Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[jeremyrh]

You have been harping on this aspect for a long time now. If it's a bad deal, walk away. Is it the case that Germany asks you to stay there, but then refuses to pay? Is it the case you want to be there? I'm sure the answer is not that clearcut, since it lies in post WW2 history. But you know, that was a long time ago now, maybe the whole thing needs a rethink.

If Germany wants to defend its borders, maybe that should be Germany's responsibility. Otherwise, in some sense what's going on is that the US government is treating its own military as some kind of profit-centre mercenary army that it rents out to other countries. If you're not getting paid enough for that service, that's on you. Shouldn't Trump have been the kind of guy who would have done something about that? I mean, what the hell was Hannity advising him on during those daily phone calls, TV make-up?

This brings up something else that I thought of. Does the US pay land rental on those German bases? I'm not saying they should pay retail, I would understand a sweetheart government to government deal, but I bet there are a lot of German real estate developers who might want that land to build condos, strip malls, bowling alleys and such. Couldn't those US soldiers do all work on the web back at home, free up the land for private commercial use, you know, create jobs and such. Could it be that the cheap land rental offsets the costs of military deployment there? Maybe it's not the case that Germany owes the US money for Nato defence, maybe the US needs to pay up some rent arrears. Which is it?

How much has the US paid the Germans for the help provided in their war in Afghanistan?

[faberryman]

The CDC is becoming politicized and will lose its authority and trust.

I thought that boat sailed a couple of days ago when the CDC said soap and water is good enough.

[Alan Klein]

If everything is hunky dory, why are you complaining about Germany only spending 2% on defense?

Germany is spending less than the 2% they promised to pay.  That forces America to make up the difference in US troops to protect their country.  Why is the US doing that?  They're the richest country in Europe but failed to meet their obligations and promises. Meanwhile, the money spent on our troops there can not be spent on America's social needs while Germany has all their great social programs paid for.  How is that fair to American taxpayers like you and me?

[Alan Klein]

I thought that boat sailed a couple of days ago when the CDC said soap and water is good enough.

A government health agency should not get into race politics.  Biden is twisting their arm to do it.  People will just ignore the CDC's pronouncements about disease figuring they're just another political megaphone.  The administration is undermining their authority which is bad enough to begin with.

[Alan Klein]

Packing the Supreme Court. The court moves left and right over time. Biden will get his chance to nominate liberal justices. Leave it at that.

Because of the way we've handled it in the last few decades, respect for the court has waned. If we pack it though, all respect will be lost. That's dangerous. If it's "packed", I could see a time very soon when their decisions will be ignored. Then what?

Will Biden ‘Pack’ the Supreme Court?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/09/us/politics/how-does-court-packing-work.html

[Robert Roaldi]

How much has the US paid the Germans for the help provided in their war in Afghanistan?

I hope you're not asking me specifically, I have no idea.

[Robert Roaldi]

The US government bailed out the Autoworkers Union in the 2008 crisis by supporting GM.  I think it was around one billion, chicken feed by today's standards.

Well it must have helped the shareholders a bit too. No?

Couldn't you look at it as the government giving those workers their taxes back? Or is it only rich people who need to have low taxes?

Frankly, the new giveaway of $86 billion for employee pensions might help me and my wife. I'm not sure, so maybe I shouldn't complain.  See how we all want free stuff?  Even me. 

What do you mean, give-a-way? You're always telling us how the government has no money, it's just money from taxpayers. So here they are giving it back, you should be happy.

[Robert Roaldi]

A government health agency should not get into race politics.  ...

My limited understanding is that the CDC has a wide remit when it comes to research (except they're not allowed to study the effects of guns, because you know).

What if they found, for example, that "systemic racism" led to there being less medical help available to some groups? Isn't that something the country should know about. How do you know if it's real or not if you don't study it?

Why are you trying to prevent certain kinds of research. What are you afraid of finding out?

[Robert Roaldi]

Packing the Supreme Court. The court moves left and right over time. Biden will get his chance to nominate liberal justices. Leave it at that.

Because of the way we've handled it in the last few decades, respect for the court has waned. If we pack it though, all respect will be lost. That's dangerous. If it's "packed", I could see a time very soon when their decisions will be ignored. Then what?

