, Democratic deficits are often run up with social spending rather than tax cuts, which Republicans oppose because they worry the spending will lead to future tax hikes. (And some just don’t like social spending, period.) But when the GOP takes power, it immediately discards its rhetoric to try to utilize deficits’ usefulness for themselves.

https://theintercept.com/2017/10/03/donald-trumps-disgusting-remark-on
-puerto-rico-is-more-revealing-than-he-knows/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Thursday, October 5, 2017 9:06 PM

The problem is that Democrats on the other hand don't care about deficits at all.

I think we have a thread about the rest of the world doing what they can to untie the US dollar from oil as a result of our deficit.

Deficit spending doesn't fix anything by itself. It's only creating more problems.

And don't kid yourself. People have died for alternative energy solutions before. I'm amazed that we're actually making some progress on that front now. I only believe that it is allowed to happen these days because people who control everything see the writing on the wall. Alternative energy will come, but it will be on their timetable and they will still make all the money off of it when it does.

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

Friday, October 6, 2017 7:07 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
The problem is that Democrats on the other hand don't care about deficits at all.

I think we have a thread about the rest of the world doing what they can to untie the US dollar from oil as a result of our deficit.

Deficit spending doesn't fix anything by itself. It's only creating more problems.

And don't kid yourself. People have died for alternative energy solutions before. I'm amazed that we're actually making some progress on that front now. I only believe that it is allowed to happen these days because people who control everything see the writing on the wall. Alternative energy will come, but it will be on their timetable and they will still make all the money off of it when it does.

The Republican Congress wants to increase the deficit in order to give the wealthy a tax cut. Congress might not pass it because some Republicans and most Democrats won't vote for it, but the tax cut is always a GOP project, decade after decade.
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-05/gop-budget-kicks-off-effort
-on-tax-cuts-now-comes-the-hard-part

What if Trump gets lucky enough to end the inheritance tax because some Democrats act stupid by voting for Trump's tax cut? What will the rich (and Trump's family after he is dead) do with their extra money? They might do a little more charitable giving, not more than one tenth, but mostly they will buy more stocks, bonds, buildings and politicians. They are buying more control of the USA. That won't do good for 6stringJoker, but he probably doesn't care enough to be a force not to be ignored by the wealthy and their government. What Congress should be doing is a tax increase to force the wealthy to sell stocks, bonds, buildings. The wealthy would have less and less control over the USA as the years slowly go by. But that ain't gonna happen, is it? 6stringJack doesn't care very much, the vast majority don't care, while the wealthy are extremely passionate about increasing their control. Their energetic search for more money and their long range planning is why they are getting wealthier and more in control. The lower classes are too indifferent, too ignorant, too slow to stop what is happening. They only take action once every four years, but the wealthy keep at it 365 times a year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Friday, October 6, 2017 1:25 PM

You make some good points, but you ruin them with your partisanship.

Democrats are not the friends of the "99%" you make them out to be.

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

Friday, October 6, 2017 2:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
I see we've attracted a couple of trolls, both with the first initial J. That said, the biggest problem with the Democratic Parties direction is that they are locked into identity politics.

That's a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics. This is good if you are a minority. Joining forces helps to expand your powers. It is however not right for a political party to do this. They are supposed to represent everyone not just minorities. This is why so many white voters feel disenfranchised from the party and why the party has lost a thousand legislative seats nation wide in the last decade.

I'll say it again.The biggest problem with the Democratic Parties direction is that they are locked into identity politics.

That's a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics. This is good if you are a minority. Joining forces helps to expand your powers. It is however not right for a political party to do this. They are supposed to represent everyone not just minorities. This is why so many white voters feel disenfranchised from the party and why the party has lost a thousand legislative seats nation wide in the last decade.

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

Friday, October 6, 2017 3:33 PM

I will agree with that again.

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

Friday, October 6, 2017 3:39 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
I will agree with that again.

Me too. I think hell just froze over.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

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

Saturday, October 7, 2017 6:14 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
You make some good points, but you ruin them with your partisanship.

Democrats are not the friends of the "99%" you make them out to be.

Some people voted for Trump, the richest President in history, because he could not be bought. But selling themselves as indispensable men is what the rich do to become wealthy.

