Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The question of disaster relief

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    CT, it has been shown time and time again that left to their own devices, people will usually not do the right thing for their fellow human beings, especially when it comes to making money. That is why we need governments. A perfect example starts in 1929, the great crash of Wall Street. Millions of hardworking Americans lost their life savings, their pensions, everything. Why? Because people who had been trusted with those nest eggs decided to basically turn the stock markets into their own playground casino. And the really bad part of that was that they had done nothing illegal.

    In response, our government began regulating the brokerage houses in order to prevent them from pissing away people's life savings again.

    Fast forward to the 1980's when the government shifted and most of those regulations were dismantled, all in the name free markets and deregulation. Ultimately, many people were once again at the mercy of the investment bankers, and when their clients went under (1987, 2000, 2008), the bankers said "What? We did nothing wrong. We violated no regulations. So what if our clients lost their asses? We made money and that is what is important."

    Those bankers see absolutely no need for fiduciary responsibility. As long as the regulations that prevented them from pissing away their clients' funds do not exist, they feel fine.

    Yes, I want my government to do things for me that I cannot do for myself.

    I want the government to prevent corporations from dumping toxic chemical waste into my children's drinking water.

    I want my government to require seat belts and airbags in cars my children ride in.

    I want my government to insure that the medications I give my children are untainted and unadulterated.

    I want my government to make sure the aircraft my loved ones fly on are safe and well maintained. I want to know that the pilots and mechanics know what they are doing. You know damn well if it were not for government inspectors, many airlines would cut corners on training and maintenance. Even with inspectors, they are occasionally caught doing exactly that. I want the NTSB to investigate every single plane crash to determine both the cause and contributing factors and insist on changes in materials, designs, procedures, etc. when warranted. I don't want the industry covering up the truth.

    People say, "We don't need the government. Let the free market meet your needs!"

    Where was the free market when old people needed health insurance? In the 1950's, were health insurers fighting each other to cover seniors who were retired? No, they weren't. Why not? Because there is very little if any profit in insuring a demographic that tends to need a lot of health care. Because of this, the government stepped in and created something called Medicare. Every working person pays into the system their entire productive years and when they are old, they have coverage - coverage that the free market was not interested in providing.

    No, free markets won't provide all we need.

    I recall reading Lee Iacocca's autobiography (1984). If you don't know, Iocca is known as the father of the Ford Mustang and later the savior of Chrysler Motor Company. In that book, he proudly claims to have led the fight against airbags in automobiles for over twenty years. He says airbags are a terrible idea that would do nothing but increase the costs of cars. Airbags have been government mandated since the 1990's and they have saved thousands of lives. Talk about being on the wrong side of history!

    Remember, no safety features in domestic cars were standard until the government required them. Auto industry executives were heard to say "We don't dare offer seat belts as standard equipment. People will think they are not safe in our cars!" Do you know what it looks like when a child flies into a windshield? Children were flying through windshields daily for decades and the industry did nothing.

    Well, enough with the rant.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #77
      Originally posted by HawkeyeDJ View Post
      CT, it has been shown time and time again that left to their own devices, people will usually not do the right thing for their fellow human beings, especially when it comes to making money. That is why we need governments. A perfect example starts in 1929, the great crash of Wall Street. Millions of hardworking Americans lost their life savings, their pensions, everything. Why? Because people who had been trusted with those nest eggs decided to basically turn the stock markets into their own playground casino. And the really bad part of that was that they had done nothing illegal.

      In response, our government began regulating the brokerage houses in order to prevent them from pissing away people's life savings again.

      Fast forward to the 1980's when the government shifted and most of those regulations were dismantled, all in the name free markets and deregulation. Ultimately, many people were once again at the mercy of the investment bankers, and when their clients went under (1987, 2000, 2008), the bankers said "What? We did nothing wrong. We violated no regulations. So what if our clients lost their asses? We made money and that is what is important."

      Those bankers see absolutely no need for fiduciary responsibility. As long as the regulations that prevented them from pissing away their clients' funds do not exist, they feel fine.

      Yes, I want my government to do things for me that I cannot do for myself.

      I want the government to prevent corporations from dumping toxic chemical waste into my children's drinking water.

      I want my government to require seat belts and airbags in cars my children ride in.

      I want my government to insure that the medications I give my children are untainted and unadulterated.

      I want my government to make sure the aircraft my loved ones fly on are safe and well maintained. I want to know that the pilots and mechanics know what they are doing. You know damn well if it were not for government inspectors, many airlines would cut corners on training and maintenance. Even with inspectors, they are occasionally caught doing exactly that. I want the NTSB to investigate every single plane crash to determine both the cause and contributing factors and insist on changes in materials, designs, procedures, etc. when warranted. I don't want the industry covering up the truth.

      People say, "We don't need the government. Let the free market meet your needs!"

      Where was the free market when old people needed health insurance? In the 1950's, were health insurers fighting each other to cover seniors who were retired? No, they weren't. Why not? Because there is very little if any profit in insuring a demographic that tends to need a lot of health care. Because of this, the government stepped in and created something called Medicare. Every working person pays into the system their entire productive years and when they are old, they have coverage - coverage that the free market was not interested in providing.

      No, free markets won't provide all we need.

      I recall reading Lee Iacocca's autobiography (1984). If you don't know, Iocca is known as the father of the Ford Mustang and later the savior of Chrysler Motor Company. In that book, he proudly claims to have led the fight against airbags in automobiles for over twenty years. He says airbags are a terrible idea that would do nothing but increase the costs of cars. Airbags have been government mandated since the 1990's and they have saved thousands of lives. Talk about being on the wrong side of history!

      Remember, no safety features in domestic cars were standard until the government required them. Auto industry executives were heard to say "We don't dare offer seat belts as standard equipment. People will think they are not safe in our cars!" Do you know what it looks like when a child flies into a windshield? Children were flying through windshields daily for decades and the industry did nothing.

      Well, enough with the rant.
      Yes, I know what you're saying.

      I have less faith in "govt." than you do. That's all.

      As you say:

      "....it has been shown time and time again that left to their own devices, people will usually not do the right thing for their fellow human beings, especially when it comes to making money.

      Yet you have faith the people in govt. WILL ?

      ... when it has been consistently demonstrated that they will not.

      It always comes to finding & keeping that balance.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #78
        Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

        Yes, I know what you're saying.

        I have less faith in "govt." than you do. That's all.

        As you say:

        "....it has been shown time and time again that left to their own devices, people will usually not do the right thing for their fellow human beings, especially when it comes to making money.

        Yet you have faith the people in govt. WILL ?

        ... when it has been consistently demonstrated that they will not.

        It always comes to finding & keeping that balance.
        I gave you several examples of when the government has done the right thing, over the objection or the apathy of industry or free markets. And still you insist that the government will not do the right thing.

        Can I therefore assume that you think government mandated airbags and seat belts are a bad thing? You think Medicare is a bad thing, even though no one in private industry has any workable alternative? You think the government ought not regulate bank practices? You think manufacturers ought to be allowed to put lead in household paint if they are so inclined? Do you believe that cigarette makers should be allowed to claim their product is safe and healthy, as they did before the Federal Trade Commission put a stop to that back in the 1960's?

        My point is this: When there is a societal need, private industry and free markets should be given the opportunity to meet that need. If or when they fail, I want the government to step in.

        Yes, government can be wasteful and inefficient at times, and we should work to minimize that. But when I hear idiot talk like "We should privatize Social Security and let it make money in the stock market," I can't help but wonder why people don't understand why we have Social Security in the first place. Yeah, let's go back to the 1920's when life was soooo much better for the working man in America. Let Wall Street take our SS and play with it like they did with our pensions in 1929. Awesome idea.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #79
          Originally posted by HawkeyeDJ View Post
          CT, it has been shown time and time again that left to their own devices, people will usually not do the right thing for their fellow human beings, especially when it comes to making money. That is why we need governments. A perfect example starts in 1929, the great crash of Wall Street. Millions of hardworking Americans lost their life savings, their pensions, everything. Why? Because people who had been trusted with those nest eggs decided to basically turn the stock markets into their own playground casino. And the really bad part of that was that they had done nothing illegal.

