13
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
georgeob1
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 05:54 am
I don't see any responses here to Biden's SOU speech. Instead only more of the same old hand-wringing about Donald Trump. the WHBITW (worst human being in the world), and the continuing imperative to do what it takes to defeat him.

It appears to me that 'ole Joe's speech was mainly an effort to rally his base of Democrat voters and restore their declining confidence that he can once again do his assigned job as front man for an otherwise leaderless assemblage of left wing "progressives" seeking desperately to preserve and expand their power over everyone else. It appears to me that he was at least partly successful in that effort. There are however limits on what shouting, an oddly rapid flow of words, demonstrably false assertions about the state of our economy, national security , and standing in an increasingly troubled world, together with 'ole Joe's characteristically stupid pseudo-tough-guy talk, can achieve. As a unifying and focused State of our Union speech Biden's effort was a dismal failure.

Our country and public media are all very polarized now, and it is difficult to confidently predict the outcome of the ongoing political contest. There is clearly widespread unease about the state of our economy, pervasive crime, border and national security, and what the pollsters call "the direction in which the country is headed". Likely significant changes in he political alignment of major segments of our electorate are evident. Underlying all that is what appears to be a pervasive loss of self awareness and confidence in the values of Western Civilization itself (It's flaws & failures are all historically evident. The historical records of Marxist & other alternatives are all much worse, but that is often forgotten.)

All that said, public awareness and and reactions to increasing crime, civic disorder, the appalling situation on our Southern border, increasing prices for basic commodities (food, lodging, transportation & energy) and international threats to our security is growing, along with what appears to be fast-growing dissatisfaction with the current regime. I suspect a good deal of this may be either suppressed and underground ,(or merely unreported by our liberal media), and therefore a hovering source of surprise for some. Significantly much of this is coming from previously reliable Democrat voters.

What this may foretell about the coming election is as yet unknowable. but the indicators for today's Democrats are all seriously unfavorable.
Walter Hinteler
 
  5  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 06:51 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
the values of Western Civilization
I'm sure, you don't refer to racism, oppression and exploitation, but have some special ideas about what defines those "values".

georgeob1 wrote:
The historical records of Marxist & other alternatives are all much worse, but that is often forgotten.
Yes, even short-term memory seems to have been lost on many, otherwise the former president could not become a candidate.

Anyway, nice to see you back, George.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 07:37 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Anyway, nice to see you back, George.

It is
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 07:41 am
@georgeob1,
Thanks for your very predictable and typically partisan analysis of the contemporary political scene. Good to see that you're still purveying poisonous posts for our entertainment.

Quote:
I don't see any responses here to Biden's SOU speech.

I posted one here. The SotU speech has become a joke, with about as much relevance and importance as the ridiculous succession of award presentations culminating in the Oscars this weekend. (Did you enjoy "Barbie"?) I look forward to the day when a president simply recites his announcement from the White House instead of participating in this silly exercise of posturing followed by dutiful applause and childish razzing.
Quote:
It appears to me that 'ole Joe's speech was mainly an effort to rally his base of Democrat voters and restore their declining confidence that he can once again do his assigned job as front man for an otherwise leaderless assemblage of left wing "progressives" seeking desperately to preserve and expand their power over everyone else.

So you think Joe Biden is a left wing "progressive"? And what is the "power" that they are desperately seeking to preserve and expand?
Quote:
As a unifying and focused State of our Union speech Biden's effort was a dismal failure.

The House has seen to it that next to nothing has been accomplished in this dismal failure of a legislative session and you're whining that Biden's speech wasn't "unifying"?
Quote:
There is clearly widespread unease about the state of our economy, pervasive crime, border and national security, and what the pollsters call "the direction in which the country is headed".

You really think this is new? These same concerns arise with every election. The Republicans are about to re-nominate a grifting conman with 91 criminal indictments and promise to continue their campaign of fear and divisiveness so why wouldn't people be worrying about "the direction in which the country is headed"???
Quote:
(or merely unreported by our liberal media)

You must be thinking of your own "liberal media" because the media outlets I pay attention to have been reporting on this phenomenon incessantly.
Quote:
...but the indicators for today's Democrats are all seriously unfavorable.

