How liberal/conservative are you?

[Keroin]

At the point we have 21 liberal, and 12 conservative. That's almost twice as many liberal as conservative with the largest majority being very liberal (25%).

But what I find interesting is that some of the people who identify as liberal have some views I find conservative. Maybe it's where I'm from but I'd class someone who's pro-gun and anti-welfare as conservative.

True story: I once had an American approach me while I was working at a resort and ask if I considered myself left or right wing. Well, ignoring the fact that it was none of his business, I was on the job so I wasn't about to get into a political discussion. Smiling sweetly, I answered, "Oh, I'm about in the middle."

He said, "That means your left wing. You're Canadian, so your middle is our left."

I don't think the labels mean all that much, to be honest.

 

[Netzach]

I think it's funny what the assumptions are about your rationale too.

I like fairness, a lot. But honestly, why I like the idea of a social safety net?

I sell shit. My business fits the profile of most small US businesses - 1-2 employees in my case one.

I need customers. I need customers much much more than I need cheap labor. In my case, young female customers who still have a little cash floating between job kid care and basics.

People tapped out on their medical bills about to lose their house are a crappy customer base.
Come to think of it they make pretty distracted and inconsistent employees too, as businesses are beginning to notice.

Class mobility other than down? More customers, less criminals.

Win.

If I have to raise my 12.99 doodad to 14.99 to cover a nominal tax hike to get more customers?

Win. I'm not selling grocery or vital meds, so those who can't won't those who can will certainly and most will.

If you, as a small biz can't figure that out, you deserve fiscal Darwin not poor people.

Children who can expect a better standard of living with hard work than their parents?

Win. Why work hard for something as likely as winning lotto? ROI isn't just for wealthy people.

It's not merely the me me me and mine I work and you must be lazy, not unlucky BS that pisses me off. It's a total lack of long-range planning, where "enlightened" has been dropped from "self-interest" to the detriment of the latter. To the total annihilation of the latter in a lot of cases.

Welfare is also a collective corporate subsidy to cover un-liveable wages when the shit hits the fan for people at minimum, but maybe that's pushing it even harder than most people wanna go.


A solid social safety net and a more equitable distribution of wealth than our current 90/10 may be patently UN-fair if your idea of fair is it's MINE I inherited it and invested it, I made, it, fuck you. You're right, it SHOULD be allllll yours, Ayn. But know what?

What I'm proposing is also patently good common sense. When they're at your door and all you can come up with is let them eat cake, good luck.

That said, I'd like to see more high-risk microlending and education and now let's see results and less here's a shovel and a road crew approach to welfare-to-work. Again, longer range thinking than the next month and a half.

IMO, the greatest example of investment in humans as the right thing to do, with the highest long-range yield was the GI bill as it was in the early 50's and late 40's. The kind of renaissance period of the sixties, I think, was largely due to that, so many of our best minds and brightest lights were products of GI Bill educations.

 

[Keroin]

I think it's funny what the assumptions are about your rationale too.

I like fairness, a lot. But honestly, why I like the idea of a social safety net?

I sell shit. My business fits the profile of most small US businesses - 1-2 employees in my case one.

I need customers. I need customers much much more than I need cheap labor. In my case, young female customers who still have a little cash floating between job kid care and basics.

People tapped out on their medical bills about to lose their house are a crappy customer base.
Come to think of it they make pretty distracted and inconsistent employees too, as businesses are beginning to notice.

Class mobility other than down? More customers, less criminals.

Win.

If I have to raise my 12.99 doodad to 14.99 to cover a nominal tax hike to get more customers?

Win. I'm not selling grocery or vital meds, so those who can't won't those who can will certainly and most will.

If you, as a small biz can't figure that out, you deserve fiscal Darwin not poor people.

Children who can expect a better standard of living with hard work than their parents?

Win. Why work hard for something as likely as winning lotto? ROI isn't just for wealthy people.

It's not merely the me me me and mine I work and you must be lazy, not unlucky BS that pisses me off. It's a total lack of long-range planning, where "enlightened" has been dropped from "self-interest" to the detriment of the latter. To the total annihilation of the latter in a lot of cases.