          In response, our government began regulating the brokerage houses in order to prevent them from pissing away people's life savings again.

          Fast forward to the 1980's when the government shifted and most of those regulations were dismantled, all in the name free markets and deregulation. Ultimately, many people were once again at the mercy of the investment bankers, and when their clients went under (1987, 2000, 2008), the bankers said "What? We did nothing wrong. We violated no regulations. So what if our clients lost their asses? We made money and that is what is important."

          Those bankers see absolutely no need for fiduciary responsibility. As long as the regulations that prevented them from pissing away their clients' funds do not exist, they feel fine.

          Yes, I want my government to do things for me that I cannot do for myself.

          I want the government to prevent corporations from dumping toxic chemical waste into my children's drinking water.

          I want my government to require seat belts and airbags in cars my children ride in.

          I want my government to insure that the medications I give my children are untainted and unadulterated.

          I want my government to make sure the aircraft my loved ones fly on are safe and well maintained. I want to know that the pilots and mechanics know what they are doing. You know damn well if it were not for government inspectors, many airlines would cut corners on training and maintenance. Even with inspectors, they are occasionally caught doing exactly that. I want the NTSB to investigate every single plane crash to determine both the cause and contributing factors and insist on changes in materials, designs, procedures, etc. when warranted. I don't want the industry covering up the truth.

          People say, "We don't need the government. Let the free market meet your needs!"

          Where was the free market when old people needed health insurance? In the 1950's, were health insurers fighting each other to cover seniors who were retired? No, they weren't. Why not? Because there is very little if any profit in insuring a demographic that tends to need a lot of health care. Because of this, the government stepped in and created something called Medicare. Every working person pays into the system their entire productive years and when they are old, they have coverage - coverage that the free market was not interested in providing.

          No, free markets won't provide all we need.

          I recall reading Lee Iacocca's autobiography (1984). If you don't know, Iocca is known as the father of the Ford Mustang and later the savior of Chrysler Motor Company. In that book, he proudly claims to have led the fight against airbags in automobiles for over twenty years. He says airbags are a terrible idea that would do nothing but increase the costs of cars. Airbags have been government mandated since the 1990's and they have saved thousands of lives. Talk about being on the wrong side of history!

          Remember, no safety features in domestic cars were standard until the government required them. Auto industry executives were heard to say "We don't dare offer seat belts as standard equipment. People will think they are not safe in our cars!" Do you know what it looks like when a child flies into a windshield? Children were flying through windshields daily for decades and the industry did nothing.

          Well, enough with the rant.
          Ah, you and I agree on this. I have always believed free market capitalism used by a nation requires a Commons just for the reasons you laid out. I love capitalism, as it is the best system to date, but it has its flaws and those flaws negetively affect human beings. This is why you need a Commons, so capitalism can be used. Not too much of a cost to ask in exchange for a few to become extraordinarily wealthy from capitalism. For most do not become wealthy. So, it is the price that must be paid for capitalism where if not for a commons you would literally have people starving to death. We saw how the demand for charity overwhelmed charities in the great depression. So depending upon the better side of human nature ignores that not enough of us have a better side. That is just the fact of reality. Capitalism is not immune from the base side of human nature. Like marxism, it never works out like it looks on paper.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #80
            Originally posted by HawkeyeDJ View Post
            I gave you several examples of when the government has done the right thing, over the objection or the apathy of industry or free markets. And still you insist that the government will not do the right thing.
            I didn't. I essentially said that care and skepticism is important. Trusting these people too much, is foolish.

            The government CAN do "the right thing."

            Will they ? Can they always be trusted to ?