Um, the indicators for the continuation of civilization as we know it are seriously unfavorable and a MAGA victory in November will do nothing to slow down, let alone reverse, the destructive effects of our collective inability to address global calamity.

But, no worries – I can't wait for the next round of Trump tax cuts!

Trump’s Tax Cut Fueled Investment but Did Not Pay for Itself, Study Finds

The most detailed research yet on corporate response to the 2017 Republican tax law shows modest gains for workers and high cost to the federal debt.




0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 07:48 am
Biden’s Electrifying State of the Union, Why it Matters, Plus: Fascism vs Modernity

Umair Haque wrote:
Let’s not mince words. There are speeches and there are Capital S Speeches. Biden’s sensational State of the Union was one of the latter. It was visionary, historic, and startling. I didn’t know quite what to expect, and I doubt many did. Biden rose to the challenge of the moment—more on that in a second, and hit the ball out of the park.

By the way, if you didn’t watch it, do so, just even the first few minutes, because…

This speech was a special moment for America. I don’t know if Americans grasp that, but world leaders, starting this weekend, are going to be spending much of the year studying Biden’s words, ideas, and vision—because it set out sort of a new direction for America, as leader of a troubled world again.

Let me explain, on three levels, why this speech mattered so much: stylistically, substantively, and politically.

Being a Leader Versus Becoming One, or, Is Biden Fit for Office?

Lately, it’s become kind of cool to hate on Biden. I get that, though I don’t join in it. Young people will accuse him of everything from indifference to genocide, while the GOP’s attack line that he’s too old and frail to hold office again has registered, amplified by media.

The Biden we saw yesterday answered those concerns decisively. He was witty, sharp as a razor, intelligent, spry. He ran rings around the Republicans, weaving webs around them to entrap them in, leaving them bewildered and spluttering. So much so that by the end of the night, this whole business of image manipulation had been turned on its head: the new attack line was that Biden was too energetic, angry, and talkative. The irony was lost on no one, really.

This Joe Biden delivered, as many said, a masterclass. And that masterclass was in large part about what politics, unfortunately, begins with: style, “impression management,” “messaging.” Biden got his message across, in giant blinking neon letters. He roasted the Republicans, while outmaneuvering them, out-thinking them, easily outdoing them, as if they were amateurs and wannabes—and so this Joe Biden electrified people. In the media business, we track a thing called “sentiment,” which is how people talk about you on social media, and sentiment was off the charts. People were astonished, some, like the Republicans, overwhelmed, and the reaction was strikingly positive.

Those are all good things. Part of Biden’s challenge, if the goal is to avoid another Trump era, and the consequent end of democracy, more or less, was just to convince people that Biden was still in the game. After this, while, sure, you can still have doubts, if you’re fair, you’re going to have fewer and smaller ones, on the issues of Biden’s fitness and competence.

This Biden glowed, swaggered, and revelled, like a rock star.

Stylistically, the State of the Union was a devastating blow to the Republicans—think, again, how the erstwhile attack line had to flip from “he’s got one foot in the grave” to “Jesus! Why won’t he stop getting us!!” Funny—and telling.

We recently discussed the difference between occupying a leadership position—and being accepted as a leader. This Biden’s been hid away by the Democratic machine, it seems. Those roaring, electrified masses? Those surging positivity ratings? That’s a figure going from merely occupying the position, to being accepted as a leader.

That matters in a bigger way than you think, because…

What is America, Anymore?

But that was just the beginning of why this speech was so important, though it’s what the chatter has focused on. Punditry is missing the real reason this speech was made of fireworks—why world leaders are going to be studying it frantically and intensely, beginning this weekend, if not already, and continue doing so the whole year.

Beneath the swagger, Biden quietly proposed something very much like a new America. A new American social contract. The ideas came so fast and furious that they were almost easy to miss, sandwiched between philosophy and persuasion.

I’ll get to them, but first: most State of the Unions aren’t like that. They’re pretty boring, because Presidents tout their accomplishments. They’re backwards looking things, in other words, sort of performance reviews, if you like. This one really was different—profoundly different.

