Expatriation

[ProfessorNumber]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Actually dude I wasn't making a joke about you being gay. Honest. You're being way over sensative. I agree with you that a sense of entitlement in this country is a real problem, but I think health care should be a universal right. As it is right now, only the wealthy can afford it. I just don't think that's right.

My apologies for taking your post out of context. Nonetheless, you could not be more wrong in almost everything you stated. First, health care should never be considered a universal right -- it's a service that someone, or some entity, must pay for. If you're a socialist, then you would most likely believe that the government should pay for it. Since I am not a socialist, I believe it should be privately funded, with perhaps several small exceptions. America has some of the most talented doctors/surgeons/specialists in the world. As far as technology and research, we are on the cutting edge. I hope to god that socialist bastards like Obama don't disincentivise new technology and talent, by socializing healthcare. Second, I have family in the medical industry who have actually spoken with doctors from France, and have actually heard the negatives of socialized medicine. Having government controlled healthcare completely devalues it. For instance, there are people -- no joke -- who go into the same health clinics everyday, complaining of the same problems everyday, and who don't have anything wrong with them... everyday. Second, are you aware that legislation in a certain European country has been proposed to prevent "legally obese" citizens from obtaining a hip replacement? Once you turn healthcare over to the government, you have effectively given them complete control over your body. I don't want to be analyzed and have my health quantified by the US government in order to determine whether I'm a worthy candidate for kidney dialysis -- or for that matter where I should stand on the waiting list. That's fucking horrifying. Lastly, healthcare is not out of reach for the vast majority of citizens. I don't mean to be condescending, but many menial jobs -- such as full-time employment at Walgreens -- offer healthcare plans. It's not just the wealthy that can afford healthcare, and you fucking know it. If someone has a family, and isn't willing to make sacrifices elseware, in order to afford healthcare, then they're an irresponsible fuck. Only in very extreme cases of poverty/lack of healthcare, should the government even consider getting involved.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

You say gay marriage is absurd, but how is it any different than the civil rights movement of the 60's? Replace gay with black. It's interchangable. Why are we denying gay people the same rights as everybody else? If you don't see why that's a big issue then I'm at a loss.

Maybe I'd see it as a large issue if gay people had separate drinking fountains, segregated schools, and were forced to sit on the back of buses. Oh wait, their situation isn't even remotely comparable to that of the black movements in the 60's. If you don't see why your analogy is completely fucking ridiculous, then I'm at a loss. Truthfully, I believe gay people should be able to get married. However, that issue should be put on the backburner, in order focus on issues of far greater importance -- such as the war, and the economy. The economic decisions that the next president will make transcend every other issue, in that they will determine whether democracy can truly still exist. Personally, I believe that the structure and function of the goverment [socialism vs democracy] is a far greater issue than whether two guys can obtain the legal rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. Once again, you [Repug] can't see the wood through all the trees.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

You're operating with the assumption that the rich got there from working hard. Do you take into account the cycle of wealth and poverty? The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor. I think it's naive to have some feel good, fairy tale outlook on America, that "anyone" can make it. I think that's false. Some, with a little bit of luck, can. But is that fair? Does a poor farmer, who works his ass off from 5 am to 6 pm, not work as hard as some CEO?

I'm operating with the assumption that the rich have the right to be rich. Whether they obtained their wealth through a means equivalent in difficulty to farming for 12 hours a day is completely and utterly irrelevant. Seriously. The rich do tend to stay rich, and the poor do often stay poor. Big fucking deal. That's the nature of capitalism, and nowhere does it state that democratic states should operate on the basis of economic equity for all. In fact, I'm pretty sure that another form of government believes that -- oh right, that's socialism. A "poor farmer" could most likely never perform the work a CEO does. It truly pisses me off when people downplay the importance and function of high level executives, and how much they are paid. Once again, the reason they command such high salaries is due to capitalism. Is their intellectual capability and capacity not deserving of compensation? Also, your views are skewed since we only tend to hear about the "corrupt CEO" who made millions, and ripped off the "poor" lower workers. Never does anyone talk about instances where CEO's decided to forego their salary until the company was profitable (think Ford several years ago).