            Maybe & NO

            Originally posted by HawkeyeDJ View Post
            Can I therefore assume that you think government mandated airbags and seat belts are a bad thing? You think Medicare is a bad thing, even though no one in private industry has any workable alternative? You think the government ought not regulate bank practices? You think manufacturers ought to be allowed to put lead in household paint if they are so inclined? Do you believe that cigarette makers should be allowed to claim their product is safe and healthy, as they did before the Federal Trade Commission put a stop to that back in the 1960's?

            My point is this: When there is a societal need, private industry and free markets should be given the opportunity to meet that need. If or when they fail, I want the government to step in.

            Yes, government can be wasteful and inefficient at times, and we should work to minimize that. But when I hear idiot talk like "We should privatize Social Security and let it make money in the stock market," I can't help but wonder why people don't understand why we have Social Security in the first place. Yeah, let's go back to the 1920's when life was soooo much better for the working man in America. Let Wall Street take our SS and play with it like they did with our pensions in 1929. Awesome idea.
            How many people will actually get ALL of the money they were forced to put into this scheme called Social Security ?

            And is it going to be sustainable with greedy & corrupt half-wits like the men & women in govt. managing it ?

            On the other-hand, investments & 401K's can be dangerous too. My mom lost most of her retirement because of what that bernie madoff creep did. Should the govt. have prevented that ? Were they supposed to ? I don't know the answers.

            My point is that people can get screwed either way, and I think you know this.

            As Bluedog says;

            Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
            ........ So depending upon the better side of human nature ignores that not enough of us have a better side. That is just the fact of reality. Capitalism is not immune from the base side of human nature. Like marxism, it never works out like it looks on paper.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #81
              Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

              I didn't. I essentially said that care and skepticism is important. Trusting these people too much, is foolish.

              The government CAN do "the right thing."

              Will they ? Can they always be trusted to ?

              Maybe & NO



              How many people will actually get ALL of the money they were forced to put into this scheme called Social Security ?

              And is it going to be sustainable with greedy & corrupt half-wits like the men & women in govt. managing it ?

              On the other-hand, investments & 401K's can be dangerous too. My mom lost most of her retirement because of what that bernie madoff creep did. Should the govt. have prevented that ? Were they supposed to ? I don't know the answers.

              My point is that people can get screwed either way, and I think you know this.

              As Bluedog says;
              Yes, we are at the mercy of those capitalists whose self worth comes from the size of their pile of money, or at the mercy of politicians who are obviously easily corrupted, Corrupted in the sense of only representing the interests of those who finance their campaigns. And generally once these politicians get a taste of that tremendous power, they never want to let it go. There are of course exceptions but they seem few and far between these days. What american needs are leaders who believe in the constitution and what our founders set up to protect our own people from the slave labor poor of the world. And protect us from those men who because of greed, will gut out a nation like america, for profit, many times short term profit. There is a reason religion generally sees danger in those men who are obsessed with creating extraordinary wealth for themselves, because they lose morality and values in the process. To then subject america to the self interests of these kind of people just has to be destructive of americans who are not rich and must sell their labor in order to feed their families is insanity. And we can see that indeed it is destructive. Any economy has to serve the people, the nation, and not be soley concerned with profit margins of the rich. What the founders set up protected not only our workers but businesses. So to say we must compete with the world of slave labor is 180 away from what our founders thought and believed in. It is no surprise that leaving that path has created insolvable problems, which can only be solved by going back to how this nation operated for most of our history. Yet the people who got this change, and whose interests are the only interests today that get served, will fight this, using the politicians they put into office. It doesn't look good for the non elites in america. And what the people have to appeal to is an oligarchy not a republic...So the changes needed are so hard to get. And if you get a person in the oval office who wants change, they have the entire system against them, as we see with trump. And trump does not have the knowledge or skills to pull this off. He could leave some kind of trail which strikes some blows against this oligarchy, but he seems to have backed away from that too. The man had no idea that what he campaigned on would set the entire anti republic system against him. IMO.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #82
                Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                Yes, we are at the mercy of those capitalists whose self worth comes from the size of their pile of money, or at the mercy of politicians who are obviously easily corrupted, Corrupted in the sense of only representing the interests of those who finance their campaigns. And generally once these politicians get a taste of that tremendous power, they never want to let it go. There are of course exceptions but they seem few and far between these days. What american needs are leaders who believe in the constitution and what our founders set up to protect our own people from the slave labor poor of the world. And protect us from those men who because of greed, will gut out a nation like america, for profit, many times short term profit. There is a reason religion generally sees danger in those men who are obsessed with creating extraordinary wealth for themselves, because they lose morality and values in the process.
                That is correct.

                And as we see Americas founding faith rejected and mocked, it continues getting worse. When people believe they are not accountable to God, there's no such thing as right and wrong or good and bad. These are "concepts" that change with the winds and/or our moods.

                ANYTHING can have a rational sounding argument supporting it, and so we accept anything.

                Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                To then subject america to the self interests of these kind of people just has to be destructive of americans who are not rich and must sell their labor in order to feed their families is insanity. And we can see that indeed it is destructive. Any economy has to serve the people, the nation, and not be soley concerned with profit margins of the rich. What the founders set up protected not only our workers but businesses. So to say we must compete with the world of slave labor is 180 away from what our founders thought and believed in. It is no surprise that leaving that path has created insolvable problems, which can only be solved by going back to how this nation operated for most of our history. Yet the people who got this change, and whose interests are the only interests today that get served, will fight this, using the politicians they put into office. It doesn't look good for the non elites in america. And what the people have to appeal to is an oligarchy not a republic...So the changes needed are so hard to get. And if you get a person in the oval office who wants change, they have the entire system against them, as we see with trump. And trump does not have the knowledge or skills to pull this off. He could leave some kind of trail which strikes some blows against this oligarchy, but he seems to have backed away from that too. The man had no idea that what he campaigned on would set the entire anti republic system against him. IMO.
                Because there's more than JUST a political problem for America. We have major cultural & societal problems ... of our own creation. But as mankind always does, we blame our problems on someone or someTHING else.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                  That is correct.

                  And as we see Americas founding faith rejected and mocked, it continues getting worse. When people believe they are not accountable to God, there's no such thing as right and wrong or good and bad.
                  ...
                  Because there's more than JUST a political problem for America. We have major cultural & societal problems ... of our own creation. But as mankind always does, we blame our problems on someone or someTHING else.
                  Mostly well said, BD and CT, especially comments about how every class seems to have lost their way. I would disagree that "Americas founding faith" was rejected and mocked recently. Both the ideas and religion of the founding fathers -were arguably mocked and rejected by the very founding fathers themselves. Those who were the great minds of the southern part of the original 13 states, insisted on keeping slavery to form the union. Those of the northern part of 13 -who felt a distaste for slavery- were willing to let the issue go in order to form a union that was anything but "more perfect".

                  We were left with a blemish, an imperfection. Let's face it, we were left with a horrible defect from the very start of The Republic that Changed the World.
                  -The slaughter of french royalty is a reflection of the cheapness of life; could it be true, an entire class of people has no value?
                  -The rise of communist dictators mocks the "will of the people", a political system pretending to represent the people, as long as people agree with the "political" class. The worker can be a slave to the state, as long as that state pretends to achieve their objectives? Whose objectives?
                  -Perhaps the fascist state, in cooperation with those largest of employers (at the time) will see prosperity for all who deserve it. It had been tried before, after all, but that gov't. was corrupt. Perhaps the original plantation and slavery system would have worked well, if not for that confederation pretending to be a Republic?

                  Through it all was the imperfect Everyone contributing to the Illusion -from the working man, the mother raising his children, the employer and businessman, all the way to the leaders of church and country. This was the Revolution that would change the world, it will bring down Kings and Other Despots. But there's a catch:

                  Begin your revolution with a nightmare you think can be postponed, only to see those who follow invent hellish nightmares, based on the Original.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                    Mostly well said, BD and CT, especially comments about how every class seems to have lost their way. I would disagree that "Americas founding faith" was rejected and mocked recently. Both the ideas and religion of the founding fathers -were arguably mocked and rejected by the very founding fathers themselves. Those who were the great minds of the southern part of the original 13 states, insisted on keeping slavery to form the union. Those of the northern part of 13 -who felt a distaste for slavery- were willing to let the issue go in order to form a union that was anything but "more perfect".

                    We were left with a blemish, an imperfection. Let's face it, we were left with a horrible defect from the very start of The Republic that Changed the World.
                    -The slaughter of french royalty is a reflection of the cheapness of life; could it be true, an entire class of people has no value?
                    -The rise of communist dictators mocks the "will of the people", a political system pretending to represent the people, as long as people agree with the "political" class. The worker can be a slave to the state, as long as that state pretends to achieve their objectives? Whose objectives?
                    -Perhaps the fascist state, in cooperation with those largest of employers (at the time) will see prosperity for all who deserve it. It had been tried before, after all, but that gov't. was corrupt. Perhaps the original plantation and slavery system would have worked well, if not for that confederation pretending to be a Republic?

                    Through it all was the imperfect Everyone contributing to the Illusion -from the working man, the mother raising his children, the employer and businessman, all the way to the leaders of church and country. This was the Revolution that would change the world, it will bring down Kings and Other Despots. But there's a catch:

                    Begin your revolution with a nightmare you think can be postponed, only to see those who follow invent hellish nightmares, based on the Original.
                    Our religious and governmental institutions may have been adequate for an eighteenth century culture but the 21st century?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      Our religious and governmental institutions may have been adequate for an eighteenth century culture but the 21st century?
                      What principles do not stand the test of time? If you set aside the fact of slavery, which was not something new at the time of our founding, what principles used by our founders are not suitable for the 21st century? Many of them reflect the yearning of humanity going back thousands of years and yet never seen as founding principles of a civilization until those men used them in america. Yes rome once was a republic, but it failed, but it was not based upon our founding principles. Although our founders were well aware of it as they were or the ancient greeks.

                      I happen to believe that america represented the apex of western civilization, the culmination of what had preceded it, and the rejection of dictatorial monarchs. Which is all this world had ever known. I think we forget that, especially the people who attack our founders and are not educated enough to really understand it, its revolutionary nature. Until someone finds something better and IMO nothing has been found that is better, as imperfect as our founders were, they are the greatest men in history. Some have said they were guided by an Almighty Creator. Yet they were still imperfect human beings. If we can improve on what they came up with, that would be great, but we no longer have men with what it takes to improve upon it. For we are great at corrupting, but not so good in improving.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

                        What principles do not stand the test of time? If you set aside the fact of slavery, which was not something new at the time of our founding, what principles used by our founders are not suitable for the 21st century? Many of them reflect the yearning of humanity going back thousands of years and yet never seen as founding principles of a civilization until those men used them in america. Yes rome once was a republic, but it failed, but it was not based upon our founding principles. Although our founders were well aware of it as they were or the ancient greeks.

                        I happen to believe that america represented the apex of western civilization, the culmination of what had preceded it, and the rejection of dictatorial monarchs. Which is all this world had ever known. I think we forget that, especially the people who attack our founders and are not educated enough to really understand it, its revolutionary nature. Until someone finds something better and IMO nothing has been found that is better, as imperfect as our founders were, they are the greatest men in history. Some have said they were guided by an Almighty Creator. Yet they were still imperfect human beings. If we can improve on what they came up with, that would be great, but we no longer have men with what it takes to improve upon it. For we are great at corrupting, but not so good in improving.
                        True, most of this. I can accept the condition of slavery when the founding fathers shaped the Republic; it was a common condition around the world, as you noted. However, neither side (north or south) were brave enuf to make sure it would be resolved in an orderly manner. They knew slavery was inconsistent with a true republic, but they kicked the can down the road, starting a long tradition of political cowardice and needless disorder. Where was the proposal -non negotiable- of "grandfathering" slavery (it ends with the natural death of each slave owner living in 1787)? Where was the ultimatum, the south resisting and threatening to form a confederacy in 1787, the north calling their bluff?

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                          True, most of this. I can accept the condition of slavery when the founding fathers shaped the Republic; it was a common condition around the world, as you noted. However, neither side (north or south) were brave enuf to make sure it would be resolved in an orderly manner. They knew slavery was inconsistent with a true republic, but they kicked the can down the road, starting a long tradition of political cowardice and needless disorder. Where was the proposal -non negotiable- of "grandfathering" slavery (it ends with the natural death of each slave owner living in 1787)? Where was the ultimatum, the south resisting and threatening to form a confederacy in 1787, the north calling their bluff?
                          One can dwell on that mistake, and forget that indeed less than a hundred years later we fought the bloodiest war in our history, americans against americans to attempt to set it right. As you have noted, at the outset slavery was kept, due to its tremendous importance to what we had as economic activity, and it is doubtful we would have ever got this nation without that. Pragmatism had to win out as there was no other solution at the time. But you are right in that the can was kicked down the road, but we are only talking about less than a hundred years. And those founding principles prevailed and at a tremendous cost to american lives. This is what should be talked about instead of slavery. Slavery was as old as civilization, thousands of years of it, and that it was ended in a fairly young republic, given the economic dependence on it in the south is a tremendous achievement. Although some historians take the position that slavery was on its way out anyways and that bloody war was unnecessary. I agree with that, but it would have taken longer to pull it off, IMO. I come from slave owning ancestors. I have seen blacks who share my last name, which is not a common name at all, but uncommon. My ancestors lost everything, their plantations, their wealth and even their lives. So there was a personal price paid by my family, but from my perspective it was worth it. It would have been nice to inherit old money, but then again, it would not have been money made in the right and moral manner.

                          So, it is good that it happened. One of our plantations is still here, a tourist site these days, with its 3 stories, and winding staircase. Built with the labor, sweat and blood of enslaved human beings. Yet that was just the world people lived in, and accepted, many of them. I certainly feel no guilt at all, as I had nothing to do with it. I understand this was the way the world had worked for thousands of years. And I understand that in america we ended it with the blood of so many americans. But we seem to forget that, and choose to berate this nation for doing what was the status quo. We blame exclusively the white people who bought and trade the slaves from africa, but seem to forget that africans sold fellow africans to these white slave traders, and do not hold them accountable in the discourse. But again, this was the world humans lived in and it came from traditions thousands of years old. Far too many of us forget the whole story, and can thereby make america look like the exception, and then to forget how the slaves here were freed.

                          What day is it that we celebrate the freeing of slaves? I am not aware of one. Should it not be celebrated as a national holiday given its importance? Yet all that some want to dwell on is that we had slaves, which some also see as negating all of the good things about america. A neurosis of sorts. We, as white people, with european ancestory should feel guilty, even loathe ourselves, and negate what these same people did right and good in the founding of the US. And yet it is those on the Left who trash america, who cannot look for the good, but only dwell on the bad. Digging through the manure to find diamonds must soil their hands too much? Throwing out the diamonds with the manure? It isn't the most constructive psychology to have to live in. And as I said, a neurosis of sorts.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                            True, most of this. I can accept the condition of slavery when the founding fathers shaped the Republic; it was a common condition around the world, as you noted. However, neither side (north or south) were brave enuf to make sure it would be resolved in an orderly manner. They knew slavery was inconsistent with a true republic, but they kicked the can down the road, starting a long tradition of political cowardice and needless disorder. Where was the proposal -non negotiable- of "grandfathering" slavery (it ends with the natural death of each slave owner living in 1787)? Where was the ultimatum, the south resisting and threatening to form a confederacy in 1787, the north calling their bluff?
                            Kicking the can down the road is an American tradition. That's why we have a twenty trillion dollar national debt and eve more in unfunded liabilities.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #89
                              Back to disaster relief, Where are all of the social justice warriors who have the monopoly on caring? How much is Planned Parenthood contributing to disaster relief? How about Black Lives Matter or Code Pink or Antifa? All the relief I see is coming from Christian charities.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #90
                                No relief from FEMA? I know their recent funding proposal wasn't the most generous, but this is getting serious, OMD. Not even a few saltine crackers?

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X