Page 119 of 364 FirstFirst ... 1969109115116117118119120121122123129169219 ... LastLast
Results 1,771 to 1,785 of 5447
  1. #1771
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    11,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnakinFlair View Post
    Forgive me, but wasn't trickle-down economics a CONSERVATIVE fantasy? I always equate that to Ronald Reagan.
    Neo-liberalism has bought into as well, but I think you are correct in identifying where it entered the mainstream.
    "Theory: The Phoenix doesn't corrupt the characters, it corrupts the authors." Gambit, King of Thieves

  2. #1772
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    Neo-liberalism has bought into as well, but I think you are correct in identifying where it entered the mainstream.
    Could you cute some evidence for this? It seems to me neo-liberalism has moved further away. Just my sense, though.

  3. #1773
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,085

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesonAnders View Post
    In today's world, Reagan was a liberal. Haven't you learned that yet?
    Nah, all Reagan was is a better president than Trump, which is the lowest of the low bar bars to clear and he was an absolute monster. This isn't about redeeming him as much as how badly Trump messed up in office. That's how bad he's perceived by Democrats.

  4. #1774
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    11,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    I agree that a lot of police officers are treated unfairly. Everything from slurs and insults to being attacked. Just because a person chooses to be a police offier, and that person knows they are putting them selves in harms way it does not make it okay for a criminal to attack that person. When I was in prison I heard so many stories from other inmates. Both white and black about how they resisted arrest and how they attacked the police. They were laughing about it like it was a joke and the funniest thing in the world.

    Just because a person puts on a badge does not make them racist, it does not make them a thug. There are good cops, there are bad cops. Police are just like any other people. Good and bad. I have respect for a lot of cops. Not all. I have run into some bad ones. The night I was arrested I was taken in by two police and a detective. One cop was not a jerk. The other cop treated me like shit. The detective was in the middle. He was trying to get the facts. He was not polite but he was not a dick. I had more problems with my corrections officers and parole officers more then the police.

    Police do need to be held accountable because of the power they hold. Sadly I have seen police and unions fighting this. In my town they fought tooth and nail against body cameras.
    Part of the issue here is the system seems set up to make the good cops afraid of the bad ones. There often seems to be a 'snitches get stitches (if lucky)" mentality in police departments that can put organized crime's code to shame. Pair this up with an expansive view of "Qualified Immunity" that shields police from almost any form of accountability - things like SCotUS rulings that 'you have no established right not to be killed in your own home", "no established right to not have property confiscated without due process of law", and "that these actions are admittedly retaliatory in nature in no way removes the protections of qualified immunity."

    Basically, there is a LOT of work that needs to be done, and I have barely scratched the surface.
    "Theory: The Phoenix doesn't corrupt the characters, it corrupts the authors." Gambit, King of Thieves

  5. #1775
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    Nah, all Reagan was is a better president than Trump, which is the lowest of the low bar bars to clear and he was an absolute monster. This isn't about redeeming him as much as how badly Trump messed up in office. That's how bad he's perceived by Democrats.
    About 40% of the country believes Trump is the high bar

  6. #1776
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,085

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesonAnders View Post
    About 40% of the country believes Trump is the high bar
    They're Republicans, of course they're going to do that. I was speaking from a Democratic perspective of Republican presidents, it's not like the GOP didn't love W. when he was president.

    Edit: That's just a thing Republican presidents, there's no bar to clear with that. The "bar" is from a Democratic perspective, to the GOP Trump's a legend just like very other Republican president when they were in office.
    Last edited by Steel Inquisitor; 05-28-2020 at 04:59 PM.

  7. #1777
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    11,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesonAnders View Post
    Could you cute some evidence for this? It seems to me neo-liberalism has moved further away. Just my sense, though.
    Here's the Wikipedia definition of neoliberalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    "Neoliberalism" is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing state influence in the economy, especially through privatization and austerity.
    That lines up fairly closely to with what 'free market conservatives' claim to want - although I think that what we have now is really just people laying claim to that title, but want the government to provide a guaranteed income and freedom from any level of oversight (while simultaneously putting up expensive regulatory roadblocks to any potential new competition)
    Last edited by Gray Lensman; 05-28-2020 at 05:05 PM.
    "Theory: The Phoenix doesn't corrupt the characters, it corrupts the authors." Gambit, King of Thieves

  8. #1778
    Astonishing Member PwrdOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnakinFlair View Post
    I'm waiting for that as well.




