Joe is running.

[SpeareChucker]

Michelle Obama says, well yes, I was given a six-figure salary when my husband became a Senator. That's how real life works...

An investment fund backed by Hunter Biden, son of 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden, invested in a surveillance system used to spy on Muslims in China, a new report claims.

The former vice president has been facing scrutiny over his son’s business dealings in Ukraine and other countries, with reports focusing on Hunter Biden’s role in the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.

The company employed the younger Biden as a board member as the U.S. and the Obama administration were mulling a course of action amid Russia's invasion in Eastern Ukraine. Biden also apparently threatened the Ukrainian president to fire a prosecutor who happens to have been investigating corruption of Burisma.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jo...icails-condemn-china-over-concentration-camps

China and Ukraine say, yes, when you are a Senator, we take real good care of your family. That's how real life works...



B-b-b-b-b.... Ivanka and her Jew husband who calls the shots! There's just something plain wrong, maybe even criminal at work there!

 

[BotanyBoy]

the greys, b boy.
the world works in the greys.

uniforms are for the ... committed.

It can in some ways, in others it’s very black and white.

Socialism vs liberalism is a very clearly defined issue. Either the government is in control of the means of production and distribution of goods and services or it is not.

Either people are allowed to exchange their labor and property with one another or they are not.

 

[SpeareChucker]

B-b-b-b-but Europe proves that you can have eine kleine Socialism...

It's enlightened "democratic" Socialism.



https://mises.org/wire/why-social-democracy-failing-europe

 

[cleaver]

hmmmmm....
ayn rand always read cold:
reardon steel described as cold and blue and absolute.
it was truth
and vilified.

i get it.
see it.
can feel the absolute gravitational pull of the libertarian-ism of it.

and yet.

the absolute discipline involved is... unattainable
once you mix in the un-math-able(s);
that great hoard that rand despised so.

so... an exodus to the hills.

musing with a.... point.

drifting back from that ether,
i'm faced with the reality that all of us
are somewhat irresponsible.
we don't... we can't... manage to have all of our bases covered;

maggie has my back on this thing...
i can help with that...
stay in my place for a couple of days...
bob can pick up your mom at the airport...
here. please. take my seat...
if you're going to the store, could you....?

there are a multitude of interpersonal social transactions
in each of our lives every day
that are neither quite monetizable
nor quantify-able,
but have social currency
as goodwill offered or favor 'owed'.

society is that inexact transactional realm
in which individual's irresponsibilities
are... attempted to be 'covered'
for the 'greater' good.

society is, by it's very nature... collectivist.
it is the grey.

cue the exit music from the micro...

Socialism vs liberalism is a very clearly defined issue. Either the government is in control of the means of production and distribution of goods and services or it is not.

Either people are allowed to exchange their labor and property with one another or they are not.

it is not so absolute.
government is a cede of liberty.
it is a construct that is anointed to be guarantor of as much liberty as can be achieved...
with the cost being social transactional... engineering to maintain a certain (politically negotiated) social order.
it is neither precise, nor fair, nor entirely efficient, nor clean.
government and social order - by definition
cannot be reardon steel.

trigger words abound.

the extremes are the black and white.
there is absolute liberty - which should need no governing, but...
how to quantify... how to actually monetize any social transaction for... the great account? erase all the others?
there is absolute collectivism - which should need no governing, but... how to erase individualism?

so. we have the greys...
the where we actually are.

again,
in lieu of achieving either idyllic extreme
we must navigate - indeed mitigate - the greys.

again,
we must recognize where we are
and why we are where we are...
whether it is a good place; sustainable...
or a place in constant flux floating between the poles of liberty and collectivism...
favoring towards one or the other at any point in time....

and... mitigated by the anointed cede from both poles... the inefficient arbitor...
government.

i return to disparity.
the have and have not.
the accessed and the in-access-able.

the absolutes here are undeniable.
the current economic disparity
is unsustainable.
indeed, it is potentially volatile...

and while some fervently believe that circus alone
can mollify the very visceral underlying un-ease of the hoard,
bread buys more goodwill.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Libertarianism is an extreme absolutist take on liberalism and not at all what I am talking about.

