DakotaT
10 years ago

Ladies and gents.. Ignorance at it's finest!

Originally Posted by: Formo 



You really have no clue why I consider the Tea party insignificant do you? Uneducated rubes clamoring on to a Constitution they need explained to them.
UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
10 years ago
I hate when ethnic groups are "used" by politicians in any case by any party. Really unfortunate inevitability of politics.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

Republicans aren't going to get any of the minority vote because the minorities know that Party does not consider them equal in any way shape or form. They have waged a war on women, immigration, and poverty. Somebody please explain the righteous qualities of GOP, because I certainly don't see any. And the only real attribute I do see is greed.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Yeah, like I said, the Dakota Doctrine. I don't disagree with you; I just wouldn't make it a blanket indictment of all on the Republican/conservative side. Small minority, big minority, majority of those on our side, basically on the side of good, I don't know and you don't know what's in people's hearts - where the dividing line is between greed/jealousy and political reality that they aren't gonna win that vote anyway, so fuck 'em. The sick thing is that the God damned liberal Democrats USE that minority vote to ram through a bunch of crap that those minorities hate as much as the good people - stuff which really ain't good for their own cause.

What we need is a Good-Hearted Populist Conservative, first and foremost for a strong America, also with the good people in terms of social/moral stuff - opposing the gay agenda, abortion, etc., but generous - I HATE to use the word "liberal" in terms of injecting government money to help those needing help - and ideally, doing so with low taxes/mainly deficit spending. If somebody like that came along, would you support him (or her), Dakota?
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

You really have no clue why I consider the Tea party insignificant do you? Uneducated rubes clamoring on to a Constitution they need explained to them.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I'm not that much in love with the Tea Party, but "uneducated rubes"? I don't think so. You will find a solid majority of Wade-types, intellectually, among them, from what I have observed. Of course, not all are good people like he apparently is - the Dakota Doctrine, but stupid they aren't.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

I don't believe there are evil people out there conspiring to keep the poor down and take all their wealth. That makes for good movies and even better space opera novels (both of which I enjoy immensely), but its both lousy economics and lousy history. Rich people have opportunities that the rest of us don't. That's just a fact of life, and while I'm envious of those opportunities, I'm not of the mind to deny them to others just because I don't have them. And frankly, if rich people were to conspire to take other people's wealth, they probably would be better off conspiring to take the wealth of dumb rich people than either smart or dumb poor people -- because rich people have more wealth to take.


Keynes had a better solution in 1933 than Hoover/Roosevelt. The big reason we had the Great Depression is that the Fed stomped on the growth of money at the very time it should have expanded it. In the 1930s there was a "liquidity trap."

However, being the solution in 1933 doesn't make it the solution in 2006-2013.

As for fiscal policy (taxes or government spending), he was wrong. Economic growth comes because of innovation on the supply side, not by stimulating the demand side. Increasing taxes chills innovation. As for spending, my belief it is not the amount of spending that matters, it is what the money is spent on. If the people who are the best at doing something (i.e., can do it at the lowest opportunity cost) happen to be the recipients of the spending, then government spending is a good idea, if they aren't, it isn't. Thus, spending on the marines to do the national defense thing is a really good use of funds, much better than spending it on mercenaries who read Soldier of Fortune.

Now I tend to think there are very few of those situations. Building of interstate highways, building the Hoover Dam, some national parks. Some courts. (The most precise term for what I am is a "minarchist" (short for "believes that there are some "minimum" roles for government.)

And I tend to think most of transfer payments (approximately half of all government spending) are NOT transferring money from those who do things at a higher opportunity cost to those who do things with a lower one. I generally believe transfer payments are a *bad* thing.

(Which is part of the reason Dakota and others like to call me uncompassionate. [grin1] )

Keynes was also wrong in his notions that one could use fiscal policy to smooth out the business cycle. For the opportunity cost reason and because that kind of short term economic manipulation requires timing and information policy makers simply don't have.



By good guys you mean whom? lib good guys, conservative good guys, both?

The problem with politicians is they like power. Sometimes because they think that power will allow them to get the social/economic/strategic outcomes they believe the country needs, sometimes because they just like power for its own sake. I think the latter are far less prevalent than usually portrayed -- I tend to think people in politics generally do things because they tend to believe what they are doing are the right things to do. (Man is inherently fallen/sinful, not inherently evil.)

I simply think they value power-based "solutions" far too highly. I tend to believe that voluntary interaction gets far more "good" accomplished, than using coercive power to "make people do good" does. Acton said that power corrupts, but he meant it in two ways. It doesn't just corrupt the person with the power. It corrupts the interactions between people more generally. "Power" solutions tend to reduce decisions to zero-sum games. Voluntary interaction (e.g., trade) tends to be a positive-sum game.

If I'm watching a Packer game, I want a zero-sum game with the Packers winning. But in just about everything else, I want win-win solutions. And politics to me is, almost always, a zero-sum game with "some gotta win, and some gotta lose." Because everyone can't have power; if someone has it, someone else doesn't.

And that to me is why power is corrupting.



No I do not.

The greatest part of this country IMO is that Americans have regularly refused to be satisfied with the status quo. For most of its history this country has epitomized a world view that to an unprecedented degree (in historical terms) values innovation and the "creative destruction" of entrepreneurship. That to an unprecedented degree is willing to accept criticism from both within and from outside. That to an unprecedented degree has accepted diversity and difference, not in the politically correct sense of "diverse protected groups of race, religion, gender, etc." but in the real sense of voluntary association (Tocqueville's point) and individual difference. America wasn't built, America didn't grow, America didn't become the world economic leader, America didn't become the only surviving "Superpower" by conforming to the status quo ante. America did and became all the things because Americans have, over and over again, millions of times, been willing to say, "to hell with the way things have been done before, there's a better way and we're going to make it happen.

Oh, along the way, a lot of those people saying "to hell with the old way" have been loons, deluded idiots, and dangerous subversives. Absolutely. But America has grown to be great, and it has stayed great because it has allowed those loons, idiots, and subversives to do what they do. Because some of those loons, idiots, and subversives have turned out to have it correct.

Like those loons we call the Founders. Like the loons and dangerous subversives that were the original Tea Partiers. Like the loons who were willing to risk it all on the Frontier, who believed that man could fly, who thought man could land on the moon and return safely.

Am I dissatisfied with this country? I'm dissatisfied with my job, and what I've made [or rather failed to make] of the gifts God gave me as an individual. Profoundly so.

But dissatisfied with this country? Only to the extent that we seem to have been overrun by the naysayers. In my opinion, ours is a time of opportunities with maybe one precedent in human history, the original Industrial Revolution. And unlike Britain circa 1800, where they were starting from a point of historical poverty, we are starting from a point of unprecedented wealth. Not just in the sense of purchasing power, but in terms of life expectancy, health care, and especially in terms of opportunity.

If I were 18, without a penny to my name, *this* is the time and the place I'd choose to be.

Despite the sewer that is Washington DC and American political decisionmaking, despite the screwed up educational system, despite the profound ignorance which my fellow citizens demonstrate daily with respect to history and economics (damn straight I'm an elitist: I don't believe Americans are evil or stupid; but I do believe we're generally damnably ignorant).

Individuals, voluntary associations, people willing to say the hell with the status quo, people who saw power as something always needing to be limited not something to be increased or re-distributed, people who valued trade and craft and innovation -- THOSE are what made the country great.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



For a self-proclaimed Libertarian/Anarchist, Wade, you say some interesting things - some of which are very unlike that label. Prime Example: the line about "everyone can't have power; if some have it, others don't". That is as well grounded a statement as anybody could make, but it sure as hell ain't anarchist and almost as surely ain't libertarian.

I like what you say about a Zero-Sum economic situation the pie keeps getting bigger with economic growth - one person's piece doesn't have to get bigger if someone else's gets smaller. I don't think Dakota or Formo or a lot of others in here have a clue about that, and hell yeah, SOMEBODY has to provide structure and rules - your "everybody can't have the power" thing, for the system to work and keep working. I suppose it could be called "Minarchy" hahahaha. The big question is what is that minimum.

The aspect of Keynesian Economics I am mainly talking about is related to that - multiplied GROWTH through expansion of money. It has limits to its effectiveness in general, but when combined with the beauty of our dollar being the Reserve Currency, hence debt not being a problem, the benefit is basically unlimited - IMO.

Your very first paragraph, I think you totally misunderstood my question for you. when I asked what you thought about the "conspiracy theory" thing, I wasn't referring to the concept I call the Dakota Doctrine - the rich/middle class basically keeping the poor people down intentionally. I was referring to the ILLUMINATI thing - the concept which I used to laugh at, but I am rapidly coming around to belief in - that there are INSIDERS - maybe not all or primarily Jewish bankers, but people behind the scenes pulling the strings on politicians of both parties, basically controlling everything. And lest you turn the tables and call ME paranoid, my point of view is not the traditional conspiracy theorist John Birch Society one. I LIKE IT LIKE THAT. My position is that IF indeed this INSIDER group exists, it is NOT to put down/keep down regular people. It is to preserve our wonderful way of life. Think about it, those bankers and big-shots, those INSIDERS whatever/whoever they are would NOT do well in a Communist or Sharia Law situation. They need America to stay on top, same as we, the Good Normal people do.

Which brings us to the concept of STATUS QUO. I can only conclude, Wade, that we have a problem with definition of terms. Sure, we need Dynamism in some areas - Technology at the top of the list, also, arguably - even though I would and do argue strongly against it, social/moral ideas, BUT when I talk about the STATUS QUO, I mean first and foremost, America stays on Top in the world. We - America - are the primary if not only force preventing a wide variety of evil forces from taking over and reeking havoc on the lives of people everywhere. It is arguable - the Isolationist argument that "who cares what shit happens to the rabble of the rest of the world" - I'm kinda 50/50 on that hahahha, but it is UNTHINKABLE for the Status Quo to be disrupted here in America - loss of our freedom, loss of our comfortable life, loss of our security. I can't believe that when you so casually dismiss the Status Quo, you are talking about MY concept of the Status Quo - hallmarked by freedom, comfort, and security, and supported by American military power, the Constitution, and free enterprise capitalism - ALL of which are seriously under attack from the left in this country today.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
porky88
10 years ago

Good Point about the "southern strategy". However, I would suggest that strategy was a product of the political reality - then and now - that winning the black vote is hopeless for the Republicans - for the reasons I suggested in the earlier post - mainly blame the God damned leftist media, but also the gullibility of the huge majority of blacks - voting AGAINST their own interests and beliefs - allowing themselves to stay enslaved on the liberal plantation, thanks to the black liberal overseers who dutifully deliver the vote. Looking at the situation and seeing the hopelessness, Republicans invoked the Southern Strategy, basically re-enfranchising southern Democrats who were disrespected and ostracized in their own party.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 


It was definitely logical politics for the time, though Reagan and Bush41 both would‘ve won the presidency without the south. Regardless, the changing dynamics of politics has taken a great strength among Republicans -- from a political perspective -- and made it a weakness. For the first time in 100 (give or take) years, the Democrats don’t need the south to win the presidency.

I do have to say, though, that I think the influence of the liberal media is overstated. If you’re a Democrat, you read Huffington Post, the N.Y. Times, and watch MSNBC. If you’re a Republican, you read Drudge, listen to talk radio, and watch Fox. In today’s age, most partisans live inside their own bubble.

The parties use racial divisiveness to divide the country. It shouldn’t be about the black community or blue-collar workers. Why can’t a black man or black woman be a blue-collar worker? I never understood that. The first party to get over those stereotypes may just win the next generation.

DakotaT
10 years ago
The Republicans have already lost this generation, and if they keep up their caveman social ideas, they'll lose the next one too. What I can't believe is there are women out there that would actually vote for people hell bent on suppressing their rights. But then again, there are a lot of stupid people in the world.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
10 years ago

Yeah, like I said, the Dakota Doctrine. I don't disagree with you; I just wouldn't make it a blanket indictment of all on the Republican/conservative side. Small minority, big minority, majority of those on our side, basically on the side of good, I don't know and you don't know what's in people's hearts - where the dividing line is between greed/jealousy and political reality that they aren't gonna win that vote anyway, so fuck 'em. The sick thing is that the God damned liberal Democrats USE that minority vote to ram through a bunch of crap that those minorities hate as much as the good people - stuff which really ain't good for their own cause.