    Forgive me, but wasn't trickle-down economics a CONSERVATIVE fantasy? I always equate that to Ronald Reagan.
    Even though we usually talk about liberalism and conservatism as diametric opposites, strictly speaking they don't have to be. Liberalism is basically in favor of free markets, free trade, free everything, whereas conservatism is in favor of traditional values and social hierarchies, but in the world of the 1980s, those at the top of the socioeconomic ladder also just so happened to be the ones that would benefit from free trade policies. Historically, liberalism fell out of favor in the early 20th century since both socialism on the left and fascism on the right favored greater government control of economic activity, and so neoliberalism sort of represented a revival of the free market policies of the 18th and 19th centuries.

  9. #1779
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    9,931

    Default

    45's EO on Twitter reads like one of his Adderall rants from his TV snorting days.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  10. #1780
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnakinFlair View Post
    Forgive me, but wasn't trickle-down economics a CONSERVATIVE fantasy? I always equate that to Ronald Reagan.
    “Neoliberalism is a term for different social and economic ideas. Neoliberalism is characterized by free market trade, deregulation of financial markets, individualisation, and the shift away from state welfare provision.”

    So basically the opposite of social democracy.

  11. #1781
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    Even though we usually talk about liberalism and conservatism as diametric opposites, strictly speaking they don't have to be. Liberalism is basically in favor of free markets, free trade, free everything, whereas conservatism is in favor of traditional values and social hierarchies, but in the world of the 1980s, those at the top of the socioeconomic ladder also just so happened to be the ones that would benefit from free trade policies. Historically, liberalism fell out of favor in the early 20th century since both socialism on the left and fascism on the right favored greater government control of economic activity, and so neoliberalism sort of represented a revival of the free market policies of the 18th and 19th centuries.
    I should’ve read this before posting! Much better description.

    So we can all see why Zuckerberg is the way he is. Hell, Steve Jobs morphed into an asshole as well.

  12. #1782
    Extraordinary Member Malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Freeville, NY
    Posts
    8,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    I agree that a lot of police officers are treated unfairly. Everything from slurs and insults to being attacked. Just because a person chooses to be a police offier, and that person knows they are putting them selves in harms way it does not make it okay for a criminal to attack that person. When I was in prison I heard so many stories from other inmates. Both white and black about how they resisted arrest and how they attacked the police. They were laughing about it like it was a joke and the funniest thing in the world.

    Just because a person puts on a badge does not make them racist, it does not make them a thug. There are good cops, there are bad cops. Police are just like any other people. Good and bad. I have respect for a lot of cops. Not all. I have run into some bad ones. The night I was arrested I was taken in by two police and a detective. One cop was not a jerk. The other cop treated me like shit. The detective was in the middle. He was trying to get the facts. He was not polite but he was not a dick. I had more problems with my corrections officers and parole officers more then the police.

    Police do need to be held accountable because of the power they hold. Sadly I have seen police and unions fighting this. In my town they fought tooth and nail against body cameras.
    We have to stop encouraging high school bullies to enroll in the Police Academy so they can become government sanctioned bullies. As it is, we have too many Eliot Stablers and not enough Olivia Bensons.
    Watching television is not an activity.

  13. #1783
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerWarning View Post
    I'm in no way defending the cops in the Floyd incident. As I said bare minimum the cop on top of him was grossly negligent by keeping him a position with a high risk of positional asphyxia and then made it even worse by telling him to get up over and over while staying on top of him. I haven't seen a cop online (I'm in a lot of police facebook groups) who isn't saying **** him for making us all look bad.

    I don't have an easy answer. Both sides seem way too entrenched to really listen to the other. To really make progress cops have to accept that sometimes cops are bad or really **** up . . . case in point the Floyd case. Likewise the other side sometimes needs to stop defending actual criminals who are trying to seriously harm and kill cops like Michael Brown.
    How many cops have spoken out these killers in the Floyd case? How many cops or police groups or police unions EVER speak out against police brutality or extrajudicial killings of predominantly African-Americans? My larger point is people don't choose to be black. People don't choose to have their civil rights constantly violated. Cops choose to be cops. And what are the consequences been for killing African-Americans now, or in the past? Not much. That's what I mean when I say less than human. People know there are gonna be consequences if you verbally or physically assault or kill a cop. What about the reverse?

