or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Progressivism = Luddite!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Progressivism = Luddite!

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 
Along with hating things like new babies being born, electricity being generated, change, efficiency, etc because they wreck centralized planning and require some humans leave one line of work and pursue another, it turns out all of our problems can be traced back to Apple and the iPad2.

Quote:
"A few short weeks ago I came to the House floor after having purchased an iPad and said that I happened to believe, Mr. Speaker, that at some point in time this new device, which is now probably responsible for eliminating thousands of American jobs. Now Borders is closing stores because, why do you need to go to Borders anymore? Why do you need to go to Barnes & Noble? Buy an iPad and download your newspaper, download your book, download your magazine," Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL, Chicago) said on the House floor Friday afternoon.

You can say she is a horrible author. You can say she is a cartoon philosopher, but the words certainly seem to ring true.

Quote:
"Many men in the Homes of the Scholars have had strange new ideas in the past," said Solidarity 8-1164, "but when the majority of their brother Scholars voted against them, they abandoned their ideas, as all men must."

"This box is useless," said Alliance 6-7349.

"Should it be what they claim of it," said Harmony 9-2642, "then it would bring ruin to the Department of Candles. The Candle is a great boon to mankind, as approved by all men. Therefore it cannot be destroyed by the whim of one."

"This would wreck the Plans of the World Council," said Unanimity 2-9913, "and without the Plans of the World Council the sun cannot rise. It took fifty years to secure the approval of all the Councils for the Candle, and to decide upon the number needed, and to re-fit the Plans so as to make candles instead of torches. This touched upon thousands and thousands of men working in scores of States. We cannot alter the Plans again so soon."

"And if this should lighten the toil of men," said Similarity 5-0306, "then it is a great evil, for men have no cause to exist save in toiling for other men."

Then Collective 0-0009 rose and pointed at our box.

"This thing," they said, "must be destroyed."

And all the others cried as one:

"It must be destroyed!"

That evil Apple company. They acquire great wealth. They alter the path of mankind and demand the new instead of the old. They declare their devices to be "magical" and put your fellow humans out of work. They make your fellow humans ponder artistic pursuits, dreams, entertainment and enjoyment rather than merely devoting their lives being their brother's keeper.

How can the left allow these magical devices to harm their fellow man by putting people out of work? I'm sure they'll declare they ought to be destroyed. They want profit. They don't seek to help the majority or even the largest number but pursue elitism and those areas where the majority of the profits are at.\

The left is getting just more and more extreme and insane. They'll point that finger anywhere and come after anyone to avoid confronting their own failures.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #2 of 39
It's always nice when you take things out of context, isn't it?

He wasn't saying we should do anything against progress that leads to job loss.

He was saying that we need to do more to create jobs, because jobs are being lost. He was giving a real example of job loss.

Have you got any arguments about the factual status of what he said with regard to the iPad? Was he telling congress that we shouldn't have iPads or create new gadgets? Of course not.

Context and true meaning are unnecessary when you have a nice sound bite the true meaning of which can be manipulated.
post #3 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It's always nice when you take things out of context, isn't it?

Sorry, I quoted the man directly. The other examples I've documented here as well. For example can you name a clean energy source that liberals are not still trying to sue out of existence? We have lawsuits in California over wind, solar and hydroelectric power.
Quote:
He wasn't saying we should do anything against progress that leads to job loss.

He declared it was directly responsible for the loss of jobs.

Quote:
He was saying that we need to do more to create jobs, because jobs are being lost. He was giving a real example of job loss.

The iPad must be magical. It obviously appeared out of the air and thus no jobs are associated with it. No one had to design it. No one gets paid to sell it. No one works creating apps for it. It just appeared on my table one morning. The gods must have sent it.

Quote:
Have you got any arguments about the factual status of what he said with regard to the iPad? Was he telling congress that we shouldn't have iPads or create new gadgets? Of course not.

There's no proof the iPad has destroyed a single job more than has been created by it. He is spewing nonsense and spreading fear related to the very fact that something has changed. Entire industries have risen and are rising related to smartphones and tablets.
Quote:
Context and true meaning are unnecessary when you have a nice sound bite the true meaning of which can be manipulated.

You're attempting to ignore and spin away what he said. I quoted it directly and the understanding is clear. None of the jobs created from products like the iPad matter. We can only see the ones that disappeared. No one goes to Borders anymore. This is bad and must be stopped. The unemployment rate is at 9% because of products like the iPad.

It is exactly the same reasoning as I highlighted in the Rand quote. OMG, sure people might go to work generating power, running powerlines, installing these light bulbs and taming the night, but what of the candle makers and their jobs? They would be gone?

