healthcare benefits starting to kick in

[wellington1869]

 I believe it had more to do with individual financial situations than the economy, but that's just me.

dude, when you say things like the above it shows how little attention you've actually paid to the events that caused the worst financial disaster in this country since the great depression.  Seriously. At this point you're like oranjoos with his conspiracy theories about 9/11. Incredibly ill-informed and obviously so (in)secure in your views that you'll simply see any additional information as a personal threat to your self confidence.

and by the way once again you're blaming the individual victims, in this case the personal investors.  As if they hadnt been lied to and manipulated, as if there is not a differential of power in the information flows in our financial industry, as if those differentials of power have no effect on national outcomes.

what does it say when the chiefs of those giant financial corporations themselves admit their wrongdoing and the effects it had -- and you dont!

[keyboardlover]

dude, when you say things like the above it shows how little attention you've actually paid to the events that caused the worst financial disaster in this country since the great depression.  Seriously. At this point you're like oranjoos with his conspiracy theories about 9/11. Incredibly ill-informed and obviously so (in)secure in your views that all you'll simply see any additional information as a personal threat to your self confidence.

My grandparents grew up in the Great Depression. I've talked to them at length about it. The current situation PALES in comparison. I've already made my points and backed them up, but you can continue to throw fodder if you want. It makes no difference to me.

[wellington1869]

So in your beautiful world, keyboard, basically there is no such thing as "crime".  Its always the victim's fault.

You shouldnt have been out that late.
You shouldnt have worn that dress.

[ch_123]

I think that it is and was a big issue and was partly caused by both bad financial decisions on the part of individuals and unethical corporate decisions. I mean, obviously they shouldn't give mortgages to people they know can't afford them but they did (and still do). But at the same time, I think it's up to individuals to be smart about decisions (especially home buying and credit cards) and do their research and try to make the right decisions.

To give an example, I know quite a few people who were in the process of selling land and/or houses built on their land when the collapse came along, destroyed the property market, and were all but bankrupted as a consequence. Where exactly did they bring this on themselves?

[wellington1869]

My grandparents grew up in the Great Depression. I've talked to them at length about it. The current situation PALES in comparison.

speaking of fodder, how is that relevant? Its still the worst financial disaster we've faced since the great depression. That isnt opinion, its a fact,  based on how economists rank recessions.

[ch_123]

Keyboardlover argues like a five year old. If he spent as much time making good arguments as he did talking about making them, he might actually make some sense.

[wellington1869]

So in your beautiful world, keyboard, basically there is no such thing as "crime".  Its always the victim's fault.

You shouldnt have been out that late.
You shouldnt have worn that dress.

this is really what it comes down to.  Ayn rand style solipsism, and a belief that its always the victims fault; and by arguing "righteously" for some kind of innate superhuman agency, they become incapable of addressing even the problem of simple crime.  This is the stuff dictators are made of, of course.

[wellington1869]

Keyboardlover argues like a five year old. If he spent as much time making good arguments as he did talking about making them, he might actually make some sense.

yes, in the sense that he's arguing 'from the gut' rather than from collecting diverse sources of information.  He's "lashing out" based on his feelings, which he thinks are a "righteous" defense of human agency and will power (every man a Superman, neitzche style).  Great, except when it comes to the question of mankind's social relations, when this approach turns out to be incapable of taking into account the complexities of power relations, and presents mankind as nihilistically isolated and alienated in a war of all against all.

the only possible result of such thinking is to either become a sheep or a fascist. (Which were, incidentally, the two stark choices neitzche saw).

[keyboardlover]

To give an example, I know quite a few people who were in the process of selling land and/or houses built on their land when the collapse came along, destroyed the property market, and were all but bankrupted as a consequence. Where exactly did they bring this on themselves?

In the USA, the housing market had been down for at least a year before the banking collapse happened.

And Welly - I fail to see the relevancy in any of your posts either.

To both of you - my posts have substance and backing for my points and yours do not so...I'm not really sure what else there is to say. All you do is throw fodder and insults. How juvenile is that??