Liberalism absolutely allows for government/civil services.

But it does so in a democratic manner, and doesn’t require the absolute destruction of individual rights and nationalizing of the means of production to do it.

For example, raising taxes in an equitable manner to provide law enforcement, courts, military and other needs of the state? That’s all good.

Punishing the rich for being rich because if we can’t all have Lambos and mansions then NOBODY can have one? Take from the rich and give to the poor just for the sake of equity....for no other reason than to try and eliminate wealth disparity? That’s that evil shit that starves tens of millions to death.

 

[Rightguide]

B-b-b-b-but Europe proves that you can have eine kleine Socialism...

It's enlightened "democratic" Socialism.



https://mises.org/wire/why-social-democracy-failing-europe

People who espouse European socialism need to talk to present day leaders of Sweden.

 

[Rightguide]

https://i.imgur.com/Wyyl8Q2l.jpg

 

[cleaver]

Libertarianism is an extreme absolutist take on liberalism and not at all what I am talking about.

Liberalism absolutely allows for government/civil services.

But it does so in a democratic manner, and doesn’t require the absolute destruction of individual rights and nationalizing of the means of production to do it.

For example, raising taxes in an equitable manner to provide law enforcement, courts, military and other needs of the state? That’s all good.

Punishing the rich for being rich because if we can’t all have Lambos and mansions then NOBODY can have one? Take from the rich and give to the poor just for the sake of equity....for no other reason than to try and eliminate wealth disparity? That’s that evil shit that starves tens of millions to death.

in that you espouse the dismissive ceteris paribus.
the nasty intangibles of circumstance, opportunity, place, inertia and favor.

the wealthy, more, the accumulation of wealth over time, in the greys is not due to acts of individuals alone.
government/governance - that cede on liberty - can be bought/rigged/manipulated to curry favor.
politics, the collectivized aspiration of like interest, battles to curry favor.
in a very roundabout way, disparity is a measure of the innefficiency...
the very manipula-tivity of such a construct.
the faustian bargain of a demand based system is that there will indeed be disparity...

if you wish to paint my argument as an absolute, then you do indeed misread me. i advocate no such redistribution.

moreover, if somehow you believe that the current economic disparity is sustainable...
that it is only the hallmark of liberty exercised justly,
then... ok.

the crowd's gonna get out of hand though...
spurred on, no doubt by, spurious epithets and nefarious self interested 'torch bearers'...
none the less,
the constant loss of means under a system forever ginned to favor the favored
will be the very real visceral motivational catalyst.

 

[BotanyBoy]

in that you espouse the dismissive ceteris paribus.
the nasty intangibles of circumstance, opportunity, place, inertia and favor.

the wealthy, more, the accumulation of wealth over time, in the greys is not due to acts of individuals alone.
government/governance - that cede on liberty - can be bought/rigged/manipulated to curry favor.
politics, the collectivized aspiration of like interest, battles to curry favor.
in a very roundabout way, disparity is a measure of the innefficiency...
the very manipula-tivity of such a construct.
the faustian bargain of a demand based system is that there will indeed be disparity...

if you wish to paint my argument as an absolute, then you do indeed misread me. i advocate no such redistribution.

moreover, if somehow you believe that the current economic disparity is sustainable...
that it is only the hallmark of liberty exercised justly,
then... ok.

the crowd's gonna get out of hand though...
spurred on, no doubt by, spurious epithets and nefarious self interested 'torch bearers'...
none the less,
the constant loss of means under a system forever ginned to favor the favored
will be the very real visceral motivational catalyst.

I don’t dismiss them, I just take the liberal ideology that it’s not the governments place to manage them.

