Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I'm willfully ignoring it because he has me pigeonholed as some herpaderp right wing loony.

I dont oppose all entitelment programs, I understand that there are people that need help.

I wasn't talking about buffett's entire life or his politics, just the "i'm giving away everything after I die" statement.

I do think there are needs for business regulation, just not strangulating amounts of it.

I do think there should be taxes on business, just not strangulating amounts of it.

The only thing he came even close to getting right about me was about how I don't want my government to spend money on other countries, but that's because 1) we don't have any money and 2) we have people starving here.


No it's ok, just lump me in with everyone else. That prejudice is very progressive minded and liberal thinking of you.

The tale of the widow's mite comes to mind: 21 And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury, 2 and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites. 3 So He said, “Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all; 4 for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God,[a] but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had.” Is he a good guy for tossing cash at worthy causes? No doubt, but I seem to recall someone (probably Aestu) saying that rich people only make these donations to buy goodwill. I don't believe that, but it's funny to watch how the attitude changes when the rich guy in question agrees with some people's political views.

I've never heard the term "social justice" used to mean anything other than ignoring actual justice to do things that certain people think are a good idea. In fact, I think it's funny that there are so many people who use the idiotic phrase that wouldn't be happy with Buffett or anyone else making a voluntary donation because they believe those people shouldn't really be given a choice about whether or not give in the first place. The kind of people who think people who produce the kind of income Buffett does should only be allowed to keep a small fraction it, because "nobody needs that much money." It's a phrase for the sort of short-sighted half-wits that think that everyone needs to be exactly the same, and the only way to make that happen is to make everyone equally poor and miserable.

I don't entirely oppose entitlement spending, but I do think we spend too much on entitlements (among other things). I think most of the entitlement programs are mismanaged, and in a lot of cases don't help the people they should really be helping. I don't think there is enough "hand up" in these programs, the kind of steps that would eventually lead to the beneficiaries of these programs being able to support themselves adequately without aid, and because of that these programs make those beneficiaries dependent on those programs. I don't think that should be our goal. It's not good for the people we're trying to help, and it's not good for society in general.

I'm not calling all of Buffett's charitable efforts "bunk," I'm simply saying that it's not really that impressive to leave your fortune to anyone/thing after you've died and can no longer enjoy the benefits of it, especially when your estate has already enriched the people to whom most people would leave their wealth. I don't know anyone who wants Buffett, or anyone else for that matter, to be "unregulated," but that is the charge that is usually leveled when anyone criticizes regulations that are pointless, counter-productive, excessive, or otherwise harmful/unnecessary. I think a big part of the problem is that some people think we're not supposed to judge those regulations on their results, but on the basis of the intentions behind those regulations, especially when they're being passed in the name of meaningless phrases like "social justice."

But hey, it's easier to just think people who disagree with you and your "social justice" are evil "double-thinking drones" than to have a conversation about any one of these subjects on the merits of what either side is trying to do and/or the things they oppose.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

It's perfectly valid to do so.

You talk about "strangling regulation" as if it's a real concern because you've been brainwashed by the media endlessly repeating that phrase. It isn't. If it is, then how and where? Can you give examples?

Taxes on business, same thing. You think excessive taxation of business is a real concern. Why? Do you have an empirical basis to believe that excessive taxation is a serious concern in the here and now or in any political vision currently being advanced?

"Progressive minded" and "liberal". Those have a negative connotation to you because - again - you've been brainwashed by the media. If not, then can you articulate what those things mean and why you view them negatively? Can you demonstrate empirical evidence of those ideologies not working? And if so, then why do they seem to work at least somewhat better in the entire rest of the Western world?

The whole stupid gun argument. You made a bunch of claims about how guns prevent more violent crime than they cause and how banning guns wouldn't keep them out of the hands of crooks. Then statistics were linked that completely destroyed all those claims. You linked anecdotes and more claims that were revealed to be total lies. So do you believe what you do because it's what the evidence supports, or maybe you believe what you do because only one country in the world has a media that makes this insanity sound rational?

Which is the more logical conclusion? Should we believe you arrived at your conclusions independently, or that there's probably some causation to the correlation between what you believe and the media koolaid?

If it's the latter, then why shouldn't we lump you in with all such people?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Give me a break. God is dead, and has been dead for a long time now.



It absolutely does. You're trying to make the "political views" part sound arbitrary. The difference is the difference between a world view based on selfishness and a world view based on responsibility.



You're damn fucking right it shouldn't be a matter of choice. Making it a matter of choice puts generous people at a disadvantage against selfish people.

You might as well argue the draft should be optional for the same reason. You know why it wasn't? Because the irresponsible should not be free to be irresponsible. Everyone has an obligation to contribute whether they want to or not.



That's a strawman. No one has said "a small fraction" or anything like that. You believe this because you are brainwashed. If it's not because you're brainwashed, then why do you believe this?



Why do you think we spend too much, if we spend less relative to our cost of living than any other country in the Western world? What sort of entitlements are you even talking about? Free medical care? Free housing? Free water and power? Free education?

Again, it's an irrational view, at odds with factual reality, that is purely the product of brainwashing.


Dagery already established this is both false and a strawman.



