or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Hillary Melting Down?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is Hillary Melting Down? - Page 3

post #81 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I too would like to know what pre-existing social structures are, exactly. Free market capitalism does work. It needs to be regulated to some extent, but it works better than any system in human history. And I think you're essentially wrong...the vast majority of "human interaction" IS economic. Money makes the world go 'round, as they say.

The genetic proclivity to associate with others throws a wrench into *purer* free market capitalism of the sort RP is a proponent of. Extending from there to tribes, cities, nations all with borders and super social obligations, free market capitalism ONLY works when balanced against these social structures that came to exist far before the Scotsman had his laisez-faire insight.

You are a teacher right? Does your instruction serve an economic purpose, directly? Of course not, these children aren't paying you to teach them. At best their parents are, through some sort of property tax dilution. But why the fuck would parents want their children to waste time getting an education, if every interaction is economic? They are far more valuable squeezing oil from their loose change. If parents own their children, and if everything is economic, they do, why would they pay YOU to teach them music, a generally useless skill set? Hell, why don't more children kill their parents to get that yoke off their backs?

Economics is a minor aspect of society. Family, friendship, and other non-economic interactions dominate our day to day lives. We are genetically social creatures, not economic ones.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #82 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

The genetic proclivity to associate with others throws a wrench into *purer* free market capitalism of the sort RP is a proponent of. Extending from there to tribes, cities, nations all with borders and super social obligations, free market capitalism ONLY works when balanced against these social structures that came to exist far before the Scotsman had his laisez-faire insight.

You are a teacher right? Does your instruction serve an economic purpose, directly? Of course not, these children aren't paying you to teach them. At best their parents are, through some sort of property tax dilution. But why the fuck would parents want their children to waste time getting an education, if every interaction is economic? They are far more valuable squeezing oil from their loose change. If parents own their children, and if everything is economic, they do, why would they pay YOU to teach them music, a generally useless skill set? Hell, why don't more children kill their parents to get that yoke off their backs?

Economics is a minor aspect of society. Family, friendship, and other non-economic interactions dominate our day to day lives. We are genetically social creatures, not economic ones.

It really depends on what you mean by "works."

As the dominant economic system, it doesn't seem like it needs any help for it to "work" at continuing its dominance. Even Marx said the ability of capitalism to create a world in its own image was its strength. So what do you mean? Creating greater prosperity, equality, etc? That said, I certainly agree with you that capitalist economic theory doesn't account for the prevalence of non-economic decision-making.
post #83 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

We are genetically social creatures, not economic ones.

There's a difference?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #84 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

There's a difference?

What hardeeharhar meant to type was: "We are moral creatures, not political ones."

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #85 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

What hardeeharhar meant to type was: "We are moral creatures, not political ones."

There's a difference?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #86 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

There's a difference?

Yes, you silly.



Some see cultural salvation in terms of political organization, some see it as coming from obedience to God.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #87 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Yes, you silly.



Some see cultural salvation in terms of political organization, some see it as coming from obedience to God.

You seem to think I'm joking.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #88 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You seem to think I'm joking.

Not at all, I understand where you're coming from. You've been too consistent in your beliefs for me to assume that.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #89 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Not at all

Yes you do think I'm kidding!

Quote:
I understand where you're coming from.

No you don't!


Quote:
You've been too consistent in your beliefs for me to assume that.

I HAVE NOT!!

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #90 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

There's a difference?

Of course.

Economic behaviors are one's that increase your capital value -- intrinsically changing your material worth. Social behaviors are ones that change your social worth -- a much more abstract and psychologically perverse behavior set.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #91 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Of course.

Economic behaviors are one's that increase your capital value -- intrinsically changing your material worth. Social behaviors are ones that change your social worth -- a much more abstract and psychologically perverse behavior set.

/me pulls his copy of Pierre Bordieu's Distinction off the shelf....
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #92 of 235
Ah I read him in Aesthetics.

Dumbstruck for remembering what he said, however.*

And I just discovered that dumbstruck didn't mean what I thought it did.
post #93 of 235
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

The genetic proclivity to associate with others throws a wrench into *purer* free market capitalism of the sort RP is a proponent of. Extending from there to tribes, cities, nations all with borders and super social obligations, free market capitalism ONLY works when balanced against these social structures that came to exist far before the Scotsman had his laisez-faire insight.

You are a teacher right? Does your instruction serve an economic purpose, directly? Of course not, these children aren't paying you to teach them. At best their parents are, through some sort of property tax dilution. But why the fuck would parents want their children to waste time getting an education, if every interaction is economic?

Because their children are learning skills that will lead to more education and eventually employment.

Quote:
They are far more valuable squeezing oil from their loose change. If parents own their children, and if everything is economic, they do, why would they pay YOU to teach them music, a generally useless skill set? Hell, why don't more children kill their parents to get that yoke off their backs?

Because music benefits children, helps develop their brains, improves social interaction/networking/team-work skills, etc. All of these skills are exceptionally useful in the marketplace. In fact, this is a major topic in music education today. We are teaching and developing skills that are valuable., some of which you don't see. It's not just about the kid singing Mary Had a Little Lamb. It's about what that does for the child afterwards. This is where you're in over your head.

Quote:

Economics is a minor aspect of society. Family, friendship, and other non-economic interactions dominate our day to day lives. We are genetically social creatures, not economic ones.

Then perhaps you could explain why we spend most of our lives working for money, then buying stuff with that money.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #94 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Because their children are learning skills that will lead to more education and eventually employment.

Doubtful. The core skill set will likely not be involved in the eventual employment, nor for that matter further education. Music just isn't that important. (I am playing devil's advocate here, btw, I strongly value music education as I believe it makes a more rounded person capable of appreciating the cultural outputs of society as opposed to the economic ones, that you seem to favor).


Quote:
Because music benefits children, helps develop their brains, improves social interaction/networking/team-work skills, etc. All of these skills are exceptionally useful in the marketplace. In fact, this is a major topic in music education today. We are teaching and developing skills that are valuable., some of which you don't see. It's not just about the kid singing Mary Had a Little Lamb. It's about what that does for the child afterwards. This is where you're in over your head.

I am not in over my head. You see, you have made my argument for me. Your teaching music increases their SOCIAL worth.

Quote:
Then perhaps you could explain why we spend most of our lives working for money, then buying stuff with that money.

Because some smart person thousands of years ago realized that he could live a better life by bartering food stuffs for luxuries. Essentials for the unessential. This creates an economy, and necessities become commodities (and are the root cause of wars etc). The use of money for trade is a relatively new concept which accelerates goods transfers, but isn't the core reason why we have an economy. You may spend most of your life earning money, but MOST of that time is spent engaging in social behaviors that have nothing to do with earning money to buy things as you put it.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #95 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Then perhaps you could explain why we spend most of our lives working for money, then buying stuff with that money.

Because neither Thomas Carlyle nor Karl Marx won their arguments.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #96 of 235
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Doubtful. The core skill set will likely not be involved in the eventual employment, nor for that matter further education. Music just isn't that important. (I am playing devil's advocate here, btw, I strongly value music education as I believe it makes a more rounded person capable of appreciating the cultural outputs of society as opposed to the economic ones, that you seem to favor).




I am not in over my head. You see, you have made my argument for me. Your teaching music increases their SOCIAL worth.

I know you're playing devil's advocate, and I'm glad you support music education. That said, you're still off base. The social skills learned (and mathematical, and language arts, etc) potentially benefit these children in the workplace. Practicing and mastering a musical instrument also requires focus, time management, skills in logic (practice techniques, taking a piece of music apart for practice, drilling sections, reassembling it), etc. These skills are all valued in the workplace. The issue here is that you're thinking about the more demonstrable skills that it appears the child is learning. Is playing trumpet itself going to help the kid when he grows up and becomes a stock broker? Probably not. Will he have skills developed as a result of playing that instrument that will help him? Yes. And on top of that, as you point out, he will be better off socially and culturally...but that is only one area of benefit.

Quote:

Because some smart person thousands of years ago realized that he could live a better life by bartering food stuffs for luxuries. Essentials for the unessential. This creates an economy, and necessities become commodities (and are the root cause of wars etc). The use of money for trade is a relatively new concept which accelerates goods transfers, but isn't the core reason why we have an economy. You may spend most of your life earning money, but MOST of that time is spent engaging in social behaviors that have nothing to do with earning money to buy things as you put it.

I actually agree with that for the most part. But it's really too academic a point...it doesn't apply to reality in the present day. In reality, money drives human behavior to a high degree. Almost any profession works this way. When you buy an item, you look for the best price. You're likely not going to pay twice as much because you like the sales person. If you're an athlete, you're going to go to the team that pays you most almost every time.

Granted, economics is not the only consideration. There are many others that are important. You won't take a job in Alaska most likely. You won't put up with a shithead boss. But for enough money, yeah, you might. The "proof in the pudding...", as it were. The best example is that we have a lot of people doing jobs they don't like. But they do them....for money.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #97 of 235
Thread Starter 
<bump!>

Clinton is now in a statistical dead heat (Iowa) with Obama and almost with Edwards. In fact, Obama LEADS Clinton in Iowa in several polls. In one, he's up by four...getting very close to being statistically significant. Her margin is down to 7 in NH as well.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...aucus-208.html
And now she's going negative:

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pb...09/-1/SPORTS01

http://hillaryattacks.barackobama.com/

Still not a meltdown...but the negative trend is continuing as it has been since the immigration question debacle.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #98 of 235
It seems she is in full melt down now. It was inevitable. She was a bad candidate. She had no real political challenge in running in NY. Her history is a disaster. Without her handlers she's lost.


Which is great because she would have had a hard time winning the general election.
post #99 of 235
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

It seems she is in full melt down now. It was inevitable. She was a bad candidate. She had no real political challenge in running in NY. Her history is a disaster. Without her handlers she's lost.


Which is great because she would have had a hard time winning the general election.

I don't think she is in full melt down exactly. She is losing steam though, and there are Dems apprehensive about her electability in the general. I still think she won't win unless we see an exceptionally weak Republican candidate or a serious third party alternative that Perot-ifies the electorate. Then she could win.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #100 of 235
You guys crack me up. A Clinton melting down. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #101 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Some see cultural salvation in terms of political organization...

Like Sweden, for example, and Denmark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

...some see it as coming from obedience to God.

Like the Taleban.

Hmm.
post #102 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You guys crack me up. A Clinton melting down. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

She's a Clinton by marriage. She wasn't born in the trailer Without her husband she's be a just another lawyer in Oak Park.

Unless she can turn it around she's a done deal.
post #103 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

She's a Clinton by marriage. She wasn't born in the trailer Without her husband she's be a just another lawyer in Oak Park.

Unless she can turn it around she's a done deal.

Dan Qualye is the quintessential example of how the wife is sometimes more than the husband in the limelight.

Not saying this of Bill, but he sure didn't marry a trophy wife.
post #104 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I don't think she is in full melt down exactly. She is losing steam though, and there are Dems apprehensive about her electability in the general. I still think she won't win unless we see an exceptionally weak Republican candidate or a serious third party alternative that Perot-ifies the electorate. Then she could win.

Ron Paul is getting enough funding that he's likely to run as an independent. There's no way he's getting the nom.
post #105 of 235
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Ron Paul is getting enough funding that he's likely to run as an independent. There's no way he's getting the nom.

He has flat out said he will not do that. Check the last debate.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #106 of 235
Thread Starter 
<bump>

Well, one must wonder if she really is melting down. She's down double digits in NH and has lost her national lead as well. Will she come back? I don't know.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #107 of 235
Melting down? Nah. I think that she, like Romney, is simply fizzling out as the front-runner. Doesn't this always happen?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #108 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Melting down? Nah. I think that she, like Romney, is simply fizzling out as the front-runner. Doesn't this always happen?

Eh. She went from tied with Obama two days ago to now behind by double digits. I'd say that's more than "fizzling out."
post #109 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

Eh. She went from tied with Obama two days ago to now behind by double digits. I'd say that's more than "fizzling out."

"double digits" means 10 points, by what I've been reading. She was ahead. Then she tied. Then she fell behind. Now she's falling more behind.

That's fizzling out.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #110 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

"double digits" means 10 points, by what I've been reading. She was ahead. Then she tied. Then she fell behind. Now she's falling more behind.

That's fizzling out.

And if it continues up to February, she's toast.
post #111 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

And if it continues up to February, she's toast.

If it continues until Wednesday, she's toast.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #112 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

"double digits" means 10 points, by what I've been reading. She was ahead. Then she tied. Then she fell behind. Now she's falling more behind.

That's fizzling out.

We'll today it was 12-13 points via a USA today poll. Obama is gaining three points everyday and Hilary is loosing some. That is a pretty radical change, statistically speaking.
post #113 of 235
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

We'll today it was 12-13 points via a USA today poll. Obama is gaining three points everyday and Hilary is loosing some. That is a pretty radical change, statistically speaking.

I think it's more than fizzling too. She was fizzling in IA. Now she's melting down. I don't think the same can be said of Romney. He is in fact fizzling, just as RG did earlier. Looks like McCain is going to win this one, so we'll still have no idea about the GOP nominee. It could be any one of the participants in the debate last night.

As an aside, I'll be really surprised if Obama gets the nomination. I never dreamed he'd get past the Clinton machine and his relative inexperience. My feeling is that he'd be a very tough candidate in the general.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #114 of 235
Break out the tissues...Hillary tears up on campaign trail.
post #115 of 235
Regardless who gets in office, there will be no honeymoon, we'll already be sick of them. If Hillary hadn't been so eager to take the media's free 2-years-out election coverage, things might have been different. Her TQ is catching up with her.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #116 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Break out the tissues...Hillary tears up on campaign trail.

Hey man, that was actually almost...touching....

Plus it was a really cool use of special effects. You know how much they had to pay LucasArts to make it appear Hillary is vulnerable and human?

"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 #117 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Hey man, that was actually almost...touching....

Plus it was a really cool use of special effects. You know how much they had to pay LucasArts to make it appear Hillary is vulnerable and human?

American Elections : Hillary and the Denial of Feminine Traits

Quote:
Hillary, like many women reaching up to the helm of political power, has resigned from her feminine qualities . She has failed to draw upon her womanhood, her sincere affections , her moral integrity, her altruism and above all her sincerity in this campaign. In this race, Hillary has denied her sublime feminine traits. Hillary has made the mistake in trying to send the message that she is man enough to be president of the United States. She should have claimed she is woman enough to be president.

This, coming from Iran’s first and former female vice president and an Anti-Ahmadinejad politician.

Wonder if Hillary read it...

Oh and Hillary, the crocodiles called...they want their tears back.
post #118 of 235
It's interesting how the wingnuts have dedicated so much to defeating Hillary because of their extreme fear of the Clintons. Obama (if he is nominated) will be a lot tougher for a Republican to beat. If he wins this week, the wingnut media machine will be launching quite an offensive.
traveling the globe in an envelope
Reply
traveling the globe in an envelope
Reply
post #119 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Stanley View Post

It's interesting how the wingnuts have dedicated so much to defeating Hillary because of their extreme fear of the Clintons. Obama (if he is nominated) will be a lot tougher for a Republican to beat. If he wins this week, the wingnut media machine will be launching quite an offensive.

Here's one of them wing-nuts asking Obama for a date. Those damn groupies.
post #120 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Here's one of them wing-nuts asking Obama for a date. Those damn groupies.

Next you're going to tell us he is Irish or something.

"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Hillary Melting Down?