In the speech he directly declares that Steve Jobs is doing pretty well, but the jobs will be gone, not shifted, not replaced by something else, simply gone. The implication is clear. Jobs is rich and all the jobs and salaries associated with them went into his pocket.

It is zero sum reasoning. Jobs and Apple didn't create wealth. They will have extorted and exploited it away from Borders, book publishers, the text book industry and what have you. There's no way to spin it away Tonton.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #4 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Sorry, I quoted the man directly.

EXACTLY. Out of context. Do you know what taking a quote out of context means? It means quoting it directly without the surrounding context to explain the meaning. His meaning, if you watch the video, is that Congress needs to concentrate our efforts on jobs creation. If you watch the video and get the context, you can't not get that unless you're living in denial land.
Quote:
The other examples I've documented here as well. For example can you name a clean energy source that liberals are not still trying to sue out of existence? We have lawsuits in California over wind, solar and hydroelectric power.

Liberals? Try again. It may even have been made to appear like Liberals are behind certain actions, but you can be sure big oil has its hands in there somewhere. Show me where a Democratic politician is supporting such lawsuits. You can't, and you won't.
Quote:
He declared it was directly responsible for the loss of jobs.

It is.
Quote:
The iPad must be magical. It obviously appeared out of the air and thus no jobs are associated with it. No one had to design it. No one gets paid to sell it. No one works creating apps for it. It just appeared on my table one morning. The gods must have sent it.

No one said is hasn't created jobs.
Quote:
There's no proof the iPad has destroyed a single job more than has been created by it.

No there's not. There's also no proof that the iPad has created more jobs than it has eliminated. You're making that unproven claim.
Quote:
He is spewing nonsense and spreading fear related to the very fact that something has changed. Entire industries have risen and are rising related to smartphones and tablets.

You're spewing nonsense as well. Show me how many jobs created by the iPad might not have been created elsewhere in industry that wouldn't have affected retail jobs. You can't, and you won't. Your'e making assumptions, as you are wont to do.
Quote:
You're attempting to ignore and spin away what he said.

No, I'm trying to show you that you can't take things out of context. What he said, no spin, was that Congress should concentrate on jobs creation.
Quote:
I quoted it directly and the understanding is clear.

You did quote it directly, out of context, and your intention is clear.
Quote:
None of the jobs created from products like the iPad matter.

Can you show me that quote?
Quote:
We can only see the ones that disappeared.

Really? Can you show me where that is clear?
Quote:
No one goes to Borders anymore.

Pretty much true.
Quote:
This is bad and must be stopped.

Can you show me that quote?
Quote:
The unemployment rate is at 9% because of products like the iPad.

This one, too.
Quote:
It is exactly the same reasoning as I highlighted in the Rand quote.

No, it's not. In the Rand quote, the idiiot was saying verbatim that this must be stopped. In the Jackson quote, the congressman was saying that Congress needs to concentrate on jobs creation, and showed an example of job loss.
Quote:
OMG, sure people might go to work generating power, running powerlines, installing these light bulbs and taming the night, but what of the candle makers and their jobs? They would be gone?

Rand was, as you are, oversimplifying.
Quote:
In the speech he directly declares that Steve Jobs is doing pretty well, but the jobs will be gone, not shifted, not replaced by something else, simply gone.

Yep. So? Is that not true?
Quote:
The implication is clear. Jobs is rich and all the jobs and salaries associated with them went into his pocket.

That's not at all what I got out of it. That's what you implied. By no means is that the meaning according to what I heard.
Quote:
It is zero sum reasoning. Jobs and Apple didn't create wealth. They will have extorted and exploited it away from Borders, book publishers, the text book industry and what have you.

No, it's not. These are your assumptions about his intention. This is not what he said.
Quote:
There's no way to spin it away Tonton.

I guess not, when you can simply take something out of context, ignore the message actually being conveyed, and draw your own assumptions to fit your political agenda.
post #5 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

EXACTLY. Out of context. Do you know what taking a quote out of context means? It means quoting it directly without the surrounding context to explain the meaning. His meaning, if you watch the video, is that Congress needs to concentrate our efforts on jobs creation. If you watch the video and get the context, you can't not get that unless you're living in denial land.

Denial land? You're serious here apparently. I'll tell you what tonton. Find a single link anywhere for me that declares ol'JJ Jr was just misunderstood and that guys like me are just quoting him out of context.

Here's the Huffington Post coming to the same conclusion.


Here's NBC.


Here's CNN.


They all draw the same conclusion and per you, all must be intentionally taking the quote out of context.

The NBA article even makes the same point I do.

