LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksBS. People only listen to analysis which they already agree with.Originally Posted by sazerac
BS. People only listen to analysis which they already agree with.
It looks like I'm bashing American intelligence but I would say the same thing about any country. The vast majority are not involved too deeply in their country's economics or even know how the system works. I remember one time I was sitting in the living room with my family and tried to tell them about supply and demand. Their eyes just glazed over.
It's mostly propaganda and media that shapes people's opinions, not hard facts.
Men in general judge more by the sense of sight than by the sense of touch, because everyone can see, but only a few can test by feeling. Everyone sees what you seem to be, few know what you really are, and those few do not dare take a stand against the general opinion.
Your numbers are incorrect due to late timing. It's roughly 6% with an estimate of 11% to be done by the end of the year.
How Much of the Stimulus Money has Already Been Spent? : Rutledge Capital
Point is still the same: it's just as effective as the Bush 2001 tax cuts. Aka, super, duper, not effective.
O'rly? Tell me, how many Americans do you know, know just where stem cells come from? How many do you know would state IVF clinics as the origin? How many do you know, know where those leftover embryos go? If Americans knew what was happening now, do you think so many would have voted against it on the bull**** reason the religious folk claim?An incredibly elitist sentiment. For one thing, most Americans are educated and only need to be minimally informed to make a decision.
Furthermore, if Americans are so informed and educated (which by the way is incorrect if you look at percentage of population holding college degrees), then why do they keep voting their incumbents back into office when? We don't get the legislation we need for a reason. The US Congress is stale. Yet we do nothing about it. Informed you say?
While that is true, it doesn't actually address what I was writing. We get bad government because we keep voting for it. If we had informed, educated voting populace, we wouldn't have this problem. But we don't.Anyways, without democracy, the government can do whatever the hell it wants and nobody can say otherwise; even if most people were stupid, and only a select few knew what was best for them, there would be no way to guarantee that that elite would always act in everyone's interest.
Don't know. This discussion stems partly from my talk with Harry Guerrilla. He's very anti- listening to the majority for many of the reasons I stated.Plus, how would that elite come to power in the first place? Without democracy the only way to come to power would be through the use of power itself- which is blind to whether one is part of the elite or not.
I never argued that was overall better. I argued that by historically, the limitation on voting to certain people mitigated the problems we have now, and specifically, if you noticed, I specifically wrote that having an informed, educated population would do much of the same.Yes, let's go back to the good old days when women and colored people knew their place. After all, they had poor or no education back then, why should they have been able to vote?
My point is that a democracy of the uninformed and uneducated results in bad decisions. Democracy's value is determined by its voters. And America's voters suck. The fact that we still have a one party system pretending to be a two party system with that one party screwing every American is more evidence that we don't have that educated, informed voting population.
Math and reading. Two topics never taught to DP members!
Well, that's pretty much meaningless. Most of the economists didn't see this coming.
But their solution has been what "caused the crisis," so they're really not fixing anything.What does that tell us? During a crisis, fix the problem that caused the crisis and then stop.
" Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. " - Matthew 5:44-45
Before you make a claim about me politically, read a list about my views.
Huh, I was actually under the impression that you supported the stimulus.
Yes. The issue here is using aborted embryos for research, and people's opinion of the act isn't going to change based on how much they know about the actual process.O'rly? Tell me, how many Americans do you know, know just where stem cells come from? How many do you know would state IVF clinics as the origin? How many do you know, know where those leftover embryos go? If Americans knew what was happening now, do you think so many would have voted against it on the bull**** reason the religious folk claim?
Should holding a college degree really be a requirement for the ability to vote?Furthermore, if Americans are so informed and educated (which by the way is incorrect if you look at percentage of population holding college degrees),
This can be fixed with term limits. And no, I did not say "informed". I said that very little information is actually necessary. A person could know relatively little about a subject, form an opinion, learn lots and lots about the subject, and the chances are that person would still hold the same opinion.then why do they keep voting their incumbents back into office when? We don't get the legislation we need for a reason. The US Congress is stale. Yet we do nothing about it. Informed you say?
I think it has more to do with the lack of good candidates on the market. Elections nowadays seem to be between a crook and another crook. I also think the partisan system has a lot to do with that... a nonpartisan primary system just may solve it.While that is true, it doesn't actually address what I was writing. We get bad government because we keep voting for it. If we had informed, educated voting populace, we wouldn't have this problem. But we don't.
Listening to the majority is not always a good thing (see Nazi Germany). As Churchill said, Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. There is simply no effective way to date to decide who gets to govern other than letting the people decide.Don't know. This discussion stems partly from my talk with Harry Guerrilla. He's very anti- listening to the majority for many of the reasons I stated.
I think you're just being a pessimist; things really aren't that bad, and if they get that bad, voters will start pushing back.I never argued that was overall better. I argued that by historically, the limitation on voting to certain people mitigated the problems we have now, and specifically, if you noticed, I specifically wrote that having an informed, educated population would do much of the same.
My point is that a democracy of the uninformed and uneducated results in bad decisions. Democracy's value is determined by its voters. And America's voters suck. The fact that we still have a one party system pretending to be a two party system with that one party screwing every American is more evidence that we don't have that educated, informed voting population.
I've heard that "one party" crud before and have never bought it.
I support a stimulus, not the "so called" stimulus package.
Be mindful of the future, but not at the expense of the present. For in the present is where we shape our future.
How would it be different for you?I support a stimulus, not the "so called" stimulus package.
And I'm still wondering how you're a libertarian. Haven't heard anything that isn't interventionist from you.
" Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. " - Matthew 5:44-45
Before you make a claim about me politically, read a list about my views.
So... 55% want it to continue? Good thing we live in a democracy.
Only net tax-payers and veterans should be allowed to vote. Net tax-consumers get to vote when they stop leaching off the system.
Did you even read the opening post
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote