To be fair to the politicians who try to block any resolution to this issue, most of them were not around during the times when this worked before and do not have first hand experience of it.  

Granted, that is a very weak excuse for being ignorant of history less than a century old, but the party they are part of has already shown itself to be opposed to the “elitist” concepts of objective education and critical thought, and has demonstrated an eagerness to engage in historical revisionism, so I suppose we should not be surprised.  

A relevant bit of Rachel Maddow-ness… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0gNga6v9EY  

I think it’s worth noting that the basic concepts of sanitation weren’t lost.  I mean, how difficult is it to think of “Hey, let’s build a ditch and work it so the filth gets washed away.”

Priorities shifted.  Any form of representative government was lost, so who you were serving changed.

When a priority of service only went one way, there’s just no interest in anybody with power and clean floors to keep the peasantfolk clean.

I think Ron Paul is a true believer in his conservative economics, but I think a large part of what we’re dealing with is people who just don’t really care about the wellbeing of people who aren’t in position to make giant unlimited donations.

I’ve heard it said that the USA is basically running on the fumes of the infrastructure built up from the 1930s to the 1970s. Sure, there’s new highways that get built and there’s still paving work that gets done, but somehow the really pressing projects just don’t seem to get done as quickly as they used to.

Isaac Asimov’s Prelude to Foundation offers some interesting allegories here, and I here reproduce a portion of chapter 14 under the segment “University”:

[Hummin said,] “Because it isn’t maintained properly. I told you about decay.”
           
Seldon frowned. “Surely, people don’t sit around and say, ‘We’re decaying. Let’s let the Expressways fall apart.’ “
           
“No, they don’t. It’s not a purposeful thing. Bad spots are patched, decrepit coaches refurbished, magnets replaced. However, it’s done in more slapdash fashion, more carelessly, and at greater intervals. There just aren’t enough credits available.”
           
“Where have the credits gone?”
           
“Into other things. We’ve had centuries of unrest. The navy is much larger and many times more expensive than it once was. The armed forces are much better-paid, in order to keep them quiet. Unrest, revolts, and minor blazes of civil war all take their toll.”

Excessive focus on the military and insufficient focus on social welfare. Hmmm.

As WingedBeast notes, the ideas behind sanitation weren’t lost. But there were a number of factors at work. It’s generally thought that urban populations declined after A.D. 400, and indeed the process may have started before the fall of the Empire. Meanwhile, aqueducts were expensive to maintain. One of the main reasons for all the aqueducts was to supply water for the baths, and rinsing out the shit was a side benefit. With a decline in the popularity of bathing, due to cultural changes and Church disapproval, the desire to maintain the aqueducts fell. That doesn’t mean it disappeared; Roman aqueducts supplied many cities throughout the early Middle Ages. It’s probably true that the know-how and resources to conduct major renovations was lost, so when the infrastructure began falling apart, it was hard to put back together again. Nevertheless, it’s mainly true that priorities shifted, not that everyone suddenly became ignorant.

Edit: or what Invisible Neutrino said.

As long as the GOP thinks it is more important to put President Obama out of work than to put millions of ordinary people back to work, nothing will be done.

As long as the GOP thinks it is more important to put President Obama out of work than to put millions of ordinary people back to work, nothing will be done.

If Obama wants the GOP to not uniformly, unilaterally hate him, it’s easy: he just needs to stop being black! Don’t you see? THIS IS ALL HIS FAULT!

If Obama wants the GOP to not uniformly, unilaterally hate him, it’s easy: he just needs to stop being black! Don’t you see? THIS IS ALL HIS FAULT!

Ego.  The citizens of any empire that has been sufficiently strong for a sufficient amount of time will almost invariably come to think of themselves as  something more than human and view the practicalities of day-to-day maintainence as beneath us.  So concern for keeping the roads clean and well-paved will be replaced with an obsessive focus on the military. Partly because we view it as our birthright to at least equal the epic glories of our ancestors, and partly because, since we see ourselves as more than human, we also see ourselves as more than mortal.  Vulnerability is therefore a choice that we can reject by being strong enough, and the mere existence of any potential outside threat is taken to be proof in itself that we are not being strong enough. 

And as for what mundane day-to-day life we must suffer through?  Well at least give us culture war, hierarchy, some claim to being glorious here too.  If the ‘morality cop’ of others isn’t the minimum standard of who I must be than what’s the point of it all? 

Ego.  The citizens of any empire that has been sufficiently strong for a sufficient amount of time will almost invariably come to think of themselves as  something more than human and view the practicalities of day-to-day maintainence as beneath us.  So concern for keeping the roads clean and well-paved will be replaced with an obsessive focus on the military. Partly because we view it as our birthright to at least equal the epic glories of our ancestors, and partly because, since we see ourselves as more than human, we also see ourselves as more than mortal.  Vulnerability is therefore a choice that we can reject by being strong enough, and the mere existence of any potential outside threat is taken to be proof in itself that we are not being strong enough. 

And as for what mundane day-to-day life we must suffer through?  Well at least give us culture war, hierarchy, some claim to being glorious here too.  If the ‘morality cop’ of others isn’t the minimum standard of who I must be than what’s the point of it all? 

While I agree with the sentiment, I do have one comment to make on at least the Europian part: The countries that are in the most trouble (Greece foremost, Spain, Portugal, Italy & Ireland) do not have the U.S. luxury of being able to loan money to spend at lower interest than the inflation. If they loan money, they pay double-digit interests. Kinda puts a damper on investments.

One of the top comments on that video castigates Maddow, calling her a socialist who believes that private industry sucks, and that she and all her Far Left Zealots are successfully stopping all progress throughout America. Then he goes on to say that it’s a disgrace that a hack like her is standing there in the “shadow of greatness.”

The thing casting that shadow of greatness? The Hoover Dam.

 The thing casting that shadow of greatness? The Hoover Dam.  

Some people are just morons. As in, I don’t know how they walk and chew gum at the same time without tripping and causing themselves serious injury. 

I’ll largely agree with an arguable nitpick.

It’s not that people see themselves above the day-to-day.  A part of the issue is that anything government does well, asside from military involvement, soon becomes so assumed that its forgotten to be government at all.

Let’s see, who was that actor that used to play the main character in Coach?  Whatever his name, he went on Fox News saying that he was once on foodstamps and wellfair and the government didn’t help him then.

It’s not that people don’t like roads, it’s that people see roads as a given.  Oh, sure, you think about it and you know, logically, that roads need upkeep.  But, they’re so much a part of our lives that we just don’t think about them unless we’re annoyed.

Even on the best kept roads in the world, nobody thinks while driving “wow, these are such well kept roads”.  A part of the reason for keeping the roads so clean and up to par is so that people don’t *have* to think about them.

So, it’s less “the roads are beneath my consideration” and more “okay, the roads are taken care of, let’s move onto something else.  Look, there’s a same sex couple!  I have time to focus on that!”

It’s a little like studying for a test.  So long as you’ve studied, you wonder why you put all the effort into studying for such easy tests.

One of the top comments on that video castigates Maddow, calling her a socialist who believes that private industry sucks

Youtube is infested with conservative trolls who spend, apparently, their entire lives leaving comments on youtube videos about how so-and-so is a socialist. They rarely even bother watching the video their ostensibly responding to.

Conservatives know that the internet is the great liberalizer and that liberals have five or six times the web presence that they do. So small groups of them band together to attempt to influence things like Digg and youtube. If you ever attempt to talk to them, you’ll realize how utterly stupid and completely ignorant they are.

 Let’s see, who was that actor that used to play the main character in Coach?  Whatever his name, he went on Fox News saying that he was once on foodstamps and wellfair and the government didn’t help him then.  

Craig T. Nelson. 

He’s just the “Keep the government away from my social security” lady, but more famous.  

You know, I hate the Tea Party, but trotting out the Roman Empire is not exactly a great historical appeal here.  The Roman Empire, at the end stages, couldn’t even hold its own shit together, much less everyone else’s shit.  They were watering down the coinage, passing laws restricting you to the occupation of that your father had, and crushing the peasantry so hard with taxes that they begged the barbarians to take over.  There’s a reason that the peasantry didn’t want plumbing, after a while.

You know, I hate the Tea Party, but trotting out the Roman Empire is not exactly a great historical appeal here.  The Roman Empire, at the end stages, couldn’t even hold its own shit together, much less everyone else’s shit.  They were watering down the coinage, passing laws restricting you to the occupation of that your father had, and crushing the peasantry so hard with taxes that they begged the barbarians to take over.  There’s a reason that the peasantry didn’t want plumbing, after a while.

 There’s a reason that the peasantry didn’t want plumbing, after a while.  

I think the idea that people so associated the Roman Empire with plumbing that they rejected plumbing makes Fred’s point rather more than it’s opposite. To trot out a cliche, there’s something disturbing about people throwing the baby out with the bath water, no matter how dirty the bath water is.

Talking to teabaggers (I know that’s offensive.  Tough.) in my experiences goes like this:

Teabagger: [Something dumb]
Liberal, Moderate, or (actual) Conservative Person: No, actually [reality]
Teabagger: Yeah, well, [unsupported assertion which casts reality in a different light, thereby bolstering my original claim.]
LMaCP: But, but.. [reality]  not [your pretend version of it]
Teabagger: [Sadly shaking his head] Do you really believe that?  How naive, clearly [George Takei, Colonel Sanders or Huey Lewis (The Trilateral Commission)] has poisoned your mind.

When I pointed out to my boss that there were in fact NO death panels in the ACA, and that the thing everybody was so up in arms about was really to put insurance companies on the same page of not paying for made up quackery like homeopathy and anti-vaxers, that’s what he told me.

How do you argue with someone who LITERALLY revises reality around their own perceptions?  My freaking 3-year old know the difference between pretending to be Batman and taking a dangerous leap off of a high building.  I’m about to lose my shit with some of these people.

Edited because Disqus sucks. Also, Teabagger madlibs. Million dollar idea.

Talking to teabaggers (I know that’s offensive.  Tough.) in my experiences goes like this:

Teabagger: [Something dumb]
Liberal, Moderate, or (actual) Conservative Person: No, actually [reality]
Teabagger: Yeah, well, [unsupported assertion which casts reality in a different light, thereby bolstering my original claim.]
LMaCP: But, but.. [reality]  not [your pretend version of it]
Teabagger: [Sadly shaking his head] Do you really believe that?  How naive, clearly [George Takei, Colonel Sanders or Huey Lewis (The Trilateral Commission)] has poisoned your mind.

When I pointed out to my boss that there were in fact NO death panels in the ACA, and that the thing everybody was so up in arms about was really to put insurance companies on the same page of not paying for made up quackery like homeopathy and anti-vaxers, that’s what he told me.

How do you argue with someone who LITERALLY revises reality around their own perceptions?  My freaking 3-year old know the difference between pretending to be Batman and taking a dangerous leap off of a high building.  I’m about to lose my shit with some of these people.

Edited because Disqus sucks. Also, Teabagger madlibs. Million dollar idea.