Welfare is also a collective corporate subsidy to cover un-liveable wages when the shit hits the fan for people at minimum, but maybe that's pushing it even harder than most people wanna go.


A solid social safety net and a more equitable distribution of wealth than our current 90/10 may be patently UN-fair if your idea of fair is it's MINE I inherited it and invested it, I made, it, fuck you. You're right, it SHOULD be allllll yours, Ayn. But know what?

What I'm proposing is also patently good common sense. When they're at your door and all you can come up with is let them eat cake, good luck.

That said, I'd like to see more high-risk microlending and education and now let's see results and less here's a shovel and a road crew approach to welfare-to-work. Again, longer range thinking than the next month and a half.

IMO, the greatest example of investment in humans as the right thing to do, with the highest long-range yield was the GI bill as it was in the early 50's and late 40's. The kind of renaissance period of the sixties, I think, was largely due to that, so many of our best minds and brightest lights were products of GI Bill educations.

Was I making assumptions? My rationale is just stereotypes I've grown accustomed to.

Generally, I love reading your stuff, Netz, but my brain is too small to process it all today. Keroin dummy version...

Welfare: because sometimes people need help.

 

[graceanne]

The problem is that welfare doesn't help people change their circumstances.

For example. If you go to college you will lose your benefits unless you're also working full time. That's fine for, lets say, the teeny bopper, but what about the single mom? To get ahead in life she should just plan on not seeing her children for the next four (or more) years?

I think that their should be a program where if you are passing your classes you also get full benefits. That would be helping people get off of welfare, instead of keeping them on it.

 

[WriterDom]

The school, job, then marriage is a better plan for a girl. At least tech school. They are predicted shortages off all kinds of skilled labor ahead. Or do 4 years in the Navy or Air Force and let them train you. If you are pro choice how about choosing not to have a baby at 17 with a guy who probably won't be around for birthday #2? I was responsible enough to know I didn't want to knock my high school girlfriend up. I was irresponsible in a lot of other ways but we used protection.

My sister got married at 18. To a Georgia Tech guy so my mom was tinkled pink about that. He was on the acceptable list of last names. She had a kid. About eight years later she screws the golf pro. End of marriage. You can't fuck around in a small town.

She went to work for a bank and started taking classes at Clemson. I think she made straight A(s). Moved to Charlotte. Worked long enough to con another guy into taking care of her. Hasn't worked in 26 years. She's just like my mom when it comes to money. It makes it hard to love her sometimes.

 

[Netzach]

Was I making assumptions? My rationale is just stereotypes I've grown accustomed to.

Generally, I love reading your stuff, Netz, but my brain is too small to process it all today. Keroin dummy version...

Welfare: because sometimes people need help.

I didn't mean this as a riposte to anything, just riffing on the question of welfare and the pinning of being in favor of some help for people as pure bleeding heart idiocy that people tend to assume.

I don't just like social justice because I like fluffy bunnies.

 

[Netzach]

The problem is that welfare doesn't help people change their circumstances.

For example. If you go to college you will lose your benefits unless you're also working full time. That's fine for, lets say, the teeny bopper, but what about the single mom? To get ahead in life she should just plan on not seeing her children for the next four (or more) years?

I think that their should be a program where if you are passing your classes you also get full benefits. That would be helping people get off of welfare, instead of keeping them on it.

I can't agree more. Real help up, rather than creating a permanent stewing underclass that never gets anywhere if they work anywhere if they don't. The OLD GI Bill, before it was gutted more or less, made it comfortable and possible to get through school focused on school. That was the whole point.

What you're talking about might cost like, a little more. A little more people are too resentful to pay, while they wonder why retail is in the shitter.

More people in a position to be consumers = win.

 

[Shankara20]

Or do 4 years in the Navy or Air Force and let them train you.

I was trained as an Aircrew Survival Equipment specialist (parachute rigger). When it was time to reenlist I asked my supervisor what he was going to do when he left the Navy with 20 years of training at age 40. He was going to purchase an ice cream truck and drive around neighborhoods.

I didnot reenlist, but got out and went to community collage to study restaurant management.

Just saying that not all Navy training has much civilian crossover.

 

[caela]

I can't agree more. Real help up, rather than creating a permanent stewing underclass that never gets anywhere if they work anywhere if they don't. The OLD GI Bill, before it was gutted more or less, made it comfortable and possible to get through school focused on school. That was the whole point.

What you're talking about might cost like, a little more. A little more people are too resentful to pay, while they wonder why retail is in the shitter.

More people in a position to be consumers = win.

I'm all for real help be it in the form of a revamped GI Bill, work-training programs, perhaps a way for people to work part time and go to school and still keep there benefits like Gracie said; I'd also like to see more grants available for poor folk to be able to go to school with and wouldn't mind some sort of daycare subsidy for poor/single parents. Hell I love programs like WIC that are very precise and allow poor/single/struggling parents to be able to feed their children better food then they otherwise might.

ETA: I also think that such programs should be based on a person's net pay not their gross pay. I may make X$ on my paycheck but I only bring home Y$ to spend and don't think a person should be penalized for the difference.

What I don't like is simply giving people a hand-out. Perhaps all people on welfare aren't lazy and just mooching off the system but we all know that there are also a number of people who are. I'd like to see the whole system revamped with time limits and caveats stating that people need to either be in some sort of job training program or actively seeking a job...and I'd want proof. And at some point I'd also say "see-ya".

It's not our responsibility to continue paying for someone forever.

 

[Keroin]

I didn't mean this as a riposte to anything, just riffing on the question of welfare and the pinning of being in favor of some help for people as pure bleeding heart idiocy that people tend to assume.

I don't just like social justice because I like fluffy bunnies.

Groovy. No worries, I'm just too lazy to go get my Netz Rosetta Stone this morning.

The system is flawed, (aren't they all), but I'd rather have flawed welfare than none at all for many reasons. Some of my reasons are logical, some are just "goodwill toward men", fluffy bunny reasons. Me? I worked three jobs while I was in Uni. I'd have a really hard time accepting a handout from anyone but I like knowing it's there if I need it, even if many people abuse it.

 

[WriterDom]

I was trained as an Aircrew Survival Equipment specialist (parachute rigger). When it was time to reenlist I asked my supervisor what he was going to do when he left the Navy with 20 years of training at age 40. He was going to purchase an ice cream truck and drive around neighborhoods.

I didnot reenlist, but got out and went to community collage to study restaurant management.

Just saying that not all Navy training has much civilian crossover.

Yeah but these days if your scores are high enough you can pick what you want. Usually the two year schools required a six year enlistment though. I knew a guy who flunked out of A school and ended up a deck ape on my ship. In the old days if you flunked or got kicked of the academy you got sent right to the fleet. I bet they ragged the hell out of those boys.

 

[WriterDom]

There are a lot of roofs to paint white in the country. Seems like to me that would be a bad idea in the winter.

 

[graceanne]

I can't agree more. Real help up, rather than creating a permanent stewing underclass that never gets anywhere if they work anywhere if they don't. The OLD GI Bill, before it was gutted more or less, made it comfortable and possible to get through school focused on school. That was the whole point.

What you're talking about might cost like, a little more. A little more people are too resentful to pay, while they wonder why retail is in the shitter.

More people in a position to be consumers = win.

At first it would cost more money, but as more and more people get off welfare, it would cost less and less. Welfare continues to need income, because the number of people actually getting OFF welfare are few.

Another bullshit thing about welfare (at least in Oregon) is that you have to have children to qualify. You don't get squat without a child.Why not just pay people to have kids? Oh, wait! That's what we're doing! If you have a child you can get 400 a month in cash benefits, and about 300 in food stamps, plus WIC and Oregon Health Plan and all without working! (if you did the math that's over 1000 a month - for ONE child. I'm not going to do the math for more.) AND they won't help you go to college! So just keep popping those kids out and welfare will pay you more and more! Oh, lucky you!



I get so frustrated with this system.

 

[rosco rathbone]

At first it would cost more money, but as more and more people get off welfare, it would cost less and less. Welfare continues to need income, because the number of people actually getting OFF welfare are few.

