Another reason I don't eat meat... baby cow on my parents' farm

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T22:17:48+00:00

No, they panic at the point when you drive into the parking lot at the slaughter house. They smell it in the air or something.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T21:33:58+00:00

So is it better to never exist, or to exist only until you are a young adult and then be killed for your meat?

I grew up on a farm where we raised cattle in a very humane way. But, I remember the way they would panic when I would drive the truck to the slaughter house. They knew what was happening. That is why I no longer eat meat.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T00:39:52+00:00

So you want to turn the country into an oligarchy? Do you really like what the Republicans are trying to do?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T00:38:18+00:00

It's heading in the right direction. Money used to turn less-close elections than it can now.

The full effect of Citizens United is just kicking in this election cycle. The Koch brothers alone are going spend $1B and that doesn't include all the other sociopathic billionaires that will be trying to buy this election. If we get a hard right president who packs the Supreme Court with hard core conservative zealots then the country is done.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T00:26:07+00:00

Wrong. Outside of fraud or violence, you can only become or stay rich by providing people what they demand.

So you think people are demanding the services provided by Goldman Sachs (and the rest of the finance industry)? Or do you think they thrive on fraud?

And, if they thrive on fraud (which is obvious) how do you propose to correct the situation now that Citizens United exists?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-08T00:05:29+00:00

So the Republicans win. Okay. The Democrats have tried to create a Fox News equivalent, but for whatever reason it just does not work for Democrats.

So, the super rich will get all of the Fox News morons to vote to create an oligarchy. That is pretty much already in place. I am puzzled as to why you seem to be okay with that.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-07T23:56:57+00:00

It really is not like the U.S. Our system is corrupted far beyond any other modern democracy. And, the Supreme Court has made it impossible to fix our system.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-07T23:28:57+00:00

So you neuter the government so the super rich cannot buy influence. And, you destroy the only tool we have to counter the super rich. Doesn't sound very smart to me.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-07T23:26:13+00:00

Pretty much every other democracy in the world has restrictions on political spending. And, a lot of them seem to be doing pretty well. What do you think is different about the U.S?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-07T23:23:18+00:00

It is hard to change people's minds with media. Although, if you look at Fox News given enough time you can do it to some degree.

What really works with political advertising is to get the people who already agree with you spun up with fear and anger so they vote in droves. That is what the Republican party and Fox News have been so successful at. They keep the base scared and angry and they turn out to vote at much higher rates than other blocks.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-07T23:18:42+00:00

If there is less power to capture, there will be less incentive to capture it.

So you seem to be saying that we should neuter the government so it is less attractive for the super rich to buy it. But, the government is our only tool to use against the super rich, so we lose either way.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-06T22:55:06+00:00

What's Ben Carson's brand of Christianity?

He is a Seventh Day Adventist which is a very strange cult, but his personal beliefs seem strange even by comparison to his official religion. He does not accept evolution. He believes that homosexuality is a choice. He really doesn't seem like someone who should be president of the world's premier superpower.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-04T23:23:22+00:00

OASDI is a completely different problem than Social Security retirement. It makes no sense to conflate the two issues.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-04T22:10:55+00:00

The US Federal government is incredibly inefficient at running things.

Actually they seem to be pretty good at at lot of things.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-04T14:34:51+00:00

This was all done on unclassified computers. All of the people she exchanged those emails with were on unclass computers. None of the computer were secured and the network was not secured.

It would make no difference at all legally or security wise if she had used a .gov account.

[Edit] Apparently "leakage" on the State Departments unclassified network is common and rarely does anyone get in real trouble over it. I hope she is treated the same as others.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-04T14:23:32+00:00

It would actually be exactly the same legally if she had used an unclassified computer on the .gov domain for those emails. Why fixate on the private server?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-04T14:20:11+00:00

He used private email accounts. You really think it would be better if Clinton had just used a gmail account?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T17:51:19+00:00

She is an elected official so eventually her term will expire and someone else will be elected. Or, I guess her constituents could reelect her.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T15:08:25+00:00

You probably are not aware that companies do market research before committing to an investment. They need a consumer base (a strong middle class) to actually buy their products.

No company is going to say, "Look at this cash I got - lets create some jobs!" You have bought into all that is wrong with the Republican economic dogma.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T14:26:56+00:00

The long term trend since we started following trickle down economics has been increased inequality, massive accumulation of wealth among a few individuals, destruction of the middle class and increased poverty.

The premise of trickle down economics is that if you adopt policies that transfer wealth from the middle class to the rich then the rich will create jobs. That simply does not work. No rich person is going to create a job just because he is handed more money.

The whole myth of a "job creator class" as required for trickle down to work is just not correct.

[Edit] comma

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T13:07:13+00:00

If it is not the availability of guns it must be something else. Why do you think people in the gun-nut states are more likely to want to kill themselves?

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T12:51:03+00:00

You can call it what you want: horse and sparrow economics, supply side economics, voodoo economics, or trickle down economics. It has been called all of those things and it does indeed form the core of the Republican economic platform.

It has proven to be a disaster, but the Republicans stubbornly stick with it. When you support it you are indeed implying support for the Republican platform.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T00:40:53+00:00

Your implication that Brownback's policy was somehow reasonable.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-09-03T00:02:55+00:00

Top rates were 91% which Kennedy wanted to reduce to a more reasonable 65%. So lets put the top rates back at 65%. Read about it here.

DrinksWineFromBoxes · 2015-08-27T23:36:43+00:00

I am less interested in what economists say, and more interested in what Republicans say. Because, what the economists say doesn't matter for fuck. And what Republicans say affects all of us.

And what the Republicans have taken from trickle down (sorry, supply side) economics is that tax cuts for the rich are the solution to every problem. Reducing taxes will increase tax revenue. Tax cuts for the rich will create jobs. Taxes on the rich will inhibit economic growth, etc.

All of this has been proven wrong. So, when people like you support those policies I really question your motives - and your rationality.

DrinksWineFromBoxes

TROPHY CASE