[ch_123]

When you start projecting the failings of your arguments on to the people have caught you on them, that's when you should just stop.

What facts? As pointed out above, your arguments have no substance and make you look like a sociopath. Do you want some sort of academic citation about how to have basic respect for people less fortunate for you?

[keyboardlover]

When you start projecting the failings of your arguments on to the people have caught you on them, that's when you should just stop.

And...at what point did I do that?

What facts? As pointed out above, your arguments have no substance and make you look like a sociopath. Do you want some sort of academic citation about how to have basic respect for people less fortunate for you?

I doubt my arguments make me look like that to anyone with a clue in their brain. But I already knew that you weren't among that flock.

[wellington1869]

When you start projecting the failings of your arguments on to the people have caught you on them, that's when you should just stop.

but see how consistent he is on this.  He's always shifting responsibility.  The poor have themselves to blame. The sick have themselves to blame. And of course, its others who never have a point to make.  Its the basic way he interfaces with the world.

Do you want some sort of academic citation about how to have basic respect for people less fortunate for you?

i think he actually is expecting that.  BUT - he wouldnt believe it even if such a thing could be produced and presented to him. Because his apriori assumption is that man is or ought to be Superman - in all cases and contexts. Just like ayn rand, just like neitzche.  Its a very "binary" approach to the world, and he's bought into it hook line and sinker.  Its his starting assumption and he holds to it "righteously", like a religion.

[keyboardlover]

I've found in life that more often than not, the people who blame everybody else for all their problems in the world are typically the ones that never get anywhere. Obviously I don't know enough about either one of you to make a judgement, but I'm willing to bet that you both fall into that category.

[wellington1869]

Its his starting assumption and he holds to it "righteously", like a religion.

there's only one treatment for someone afflicted with such a religion: time.  Why time? Because with time comes travails. And its personal adversity that will ultimately shake any solid faith -- including one like this.

but thats something that can only come from the experience of impossible hardships, not from us "talking" to him.  He's "immune" to arguments based on reason right now, or appeals to conscience.  But when his sense of Being changes, thats when his mind will follow.

[keyboardlover]

there's only one treatment for someone afflicted with such a religion: time.  Why time? Because with time comes travails. And its personal adversity that will ultimately shake any solid faith -- including one like this.

Lol bro - I've met more adversity in life than you have any clue to speculate about. And I didn't complain about it or about what brought it on me. I met the challenges and rose above them. That's just the way I live my life. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I think these are the principles that should be taught to people.

[wellington1869]

the people who blame everybody else for all their problems in the world are typically the ones that never get anywhere.

tell me, why do you think it has to be all one or the other?

why do you think there are people who only blame others, and people who only blame themselves?

is there no way to live in between? what might such a living, and thought process, look like?

[ch_123]

And...at what point did I do that?

To both of you - my posts have substance and backing for my points and yours do not so...I'm not really sure what else there is to say. All you do is throw fodder and insults. How juvenile is that??

I doubt my arguments make me look like that to anyone with a clue in their brain. But I already knew that you weren't among that flock.

I don't see too many people here agreeing with you on that one. Either everyone here is wrong, or you are wrong. I like the more probable answer of those two options.

I've found in life that more often than not, the people who blame everybody else for all their problems in the world are typically the ones that never get anywhere.

So like the way you blame poor people for not fitting into your view of the world? Get off your box.

Obviously I don't know enough about either one of you to make a judgement, but I'm willing to bet that you both fall into that category.

You refuse to judge us and then judge us in the same sentence. I'd get that checked out by a doctor if I were you.

[wellington1869]

That's just the way I live my life.

yea all 15 years of it so far

I distinctly get the feeling we're having an argument with a 10th grader who just stumbled across rush limbaugh's first book in the bargain bin at borders.

[keyboardlover]

tell me, why do you think it has to be all one or the other?

why do you think there are people who only blame others, and people who only blame themselves?

is there no way to live in between? what might such a living, and thought process, look like?

I said 'in my experience' and 'typically'. You seem to have worrysome issues with comprehension.

By, the way, I'm in my late 20s. Probably about the same age as you.
 
More fodder. Sigh...

[wellington1869]

I said 'in my experience' and 'typically'. You seem to have worrysome issues with comprehension.

and you have worrisome issues with answering the question...

[keyboardlover]

and you have worrsyome issues with answering the question...

The question is worthless because I don't think those things and never said that I did. How on earth did you get into grad school with these comprehension issues? There are issues with the American education system indeed...

[wellington1869]

I distinctly get the feeling we're having an argument with a 10th grader who just stumbled across rush limbaugh's first book in the bargain bin at borders.

I actually see a lot of this on campus with the undergrads. They all have a copy of the neitzche reader in their back pocket. When they first come across neitzche its like a revelation to them, just like I think it was for some people who read rush limbaugh or ayn rand for the first time, to see in print what they suspected all along - that they were awesome and everyone else had to be chumps who deserved whatever they got.   For a kid, its a tremendously empowering thing to think and feel.

Its a seriously fatalistic, nihilistic, and aristocratic attitude and can do real damage in the wrong hands.

[ch_123]

I love how Keyboardlover turned this discussion about healthcare turned into an argument about poor people, and then into a match where he calls everyone who disagrees with him (I could have left out the 'who disagrees with him' bit there and still refer to the same people) a retard or whatever. For bonus combo points, people who are particularly bad at arguing wiill jump between these nested layers of abstraction, often in the same sentence, in order to confuse the **** out of anyone who is trying to figure what they are talking about... Which is usually nothing at the end of the day.

[microsoft windows]

We all should just get North Korean health care: a chain saw and some band aids. Hey-They spend less than $1 per person with health care there.

[keyboardlover]

I love how Keyboardlover turned this discussion about healthcare turned into an argument about poor people, and then into a match where he calls everyone who disagrees with him (I could have left out the 'who disagrees with him' bit there and still refer to the same people) a retard or whatever. For bonus combo points, people who are particularly bad at arguing wiill jump between these nested layers of abstraction, often in the same sentence, in order to confuse the **** out of anyone who is trying to figure what they are talking about.

I'm pretty sure someone mentioned poor people before I did. And...the rest of your statement is petty fodder. Wouldn't expect anything more of you at this point

[wellington1869]

some good news...

"AP Poll: Repeal? Many wish health law went further"

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care overhaul has divided the nation, and Republicans believe their call for repeal will help them win elections in November. But the picture's not that clear cut.

A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1.

I also think this is one of those laws that will find support grow rather than decrease over time. Not unlike the mandatory seatbelt law in some states. In Massachusetts, there was 2-1 opposition to the law right before it went into effect ("how dare government force me to wear my seatbelt! Hurrrr!").  2 years after the law went into effect, support for it was at 80%.

[keyboardlover]

Many wish health law went further"

..."regardless of whether they support the law, oppose it or remain neutral."

Not really good or bad news...just makes sense to me.

[wellington1869]

..."regardless of whether they support the law, oppose it or remain neutral."

Not really good or bad news...just makes sense to me.

its good news if it means people like you are in a 2-1 minority

the real good news is this:

75 percent who want substantial changes in the system

the status quo is not going to do, and the repubs want a return to the status quo.

[keyboardlover]

its good news if it means people like you are in a 2-1 minority

How do you even know I'm in that boat??

"Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1."

All that says is that more people (who either oppose, support, or remain neutral) believe it should have done more, than those who don't and just think the government should stay out. I oppose it, and I believe it should have done more, so actually I'm not in that minority!
**Cue Welly's brain exploding**

Isn't math fun?

[wellington1869]

I believe it should have done more, so actually I'm not in that minority!

do tell -- given how you've been repeating that sick people have only themselves to blame, how is it that you wanted the law to have "done more"?  Care to explain?

[ch_123]

He wants it to do more to blame sick people?

[keyboardlover]

do tell -- given how you've been repeating that sick people have only themselves to blame, how is it that you wanted the law to have "done more"?  Care to explain?