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Look, I'm not promoting that we make the rich poor so that everyone is middle class. But I do think the rich, especially the very rich, can pay a little more in taxes for the good of all. The poor might get to live slightly better off lives, and the rich will continue to be rich, although perhaps not as disgustingly so.

Yes, you are promoting that we make the rich poorer, in relative terms, in order to benefit the lower/middle class. The very rich already do pay a lot more in taxes that the lower classes, and they have every right to be disgustingly rich. I personally hate shia labeouf. I think he's a completely average looking guy and a shitty actor. He probably has more money right now than I ever will, and I'm pretty jealous of that. However, I respect his right to do that. The market is clearly willing to pay him very generous amounts for his dog-shit work, and I have zero problem with that notion. P-Diddy spends more on parties than the vast majority of Americans spend on the purchase of home. Sure, he's a douche -- but as long as people are willing to buy products related to him, then he deserves that lifestyle.

I'm so sick of socialist bastards telling me that the rich don't need to be so rich. Bullshit. This notion of economic equality, and the idea that competition isn't necessary is completely fucking stupid. I'm most likely going to be in the field of sales when I graduate from college. If I don't hit my numbers, I get motherfucking fired. The sales manager isn't going to take sales/clients from Sally, and put them in my book, just because Sally has a lot of family connections and thus selling comes easy to her. That would be socialism -- which is what you want.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by ProfessorNumber

Alright, if I'm reading this correctly, it would appear that you made a joke insinuating that I'm a homosexual. While your attempt at humor was pretty amazing, clever, and well-played, I am in fact a heterosexual person. It's great to see that your sense of humor is as good/intelligent as your mis-guided political views.

i think he was generally saying "you're" as in "a gay person", not YOU.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

You're operating with the assumption that the rich got there from working hard. Do you take into account the cycle of wealth and poverty? The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor. I think it's naive to have some feel good, fairy tale outlook on America, that "anyone" can make it. I think that's false. Some, with a little bit of luck, can. But is that fair? Does a poor farmer, who works his ass off from 5 am to 6 pm, not work as hard as some CEO?

Look, I'm not promoting that we make the rich poor so that everyone is middle class. But I do think the rich, especially the very rich, can pay a little more in taxes for the good of all. The poor might get to live slightly better off lives, and the rich will continue to be rich, although perhaps not as disgustingly so.

+1

[Mr. Blonde]

well that was an ill-timed post.


in regard to healthcare, i am going to have to agree with PN on this one. I am definitely in favor of a reform, as there are some fucked up things going on with our healthcare system in America, but he's right...with most full time jobs you can easily get on an affordable (if not free) healthcare plan. I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for the poor, middle class, or any other class who has all these responsibilities (families and kids) to take care of and therefore can't (or says they can't when they really can do to their sense of entitlement) sacrifice the time, effort, or hard work to get their family on a health care plan. If you can't take care of your fucking kids, don't have them. That should be common fucking knowledge, and yet poor idiots can't stop breeding for the life of them.

I will never get married until i'm financially stable enough to do it. I won't ever have children unless I am in a financial position to assure they will be well off in the world.

[Repugnant Abomination]

I've been drinking the last 20 minutes, so I'm going to put our debate on hold until tomorrow. However, just let me emphasize that while we don't agree on a number of things, I respect your ability to articulate your point.

But, while I'm still coherent...You mentioned the war. Since we've been talking about mostly economic issues, could you explain your stance on the war?

You can read my initial, and painfully constrained opening argument about why I prefer Obama in terms of Iraq, here: http://nubblies.net/forums/showthrea...880#post363880

[ProfessorNumber]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

i think he was generally saying "you're" as in "a gay person", not YOU.