Here is another extract only for Democrats. A Republican might say "You make some good points, but you ruin them with your partisanship", but it does not mention D's or R's, it simply does not respect some ideas that R's think were handed down by God as part of natural law:

www.edge.org/conversation/tim_oreilly-reality-is-an-activity-of-the-mo
st-august-imagination

I remember a conversation I had with Walt Mossberg in which he recounted a conversation he had with Steve Ballmer who, at the times, was the CEO of Microsoft. He told me he’d said, "Steve, if you guys would be 5 percent less greedy, the world would like you 100 percent more." I'm now watching that dynamic play out again with Google where, despite their "don't be evil" philosophy, they're becoming the focus of antitrust investigations.

I look at these patterns in platforms in which they start out with a burst of optimism and creation of public value, then gradually they start turning away from that. I'm trying to understand why that is.

It seems to me that the same pattern we've seen with technology platforms is playing out today in our broader economy, where financial markets in particular have turned into an extractive monopoly rather than a support system for our economy. Something like 85 percent of all corporate "investment" today goes to dividends and share buybacks. Very little goes to actual investment in people, building things, and R&D. It's all going into financial gamesmanship.

Looking at the pattern of algorithmic systems like Google and Facebook, I started thinking about how that applies to financial markets. A system like Google has hundreds of factors that are being taken into account, but they all have a master objective function, a fitness function, which is relevance in search results and ads.

Facebook's fitness function, their objective function, is to produce content that's engaging. We saw how that went wrong with fake news. Mark and the Facebook team are trying to deal with that. They're wrestling with the fact that they had this idea about how to build an engaging product, and it's been subverted.

I look at our economic system where inequality is increasing, and I ask myself: Is that also a system that's dominated by an algorithm? What are they trying to optimize for?

I started to realize that thirty or forty years ago was the point we told companies that there's only one thing to optimize for, and that is shareholder value. That's the point in the '70s where you see this great divergence between the increased productivity brought on by technology and the actual benefit to the economy, where you see inequality soar, where you see people not doing as well as their parents. I came around to thinking that in some ways financial markets are that rogue AI that people like Elon Musk have been talking about.

Nick Bostrom and Elon Musk and everybody use these artificial thought experiments, like the AI which follows its objective function of making paperclips. Musk used one recently about the strawberry-picking robot that decides humans are in the way of its picking strawberries. Those aren't realistic. What is realistic is a world in which you have an increasingly algorithmic financial system saying, "Hey, optimize for corporate profit because it drives stock price. Never mind what happens to the people. Never mind what happens to society." We're in that AI-driven situation.

What do we do about that? How do we debug the objective function of an increasingly automated economy, of an economy that's dominated by systems that are, to use a great quote from Wallace Stevens, "without human feeling, without human meaning, a foreign song"? We're living in a world which is dominated by a system that disregards human value. A great quote comes to mind from a guy named Andrew Singer. Many years ago he said to me, "The art of debugging a computer program is to figure out what you really told the computer to do instead of what you thought you told it to do." Right now, Facebook is engaged in this struggle, as is Google.

We have to do the same thing in our society. We had a theory that if we optimized for shareholder value and corporate profit, and if we aligned the interest of shareholders and the interests of management, companies would prosper and the economy would prosper. Now, thirty or forty years on, we're looking at it and realizing it didn't quite work out that way. So what do we replace it with?

If you think back to the Middle Ages, everybody believed in the divine right of kings. Right now, everybody believes in the divine right of capital. It's only “natural” that the owners of businesses and the owners of capital should try to extract as much as possible for themselves and leave society in the lurch, and that they should basically treat people as a cost to be eliminated. We accept that. We simply believe that that's the way the world works. We ignore things that run contrary to that. We have this sense that the way the world is today, that the story we tell ourselves about the world is somehow true.

More at www.edge.org/conversation/tim_oreilly-reality-is-an-activity-of-the-mo
st-august-imagination

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Saturday, October 7, 2017 11:40 AM

rezident owtsidr

Good article.

Wen skamz and mistakes are too big, peepl cant see them.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

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

Saturday, October 7, 2017 1:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Good article.

Wen skamz and mistakes are too big, peepl cant see them.

Gee... you mean like everybody who voted for Hillary?