People often lament the loss of one industry without recognizing the value of the industry that replaces it. The classic example of course is the buggy whip manufacturer who does not anticipate the economic value of the automobile.

A quick check, however, reveals many of "those jobs" really are not that great. According to this job description, bookbinders can expect a noisy workplace where they "stand at their machines most of the day.

In addition, they do a considerable amount of stretching and lifting to operate these machines and often carry heavy batches of printed matter" for an average pay of $13.71 an hour.

An average Apple store "retail specialist" earns more than that selling those iPads.


Quote:
Liberals? Try again. It may even have been made to appear like Liberals are behind certain actions, but you can be sure big oil has its hands in there somewhere. Show me where a Democratic politician is supporting such lawsuits. You can't, and you won't.

Who said anything about whether it is a politician? The suits are often by the Sierra club. I'll be happy to let them know they are now "big oil."

Quote:
It is.

No one said is hasn't created jobs.

JJ Jr said the reason the unemployment rate was pegged down was because of products like the iPad. The reasoning is clear. Technological progress harms employment.

Quote:
No there's not. There's also no proof that the iPad has created more jobs than it has eliminated. You're making that unproven claim.

Whether both claims can be proven or not, I'm not the one seeking action based on an unproven claim. As both you and he note, the claims are unproven yet he wants money for his unproven claim.

Quote:
You're spewing nonsense as well. Show me how many jobs created by the iPad might not have been created elsewhere in industry that wouldn't have affected retail jobs. You can't, and you won't. Your'e making assumptions, as you are wont to do.

I think you got a little wrapped up in yourself there. I'm not quite sure what you're asking for there. Looks sort of like an awkward double negative. Might not wouldn't.

Quote:
No, I'm trying to show you that you can't take things out of context. What he said, no spin, was that Congress should concentrate on jobs creation.

Please find one other news source anywhere that claims that thinking the quote means that is taking it out of context. Hell give me a blogger or opinion piece. You've got to be the only person on the planet defending this.

Quote:
You did quote it directly, out of context, and your intention is clear.

My INTENTIONS override his actual words. Can you show anyone else claiming that direct quote means different from what I said? I've given several examples from multiple sources to support my conclusion as it is also theirs. Find any article out there that declares ol'JJ Jr is just misunderstood.

Quote:
Can you show me that quote?

If they mattered, he would note them and understand them. He doesn't. He bemoans only the loss of older jobs from printing. He notes it with Borders and college textbooks.

Quote:
Really? Can you show me where that is clear?

"Now Borders is closing stores because why do you need to go to Borders anymore? Why do you need to go to Barnes & Noble?" Jackson said. "Buy an iPad and download your newspaper, download your book, download your magazine."

"What becomes of publishing companies and publishing company jobs? What becomes of bookstores and librarians and all of the jobs associated with paper?"

Those are very clear. He only notes all the jobs that are gone and speaks about none of the jobs that were created. He bemoans the loss of paper. It is the classic form of being a Luddite.

Quote:
Pretty much true.

They weren't a good company to begin with in my opinion.

Quote:
Can you show me that quote?

This one, too.

The iPad good for Jobs, Jackson says, but not good for jobs.

Quote:
No, it's not. In the Rand quote, the idiiot was saying verbatim that this must be stopped. In the Jackson quote, the congressman was saying that Congress needs to concentrate on jobs creation, and showed an example of job loss.

It's not job loss though. It is reallocation of resources. It is like declaring all the jobs are gone because we don't all farm. At one time 97% of the population was engaged in agrarian jobs. Oh noes! Where did all the jobs go? We are now all unemployed because of tractors!

No new jobs were replaced and efficiency gains made the old jobs economically not viable. It becomes economically nonviable to pay someone to cut down a tree, turn it to paper, print on it, bind it, ship it, stock it and sale it when it can be done digitally. Sure more people have gone to work designing and assembling tablets, shipping them, selling them, etc and they do a lot more.

Quote:
Rand was, as you are, oversimplifying.

Oversimplifying is reserved for those who cannot see the new jobs and only bemoan the old jobs.

Quote:
Yep. So? Is that not true?

It is not true. Talk about a simplistic view! The entire smartphone and tablet industry has replaced these publishing jobs.

Quote:
That's not at all what I got out of it. That's what you implied. By no means is that the meaning according to what I heard.

Clean your ears. "Steve Jobs is doing pretty well" "There is no protection for jobs here in America to ensure that the American people are being put to work."
Quote:
No, it's not. These are your assumptions about his intention. This is not what he said.
I guess not, when you can simply take something out of context, ignore the message actually being conveyed, and draw your own assumptions to fit your political agenda.

Again I challenge you to find any media source defending this statement.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #6 of 39
Yep... it's that "Liberal Media"... LOL.

Have a look a the comments on the Huff Post article. Those peope get it.

You do know that Huff Post is not independent any more, right?

Commentss:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ak14

He isn't not exactly contradict*ing himself. It's different aspects of the same. what he says that these and many other jobs that are gone, and will go got to do with advanced technology*, its structrual*. in the future there will be much less traditiona*l jobs, maybe more spare time, for many. this is a strutrual change that happens in modern society. well predicted by Asimov and others 3-4 decades ago.
And it will also revolution*ize education, etc.
save paper, and protect the environmen*t on one hand, and would cause social unrest world wide, for lack of jobs, until well adapt to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FredSays

It's obvious that most of the posts about the Congressma*n are from folks who didn't watch the video but only read and believed the mis-charac*terization of the author of the article. Jackson did not condemn technology*; he was chiding the 112th Congress for doing NOTHING to foster a climate to create American jobs. Ignore the article, watch and pay attention to the video, then evaluate what he said. If you still come to the same conclusion as the article's author, you're a candidate for FOX.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mutton

Well, he's right. The internet is killing jobs as well. Robots replace people. One iPhone replaces several other devices, meaning they no longer need to be produced. I think we're getting to the point where there won't be enough work for to employ the entire population at the same time that all the social safety nets are being destroyed. We live in interestin*g times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by binarystar

You guys know you're wrong for that misleading headline. And judging by a lot of the comments below that's about all a lot of the readers here read besides the name "Jesse Jackson" before they started making their funny little quips.

I don't agree with his point since I don't really see a problem with some jobs becoming extinct due to technology advances but he was not at any point "blaming the ipad for american unemployme*nt" - he was using it as an example.

I could find 50 more quotes like that that are more intelligent than your out of context assumptions.
post #7 of 39
Now. Perhaps you can tell me what Jackson's recommendation to Congress was about what should be done.

What did he suggest Congress should do about whatever problem he was addressing?

Perhaps... just perhaps... that was his message!?
post #8 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yep... it's that "Liberal Media"... LOL.

Have a look a the comments on the Huff Post article. Those peope get it.

You do know that Huff Post is not independent any more, right?

Commentss:

I could find 50 more quotes like that that are more intelligent than your out of context assumptions.

I'm sure you can find other delusional people out there commenting on it. I didn't ask for that. I said give me a mainstream press report, an opinion column or at least a blogger from from a news site.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Now. Perhaps you can tell me what Jackson's recommendation to Congress was about what should be done.

What did he suggest Congress should do about whatever problem he was addressing?

Perhaps... just perhaps... that was his message!?

We don't need you to go shifting the goalposts to what you prefer to discuss instead of the actual thread topic.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #9 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm sure you can find other delusional people out there commenting on it.

Yeah, I saw many of them on that thread with the same opinion you had. Fortunately, there were also people who actually listened to the point he was making, instead of taking his example out of context.
Quote:
I didn't ask for that. I said give me a mainstream press report, an opinion column or at least a blogger from from a news site.

Give Josh Marshall a moment, I'm sure he'll come up with something. I find it hilarious, however, that you're using the mainstream media to defend your point...
Quote:
We don't need you to go shifting the goalposts to what you prefer to discuss instead of the actual thread topic.

LOL. Yeah. That's what I did. Shift the goalposts. In my first post on this thread, I asked you to look at the context and meaning of his point. In the last post I asked you to look at the context and meaning of his point. What a back flip!
post #10 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yeah, I saw many of them on that thread with the same opinion you had. Fortunately, there were also people who actually listened to the point he was making, instead of taking his example out of context.

Actually it is quite the opposite of listening since everyone who isn't some extreme, blinder addled partisan got the same point.

Quote:
Give Josh Marshall a moment, I'm sure he'll come up with something. I find it hilarious, however, that you're using the mainstream media to defend your point...

I never said anything about mainstream. I merely said any news organization reporting on or commenting on it. The dude down at the donut shop isn't quite the same but as an example, I wouldn't at all toss away talking points memo as not "mainstream" or large enough. Someone who warranted or not, needs to keep their credibility on news matters is all I required.
Quote:
LOL. Yeah. That's what I did. Shift the goalposts. In my first post on this thread, I asked you to look at the context and meaning of his point. In the last post I asked you to look at the context and meaning of his point. What a back flip!

You're trying to make it about the messengers and the intentions rather than the actual words. This mindset is, not to be rude, but really strange. Escape utopia long enough to stop slapping at people who see the man and hear his actual words. You take down Huffington Post declaring they aren't, what a real news organization I guess? I also provided NBC and CNN. It isn't some grand conspiracy.

You know between this and threads like the Krugman thing, it is really very troubling. I'd be the last guy who wants to say there is a movement of people so extreme in their views that they are just fundamentally disconnected from any sort of common, mainstream or just regular views but that is increasingly what the Democratic party and those who support it look and sound like. I mean bemoaning the true coming of paperless times which is so much better for the environment is just odd and shows some really cynical manipulation that is nothing more than being about power. The man owns an iPad. He was praising it earlier.

Does the Democratic Party really so cynically believe they can just lie without pretense? Do they really think everyone who isn't them is just that stupid?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #11 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You're trying to make it about the messengers and the intentions rather than the actual words.

BULL SHIT!

His ACTUAL WORDS were that Congress should do something about job loss. That's all. That's the only recommendation that he had. He didn't have any single other recommendation or criticism. You're talking about him saying something that weren't his actual words. You're trying to say he thinks there's something wrong with iPads. He's not.
post #12 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I never said anything about mainstream. I merely said any news organization reporting on or commenting on it. The dude down at the donut shop isn't quite the same but as an example, I wouldn't at all toss away talking points memo as not "mainstream" or large enough. Someone who warranted or not, needs to keep their credibility on news matters is all I required.

How about the Atlantic?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...s-jobs/237497/
post #13 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

BULL SHIT!

His ACTUAL WORDS were that Congress should do something about job loss. That's all. That's the only recommendation that he had. He didn't have any single other recommendation or criticism. You're talking about him saying something that weren't his actual words. You're trying to say he thinks there's something wrong with iPads. He's not.

It amounts to saying that government should stop the business cycle. Cars replaced horses. The government didn't need to intervene. iPads shall replace paper. The government need not intervene. Unemployment isn't at 9% due to iPads. It is there due to bad government policy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

How about the Atlantic?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...s-jobs/237497/

It says he got a bad rap, but also agrees that he is shooting himself in the foot because it leads to a better result. Thanks to you now, one whole person has liked that comment.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #14 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

iPads shall replace paper.

On this alone the green lefties ought to be thrilled! Eventually maybe we can stop hearing them ignorantly whine about "killing a tree" when the use of paper exceeds their tender sensibilities.


Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Unemployment isn't at 9% due to iPads. It is there due to bad government policy.

Yep.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #15 of 39
By the way for all of the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth we get from the left about trade and jobs...the reality is that if they were to be consistent they should be Luddites...because the fact is that technology and automation generally eliminates more jobs (at the point of the automation) than trade does.

Personally I think this is a great trend. Soon those physical book stores, music stores and video stores will all be gone. You'll get these things over the Internet onto devices like iPad, iPhone, iPod, Apple TV, etc. No need to drive to these stores. No need to ship books, DVDs, CDs, etc. all over the country. The resources (buildings, people, paper, plastic, metal, trucks, fuel, etc.) will be shifted and re-deployed to other uses. WHo knows maybe it will even help Climate Change." ;-) Creative destruction at its best.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #16 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It amounts to saying that government should stop the business cycle.

Yep, what you're saying he's saying amounts to that. What he's saying doesn't. Show me where he says that.
Quote:
Cars replaced horses. The government didn't need to intervene. iPads shall replace paper. The government need not intervene. Unemployment isn't at 9% due to iPads. It is there due to bad government policy.

Absolutely.
Quote:
It says he got a bad rap, but also agrees that he is shooting himself in the foot because it leads to a better result. Thanks to you now, one whole person has liked that comment.

"Shooting himself in the foot"? What the hell are you talking about? You read so much into things that simply isn't there.
post #17 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Unemployment isn't at 9% due to iPads. It is there due to bad government policy.

[sarcasm]Who says it's Government's job to deal with unemployment!!!!????[/sarcasm]
post #18 of 39
And the award for gross mis-interpretation and mis-representation of another poster's statement goes to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

[sarcasm]Who says it's Government's job to deal with unemployment!!!!????[/sarcasm]

Failed attempt sarcasm aside...it is not the government's job to deal with unemployment...but that doesn't mean its actions can't cause it (or make it worse), which is the point. In fact, the government's actions in trying to "deal with unemployment" have actually made it worse and more persistent.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #19 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

And the award for gross mis-interpretation and mis-representation of another poster's statement goes to...



Failed attempt sarcasm aside...it is not the government's job to deal with unemployment...but that doesn't mean its actions can't cause it (or make it worse), which is the point. In fact, the government's actions in trying to "deal with unemployment" have actually made it worse and more persistent.

Agreed. All those tax cuts for the wealthy that Conservatives have incessantly claimed would create new jobs haven't created any, and in fact they have led to a budget crisis that has forced the government to cut programs that actually work. Finally we're in agreement here. The government's current efforts have not worked.
post #20 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Agreed. All those tax cuts for the wealthy that Conservatives have incessantly claimed would create new jobs haven't created any, and in fact they have led to a budget crisis that has forced the government to cut programs that actually work. Finally we're in agreement here. The government's current efforts have not worked.

We're probably not in agreement about as much as you think. I notice you omitted the massive government spending which was supposed to create many many jobs and which appears to have resulted in higher unemployment.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #21 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

We're probably not in agreement about as much as you think. I notice you omitted the massive government spending which was supposed to create many many jobs and which appears to have resulted in higher unemployment.

Again, we're in agreement here. I'm all for massive government spending cuts. Cut 90% of the military budget right now (or as soon as logistically possible). Cut 90% of NASA spending until we can afford it. My friend and ex-boss Law Yuk Kai would kill me for saying this, but cut "Exporting Democracy" projects like NED. Most of all, cut corporate welfare. No more bailouts. No more "too big to fail".
post #22 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Again, we're in agreement here. I'm all for massive government spending cuts. Cut 90% of the military budget right now (or as soon as logistically possible). Cut 90% of NASA spending until we can afford it. My friend and ex-boss Law Yuk Kai would kill me for saying this, but cut "Exporting Democracy" projects like NED. Most of all, cut corporate welfare. No more bailouts. No more "too big to fail".

We're mostly in agreement here. You've omitted some things. I'd cut 100% of NASA...permanently, not "until we can afford it." I'd also add cuts to most welfare programs (at least at the federal level...these can be handled privately or at state or local levels.) As for the wars, maybe the US will get a president that wants to end them and return the country to a position of armed neutrality. That's how you'll be able to cut the war budget by 90%.

Also cut taxes massively. Eliminate all income, investment, capital gains and interest taxes. What little remaining tax revenue requirements there are could be covered with a very modest sales tax.

I'm sure we also disagree on the stimulative effects of certain kinds of tax cuts.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #23 of 39
Thread Starter 
First, just to reiterate, I'm not alone on this understanding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yep, what you're saying he's saying amounts to that. What he's saying doesn't. Show me where he says that.

Absolutely.

You say absolutely to an understanding of the cycle (which clearly is a misunderstanding) then declare that he is merely demanding the government do something about jobs which.....shows a misunderstanding of the business cycle.

Spinning Jackson has to break down at some point due to this lack of understanding. What Jackson is calling for is a clear redistribution ploy which I'm sure you get but don't care to fess up to as well. The jobs don't disappear in one instance without reappearing in another. Borders or college textbook printers don't disappear in a vacuum. They are replaced by something better and the jobs associated with that better are here now (and growing) as well.

People are ordering e-books because that infrastructure has risen up and when measured next to going to a book store, is found to be better. As it continues rising up, jobs will be created managing the data centers, building out the networks more, hiring people to create and convert older books, draft agreements, etc.

Jackson doesn't see the prior job creation nor the future job creation. The government THUS must step into this cycle aka stop what is going on and alter the dynamics. The target is pretty clear the rich aka Steve Jobs is doing pretty well. Steve Jobs and others like him ought to pay taxes to make up for the jobs shortfall that exists due to what they created. Per them and folks like yourself, the wealth is a zero sum. Apple and Jobs didn't create wealth with the iPad, but merely reallocated all the existing wealth and jobs to themselves. Thus redistributing it back is only "fair." It doesn't even matter if everyone goes back to book stores and binding books but on the government dime (like our commuter train lines, like automakers, etc.) The government HAS to do something. There are too many livelihoods and industries at stake. That sector of the economy is "too big to fail."
Quote:
"Shooting himself in the foot"? What the hell are you talking about? You read so much into things that simply isn't there.

Link at the top shows it certainly is there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

[sarcasm]Who says it's Government's job to deal with unemployment!!!!????[/sarcasm]

Jesse Jackson Jr.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Agreed. All those tax cuts for the wealthy that Conservatives have incessantly claimed would create new jobs haven't created any, and in fact they have led to a budget crisis that has forced the government to cut programs that actually work. Finally we're in agreement here. The government's current efforts have not worked.

Perhaps you should get your numbers right. The tax cuts for the non-rich have ALWAYS cost much more than for the rich. When the articles about the cuts expiring were floating around last November. The number for ten years for the rich was roughly $830 billion depending upon the source you checked. The problem, the cost of the cuts for all income earners was $3.7 trillion for ten years. I've written many times that NO ONE should be off the tax rolls. When Bush was president and even now I'll gladly note that he did great damage in lower rates so that almost half the country effectively gets something for nothing.

If Obama, and perhaps Jesse Jackson Jr. really wanted to claim some fiscal leadership, they would stop focusing on the rich and roll back all the tax cuts which would net them so much more. Obama is trying to grab less than a trillion over ten years. The amount of pretty measly when considered in the massive scale of the current federal government. $83 billion a year to fight against a yearly $1.5 trillion dollar deficit. Even with your math and understanding you've got to admit that taxing the rich won't cut it there. Even taxing all won't cut it there. The spending has got to stop.

I've gladly said that I believe the Laffer curve does work but at the same time I've said we aren't on the side of it where economic activity is going to radically change. That wasn't true when Reagan took office. The top brackets were 65-70% then. If the top bracket went from 33% to 36% as an example, I don't think we would see people retiring rather than work. Likewise since the poor and middle class have no choice but to work, of course they are going keep doing what they do so balance the books. If we are truly all in this together then we shouldn't have people off the tax rolls and credits for taxes not paid should be removed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

We're probably not in agreement about as much as you think. I notice you omitted the massive government spending which was supposed to create many many jobs and which appears to have resulted in higher unemployment.

I'll never stop noting it. Keynesian economics should be declared a joke.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Again, we're in agreement here. I'm all for massive government spending cuts. Cut 90% of the military budget right now (or as soon as logistically possible). Cut 90% of NASA spending until we can afford it. My friend and ex-boss Law Yuk Kai would kill me for saying this, but cut "Exporting Democracy" projects like NED. Most of all, cut corporate welfare. No more bailouts. No more "too big to fail".

You know tonton, folks like yourself throw out that 90% figure but then want the U.S. to be the cop of the world the second something goes wrong. You can't have your cake and eat it too there. We could cut 90% but would basically have to become more isolationist again and return to projecting power within our own borders. Some protesters jump in front of some cameras in Egypt, we don't park an aircraft carrier off the coast.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #24 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You know tonton, folks like yourself throw out that 90% figure but then want the U.S. to be the cop of the world the second something goes wrong.

No. Folks like me (in other words, "I") absolutely don't want that. Stop telling me what I want. I know what I want. Thanks.
post #25 of 39
Thread Starter 
Charlotteobserver

Quote:
"The purpose of the tree ordinance is to protect trees," Johnson said. "Charlotte has always been known as the city of trees. When we take down trees, we need to replace these trees."

Individuals who would like to trim their trees should call the city foresters to receive a free permit to conduct the landscape work.

Foresters will then meet with the person receiving the permit and give instructions on how to properly trim their trees, Johnson said.

The state Division of Forestry recommends that anyone trimming trees should be certified by the National Horticulture Board, but certification is not required to receive a permit.

On private property, fine amounts are based on the size of the tree improperly pruned. For small trees such as cherry trees or crape myrtles, the fine is $75 per tree. Excessive cutting can increase that fine to $100 per branch.

For large trees such as oaks or maples, the fine is $150 per tree.

Because there is a widespread lack of understanding on how to prune crape myrtles in the Charlotte area, Johnson said, residents found in violation regarding these trees are asked to simply replace them, and the fine will be lifted.

Sales said trees found in violation at the church must be cut down and replaced with new trees by October, but the church plans to appeal. Sales doesn't know how much it would cost to replace the trees.

"We trimmed back these trees in the interest of the church," Sales said. "If we were in violation, we certainly did not know we were."

Typically during the course of a year, Johnson said, about six private residents are found in violation of improper topping or pruning.

"We are trying to be pro-active and not trying to fine people excessively," Johnson said.

We protect trees by cutting them down and killing if we don't like your cuts. If you have several government agencies approval you can actually trim a tree and keep your wallet.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #26 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
"The other thing that happened though, this goes to the point you were just making, is there are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers," President Obama said about unemployment in an interview with NBC's Ann Curry.

Obama claims ATMs and kiosks at airports have eliminated some jobs.

"If you see it when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport and you use a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate," he said.

RCP.com

It's the iPads. It's ATM's. It's electric light bulbs. Stop all this productivity from harming your fellow man. Pick up your pitchforks and your torches and burn it all down so we can employ someone (with the proper permits) to rebuild it all again.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #27 of 39
Should I start investing in candles?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Charlotteobserver



We protect trees by cutting them down and killing if we don't like your cuts. If you have several government agencies approval you can actually trim a tree and keep your wallet.

I haven 't read the thread...

My brothers Ex girlfriend's ex boyfriend ( they may actually still be together, not sure, but she has one of my brothers kids born on 9/11) was Clintons whatever for the environment and one of his pet projects was the trees in D.C.

I only met him one time but he was completely genuine. I guess all I'm saying ( because I get pissed off with the number of rules and regs too) is that there may, and I suppose in this case it's a faily big "may", because I'm not at all familiar with any of this) be positives that far outweigh the negatives.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #29 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Charlotteobserver



We protect trees by cutting them down and killing if we don't like your cuts. If you have several government agencies approval you can actually trim a tree and keep your wallet.

That's a rather obtuse interpretation of the news story. I'm not saying I agree with the policy, but at least report the fucker accurately. Your intellectual dishonesty and partisan hackery is showing again. You did a great job of clever editing to not post this important paragraph:


"When they are nonrepairable, when they have been pruned beyond repair, we will ask them to be replaced," Johnson said. "We do that for a number of reasons but mainly because they are going to come back unhealthy and create a dangerous situation down the road."

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #30 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

"When they are nonrepairable, when they have been pruned beyond repair, we will ask them to be replaced," Johnson said. "We do that for a number of reasons but mainly because they are going to come back unhealthy and create a dangerous situation down the road."

They are doing more than asking. They are forcing.

Who owns the property and the trees?

And what "dangerous situation" would this create down the road?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #31 of 39
I'm not taking their side here. I don't know enough about pruning trees to offer anything to this conversation, nor do I give enough of a shit about it to go do some research. I'm merely pointing out Trumpetman LEAVING OUT A VERY IMPORTANT PARAGRAPH.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #32 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I'm not taking their side here. I don't know enough about pruning trees to offer anything to this conversation, nor do I give enough of a shit about it to go do some research. I'm merely pointing out Trumpetman LEAVING OUT A VERY IMPORTANT PARAGRAPH.


"When they are nonrepairable, when they have been pruned beyond repair, we will ask them to be replaced," Johnson said. "We do that for a number of reasons but mainly because they are going to come back unhealthy and create a dangerous situation down the road."


Understand that paragraph comes from the bureaucrat and justifies the ridiculous actions.

The trees don't die. They grow back where the topping occurred and look different than the city wanted. They are as damaged long term as someone giving you a bad haircut.

No matter how damaged they may be though, and no matter how many rationalizations are used to justify the claims of damage (oh, they MAY BE MORE PRONE to X, Y, Z) no damage can be more extensive than killing the trees outright.

Also if you go read about crape myrtle "murder" as the bad pruning is called, it is reversible and repairable because the trees don't stop growing, they merely grow in an unapproved manner.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #33 of 39
If you wanted to give an unbiased account of the story, you would have included the local government's reason for the policy. But that isn't what you want so you didn't. And I really don't care about this story enough to go research it more.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #34 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

If you wanted to give an unbiased account of the story, you would have included the local government's reason for the policy. But that isn't what you want so you didn't. And I really don't care about this story enough to go research it more.

Bias has nothing to do with it. You found what you wanted to find because as always, I provide a link. I seldom quote full articles. I highlight what I think is important to the point I am trying to put across. Of course the city provides a rationale for what they do as do most well-intentioned but idiotic people who muck up property rights.

If someone didn't agree with my point or wanted to read about something other than what I highlighted, all they had to do was exactly what you did, click on the link.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #35 of 39
You quoted an awful lot of that article. The one major thing you left out was the justification. Of course that's what you left out.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #36 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You quoted an awful lot of that article. The one major thing you left out was the justification. Of course that's what you left out.

BR, you personify what is wrong with Democrats and the left in general. The city gets to fine a church thousands of dollars not for neglect, blight or disrepair of property but for declaring they cut their trees wrong and the problem is that.... well the person noting this didn't quote enough or the right part.

Do you even have a real point anymore?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #37 of 39
I'm not saying the city is right. I'm saying you are wrong for not at least including the justification and painting a wholly different picture from what is stated in the article.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #38 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I'm not saying the city is right. I'm saying you are wrong for not at least including the justification and painting a wholly different picture from what is stated in the article.

The picture painted isn't different. Stop being petty and ridiculous. Please find a point beyond lamenting the fact that so many messengers can point out how terrible and tyrannical government at almost all levels has become.

We protect trees by cutting them down and killing (them) if we don't like your cuts. If you have several government agencies approval you can actually trim a tree and keep your wallet.

The point stands. Nothing about it is misleading or even wrong. You wanted a rationalization included to soften the very clear point made there but the point remains regardless.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #39 of 39
You don't mention the forcible replacement.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Progressivism = Luddite!