Will Biden ‘Pack’ the Supreme Court?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/09/us/politics/how-does-court-packing-work.html

I don't think you should freak out over every "what if" speculation in the fake media. You're just driving yourself nuts over things that won't happen.

[Alan Klein]

Well it must have helped the shareholders a bit too. No?

Couldn't you look at it as the government giving those workers their taxes back? Or is it only rich people who need to have low taxes?



What do you mean, give-a-way? You're always telling us how the government has no money, it's just money from taxpayers. So here they are giving it back, you should be happy.

Why should some black worker in Mississippi who's not in a union and has no pension, bailout with his taxes some rich white guy in Detroit who made three times as much in hourly wages?  Isn't that systemic racism?

The government doesn't give back money.  It's not theirs to begin with.  They take it from some and redistribute it to others, mostly those who use lobbyists who complain a lot in Washington.  It's all unconstitutional.  The constitution allows the government to pay for an army, a post office, etc. but not to pay to bailout unions and corporations.  Where's the Supreme Court when you really need them to stop this practice?

[Alan Klein]

My limited understanding is that the CDC has a wide remit when it comes to research (except they're not allowed to study the effects of guns, because you know).

What if they found, for example, that "systemic racism" led to there being less medical help available to some groups? Isn't that something the country should know about. How do you know if it's real or not if you don't study it?

Why are you trying to prevent certain kinds of research. What are you afraid of finding out?

Because it has nothing to do with the study of viruses.  It's all about race politics. Every American realizes that.  So all they're doing is showing they're involved in politics pushed by the Democrats and the Biden administration.  They'll lose respect at a time when they're most needed with COvid directions and research.  If they want to study these things, let another social agency handle it, not virologists.

[jeremyrh]

I hope you're not asking me specifically, I have no idea.

Haha no. I imagine that the answer is “zero”.

[Robert Roaldi]

Why should some black worker in Mississippi who's not in a union and has no pension, bailout with his taxes some rich white guy in Detroit who made three times as much in hourly wages?  Isn't that systemic racism?  ...

Why would that be systemic racism? Doesn't the same thing happen to some non-unionized white worker in Mississippi?

But a good question nonetheless. And why most countries have progressive tax systems, so people who earn less pay less percentage taxes.

So you object to the tax concessions that Trump gave to the 1%, then? Why shouldn't they pay their fair share, especially since they tend to benefit more from society's services, e.g., air traffic, law and order, tax deductions, tax sheltering of investment income (pay less tax than salaried income), etc.

[Robert Roaldi]

Because it has nothing to do with the study of viruses.  It's all about race politics. Every American realizes that.  So all they're doing is showing they're involved in politics pushed by the Democrats and the Biden administration.  They'll lose respect at a time when they're most needed with COvid directions and research.  If they want to study these things, let another social agency handle it, not virologists.

I'm not sure that the CDC only concerns itself with viruses. I believe that their purpose is wider than that, but I'm no expert so won't comment further. Maybe others know more.

But if they are studying that, as you stated, they must feel they have the right to do so. Are you sure they don't have that right or are you upset with the fact that they might?

[James Clark]

You really are a tool. 

First, with my assistants' story, I was being satirical directing it at progressives like you who insist that minorities would have a harder time then whites with Voter ID laws because somehow, even though you never explain how, minorities have a harder time getting and/or keeping IDs.  I was making fun of you and your views with this story.  You were the butt end of the joke, in case you were too dense to realize it. 

Second, why dont you prove me wrong James?  Why cant you start adding some bite with your bark?  Because up until now you have been just a whiner who has provided absolutely nothing in terms of proof to your statements on registering to vote.  Why dont you actually give me an example of a state that does not allow you to perform voter registration during driver license applications or renewals (for adults) and makes people go out of their way to register to vote. 

Please, provide us with proof, and more then just your feelings, because that is all you have given us so far on this.  Give me an example of a state where it is hard, or even just annoying, to register to vote.  Please.

Listen, dude.  After some self-reflection, I'm gonna take a step back and de-escalate.  I'm going to address one specific thing, and ask you to do the same, because there are probably a billion permutations of voter access, but you used this specific example, so let's run with that.

