(June 26, 2014 at 12:20 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Insanity, how can you vote on every single one? Lmao.

He can because HE'S FUCKING INSANE!

(June 26, 2014 at 2:43 am)JuliaL Wrote: Unfortunately, existing societies developed and still live with some attitudes which previously had value but have outlived much of their usefulness. Among these is, "If you don't work, you don't eat."
Machines have absorbed not only the jobs of the unskilled manual laborers like ditch diggers and farmers. They have taken those of the skilled such as machinists, production engineers, clerks, typists and secretaries. Long before singularity, I expect creative and intellectual tasks to be taken as well.
This leaves few options for individuals other than starvation. One is bureaucracy where an unlimited number of make-work paper pushing jobs can be created in government or finance. Another option is to become one of the very few masters of the system. The one percenters who climb to the top of the pile of their fellow humans by becoming masters of the system. The owners of Starbucks rather than the rest of us who just work there.
We could get lucky and experience a substantial loss of technological civilization via climate change or ecological collapse. Then we'd be back to total employment grubbing out enough food to avoid starving before spring.
[/sarcasm]
I am retired from an engineering career in automation taking away those jobs and giving them to machines. No need to offshore them. The machines work cheaper than the Chinese. Don't be too mad at me. I needed the work.

I noticed this trend too and it has greatly shifted my views. 20 years ago I would have told you people on welfare should be bused out to the fields and made to pick onions for their welfare check. Now I advocate a universal basic income. We have so much production capacity in society that not everyone has to work. If someone wants to stay home all day and smoke pot on the government dole...I'm actually okay with it(provided the government isn't borrowing money to do it).

Also I don't think it is all social attitudes. Many humans just have a need to do something. I wondered if say if Apple kept the income of it employees the same....but shortened their work week from 5 days to 3(by reducing their hours)....how many of those employees would look for a second job? I bet quite a few would....to make use of the extra time on their hands.

As a 12 Stepper for 28 years, I'd have a problem with the government specifically paying people to stay home and drug themselves all day.

Curiously, I'm pretty liberal about assisted suicide . . .

(June 26, 2014 at 12:20 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Insanity, how can you vote on every single one? Lmao.

Because that would be insanity.

---

Curse you Nappy, beat me to it again.

(June 26, 2014 at 10:15 am)vorlon13 Wrote: As a 12 Stepper for 28 years, I'd have a problem with the government specifically paying people to stay home and drug themselves all day.

Curiously, I'm pretty liberal about assisted suicide . . .

I do too....but I have an even bigger problem with the government telling people how they must spend the wealth transferred to them. Why should a single mom be forced to by food with her food stamps when she needs diapers? Suppose the mom is an efficient shopper....A coupon clipper who can buy a whole cart of groceries for $20 bucks, the government forcing her to buy food with food stamps instead of say a college text book is ridiculous.

A common mentality among liberals and conservatives is that poor people are just too stupid to make good monetary decisions....thus they need the government to do it for them. I reject that notion.

But, but, we have Obama now. He fixed all these things didn't he?

Personally I think it is the voter that is the problem. Chief among them are the one issue voters and those that are uninformed which unfortunately today is the republican party.

We have a system that depends on trying to elect the lesser evil. We have a corrupt judicial system that vote primarily party instead of law. AT the state level it is even worse when a judge is recalled not because he interpreted the law incorrectly but because the narrow minded ignorant are upset at the law and wanted a activist for a judge (teaparty) instead of changing the law. We have a supreme court that thinks that money isn't corrupting (how stupid can you get).

I don't have any illusions that democrats are less corrupt or potentially corrupt, but a lot of time it has to do with who is in power. Today the republican party is solidly corrupt while the democrats have to appear to support populism to try to get elected. They at least admit that science is science while creationism is ignorance. They admit that science knows more about climate than the koch brothers. They admit that jobs are created by supply and demand, and not based on how much money the rich have.

The problem is unfortunately going to be very difficult to deal with because of the corruption in both congress and the supreme court. Where money rules instead of the people.

To solve the problem, we have to make it so that special interests and lobbyists don't control congress and that means taking money out of running for office. It won't happen until we get a "real" court, but that won't happen if people don't educate themselves on the issue instead of on "abortion" or "appearance" of being a christian. ( I don't know of any politician that is really a "christian" in any sense of the word except in appearance).

So ultimately, it isn't government that is the problem, it is the voter that is the problem in my opinion.

(June 26, 2014 at 3:21 pm)Isun Wrote: Personally I think it is the voter that is the problem. Chief among them are the one issue voters and those that are uninformed which unfortunately today is the republican party.