+1

Yeah, I figured that out.


Let me ask you a question, Mr. Blonde -- Why did you get (or are still getting) an education from a presumably decent university (IU?)? How would you like to make the same amount of money, per year, as the 35 year old Hispanic worker at your local Burger King? You both will be working full time, and who's to say that your occupation is any more difficult than flipping burgers? In fact, your job will probably be easier, in that you could be sitting behind a desk and typing all day (I don't know your what your major is). It's not right to let the government determine what your capabilities and time are worth. The market place should determine those -- otherwise, what incentive is there to get higher education, or to work hard in order to be promoted. Competition and potential inequity bring out the best in a country.

[Mr. Blonde]

I really, really don't like rich people. I never have, and for the most part I see them as only having gotten ahead because of their fathers and families. I have met some who are respectable human beings, but for the most part, the ones I meet at least, are not only less intelligent and socially aware than myself, but also complete fucking douchebags/dumb whores. I was +1 -ing more in that regard than letting Julian Garcia make the same as me.


I don't have much of a problem with rich folk of the pro sport/celebrity breed. As you said, they got where they are because idiots are willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money on entertainment. Its the elitist office/business fucks who I don't see as really being that hard of workers, having much of a work or business ethic, and also being complete fucks with sinecure-esque jobs.


My comments here are mostly going to be social observances and gripes. I clearly don't possess the level of political (especially economic) knowledge that you guys do, but i'd like to, so i'm taking everything into regard here.

[ProfessorNumber]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I've been drinking the last 20 minutes, so I'm going to put our debate on hold until tomorrow. However, just let me emphasize that while we don't agree on a number of things, I respect your ability to articulate your point.

But, while I'm still coherent...You mentioned the war. Since we've been talking about mostly economic issues, could you explain your stance on the war?

You can read my initial, and painfully constrained opening argument about why I prefer Obama in terms of Iraq, here: http://nubblies.net/forums/showthrea...880#post363880

I appreciate that, and would say the same about you -- that's why I've done my best to not be overly insulting in a personal way. With regards to the war, I'll have to get back to you. For now, I'll just say that I'm not overly fond of it.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

I really, really don't like rich people. I never have, and for the most part I see them as only having gotten ahead because of their fathers and families. I have met some who are respectable human beings, but for the most part, the ones I meet at least, are not only less intelligent and socially aware than myself, but also complete fucking douchebags/dumb whores. I was +1 -ing more in that regard than letting Julian Garcia make the same as me.


I don't have much of a problem with rich folk of the pro sport/celebrity breed. As you said, they got where they are because idiots are willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money on entertainment. Its the elitist office/business fucks who I don't see as really being that hard of workers, having much of a work or business ethic, and also being complete fucks with sinecure-esque jobs.

I think most people -- like yourself, or me -- would agree with your social observances. However, you do have to be careful not to grossly over-generalize/stereotype. While money can certainly bring out the worst in people, bad character and wealth are certainly not synonymous. I know people who are absurdly wealthy, but they are completely down to earth and very nice. The problem is, we tend to only remember the bad rather than the good. For instance, it's much easier to remember the BMW driver who cut us off, rather than the one who let us merge. Eventually these beliefs become self-fulfilling prophecies, and our opinions of such people are skewed before we even interact with them. Think of the pareto rule here -- 20/80. 20% of the jerks/douches account for 80% of the negative beliefs that are assigned to all rich-people/BMW-drivers.

With regards to your comments about office/business workers, I have to disagree. Having worked out of several offices throughout the summer, I can tell you that the work ethic is typically pretty high (or at least within my organization). Sure, some of the employees tended to be a tad bit elitist, but they were definitely the minority. What you have to remember is that these people have jobs for a reason. Large corporations don't remain profitable (or open), if their employees are completely incompetent. Additionally, as I've mentioned earlier, I don't believe it's fair for you to quantify what an "office worker's" intellectual capacity or capabilities are worth.

[Ugly Bastard]

Wow... this has been some epic reading.

Professor Number... I have like, huge, huge, huge respect for you right now. I just bought this blog called nobamablog.com. I'm going to make anti-Obama entries between now and the election. If you're interested, I'll pay you (and somewhat handsomely, at that) to write some articles for that site. PM me if this interests you and we'll discuss it from there. It is soooo refreshing to see someone who is a.) young and b.) poor and yet still have the intelligence to realize why socialism is bad for you in the longterm. When you said you were going into sales, the first thought that popped into my head was, "this guy is going to go far in life." Bravo on not being a huge, whining pussy like Mr. Blonde...

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

but for the most part, the [rich people] I meet... are... less intelligent... than myself

Are you out of your fucking mind, Sam? Like seriously... I like(d?) you and all... but you really hoisted up your "dumbass" flag high and proud in this thread. I am just blatantly disappointed because, unlike Repug, I view you as someone who is capable of making a lot of money and living the enviable, badass lifestyle of your dreams. Evidently some subconscious part of you agrees, otherwise you wouldn't have the confidence to say that you're smarter than rich people.

I don't know what's going on in your life because we haven't talked much lately, but you're seriously spouting some weak shit here man. You're better than that. Make a change, do something else... whatever's going on in your life clearly seems to be fucking up your head. Get in touch if there's any way I can help you out.

Lastly, Repug... you're a fucking idiot. I'm not even going to explain why because Professor Number has done that logically and more thoroughly than I ever could. While you whine about the rights of gay people, I'll be creating effiencies in society and making more fucking cash so I can do cool shit like travel, fuck hookers, and pay smart people like Professor Number to do my work for me. LOL... the funny part is... the gay guys I know would agree that you're a whiney bitch.

Good fucking god... get a life.

Let me visualize this for you motherfuckers. Everyone loves a chart. Except women and whiney liberals, of course...

[Mr. Blonde]

Two can play that game UB, you've come quite a ways from the guy I knew in college, and I too haven't exactly been in touch with you lately, but with how you're coming off i'm really starting to question your character as a person, at least the direction in which you're heading. I'm more like to also agree with PN, because he at least has a level of humbleness in his arguments, whereas you are seeming to embody the exact kind of person I have always disliked. If and when i do become wealthy and able to do whatever the fuck I want, I plan on doing it mostly on my own terms, not on the upper class conservative censorship-overlording fucks that run this country. And when and if I am a patron of this lifestyle, you can be certain I will be unhappy if I have to befriend the likes of elitist rich people [seemingly] concerned only with their money, and the lifestyle that comes along with it. You hate women as much as I do, i'm calling no homo here, but take them completely out of your equation and when it really comes down to it fortunes really aren't worth a god damn unless you plan on owning a country.

[Ugly Bastard]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Two can play that game UB, you've come quite a ways from the guy I knew in college, and I too haven't exactly been in touch with you lately, but with how you're coming off i'm really starting to question your character as a person, at least the direction in which you're heading. I'm more like to also agree with PN, because he at least has a level of humbleness in his arguments, whereas you are seeming to embody the exact kind of person I have always disliked. If and when i do become wealthy and able to do whatever the fuck I want, I plan on doing it mostly on my own terms, not on the upper class conservative censorship-overlording fucks that run this country. And when and if I am a patron of this lifestyle, you can be certain I will be unhappy if I have to befriend the likes of elitist rich people [seemingly] concerned only with their money, and the lifestyle that comes along with it. You hate women as much as I do, i'm calling no homo here, but take them completely out of your equation and when it really comes down to it fortunes really aren't worth a god damn unless you plan on owning a country.

Wow I seriously have no fucking clue what any of that is supposed to mean except for the part I emboldened, which I felt compelled to say in a footnote that: the post-Reagan self-righteous "neo-cons" running the GOP these days make me sick with their "tell you what you can and cannot see, think, or read" attitude. It almost makes me as sick as Democrats telling me what I can or cannot do with my money (ie: not spend it for myself since I have to pay it in the form of taxes so do-nothing idiots can be rewarded for their stupidity).

Oh... and regarding you "questioning my character as a person"... let me clear something up for you: I'm fucking awesome. You could be too if you stopped caring what weak, stupid women and feminine-men think about you. Tap into the inner menarebetterthanwomen.com reader, for Christ's sake...

"Questioning my character"... Jesus fucking Christ Sam...

[AcTivE]

kill the niggers!

hey UB i'm just curious (you've actually inspired me to actually get goin on the money thing), can you answer--are you over 500k banked yet?

[Ugly Bastard]

Edited to reflect recent AIM conversation:

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

1. Are you really comparing death with taxes?

2. Gas is at an all time high.

3. No, I am not.

1. Aren't death and taxes the only thing certain in life?

2. The fact you noted that gas prices are high as a rebuttal means you didn't understand my point. This would be a great example of what I was getting at:

Originally Posted by ProfessorNumber

It's almost comical how he states that we should be concerned with gay marriage -- despite that issue having no significance in my life -- and then proceeds to state how he doesn't care about taxing the rich, since it doesn't directly affect him.

3. Calling you a 'tard probably didn't help my case or help you realize how retarded your original statement was, it was just something I added at the end without thinking, I hope you forgive me some day. <3

[DJ FC]

Holy shit where was I for all of this.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Explain to me why this is a bad thing. I'm not being facetious. Why should I, a poor college kid, care if millionaires are going to be taxed more? Especially when I stand to be the one to benefit from it.

The answer:

Because you won't actually benefit from it! People come to America, invest in America, work hard in America, and attend Ivy League schools in America because America is the place where you could succeed. Where success was rewarded and accepted as a positive thing. Where it was acknowledged that when you create value and in turn make a profit, everyone around you and everyone in society benefits. In these troubled times, we can easily forget about incentives. Good God incentives! They are real! Everybody does something for a reason. And if you tax all the millionares, there will be less people becoming millionares. And they are the ones supporting the rest of society as it is. It feels good to tax them and give to the poor. But to borrow from an old joke, socialism is like masturbation - it feels good until you realize that you are just fucking yourself. I detest people like Obama, because they use labels such as "greed" to justify their actions, when in fact they are the greedy. They want everything for free.

[DJ FC]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Its the elitist office/business fucks who I don't see as really being that hard of workers, having much of a work or business ethic, and also being complete fucks with sinecure-esque jobs.

I work 14 hours a fucking day. Analysts at banks put in at least 100+ hours every week. Consultants might spend 80% of their life on the road. Lawyers had to go to top schools and bust their asses just to be at the bottom rung and work their asses off.
At insurance companies the acturaries have studied more math than anyone on this board could comprehend. Even passing the CPA exam isn't easy. The people who really move money around in this country are incredibly motivated and competitive. But to you, you just see some ordinary office guy. And you lump them all together. It's a shame. The financial world is sooooo much bigger than people imagine. And the participants in it are the smartest and hardest working people on the planet.

[Repugnant Abomination]

Hung over. Scanned over everything so far. A few comments.

Professor: You're all right. Thank you for being respectful.

GW: Thanks for answering my question.

UB: Maybe you're just really hyped up over the content of this conversation, but I'm beginning to think that you're a genuine asshole. Not because your views differ from mine right now, but because you treat people who don't agree with you like shit.

[Ugly Bastard]

At least you're right about something.

[Repugnant Abomination]

I understand the basics of what most of you are saying, I think. Honestly I'm inclined to agree. I never once said that I am pro socialism - I think my support for Ron Paul shows that.

I just think most of you guys (right or wrong) place too much importance soley on economics. I've been saying that from the start. I'm willing to take on some minor socialistic policies, because I agree with Obama on more overall issues.

Some points I'd like to make that get ignored (especially by UB, who apparently only posts in hyperbole and juiced up masculinity):

1. I want the war to be over. It's a financial black hole and McCain is too stubborn to ever change his views on it. We'll be there forever if he's elected.

2. Stem cell research. This is a huge issue to me. The Republicans (aka evangelical christians) will never let us research this. Do you realize the benefits? By the time we're all up there in age this research will vastly improve the quality of our lives.

3. Gay rights. I think they should be able to marry and adopt. It is a civil rights issue. People can't be as openly hostile as they were to blacks back in the day, but the climate is still poor for these folks. I think part of a countries cultural sophistication is the way it treats all of it's people.

4. The biggest issue for me: the highjacking of the republican party by the evangelical christians. I don't see how you guys can ignore this so much. Religion and politics should never mix, but they do, painfully so with the republican party. They vote based on their Bible, and they push their RELIGIOUS agendas through the republican party. Check out the documentary: God's next army. It's about Patrick Henry College, a privately funded, elite school that is a gateway into the Republican party. They push their conservative christian values in government, with the goal of making this a Christian nation, much like Islam in the middle east. They are very well organized, aggressive, and well funded, and exercise their political strength through the republican party.

If you don't think this is a huge issue then consider this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10545387/ Basically Dover school was trying to teach intelligent design in the class room. A public school. Now, thankfully the judge ruled against it, but that was a miracle. Here's why - Bush, and the republican party, wanted BOTH evolution and intelligent design taught in schools. He personally appointed the judge, a well known Republican. It was quite literally shocking that this man went against his party in his decision. Bush, and the rest of the Christian right were outraged, and he received plenty of death threats.

That's what we're dealing with on the right. McCain will only strengthen their cause, by default, especially because he has to pander to them. With that said, of all the republican nominee's I was glad he got the nod. He's very moderate when compared to Romney or Huckabee, and since Paul wasn't going to get it McCain was the best alternative.

[Repugnant Abomination]

I'm curious what you guys think about Libertarian Socialism. Naom Chomsky, probably the greatest academic in the 20th century, is a big proponet of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

[ProfessorNumber]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I'm curious what you guys think about Libertarian Socialism. Naom Chomsky, probably the greatest academic in the 20th century, is a big proponet of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

It sounds abso-fucking-lutely awful. Seriously. In a nutshell, it seeks to put the power of a country in the very hands of those who have historically hindered industrial/technological progress.

Originally Posted by Shitty Wikipedia Article

"libertarian socialists place their hopes in trade unions, workers' councils, municipalities, citizens' assemblies, and other non-bureaucratic, decentralized means of action"

Throughout our development as a nation, it has almost always been the myopic views of unions that held back development. Men like F. W. Taylor and H. Gantt sought to create efficiences through improved motions, ergonomics, and performance based pay. The unions couldn't see the benefit, and ignorantly valued security over a system that would have invariably resulted in greater compensation for them, and huge progress for our country as a whole. In the words of Samuel Gompers (That fucking cock-sucking piece of shit AFL leader), the unions wanted "More, more, and then more". Can you imagine a country without a centralized government, where all the piece of shit unions are squawking for more? It would be disastrous.

In summation, Social Libertarianism is thinly veiled anarchy and communism. Chomsky can eat a dick.

[Repugnant Abomination]

Nice breakdown. I don't know why anarchy appeals to me so much, but you put it in a perspective that definitely doesn't sound good.

Now what about my first post?

[DJ FC]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Naom Chomsky, probably the greatest academic in the 20th century

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

[Repugnant Abomination]

You don't think so? Maybe not the greatest, but his contributions to linguistics basically revolutionized the way we understand language.

[DJ FC]

Ummm... Albert Einstein?

No. You pick Noam "Dooshbag" Chomsky

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

.