11

New Study Finds Wimpy Guys More Likely To Be Socialists

Posted by  $  allosaur 4 months ago to News
111 comments | Share | Flag

Reading what's in the link, I immediately thought of my lib brother. I have four brothers. The only lib is the second wimpiest.
I'm pretty sure the wimpiest, who washed out as an Air Force recruit, is still a conservative.
At family reunions we don't discuss politics because of the lib.
My most conservative of brothers is not a wimp at all and likes to talk about the lib behind his back.
So far none of my brothers know I'm here in The Gulch. Or at least~I don't think so.
SOURCE URL: http://www.mrctv.org/blog/new-study-finds-wimpier-guys-are-more-likely-be-socialists?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTTJObU5Ea3pZamMxTUdZMiIsInQiOiJmZEhlVDBKdlZuU01wWUV6MHpHY2FVVWJkNE1RallxM1hmYkxybzJET1B4VUVRejA5aDM5TkdwVTBqcFQxQXc1Yno3T3Y4YTRicUxrWkZuR0NqRmRKVHBMeXpcL1BHcTZCZ1RLNEwxZ3N1RWJISDBCa3hKYklvaTVIMFJ4WWpNaVcifQ%3D%3D


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 12
    Posted by  $  Suzanne43 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    When I first heard about this study, I did laugh, but then there might be something to it. The few Liberal men that I know are really a bunch of wimps. Then there is the newly elected congressman from Montana and that snowflake reporter. Maybe the congressman shouldn't have beaten up the snowflake, but I did have to smirk. He did what a lot of us would like to do. So, give me the Mitch Rapp type any day.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 4 weeks ago
      Never been there, but Montana sounds like a state that a rugged quick-fisted no nonsense heroic kinda character would come from.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by NealS 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        I recall once in Montana a long time ago, some felon (I believe his sentence was involving a child) was being released from prison. The public was not too fond of the release. Somehow the news reported the release and then gave day, of release, the specific time, and even which gate he was being released from. Then the authorities decided it wasn't in anyone's best interest and the release was stopped. Talk about political correctness, this was one of the good examples. Montana is a beautiful state, hopefully the Hollywood liberals that are moving there don't totally destroy it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by NealS 3 months, 3 weeks ago
      I was wondering if Mitch Rapp was just trying to impress voters to get the vote the way Trump did, try something that everyone has actually thought about, would like to do, not politically correct, and totally out of the ordinary. It seems to have worked for him. Now the republicans will support him and the democrats will want him incarcerated without any kind of trial. Today we don't even have to listen to the news, we already know exactly how each party will respond to every situation, period. It makes for a dangerous world for us (the United States), that party thing, especially today when the democrats have control of educating our youth. Too many of our youth are being brainwashed. I'm thinking about protesting the support of our higher education from my tax dollars.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Kittyhawk 3 months, 4 weeks ago
      I'm not sure why you say the reporter from the Montana situation was a "snowflake." Perhaps you have information I'm not privy to? From the recording, it sounds like he was just doing his job (which includes being somewhat persistent in trying to get a quote) and the politician responded with irrational anger and a physical attack. http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/24/rep...

      The linked article only provides audio of the altercation, while video would have provided more details. The politician's handlers have tried to justify the attack by claiming the reporter was asked to lower the recorder and leave, but that is not in the audio. The handlers also claim that the politician grabbed for the reporter's phone (which is an admission of assault, I believe), which made the reporter grab the politician's wrist and cause them both to fall. From the audio, this attempted justification does not ring true to me. I hear the politician acting out of control, shouting and angry in response to a reporter doing what reporters do. If he can't handle being questioned without erupting in anger, he seems like the snowflake in this situation, and he really shouldn't be pursuing any kind of public position which necessitates interacting with the press.