Here are just a few of the Big Ideas in Biden’s vision—and what their sort of link to the cutting edge of global thinking is.

—Taxing billionaires, which is part of a new movement, arising mostly in Europe, to reduce inequality, by having a global tax on the ultra-rich.
—Limiting executive compensation—this one in a soft way, not a hard one, salaries over $1 million no longer being tax deductible. This is linked, too, to recent moves by European nations to make economies more equal again.
—Giving home buyers tax credits. This is a first step towards fixing America’s badly broken housing market. The world’s is, in fact, and many European nations are trying to fix that through incentives like this.
—Lowering drug prices. One of Biden’s most revolutionary policy ideas was to let the government negotiate for far more drugs—this is a big, big deal, because of course Americans are ripped off incredibly badly by their version of “healthcare.” This is a way to modernize America and bring it in line with other Western nations.
—Freezing taxes on those earning than less $400K.

There were plenty more, in fact, than all this. The point isn’t just the “policy ideas”—rather, it’s the direction that Biden wants to go in, if you read between the lines a little bit. What is Biden really saying? He’s recognizing how badly broken many aspects of the American social contract—healthcare, housing, inequality, salaries, taxes—and how all that adds up to an incredibly precarious life even at or above the median.

Biden seemed to be channeling the ghost of FDR—and the spirit of Truman. The FDR aspect: he appears to be reaching for something like a new deal, or at least as close to one as America’s going to get in this tenuous situation. The spirit of Truman: he didn’t say this nicely, he roasted the Republicans as he said it, driving home the point how little they actually care about people’s lives, and simply rely on scapegoating, how empty of ideas their side really is.

This is a Big Deal. An American President doesn’t not just say this stuff lightly—they never say it at all. Taxing billionaires? Not taxing everyone else? Making corporations pay their fair share? Expanding the role of government? Reducing the drivers of inequality, from overblown exec salaries to a crumbled housing ladder? That’s…the stuff…much more aligned with…European social democracy…than American politics, which is usually anodyne variants of the same thing, aka, slightly different flavours of Coke versus Pepsi capitalism.

This isn’t two slightly different variants of capitalism, and if you read between the lines, meaning that it’s a first draft at setting out a vision, the end result will be even more radical. Taxing billionaires, limiting salaries, intervening in broken markets, giving people actual support—none of these are ideas we associate in the slightest with…American politics. They’re the stuff of social democracy, and Biden’s setting out a sort of lightweight-almost social democratic vision. It’s not quite one fully, but what it does, at last, is begin to put America on the path to becoming one, like the rest of the Western world.

The Transformation of Politics From Anti-Modern to Modern

And all that draws a sharp distinction between the two parties, at long, long last. I’ve been sharply critical of the Democrats in recent times. Who are they? What do they stand for? What’s the idea here? What’s their sort of theory of the world, of a just society, of a good life?

Now we know. We know that it’s something a lot more like lightweight European social democracy in nascent form—a good life comes from a just society, which is one that’s socioeconomically equal, not just “equal opportunity,” or what have you, yesterday’s nostrums—than yesterday’s tired neoliberalism. That said, of course, that a good life comes from being a survivor in a brutal game whose stakes are life or death.

But that’s just what the other side said, too. So all this finally draws the difference between the two parties into sharp, stark relief. Sure, one’s for democracy, and the other one’s for fascism—but the truth is to win just that political contest, you can’t just rely on that issue itself. You need to go deep into the issues people actually care about, which are always the economy, money, their property, stability, a sense of security, upwards mobility, etcetera.

Nobody ever really beat the fascists by saying: but we’re offering you democracy!

This is a breakthrough, and it shouldn’t be underestimated. For an American President to stand on the podium and say this stuff? The government should set prices, salaries for bigwigs are way too high, billionaires and corporations should be taxed—I scarcely thought I’d see that day happen, ever, period. America’s been incredibly resistant to these ideas, on both sides of politics. The GOP, of course, built its political fortunes around defending capitalism and individualism, from Reaganomics on, and then Clintonomics was a sort of thinly disguised variant of much the same thing.