It's not as if the Democrats had anybody decent up against Trump.

You've got 3 years. Do something about that.

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

Saturday, October 7, 2017 11:34 PM

OONJERAH

If Hillary was popular (she's not), that'd be one thing.
She hoped to become the first woman president of the USA.

The USA may not be ready for that, despite all our talk of equality.
On a ticket with a popular male candidate for pres, had she run for
vice-president, easier for voters to accept that role.

Evenso, I think there are many women politicians in the USA who are
more respected than Hillary.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

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

Sunday, October 8, 2017 12:20 AM

Hillary would never have run as VP. Way too big of an ego.

She technically did win the popular vote. I think a lot of people who voted for Trump were simply voting against the Clinton family and the status quo.

I think say, a female version of Bernie Sanders would have won by a landslide against Trump.

I don't think it had much to do with a fact she was a woman in the end. Sure, there are some people who were voting against that, but they generally speaking would have been voting against any democrat these days for a lot of other reasons anyhow.

You guys (and gals) just put the wrong woman up. She's just a shitty person all around. If you put another woman up next time, I suggest that it be somebody people actually like. Don't want to make a streak of females losing in that race and set a precedent of it.

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 2:08 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Good article.
Wen skamz and mistakes are too big, peepl cant see them.

The article is trying to make the point that it isn't a question of "skamz" ... not even BIG skamz ... but a SYSTEMS problem. That's why they keep using the word "algorithm".

That's the point that I've been trying to make: It doesn't matter how honest, or greedy, any particular business people are. Once you set up a system of rewards (a system or algorithm) it tends to impose its logic on the people who are in it.

For example, let's assume that you have a very generous business person who pays workers, salespeople, and suppliers fairly. Mr/Ms Generous doesn't make as large of a profit as Mr/Ms Chiseler, who pays poorly. Mr/Ms Chiseler can use that profit to expand. Eventually, Mr/Ms Chiseler can even buy up Mr/Ms Generous.

Play that out over multiple iterations of multiple businesses, and eventually you'll see that the businesses which make the largest profit are the ones who "win" the business space, because those are the rules of the game. Because there are very few ethical requirements on businesses ... and there are reasons why that's so, but I don't want to get into that now ... the least ethical will always overtake the most ethical, given time.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 4:29 AM

rezident owtsidr

I agree.

Wun Goverment's main jobz iz to keep companyz from running amok.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 5:43 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Play that out over multiple iterations of multiple businesses, and eventually you'll see that the businesses which make the largest profit are the ones who "win" the business space, because those are the rules of the game. Because there are very few ethical requirements on businesses ... and there are reasons why that's so, but I don't want to get into that now ... the least ethical will always overtake the most ethical, given time.

That is because one particular party (I can't say which because saying always causes 6stringJoker to stop thinking since the conversation is now "partisan" ) despises the idea of government enforcing ethics. With that unnamed political party, it's always the "Market" that will enforce better behavior.

I'll give you an example of the difference between the two parties from yesterday's Houston Chronicle:
www.pressreader.com/usa/houston-chronicle-sunday/20171008/284064846941
489

CEO Smith told Congress that Equifax’s failure was caused by one person failing to make sure a manual patch was applied to vulnerable software. He chalked it up to one human’s error.

A closer examination, though, shows a pattern of his executive team taking shortcuts on cybersecurity. For example, personally identifying information was not encrypted, and executives scheduled security reviews only once a quarter.

The data breach may ultimately generate higher profits for Equifax and its competitors.

Smith need not fear any criminal consequences, though.

The Federal Trade Commission may sue Atlanta-based Equifax for the leak under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, but the settlements rarely amount to more than a slap on the wrist. Consumers can bring a class action lawsuit, but odds of a significant settlement are slim. And under current U.S. law, consumers can’t stop Equifax from stockpiling our personal information.

“I never said it was OK to have all my information, and now I want out. I want to lock out Equifax. Can I do that?” Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., asked Smith on Tuesday. [Did you notice it was a Democrat saying this?]

“That requires a much broader discussion around the role of the credit reporting agencies,” Smith said, dodging the question.

The data breach may ultimately generate higher profits for Equifax and its competitors because more consumers will need to pay for credit monitoring and freezes.