      My two cents' worth: I don't consider bullies who respond to words with physical violence to be heroes. And I don't think reporters who merely press public figures for an answer are "snowflakes." I also don't think that anyone - snowflake or not - is deserving of physical abuse in the absence of threatening or initiating a physical attack. Are they annoying? Sure. Does anyone irritated with a snowflake or a nosy reporter have the right to beat them up? No.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
        If Jacobs actually grabbed Gianforte's wrist, here in Alabama that's called "putting your hands on somebody" and that's a big no-no.
        In fact,it is an assault and the grabbee has a right to defend himself against the grabber.
        Should the grabbee (I made that word up) has witnesses to that as being a stated (true or not) fact, he/she is pretty well in the clear.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  DrZarkov99 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    My liberal brother in law is quite in favor of socialism, and he's such a wimp that he's disturbed when anyone watches a TV show with violence, or car chases, or anything loud. God forbid he should actually experience real life.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 4 weeks ago
      Upon reading your reply, I immediately contemplated a fantasy of giving him a tour of the prison I used to work at for two decades while sharing some "war stories" about what happened at this spot and that spot and so on.
      Then it occurred to me that I most likely could not get him to walk through the front gate.
      I've heard of that happening.
      One was a state trooper who was told he had to lock up his gun in his car.
      Another was a trainee who waved to get out, quitting as fast as the gate closed behind him.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  DrZarkov99 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        What's really bizarre is that his son is a crack shot with rifle and shotgun, and is an amazing hunter (he keeps two family freezers full of game year round). My nephew also works for one of the best military/law enforcement style rifle manufacturers in the country. Oddly, his dad is very proud of him, but won't touch a gun himself.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 4 months ago
    Wimpy stone age brains versus strong modern day minds...the body could go either way...however, not many politician's kick ass...seems those that seek government positions are not just the weakest in society but the dumbest in reality too!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  4 months ago
      Too many RINOs wimp out for wimpy Jackass Party members and will still do it when they have for wins the upper hand~like right now.
      Methinks a separate study should be made for RINOs.
      That is, if they can be coaxed to come out from under the safe zones beneath their assigned Congressional desks.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 4 months ago
        Hello allosaur,

        RINOs don't wimp out, they are keeping their options open. They, like the POS d's, have zero fidelity to the Constitution and even less loyalty to those that elected them. Most in government are out for growing their own power, growing their own influence, and amassing their own wealth. If they prevent the opposition from doing shady things that yield enormous profit, they wouldn't be able to profiteer from those things themselves. This is why the ethic committee of the fedgov is a laughing stock, a token agency for dragging investigations out until someone chooses to retire. RINOs are far worse then d's ever could be - they lack any conviction whatever- even the wrong kind.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  4 months ago
          In a nutshell, you must mean RINOs are career politicians with a "R" beside their names.
          And will this sorry lot ever support term limits?
          Only when they are up for reelection.
          But should they run to be reelected yet again?
          They will say they support term limits until reelected even yet again, and again, and again, and again as many times it takes for them to finally retire with a big fat pension paid for by~ guess whooooo?
          It's yooooooooou!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 4 months ago
            That's true. Our politicians are manufactured by our government and elected by our society, who are largely educated to expect a handout . Sadly, there are very few that actually have the conviction to honor their oaths and fewer still who will limit their exploitation time at the fedgov teat.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by scojohnson 3 months, 4 weeks ago
        No, it's because most Republicans were raised with some strict manners and it's a trying not to be rude / trying not to 'offend' thing.

        I'll exempt the head of the College Republican Party in Minnesota 25 years ago when I was there, he was an asshole. Most of the ones that turn into professional campaign operatives are assholes though.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    Can a Hero be a Wimp? Don't answer that. I don't assign the term Hero lightly but I do know a few who have performed heroic actions.
    John McCain who is often called a Hero is about the wimpiest RINO of the bunch. I suspect he might have been neutered during his stay in the Hanoi Hilton but at some point real soon I hope the wimps in AZ decide to put him out to pasture. Wow has he become a complete disgrace IMO.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 3 weeks ago
      Here lies the problem with hero worship. That is, what does the worshiper do when yesterdays hero morphs into today's village idiot?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        Excellent point Mac. I have seen with my own eyes how in youth a lot of people tend to be liberals but change at some point as they grow old and wiser. McCain seems to be going in reverse and becoming liberal as he ages. I'm of the belief he has lost the twins along the way.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
          Believe it or not, 70-year-old me became a lib during the late 60s but was ready to vote for Ronald Reagan by 1980.
          Living through Jimmy Carter and my 30th year were among factors that helped with that.
          I first heard of Ayn Rand when AS1 was listed on Netflix.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 3 weeks ago
            Being a NY State employee and thinking ahead about promotional prospects I was always a registered D. I came of age in 1969 and have never cast a vote for a D in my life except in some local elections. I think there are many people who register in the party most beneficial for their careers but who vote opposite. I started reading AS while in the USN during Vietnam and have never finished it. Bought the DVD first part when it came out and have the set now wishing there were more.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by evlwhtguy 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    There is a shocker..."wimps tend to be socialists"...Who would-a-thunk it!....I suspect because they prefer to be part of a group...[mob] rather than risk anything by themselves.