In more prosaic terms, this is the sort of stuff that Bernie and Liz have long pleaded for, argued vehemently for, demanded. Where does it come from? Again, from European social democracy, but now let’s make that concrete. In France, the government negotiates everything from drug prices to waiter’s salaries. Executive pay is sharply restrained by both norms and laws. One of the ways in which, for example, smarter parties, like Spain’s socialists, stayed in power, was to give people more support precisely for basic necessities like housing.

So this is incredibly smart stuff—in the sense that we know it works. France is probably the world’s most successful society, by a very long way, right about now, and Spain’s not far behind. America, by contrast, is way behind. It needs to catch up to the rest of the Western world in basic political terms, and that’s by having it’s “sides’ not just be predatory capitalism versus slightly less predatory capitalism, but modern oppositions, like conservative versus liberalism versus green in social democratic terms, which are completely different from America’s. Nobody in Europe, for example, not even conservatives, would say that people deserve nothing, and government shouldn’t exist—but of course America’s do.

So this transforms America politically. It does something long, long overdue, and it does it in a clever way, which is that the people listening to it won’t even know about it. They’re not going to know that “oh, this idea comes from France, and this one from Spain, and this one from the EU itself.” It doesn’t matter, and of course, to make Americans, that’d make it a non-starter. It just puts these ideas front and center, and more importantly, the philosophies behind them.

Those theories of the world, of the good life, of the just society, and how they’re linked. Now, at last, there’s a variant of politics on offer that’s not just “life should just be winners and losers, and winners should take it all, and losers should basically be left to perish.” It’s incredibly important that this happen, for any society, not just America, this evolution of politics to what we call a modern level, not just a sort of still-trapped-in-the 19th century one. In America, the State of the Union is the last place I expected it to, if it ever did.

theissue
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 08:13 am

Newt on Britt: 'Ah, well, um, I don't have any comment right now, thank you.'

“When I called Gingrich this morning and asked if Britt had, in fact, risen to the occasion last night, he sounded flustered. ‘Ah, well, um, I don’t have any comment right now, thank you.’ He hung up.”

“Gingrich is far from the only Republican skirting on-the-record conversations today about Britt’s performance. The Alabamian’s 17-minute address, delivered from her own kitchen, surprised many in the party for its tonal confusion and the dramatic affectations that often distracted from the message itself—a party-line discourse on illegal immigration and the imperiled future of American families. The speech has been mocked widely on social media and cable news, including by various right-wing commentators. But lawmakers and other prominent Republicans—those who had cast the event as Britt’s potential star turn—have mostly stayed quiet

https://politicalwire.com/2024/03/09/katie-britts-strange-speech/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/03/katie-britt-state-of-the-union-response/677693/
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 08:24 am
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 10:45 am
@georgeob1,
Hi george. I really do wish you were less predictable and more reflective. Every paragraph you've written here is filled with agitprop found in most any Fox show or WSJ editorial and it is overly tiresome to take you to task on all the shallow claims and cliches you echo. So let's just look at paragraph one.
Quote:
more of the same old hand-wringing about Donald Trump...and the continuing imperative to do what it takes to defeat him.

We liberals are unique in that way. You and your political/ideological allies certainly never wring your hands at the prospect of leadership by, say, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or Joe Biden. You've never proclaimed that it is imperative such figures do not gain office. Right? So why even write such a sentence?

More critically, you are incapable of making any serious discernments about all the individuals just named. Biden is a classic liberal/Democratic figure who is not in any way notably different in ideology, policy platform or behavior compared with any Dem President in our lifetimes. While at the same time, you are utterly incapable of confronting or admitting how clearly and dangerously abnormal Trump is.

What other Republican leader has publicly invited Putin to "do whatever the hell he wants"? Or who yesterday said of Orban, “There’s nobody that’s better, smarter or a better leader than Viktor Orban. He says, ‘This is the way it’s gonna be,’ and that’s the end of it. He’s the boss.”Or who has refused to speak critically of avowed Nazis who support him? Or who has bragged about sexually assaulting women? Or who has been found guilty of rape by a jury of his peers? Or who has faced the number of criminal indictments Trump is facing? Or who has been so profligate - on a daily basis - of spreading clear falsehoods? Or who has been equally profligate in personally insulting women, members of the military or anyone who speaks out against him? Or who has lost such a large cadre of senior Republicans/conservatives and who now work daily to prevent him regaining power (eg the Cheneys)? Who has spoken fondly of so many autocrats and tyrants who hold power elsewhere? Who was the central figure in a wide-ranging and totally fraudulent plot to prevent being replaced in office? Who has used millions in donations to avoid paying for his lawyers' fees? Who has tried to pass himself off as a religious and pious individual when he is very much the opposite of that. And this list is only very partial.

