Republicans Want New Congressional leadership

[Sean Renaud]

No but it does make you look like either a partisan ass kiss or a racial ass kiss.

Kinda exactly like the folks who absolutely refuse to admit that Obama is anything but a Kenyan communist out to destroy the US are either partisan ass kissers or racist fucks.

The guy is fucking SPINELESS....or not much of a democrat and a total fucking liar/DINO. Take your pick but calling him weak and gutless is being nice.

What the fuck happened to bringing the troops home and we could take it to the bank? Oh wait liar....

HC reform? Sold us Romneycare.....a huge big pharma/insurance dick suck. Sure we got expanded coverage and blah blah.....still paying 5 star prime rib prices for Alpo Health Care, what a fucking joke.

Getting us energy independent? Re-upping and expanding PATRIOT act?

List goes on...he's Bush 2.0.

Not much of a liberal. Most Democrats are just to the left of center. Just like no matter how they howl the majority or Republicans are only slightly to the right of center.

One of the big differences between the left and right for the most part is our lefties know they are something special. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Orfeo. They know they aren't mainstream and likely will die before they are. They know they are right (and I agree on many stances) but they don't think they are mainstream. Conservatives swear they speak for most Americans.

But Obama is a fairly typical Democrat and even a fairly typical American.

 

[Kitty]

I called him a passive diplomat and got no loooooove for that.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'm not partisan. Racial ass kiss maybe =\ But still is that bad?

Would it be bad if I cut politicians slack because of their skin color?

It's not like I'm as bad about hugging Obama as vetteman is hating him.

No...vettey and friends are obsessive whack jobs.

I admit his faults when necessary. But I do not make so much noise as his haters because I do not want to be seen as the foolish colored gal insulting "her" President.

How's that?

I suppose it's better to be the racist colored gall who gives her officials slack....as long as they are black.

I dunno you tell me. I don't take into account a persons skin color whenever they are telling me it's rain as they piss in my face.

 

[Kitty]

Would it be bad if I cut politicians slack because of their skin color?



No...vettey and friends are obsessive whack jobs.



I suppose it's better to be the racist colored gall who gives her officials slack....as long as they are black.

I dunno you tell me. I don't take into account a persons skin color whenever they are telling me it's rain as they piss in my face.

It just is my obligation to show integrity to support him. I can critique him but I know there are horrible people out here who will twist it as, look it's not just white people who don't like him. I don't want to contribute to that. But I have said disapproving things of him but oh well.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It just is my obligation to show integrity to support him. I can critique him but I know there are horrible people out here who will twist it as, look it's not just white people who don't like him. I don't want to contribute to that. But I have said disapproving things of him but oh well.

It is not integrity to support him however. It's integrity to call him on his shit each and every single time.

 

[phrodeau]

I am making an accounting argument. Every single dollar they earn comes from the balance sheet of some other entity or person. It is stirring money around exactly the same way as wall street except in some functions such as venture capitalism there is an increase due to interest earned. Same with banks, interest earned adds to gdp. Robbing peter to pay paul adds not one thin dime.

Paying a lawyer money to read and interpret gov't regs also adds nothing. It is an expense. GDP is the product. it is the money earned after expenses. Some expenses are someone else's productivity but not lawyers. Or accountants for that matter.

Neither are gov't bureaucrats. they are an expense, they are paid, but the money comes off the top to pay them, it is a wash.

You have to mine something, grow something build something, rent something, transport something, or create something of intellectual property that others will buy. If it doesn't create an asset, it is a drain.

OK, let's let all the cops go, so they can stay home and be safe.

 

[Kitty]

It is not integrity to support him however. It's integrity to call him on his shit each and every single time.

It's integrity to not insult him every time he does something you or I don't like, but still accept the truth and recognize his faults for myself.

 

[Sean Renaud]

He has a real hard time with the fact that money is largely a social construct.

 

[phrodeau]

Boehner wins.

Well, I guess he has accomplished something then.

http://www.boehneraccomplishments.com/

 

[Boxlicker101]

"Tort reform" is dishonest and partisan bullshit. And the way I see it, personal-injury lawyers are valuable to society because we function as a sort of private negligence police. Supermarket managers know it is important to keep their floors clean because of possible slip-and-fall actions, manufacturers know they had damn well better test everything carefully before putting it on the market, doctors are careful to avoid committing malpractice (imagine how much damage they could do if they weren't -- you'll put anything in your body if a doctor prescribes it), and so on.