Regulation isn't responsible for our social problems. Other countries have far more and are not suffering our problems. So why do you believe this if it isn't true? Again: media brainwashing at work.

If you would claim otherwise, again: what regulations are you talking about, and how are they causally responsible for our economic problems?



This is a false symmetry. Your factually wrong beliefs don't become somehow more valid because they oppose positions that are factually correct. Just because libertarians are hypocrites doesn't mean that those they oppose are.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

I think one big problem our society faces is the inability to distinguish opposing entitlement programs and restructuring them to make them more effective.

It prevents viable solutions from being implemented because the extreme right mistakenly believes slashing entitlements is the answer and the extreme left views any criticism of obvious flaws in the current model as a threat.

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming

Warren Buffet has given away more money in his lifetime (ie: while still alive) than the entirety of Bleeding Hollow combined will make over the course of their lives I would wager. By saying he's giving everything after he dies, you cheapen his charitable acts and also misrepresent what other posters are saying, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming

Aurora Colorado Shootings ----> Warren Buffet.


FUBU, ladies and gentlemen.

I don't think this is entirely accurate.

Most people who identify as liberal/progressive/whatever would be in favor of big infrastructure projects, nationalized utilities and healthcare, and fully funding RnD and education. But the right opposes all those things tooth and nail, so what we get instead, is Social Security.

So let's be clear - when we're talking about "entitlement programs", what we are really talking about, is Social Security.

Social Security is a non-answer to America's problems that causally exists because of the right. The right accepts it, because they don't have any better ideas, but also because if it didn't exist we'd be back in the days of food riots and civil warfare, and life would be unlivable.

Disingenuous libertarians like Ron Paul try to invoke racism and blame black people, others, like Romney, blithely blame sheer laziness. But the reality is, doles as a shill, a non-answer to social problems, have been a constant in many times and places. Always as a tool of the right, as a way of copping out of asking hard questions and committing to a more fundamental restructuring of society.

And that is why liberals are not to blame for "entitlements" - the right is.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Guess we should go back to talking about that evil, right-wing 'fair tax' that democrats hate, since there is a sizable percentage of Americans that have no income tax burden and, in many cases, receive more in entitlements than are paid for.


I see it differently. I see the 'racists' as being the democratic party and the progressive movement since they're the ones who buy votes of the minority with entitlements and they constantly champion programs which give minorities an advantage. Progressives, Liberals and Democrats see minorities as inferior and incapable of playing on the same court with white people, so things like Affirmative Action and other social programs are set in place to 'level the playing field.' Because of these issues, the aforementioned political groups are doing nothing more than enslaving minorities because they're making it harder for minorities to provide for, and better, themselves. Really, the best way to make someone your slave is to remove their capability to provide for themselves and be dependent on another.

But I'm the racist.

This thread is way off topic, and it's all Obama's fault.

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming

Is it so wrong?

These are the times we live in. If our problems were simple, they'd already have been solved. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I don't think you can take any one problem with this country and consider it apart from the rest of the ball of yarn.

I definitely believe that the grave fault in "the American Dream" are at work on both sides of that duality and run through every element of social and political discourse. FUBU just spirals closer to the bone.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

What do you mean you think that minorities can make it on their own without us helping them?

What are you, racist?

There is nothing "fair" about a flat tax. Flat taxes are regressive.

You're trying to say something downright crazy and make it sound reasonable, that it's somehow unfair that some people get more back in "entitlements" than their taxes pay for. What, you think taxation and benefits from spending should be 1:1? Everyone in the military or on social security receives more entitlements than their taxes pay for. Probably most corporations receive more entitlements than their taxes pay for. Even in the best of all worlds, tax and spend isn't going to be 1:1 because that's just not how reality works.

So what this really boils down to is, "I REFUSE to give ANYTHING back to my country! If I have to give my country a DIME of my money or a MINUTE of my time, I DEMAND that same amount back!" It's a selfish and unpatriotic mentality. That simple.

You have no place to talk here since every dollar you have and every piece of property you own was paid for through entitlement both through the Guard as well as through a job that would completely not exist without our system of entitlements. The fact you get your dough from the DOD instead of the SSA makes no difference; either way you get a check each month for providing nothing of value to your community.

As I've said before, American political views are a mirror of personal and social issues, not actual facts. No one really believes in this flat tax or libertarian crap based on cold hard facts. People believe in it for spiteful and selfish reasons, as a pathetic effort to make themselves out as proud and independent loners, instead of wayward members of a dysfunctional community.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

True. The American Dream is a funny thing too. I think it does allow some people to achieve more than they would have otherwise. You can't tell me that the American Dream didn't drive (and continues to drive) immigration to this country. At the same time, it allows those being stepped on to say "thank you sir may I have another!?"

It's like poor conservatives living in the backwoods of America. They love Mitt Romney, despite the fact that he has enough money to have them killed many times over, he pays a laughable % of his income in taxes compared to what they pay, and he and his party are killing job growth. Yet these poor hicks just keep saying "DAT DAYUM OBAMA IS RUININ DA COUNTRY"

They are allowing the rich to walk on them, in part because of the American Dream.

Strange times indeed.

he and his party are killing job growth just like obama and his party are killing job growth.

blaming one side for how many/how severe problems we have is foolish and shortsighted.