It's been very sad to watch you cheapen your intellect and your values in this manner.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 12:21 pm
More on Sen. Britt's response to Joe Biden – the lies flow freely...
georgeob1
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 02:13 pm
Good to encounter you as well Bernie. A substantial degree of predictability is a quality I and all of the posters here, including yourself, share. Nearly any of the values or political positions voiced by posters here can be (with or without real meaning) attributed to some element of the media. Shall I accuse you of getting your ideas and perspectives from CNN or CBC? The real truth is that neither of us really knows just how the other evolved his perspectives on the current political situation.
We all have different experiences in life, different educational backgrounds and associations with people and groups, different experiences in studying and reflecting on human history and contemporary political analysis, and we all – perhaps to different degrees - reflect seriously on these matters in forming our own ideas and perspectives. Suggesting otherwise in the absence of real knowledge is both prejudicial and offensive.
I referred to a decline in some values that have characterized Western Civilization. Walter Hinteler appears to believe that “racism, oppression and exploitation” are the chief or unique features there. I believe he really knows better, but the real fact is that ALL known civilizations and cultures reflect these things to varying degrees - all fundamental manifestations of our common – and very complex – human natures. The etymology of the word “slave” derives from “Slav”- a linguistic gift of the Ottomans, based on their common source for them. The historically observable fact here is that racism, exploitation and oppression are prominently present in all the known human civilizations. Many civilizations and cultures contributed to the development of philosophy, science, and mathematics, but none have yet equaled the explosion of knowledge, applied science, economic development and.-perhaps unequal - individual freedom that Western Civilization has achieved over the last six centuries. That is simply an observable historical fact. Others have handily adopted those things, and something still better may yet evolve, though I see little indication of that now.
On the contrary, I see growing authoritarianism – masked usually in the form of some “progressive” program designed to “perfect” some attribute of society, but usually involving some net suppression of individual freedom – while not achieving its intended goal and often worsening the targeted problem. Religion is fading and with it the intolerance that once accompanied it. However new apparently worse forms of intolerance are very quickly replacing it while a variety of “group values” are quickly surpassing old ones based on actual individual achievement. The issues attending all this are indeed a significant element underlying the contemporary political scene. They too influence my views here.
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 02:33 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
On the contrary, I see growing authoritarianism – masked usually in the form of some “progressive” program designed to “perfect” some attribute of society, but usually involving some net suppression of individual freedom – while not achieving its intended goal and often worsening the targeted problem.

Do you really consider Orbán, Erdoğan, Modi, Lukashenko, Putin, etc. to be "progressives"?
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 02:43 pm
@hightor,
dug up some more on this story:

Katie Britt Accused of 'Whopping Lie' in SOTU Response

Quote:
Senator Katie Britt, an Alabama Republican, has been accused of making a "whopping lie" regarding a sex trafficking victim in her State of the Union rebuttal address.

President Joe Biden on Thursday evening delivered the annual State of the Union address before Congress. After weathering months of recent criticism over his age and its effect on his fitness for office, Biden's address was noted and praised by many for its energy and vigor, with the president frequently railing against his "predecessor" and the dangers he poses to the country. Some Republicans, conversely, complained that the speech was too energetic and too politicized.

Britt is the junior senator from Alabama, having been elected to office in the 2022 midterms. At 40, she was the youngest Republican woman ever elected to the Senate and the first-ever female senator from Alabama, leading many to deem her a rising star in the party. Her rebuttal to Biden's State of the Union address, however, had a less than favorable reception. While some in the GOP praised her address for its attacks against the president and his border policies, others were critical and mocking of her cadence and tone. Some critics deemed it "creepy" and amateurish.