Another bullshit thing about welfare (at least in Oregon) is that you have to have children to qualify. You don't get squat without a child.Why not just pay people to have kids? Oh, wait! That's what we're doing! If you have a child you can get 400 a month in cash benefits, and about 300 in food stamps, plus WIC and Oregon Health Plan and all without working! (if you did the math that's over 1000 a month - for ONE child. I'm not going to do the math for more.) AND they won't help you go to college! So just keep popping those kids out and welfare will pay you more and more! Oh, lucky you!



I get so frustrated with this system.

I was on a Greyhound from SLC to Portland and all these ne'erdowells, drifters, scapegraces, nuts off their meds, roving weed dealers and other losers made friends on the ride and were all talking about how they hadf to get back to OR where the living was easy.

 

[Netzach]

I'm all for real help be it in the form of a revamped GI Bill, work-training programs, perhaps a way for people to work part time and go to school and still keep there benefits like Gracie said; I'd also like to see more grants available for poor folk to be able to go to school with and wouldn't mind some sort of daycare subsidy for poor/single parents. Hell I love programs like WIC that are very precise and allow poor/single/struggling parents to be able to feed their children better food then they otherwise might.

ETA: I also think that such programs should be based on a person's net pay not their gross pay. I may make X$ on my paycheck but I only bring home Y$ to spend and don't think a person should be penalized for the difference.

What I don't like is simply giving people a hand-out. Perhaps all people on welfare aren't lazy and just mooching off the system but we all know that there are also a number of people who are. I'd like to see the whole system revamped with time limits and caveats stating that people need to either be in some sort of job training program or actively seeking a job...and I'd want proof. And at some point I'd also say "see-ya".

It's not our responsibility to continue paying for someone forever.

Ok.

Farm subsidy.

Airlines.

Things that suck cash for loser propositions to proportions that make welfare cheats look like the small potatoes they are. When is enough enough for these things? Make money, be nationalized, or go out of business. Man up.

But Regan painted us a picture, she didn't look like us, we thought, so we had a new scapegoat.

And it was revamped along those lines. Now we give legal Somali war refugee women six months to acclimate to MN, learn english and get self sustaining. If they can't they're lazy.

Fuck, I'm the laziest fucker ever born if that's lazy. We hate on those people, but the ultimate welfare cheat I ever met was this white guy you see, with a garage filled with several million dollars of classic autos and a field filled with - nothing. Nothing at all.

Good gig.

 

[WriterDom]

In Georgia you can go to college or Tech school and the lottery pays for tuition and books. The only catch is you have to maintain a B average. I could even get some money for grad school if I agreed to teach a year for each X amount of dollars. I'd only do that if they would let me take my paddle to class.

 

[caela]

At first it would cost more money, but as more and more people get off welfare, it would cost less and less. Welfare continues to need income, because the number of people actually getting OFF welfare are few.

Another bullshit thing about welfare (at least in Oregon) is that you have to have children to qualify. You don't get squat without a child.Why not just pay people to have kids? Oh, wait! That's what we're doing! If you have a child you can get 400 a month in cash benefits, and about 300 in food stamps, plus WIC and Oregon Health Plan and all without working! (if you did the math that's over 1000 a month - for ONE child. I'm not going to do the math for more.) AND they won't help you go to college! So just keep popping those kids out and welfare will pay you more and more! Oh, lucky you!



I get so frustrated with this system.

MI does pretty much the same thing. Having dealt with our system is a part of why I find it so damned broken and would rather just chuck it than keep it "as is". When I was going to school I was also busting my hump full time making about 7$ an hour. I didn't live at home and I didn't have roommates so all of my bills fell on me. I called it a banner week if I could buy mac 'n cheese instead of raman noodles and I spent a lot of time driving as little as possible because I could afford even the cheapest insurance on my car and still make my rent payment. Yes that means I rode the bus and my bike a LOT.

I finally decided to suck up my pride and went down to the welfare office to apply for foodstamps. Didn't want any other help, just a little something to help with groceries so I could eat something other than raman on a regular basis and maybe be able to afford to insure my car.

Since I had no children and worked full time I was told I qualified for a whopping 10$ a month in food assistance. If I wanted more I had to cut my hours at work - but if I did that voluntarily I wouldn't qualify for more - or if I got preggers they'd be more than happy to help me out, nevermind the fact that getting pregnant would have gotten me kicked out of my program because the schools insurance carrier wouldn't cover it if I was exposed to something toxic (and doing clinicals in a hospital I was) and my baby came out deformed.