If that is truly the case then you don’t advocate socialism and disparity is of no concern to you nor should you want to see it as a political concern of the federal government.

But considering your obsession with disparity, I’m not so sure that’s truly the case.

Disparity of far far greater depths have been the norm for all but the last few generations of humans, sustainability has little to do with it.

The loss of means comes at the hands of the government, more government involvement and authority will only result in the further loss of means.

If we want a system that isn’t ginned in favor of the favored.....then you must take their authority to gin the system away. It’s the only way that's actually been effective as men cannot be trusted with the authority to decide who gets to be how wealthy with other peoples money. Because they will always favor the favored. Have since ancient times.

That freedom comes with an unavoidable price though, that you are responsible for you and yours. Just like everyone else.

So we as a society need to decide if the USA is going to continue to be a free liberal democracy that values individual rights, equality and liberty. Or are we going to abandon those ideals in favor of being well kept pets of the US federal government that value collectivism, equity and just hope nobody but the most incorruptible and benevolent of people ever rise to power.

Can’t have it both ways....have to pick one or the other.

 

[cleaver]

I don’t dismiss them, I just take the liberal ideology that it’s not the governments place to manage them.

If that is truly the case then you don’t advocate socialism and disparity is of no concern to you nor should you want to see it as a political concern of the federal government.

But considering your obsession with disparity, I’m not so sure that’s truly the case.

Disparity of far far greater depths have been the norm for all but the last few generations of humans, sustainability has little to do with it.

The loss of means comes at the hands of the government, more government involvement and authority will only result in the further loss of means.

If we want a system that isn’t ginned in favor of the favored.....then you must take their authority to gin the system away. It’s the only way that's actually been effective as men cannot be trusted with the authority to decide who gets to be how wealthy with other peoples money. Because they will always favor the favored. Have since ancient times.

That freedom comes with an unavoidable price though, that you are responsible for you and yours. Just like everyone else.

So we as a society need to decide if the USA is going to continue to be a free liberal democracy that values individual rights, equality and liberty. Or are we going to abandon those ideals in favor of being well kept pets of the US federal government that value collectivism, equity and just hope nobody but the most incorruptible and benevolent of people ever rise to power.

Can’t have it both ways....have to pick one or the other.

starting when?
i mean, let's say we start tomorrow?
what d'i get to keep?

somebody deciding on its provenance?
some.... anointed authori-tay?

i'm just trying to keep the rabble from the gates of your manor...

 

[BotanyBoy]

starting when?
i mean, let's say we start tomorrow?
what d'i get to keep?

somebody deciding on its provenance?
some.... anointed authori-tay?

i'm just trying to keep the rabble from the gates of your manor...

Soon as possible would be nice.

What would you get to keep? Your property, your means.

My manor isn’t yours to worry about.

Besides the heavily armed combat vets living in it wish some rabble would.

 

[cleaver]

Soon as possible would be nice.

What would you get to keep? Your property, your means.

My manor isn’t yours to worry about.

Besides the heavily armed combat vets living in it wish some rabble would.

ok then.
i can respect that.

ain't gonna happen, but...
i do in fact completely understand your position.

so?
what are we gonna do where we actually are?

how do you reach your goal?

 

[BotanyBoy]

ok then.
i can respect that.

ain't gonna happen, but...
i do in fact completely understand your position.

so?
what are we gonna do where we actually are?

how do you reach your goal?

It’s been a work in progress for some time. I still hold hope we will one day we will live up to the ideals the nation was founded on.

I vote for those who share and best represent my political views.

Do what I can to oppose those who are antithetical to them.

Now if you’re asking what kinds of things I personally think we should do we’ll need to narrow that down a bit more to certain issues.