In addition to that, accusations have also emerged that Britt's rebuttal featured a "whopping lie" in her reference to a woman who said she had been sexually trafficked from Mexico to the U.S. at the age of 12. Britt claimed to have met this woman during a visit to the border in the "Del Rio sector of Texas."

"She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at age 12," Britt said. "She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped...We wouldn't be OK with this happening in a third-world country. This is the United States of America, and it's past time we start acting like it. President Biden's border crisis is a disgrace. It's despicable. And it's almost entirely preventable."

On Friday, however, Talking Point Memo journalist Jonathan M. Katz posted a lengthy video to TikTok in which he cited evidence to suggest that Britt's portrayal of the woman's situation was inaccurate. According to information Katz found, including from her own past testimony before Congress, the woman that he believes the senator likely spoke to, Karla Jacinto Romero, was trafficked at a young age entirely within Mexico. This occurred during a time when Biden was not in the White House in any capacity, between 2004 and 2008.

"These events didn't happen in the United States," Katz said. "These crimes didn't take place in the United States. Or even near the border. They took place in Mexico."

Newsweek reached out to Britt's office via email on Saturday afternoon for comment. Any responses received will be added to this story in a later update. Newsweek has not been able to independently verify whether Britt was referring to Jacinto Romero.

A 2021 report from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) warned that violent drug organizations are using human trafficking to expand profits. "For traffickers, it doesn't matter which product is being sold—both drugs and sex are lucrative industries—as long as money is made. Drug cartels often use trafficked women and children to smuggle drugs across the border, doubling up on the money they can make from them," the report said.

The U.S. State Department has previously estimated that between 14,500 and 17,500 people are trafficked into the country every year. "At-risk populations can face deceitful recruitment practices by those bent on exploiting them for labor or commercial sex," according to the State Department website.

The accusation against Britt and accompanying evidence from Katz received praise from some on social media.

"Wild that Katie Britt told a whopping lie during her State of the Union rebuttal with her story about a sex trafficking victim and these are the only outlets/sites covering it," Kaivan Shroff, press secretary for the pro-Biden non-profit group Dream for America, wrote in a post to X, featuring photos of headlines. "Imagine if a Democrat did the same...would be a huge story. Instead media doesn't care, gives a pass."

"So it appears that [Katie Britt] is not just a bad actress but also a huge liar," journalist John Harwood wrote in a post. "This is what the Republican Party has become."

"He caught Sen. Britt in an out and out lie," Talking Points founder Josh Marshall wrote in his post. "Amazing work. And just sitting there in plain site. Really worth your taking a few minutes to watch this video" Sen. Britt, not only an emotionally disregulated freak, also a big fat liar."

Notably, Trump had high praise for Britt after her response to Biden, specifically mentioning her comments about migrant issues.

"Katie Britt was a GREAT contrast to an Angry, and obviously very Disturbed, 'President.' She was compassionate and caring, especially concerning Women and Women's Issues. Her conversation on Migrant Crime was powerful and insightful," the former president wrote on Truth Social.

newsweek
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 03:24 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
The etymology of the word “slave” derives from “Slav”- a linguistic gift of the Ottomans, based on their common source for them.
The English 'slave' as well as the German 'Sklave' come from theOld French sclave > from Medieval Latin sclāvus (“slave”/"Sklave") > from Late Latin Sclāvus (“Slav”/"Slawe"), because Slavs were often forced into slavery in the Middle Ages.
The Latin term is taken from the Greek Σκλαβηνός ("Sklabēnós"), ultimately from Proto-Slavic *slověnin". (Source: Wiktionary, Grimms Wörterbuch)
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 05:15 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Good to encounter you as well Bernie.
As I hope you appreciate, I've always been fond of you personally and I think of you often. And it is only infrequently when those thoughts turn to murder fantasies. I'm going to write quickly here as I'm trying out some new edibles and god knows what's going to happen 20 minutes up the road. The newest such has you poisoned by an immigrant.
Quote:
Shall I accuse you of getting your ideas and perspectives from CNN or CBC?