So there’s a Bible story about government spending and taxation. Old testament. The government is Egypt. God sends some sound fiscal policy by way of a dream: tax farms (in the form of grain) during the seven upcoming good years, and spend during the lean years which will follow those. Pure Keynesianism, right? Why don’t more Christians talk about that?

Of course, a fiscal conservative might point out that we didn’t accumulate any savings during the recent good years, and so can’t afford to help keep people from starving now. But the thing is, we were running a surplus, until people took office who believed that it’s wrong for the government *ever* to run a surplus. If you say that any surplus is a sign that tax rates are too high and immediately begin cutting them, then you’re guarenteeing the government debt will grow without end, since the budget can never be balanced on average without some positive revenue years to cancel out the inevitable negative revenue years.

It more sad than scary at this point that our national paranoia that someone, somewhere might get something they don’t expressly “deserve” is going to hobble us from taking the steps to prevent complete economic collapse. Topped off with the petty wish of too many who are currently crushed by the system but with they too could be wealthy so they could do the crushing too. 

It more sad than scary at this point that our national paranoia that someone, somewhere might get something they don’t expressly “deserve” is going to hobble us from taking the steps to prevent complete economic collapse. Topped off with the petty wish of too many who are currently crushed by the system but with they too could be wealthy so they could do the crushing too. 

Youtube is infested with conservative trolls who spend, apparently, their entire lives leaving comments on youtube videos about how so-and-so is a socialist. They rarely even bother watching the video their ostensibly responding to.

The immediate aftermath of the 2008 presidential election was awful for YouTube comments.  The only people I ever heard refer to Obama as some kind of deity were the conservatives derisively calling him a “liberal god”.  Ha!  The many desperate attempts to get the message out that his election was the evidence of the impending NWO global take over conspiracy coming to fruition was just absurd.  

Of course, stupid people and YouTube have always gone hand in hand. Are we really surprised that they attract the worst of the wingnuts?

The comments on that video have shown me, at least, that however much I may hate Conservatives, I can always hate more. The more you know~

The comments on that video have shown me, at least, that however much I may hate Conservatives, I can always hate more. The more you know~

 So there’s a Bible story about government spending and taxation. Old testament. The government is Egypt. God sends some sound fiscal policy by way of a dream: tax farms (in the form of grain) during the seven upcoming good years, and spend during the lean years which will follow those. Pure Keynesianism, right? Why don’t more Christians talk about that?  

Because that’s the Old Testament and that no longer applies to us today. Except the part that says that teh ghay is totally nasty. They pick and chose the parts they want to follow* and they didn’t chose that part, so no fair bringing it up. 

*And then accuse anyone who thinks differently from them of being Cafeteria Christians. That would be really funny if it weren’t so infuriating. 

 So there’s a Bible story about government spending and taxation. Old testament. The government is Egypt. God sends some sound fiscal policy by way of a dream: tax farms (in the form of grain) during the seven upcoming good years, and spend during the lean years which will follow those. Pure Keynesianism, right? Why don’t more Christians talk about that?  

Because that’s the Old Testament and that no longer applies to us today. Except the part that says that teh ghay is totally nasty. They pick and chose the parts they want to follow* and they didn’t chose that part, so no fair bringing it up. 

*And then accuse anyone who thinks differently from them of being Cafeteria Christians. That would be really funny if it weren’t so infuriating. 

And what’s especially appalling is that those who screamed about “Death Panels” apparently see no contradiction in wildly cheering the idea of somebody dying due to lack of insurance. I really hate the Tea Party, I know I should be fair and nuanced but I can’t. I live here, I need roads, electricity, clean water, and sewer. And some gibbering aging morons are going to burn it down to the ground before they share it with me. But I’m expected to help pay for their Medicare provided scooter. Fuck them. 

And what’s especially appalling is that those who screamed about “Death Panels” apparently see no contradiction in wildly cheering the idea of somebody dying due to lack of insurance. I really hate the Tea Party, I know I should be fair and nuanced but I can’t. I live here, I need roads, electricity, clean water, and sewer. And some gibbering aging morons are going to burn it down to the ground before they share it with me. But I’m expected to help pay for their Medicare provided scooter. Fuck them. 

And what’s especially appalling is that those who screamed about “Death Panels” apparently see no contradiction in wildly cheering the idea of somebody dying due to lack of insurance. I really hate the Tea Party, I know I should be fair and nuanced but I can’t. I live here, I need roads, electricity, clean water, and sewer. And some gibbering aging morons are going to burn it down to the ground before they share it with me. But I’m expected to help pay for their Medicare provided scooter. Fuck them. 

And hey, never forget that a surprising number of conservative posters are paid by Americans for Progress and similar think-tanks and industry support groups. When you are paid by the post there is quite a bit of motivation to spread these messages far and wide.

What was all that “liberals worship Obama” stuff about anyway?  Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?

And hey, never forget that a surprising number of conservative posters are paid by Americans for Progress and similar think-tanks and industry support groups. When you are paid by the post there is quite a bit of motivation to spread these messages far and wide.

What was all that “liberals worship Obama” stuff about anyway?  Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?

They were never against Death Panels. They just wanted to be the ones running them.

They were never against Death Panels. They just wanted to be the ones running them.

 Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?  

Only when the candidate has a (D) next to his or her name. If they have an (R) it’s mandatory.

One of my Right wing grad school classmates tried to pull the whole “Liberals worship Obama” thing on me. I just hit Goggle and pulled up a couple clips of the Winger reaction to Bush the Lesser in his flight suit and then asked him if he really wanted to have that conversation with me. Never heard another word about it. 

(It should be noted that, other than his appalling politics, I actually liked that guy a lot. He was in my program so we had several classes together and we got along fine.)

 Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?  

Only when the candidate has a (D) next to his or her name. If they have an (R) it’s mandatory.

One of my Right wing grad school classmates tried to pull the whole “Liberals worship Obama” thing on me. I just hit Goggle and pulled up a couple clips of the Winger reaction to Bush the Lesser in his flight suit and then asked him if he really wanted to have that conversation with me. Never heard another word about it. 

(It should be noted that, other than his appalling politics, I actually liked that guy a lot. He was in my program so we had several classes together and we got along fine.)

So no Jubilee years either, then?

But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance.

But the wisdom of saving during the good times and spending during the bad times, especially for government, is so obvious that I can’t believe I haven’t seen anyone address that story in this context, not even to refute it. How *would* those well-meaning Christians refute it?

So there’s a Bible story about government spending and taxation. Old testament. The government is Egypt. God sends some sound fiscal policy by way of a dream: tax farms (in the form of grain) during the seven upcoming good years, and spend during the lean years which will follow those. Pure Keynesianism, right? Why don’t more Christians talk about that?

Not really. Egypt taxes during the good years, then sells back the receipts at a steep profit during the lean years. The government spending keeps the famine at bay, but the pharaoh isn’t doing any deficit spending, and he’s not doing it to stimulate the economy, except insofar as it ensures he has an economy.

So no Jubilee years either, then?

But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance.

But the wisdom of saving during the good times and spending during the bad times, especially for government, is so obvious that I can’t believe I haven’t seen anyone address that story in this context, not even to refute it. How *would* those well-meaning Christians refute it?

So there’s a Bible story about government spending and taxation. Old testament. The government is Egypt. God sends some sound fiscal policy by way of a dream: tax farms (in the form of grain) during the seven upcoming good years, and spend during the lean years which will follow those. Pure Keynesianism, right? Why don’t more Christians talk about that?

Not really. Egypt taxes during the good years, then sells back the receipts at a steep profit during the lean years. The government spending keeps the famine at bay, but the pharaoh isn’t doing any deficit spending, and he’s not doing it to stimulate the economy, except insofar as it ensures he has an economy.

 The government spending keeps the famine at bay, but the pharaoh isn’t doing any deficit spending, and he’s not doing it to stimulate the economy, except insofar as it ensures he has an economy.  

Oh yeah, it’s the deficit spending part that makes all the difference. Accept that it’s absolutely, factually not. And also at this point government spending to stimulate the economy would be for the purpose of ensuring that there is an economy, because austerity is not getting the job done. 

 The government spending keeps the famine at bay, but the pharaoh isn’t doing any deficit spending, and he’s not doing it to stimulate the economy, except insofar as it ensures he has an economy.  

Oh yeah, it’s the deficit spending part that makes all the difference. Accept that it’s absolutely, factually not. And also at this point government spending to stimulate the economy would be for the purpose of ensuring that there is an economy, because austerity is not getting the job done. 

 But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance. 

I know many people who try to live with as little debt as possible. I have no issue with that. We’d be in less trouble right now if we had had a lower rate of consumer debt and a higher savings rate before the financial tidal wave hit. 

The problem is that the same people who live with little debt and advocate for others to do the same vote again and again for the conservative policies that created the boom in consumer debt. They attribute it to personal failure while supporting the systemic changes that prompted it and then complaining about those systemic changes (like the lack of good jobs). 

 But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance. 

I know many people who try to live with as little debt as possible. I have no issue with that. We’d be in less trouble right now if we had had a lower rate of consumer debt and a higher savings rate before the financial tidal wave hit. 

The problem is that the same people who live with little debt and advocate for others to do the same vote again and again for the conservative policies that created the boom in consumer debt. They attribute it to personal failure while supporting the systemic changes that prompted it and then complaining about those systemic changes (like the lack of good jobs). 

Joseph taxed 20% during the good years, and then “opened all the storehouses and sold grain to the Egyptians, for the famine was severe throughout Egypt,” during the bad years.  http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+41&version=NIV I don’t see the part about “at a steep profit.” The implication is that this actually staves off famine for Egypt as a whole, which it couldn’t do if only the wealthy were able to buy food. Also, if you’re trying to wring the maximum amount of money out of scare resource, you don’t “open all the storehouses.” You sell a little at a time, to keep demand high.

And again, the only reason we’re reduced to deficit spending now is that the right wing never allows us to accumulate a surplus like that in the good years.

I think the distinction between “stimulus” and “keeping famine at bay” is a false one. The point of stimulus spending is to keep famine at bay, or rather, to make sure most people can afford to eat. The difference between stimulus spending and the dole is that stimulus spending implies you’re actually *buying* something, not just giving hand outs. You’re asking for something in return, but the point is really what you’re giving, not what you’re getting. Same with Joseph. We don’t know what his asking price was, but the point is he was distributing wheat, not that he was making money for the Pharoh.

Joseph taxed 20% during the good years, and then “opened all the storehouses and sold grain to the Egyptians, for the famine was severe throughout Egypt,” during the bad years.  http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+41&version=NIV I don’t see the part about “at a steep profit.” The implication is that this actually staves off famine for Egypt as a whole, which it couldn’t do if only the wealthy were able to buy food. Also, if you’re trying to wring the maximum amount of money out of scare resource, you don’t “open all the storehouses.” You sell a little at a time, to keep demand high.

And again, the only reason we’re reduced to deficit spending now is that the right wing never allows us to accumulate a surplus like that in the good years.

I think the distinction between “stimulus” and “keeping famine at bay” is a false one. The point of stimulus spending is to keep famine at bay, or rather, to make sure most people can afford to eat. The difference between stimulus spending and the dole is that stimulus spending implies you’re actually *buying* something, not just giving hand outs. You’re asking for something in return, but the point is really what you’re giving, not what you’re getting. Same with Joseph. We don’t know what his asking price was, but the point is he was distributing wheat, not that he was making money for the Pharoh.

Perhaps the people claiming not to know how to fix the problem actually don’t want the problem fixed. I’m not generally one for declaring other people evil, but so many of the actions taken by current conservatives seem evil, it’s hard not to assume they’re as evil as they act. At this point, I think there’s at least a percentage of them that truly want the to be people starving in the streets. Look at what’s going on in Michigan, for example. Never mind that these are people who boo soldiers for being gay and cheer the execution of the innocent. I just can’t see how good people get that self deluded.

Perhaps the people claiming not to know how to fix the problem actually don’t want the problem fixed. I’m not generally one for declaring other people evil, but so many of the actions taken by current conservatives seem evil, it’s hard not to assume they’re as evil as they act. At this point, I think there’s at least a percentage of them that truly want the to be people starving in the streets. Look at what’s going on in Michigan, for example. Never mind that these are people who boo soldiers for being gay and cheer the execution of the innocent. I just can’t see how good people get that self deluded.

And what’s especially appalling is that those who screamed about “Death Panels” apparently see no contradiction in wildly cheering the idea of somebody dying due to lack of insurance.

What’s even funnier (actually sadder) is that Death Panels already exist. Every single insurance company has dozens of people on the payroll whose express job it is to deny coverage by any means necessary.

Throughout the Healthcare Reform debate it was as if we visited bizzaro world. Things that every. single. health insurance. company. does. routinely were held up as horrifying and evil theoretical outcomes of government healthcare.

And what’s especially appalling is that those who screamed about “Death Panels” apparently see no contradiction in wildly cheering the idea of somebody dying due to lack of insurance.

What’s even funnier (actually sadder) is that Death Panels already exist. Every single insurance company has dozens of people on the payroll whose express job it is to deny coverage by any means necessary.

Throughout the Healthcare Reform debate it was as if we visited bizzaro world. Things that every. single. health insurance. company. does. routinely were held up as horrifying and evil theoretical outcomes of government healthcare.

Regarding the nationalized health care, there was one comment some right winger said online that I could not dismiss out of hand, which was “I don’t want politicians running my health care.”  

That I find is actually a valid point.  The politicians that I want to avoid running my health care are the ones who would try to shut the health care program down, or just so throughly gut the program that it is incapable of functioning, all to try and force me to pay higher premiums on some private health care provider who will wring more money out of me for the same services I would otherwise get if the public option were working.  

However, the private insurers are worse.  The only politician I fear running my health care is one who will try and drive me out of it.  

Regarding the nationalized health care, there was one comment some right winger said online that I could not dismiss out of hand, which was “I don’t want politicians running my health care.”  

That I find is actually a valid point.  The politicians that I want to avoid running my health care are the ones who would try to shut the health care program down, or just so throughly gut the program that it is incapable of functioning, all to try and force me to pay higher premiums on some private health care provider who will wring more money out of me for the same services I would otherwise get if the public option were working.  

However, the private insurers are worse.  The only politician I fear running my health care is one who will try and drive me out of it.  

The profits are detailed in Genesis 47: Joseph takes all the people’s money, all their possessions, and all their land, and makes them slaves, in exchange for just enough food to live on. (In fairness, he probably didn’t have the surplus food to ration, especially since he was selling to Canaan too.) This isn’t Keynesian economics, it’s the fire department charging you $50,000 to save your house.
There is probably some advice about saving for the future bad times in Proverbs, it just doesn’t apply here. I’m not sure if it even makes sense to talk about a business cycle in the Bronze Age at all.

The profits are detailed in Genesis 47: Joseph takes all the people’s money, all their possessions, and all their land, and makes them slaves, in exchange for just enough food to live on. (In fairness, he probably didn’t have the surplus food to ration, especially since he was selling to Canaan too.) This isn’t Keynesian economics, it’s the fire department charging you $50,000 to save your house.
There is probably some advice about saving for the future bad times in Proverbs, it just doesn’t apply here. I’m not sure if it even makes sense to talk about a business cycle in the Bronze Age at all.

The difference between the famine story and modern times isn’t issue of the business cycle in the Bronze Age, it’s about the relationship between the people and their government. Joseph worked for Pharaoh—and so did Pharaoh. That situation was far more akin to a modern corporation creating a business plan that will allow it to gouge people after a disaster than the way our government is supposed to work.   

Even allowing for that, taking from the story the idea that those in charge should build up stores in good times to see the people through lean times is hardly more of a stretch than many of the other lessons we’re supposedly meant to learn from the Bible. 

The difference between the famine story and modern times isn’t issue of the business cycle in the Bronze Age, it’s about the relationship between the people and their government. Joseph worked for Pharaoh—and so did Pharaoh. That situation was far more akin to a modern corporation creating a business plan that will allow it to gouge people after a disaster than the way our government is supposed to work.   

Even allowing for that, taking from the story the idea that those in charge should build up stores in good times to see the people through lean times is hardly more of a stretch than many of the other lessons we’re supposedly meant to learn from the Bible. 

Perhaps the people claiming not to know how to fix the problem actually don’t want the problem fixed.

Well, according to a trader the BBC interviewed they don’t actually care about the economy being fixed. Crashes and recessions are just a great way to make money and not something to be avoided. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC19fEqR5bA

Perhaps the people claiming not to know how to fix the problem actually don’t want the problem fixed.

Well, according to a trader the BBC interviewed they don’t actually care about the economy being fixed. Crashes and recessions are just a great way to make money and not something to be avoided. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC19fEqR5bA

They attribute it to personal failure while supporting the systemic
changes that prompted it and then complaining about those systemic
changes (like the lack of good jobs).
There was a column in today’s LA Times about a guy who was unemployed for many months, and was getting food from a charity group. He finally got a job, but it’s not paying him much, and it’s far enough from where he lives that travel is eating his paycheck, even though he’s cut way back on everything he can.

Someone wrote a comment about how he should get trained for some other job, and be responsible for himself, because they don’t want to pay for other people. And they said that they didn’t want to sound heartless.

They attribute it to personal failure while supporting the systemic
changes that prompted it and then complaining about those systemic
changes (like the lack of good jobs).
There was a column in today’s LA Times about a guy who was unemployed for many months, and was getting food from a charity group. He finally got a job, but it’s not paying him much, and it’s far enough from where he lives that travel is eating his paycheck, even though he’s cut way back on everything he can.

Someone wrote a comment about how he should get trained for some other job, and be responsible for himself, because they don’t want to pay for other people. And they said that they didn’t want to sound heartless.

Yahoo News is 100 times worse than Youtube.

Yahoo News is 100 times worse than Youtube.

And they said that they didn’t want to sound heartless. 

Hum, if only there was some way to avoid sounding heartless. There must be one, right? What to do? What to do? Not be heartless perhaps? Nah, that can’t be it. Must be something about phrasing things correctly.

And they said that they didn’t want to sound heartless. 

Hum, if only there was some way to avoid sounding heartless. There must be one, right? What to do? What to do? Not be heartless perhaps? Nah, that can’t be it. Must be something about phrasing things correctly.

Kiba:

Reminds me of the time way back in 1998 when Malaysia slammed down controls over capital flows, the local paper interviewed some forex traders who whined and snivelled and sounded more entitled than the douchebag who expected the girl to put out on the first date.

Kiba:

Reminds me of the time way back in 1998 when Malaysia slammed down controls over capital flows, the local paper interviewed some forex traders who whined and snivelled and sounded more entitled than the douchebag who expected the girl to put out on the first date.

It’s like, people like that seem to think it’s their God-given right to do whatever they want to make as much cashola as they can without one smidgen of a thought for the side or after-effects of what they did to make that money.

What was all that “liberals worship Obama” stuff about anyway?  Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?

DARVO in action, of course.  The smarter conservatives figured out in retrospect how idiotic their terror-driven ass-kissing of Bush had looked to the rest of us, so naturally they HAD to accuse Liberals of worshipping Obama the same way they’d been grovelling before The Deciderer.

What was all that “liberals worship Obama” stuff about anyway?  Was there some rule against being excited by a candidate?

DARVO in action, of course.  The smarter conservatives figured out in retrospect how idiotic their terror-driven ass-kissing of Bush had looked to the rest of us, so naturally they HAD to accuse Liberals of worshipping Obama the same way they’d been grovelling before The Deciderer.

So no Jubilee years either, then?

HAHAHAno.  

Also, no leaving any harvest for the Poor to glean.  They might be Unworthy, dontchaknow.

But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance. 

They might be trying to LIVE by those principles, but I’ve never seen conservatives try to GOVERN by them.  Pretty much every Republican government in my lifetime seems to have been convinced that the armed forces are paid for with ever-replenishing fairy gold.

So no Jubilee years either, then?

HAHAHAno.  

Also, no leaving any harvest for the Poor to glean.  They might be Unworthy, dontchaknow.

But I don’t think that all conservatives are that cynical. Some of them really are trying to live by the principles they were raised on (which they have been raised to believe are the Bible’s principles) including austerity and debt-avoidance. 

They might be trying to LIVE by those principles, but I’ve never seen conservatives try to GOVERN by them.  Pretty much every Republican government in my lifetime seems to have been convinced that the armed forces are paid for with ever-replenishing fairy gold.

If that was a link, it didn’t work for me.  What’s DARVO?

If that was a link, it didn’t work for me.  What’s DARVO?

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/86132/how-conservatives-tax-the-poor

It’s a sad state of affairs when it’s actually a shock for a Republican governor like Bob Riley to invoke Jesus Christ in insisting that the rich must be taxed to help the poor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/us/gop-chief-s-idea-for-raising-alabama-taxes.html?ref=bobriley&pagewanted=2

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/86132/how-conservatives-tax-the-poor

It’s a sad state of affairs when it’s actually a shock for a Republican governor like Bob Riley to invoke Jesus Christ in insisting that the rich must be taxed to help the poor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/us/gop-chief-s-idea-for-raising-alabama-taxes.html?ref=bobriley&pagewanted=2

DARVO refers to a reaction perpetrators of wrong doing, particularly sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. DARVO stands for “Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.”‘

aka Republican Standard Operating Procedure.

(And here’s the link again, just in case.
http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineDARVO.html

DARVO refers to a reaction perpetrators of wrong doing, particularly sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. DARVO stands for “Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.”‘

aka Republican Standard Operating Procedure.