We have a system that depends on trying to elect the lesser evil. We have a corrupt judicial system that vote primarily party instead of law. AT the state level it is even worse when a judge is recalled not because he interpreted the law incorrectly but because the narrow minded ignorant are upset at the law and wanted a activist for a judge (teaparty) instead of changing the law. We have a supreme court that thinks that money isn't corrupting (how stupid can you get).

I don't have any illusions that democrats are less corrupt or potentially corrupt, but a lot of time it has to do with who is in power. Today the republican party is solidly corrupt while the democrats have to appear to support populism to try to get elected. They at least admit that science is science while creationism is ignorance. They admit that science knows more about climate than the koch brothers. They admit that jobs are created by supply and demand, and not based on how much money the rich have.

The problem is unfortunately going to be very difficult to deal with because of the corruption in both congress and the supreme court. Where money rules instead of the people.

To solve the problem, we have to make it so that special interests and lobbyists don't control congress and that means taking money out of running for office. It won't happen until we get a "real" court, but that won't happen if people don't educate themselves on the issue instead of on "abortion" or "appearance" of being a christian. ( I don't know of any politician that is really a "christian" in any sense of the word except in appearance).

So ultimately, it isn't government that is the problem, it is the voter that is the problem in my opinion.

There are dumb voters but there usually isn't anybody worth a fuck to vote for. Besides they all work for the same boss anyway. Both sides have the same ultimate agenda with a few smaller agendas to entice voters.

(June 26, 2014 at 3:21 pm)Isun Wrote: Personally I think it is the voter that is the problem. Chief among them are the one issue voters and those that are uninformed which unfortunately today is the republican party.

We have a system that depends on trying to elect the lesser evil. We have a corrupt judicial system that vote primarily party instead of law. AT the state level it is even worse when a judge is recalled not because he interpreted the law incorrectly but because the narrow minded ignorant are upset at the law and wanted a activist for a judge (teaparty) instead of changing the law. We have a supreme court that thinks that money isn't corrupting (how stupid can you get).

I don't have any illusions that democrats are less corrupt or potentially corrupt, but a lot of time it has to do with who is in power. Today the republican party is solidly corrupt while the democrats have to appear to support populism to try to get elected. They at least admit that science is science while creationism is ignorance. They admit that science knows more about climate than the koch brothers. They admit that jobs are created by supply and demand, and not based on how much money the rich have.

Painting the democrats as somehow better than the Republicans is your own bias. I ascribe to neither, but even lean towards the democratic side, but I'm still not going to give them even an ounce of moral superiority.

Quote:So ultimately, it isn't government that is the problem, it is the voter that is the problem in my opinion.

Preposterous. Utterly preposterous. The idea of "voting the bums out" is pure naivete. You don't vote out a corrupt system and even you admit that it IS the fault of a government that is bought and paid for by the rich:

Isun Forgot that he Wrote:The problem is unfortunately going to be very difficult to deal with because of the corruption in both congress and the supreme court. Where money rules instead of the people.

Yes, at least half of the American people are stupid as holy fuck and they will never pull the blindfold from their collective eyes, but saying that all we need to do is learn how to vote and that the blame rests on the American people is bull shit. Newsflash: I don't get to vote for the things I want to vote for. Nobody asked me if I wanted to send troops into Afghanistan or how I felt about this new fucked up health care system that is a giant scam to make the rich even richer.

Quote:To solve the problem, we have to make it so that special interests and lobbyists don't control congress and that means taking money out of running for office.

This I agree with .... but how pray tell, is that the fault of the American voter? You want to accomplish this simply by correcting the way we vote? See how ubsurd your notion is. Criminals (and that's what we have in office) don't just hand over billions of dollars because some voters told them to.

Quote:It won't happen until we get a "real" court, but that won't happen if people don't educate themselves on the issue instead of on "abortion" or "appearance" of being a christian.

What "court" are you talking about???? Exactly what does this even mean???




Ridiculous - the idea that the American voter just needs to learn how to vote and the government isn't to blame for its own actions. Stupid. Just a stupid notion.

The reason I say the voters, is that if they actually acted as responsible voters, we would be able to solve a lot of problems in our government. Would it be perfect? No, but it is would be manageable vs the disaster that we have today.

I was talking to someone at work, and her view is probably the same nationally. She doesn't vote because she knows that it doesn't mean anything. The corporations owns congress. Why should she vote when it doesn't matter who she votes for?