As is the system is designed to create people that continue to be dependent on it, not to help people become independent and productive citizens.

 

[caela]

Ok.

Farm subsidy.

Airlines.

Things that suck cash for loser propositions to proportions that make welfare cheats look like the small potatoes they are. When is enough enough for these things? Make money, be nationalized, or go out of business. Man up.

But Regan painted us a picture, she didn't look like us, we thought, so we had a new scapegoat.

And it was revamped along those lines. Now we give legal Somali war refugee women six months to acclimate to MN, learn english and get self sustaining.

Oh no, I am bitch enough to say quit paying for them too. A business is supposed to be just that, if you can't make a profit then it's time to go belly up and try something new.

ETA: Six months is not enough time to become fluent in English. I would certainly change that timeline but I wouldn't just let them keep collecting a check forever either. For your Somali women (or any immigrant really) I would be willing to extend that for say two years (just a number I'm throwing out, I'd need more information to really give a realistic number) with the caveat that they are taking classes to become fluent in English and I'd also be getting them some form of job training even if it was just something as simple as learning data entry to give them a starting point in the workforce.

 

[graceanne]

I was on a Greyhound from SLC to Portland and all these ne'erdowells, drifters, scapegraces, nuts off their meds, roving weed dealers and other losers made friends on the ride and were all talking about how they hadf to get back to OR where the living was easy.

I SO believe that. In portland there's a soup kitchen around every corner.

 

[Netzach]

Oh no, I am bitch enough to say quit paying for them too. A business is supposed to be just that, if you can't make a profit then it's time to go belly up and try something new.

ETA: Six months is not enough time to become fluent in English. I would certainly change that timeline but I wouldn't just let them keep collecting a check forever either. For your Somali women (or any immigrant really) I would be willing to extend that for say two years (just a number I'm throwing out, I'd need more information to really give a realistic number) with the caveat that they are taking classes to become fluent in English and I'd also be getting them some form of job training even if it was just something as simple as learning data entry to give them a starting point in the workforce.

LOL we're actually in more or less agreement, cool. I'm just thinking top-down reform saves maximum $ up front. You kick farmer Joe off the teat and you save hundreds of thousands, kick wanda jane welfare mom off you save a couple thousand. ROI - not just for people, for governments, too.

Unless you have another agenda.

Like getting people who are close to wanda jane's situation to resent her and ignore the S&L crisis?

 

[caela]

LOL we're actually in more or less agreement, cool. I'm just thinking top-down reform saves maximum $ up front.

Agreed.

I don't mind the initial outflow of money that would be needed to actually invest in people and give them a hand-up...what I don't like is the constant flushing down the toilet of money, that the current welfare system is.

I don't like the amount I pay in taxes but if the gov't is going to steal my money I'd like to see it doing some good not just going up in smoke.

ETA: I'm being blonde but what is ROI?

Oh and I'd kick farmer Joe off the teat and get WandaJane into a job training program, if she were unwilling to enroll in said program (or unwilling to put in the work for it) then I'd kick her off the teat too.

 

[Netzach]

Agreed.

I don't mind the initial outflow of money that would be needed to actually invest in people and give them a hand-up...what I don't like is the constant flushing down the toilet of money, that the current welfare system is.

I don't like the amount I pay in taxes but if the gov't is going to steal my money I'd like to see it doing some good not just going up in smoke.

ETA: I'm being blonde but what is ROI?

Oh and I'd kick farmer Joe off the teat and get WandaJane into a job training program, if she were unwilling to enroll in said program (or unwilling to put in the work for it) then I'd kick her off the teat too.

ROI - return on investment

What irks me about farm is the fact that there's a Wizard behind the curtain.

Wanda doesn't have one. And some people are simply too fucked up, too unskilled and too unteachable to work and I don't think they deserve to starve to death, the world has all kinds. The actual percentage of these is small, the percentage faking it is small and it's the risk factor of how a first world country with this much money should see its humans. It's the same as with the death penalty, in an ideal world where we're always right, yes, it SHOULD be X. But it's usually not even Y and I don't presume to know Wanda's troubles.