That would be unwise (we've talked about this before) as I never watch TV news (or SOTU addresses). I read. And I attend to video files of what Fox has been up to most every day.
Quote:
we all – perhaps to different degrees - reflect seriously on these matters in forming our own ideas and perspectives.
Yes, certainly. Your proviso, though, is utterly critical. I've spoken with a lot of people who have, they promise me, reflected seriously on the matter and have concluded that vaccines are not merely worthless in preventing disease but also that they are being pushed into the culture only so that big pharma can make money and so that the government/deep state can increase its totalitarian control of the population. So, neither of us get a pass but... imagine that you and I are in a good Jesuit school studying Critical Thinking. And further that we had submitted very short papers on today's politics (the post you wrote above and the one I wrote) and the next morning (it's raining, they sky dark), the Jesuit scholar enters the class, his face glowing to one of us but when he turns to the other, a scowl that freezes the bones, grabs you up but the scruff of your neck and half-carries you into the back room where he pulls down your pants and canes you until your ass is on fire and then...uh...let's leave it there. It hurts me to think of you going through all that. To be avoided.

A lot of this is empirical. And empiricism is a dependable means of getting closer to the truth and avoiding biases. If you go back and read what I wrote about Trump and everything I said is verifiable. And you left that dilemma and floated off into the clouds.
georgeob1
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 05:20 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Quote:
On the contrary, I see growing authoritarianism – masked usually in the form of some “progressive” program designed to “perfect” some attribute of society, but usually involving some net suppression of individual freedom – while not achieving its intended goal and often worsening the targeted problem.

Do you really consider Orbán, Erdoğan, Modi, Lukashenko, Putin, etc. to be "progressives"?

No, not at all, though they are all indeed authoritarians. Look instead to the Governments of California & Oregon as contrasted with (say ) Texas and Florida. The results are evident.

In my aviation years there were huge differenced between the carrier Navy culture for tactics, and that in Air Force Units. The Navy focused on outcomes and results, while the Air Force emphasized input and procedures. Our Joke was the Air Force had a big book listing all the actions that were permitted (and a lot of effort went into enforcing it). The Navy had a smaller one indicating those that were prohibited, and simply rewarded good outcomes. The Air Force approach was "Progressive". Very often elegantly conceived complex tactics were involved, but the enemy quickly learned to evade them and we lost about 500 F-105s as a result. Navy airwings adopted and quickly modified their tactics. Each one was different. Better outcomes and fewer losses resulted. In the same way free market capitalism allocates capital far more productively than do planned or socialist economies.

georgeob1
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 9 Mar, 2024 06:26 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Yes, certainly. Your proviso, though, is utterly critical. I've spoken with a lot of people who have, they promise me, reflected seriously on the matter and have concluded that vaccines are not merely worthless in preventing disease but also that they are being pushed into the culture only so that big pharma can make money and so that the government/deep state can increase its totalitarian control of the population.

Life and human nature are very complex, We are all capable of blissfully holding completely contradictory ideas in our heads at the same moment. Some vaccines are more effective than others, and many factors, both good and bad, do indeed go into government decisions regarding them. The details are important and relevant. High profits yield innovation, new drugs of variable effectiveness, while only the good, effective ones tend to survive in the market (and we do most of the world's new research and development for them). In a perversely analogous way, the Canadian government is the exclusive buyer of imported U.S. medicines; gets good prices as a result; and Canadians benefit from it. However you get access to only those the government decides to buy.

Blatham wrote:
A lot of this is empirical. And empiricism is a dependable means of getting closer to the truth and avoiding biases. If you go back and read what I wrote about Trump and everything I said is verifiable. And you left that dilemma and floated off into the clouds.
I fully agree. As a person Trump has many disagreeable qualities. (I probably wouldn't take him as a guest at the Bohemian Club.) However in comparison to the current regime he governed very well indeed. In keeping with your excellent point, I make an empirical judgment based on the results that followed. The current situation makes the judgement quite easy.

An amusing excursion on the Jesuits, however I have nothing but good memories of it all. They were cheerful, emphasized the ironies of life, and very oriented towards results & achievement in learning. I applied to Annapolis to escape a programmed move to Georgetown and try something new. It turned out to be very similar. Same for Naval Aviation, The motto in my squadron was "Results count: everything else is bullshit."
glitterbag
 
  3  
Reply Sun 10 Mar, 2024 01:30 am
@Bogulum,
Bogulum wrote:

Do you think that if, after Orban's visit Trump suddenly has the cash he needs to appeal his cases or pay off his fines, the MSM will make much of a story of it?