 

[SpeareChucker]

hmmmmm....
ayn rand always read cold:
reardon steel described as cold and blue and absolute.
it was truth
and vilified.

i get it.
see it.
can feel the absolute gravitational pull of the libertarian-ism of it.

and yet.

the absolute discipline involved is... unattainable
once you mix in the un-math-able(s);
that great hoard that rand despised so.

so... an exodus to the hills.

musing with a.... point.

drifting back from that ether,
i'm faced with the reality that all of us
are somewhat irresponsible.
we don't... we can't... manage to have all of our bases covered;

maggie has my back on this thing...
i can help with that...
stay in my place for a couple of days...
bob can pick up your mom at the airport...
here. please. take my seat...
if you're going to the store, could you....?

there are a multitude of interpersonal social transactions
in each of our lives every day
that are neither quite monetizable
nor quantify-able,
but have social currency
as goodwill offered or favor 'owed'.

society is that inexact transactional realm
in which individual's irresponsibilities
are... attempted to be 'covered'
for the 'greater' good.

society is, by it's very nature... collectivist.
it is the grey.

cue the exit music from the micro...




it is not so absolute.
government is a cede of liberty.
it is a construct that is anointed to be guarantor of as much liberty as can be achieved...
with the cost being social transactional... engineering to maintain a certain (politically negotiated) social order.
it is neither precise, nor fair, nor entirely efficient, nor clean.
government and social order - by definition
cannot be reardon steel.

trigger words abound.

the extremes are the black and white.
there is absolute liberty - which should need no governing, but...
how to quantify... how to actually monetize any social transaction for... the great account? erase all the others?
there is absolute collectivism - which should need no governing, but... how to erase individualism?

so. we have the greys...
the where we actually are.

again,
in lieu of achieving either idyllic extreme
we must navigate - indeed mitigate - the greys.

again,
we must recognize where we are
and why we are where we are...
whether it is a good place; sustainable...
or a place in constant flux floating between the poles of liberty and collectivism...
favoring towards one or the other at any point in time....

and... mitigated by the anointed cede from both poles... the inefficient arbitor...
government.

i return to disparity.
the have and have not.
the accessed and the in-access-able.

the absolutes here are undeniable.
the current economic disparity
is unsustainable.
indeed, it is potentially volatile...

and while some fervently believe that circus alone
can mollify the very visceral underlying un-ease of the hoard,
bread buys more goodwill.

It's not Randian, it's Misian, more Praxeology, less stoic individualism.
Thinking that the black and white are the extremes is extremist thinking.
As Hoffer ponts out, evangelical and the atheist are peas in a pod and in the black.
It is the moderate agnostic who is in the white and they grays are between them,
but too many of Aristotle's lesser men yearning to be slaves seek the black and
the conversion of the gray...

The absolute is in conviction, and that takes a true believer.
It is easier to make an atheist an evangelical than it is an agnostic an atheist.
As it was in Germany, the best converts for the Nazis were the Communists
(and turn-about was fair play since they were both of the black
it was the von Mises who fled instead of joining)

Social currency, too, is an absolutism tending to black and not a true contract,
it is an abstract best suited to the family or the absolutism of the mass movement
and the demand of self-sacrifice, submission and immersion required of altruism
which is not good deeds but rather being merged with the tribe.

 

[Aquagal]

This evolved into a good read. Thank you to those that even when you don’t agree can have civil discourse.

 

[cleaver]

This evolved into a good read. Thank you to those that even when you don’t agree can have civil discourse.

thank you, ma'am.
indeed, civility is not dead here;
even in the more volatile corners of this old creaky joint...

and though, at times,
a good old drive-by shouting may soothe selfishly the immediate,
doing a bit more work...
listening...
hacking away at the pre-packaged dicta
to actually converse
is
in the end...
a more satisfying meal.

on that, i'm sure we all here can agree.

It's not Randian, it's Misian, more Praxeology, less stoic individualism.
Thinking that the black and white are the extremes is extremist thinking.
As Hoffer ponts out, evangelical and the atheist are peas in a pod and in the black.
It is the moderate agnostic who is in the white and they grays are between them,
but too many of Aristotle's lesser men yearning to be slaves seek the black and
the conversion of the gray...