(And here’s the link again, just in case.
http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineDARVO.html

Yes, let’s spend money like water hoping against home that somehow we’ll be able to pay it back in the future…  Oh, wait.  *Isn’t that exactly how we got in this mess in the first place?*

Not to mention that you leave out the bits of history and economy inconvenient to your thesis – like the millions of blue collar smokestack industry jobs that fueled economic growth in the 50′s and 60′s that are now gone forever.  They aren’t going to be replaced with white collar jobs either.

Yes, let’s spend money like water hoping against home that somehow we’ll be able to pay it back in the future…  Oh, wait.  *Isn’t that exactly how we got in this mess in the first place?*

Not to mention that you leave out the bits of history and economy inconvenient to your thesis – like the millions of blue collar smokestack industry jobs that fueled economic growth in the 50′s and 60′s that are now gone forever.  They aren’t going to be replaced with white collar jobs either.

Oh, wait.  *Isn’t that exactly how we got in this mess in the first place? 

No.

Not to mention that you leave out the bits of history and economy
inconvenient to your thesis – like the millions of blue collar
smokestack industry jobs that fueled economic growth in the 50′s and
60′s that are now gone forever.  They aren’t going to be replaced with
white collar jobs either.

I certianly remember that and I’m sure other people do to. Fred certainly does, which is one of the (many) reasons he strongly favors infrastructure projects. Many of the jobs created by those projects are blue collar jobs.

What exactly is your solution to the problem of blue collar jobs disappearing and not being replaced by white collar jobs? Does your plan involve several million people dying off or being incarcerated or otherwise taken out of the job pool? Austerity creates even higher rates of unemployment, of all collar colors, so unless you’re planning on reducing the worker pool you need some other solution.

Oh, wait.  *Isn’t that exactly how we got in this mess in the first place? 

No.

Not to mention that you leave out the bits of history and economy
inconvenient to your thesis – like the millions of blue collar
smokestack industry jobs that fueled economic growth in the 50′s and
60′s that are now gone forever.  They aren’t going to be replaced with
white collar jobs either.

I certianly remember that and I’m sure other people do to. Fred certainly does, which is one of the (many) reasons he strongly favors infrastructure projects. Many of the jobs created by those projects are blue collar jobs.

What exactly is your solution to the problem of blue collar jobs disappearing and not being replaced by white collar jobs? Does your plan involve several million people dying off or being incarcerated or otherwise taken out of the job pool? Austerity creates even higher rates of unemployment, of all collar colors, so unless you’re planning on reducing the worker pool you need some other solution.

Austerity creates even higher rates of unemployment, of all collar colors, so unless you’re planning on reducing the worker pool you need some other solution.

I’m sure the Prison-Industrial Complex will be HAPPY to take up the slack once the Food Riots get underway.

Austerity creates even higher rates of unemployment, of all collar colors, so unless you’re planning on reducing the worker pool you need some other solution.

I’m sure the Prison-Industrial Complex will be HAPPY to take up the slack once the Food Riots get underway.

It’s kind of strange how accidental “prison Keynesianism” came to be an unstated policy for giving people good jobs who’re protected by the government from the untrammelled workings of the free market.

It’s also a crying shame that this kind of method of securing jobs for people is one of the few Conservatively Correct methods of government interventionism.

It’s kind of strange how accidental “prison Keynesianism” came to be an unstated policy for giving people good jobs who’re protected by the government from the untrammelled workings of the free market.

It’s also a crying shame that this kind of method of securing jobs for people is one of the few Conservatively Correct methods of government interventionism.

Somehow, the Great Conservative Hivemind decided that the only parts of the government that AREN’T totally inept, completely evil, and deserving of the Righteous Slashing of the Budget are those parts that kill or imprison people.

Funny, that.

Somehow, the Great Conservative Hivemind decided that the only parts of the government that AREN’T totally inept, completely evil, and deserving of the Righteous Slashing of the Budget are those parts that kill or imprison people.

Funny, that.

Righties these days hate civilization; you might remember it; the recognition that physics and biology trump ideology, that mere laborers and mechanics should have a say in their affairs and be allowed to live the good life, that the wealth and power of private tyrants should be limited, that everyone should be equal before the law, that violence should not be the first recourse in disputes. Even a casual reading of righty coments shows how much they hate this progress we have made over the last few thousand years.

Righties these days hate civilization; you might remember it; the recognition that physics and biology trump ideology, that mere laborers and mechanics should have a say in their affairs and be allowed to live the good life, that the wealth and power of private tyrants should be limited, that everyone should be equal before the law, that violence should not be the first recourse in disputes. Even a casual reading of righty coments shows how much they hate this progress we have made over the last few thousand years.

I’m sure the Prison-Industrial Complex will be HAPPY to take up the slack once the Food Riots get underway.

This is exactly where I fear we’re headed. Recently Cornell West wrote a price that I can’t find right now (one day I will better organize my saves links) about the fact that the Great Recession has created a situation in which many whites, including some who were formally in the middle class, as being treated the way the AA community has been treated all along, including unrelenting high levels of unemployment and demonization by politicians and the press. The other piece of that puzzle is high rates of incarceration as a tool of control.

I’m sure the Prison-Industrial Complex will be HAPPY to take up the slack once the Food Riots get underway.

This is exactly where I fear we’re headed. Recently Cornell West wrote a piece that I can’t find right now (one day I will better organize my saved links) about the fact that the Great Recession has created a situation in which many whites, including some who were formerly in the middle class, are being treated the way the AA community has been treated all along, including unrelenting high levels of unemployment and demonization by politicians and the press.

The other piece of that puzzle is high rates of incarceration as a tool of control.

Pretty much every Republican government in my lifetime seems to have
been convinced that the armed forces are paid for with ever-replenishing
fairy gold.

The Republicans (especially the Tea Party) are big on fairies.  I’m reasonably certain they think there are road fairies, water supply fairies, sewer fairies, snow removal fairies, etc.  Of course, even relying on fairy aid rather does in their “I do everything myself!  EVERYTHING!” claim.  Ah well.

Pretty much every Republican government in my lifetime seems to have
been convinced that the armed forces are paid for with ever-replenishing
fairy gold.

The Republicans (especially the Tea Party) are big on fairies.  I’m reasonably certain they think there are road fairies, water supply fairies, sewer fairies, snow removal fairies, etc.  Of course, even relying on fairy aid rather does in their “I do everything myself!  EVERYTHING!” claim.  Ah well.

I’d highly recommend the on going non-coverage of the Wall Street Occupation going on.  The police are out in force there and are pretty free with the mace and arresting already.  Kinda like they were in the WTO protests and completely unlike how they are for Teapartiers with guns…

I’d highly recommend the on going non-coverage of the Wall Street Occupation going on.  The police are out in force there and are pretty free with the mace and arresting already.  Kinda like they were in the WTO protests and completely unlike how they are for Teapartiers with guns…

The problem is that very few other debts and claims to do the same again by the same people to vote conservative policies based on the boom in consumer debt.

The problem is that very few other debts and claims to do the same again by the same people to vote conservative policies based on the boom in consumer debt.

Bail Hearing Lawyer

If you ever attempt to talk to them, you’ll realize how utterly stupid and completely ignorant they are.

Indeed, this board hosts a piece of performance art demonstrating just that.

If you ever attempt to talk to them, you’ll realize how utterly stupid and completely ignorant they are.

Indeed, this board hosts a piece of performance art demonstrating just that.

Argleblarglewtf.

That’s *exactly* the quicksand trap I was talking about a week or so ago – you want to get out of poverty, you have to take a lunge at that branch* – and if you lunge and *miss* – which is not a hard thing to do… then you’re deeper in the hole than when you started.

Which is a freaking idiotic setup to have.

Not just in terms of morality – it’s morally repugnant to have a system set up so that you’re telling people they are not worth shit unless they make X amount of money, but then have things set so that trying to get to that level is as likely to sink them as help them achieve their dreams – probably more likely.

*Education, training, moving to a new location, whatever it is you need to do to get a better job basically is going to come with some inherent risks.  There are very few things someone in poverty (or even someone in the middle class TBH) can do without risk to improve their income level.

Argleblarglewtf.

That’s *exactly* the quicksand trap I was talking about a week or so ago – you want to get out of poverty, you have to take a lunge at that branch* – and if you lunge and *miss* – which is not a hard thing to do… then you’re deeper in the hole than when you started.

Which is a freaking idiotic setup to have.

It’s both foolish and morally repugnant to have a system set up so that you’re telling people they are not worth shit unless they make X amount of money, but then have things set so that trying to get to that level is as likely to sink them as help them achieve their dreams – probably more likely.

*Education, training, moving to a new location, whatever it is you need to do to get a better job basically is going to come with some inherent risks.  There are very few things someone in poverty (or even someone in the middle class TBH) can do without risk to improve their income level.

We got into this because of banks being turned into frigging gambling casinos.

What this means is that securities were cut up, repacked, and then sold with shiny new triple A ratings, even though the banks selling them knew full well they were shit.

There’s more to it than that though – you have to remember those blue collar jobs have largely been lost due to free-trade policies – things that the right wing tends to support and which the left wing generally opposes.  The result is American factory jobs going to places with cheap labor, few regulations and no real incentive to change.

Those factory jobs didn’t disappear because of government spending – they disappeared because politicians decided that serving the interests of enormous corporations by making offshoring jobs incredibly easy.*

While I am sad to say Bill Clinton signed one such deal – it was primarily Republicans who drove it, just as it has always been economic ‘conservatives’** who drives said deals. 

We on the left? Yeah we’re generally not fond of them.  Most of us are rather big on making said blue collar jobs both A) available and B) worth having (as in they pay well enough and give enough benefits that being a factory worker allows one to live a decent life.)

Additionally in terms of government spending vs revenue, the problem there is that while income tax for the top bracket is ~35%, that bracket starts at 378k – meaning that someone who makes millions every year pays the same rate as someone who makes 400k a year.  Both are well off of course, but I think it’s fair to same the millionaire is making out like a bandit in comparison.  On top of that though, income tax does not take into account income from non-work related sources.

So for example, say you have millions of dollars in stock dividends coming your way:  There’s a good chance you’re paying only 15% on that.

That means someone who makes the vast majority of their money that way, can easily end up paying less in taxes than say… their secretary.  Or put another way, Warren Buffet probably paid less in taxes than you did in the last year.

Furthermore due to tax loopholes, companies like GE pay literally *nothing* in taxes.  Nothing.  Exxon Mobil? Nothing.  Oh they pay corporate taxes in other countries – where they send jobs when they can, but they don’t pay us a dime.

You in all likelihood paid more in taxes than Exxon did.  Did I mention Exxon made 370 billion dollars last year?  Yeah.  That sound fair to you?

And don’t give me that “Job creators” crap – sure they create jobs… in China.

The thing is, we’re trapped in this bizarre thought pattern in this country that the way to get companies to create more jobs is to lower the barriers on them even further – get rid of stuff like minimum wage, benefits, unions, etc… But that doesn’t work; not unless you want Joe and Jane Average to have a standard of living comparable to that of the working poor in the third world.  Generally speaking I don’t think we want to race to the bottom like that; because the only people who benefit from that arrangement are the people already on top.

Before I finish up, I’d like to add that while the above may sound conspiratorial – it really isn’t.  There’s no need for it to be – from the perspective of an amoral CEO, there’s absolutely no reason to pay American workers if one can pay 3 Chinese workers for the same price.  That only changes if there are regulations that in one way or another protect American jobs against that kind of race to the bottom.

Finally, a not insignificant chunk of our debt comes from the war in Iraq and the other in Afghanistan.  War is *expensive*.  Iraq alone has cost an estimated 3.8 trillion in economic growth.  No that isn’t funds spent, that number is 800 or so billion (including 12 billion that was simply lost.  You read that right – lost.  As in “We don’t know what the hell we did with it” lost – not “Burned in a fire” lost.)

If you’re wondering how you didn’t notice this during the Bush years, it’s because unlike today, the war was never put in the budget during those years – instead it was funded in separate funding bills which allowed the budget to appear more balanced than it in fact was.

Summed up – it’s not spending that got us into this hole – it’s people at the top**** who are motivated solely by enriching themselves by whatever means are available and giving no concern to the wellbeing of their nation or it’s people.

And really, why would they?  Unless a corporation is run by unusually ethical people, they’re just not going to do things like pay decent wages voluntarily. 

If you want to examine what things were like before we had stuff like the minimum wage, OSHA, and legally allowed unions with the ability to strike, look into the Gilded Age and company scrip.

*And sadly a no-brainer business decision if you’re an amoral bastard.

**This label is a crock, I will add.  There’s nothing conservative about throwing open the trade lanes without giving a shit what it’ll actually do to the economy.  But then you have to remember that most of these transnational corporations and the people who benefit from them at the very top really do not give one tiny shit about America.  They don’t need to – they can burn the country to the ground and then buy themselves an island with the plunder.

***This should be upsetting for entirely other reasons – not that someone doesn’t pay income taxes, but that they make so little money that making them pay would be counterproductive.

****I will add that the motivations present could easily have been present in someone at the bottom as well.  The difference is that someone at the top makes huge waves when they do it, while someone at the bottom… well they don’t.  They don’t have the economic footprint to do so.

o.

We got into this because of banks being turned into frigging gambling casinos.

What this means is that securities were cut up, repacked, and then sold with shiny new triple A ratings, even though the banks selling them knew full well they were shit.

There’s more to it than that though – you have to remember those blue collar jobs have largely been lost due to free-trade policies – things that the right wing tends to support and which the left wing generally opposes.  The result is American factory jobs going to places with cheap labor, few regulations and no real incentive to change.

Those factory jobs didn’t disappear because of government spending – they disappeared because politicians decided that serving the interests of enormous corporations by making offshoring jobs incredibly easy.*

While I am sad to say Bill Clinton signed one such deal – it was primarily Republicans who drove it, just as it has always been economic ‘conservatives’** who drives said deals. 

We on the left? Yeah we’re generally not fond of them.  Most of us are rather big on making said blue collar jobs both A) available and B) worth having (as in they pay well enough and give enough benefits that being a factory worker allows one to live a decent life.)

Additionally in terms of government spending vs revenue, the problem there is that while income tax for the top bracket is ~35%, that bracket starts at 378k – meaning that someone who makes millions every year pays the same rate as someone who makes 400k a year.  Both are well off of course, but I think it’s fair to same the millionaire is making out like a bandit in comparison.  On top of that though, income tax does not take into account income from non-work related sources.

So for example, say you have millions of dollars in stock dividends coming your way:  There’s a good chance you’re paying only 15% on that.

That means someone who makes the vast majority of their money that way, can easily end up paying less in taxes than say… their secretary.  Or put another way, Warren Buffet probably paid less in taxes than you did in the last year. *edit* For clarity – this paragraph is about in terms of percentage, not in terms of absolute dollars. Further down we’re talking actual dollars.

Furthermore due to tax loopholes, companies like GE pay literally *nothing* in taxes.  Nothing.  Exxon Mobil? Nothing.  Oh they pay corporate taxes in other countries – where they send jobs when they can, but they don’t pay us a dime.

You in all likelihood paid more in taxes than Exxon did.  Did I mention Exxon made 370 billion dollars last year?  Yeah.  That sound fair to you?

And don’t give me that “Job creators” crap – sure they create jobs… in China.

The thing is, we’re trapped in this bizarre thought pattern in this country that the way to get companies to create more jobs is to lower the barriers on them even further – get rid of stuff like minimum wage, benefits, unions, etc… But that doesn’t work; not unless you want Joe and Jane Average to have a standard of living comparable to that of the working poor in the third world.  Generally speaking I don’t think we want to race to the bottom like that; because the only people who benefit from that arrangement are the people already on top.

Before I finish up, I’d like to add that while the above may sound conspiratorial – it really isn’t.  There’s no need for it to be – from the perspective of an amoral CEO, there’s absolutely no reason to pay American workers if one can pay 3 Chinese workers for the same price.  That only changes if there are regulations that in one way or another protect American jobs against that kind of race to the bottom.

Finally, a not insignificant chunk of our debt comes from the war in Iraq and the other in Afghanistan.  War is *expensive*.  Iraq alone has cost an estimated 3.8 trillion in economic growth.  No that isn’t funds spent, that number is 800 or so billion (including 12 billion that was simply lost.  You read that right – lost.  As in “We don’t know what the hell we did with it” lost – not “Burned in a fire” lost.)

If you’re wondering how you didn’t notice this during the Bush years, it’s because unlike today, the war was never put in the budget during those years – instead it was funded in separate funding bills which allowed the budget to appear more balanced than it in fact was.

Summed up – it’s not spending that got us into this hole – it’s people at the top**** who are motivated solely by enriching themselves by whatever means are available and giving no concern to the wellbeing of their nation or it’s people.

And really, why would they?  Unless a corporation is run by unusually ethical people, they’re just not going to do things like pay decent wages voluntarily. 

If you want to examine what things were like before we had stuff like the minimum wage, OSHA, and legally allowed unions with the ability to strike, look into the Gilded Age and company scrip.

*And sadly a no-brainer business decision if you’re an amoral bastard.

**This label is a crock, I will add.  There’s nothing conservative about throwing open the trade lanes without giving a shit what it’ll actually do to the economy.  But then you have to remember that most of these transnational corporations and the people who benefit from them at the very top really do not give one tiny shit about America.  They don’t need to – they can burn the country to the ground and then buy themselves an island with the plunder.

***This should be upsetting for entirely other reasons – not that someone doesn’t pay income taxes, but that they make so little money that making them pay would be counterproductive.

****I will add that the motivations present could easily have been present in someone at the bottom as well.  The difference is that someone at the top makes huge waves when they do it, while someone at the bottom… well they don’t.  They don’t have the economic footprint to do so.

o.

Regarding Genesis 47: I confess I’d forgotten that part of the story. But looking at it, I’m still not sure I agree with your interpretation: ‘Joseph said to the people, “Now that I have bought you and your land today for Pharaoh, here is seed for you so you can plant the ground. But when the crop comes in, give a fifth of it to Pharaoh. The other four-fifths you may keep as seed for the fields and as food for yourselves and your households and your children.”
 “You have saved our lives,” they said. “May we find favor in the eyes of our lord; we will be in bondage to Pharaoh.” So Joseph established it as a law concerning land in Egypt—still in force today—that a fifth of the produce belongs to Pharaoh. It was only the land of the priests that did not become Pharaoh’s.’

Yes, he takes their land and their livestock and their labor, but then he gives them seed corn in return, something to plant over and above the something to eat that they actually bargained for. So he’s not just being rapacious. Sounds like Joseph was trying to establish a permanent taxation scheme.  “I’ll give you food now on the condition that you continue paying taxes in the future.” Did he really need to own the land and the livestock and the labor of the people in order to do that? We wouldn’t think so (sounds awfully socialist) but back then, people maybe had different notions of what rights were included under “ownership.”

Or maybe I’m trying too hard to make Joseph (and God) the good guys here. But this is a story that needs grappling with, if you’re a Bible-believer with any political opinions at all, I think.

Regarding Genesis 47: I confess I’d forgotten that part of the story. But looking at it, I’m still not sure I agree with your interpretation: ‘Joseph said to the people, “Now that I have bought you and your land today for Pharaoh, here is seed for you so you can plant the ground. But when the crop comes in, give a fifth of it to Pharaoh. The other four-fifths you may keep as seed for the fields and as food for yourselves and your households and your children.”
 “You have saved our lives,” they said. “May we find favor in the eyes of our lord; we will be in bondage to Pharaoh.” So Joseph established it as a law concerning land in Egypt—still in force today—that a fifth of the produce belongs to Pharaoh. It was only the land of the priests that did not become Pharaoh’s.’

Yes, he takes their land and their livestock and their labor, but then he gives them seed corn in return, something to plant over and above the something to eat that they actually bargained for. So he’s not just being rapacious. Sounds like Joseph was trying to establish a permanent taxation scheme.  “I’ll give you food now on the condition that you continue paying taxes in the future.” Did he really need to own the land and the livestock and the labor of the people in order to do that? We wouldn’t think so (sounds awfully socialist) but back then, people maybe had different notions of what rights were included under “ownership.”

Or maybe I’m trying too hard to make Joseph (and God) the good guys here. But this is a story that needs grappling with, if you’re a Bible-believer with any political opinions at all, I think.

 I’d highly recommend the on going non-coverage of the Wall Street Occupation going on.  The police are out in force there and are pretty free with the mace and arresting already.  Kinda like they were in the WTO protests and completely unlike how they are for Teapartiers with guns…  

Yeah, I noticed that. The protests are getting so little coverage in the press that very few other people will though. 

And of course there’s the DFH issue. Tea Partiers with guns are good old salt of the earth Americans who are just upset and want their country back. We need to listen to their concerns. The Wall Street protesters are DNFs who want anarchy and free love and their concerns are of no consequence. 

 I’d highly recommend the on going non-coverage of the Wall Street Occupation going on.  The police are out in force there and are pretty free with the mace and arresting already.  Kinda like they were in the WTO protests and completely unlike how they are for Teapartiers with guns…  

Yeah, I noticed that. The protests are getting so little coverage in the press that very few other people will though. 

And of course there’s the DFH issue. Tea Partiers with guns are good old salt of the earth Americans who are just upset and want their country back. We need to listen to their concerns. The Wall Street protesters are DFHs who want anarchy and free love and their concerns are of no consequence.

And lets not forget that ignoring the Wall Street protesters helps with the pretense that we are not, in fact, in a depression.

And lets not forget that ignoring the Wall Street protesters helps with the pretense that we are not, in fact, in a depression.

I don’t tend toward conspiracy theories*, but part of me looks at this and thinks that they’re ignoring it because they hope that will drive people to do more and more extreme things until they reach full-on Burn Shit Down, which will provide a pretext for a crack down. It’s not like it’s never happened anywhere else. I hate to think of it happening here, but I no longer believe that it’s not possible. 

*Short version—most of the bad crap that happens in the world doesn’t require conscious effort, let alone a conspiracy. I have no need for a Grand Theory of Everything WRT to human behavior. Most importantly, people can’t STFU, so I see no realistic way that some shadowy group could keep a vast global conspiracy on the QT for any length of time.

I don’t tend toward conspiracy theories*, but part of me looks at this and thinks that they’re ignoring it because they hope that will drive people to do more and more extreme things until they reach full-on Burn Shit Down, which will provide a pretext for a crack down. It’s not like it’s never happened anywhere else. I hate to think of it happening here, but I no longer believe that it’s not possible. 

*Short version—most of the bad crap that happens in the world doesn’t require conscious effort, let alone a conspiracy. I have no need for a Grand Theory of Everything WRT to human behavior. Most importantly, people can’t STFU, so I see no realistic way that some shadowy group could keep a vast global conspiracy on the QT for any length of time.

An interesting piece on the Guardian website today re: the Wall St. Occupation/police brutality/brutality in US Politics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/26/americas-barely-tamed-brutality?newsfeed=true

An interesting piece on the Guardian website today re: the Wall St. Occupation/police brutality/brutality in US Politics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/26/americas-barely-tamed-brutality?newsfeed=true

Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence. But dammit, he’s right.

Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence. But dammit, he’s right.

 Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence. But dammit, he’s right.  

You don’t have to go anywhere near that far back to find the ugliness under the surface of  UK society. Which doesn’t mean he’s not right about America, because he is. It only means that there’s at least an element of “it takes one to know one” going on.  

 Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence. But dammit, he’s right.  

You don’t have to go anywhere near that far back to find the ugliness under the surface of  UK society. Which doesn’t mean he’s not right about America, because he is. It only means that there’s at least an element of “it takes one to know one” going on.  

Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence.

I don’t think he would deny your challenge. Violence is inherent in the system of Empire. I didn’t read the comments on his story, but I did glance at them – the first one (at that point) referenced the violence against protesters in London last month.

Part of me wants to challenge the writer about the brutality practiced by his own country during the Boer War and during the Irish and Indian struggles for independence.

I don’t think he would deny your challenge. Violence is inherent in the system of Empire. I didn’t read the comments on his story, but I did glance at them – the first one (at that point) referenced the violence against protesters in London last month.

I’m with you on there not being conspiracies required.  In addition to everything you said, it’s very easy to get what amounts to a conspiracy without much effort on anyone’s part – just look at how much the news (for whatever reason) seems to follow Fox News’s lead.  I don’t think it’s a conspiracy, but somehow other news agencies feel compelled to report (or not report) on the same things Fox does.

I don’t know if you’re right and they’re (the news, the government, whomever) hoping that something more drastic happens or if it’s just a massive case of DENIAL.  I would expect news agencies, especially with the fondness for disaster journalism, to be all over the soup kitchen lines, Wall Street protests, and other signs that we’re in a depression.  But they’re not.  Maybe it’s that the journalists themselves can’t face the idea (it is, after all, one thing to report on a natural disaster or a problem you don’t think will effect you, and another thing entirely to report on one that will).  Maybe it’s that lines and peaceful protests aren’t exciting enough.  (Though they report on Tea Party protests.  On the other hand, the rhetoric there is far more inflammatory.) 

I’m with you on there not being conspiracies required.  In addition to everything you said, it’s very easy to get what amounts to a conspiracy without much effort on anyone’s part – just look at how much the news (for whatever reason) seems to follow Fox News’s lead.  I don’t think it’s a conspiracy, but somehow other news agencies feel compelled to report (or not report) on the same things Fox does.

I don’t know if you’re right and they’re (the news, the government, whomever) hoping that something more drastic happens or if it’s just a massive case of DENIAL.  I would expect news agencies, especially with the fondness for disaster journalism, to be all over the soup kitchen lines, Wall Street protests, and other signs that we’re in a depression.  But they’re not.  Maybe it’s that the journalists themselves can’t face the idea (it is, after all, one thing to report on a natural disaster or a problem you don’t think will effect you, and another thing entirely to report on one that will).  Maybe it’s that lines and peaceful protests aren’t exciting enough.  (Though they report on Tea Party protests.  On the other hand, the rhetoric there is far more inflammatory.) 

http://i.imgur.com/xs31h.jpg

Hey, Fox News? Fuck you. In spades.

http://i.imgur.com/xs31h.jpg

Hey, Fox News? Fuck you. In spades.

http://i.imgur.com/xs31h.jpg

Hey, Fox News? Fuck you. In spades.

Or a banana republic corporatocracy/kleptocracy?

Oh look the Master’s of the Universe are drinking champagne.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PiXDTK_CBY&sns=fb

Dear gods, they are clueless and hateful there.

Or a banana republic corporatocracy/kleptocracy?

Oh look the Master’s of the Universe are drinking champagne.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PiXDTK_CBY&sns=fb

Dear gods, they are clueless and hateful there.

I don’t think its a conspiracy, per se, but it isn’t too hard to see the rich elites wanting to protect their interests here.  A “protest” of people devoted to lowering taxes and keeping the status quo?  Give it as much coverage as possible.  Let’s pretend that we care and give a vent for the anger our systems created.  An actual protest of us and our policies however needs to be ignored at large and met with overwhelming force to keep the uppity plebes in their place.

I don’t think its a conspiracy, per se, but it isn’t too hard to see the rich elites wanting to protect their interests here.  A “protest” of people devoted to lowering taxes and keeping the status quo?  Give it as much coverage as possible.  Let’s pretend that we care and give a vent for the anger our systems created.  An actual protest of us and our policies however needs to be ignored at large and met with overwhelming force to keep the uppity plebes in their place.

I think the fact that the large media outlets are now almost all subsidiaries of very large corporations is really the main factor. Reporters can’t cover what their editors won’t print/put on the air. Editors aren’t going to run with something that disturbs the head office because that’s a career limiting move. No corporation is going voluntarily present information that casts corporations in a bad light.  

I think the fact that the large media outlets are now almost all subsidiaries of very large corporations is really the main factor. Reporters can’t cover what their editors won’t print/put on the air. Editors aren’t going to run with something that disturbs the head office because that’s a career limiting move. No corporation is going voluntarily present information that casts corporations in a bad light.  

I think the fact that the large media outlets are now almost all subsidiaries of very large corporations is really the main factor. Reporters can’t cover what their editors won’t print/put on the air. Editors aren’t going to run with something that disturbs the head office because that’s a career limiting move. No corporation is going voluntarily present information that casts corporations in a bad light.  

I can remember in the 1990s when people used to go LOL U CONSPIRACY THEORIST at me when I would try to point out these kinds of biases in the media. Even now it’s still not easy to get someone to see who’s steeped in the cultural myth of the intrepid reporter and a free press with many competing sources of news.

I can remember in the 1990s when people used to go LOL U CONSPIRACY THEORIST at me when I would try to point out these kinds of biases in the media. Even now it’s still not easy to get someone to see who’s steeped in the cultural myth of the intrepid reporter and a free press with many competing sources of news.

I think we need a new term in our lexicon.

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

“The fact that major news organizations, all for the same reasons and independantly, are ignoring these protests represents an accidental conspiracy.”

I think we need a new term in our lexicon.

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

“The fact that major news organizations, all for the same reasons and independantly, are ignoring these protests represents an accidental conspiracy.”

I certianly remember that and I’m sure other people do to. Fred certainly does, which is one of the (many) reasons he strongly favors infrastructure projects. Many of the jobs created by those projects are blue collar jobs. 

One of the nice things about infrastructure investment is that those are the kind of blue collar jobs which cannot be outsourced to cheaper labor markets in other countries.  If you are going to be building infrastructure in a particular location, than the labor must necessarily be in that location.  Maybe you could ship migrant labor in from somewhere else, but the cost of doing so quickly exceeds the savings you get from hiring locally, rendering the financial impetus to do so moot.

I certianly remember that and I’m sure other people do to. Fred certainly does, which is one of the (many) reasons he strongly favors infrastructure projects. Many of the jobs created by those projects are blue collar jobs. 

One of the nice things about infrastructure investment is that those are the kind of blue collar jobs which cannot be outsourced to cheaper labor markets in other countries.  If you are going to be building infrastructure in a particular location, than the labor must necessarily be in that location.  Maybe you could ship migrant labor in from somewhere else, but the cost of doing so quickly exceeds the savings you get from hiring locally, rendering the financial impetus to do so moot.

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

Ghost in the Shell refers to this phenomena as a “Stand Alone Complex”, where a group of individuals work toward a single goal without any centralized leadership or interrelated planing or intended cooperation.  

They actually made an entire series with the central plot arc structured around the concept.  I recommend you give it a watch.  It really is a rather striking near-future science fiction study on society.  

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

Ghost in the Shell refers to this phenomena as a “Stand Alone Complex”, where a group of individuals work toward a single goal without any centralized leadership or interrelated planing or intended cooperation.  

They actually made an entire series with the central plot arc structured around the concept.  I recommend you give it a watch.  It really is a rather striking near-future science fiction study on society.  

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

Ghost in the Shell refers to this phenomena as a “Stand Alone Complex”, where a group of individuals work toward a single goal without any centralized leadership or interrelated planing or intended cooperation.  

They actually made an entire series with the central plot arc structured around the concept.  I recommend you give it a watch.  It really is a rather striking near-future science fiction study on society.  

This kind of sums up my feelings about most conspiracy theories:  Alan Moore on Conspiracies.
(I kind of wonder if the captions were machine-generated or if the person typing them was just that bad.  Maybe it was a conspiracy.)

This kind of sums up my feelings about most conspiracy theories:  Alan Moore on Conspiracies.
(I kind of wonder if the captions were machine-generated or if the person typing them was just that bad.  Maybe it was a conspiracy.)

While it’s not referred to as such, there are sociological phenomena that mirror this.  We’re starting to see more and more of this on larger scales.  (There’s a reason why one of the symbols of Anonymous is the Laughing Man icon.)  There was a book about this, Direction (some_number), which had this as a basic premise: A large group of unrelated people Doing Stuff against the current establishment, a mixture of both extreme right-wing and extreme left-wing ideologies.

(I can’t recommend the book, though.  The author set up this great series of events — culminating in EMP BOMBS LAUNCHED FROM THE MOON! — and his entire focus was on the national command succession as established by the US Constitution.  A book about a National Command succession crisis could make a fascinating political thriller, or a book about any of the other ‘two dozen ticking time bombs’ the author mentions as being in the Constitution.  But the book sets this up against the backdrop of an even more interesting sociological phenomenon — as well as EMP BOMBS LAUNCHED FROM THE MOON! — and both aspects try to overshadow the other, making a case of ‘Two great tastes that don’t go well together at all.’)

While it’s not referred to as such, there are sociological phenomena that mirror this.  We’re starting to see more and more of this on larger scales.  (There’s a reason why one of the symbols of Anonymous is the Laughing Man icon.)  There was a book about this, Direction (some_number), which had this as a basic premise: A large group of unrelated people Doing Stuff against the current establishment, a mixture of both extreme right-wing and extreme left-wing ideologies.

(I can’t recommend the book, though.  The author set up this great series of events — culminating in EMP BOMBS LAUNCHED FROM THE MOON! — and his entire focus was on the national command succession as established by the US Constitution.  A book about a National Command succession crisis could make a fascinating political thriller, or a book about any of the other ‘two dozen ticking time bombs’ the author mentions as being in the Constitution.  But the book sets this up against the backdrop of an even more interesting sociological phenomenon — as well as EMP BOMBS LAUNCHED FROM THE MOON! — and both aspects try to overshadow the other, making a case of ‘Two great tastes that don’t go well together at all.’)

I’d also point out that the ‘GITS:SAC’ movie is just the pertinent ‘Laughing Man’ episodes from the first season of GITS:SAC.  It’s only slightly disjointed in places but makes for an easier-to-follow storyline.  You miss out on Tachikomatic Days, however. =)

I’d also point out that the ‘GITS:SAC’ movie is just the pertinent ‘Laughing Man’ episodes from the first season of GITS:SAC.  It’s only slightly disjointed in places but makes for an easier-to-follow storyline.  You miss out on Tachikomatic Days, however. =)

I’d also point out that the ‘GITS:SAC’ movie is just the pertinent ‘Laughing Man’ episodes from the first season of GITS:SAC.  It’s only slightly disjointed in places but makes for an easier-to-follow storyline.  You miss out on Tachikomatic Days, however. =)

Agreed, but I wanted to avoid confusing the uninitiated.  ”Ghost in the Shell” is the title of the franchise, and it can refer to many of the different things in it, not all of which explore the same ideas (though all are thematically linked.)  

Just for the reference of those who are unfamiliar, Ghost in the Shell was a post cyberpunk manga written by Shiro Masamune in the late eighties.  It was later made into a film adaptation in 1995, which had to cherry pick some themes and details from the manga for the necessity of being a movie, and is considered a distinct continuity.  In 2003, they produced a different adaptation, called Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, again a (different) distinct continuity, though with the freedom allowed by a twenty-six episode series they had a lot more opportunity to explore the ramifications of that fictional world.  That was the series which I linked to previously, and contains the themes we were talking about.  @VMink:disqus mentioned the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex:  The Laughing Man, which is a film compilation of just those episodes which further the central plot arc of the Stand Alone Complex series.  It does have to cut out a lot of incidental episodes though which, while not directly factoring into the central arc, do a lot to further flesh out the world that the characters exist in.  

I’d also point out that the ‘GITS:SAC’ movie is just the pertinent ‘Laughing Man’ episodes from the first season of GITS:SAC.  It’s only slightly disjointed in places but makes for an easier-to-follow storyline.  You miss out on Tachikomatic Days, however. =)

Agreed, but I wanted to avoid confusing the uninitiated.  ”Ghost in the Shell” is the title of the franchise, and it can refer to many of the different things in it, not all of which explore the same ideas (though all are thematically linked.)  

Just for the reference of those who are unfamiliar, Ghost in the Shell was a post cyberpunk manga written by Shiro Masamune in the late eighties.  It was later made into a film adaptation in 1995, which had to cherry pick some themes and details from the manga for the necessity of being a movie, and is considered a distinct continuity.  In 2003, they produced a different adaptation, called Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, again a (different) distinct continuity, though with the freedom allowed by a twenty-six episode series they had a lot more opportunity to explore the ramifications of that fictional world.  That was the series which I linked to previously, and contains the themes we were talking about.  @VMink:disqus mentioned the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex:  The Laughing Man, which is a film compilation of just those episodes which further the central plot arc of the Stand Alone Complex series.  It does have to cut out a lot of incidental episodes though which, while not directly factoring into the central arc, do a lot to further flesh out the world that the characters exist in.  

I’d also point out that the ‘GITS:SAC’ movie is just the pertinent ‘Laughing Man’ episodes from the first season of GITS:SAC.  It’s only slightly disjointed in places but makes for an easier-to-follow storyline.  You miss out on Tachikomatic Days, however. =)

Agreed, but I wanted to avoid confusing the uninitiated.  ”Ghost in the Shell” is the title of the franchise, and it can refer to many of the different things in it, not all of which explore the same ideas (though all are thematically linked.)  

Just for the reference of those who are unfamiliar, Ghost in the Shell was a post cyberpunk manga written by Shiro Masamune in the late eighties.  It was later made into a film adaptation in 1995, which had to cherry pick some themes and details from the manga for the necessity of being a movie, and is considered a distinct continuity.  In 2003, they produced a different adaptation, called Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, again a (different) distinct continuity, though with the freedom allowed by a twenty-six episode series they had a lot more opportunity to explore the ramifications of that fictional world.  That was the series which I linked to previously, and contains the themes we were talking about.  @VMink:disqus mentioned the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex:  The Laughing Man, which is a film compilation of just those episodes which further the central plot arc of the Stand Alone Complex series.  It does have to cut out a lot of incidental episodes though which, while not directly factoring into the central arc, do a lot to further flesh out the world that the characters exist in.  

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

I like it.  It might be oxymoronic (“Emergent Conspiracy” would be more accurate but less catchy), but I think it fills a need.

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain action.

I like it.  It might be oxymoronic (“Emergent Conspiracy” would be more accurate but less catchy), but I think it fills a need.

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without
organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain
action.

The first time I heard a description of something like that, it was in an opinion column talking about the JFK assassination.

The columnist was pointing out that many of the ‘cover-up’ actions often used as evidence of a conspiracy didn’t actually require a conspiracy at all.  They just required a whole bunch of people each with their own skeletons in the closet, and each of whom knew that the investigation that was coming up had a chance of unearthing those skeletons.  The end result is a large group of corrupt politicians, completely independently of each other, all acting together to delay or subvert the investigation before it can get to them…

“Accidental Conspiracy”, where the actions of a group, without
organizing around the purpose, create an effective conspiracy to certain
action.

The first time I heard a description of something like that, it was in an opinion column talking about the JFK assassination.

The columnist was pointing out that many of the ‘cover-up’ actions often used as evidence of a conspiracy didn’t actually require a conspiracy at all.  They just required a whole bunch of people each with their own skeletons in the closet, and each of whom knew that the investigation that was coming up had a chance of unearthing those skeletons.  The end result is a large group of corrupt politicians, completely independently of each other, all acting together to delay or subvert the investigation before it can get to them…

I loved (and fairly shamelessly stole ideas and general concepts such as cyber-bodies and -minds) Ghost in the Shell. Glad to see it referenced here.

As an aside, amazing how much my ‘want-to-write-instincts’ are flaring up while going through the LB deconstruction archives from post one. It’s like a direct ‘i’m-a-shmuck-and-i’m-still-superior-to-this’ effect.

I loved (and fairly shamelessly stole ideas and general concepts such as cyber-bodies and -minds) Ghost in the Shell. Glad to see it referenced here.

As an aside, amazing how much my ‘want-to-write-instincts’ are flaring up while going through the LB deconstruction archives from post one. It’s like a direct ‘i’m-a-shmuck-and-i’m-still-superior-to-this’ effect.

More on topic, liberal blogger driftglass often says that we don’t have a media anymore in this country. FOX is active treacherous lies and the rest are bread and circuses centrist claptrap, punctuated very occasionally by a lone hero like Rachel Maddow. It makes me sad that I can’t argue that point.

More on topic, liberal blogger driftglass often says that we don’t have a media anymore in this country. FOX is active treacherous lies and the rest are bread and circuses centrist claptrap, punctuated very occasionally by a lone hero like Rachel Maddow. It makes me sad that I can’t argue that point.

Well, we’ve still got the Daily Show and the Onion…

…yeah, we’re screwed.  A democracy can’t work unless the people are _informed_, and our current system has degenerated into a (“Whoever can afford the most attack ads” in Latin)-ocracy.

More on topic, liberal blogger driftglass often says that we don’t have a media anymore in this country. FOX is active treacherous lies and the rest are bread and circuses centrist claptrap, punctuated very occasionally by a lone hero like Rachel Maddow. It makes me sad that I can’t argue that point.

Well, we’ve still got the Daily Show and the Onion…

…yeah, we’re screwed.  A democracy can’t work unless the people are _informed_, and our current system has degenerated into a (“Whoever can afford the most attack ads” in Latin)-ocracy.

“Plutocracy” or ‘oligarchy,’ but probably the first (which is “rule by the wealthy” or literally “authority of wealth.”)

“Plutocracy” or ‘oligarchy,’ but probably the first (which is “rule by the wealthy” or literally “authority of wealth.”)

(Interesting philological sideline: The -cracy suffix means ‘authority’ while the ‘-archy’ suffix means ‘rule.’ I have to wonder what criteria calls for one over the other.)

Well, we’ve still got the Daily Show and the Onion…

…yeah, we’re screwed. 

The most obvious absurdist comedy is more accurate and truthful than the actual news media.  What the hell does that say about us?  :(

Well, we’ve still got the Daily Show and the Onion…

…yeah, we’re screwed. 

The most obvious absurdist comedy is more accurate and truthful than the actual news media.  What the hell does that say about us?  :(

NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.

NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.

Only the court jester is allowed to tell the truth.

Only the court jester is allowed to tell the truth.

I suspect if one wanted to get really technical, -ocracy could refer to something that isn’t strictly a ruling thing, but rather something which has immense respect and sway within a given system.

Theoretically that actually applies perfectly to the idea of plutocracy in the US – strictly speaking wealth and wealthy people do not rule; but wealth has a *tremendous* impact on getting ideas heard, and for a lot of people is a prime indicator as to whether one is worthy of being listened to at all.

A plutarchy (I’m makin’ up words maybe) – would be a literal direct rule-by-wealth.  Maybe it’d involve directly purchasing senate seats or something.  Very Ferengi like.

Of course that’s just me interpreting from context, it could be one of those things where it’s less intuitive than that.

I suspect if one wanted to get really technical, -ocracy could refer to something that isn’t strictly a ruling thing, but rather something which has immense respect and sway within a given system.

Theoretically that actually applies perfectly to the idea of plutocracy in the US – strictly speaking wealth and wealthy people do not rule; but wealth has a *tremendous* impact on getting ideas heard, and for a lot of people is a prime indicator as to whether one is worthy of being listened to at all.

A plutarchy (I’m makin’ up words maybe) – would be a literal direct rule-by-wealth.  Maybe it’d involve directly purchasing senate seats or something.  Very Ferengi like.

Of course that’s just me interpreting from context, it could be one of those things where it’s less intuitive than that.

Only the court jester is allowed to tell the truth.

Strictly speaking, anyone can tell the truth.  The court jester is just the only one the king is not allowed to execute for doing so.  

Only the court jester is allowed to tell the truth.

Strictly speaking, anyone can tell the truth.  The court jester is just the only one the king is not allowed to execute for doing so.  

NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.

Thank goodness.  For how long this thing has been going on, the media reaction has been intolerable.  

NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.

Thank goodness.  For how long this thing has been going on, the media reaction has been intolerable.  

 NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.  

The Washington Post is covering it a bit, but it’s buried inside. It’s the same in the NY Times. Surprise. 

 NPR had a piece on the Wall Street occupation today, so it’s gaining some traction.  

The Washington Post is covering it a bit, but it’s buried inside. It’s the same in the NY Times. Surprise. 

The most obvious absurdist comedy is more accurate and truthful than the actual news media.  What the hell does that say about us?  :(

The great comedian Paul Krassner said that satire died the day Henry Kissinger won a Nobel Peace Prize.  I’d say reality keeps outpacing even the most absurd satire.

The most obvious absurdist comedy is more accurate and truthful than the actual news media.  What the hell does that say about us?  :(

The great comedian Paul Krassner said that satire died the day Henry Kissinger won a Nobel Peace Prize.  I’d say reality keeps outpacing even the most absurd satire.

Damn that LIBERAL BIASED media!!@!1!one!

Damn that LIBERAL BIASED media!!@!1!one!

In Egypt, I understand, everything (and everyone) belonged to Pharaoh. So there wasn’t going to be a big fuss about ownership: there wasn’t any ownership as we know it.

In Egypt, I understand, everything (and everyone) belonged to Pharaoh. So there wasn’t going to be a big fuss about ownership: there wasn’t any ownership as we know it.

Utilities, for instance, can’t have jobs shipped overseas, except for certain support jobs. (Our IT Unhelpful Desk is located somewhere in Quebec. And we just did a big data-conversion project where stuff was done in India – it was a manpower/time thing: they needed a lot of work done in a relatively short time.)

Utilities, for instance, can’t have jobs shipped overseas, except for certain support jobs. (Our IT Unhelpful Desk is located somewhere in Quebec. And we just did a big data-conversion project where stuff was done in India – it was a manpower/time thing: they needed a lot of work done in a relatively short time.)

“No matter how cynical I get, I can’t keep up.” – Lily Tomlin

“No matter how cynical I get, I can’t keep up.” – Lily Tomlin

Just one thing, JJohnson.  Regarding

” income tax for the top bracket is ~35%, that bracket starts at 378k -
meaning that someone who makes millions every year pays the same rate as
someone who makes 400k a year.”

Tax brackets only apply to the portion of your income in the bracket.  Someone making 400k a year only pays the 35% rate on 22k of his income, the million dollar a year income pays 35% on 622k.  The lower brackets apply to their first 378k equally. 

Just one thing, JJohnson.  Regarding

” income tax for the top bracket is ~35%, that bracket starts at 378k –
meaning that someone who makes millions every year pays the same rate as
someone who makes 400k a year.”

Tax brackets only apply to the portion of your income in the bracket.  Someone making 400k a year only pays the 35% rate on 22k of his income, the million dollar a year income pays 35% on 622k.  The lower brackets apply to their first 378k equally. 

This is true, and I admit I should probably have mentioned it as it does give a slightly distorted view to leave it out.  In my defense, I was ranting, and ranting is not the most clearheaded mode of argument.  Err:  Basically “My bad.”

This is true, and I admit I should probably have mentioned it as it does give a slightly distorted view to leave it out.  In my defense, I was ranting, and ranting is not the most clearheaded mode of argument.  Err:  Basically “My bad.”

I finded something intriguing… http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,788462,00.html – found that on Balloon Juice Makes sense though eh?

I finded something intriguing… http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,788462,00.html – found that on Balloon Juice Makes sense though eh?

The arrests and unnecessary use of pepper spray against the Wall Street protesters is starting to get more attention. There will be a rally against the NYPD’s actions on Friday. 

http://www.amny.com/urbanite-1.812039/wall-st-protesters-to-rally-against-brutal-arrests-by-nypd-1.3205821

The officer who was caught on tape casually pepper spraying people who weren’t violent is apparently already being sued for brutality because of his behavior during the protests against the 2004 Republican convention. 

In the accounts I’ve seen the protesters have been saying that most of the cops were fine and doing their best in what is always a difficult situation, but as usual the NYPD is protecting its bad apples at the cost of the reputation of its good officers. 

In other totally unsurprising news, the NY Times is still barely covering the story. 

The arrests and unnecessary use of pepper spray against the Wall Street protesters is starting to get more attention. There will be a rally against the NYPD’s actions on Friday. 

http://www.amny.com/urbanite-1.812039/wall-st-protesters-to-rally-against-brutal-arrests-by-nypd-1.3205821

The officer who was caught on tape casually pepper spraying people who weren’t violent is apparently already being sued for brutality because of his behavior during the protests against the 2004 Republican convention. 

In the accounts I’ve seen the protesters have been saying that most of the cops were fine and doing their best in what is always a difficult situation, but as usual the NYPD is protecting its bad apples at the cost of the reputation of its good officers. 

In other totally unsurprising news, the NY Times is still barely covering the story. 

I am seeing more news outlets picking up the story now.  

It is shameful that it took an incident with the police before most of them even took notice.  

I am seeing more news outlets picking up the story now.  

It is shameful that it took an incident with the police before most of them even took notice.  

Venkatesh Rao once had an interesting comment to the effect that people like to build infrastructure, but they don’t like to maintain it.  He describes the differences in innovation that occur between “growing pains” and “dying pains,” and how we wince at the sight of decay, but we feel powerless to stop it.  

I, for one, don’t buy the idea that we’re programmed, somehow, as a species, to expect eventual decay.  But I can understand the point of view that, having built marvelous edifices, we somehow expect them to stay, the same way the rivers and mountains always stayed the same within living memory.  Maintenance and repair are themselves admissions of temporality.

Venkatesh Rao once had an interesting comment to the effect that people like to build infrastructure, but they don’t like to maintain it.  He describes the differences in innovation that occur between “growing pains” and “dying pains,” and how we wince at the sight of decay, but we feel powerless to stop it.  

I, for one, don’t buy the idea that we’re programmed, somehow, as a species, to expect eventual decay.  But I can understand the point of view that, having built marvelous edifices, we somehow expect them to stay, the same way the rivers and mountains always stayed the same within living memory.  Maintenance and repair are themselves admissions of temporality.

Venkatesh Rao once had an interesting comment to the effect that people like to build infrastructure, but they don’t like to maintain it.  He describes the differences in innovation that occur between “growing pains” and “dying pains,” and how we wince at the sight of decay, but we feel powerless to stop it. 

According to my sister who lives in Zurich, they do not do patchwork road maintenance there.  Rather, the government determined that it was more cost-effective to rip up a road once every two years and repave the entire thing.  So the roadwork crews are always busy, tearing up and repaving some street or another, and going through the entire city’s worth on a two year cycle.  

There is no maintenance there, only continued regeneration.  

Venkatesh Rao once had an interesting comment to the effect that people like to build infrastructure, but they don’t like to maintain it.  He describes the differences in innovation that occur between “growing pains” and “dying pains,” and how we wince at the sight of decay, but we feel powerless to stop it. 

According to my sister who lives in Zurich, they do not do patchwork road maintenance there.  Rather, the government determined that it was more cost-effective to rip up a road once every two years and repave the entire thing.  So the roadwork crews are always busy, tearing up and repaving some street or another, and going through the entire city’s worth on a two year cycle.  

There is no maintenance there, only continued regeneration.  

Why not build concrete roads or some such thing that wouldn’t need such frequent repair?

Why not build concrete roads or some such thing that wouldn’t need such frequent repair?

 It’s probably weather. Freeze/thaw cycles are hard on roads. (That’s why so many cities had streets paved with bricks on sand: the pavement lasted longer. On the other hand, it requires skilled labor to maintain brick paving, which is why so many cities don’t use it any more.)

 It’s probably weather. Freeze/thaw cycles are hard on roads. (That’s why so many cities had streets paved with bricks on sand: the pavement lasted longer. On the other hand, it requires skilled labor to maintain brick paving, which is why so many cities don’t use it any more.)

Concrete, sadly, is not necessarily as robust as people tend to think.  It tends to get distorted and broken with alarming frequency.  Something like a tree root growing underneath it can cause it to crack and distort after a few years, necessitating it be smoothed over again, but as long as the tree remains it will just crack more eventually.  Likewise, a heavily traveled road is going to wear very shallow groves into the concrete with the tires of the vehicles which travel it, but those groves will be just deep enough for rainwater to make them worse, producing cracking of a different sort.  Further underground infrastructure development, such as new sewers or cable conduits, require sections of the road to be torn up anyway and repaved over after the work beneath them is done, etc.

The net result is that concrete roads do in fact require semi-regular maintenance.  The urban transportation engineers in Zurich simply concluded that the the logistics of replacement made it cheaper than more ad-hoc repair, and less susceptible to fickle budget adjustments.  I imagine that most of the concrete they tear up on the roads is broken down in big grinders and used to form the concrete to be poured onto the next road.  

It actually probably goes a little smoother than we imagine such operations would go over here, considering how good and popular public transportation is in Zurich.  When only 18% of people are driving cars, the impact of this on commutes can be mitigated with effective planning on the part of public mass transit authorities.

Concrete, sadly, is not necessarily as robust as people tend to think.  It tends to get distorted and broken with alarming frequency.  Something like a tree root growing underneath it can cause it to crack and distort after a few years, necessitating it be smoothed over again, but as long as the tree remains it will just crack more eventually.  Likewise, a heavily traveled road is going to wear very shallow groves into the concrete with the tires of the vehicles which travel it, but those groves will be just deep enough for rainwater to make them worse, producing cracking of a different sort.  Further underground infrastructure development, such as new sewers or cable conduits, require sections of the road to be torn up anyway and repaved over after the work beneath them is done, etc.

The net result is that concrete roads do in fact require semi-regular maintenance.  The urban transportation engineers in Zurich simply concluded that the the logistics of replacement made it cheaper than more ad-hoc repair, and less susceptible to fickle budget adjustments.  I imagine that most of the concrete they tear up on the roads is broken down in big grinders and used to form the concrete to be poured onto the next road.  

It actually probably goes a little smoother than we imagine such operations would go over here, considering how good and popular public transportation is in Zurich.  When only 18% of people are driving cars, the impact of this on commutes can be mitigated with effective planning on the part of public mass transit authorities.

I can attest to the serious issues with concrete-paved roads becoming semi-undrivable after some time.

There are numerous ways to repave roads that don’t involve as much inconvenience to the driver, for example there is an in-place recycling technique where the ground-up asphalt aggregate of a road can be used to replenish the surface, which cuts down on the time the road is out of use.

I can attest to the serious issues with concrete-paved roads becoming semi-undrivable after some time.

There are numerous ways to repave roads that don’t involve as much inconvenience to the driver, for example there is an in-place recycling technique where the ground-up asphalt aggregate of a road can be used to replenish the surface, which cuts down on the time the road is out of use.