You say you were registered to vote when you got your DL.  Consider how you got to the DMV, and did you lose a day of work to do that?  If you did, did missing that work cause you to miss rent, or a meal for your kid, or a loan payment, or a credit card payment?  Did it mean that you couldn't pay for child care, so you missed *another* day of work, and how did that impact all of your other financial obligations? 

Maybe the answer to ALL of these questions is yes, and if so, I applaud you on your civic commitment, but regardless - should we really be asking people to make those choices in order to participate in society? I know you asked for a specific example of someone who has trouble registering, but considering the above questions, isn't it likely that ANYONE who's below the poverty line, for example, has to deal with those issues?

[faberryman]

Germany is spending less than the 2% they promised to pay.  That forces America to make up the difference in US troops to protect their country.  Why is the US doing that?

The US is not "forced" to make up the difference. If the US actually makes up the difference, which I don't know is true or false, it probably thinks it is advantageous for it to do so. You may agree or disagree.

[faberryman]

People will just ignore the CDC's pronouncements about disease figuring they're just another political megaphone.

Maybe they will, maybe they won't. I suspect that only a tiny fraction of Americans have ever visited the CDC website to begin with, so they are unlikely to go there to read about racism being a public health problem. Even if some people read it, I don't think it will change anyone's views on racism on way or the other, so I am not clutching my pearls about it. I am a little curious why you would buy that whole disinfectant thing hook, line, and sinker, and then not believe the CDC when they tell you racism is a public health problem. Was the soap and water thing the last straw for you?

[Alan Klein]

Why would that be systemic racism? Doesn't the same thing happen to some non-unionized white worker in Mississippi?

But a good question nonetheless. And why most countries have progressive tax systems, so people who earn less pay less percentage taxes.

So you object to the tax concessions that Trump gave to the 1%, then? Why shouldn't they pay their fair share, especially since they tend to benefit more from society's services, e.g., air traffic, law and order, tax deductions, tax sheltering of investment income (pay less tax than salaried income), etc.

I used non-union black workers in Mississippi because workers at an Amazon plant there with 85% black workers making $15 an hour minimum wage, is in the news today.  They just voted recently not to become unionized.  I thought I'd conflate both issues to make two points.

Regarding taxes, what is the amount the rich should pay to make it a "fair share".  We have a progressive tax system already.  We can debate what the amounts should be.  But the top 1% currently pay 38% of all taxes and the top 10% pay 70% of all taxes. The bottom 50% only pay 3%. 

What amounts are fair? 


Income Category   2017 AGI   Percent of All Income   Percent of Income Taxes Paid
Top 1%                  Over $515,371   21.0%                       38.5%
Top 5%                  Over $208,053   36.5%                       59.1%
Top 10%                  Over $145,135   47.7%                       70.1%
Top 25%                  Over $83,682   69.1%                       86.1%
Top 50%                  Over $41,740   88.8%                       96.9%
Bottom 50%          Below $41,740   11.3%                         3.1%

https://www.kiplinger.com/article/taxes/t054-c000-s001-how-you-rank-as-a-taxpayer.html

[faberryman]

What amounts are fair?

I would throw the whole tax code and regulations out and start over from scratch. Maybe look at a flat tax. Arguing about marginal rates is a waste of time and entirely disingenuous.

[Alan Klein]

Maybe they will, maybe they won't. I suspect that only a tiny fraction of Americans have ever visited the CDC website to begin with, so they are unlikely to go there to read about racism being a public health problem. Even if some people read it, I don't think it will change anyone's views on racism on way or the other, so I am not clutching my pearls about it. I am a little curious why you would buy that whole disinfectant thing hook, line, and sinker, and then not believe the CDC when they tell you racism is a public health problem. Was the soap and water thing the last straw for you?

Because it's obviously a political position that Biden told them to take.  It's all part of Democrats and the administration using the race card to justify HR1 voting law changes and pass other liberal laws. By getting the CDC involved, they'll claim that racism is systemic.  The Democrats will justify their social policies based on "science".   Meanwhile, CDC credibility on real virus issues will soon be in the toilet.