    Look at Justine Damond and the effort that went to prosecute her killer because she was a white woman. Then look at the efforts to prosecute cops that kill African-Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post

    Police do need to be held accountable because of the power they hold. Sadly I have seen police and unions fighting this. In my town they fought tooth and nail against body cameras.
    And would body cameras have been necessary if cops didn't go around violating people's human rights and killing people?


    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    Part of the issue here is the system seems set up to make the good cops afraid of the bad ones. There often seems to be a 'snitches get stitches (if lucky)" mentality in police departments that can put organized crime's code to shame. Pair this up with an expansive view of "Qualified Immunity" that shields police from almost any form of accountability - things like SCotUS rulings that 'you have no established right not to be killed in your own home", "no established right to not have property confiscated without due process of law", and "that these actions are admittedly retaliatory in nature in no way removes the protections of qualified immunity."

    Basically, there is a LOT of work that needs to be done, and I have barely scratched the surface.
    Exactly. And who is most likely going to be impacted by these court rulings? Well, it ain't white people.

  14. #1784
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerWarning View Post
    You say that but what most don't realize just how frequently cops are being shot and sometimes killed.

    In just the last few hours a cop was shot and killed in Ogden, Utah and another shot and injured.

    https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/5/...n-ogden-police

    In the last 24 hrs at least two others have been shot, one critically in Ohio.

    https://www.nbc4i.com/news/local-new...east-columbus/

    Cops are being shot on a near daily basis. Body armor and training means many survive but it happens to cops on a daily basis.

    Yes the cops in the Floyd incident at bare minimum are guilty of gross negligience. But these things only happen sporadically. Meanwhile multiple cops will be shot each week. But stoking racial fires gets more page clicks than another cop shot so you don't hear about them in most media.
    Looking at the statistics, 48 cops were shot to death last year. Three died from assault. Seven died from vehicular assault.

    https://www.odmp.org/search/year?year=2019

    Every death is a tragedy, but it doesn't stand to reason that more police officers are murdered on the line of duty than kill someone unnecessarily.



    Quote Originally Posted by AnakinFlair View Post
    I'm waiting for that as well.




    Forgive me, but wasn't trickle-down economics a CONSERVATIVE fantasy? I always equate that to Ronald Reagan.
    Trickle-down economics doesn't really exist as an economic policy. It's more of a caricature.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ie_121142.html

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy_hansen View Post
    “Neoliberalism is a term for different social and economic ideas. Neoliberalism is characterized by free market trade, deregulation of financial markets, individualisation, and the shift away from state welfare provision.”

    So basically the opposite of social democracy.
    If it's a term for different ideas, doesn't that suggest it's a meaningless buzzword?
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  15. #1785
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    You generally only really "consider" the facts that you deem worthy of consideration -- such as when I tell you about how racist police have harassed me many times personally or how Republicans routinely suppress African-American votes and you respond by claiming in so many words that's not your problem and instead ask for "policy" suggestions that your Republican compatriots will not only never enact, but have already blocked and rolled back when proposed by the Democrats.

    It's nothing "personal" Mets -- I've tried to engage you repeatedly on the basis of facts alone and you've routinely dodged or ignored them.

    We don't all have the dubious privilege of being able to ignore when "minorities" are being systemically oppressed -- and even killed -- due to a lack of concern from Republicans for the poor and people of color, epecially when many of said Republicans are the individuals who are promoting and legislating and benefitting from the policies that enable this kind of oppression, bigotry and abuse.



    You can keep trying to call that "personal" all you want -- so long as you remember that it's your party that made it personal with it's overt racism and bigotry towards individuals like myself and many others on this forum -- Trump is only a symptom, not the cause, and you know this.

    You didn't even bother to address the facts provided -- including video evidence -- regarding Republicans cutting the education budget.

    Not that I expect you (or your party) to do so in an objective manner regardless -- that's not based on bias but "personal" experience.
    If you're making statements about me as an individual, of course it's personal. It's about the person making the comment, rather than what was actually said.

    There is no obligation to respond to any point in a public forum. It could be seen as suspicious if I don't respond to a relevant point, but that does require the point to be relevant. If I note that education spending is high in the United States, and that the problem isn't how much we're spending, a comment about Republicans cutting education budgets doesn't address the question of whether money is spent wisely.