    Hey, Allosour....too bad about your "second wimpiest" brother...I suspect that you end up being more or less barred from speaking politics at family reunions because Mr. "second wimpiest" gets nasty and starts calling people names when he uses his one canned argument on any given subject and it gets parried by a conservative and then he has no comeback. I have a brother in law like that. What a pain in the behind.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 4 weeks ago
      He was a loudmouth during late 60s and the 70s before he realized he was the only one not voting for Reagan.
      Political conversation around him froze over and I think he caught on and decided to shut up also.
      For some reason he likes to talk about weapons; but when a year ago I told him my son and I had recently been at a pistol range, he looked at me all appalled.
      He was spending a weekend with my most conservative of brothers who later told me the lib
      could not comprehend how shooting a gun at a range could be fun or even necessary.
      I always thought target practice helps one shoot straight~but what do I know?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by evlwhtguy 3 months, 4 weeks ago
        Well, at least you don't have to put up with nasty looks and temper tantrums and being called the usual...hater, selfish, racist, etc. My brother in law...and in fact my whole side of the family are a bunch of libtards. My wife's folks however are all conservative to the core. They treat me like the "Second coming"
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Flootus5 3 months, 3 weeks ago
    From the article:

    “Lots of guys who are phenomenally successful in modern societies would probably be nowhere near as successful in hunter gatherer societies.”

    Bill Gates comes to mind.....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    It only is logical. A wimpy guy wants someone to take care of him and see to his (or her) needs. He can be relied upon to do some pretty good stuff if all his needs are met, but if not, he tends to feel as if the world owes him a living. He tends to like demonstrations but rarely would participate. I suppose you can tell that I know a few.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    Look again at the footage from the news cameras when, on the night of Hillary's defeat, they panned the audience at her convention hall. Really look at those guys...Tell me what you see.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    Those who can't control themselves often seek arbitrary control over others as a false substitute. Those who are actually in control of themselves know that they have enough to worry about in controlling themselves that it is self-delusion to believe they can control another person on top of that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 3 months, 3 weeks ago
    I never even thought about that, but it seems to make sense. Of three liberals I still know all of them are wimps now that I think about it. It also seems to have a lot to do with their intelligence, at least their ability to learn anything. That's only my observation, not a scientific study.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    The same applies to women. Haven't you all noticed that the hardcore liberal/progressive/socialists females are generally ugly as hell? At an early age, most people have socialists leanings (adolescent, really), but with adulthood, grow out of it (sometimes the adulthood comes late, say at 40+). The hardcore that remains are (mostly) otherwise failures in life, in the looks department as well as in the brains department.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    I think this is dangerous wishful thinking. It's great if it's true since we don't want socialists to be strong, but I would not count on this wish being true. It reminds me of calling suicide attacks "cowardly". They're actually brave if they go through with it. We wish they would always chicken out, but unfortunately our wish does not come true.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    First: What is a wimpy guy and what is a socialist?
    I hope that whoever buys into this isn't using the distorted and incorrect definition that substitutes the definition of communist in place of the real definition of socialist. A Socialist is somebody who wants the kind of social reforms that eliminate poverty, hunger, disease, ignorance, you know, all those symptoms of economic inequality that result when there are a rich class, a middle class and a poor class within a society.


    So, if Wimpy guys are more likely to actually care about the needs of their fellow citizens, and therefor are more likely to be attracted to socialist ideals, does that mean that Capitalism is more likely to attract Neanderthal knuckle-draggers (non-wimpy) who care more about greedy gain at the expense of others than about win-win scenarios?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Maritimus 3 months, 3 weeks ago
      To trogwolf
      socialism: noun; a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution and exchange should be owned and regulated by the community as a whole.
      Compact Oxford English Dictionary, Revised edition 2003.
      Please do not forget that all communist tyrants called themselves socialists.
      Also, please do not forget that all aspiring socialists tried to hide themselves behind more benign sounding labels, like liberals, progressives, democrats, etc. in an effort to hide from ignorant voters what they really have in mind for the future, if they get to hold power.
      "Regulated by the community" really means by the individuals that wheel the power in the name of the "community".
      When I was a university student in a communist tyranny in the '50s, we joked that the definition of the automobile was "the means by which the people transport themselves through their representatives".
      That is socialism, by any name.
      What you describe that socialists want is UTOPIA.
      EDIT: added addressee and rearranged mistaken order of lines
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        Socialism is not merely a noun. It is an idea that has been evolving for nearly 200 years. It is addressed in novels like Les Miserables by Victor Hugo, published a little over 150 years ago. Only infantile minds seek to define such a profound concept with a one or two line dictionary entry. Even the editors of Merriam Webster's 1915 Dictionary understood this and referenced the encyclopedia Britannica for more in depth understanding. It is interesting that influences since then have caused a description of Soviet Communism to appear as the current "definition" of Socialism. Dig deeper. https://www.britannica.com/topic/soci...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
          You might as well "define" the United States of America with a one or two line entry when it is constantly evolving. You could take a snapshot every 20 years and wonder if you were looking at the same country.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Kittyhawk 3 months, 4 weeks ago
      I agree that it's important to define one's terms. Ayn Rand's opinion was that the difference between socialism and communism was the difference between suicide and murder. When we consider "the kind of social reforms that eliminate poverty, hunger, disease, ignorance," the key factor to me is not whether the specific reforms will be chosen by a dictator or by the people democratically, but what the reforms are and how they will be implemented. Under socialism or communism (or any form of government, actually), the reforms will be implemented using government force to take away rights and property from some individuals who rightfully (naturally) possessed them, for the benefit of other individuals chosen by the ruling class.

