Impeaching Donald Trump

[Rob C]

1.  There is a conservative radio host in the USA named Dennis Prager who is found of saying, I don't need agreement, I just need clarity.  You provided some nice clarity, until you got to talking about black kids in ghettos.  Why not just people in ghettos?  Lets keep skin color out of it, or I will need to start siting psychological studies on the effect of single parent households, including the recent landmark study that showed even if you are raised in a dual parent household but in a neighborhood with a majority of single parent households, you still will not escape the effects.  Then we will need to start talking about cross racial statistics on the rate of single family households and the history in the rates of decline, pointing out that in fact one particular racial group had higher rates of dual parent households prior to the 1960s but now has the highest rate in single parent households.  Then that leads to what happened in the 60s that encouraged this devolution. 

2.  It becomes a whole can worms. 

3. But anyway, getting back to your other points.  It is not nice to see people die on the streets from easily curable diseases, but that is not what I see.  As a matter of fact, I dont see much of anyone living or dying on the street.  Philadelphia does not have a big homeless problem.  I see the occasional vagabond staking out a spot on Callowhill Street, under 676, but we have a lot of privately operated shelters in the city.  I've actually been hire to photograph a couple.  On top of that, it is illegal to live on the streets in Philly, which helps officers to get these people to except help and go to the shelters.  Now in LA or San Fran, I hear a lot of discouraging news.  But it appears to be brought on by giving people too much carrot and not using enough stick.  Of course, using too much stick and not enough carrot has it's problems, which is why I support private shelters. 

4.  On defense, I agree we spend way too much on defense.  If I was in charge, we would be a near isolationist country.  I would have us pull out of NATO and the middle east, and mostly anywhere else.  Perhaps provide help to Israel when needed, but they bested three countries at once in the 1967 War and appear to be able to handle themselves, and a few other choice allies. 

Insofar as the prison debate, as I alluded to above, I believe the route cause to much of the increase in the prison rate to be related to the increase in single parent households along with the devolution of family structure and basic societal structures, like church.  (Note, I am an atheist and cant stand the hocus pocus of any religion, so it is quite difficult for me to side with the conservative right on this.  I do believe the increase in non-secularism is a contributing factor, even though I have no plans of joining any churches.)  So, by the time they reach adulthood, it is kind of baked into the cake.  Now I am not an Inspector Javert here and feel redemption is beyond possibility,

5.  but I do insist on holding adults responsible for there actions and expect them to pay for their sins.  (I am also for the death penally in case you are wondering.)  Money and time would be better spent on trying to instill basic societal structures, like promoting marriage and raising kids in in two parent households.  However, many elites promote the idea that marrage does not need to be for everyone and two parent households are not necessarily needed, even though most (83%) reap the financial benefits of being married.

1.  Perhaps "siting" some psychological studies could liven the debate, somewhat. Claiming that two-parent or one-parent families do cross-pollinate trouble is a no brainer: bad apples always rot more good apples than good apples turn rotten ones good. Geez!

What happened in the sixties? Oh, did you mean free love? It was myth: Suzi Quatro's mum says "somebody always pays!" The concept of sleeping around is as old as Adam and Eve, and if anyone seriously believes it was truly a phenomenon of the 60s, they need either to get a life or to speak with the ancestors after getting them a little tight. If there was a difference it was in the way hypocrisy was or was not applied to the same unavoidable human behaviour. Bible Belt America may have had a little more of it than elsewhere. The hypocricy, I mean. Wait, isn't the Mormon ethic big in your country?

2. Worms are canned simply for the excitement and pleasure of the opening of the cans. Just like beer.

3. From what I hear on American Internet radio, Philly has always had a tough reputation. Being illegal to live on the street is as much a solution to the problem as saying that it is illegal to sell drugs is the solution to selling drugs.

4.  True isolationism would mean that you'd have to consume all your own products at home; you'd be starved of foreign investment and have no place to sell your weapons and commercial aircraft (pace, 737 Max) other than in your own High Street, shopping malls and airshows. Out of NATO means out of your early-warning radar systems which, incidentally, whilst they may give your POTUS a few more minutes to save his ass, do absolutely nothing for the head honchos of Europe. In fairness, warning does nothing for the rest of the citizens anywhere: they will still fry in a flash or slowly rot with cancer, burns and deformities.

Israel will always receive US help. Look at the structure of American power and wealth, through banking to the art world, or are they the same thing twice?

5.  Indeed, but that requires the perfect world with perfect heroes and rôle models right to the top of your political and religious trees. As with us, your country stands not a chance. It also requires castration at birth, which, actually, may resolve everything.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

In America’s most “socialist” state, California, showing us what to expect if the disease (of socialism) spreads to the whole US:

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/man-caught-pooping-in-aisle-of-san-francisco-safeway/

[JoeKitchen]

In America’s most “socialist” state, California, showing us what to expect if the disease (of socialism) spreads to the whole US:

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/man-caught-pooping-in-aisle-of-san-francisco-safeway/

Look on the bright, at least he made it to the isle with toilet paper.  There's always a bright side. 

In all seriousness, I just cant understand how this is going on.  How are the  politicians in CA getting re-elected?  I mean, left vs right, capitalism vs. socialism, how much regulation to have, these are all abstract arguments.  But poop and piss in the street, that's the real deal; you can see that. 

And I really cant understand the 9th Circuit Court's ruling on this.  It is totally absurd.

There's a pandemic just waiting to break out in CA. 

[JoeKitchen]

Rob, BTW, not everything in teh 60s was about sex, drugs and rock and roll.  Let's get our mind out of the gutter.   

I was alluding to certain social programs put in place in the USA. 

[BernardLanguillier]

In America’s most “socialist” state, California, showing us what to expect if the disease (of socialism) spreads to the whole US:

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/man-caught-pooping-in-aisle-of-san-francisco-safeway/

You’ve got to wonder how those crazy Californian lefties generate twice as much economic power as the second closest state in the union...

Cheers,
Bernard

[JoeKitchen]

You’ve got to wonder how those crazy Californian lefties generate twice as much economic power as the second closest state in the union...

Cheers,
Bernard

Give it time; it was pretty recently that CA was a republican run state.  As Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is great until you run out of other people's money. 

Plus, CA has seen 5 million residents move in the last decade with a net loss of 1 million.  A big part of it are quality of life issues, such as this.  There's only so much crap you take.   

[BernardLanguillier]

Give it time; it was pretty recently that CA was a republican run state.  As Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is great until you run out of other people's money. 

Plus, CA has seen 5 million residents move in the last decade with a net loss of 1 million.  A big part of it are quality of life issues, such as this.  There's only so much crap you take.   

Yes, but that has nothing to do with it being a socialist state, it has everything to do with the increase of the cost of living thanks to the inflation of salaries from the GAFA and co.

Btw Schwarzy was the worst leftie among the Republicans!

Cheers,
Bernard

[kers]

As Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is great until you run out of other people's money. 

America et al already reached that bottom... many times ...and it was not socialism that caused it...
There is a cure that is widely used : start the presses!

All the candidate presidents say- we have to do something about it! ; Once in power they say:  make them run harder!

[PeterAit]

People talk about "wealth redistribution." Well, you want to know what is the oldest and most successful wealth redistribution system ever devised? The corporation, which takes wealth created by workers and redistributes part of it to owners and executives. Now that's the way corporations are supposed to work, and is the foundation of pretty much every economy. But it's telling that conservatives think it's fine and dandy when wealth is redistributed to them (dividends, increased stock prices) but get all bothered when wealth is distributed away from them (taxes for food stamps and welfare).

[Rob C]

Rob, BTW, not everything in teh 60s was about sex, drugs and rock and roll.  Let's get our mind out of the gutter.   

I was alluding to certain social programs put in place in the USA.

Your sixties must have come wrapped in cotton wool. I was an avid reader of Playboy in that era - increased my word power far more than did the Reader's Digest a decade earlier, without, unlike the latter, ever attempting to tell me such was part of its remit!

" not everything in teh 60s was about sex, drugs and rock and roll.  Let's get our mind out of the gutter."

Well, what can I say? Different strokes for different folks? Personally speaking, I never did have sex in the gutter - that I can recall; but do tell us more about such an experience and what some of us may have missed out on!

;-)  ;-.)  That's sex with a girl with a famous mole, by the way.

Rob

[RSL]

Thanks for giving me credit for three, even though you asked us for one.

So, why was the Apollo program not a legitimate function of government?  It was certainly successful.

And why are libraries not legitimate?  They, too seem very successful.


 
But that basically disables ALL forms of taxation.  How do you pay for those three items that you do think qualify?

Hello, Peter,

I was replying to your unsupported assertions with an unsupported assertion. If you’d like to discuss it, I’d be happy to do so.

First, I probably could be convinced that at the time the Apollo program was a legitimate expenditure of taxpayer money -- if it could be connected convincingly to the cold war. After the Russians beat us into space we were demonstrating that we were way ahead of them in that playing field. We certainly were, but I’m not sure we needed to demonstrate it with a massive expenditure of taxpayer money. In any case, a lot of useful stuff came out of the Apollo program. One thing not so useful was NASA. It’s less and less useful, but it’s another government program, marginally useful at best, funded by taxpayers, that refuses to die; refuses even to be put into mothballs.

What’s the difference between a public library and an opera? Why, exactly, should taxpayers be forced to support a library? Don’t get me wrong, I love libraries and before the web matured I used to spend a lot of time in libraries. But the question has to do with forcing people who don’t use libraries to support them with their hard-earned money. Unfortunately, I see cases where taxpayer money is being used nowadays to support operas. The NEA is an abomination when you consider that Joe, the guy who works in the Chrysler press plant, and will never go to the opera, is having his pocket picked by his government to support the opera.

I’ll leave it at that. We can discuss your “entire families going bankrupt because someone got sick” if you want to, but it’s a complicated subject that leads to people not needing to work as long as taxpayers are being forced to provide them with everything they need.

The bottom line is the question of whether or not it’s moral to force people to give up their earnings for a “program” YOU think is a good idea. It leads to the idea of the government “paying” for programs, and illusions like the idea of “government money,” which you can get by enrolling in one of those programs. There’s no such thing as government money. It  all comes from you and me and the rest of the taxpayers.

And no, it doesn’t “disable all forms of taxation” as legitimate. A society needs the other three things in order to survive as a society. Without a military the society will be invaded. Without police forces the society will degenerate into a shambles. You can see the beginnings of that one in New York, Chicago, LA, San Francisco... And without a fire department you’re dependent on your garden hose.

[RSL]

People talk about "wealth redistribution." Well, you want to know what is the oldest and most successful wealth redistribution system ever devised? The corporation, which takes wealth created by workers and redistributes part of it to owners and executives. Now that's the way corporations are supposed to work, and is the foundation of pretty much every economy. But it's telling that conservatives think it's fine and dandy when wealth is redistributed to them (dividends, increased stock prices) but get all bothered when wealth is distributed away from them (taxes for food stamps and welfare).

ROTFL!!!! I'd like to pass this one up, but I just can't. Peter, please describe for us exactly what you think a corporation is.

[Alan Klein]

That would be an example of language complexity, Bernard 

You see, “nobody”  is known as a hyperbole, a favorite of Trump, so no wonder you don’t get it

I guess your head would explode upon encountering Yogi Berra: “Nobody comes here anymore. It is too crowded.”

Yes that's what I meant.   The same nobody's who don't go there anymore are the same nobody's who also don't want nuclear. 😂

[Alan Klein]

People talk about "wealth redistribution." Well, you want to know what is the oldest and most successful wealth redistribution system ever devised? The corporation, which takes wealth created by workers and redistributes part of it to owners and executives. Now that's the way corporations are supposed to work, and is the foundation of pretty much every economy. But it's telling that conservatives think it's fine and dandy when wealth is redistributed to them (dividends, increased stock prices) but get all bothered when wealth is distributed away from them (taxes for food stamps and welfare).

My wife agrees with you.  She believes in wealth redistribution and socialism too. She always tells me what's hers is hers and what's mine is hers as well.

[Alan Klein]

Yes, but that has nothing to do with it being a socialist state, it has everything to do with the increase of the cost of living thanks to the inflation of salaries from the GAFA and co.

Btw Schwarzy was the worst leftie among the Republicans!

Cheers,
Bernard

My wife and I just spent 9 days in California.   5 in San Diego and now we're in Los Angeles.   Prices are out of sight.   I don't know how people can afford to live here and I'm from NYC not exactly a cheap area.   Gasoline is 50% higher.  Average homes are over a million.   Restaurants 40% higher.   It's nuts!  Well,  if you could afford them.

Don't know who Schwarzy and GAFA are.   But if they're causing the cost increases and I was a Californian,  I'd shoot them or move to Texas.

[Peter McLennan]

Hello, Peter,

First, I probably could be convinced that at the time the Apollo program was a legitimate expenditure of taxpayer money -- if it could be connected convincingly to the cold war.

First, thanks for your detailed response.  A substantially more useful contribution to the discussion than three smilie faces.

That the Apollo Program was a response to Russian space sucesses is a matter of historical fact.  The same goes for NASA's success.  Have you never seen an image of the moons of Saturn and felt a little twinge of awe?  Or pride?

What’s the difference between a public library and an opera?

Any operas I've attended required you to purchase a ticket in order to attend.  This is not true for a library.  Thus, opera is at least partially supported by free enterprise. (something I support, BTW.  The success of free-enterprise SpaceEx is notable.)

Why, exactly, should taxpayers be forced to support a library?

Because if they don't, hardly anybody will.  Can you imagine today's publishing industry supporting the idea of libraries?  Or authors thinking libraries were a good idea?

Absent "enforced" (your words, not mine) public support, libraries would never exist.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I love libraries and before the web matured I used to spend a lot of time in libraries.

Thus rendering inexplicable your lack of support for funding them.

Unfortunately, I see cases where taxpayer money is being used nowadays to support operas. The NEA is an abomination when you consider that Joe, the guy who works in the Chrysler press plant, and will never go to the opera, is having his pocket picked by his government to support the opera.

FWIW, I'm not an opera fan.  I do think, however that the total dollar figure "picked from the pockets" of the boys in the Chrysler plant to support opera is vanishingly small.

We can discuss your “entire families going bankrupt because someone got sick” if you want to, but it’s a complicated subject that leads to people not needing to work as long as taxpayers are being forced to provide them with everything they need.

Another vanishingly small percentage, yet one frequently cited by the right. In the Socialist Hell that is Canada, there are very very few who refuse to work, yet are treated "for free."  And no families go bankrupt because somebody got sick.  It's just a better, more efficient, more fiscally responsible, more caring idea to look after each other, healthwise. Most western democracies realize this.

The bottom line is the question of whether or not it’s moral to force people to give up their earnings for a “program” YOU think is a good idea.

Actually, it's usually programs that are supported by the voters.  We've just easily identified five.  There lots more.

Can you imagine a free-enterprise highway system?  Ain't gonna work.  We've both experienced the highway systems in areas where supportive taxes are low.  I think they're actually corruptly financed by the shock absorber industry. 

There’s no such thing as government money. It  all comes from you and me and the rest of the taxpayers.

Actually, I think we all know this. We don't need this particular bell rung over and over and over.

And no, it doesn’t “disable all forms of taxation” as legitimate. A society needs the other three things in order to survive as a society. Without a military the society will be invaded. Without police forces the society will degenerate into a shambles. You can see the beginnings of that one in New York, Chicago, LA, San Francisco... And without a fire department you’re dependent on your garden hose.

My position is that there are far more than just "three things" that society needs in order to survive that are supported by taxes   It's just that the anti-tax-at-all-costs faction refuse to see them.

Right-side-of-the-spectrum Alberta, for instance, recently fired a few thousand nurses and cut many more essential services in order to balance their provincial budget.  Other than the outlier-case of Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories) Alberta is the only province which refuses to invoke a sales tax.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

First, thanks for your detailed response.  A substantially more useful contribution to the discussion than three smilie faces...

Did you miss my response #2178?

[RSL]

That the Apollo Program was a response to Russian space sucesses is a matter of historical fact.  The same goes for NASA's success.  Have you never seen an image of the moons of Saturn and felt a little twinge of awe?  Or pride?

Peter, I'll be 90 in March. I was there when all this was going on. Of course there was pride in our accomplishments. So what does that have to do with taxpayers being forced to support something they don't want to support?