The absolute is in conviction, and that takes a true believer.
It is easier to make an atheist an evangelical than it is an agnostic an atheist.
As it was in Germany, the best converts for the Nazis were the Communists
(and turn-about was fair play since they were both of the black
it was the von Mises who fled instead of joining)

Social currency, too, is an absolutism tending to black and not a true contract,
it is an abstract best suited to the family or the absolutism of the mass movement
and the demand of self-sacrifice, submission and immersion required of altruism
which is not good deeds but rather being merged with the tribe.

wow.
again an interesting take.
admittedly, i'd hoped that my quoted post would elicit/trigger
such a reasoned response...
interesting that a thread on biden tossing his hat into the ring
could rationally/reasonably veer into policy, economics, philosophy, history...

indeed, as i say to aqua, discourse on this forum need not always be doomed

at this, allow me to defer on a response -
as i'd like to spend some time on it and...
it's nice as fuck out.

 

[SpeareChucker]

The only reason that it has remained rational is

A. No real passion for Biden
B. What in our discussions involves Trump and the passion he illicits?
C. Our styles in writing and discourse, the passionate cannot follow: no training or skill...

 

[SpeareChucker]

Honest Joe has awarded Trump a nickname.

Indeed.



imitation == sincere flattery

Say it ain't so Joe!
I never thought you recognized a winner when you saw one...

 

[DawnODay]

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden reportedly had to correct himself over the weekend after telling donors Margaret Thatcher is concerned about the United States under President Trump.

Thatcher, the former prime minister of Britain, died in 2013 – nearly two years before Trump launched his first campaign for president.​

A. Pappas, Biden mistakenly claims Margaret Thatcher, who died in 2013, is worried about Trump, Fox News (May 7, 2019), citing J. Epstein, Biden Calls Trump a ‘Clown’ While Decrying President’s Nicknames, Bloomberg (May 4, 2019).

 

[SpeareChucker]

That's just Joe...



It's not like he sees dead heroes.

 

[cleaver]

That's just Joe...



It's not like he sees dead heroes.

yeah. not a perfect candidate.
redux on joe.

he'll talk his way out of the job.

 

[Rightguide]

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden reportedly had to correct himself over the weekend after telling donors Margaret Thatcher is concerned about the United States under President Trump.

Thatcher, the former prime minister of Britain, died in 2013 – nearly two years before Trump launched his first campaign for president.​

A. Pappas, Biden mistakenly claims Margaret Thatcher, who died in 2013, is worried about Trump, Fox News (May 7, 2019), citing J. Epstein, Biden Calls Trump a ‘Clown’ While Decrying President’s Nicknames, Bloomberg (May 4, 2019).

He's also out there trying to tell everyone the Chinese are not a threat to the United States. Just adding to his career record of being 100% wrong on matter of foreign affairs...despite being the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at one time.

 

[heathergives]

https://c-6rtwjumjzx7877x24nrl-x78-rx78s-htrx2efpfrfnejix2esjy.g01.msn.com/g00/3_c-6bbb.rx78s.htr_/c-6RTWJUMJZX77x24myyux78x3ax2fx2fnrl-x78-rx78s-htr.fpfrfneji.sjyx2fyjsfsyx2ffrux2fjsynydnix2fFFGgyhB.nrlx3fmx3d961x26bx3d179x26rx3d1x26vx3d15x26zx3dyx26tx3dkx26qx3dkx26n65h.rfwpx3dnrflj_$/$/$/$/$

 

[DawnODay]

J. Harris, 'Say It Ain't So, Joe!' Watch Joe Biden Call For A Border Fence in 2007!, KFYI (May 10, 2019).

 

[thighlicker85]

licking

She's delusional.

who gives a shit