Did I ever actually say that sick people have only themselves to blame for getting sick? You're an expert at putting words in other people's mouths, you should run for office!
Ch_123 can't be your vice president fortunately, since he wasn't born here

But nah, I'm done with this thread. I've said my peace. You can take it as admitting defeat if you want, but I'm confident that those who actually read and understand the thread will know that it's not.

And frankly if there are things you really want to discuss with me further, you're more than welcome to PM me (that goes for everyone).

[wellington1869]

Did I ever actually say that sick people have only themselves to blame for getting sick? You're an expert at putting words in other people's mouths, you should run for office!

But nah, I'm done with this thread. I've said my peace.

hahahahahaha! ok,  you've said that the poor and the sick have to cure themselves and be productive and are not entitled to tax payer support or standard governmental policies overseeing their benefits. and yes, you've said your piece.

if there's anything more to your (increasingly mysterious and secretive and "abstracted") opinions, you simply havent said it out loud. For some reason.

But nah, I'm done with this thread. I've said my peace. You can take it as admitting defeat if you want, but I'm confident that those who actually read and understand the thread will know that it's not.

And frankly if there are things you really want to discuss with me further, you're more than welcome to PM me (that goes for everyone).

yea, whats with that secretiveness? Are you a cult member or something?  "You all know what I mean. wink wink".  I also love how you say "thats not what i've said!" (after saying exactly that) and then refuse to say what you've said.  More mystery!

[keyboardlover]

hahahahahaha! ok,  you've said that the poor and the sick have to cure themselves and be productive and are not entitled to tax payer support or standard governmental policies overseeing their benefits. and yes, you've said your piece.

if there's anything more to your (increasingly mysterious and secretive and "abstracted") opinions, you simply havent said it out loud. For some reason.

Wow...did I say that Welly? Did I really? I never see any quotes on these things from either of you. Masters of propoganda, just like Hitler was

[wellington1869]

Wow...did I say that Welly? Did I really? I never see any quotes on these things from either of you.

dude the quotes are in full view in the thread above. And rather than saying "is that what I said?" why dont you clarify it right here? I keep repeatedly giving you opportunities to be clear, and you repeatedly walk away from them.

Masters of propoganda, just like Hitler was

wow, godwin for the win. I guess the thread has run its course.

[wellington1869]

opportunity #5, by my count:

if you think we've misrepresented your position on the sick and poor and the proper role of the federal government in dealing with them, can you clarify it here now?  What would you do about, for instance, the 5% unemployed (who come out to 15 to 20 million people) even during times of "full employment" who cant afford healthcare?

This is the second time i'm asking that as clearly as possible, and I suspect it will be the second time that you absolutely refuse to give a clear answer, and will only insinuate that their position  does not deserve federal support or oversight.

[keyboardlover]

dude the quotes are in full view in the thread above. And rather than saying "is that what I said?" why dont you clarify it right here? I keep repeatedly giving you opportunities to be clear, and you repeatedly walk away from them.

Quotes from me, regarding what you constantly accuse me of saying, are definitely not there. I already clarified my points, so there's nothing really more for me to say.

wow, godwin for the win. I guess the thread has run its course.

Wow...that is weird...

[keyboardlover]

If you think we've misrepresented your position on the sick and poor and the proper role of the federal government in dealing with them, can you clarify it here now?  What would you do about, for instance, the 5% unemployed (who come out to 15 to 20 million people) even during times of "full employment" who cant afford healthcare?

This is the second time i'm asking that as clearly as possible, and I suspect it will be the second time that you absolutely refuse to give a clear answer, and will only insinuate that their position  does not deserve federal support or oversight.

Did you read what I wrote about working to create jobs and more opportunities, via capitalism? So that every person who is able-bodied and can work can afford healthcare? Is that not clear enough to you? You keep claiming you read my posts but keep posting as if you haven't.

So if you want to continue this with me, PM me. Why continue to ask the same tired questions that have already been answered in this thread? It just makes it confusing to read, and it makes you look kind of dumb dude.