Remarkably, he did post bond after Orban's visit.........face it folks, he sees the whole world as his personal customers, renters, contributors and dupes.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Mar, 2024 06:04 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
I fully agree. As a person Trump has many disagreeable qualities. (I probably wouldn't take him as a guest at the Bohemian Club.) However in comparison to the current regime he governed very well indeed. In keeping with your excellent point, I make an empirical judgment based on the results that followed. The current situation makes the judgement quite easy.


First of all, Hi, George. Really great to see ya. I certainly can second Bernie's comments about the esteem in which we have held your comments, because he, Jonathan, and I often brought you and your arguments (even those with which we strongly disagreed), favorably, into our many conversations while eating and drinking at the Big Apple spots we frequented.

This one I quoted above (which I have heard in various forms from several conservative Americans during the last decade), though, got me to thinking.

Adolf Hitler and Benito Musollini hit me in much that same way. They had many qualities that I found disagreeable...enough so to preclude me ever wanting to invite either to play golf with me at any of the courses where I play.

They did govern well. Both are credited with making the trains run on time, as a for instance; both were able to get large majorities of their citizens to agree to political tactics and procedures that others were not...to work together, so to speak.

I doubt I have to labor this. I'm sure you understand the point I am trying to make.

Anyway...just wanted to say, Hello.
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Sun 10 Mar, 2024 07:05 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
In the same way free market capitalism allocates capital far more productively than do planned or socialist economies.

Well, yeah. "Free market capitalism" is a system designed around the accumulation and allocation of wealth. Planned economies devalue the accumulation of capital as an end in itself are designed to maintain a reasonable level of goods and services for society as a whole. Take public health as an example. In a severe pandemic, social distancing, mass vaccination, and wearing personal protective gear might be encouraged in a planned economy because those measures are the best way to prevent the spread of disease even at the expense of business profits. Free market capitalist economies might respond by allowing natural immunity to develop over time while allowing commercial enterprise to continue unimpeded. In large technically advanced societies a flexible mix of both systems is preferable to ideological rigidity.
georgeob1
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 10 Mar, 2024 09:38 am
@hightor,
The accumulated evidence of the performance of planned economies (of which the Soviet and early (before Deng) China economies are the largest examples, indicates only slow growth, little new product development, widespread bureaucratic corruption and mass poverty. The elites lived relatively well, but the people suffered. Even in the Former East Germany ( as well as Poland Hungary Romania and the rest of the former Soviet empire) the differences with the Western European economies were stark. Perhaps the most vivid example was the Porsche, Mercedes Benz and Audi automobiles of West German, contrasted with the Trabant ( an ugly plastic body vehicle with a very dirty two cycle IC engine) produced in East Germany. That just one generation of Socialism did that to Germans is a truly remarkable thing.

I don't know of any absolutely free markets in the world. Even Singapore has well organized programs for retirement income and elements of medical care. It is far easier to moderate the adverse side effects of Free markets than those of Planned economies and the historical facts provide ample support for that principal.

The United States, as you implied operates a largely free market for the development of medicines and vaccines , but does augment access to it and medical care with Medicaid and Medicare. One result is that we lead the world in the development of new medicines and vaccines (as was evident in the COVID epidemic). An adverse side effect is that costs are often (not always) higher. That too is moderated by government health programs.

The Canadian Government operates a very good health care system for its citizens, and has made itself the exclusive buyer of imported medicines & vaccines. This gives it greater leverage in buying and the savings presumably lower the average costs to Canadians (paid through their taxes) . However they get access to only the drugs (and treatments) the government chooses to buy. The capacity of the Health Care system is fixed by the government, and largely meets the needs of the people, but wait times for many treatments are long compared to those here. There are such tradeoffs everywhere.

Individual freedom is important. and in economic affairs (and many others) it generally yields better results than are achieved by authoritarian bureaucracies.


 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.2 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 08:08:19