We probably don't have much deterrent effect on motor vehicle accidents, but, then, I can't imagine what would. Not even a death penalty for speeding would. Americans will drive, and some drivers will sometimes be careless idiots. But, at least with PI lawyers around, people injured by a driver's negligence can do something about it, like settle with the tortfeasor's insurance company or one's own uninsured-motorist carrier for enough money to cover medical bills and lost wages.

. . . Say, is that an ambulance siren? Please excuse me for a moment . . .

I don't believe anybody is calling for tort elimination, but reform just might be a big benefit. People should not be able to collect big bucks because they harm themselves through their own stupidity. For instance, why do people and their mouthpieces collect from tobacco companies because they ruin their health by smoking. For at least half a century, it has been well know that smoking is injurious to one's health but people have started smoking, gotten sick and sued big tobacco anyhow. I have no love for tobacco companies but I am using them as an egregious example.

Even when there is fault, the awards are ridiculous, at times. Tort reform would mean capping the amounts recoverable for "pain and suffering" and other intangibles and make lawyers pay for bringing frivolous lawsuits.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It just is my obligation to show integrity to support him.

Based upon what? His office or his skin color?

I can critique him but I know there are horrible people out here who will twist it as, look it's not just white people who don't like him. I don't want to contribute to that. But I have said disapproving things of him but oh well.

No one is asking you to twist anything....

But lets be real, how has he stood up to republicans and done the lefty anything?

War? Nope...totally lied to us.

HC reform? Half assed at best and it's a republican big pharma/insurance dick suck program anyhow.

Education? Kept Bush doctrine, FAIL.

PATRIOT act...the one the left was in a total fucking uproar about and posting pic's of Bush as hitler over? Yep he kept that, expanded it's power then bombed an american citizen summary execution style. Not a fucking peep from the left....

Promise to leave MMJ states alone? Ran more raids against MMJ in his first 2 years than bush did in 8....

So tell me how is Obama anything but a fucking push over if not a straight the fuck up DINO republican/Bush 2.0?

He's not...he's just another puppet doing the same old song and dance for the same old string pullers.
http://local-static3.forum-files.fobby.net/forum_attachments/0012/0408/changewhen.jpg

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't believe anybody is calling for tort elimination, but reform just might be a big benefit. People should not be able to collect big bucks because they harm themselves through their own stupidity. For instance, why do people and their mouthpieces collect from tobacco companies because they ruin their health by spoken. For at least half a century, it has been well know that smoking is injurious to one's health but people have started smoking, gotten sick and sued big tobacco anyhow. I have no love for tobacco companies but I am using them as an egregious example.

Even when there is fault, the awards are ridiculous, at times. Tort reform would mean capping the amounts recoverable for "pain and suffering" and other intangibles and make lawyers pay for bringing frivolous lawsuits.

Those cases almost never win. Smoking is exactly the same as global warming it was "known" but it was in no way official until if we're being generous 1970. Which is creeping up on fifty years but the word may means exactly that and lots of things may harm your health. How much education are we expecting the average person to have by the way? I mean when it comes to what we should and shouldn't eat all I hear is "dont' worry the doctors will change their minds in five years. Remember eggs? Or Nutrisweet? Or High Fructose Corn Syrup? That's not stupidity.

You have to make the award rediculous. The person being rewarded isn't the only point. The point is also to cause harm to the company at fault. To use your earlier smoking example if they win and they have to pay out 100k to the victims who bother to file a suit, can prove it was smoking and not living with asbestos or being in a fire that one time or living next to a coal plant or all the other shit their lawyers will figure it out the fuck do they care. They are still a multibillion dollar industry. They could drop millions a year and laugh it off.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Actually Bot he did change the education system and REpublicans bitch endlessly about us having something that resembles standards and started the Race to the Top. Should he have done more? Yes. But that is one department where I'll say he's definitely in solid B, B- territory.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Actually Bot he did change the education system and REpublicans bitch endlessly about us having something that resembles standards and started the Race to the Top. Should he have done more? Yes. But that is one department where I'll say he's definitely in solid B, B- territory.

Oh I didn't notice...last info I was privy too was keeping No lil shits left behind. My bad!

Still a spineless DINO, sell out or just a liar.....I suspect a healthy mix of all 3.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Oh I didn't notice...last info I was privy too was keeping No lil shits left behind. My bad!

Still a spineless DINO, sell out or just a liar.....I suspect a healthy mix of all 3.

Oh, No Child Left Behind was kept, but very few programs ever end. I'm not gonna call him on not scrapping everything from his predecessor and we do have Common Core now which you've defended a few times.