What we need is a Good-Hearted Populist Conservative, first and foremost for a strong America, also with the good people in terms of social/moral stuff - opposing the gay agenda, abortion, etc., but generous - I HATE to use the word "liberal" in terms of injecting government money to help those needing help - and ideally, doing so with low taxes/mainly deficit spending. If somebody like that came along, would you support him (or her), Dakota?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



First of all you blanket anyone who votes for Democrats. You do realize there are Democrats who make huge contributions to this country. They are not all Nancy Pelosi-like.

And yes I want moral conservatives to run the show. People who have real ethics. But until they get out of bed with the thieves, it is all a joke. The Tea Party is more or less wannabe tax evaders without any courage, sprinkle in some self righteousness, and add some bigotry and wallah, you have a movement.
UserPostedImage
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

First of all you blanket anyone who votes for Democrats. You do realize there are Democrats who make huge contributions to this country. They are not all Nancy Pelosi-like.

And yes I want moral conservatives to run the show. People who have real ethics. But until they get out of bed with the thieves, it is all a joke. The Tea Party is more or less wannabe tax evaders without any courage, sprinkle in some self righteousness, and add some bigotry and wallah, you have a movement.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Dakota, name me one or two or three of those phantom "good" non-Pelosi-like Dems you spoke of. I really can't think of any. Joe Lieberman kinda was the last, and he's finished - and he really wasn't good on much except foreign policy stuff anyway.

And while you're straining your brain, name me one or two of those "moral conservatives" you say you wish there were more of. The Tea Party's big thing is balancing the budget - more so than cutting taxes. That is one thing I really don't like about them. If it came down to a choice, raise taxes or go into more debt, they'd actually raise taxes. How stupid! The other big thing about the Tea Party is they are people like Formo and Wade and Steve who would sacrifice security for paranoid worries about their rights being usurped. If you're gonna hate on people, Dakota, you at least should hate on them for the primary or secondary items they believe in, not the anti-tax stuff and ethics stuff YOU like to talk about. What you're describing - an unethical tax cheat - is ME, Not the Tea Partiers.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

It was definitely logical politics for the time, though Reagan and Bush41 both would‘ve won the presidency without the south. Regardless, the changing dynamics of politics has taken a great strength among Republicans -- from a political perspective -- and made it a weakness. For the first time in 100 (give or take) years, the Democrats don’t need the south to win the presidency.

I do have to say, though, that I think the influence of the liberal media is overstated. If you’re a Democrat, you read Huffington Post, the N.Y. Times, and watch MSNBC. If you’re a Republican, you read Drudge, listen to talk radio, and watch Fox. In today’s age, most partisans live inside their own bubble.

The parties use racial divisiveness to divide the country. It shouldn’t be about the black community or blue-collar workers. Why can’t a black man or black woman be a blue-collar worker? I never understood that. The first party to get over those stereotypes may just win the next generation.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



Porky, the huge flaw in your logic is that we are NOT talking about the 10-15% hard core Dem/libs or the 20-30% dedicated conservatives. We're talking about the 55-70% of know-nothing/care very little people who casually/almost by accident get their political "knowledge" from the God damned leftist mainstream media - the 21st century equivalents of Walter Cronkite - that stinking Commie anti-American piece of crap.

What does this have to do with a black man or woman being a blue-collar worker or not? Very little. What it has to do with is that black man or woman being 94% likely to vote for whatever leftist piece of garbage their overseer on the liberal plantation i.e. "black leader" tells them to vote for, never mind that the black man or woman may have outstanding pro-American pro-Christian morality views, much more like most Tea Partiers than like the leftist assholes they vote for. You don't see anything horribly wrong with that picture?

I will concede that conservatives Republicans don't do much to rescue that situation - basically giving up on the black vote, but black gullibility and corruption of that black overseer class are the primary reasons for this sick situation.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (41m) : No.
Mucky Tundra (2h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (3h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (6h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (7h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (17h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.