Political & socio-economic nerd-rage thread. page 40

[kenn]

Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Hobbes......uh sure, I guess.

What does that mean?

[kenn]

Neither of those are tied to color.

Go away.

[Rojo]

Culture

Huh?

population density, and population spread.

Australia's less dense and more spread out than we are. Yet they have universal healthcare.

Go away.

So you can enjoy the "libertarian" wank-fest?

[Rojo]

That. is. hot.

[magicmerl]

Either you are a leech, or you are not.

I think that this is too black and white.

When I was born, I was costing the state money via the medical services they they funded. Does that make me a leech?

When I went through the schooling system, the education services I used were wholly or partly funded by the government. Does that make me a leech?

I found myself between jobs. I applied for and received the unemployment benefit (newsflash: It was not enough to live on). Does that make me a leech?

Perhaps, before judging people, you should walk a mile in their people's shoes first.

So you can enjoy the "libertarian" wank-fest?

That is how I interpret that comment.

[magicmerl]

You assume I have not had my own hardships in life, and that I have not had my own issues. I got myself out of various situations where I needed help. Not everyone can, but those that could, should.

No, I don't assume that. I think that everybody goes through hardships and has issues. Everybody gets in situations where they need help sometimes. Calling people you don't know a 'leech' seems like ignorant slander.

It reminds me of a conversation I had (in america, funnily enough) where the person I was talking to was telling me why america could never have a woman president. "Because some foreign diplomat will speak to her in a low voice and she'll give away nuclear secrets'. I questioned why she had such a low opinion of her mother, who could be so easily swayed. She answered that that it didn't apply to her mother or any other women she personally knew, it was female politicians the idea applied to.

I think that if you are making generalisations about people in general that are not true about specific people you know (or ONLY apply to those specific people) then perhaps that generalisation is a false one.

Changing the subject, if this had actually been implemented, would it have made america a better or worse country than it is today?

[Grok]

Changing the subject, if this had actually been implemented, would it have made america a better or worse country than it is today?

Anything out of the mind of FDR will make the country worse.

[kenn]

Anything out of the mind of FDR will make the country worse.

Yet we use so many of the policies...

[kenn]

No, I don't assume that. I think that everybody goes through hardships and has issues. Everybody gets in situations where they need help sometimes. Calling people you don't know a 'leech' seems like ignorant slander.

It reminds me of a conversation I had (in america, funnily enough) where the person I was talking to was telling me why america could never have a woman president. "Because some foreign diplomat will speak to her in a low voice and she'll give away nuclear secrets'. I questioned why she had such a low opinion of her mother, who could be so easily swayed. She answered that that it didn't apply to her mother or any other women she personally knew, it was female politicians the idea applied to.

I think that if you are making generalisations about people in general that are not true about specific people you know (or ONLY apply to those specific people) then perhaps that generalisation is a false one.

Changing the subject, if this had actually been implemented, would it have made america a better or worse country than it is today?

Considerkng Hoovers and FDRs policies kept us in a great depression and ignored the proven example of what to do in the recession of 1920-21, it would've only made things worse.

[magicmerl]

I guess the government can't pay for anything without taxes.