I didn't defend his spine. I guess we'll see in a few years how much of a sell out he was. For the moment I give him the benefit of the doubt there. I think equal parts liar, spineless and being a Jr. Senator and one under Bush at that (he got most of what he wanted) he didn't quite grasp that he wasn't the boss. Bush was the boss. I'll chalk that up to naiveity.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Oh, No Child Left Behind was kept, but very few programs ever end. I'm not gonna call him on not scrapping everything from his predecessor and we do have Common Core now which you've defended a few times.

I didn't defend his spine. I guess we'll see in a few years how much of a sell out he was. For the moment I give him the benefit of the doubt there. I think equal parts liar, spineless and being a Jr. Senator and one under Bush at that (he got most of what he wanted) he didn't quite grasp that he wasn't the boss. Bush was the boss. I'll chalk that up to naiveity.

True true...

I didn't really defend it as I don't know much about it, so much as didn't instantly think Home Skool was a better option

I didn't think you were, and good points...maybe he is just naive...

 

[Que]

He has a real hard time with the fact that money is largely a social construct.

No. Money is a medium of exchange. Including real money like gold or sea shells that have some intrinsic value, or fiat currency like we have.

For there to be commerce, someone, somewhere, has to create or discover something of value.

 

[Sean Renaud]

No. Money is a medium of exchange. Including real money like gold or sea shells that have some intrinsic value, or fiat currency like we have.

For there to be commerce, someone, somewhere, has to create or discover something of value.

That's simply factually incorrect. Money, especially fiat money, has no intrinsic value at all. It's just an agreed upon standard that was put in place to simplify things because your second paragraph is again demonstrably false.

If I teach you to farm and you cannot farm prior to that sure the physical thing may come later but I have in fact created something of value no matter how much you don't like it.

In the modern world money more mostly should be defined not as physical thing but as a unit of time. It would take me 15 minutes to drive to the store and grab this. It would take you 20 minutes to read and understand the causes of WWII. You give me the the spare five minutes and we're straight.

 

[Que]

That's simply factually incorrect. Money, especially fiat money, has no intrinsic value at all. It's just an agreed upon standard that was put in place to simplify things because your second paragraph is again demonstrably false.

If I teach you to farm and you cannot farm prior to that sure the physical thing may come later but I have in fact created something of value no matter how much you don't like it.

In the modern world money more mostly should be defined not as physical thing but as a unit of time. It would take me 15 minutes to drive to the store and grab this. It would take you 20 minutes to read and understand the causes of WWII. You give me the the spare five minutes and we're straight.

In your example you have created something of value. You have increased my own human capital so that I can be more productive. Same as if you invented a robot to do the work for me. You created something.

Getting to neighbors to fight so that two lawyers get paid as they hammer their difference out in court over the height of a fence creates nothing, and makes both neighbors poorer, just the same as if the Lawyers stole the money.

Burglary causes money to change hands. That doesn't mean anything of value was created. Money circulating is not wealth growing, it is simply a transfer of wealth. Wealth is created, not 'agreed on.'

 

[BotanyBoy]

Burglary causes money to change hands. That doesn't mean anything of value was created. Money circulating is not wealth growing, it is simply a transfer of wealth. Wealth is created, not 'agreed on.'

Wealth or value as it were is subjective.

Lawyers for example provide a service to the common man...for a fee. Yet you deny that as creation of wealth, do you deny the service industry and other non "wealth" creating jobs as a whole or is it just lawyers you beef over?

My little trees in pots...not really worth anything, but people pay me hundreds for them. Because value is agreed upon, not created....and you can't have wealth without value.

 

[Sean Renaud]

In your example you have created something of value. You have increased my own human capital so that I can be more productive. Same as if you invented a robot to do the work for me. You created something.

Getting to neighbors to fight so that two lawyers get paid as they hammer their difference out in court over the height of a fence creates nothing, and makes both neighbors poorer, just the same as if the Lawyers stole the money.

Burglary causes money to change hands. That doesn't mean anything of value was created. Money circulating is not wealth growing, it is simply a transfer of wealth. Wealth is created, not 'agreed on.'

So then I assume happiness is human capital or are we going to argue entertainers create nothing since many of them do.

Your example of the fence is bullshit unless it's some stupid picket fence in the middle of nowhere especially historically speaking. Even if we're not arguing that your fence needs to keep your whatever off my property the value of my house is based in large part on its aesthetic appearance. You are directly robbing me of future earnings by uglifying my house.

Lawyers are not burglars and while money circulating does "create wealth" in this case. Unless your still believing in human capital. In which case I made you smarter when I robbed you. Bet you'll lock your doors, fence your windows, get an alarm, dog, gun, automated defense grid won't you!