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    There's a bit of projection going on here, no? While racism certainly exists in China it is nowhere near as vicious or universal as it is in the West. The critical distinction is that racism isn't foundational to society there like it is here, if you eliminate racism from Chinese culture it would still look more or less the same, the days when they could fancy themselves this celestial kingdom looking down on the barbaric hordes from on high are long in the past now. On the other hand, if you were to envision an America without racism, it would be completely unrecognizable.
    Isn't the main reason Chinese culture would look the same without racism that 91.5% of the country is Han Chinese?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    Trump probably thinks that there is only one race, White. Which makes him not racist since he can't be possibly be racist against White people. Anyone who isn't White, he probably doesn't see them as People, so they don't count.
    I'm sure he sees Kanye West as a person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    True, but you can see an escalation in his language when dealing with critics who are women or of color. He uses terms that never come up when the critic is white and Male. Although he does seem to reserve special hate if that critic is a Republican. It fits his wannabe mob boss mentality.
    Do you think he recognizes this about himself?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kieran_Frost View Post
    I... hmmmm... I just don't feel you have critical thinking. The overt bias in this just ruins any credibility of opinion. If you want to go after Churchill for India, which is totally valid, DO THAT! But if you can't make your arguement without drastically downplaying his good qualities "he got them through"... come on.

    If you have a good point, you don't need to stack the deck to make it. The fact you did, implies you don't have the confidence in opinion to play fair.
    #truthbombOFLOVE
    What were his good qualities, aside from arguably the most important actions of any prime minister?

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    Obama already made the effort to do so while he was in office.

    Republicans obstructed or attempted to roll back all of his changes.

    You're operating under the assumption that Republicans see this as a problem rather than a benefit.

    It's a reasonable assumption but one that doesn't hold up under scrutiny given their repeated obstruction of any real police reform.

    And like I told Mets before -- if people can't get justice through democracy, they will seek it through other means.

    -----
    "In the wake of two black men killed in officer-involved shootings, President Obama reminded the nation in a Thursday night speech that his White House has already taken steps to help improve relations between police and communities.

    “Last year, we put together a task force that was comprised of civil rights activists and community leaders, but also law enforcement officials — police captains, sheriffs,” the President said. “And they came up with specific recommendations and steps that could ensure that the trust between communities and police departments were rebuilt and incidents like this would be less likely to occur.”

    That group, the White House Task Force on 21st Century Policing, was created in the wake of a spate of officer-involved killings of black men in 2014, and a year later it released a lengthy report calling for more data on police-involved shootings, better assessments of community attitudes toward police, and the removal of incentives on police practices like arrests and convictions. But while the task force’s recommendations have indeed been embraced by some of the nation’s law enforcement, its effects have been noticeably limited.

    According to a one-year update by the Task Force, at least nine states and municipalities have taken significant steps to implement their recommendations and law enforcement agencies in every state have in some way grappled with reform. In May 2016, 15 police departments signed on to join the “Advancing 21st Century Policing Initiative.” However, those successes are a drop in the bucket for the task force considering there are 18,000 police departments in the United States.

    Even President Obama mentioned his frustration with the slow pace of change even as he praised the task force’s suggested reforms. “Change has been too slow and we have to have a greater sense of urgency about this,” the President said Thursday."

    https://time.com/4398392/obama-polic...tury-policing/

    -----
    "Before he is ousted, Sessions limits U.S. oversight of local police"

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice has moved to sharply curtail federal authority aimed at curtailing abuse and civil rights violations at local police departments across the country by directing U.S. attorneys to limit the use of consent decrees and settlement agreements.

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in one of his final acts before President Donald Trump ousted him, said the Justice Department could investigate alleged legal violations but that “special caution” was required before resolving any disputes with states or local entities, the department said late Thursday.

    Sessions has long opposed consent decrees between the Justice Department and police departments in cities such as Chicago and Baltimore to institute reforms, which were heavily utilized in the Obama administration, and sought to delay or overturn them.

    Sessions had ordered a sweeping review of the decrees nationwide, alarming civil rights advocates who saw them as ways to address alleged unlawful police stops, excessive force and other violations, especially toward blacks and other minorities."

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1NE1NL
    I'm not sure what earlier argument you're referring to, but it seems unwise to imply that it's a valid approach to go for justice without democracy. It probably increases the chances Republicans have of winning elections, and gives moral cover to corrupt conservatives.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •