So, I'm Thinking Last Night..........

Watching all the political results in between the bud shoot out.

And a question keeps poppin up, How the Hell do these folks keep on getting hood winked by the Clintons????

Then, I ask myself what do they understand about there voters that I don't. Now, seeing there voters are female, high school educated, etc.


So, I'm thinking the answer is that, they keep on believing what the hell they SAY, cause it is what they want to HEAR.

negate the fact whether it is real or rationale, the clintons say exactly what folks want too hear, right or wrong

So, i'm at work and they interview a lady from maine on why she is voting for hillary, and a hillary supporter.

Her answer, Hilary will lower interest rates on college loans.

she was a very nice lady, seemed intelligent, etc., yet she was serious

Thus, she really really really sincerely believes Hilary Clinton as President controls interest rates.

And thus, life goes on...................

I guess they also believe we will have Universal Health Care if Hilary is elected, even though doctors, medical companies, and drug companies have not even begun to fight.............and if we do have universal health care there will be no consequences, like let's pay nurses like we pay ditch diggers to keep costs down, be damned they educated and worked for there profession and have earned the right too earn whatever they can, let's put caps on what they can earn to control costs for all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trip

Watching all the political results in between the bud shoot out.

And a question keeps poppin up, How the Hell do these folks keep on getting hood winked by the Clintons????

Then, I ask myself what do they understand about there voters that I don't. Now, seeing there voters are female, high school educated, etc.


So, I'm thinking the answer is that, they keep on believing what the hell they SAY, cause it is what they want to HEAR.

negate the fact whether it is real or rationale, the clintons say exactly what folks want too hear, right or wrong

So, i'm at work and they interview a lady from maine on why she is voting for hillary, and a hillary supporter.

Her answer, Hilary will lower interest rates on college loans.

she was a very nice lady, seemed intelligent, etc., yet she was serious

Thus, she really really really sincerely believes Hilary Clinton as President controls interest rates.

And thus, life goes on...................

I guess they also believe we will have Universal Health Care if Hilary is elected, even though doctors, medical companies, and drug companies have not even begun to fight.............and if we do have universal health care there will be no consequences, like let's pay nurses like we pay ditch diggers to keep costs down, be damned they educated and worked for there profession and have earned the right too earn whatever they can, let's put caps on what they can earn to control costs for all

---

The results of a society built on pragmatism. People like to pretend pragmatism is realistic as opposed to a certain ideology which is implied to be too idealistic. The thing is, pragmatism is an ideology, it is just a very inconsistent ideology; with no one standard to apply issues to. So people resort to identity politics and tribal (lobbyists) warfare promising funds from the treasury to certain demographics to satisfy the desire for instant gratification at the expense of long term benefits.

is that anyn rand, lol

the only sentence i understood was the last one, lol

i had too get out old dick too look up pragmatic, and it still was fuzzy

my point was, the clintons know damned well what they are doing, and continue to do it, imho, that is cruel, they raise peoples hopes knowing damned well they will not be met

a votr for hillary is a vote for a third term of clinton shennanigans and four years of crap and tax and spend hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trip

is that anyn rand, lol

the only sentence i understood was the last one, lol

i had too get out old dick too look up pragmatic, and it still was fuzzy

my point was, the clintons know damned well what they are doing, and continue to do it, imho, that is cruel, they raise peoples hopes knowing damned well they will not be met

---

Sorry man! I get frustrated when I hear of extremely ignorant people like the example you gave and I get kind of apathetic about my degree of articulation. Pragmatism is rough concept to get a hold of considering we rely on a pragmatic society to explain a truly negative concept to us and by default it is defended as being "realistic", when it is anything but realistic.

For example, we live in a society that a solution for combating poverty (typically defined by socialists but that is beside the point) is increasing minimum wage. Which does the opposite of helping the poor but to the uneducated poor, who's votes count just as much as the educated, it seems to satisfy their instant gratification but the consequences are:

-in a small business who only needs employees to man a station for a few hours, ultimately lets some of those employees go because their job is not worth the minimum wage but it would be a perfect job for a student who could study and make some money at the same time. So an unintended consequence is unemployment will go up and business' will go out of business.

-In big business, headquarters are moved off shore with some of their manufacturing plants because they can operate at lower expenses where there is no minimum wage to be more competitive with other companies. An unintended consequence is business' that do not move out of country are at a financial disadvantage, unemployment increases because of business that do move out of country and tax revenue goes down.

-The result on currency is the same as if minimum wage was raised to one million dollars an hour. Companies pass the artificial cost of inflation on to the consumers. So yeah, people are making more money but product cost will absorb that inflation. So now we have a million dollar gallon of milk.

So minimum wage laws do not help the poor; it does the opposite but because the issue of poverty is taken and isolated to come up with a pragmatic solution, the big picture is missed.

This is how our society solves all our perceived problems and this process is only challenged by people like Ron Paul but because it is a philosophical problem, even though he is speaking the truth it is perceived by our pragmatically dominated society that he is speaking a different language and may appear disconnected to reality; when he is the only one that is truly connected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klash

Sorry man! I get frustrated when I hear of extremely ignorant people like the example you gave and I get kind of apathetic about my degree of articulation. Pragmatism is rough concept to get a hold of considering we rely on a pragmatic society to explain a truly negative concept to us and by default it is defended as being "realistic", when it is anything but realistic.

For example, we live in a society that a solution for combating poverty (typically defined by socialists but that is beside the point) is increasing minimum wage. Which does the opposite of helping the poor but to the uneducated poor, who's votes count just as much as the educated, it seems to satisfy their instant gratification but the consequences are:

-in a small business who only needs employees to man a station for a few hours, ultimately lets some of those employees go because their job is not worth the minimum wage but it would be a perfect job for a student who could study and make some money at the same time. So an unintended consequence is unemployment will go up and business' will go out of business.

-In big business, headquarters are moved off shore with some of their manufacturing plants because they can operate at lower expenses where there is no minimum wage to be more competitive with other companies. An unintended consequence is business' that do not move out of country are at a financial disadvantage, unemployment increases because of business that do move out of country and tax revenue goes down.

-The result on currency is the same as if minimum wage was raised to one million dollars an hour. Companies pass the artificial cost of inflation on to the consumers. So yeah, people are making more money but product cost will absorb that inflation. So now we have a million dollar gallon of milk.

So minimum wage laws do not help the poor; it does the opposite but because the issue of poverty is taken and isolated to come up with a pragmatic solution, the big picture is missed.

This is how our society solves all our perceived problems and this process is only challenged by people like Ron Paul but because it is a philosophical problem, even though he is speaking the truth it is perceived by our pragmatically dominated society that he is speaking a different language and may appear disconnected to reality; when he is the only one that is truly connected.

---

you dont think minimum wage needs to be raised...ever?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daved150

you dont think minimum wage needs to be raised...ever?

---

Not only does it not work at obtaining its stated goal, it undermines a free society.

Personally I will vote, I always do.....and I hope the best candidate wins......but at the same time I cant wait until its over.

Personally I will vote, I always do.....and I hope the best candidate wins......but at the same time I cant wait until its over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klash

Not only does it not work at obtaining its stated goal, it undermines a free society.

---

Not to mention it makes no sense with an open and free economy like we (are supposed) to have.


The problem I see is that people have become too assed lazy to do things for themselves. Literally its become like when Homer Simpson was running for Springfield Sanitation Comish... Cant someone else do it?

If that mentality continues, it will come down to a very small group of people who will be doing it and those people with inevitably leave for greener pastures. And then everyone else is up a creek without a paddle... Im sure you all have seen and read about the guys who go out to dinner? Ill repost it just incase:

"Suppose that every day 10 men go to a restaurant for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If it was paid the way we pay our taxes, the first four men would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1; the sixth would pay $3; the seventh $7; the eighth $12; the ninth $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59."

The 10 men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Now dinner for the 10 only costs $80. The first four are unaffected. They still eat for free. Can you figure out how to divvy up the $20 savings among the remaining six so that everyone gets his fair share? The men realize that $20 divided by 6 is $3.33, but if they subtract that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being paid to eat their meal.

The restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same percentage, being sure to give each a break, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so now the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of $59.

Outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," complained the sixth man, pointing to the tenth, "and he got $7!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!"

"That's true," shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor."

Then, the nine men surrounded the tenth man (the richest one, paying the most) and beat him up. The next night the richest man didn't show up for dinner, so now the nine men sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They were $52 short!

"And that, boys, girls and college instructors, is how America's tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table any more. There are lots of good restaurants in Switzerland and the Caribbean."


Now its silly and over the top, but the essence of the story is very true. The more you try and force people to pay more than what they think is fair, the more then get better accountants and find ways to hide their money. But if it gets to a certain point, they will just leave.

^I was aware of the tax discrimination but I've never seen that story before; thanks for posting it I'll use it a lot! ;)

Thanks for posting that perfect little taxation analogy BDiddy. I will definitely be useing that as well.

About your gripe with the Clintons trip. That pretty much sums it up. Say whatever the people want to hear...whatever is popular. Make a good speach. Hit with the people. Good to go...Don't have to worry about follow through or anything. Just popularity. That's all it takes for what I'm hoping isn't the majority. Sadly though, there is that massive population that just didn't get too much thru life, like thru school or family, mentors, anywhere. And, like somebody else said, their vote counts the same as the next voter.