[wellington1869]

opportunity #6:

you said, "everyone deserves healthcare, but everyone should have to pay or work for it (unless covered by Medicaid, Medicare, Disability, etc.)"

to which I said, "You say you want them to pay for healthcare - there will always be a 5% unemployment (when economists say "full employment" they actually mean 95% employment, as you know. There is no such thing as full employment in a capitalist society). 5% unemployment is considered a huge success and thats at the best of times (which occur but rarely). Thats, um, 15-20 million people unemployed at the best of times. Lets just start with them as an illustration of the point"

to which you said, "If you read my posts you'd see that I already believe that the majority of the bottom half of the bell curve has the abilities to do better (those not already taken care of by current programs). And I gave reasons why. End of story."

which of course doesnt answer the question. To restate the question: would you be in favor of federal benefits or oversight for those 15 to 20 million or not?  

We understand clearly based on your quotes above that you think they can and should work to pay for the benefits. But here we are talking about people who -- by economic laws of capitalism itself - cannot find work all the time.  What should happen to them while they're looking for a job and cannot afford healthcare?  How about health insurance for their children during that time? Clear answer forthcoming?

[ch_123]

Wow...did I say that Welly? Did I really? I never see any quotes on these things from either of you. Masters of propoganda, just like Hitler was

Reductio ad Hiterlum! I love this guy! He brings back great memories of my early secondary school debating days...

[keyboardlover]

Reductio ad Hiterlum! I love this guy! He brings back great memories of my early secondary school debating days...

Doesn't appear that your skills have improved since then

Welly - I don't see a PM from you yet

[wellington1869]

Welly - I don't see a PM from you yet

and you wont see one... no reason for this to be a secret conversation...

[ch_123]

There are several fatal assumptions there about how good I am at arguing, and how good I was way back when in that first sentence.

And why all this secrecy? If you're so confident that you are right, why don't you post your great arguments out in public for all to see? In fact, you said you were tired of this thread, why are you still here?

[wellington1869]

opportunity #7...

opportunity #6:

you said, "everyone deserves healthcare, but everyone should have to pay or work for it (unless covered by Medicaid, Medicare, Disability, etc.)"

to which I said, "You say you want them to pay for healthcare - there will always be a 5% unemployment (when economists say "full employment" they actually mean 95% employment, as you know. There is no such thing as full employment in a capitalist society). 5% unemployment is considered a huge success and thats at the best of times (which occur but rarely). Thats, um, 15-20 million people unemployed at the best of times. Lets just start with them as an illustration of the point"

to which you said, "If you read my posts you'd see that I already believe that the majority of the bottom half of the bell curve has the abilities to do better (those not already taken care of by current programs). And I gave reasons why. End of story."

which of course doesnt answer the question. To restate the question: would you be in favor of federal benefits or oversight for those 15 to 20 million or not?  

We understand clearly based on your quotes above that you think they can and should work to pay for the benefits. But here we are talking about people who -- by economic laws of capitalism itself - cannot find work all the time.  What should happen to them while they're looking for a job and cannot afford healthcare?  How about health insurance for their children during that time? Clear answer forthcoming?

[keyboardlover]

And why all this secrecy? If you're so confident that you are right, why don't you post your great arguments out in public for all to see? In fact, you said you were tired of this thread, why are you still here?

Just trolling

[ch_123]

[keyboardlover]

And why all this secrecy? If you're so confident that you are right, why don't you post your great arguments out in public for all to see? In fact, you said you were tired of this thread, why are you still here?

I already did. Some smarter folks already understood my point and didn't post further (like Patrick mentioned). You and Welly seem to be the dumbest of the lot.

[ch_123]

PROTIP: When someone opens with -

Keybaordlover: I am not saying that you are not entitled to your opinions.

They're politely suggesting that you're talking out of your ass.

[keyboardlover]

PROTIP: When someone opens with -
They're politely suggesting that you're talking out of your ass.

[pikapika]

keyboard lover is using an inductive reasoning (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning ) which means that the only thing that counts is his own experience, it's totally non refutable and can always bring some more arguments till infinite.
this kind of reasoning has been put down by all epistemologists as it can't prove anything

i think debating furthermore can be just for fun as nothing really interesting can come from it