Any operas I've attended required you to purchase a ticket in order to attend.  This is not true for a library.  Thus, opera is at least partially supported by free enterprise. (something I support, BTW.  The success of free-enterprise SpaceEx is notable.)

Having to do with libraries being supported with taxes:

Because if they don't, hardly anybody will.  Can you imagine today's publishing industry supporting the idea of libraries?  Or authors thinking libraries were a good idea?

Absent "enforced" (your words, not mine) public support, libraries would never exist.
 
Thus rendering inexplicable your lack of support for funding them.

FWIW, I'm not an opera fan.  I do think, however that the total dollar figure "picked from the pockets" of the boys in the Chrysler plant to support opera is vanishingly small.

Ah ha! "Vanishingly small" eh? Yep. Look at the tax structure in New York or California. There's "vanishingly small" tax piled on top of "vanishingly small" tax until you're ready to get out of town and head for some place where the taxes really are "vanishingly small." Unfortunately, nowadays there's no such place.

Another vanishingly small percentage, yet one frequently cited by the right. In the Socialist Hell that is Canada, there are very very few who refuse to work, yet are treated "for free."  And no families go bankrupt because somebody got sick.  It's just a better, more efficient, more fiscally responsible, more caring idea to look after each other, healthwise. Most western democracies realize this.

Sure, Peter. First, I lived in Beausejour, Manitoba for a couple years. I was a controller at a highline radar site, so as an American I didn't have to depend on Canada's wonderful "free" medical care. But I've spent winters in Florida for many years now. Canadians come down here so they can go to the doctor and not have to wait months and months for what they need. In the U.S. you can walk in to a clinic and get a cat scan within the hour. How long does it take in Canada?

Actually, it's usually programs that are supported by the voters.  We've just easily identified five.  There lots more.

Sure. The guillotine was supported by the "voters" in France during the revolution. So what? That doesn't make it right.

Can you imagine a free-enterprise highway system?  Ain't gonna work.  We've both experienced the highway systems in areas where supportive taxes are low.  I think they're actually corruptly financed by the shock absorber industry. 
Actually, I think we all know this. We don't need this particular bell rung over and over and over.

My position is that there are far more than just "three things" that society needs in order to survive that are supported by taxes   It's just that the anti-tax-at-all-costs faction refuse to see them.

Absolutely. Highways are an appropriate use of tax money. So are water systems. So are sewers. There are a few things like that absolutely necessary for a community to exist. But neither libraries nor opera (which, by the way, I love -- at least the music) nor any kind of art are essential for a community to exist. Let the library lovers and the opera lovers support their loves, but don't force those who aren't interested -- ultimately at the point of a gun -- to support those things.

Right-side-of-the-spectrum Alberta, for instance, recently fired a few thousand nurses and cut many more essential services in order to balance their provincial budget.  Other than the outlier-case of Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories) Alberta is the only province which refuses to invoke a sales tax.

As Maggie Thatcher said, "Eventually you run out of other people's money."

[Rob C]

What I would say, though, is that when we used to drive through Fance, after the initial buzz of finding nice little places on minor roads to stop for the night and eat, we did use the motorways more and more. AFAIK, these were privately built - there may have been govt. help, I simply don't know how they were funded - but you had to pay. They were always in excellent condition, low traffic volume (but we avoided peak holiday seasons) and hitting the UK versions when we got off the ferry was an eye-opening experience: free, but OMG, what a mess! I think a stretch of private motorway (toll) has now been built to help keep traffic moving on a part of the free motorway, but I don't know how willing the Brits are to pay if they can suffer and get it free. After all, only the Brits here at the distant end of Mallorca would do a 120 klicks round trip to Palma to save a few pesetas on a case of wine at Continente, one of the first huge superstores on the island. Some things just don't compute.

:-)

[RSL]

Good point, Rob. Down here in Florida, the turnpike, that runs the length of the state is, of course, a toll road. It's always in top shape. If you're a resident you deposit money with the turnpike authority and stick a transponder on your windshield. With that done you never have to stop at a toll booth to pay. It's a great setup, and makes a lot more sense than "freeways," which, in spite of the name aren't free. They're paid for by the taxpayers.