Joe's story is interesting. I had no idea how this worked till I started screwing ex farmboys.

See, Joe used to do OK with a lot of assbusting farm labor till about the seventies. Then all of a sudden you just wouldn't get the right yield without this or that piece of equipment or pesticide, which ADM would talk Joe into. Shit, everyone wants to stay competitive.

Then ADM had Joe's cash in hand, he lost his ass because it wasn't the ONLY way to farm after all, and the gov't came in to save the family farm and all that's good about America.

Joe sort of wins this, but really ADM who can keep selling and selling to a hungry customer base, products that don't work the way they insist and methods that don't work the way they insist, pushing and pushing the price down til styrofoam peanuts cost more than real ones.

I wouldn't kick Joe off the teat posthaste either. But I'd get him savvy with quickbooks and considering growing wine grapes or organic or things people are actually buying this side of China.

 

[WriterDom]

I wouldn't kick Joe off the teat posthaste either. But I'd get him savvy with quickbooks and considering growing wine grapes or organic or things people are actually buying this side of China.

Or pot. Wouldn't it be nice to get some income from taxing pot and stop sending people to jail for it? Getting honest people to grow it and pay taxes on their income. Rather than funding the Mexican cartels.

 

[caela]

ROI - return on investment

What irks me about farm is the fact that there's a Wizard behind the curtain.

Wanda doesn't have one. And some people are simply too fucked up, too unskilled and too unteachable to work and I don't think they deserve to starve to death, the world has all kinds. The actual percentage of these is small, the percentage faking it is small and it's the risk factor of how a first world country with this much money should see its humans. It's the same as with the death penalty, in an ideal world where we're always right, yes, it SHOULD be X. But it's usually not even Y and I don't presume to know Wanda's troubles.

Joe's story is interesting. I had no idea how this worked till I started screwing ex farmboys.

See, Joe used to do OK with a lot of assbusting farm labor till about the seventies. Then all of a sudden you just wouldn't get the right yield without this or that piece of equipment or pesticide, which ADM would talk Joe into. Shit, everyone wants to stay competitive.

Then ADM had Joe's cash in hand, he lost his ass because it wasn't the ONLY way to farm after all, and the gov't came in to save the family farm and all that's good about America.

Joe sort of wins this, but really ADM who can keep selling and selling to a hungry customer base, products that don't work the way they insist and methods that don't work the way they insist, pushing and pushing the price down til styrofoam peanuts cost more than real ones.

I wouldn't kick Joe off the teat posthaste either. But I'd get him savvy with quickbooks and considering growing wine grapes or organic or things people are actually buying this side of China.

You have a point about Joe. I'd be willing for him to get some help too but if he wants to keep playing ball with ADM, even when they're fucking him in the ass with no lube, then he's got no one but himself to blame when he loses the game. It's not our job to try and rig it in his favor.

As for Wanda, I don't know her trials and hardships either but I've met very few people who are so unteachable that they can't do something. Hell even training her as a bag-person would at least make her a productive member of society. Some of the best bagger's I've ever met are also the most mentally deficient (literally, as in mental retardation).

If she's unskilled, well that's the point of a job-training program. If she's fucked up then she needs to be getting help (working a program, seeing a therapist etc.) if she wants to continue getting any gov't money. In my experience, being unskilled is often a lack of opprotunity and education and is highly correctable if you give a person a chance. Being fucked up is usually the result of poor choices (not always but more often than not) and it's not our job to keep patting a person on the head and paying them to keep making more poor choices.

ETA: I did mention that I'm a bitch right? I'm selfish in that I bust my ass to support myself and my daughter...not Wanda and hers. I don't mind giving to charity but I am offended that the state forces me to do it.

Robin Hood is a cute fairy tale, not a justification for stealing from me to give to Wanda.

 

[RawHumor]

I voted moderately conservative.

I'm for gay marriage, call it what you will, but like WD said, clergy that don't want to do it shouldn't have to.

I'm pro guns, anti-abortion, for lower taxes, and against federalization of the private sector.

Nationalized health care? That's tough - I think streamlined health care could be cheaper for everyone... nationalizing our current system would just be a disaster.