Democrats have proposed legislation that would force credit agencies to offer free credit freezes, but no Republicans have signed on. Democrats have also proposed giving more power to federal regulators to protect consumer data, but again, there is no Republican support. [Did you notice it was Republicans not supporting change?]

At a time when President Donald Trump is promising fewer regulations, Republicans don’t want to give more authority to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Obama-era agency that the president has promised to eliminate.

That leaves consumers paying credit agencies not to share our information.

A credit freeze, though, only prevents a criminal from obtaining a new credit card or loan using your information. A freeze does nothing to stop thieves from accessing your existing credit cards or bank accounts, which constitutes 86 percent of identity fraud cases, according to Bureau of Justice statistics.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

The European Union has much stricter rules protecting a person’s right to privacy and sets very high cybersecurity standards on companies and government agencies that possess sensitive personal information. . . .

More at www.pressreader.com/usa/houston-chronicle-sunday/20171008/284064846941
489

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 8:53 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
That is because one particular party (I can't say which because saying always causes 6stringJoker to stop thinking since the conversation is now "partisan" ) despises the idea of government enforcing ethics. With that unnamed political party, it's always the "Market" that will enforce better behavior.

Oh, you mean like how Bill Clinton set in motion the 2008 financial mayhem by repealing Glass-Steagall and signing the Commodities Futures Trading Act, promoting runaway corporations with various "free trade" agreements, and rewarding a "rentier" economy of ideas by promoting the DMCA?

[snark] You mean like how Obama sent those writers of fraudulent mortgages and fraudulent investment products to jail; sternly allowing "market forces" to crush those "too big to fail" banks by allowing them to fail instead of bailing them out; re-instituting Glass Steagall; refusing to sign the extortionate "bail in" procedures which allow banks to dip into their depositors' accounts to make themselves whole; re-industrializing the USA and restoring our sovereignty by repudiating the various "free trade" agreements and their extra-judicial secret trade tribunals; and disallowing nearly all of the M&A's which came before the SEC for approval? [/snark]

You mean like THAT Democratic enforcement of honest business practices and promotion of competition?

SECOND, I'd be the last person to say that Republicans enforce better business practices, but then - neither do Dems. All you have to do is look at the results: That xfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, which began under Reagan? It continued unabated whether the President had a "D" or an "R" after his name; and Bush's business policies continued without a hiccup under Obama. And like I said, if you don't believe me, just look at the results.

There is SO MUCH systemically wrong with our entire business system, starting with fractional reserve banking, any President who attempted to reverse course on anything fundamental would be assassinated in short order. Again, not dependent on whether there was a "D" or an "R" after their name.

But if you want some ideas on how to REALLY reform the system:

Get rid of fractional reserve lending. Lending money that an institution doesn't have is really money-creation; which means that SOME institutions get to "print money" for profit, while most of the rest of us have to WORK for a living.

Revise incorporation laws to require ethical standards in their business practices; right now, corps only have to mind their "fiduciary duty" to their shareholders. Create a "death penalty" - i.e. forced disbandment - for corporations which fail to meet their ethical standards, in addition to punishing individual decision-makers.

Another possibility is to simply require that all businesses be owned by their employees.

Either do away with the stock market entirely, or ban stock trades that take place in less than six months after purchase. The stock market used to be a reasonable way for a company to raise cash for investment; now it's just a gambling casino of microsecond speculation: a travesty of what it was supposed to be.

I don't even know WHAT to do with hedge funds and derivatives! The only thing I can hope for is that if their source of cheap funding (money conjured out of thin air by investment banks) is shut off, the speculation will be shut off too.

Reverse Citizen's United. Remove "personhood" from corporate status by Congressional law. Define "free speech" as speech that one does not have to pay to have distributed; any bought-and-paid-for speech is automatically considered "advertising", even if it's news.

Redefine anti-trust action as not just applying to "monopolistic practices" but also to corporations over a certain size.

Revise corporate tax law to make it similar to individual income tax law; institute a Value Added Tax to be applied at the point of manufacture or assembly; eliminate most of the specialized deductions, exemptions, depreciations, and expenses which benefit mostly large corporations.

Re-institute a "border tax" to promote domestic manufacturing.