 

[Que]

So then I assume happiness is human capital or are we going to argue entertainers create nothing since many of them do.

Your example of the fence is bullshit unless it's some stupid picket fence in the middle of nowhere especially historically speaking. Even if we're not arguing that your fence needs to keep your whatever off my property the value of my house is based in large part on its aesthetic appearance. You are directly robbing me of future earnings by uglifying my house.

Lawyers are not burglars and while money circulating does "create wealth" in this case. Unless your still believing in human capital. In which case I made you smarter when I robbed you. Bet you'll lock your doors, fence your windows, get an alarm, dog, gun, automated defense grid won't you!

I don't understand a lot about intellectual property as it relates to wealth creation. It is something tangible though. A pleasant memory seems worth something.

Lets look at it as it relates to actual GDP. If a singer sells a lot of albums in a foreign country (lets leave off subsidiaries and bullshit like that) that should increase our GDP, while taking the same amount of potential GDP in the other country away. It was money, they had it now "we" have it. So I think thats the best way for me to figure it.

Intellectual property is weird to me. I get that Elvis estate has the unquestioned right to make money off it (Or is it michael jacksons estate since he owns the catalog) but if someone has an elvis record, and records it to MP3 and gives it to his next-door neighbor for no money, the estate loses out on a potential sale but they were not robbed. At least that is the way the sony lawyer argued it in the betamax case. In the napster case the sony lawyers argued the opposite.

You could argue that some lawyer somewhere created value by creating the ability to form an LLC, thereby keeping other asshole lawyers at bay and helping one run a business without being robbed so one is more productive.

But ambulance chasers are a net drain, especially by adding to the cost of healthcare.

 

[Sean Renaud]

A lot what happens with IP or even copyright is huge and complicated. I'm of the mind personally that if you buy a CD and hand it over you've done nothing wrong, if you make a copy or in the case of MP3 DL it to someone else then yes you have robbed someone. I just don't care that Britney Spears went from 3 million dollars for a hit single to 2.5 million dollars. And as someone who knows a fair amount of low level entertainers there is a line that nobody can draw where that kind of behavior helps you. If nobody knows your name then it's great it's not until people who have heard of you and would have gone out of their way to purchase your product start getting it free that shit becomes an issue but like I said that's a magical line.

So now the argument has to do with it leaving the country? So a lawyer who prevents you from lowering my property value does nothing. But the lawyers who write the the contracts that bring foreign goods into the country are?

It really depends on the the ambulance chaser and how much you value human life or to look at it in a colder way how much value said life would have produced had it survived to the national average. I want the car companies that knowing sold cars with defective ignitions switches to fucking suffer so they don't do that again. Even assuming they didn't kill anybody who would grow up to be awesome it's almost impossible they didn't kill a current or future 1%er. Who over their life time would have contributed.

Loss prevention is a value.

Honestly with your opinion on teachers and entertainers I think you've got yourself tied in one helluva knot trying to pretend that lawyers are evil mostly because it's a Republican stance. One that hinges heavily on the libertarian idea that people are good and honest and virtuous and government does more harm than good.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I don't understand a lot about intellectual property as it relates to wealth creation. It is something tangible though. A pleasant memory seems worth something.

Games, movies, music, education, tourism/travel, fine art.....TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR.

TRILLIONS

You could argue that some lawyer somewhere created value by creating the ability to form an LLC, thereby keeping other asshole lawyers at bay and helping one run a business without being robbed so one is more productive.

But ambulance chasers are a net drain, especially by adding to the cost of healthcare.

LOL just refuses to admit they are no different than any other service based industry....

At the nitty gritty our legal system is less than simple, lawyers are experts, that makes them of particular value to those of us who don't have the fucking time to keep up to date on a load of legal bullshit and track of where all the red tape is at.

How is this any different from any number of other "Can't be an expert at everything, better call a pro." services out there??

 

[Sean Renaud]

But it's not just the service industry. I would imagine he'd make the same argument about police, cops, the military, and Congress. The first three are really more loss prevention than wealth creation but that's why I said it's nice to think of money as time not stuff. The time I'm not spending gaurding my own shit is time I can spend making shit. And our government creates the environment in which we can create wealth. They run the various LEA and military that buy me time. They run the patents that allow me to maintain control of my IP trust me Bill Gates would not be where he is today if the first kid who cracked Windows was able to start selling Windows from his store. Hell without trademark (also government) he wouldn't even have to change the goddamn name!