Nationalize certain important and infrastructural businesses, like health care insurance, electrical distribution, and energy extraction. Create a REAL national bank, not just a private bank which lends to the US government. Foster the creation of state and local banks.

That's just for starters.

Let the screaming begin!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 11:56 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

My proposal for "free speech" just met with some resistance. Long story but there are unintended consequences with my proposal. So maybe simply have a democratically-elected commission run the internet instead, just like the government maintains the interstates.

This thing with Equifax ... it's just nibbling around the edges of "what is wrong with our system" by attacking a momentarily unpopular business, but it doesn't solve the fundamental problem of a system based entirely on profit (to the exclusion of everything else).

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 12:40 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.

So, I'm going to start with a mention of Trump. Whether by accident or design, in international terms, he's doing exactly what the Deep State wants him to do*.

Even better, the Deep State gets to coast. Consider the alternative, under Hillary. Can you imagine how much fluffing of the American public it would take to get this all done with Hillary instead? Yeah, she's on-board and all that, but, wow. They'd have to make all this look statesman-like. Done with regrets and after deep and serious consideration of the potential consequences. With nothing but freedom, justice, and the American way in mind. We'd be treated to a full-on propaganda campaign, the likes of which we haven't yet seen, not even for Hussein's purported WMDs. Because, without all the kabuki, it would look like the foregone result of an uncaring party being crammed down the throats of a powerless populace.

And that in fact is the function of the 'democratic party'. To bring us on-board with things that hurt us but benefit business and internationalists - people like the Podestas, for example. People with agendas who view us as less than pawns.

*After they stopped Trump from normalizing relations with Russia (through an unrelenting and Deep State/ media coordinated campaign that included daily anonymous leaks and unevidenced claims) everything else was a bonus. And if Trump was doing something significantly challenging to the Deep State at the moment, he'd either not be alive, or not in power.

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 5:21 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

SECOND, I'd be the last person to say that Republicans enforce better business practices, but then - neither do Dems. All you have to do is look at the results: That xfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, which began under Reagan? It continued unabated whether the President had a "D" or an "R" after his name; and Bush's business policies continued without a hiccup under Obama. And like I said, if you don't believe me, just look at the results.

There is SO MUCH systemically wrong with our entire business system, starting with fractional reserve banking, any President who attempted to reverse course on anything fundamental would be assassinated in short order. Again, not dependent on whether there was a "D" or an "R" after their name.

But if you want some ideas on how to REALLY reform the system:

Get rid of fractional reserve lending.
Revise incorporation laws to require ethical standards in their business practices; Create a "death penalty" - i.e. forced disbandment - for corporations which fail to meet their ethical standards, in addition to punishing individual decision-makers.
Either do away with the stock market entirely, or ban stock trades that take place in less than six months after purchase.
I don't even know WHAT to do with hedge funds and derivatives!
Reverse Citizen's United.
Redefine anti-trust action as not just applying to "monopolistic practices" but also to corporations over a certain size.

Revise corporate tax law to make it similar to individual income tax law; institute a Value Added Tax to be applied at the point of manufacture or assembly; eliminate most of the specialized deductions, exemptions, depreciations, and expenses which benefit mostly large corporations.

Re-institute a "border tax" to promote domestic manufacturing.

Nationalize certain important and infrastructural businesses, like health care insurance, electrical distribution, and energy extraction. Create a REAL national bank, not just a private bank which lends to the US government. Foster the creation of state and local banks.

That's just for starters.

Signym, you started with the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans. I don't believe that is true. Politics is entertainment for the masses and Democrats are the equivalent of documentary makers, while Republicans make the equivalent of Hollywood's summer movies. Note that even the very best documentary Oscar-winners get far less attention than the crappiest comic book movie.
www.imdb.com/list/ls000528998/

Signym's reforms all revolve around money. The cheaters can make money very fast, sometimes within seconds, but when they are caught cheating, their money can't be taken away quickly. It's months, years, but most of the time, never does the money get returned that the cheater stole. You need to devise a system with less friction when returning stolen wealth. Since Firefly is science fiction, can America do away with money completely to make that happen? I think it could be done, but the cheaters would fight that change even harder than they fight to hold on to money they steal under the present system, the one they have been building all their lives.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

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

Monday, October 9, 2017 5:56 PM