      As a practical matter, many of the reforms advocated by socialists and communists have been tried in various countries, to various degrees, over the past hundred years, and those reforms have had not been successful in eliminating or even reducing poverty, hunger, disease, ignorance, or class distinctions. Rather, they have increased those social ills.

      As a moral matter, initiating force (threats or actual imprisonment, physical harm, and/or death) to achieve your preferred social goals is wrong. The ends do not justify the means. The individual matters, and the individual's rights and happiness and well-being should not be sacrificed for the illusory "common good."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        Very well stated.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
          As much as I enjoy Ayn Rand's novels, the ideals of which tend to be capital(istic), it is important to always keep in mind that she creates an idealized setting that tends to ignore true human nature, choosing rather to paint a picture of human nature that more harshly contrasts with the ideals of her protagonists.

          I equally enjoy Victor Hugo's novels. He is also an idealist. His ideals are social(istic). His life span wasn't long enough to notice that universal education was not enough to cure poverty, illness, ignorance or to eliminate crime.

          IIf you want to have your mind blown, llok at the difference in the definition of Socialism in the Webster's Dictionary of 100 years ago and compare it to the definition in the Webster's dictionary of today. Socialism is an idea that requires encyclopedic coverage to define, at the least, and thousands of pages of literature and history to understand, if you want to be thorough. 100 years ago, the Editors of Webster's understood this. Today, what you find there is a succinct definition of Soviet Communism and people who choose not to think quote it as if it were a legitimate definition of Socialism.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 3 weeks ago
      I have my own way of looking at it. I've said this before in the Gulch, but may as well repeat:

      Socialists are a misguided people who have become so frustrated over their inability to make the lame walk that they cripple everyone in the name of equality. Communists are of similar bent except their frustration is over raising the dead.

      Also:

      Socialist policies can be made to appear to work as long as there is a strong enough capitalist base to support them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by strugatsky 3 months, 4 weeks ago
      Socialism, communism, capitalism - those are economic systems. They have actual definitions. What you have listed are adolescent feelings that progressive snowflakes use as justification for not going to school.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        you are mistaken. I recommend research, beginning perhaps with a glance at a 100 year old dictionary and comparing it with a contemporary one, and education in literature and history.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by evlwhtguy 3 months, 4 weeks ago
      So....What are "Neanderthal knuckle-draggers (non-wimpy) who care more about greedy gain at the expense of others than about win-win scenarios? "
      " I hope that" ......You aren't ...."using the distorted and incorrect definition that substitutes the definition of"..a totalitarian.."communist in place of the real definition of a..." politically conservative American.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
        "So....What are "Neanderthal knuckle-draggers (non-wimpy)"? You know. People who think violence is an acceptable solution. People who would rather turn over their right to think to some organizational label and use labels to categorize others, because it is too much work to think for themselves and consider ideas on their merit.
        " the real definition of a..." politically conservative American." which is what? A lot of Democrats are politically conservative. A lot of Republicans are liberal, some of those have even served as President. If you are not a constitutionalist, you are not politically conservative, in my humble opinion. The constitution calls for equal access to all rights and privileges of citizenship. That means Education, Health Care, Protection of the law, etc. NONE of these should be more available to a monied elite than they are to the rest of the population. It is only a matter of time until each of them becomes constitutionally defined and protected.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
          "the constitution calls for equal access to all rights and privileges of citizenship. That means Education, Health Care, Protection of the law, etc"
          Does the Constitution guarantee access to education and health care? I don't think it mentions health care, although maybe this was less of an issue at the time it was written because there weren't expensive treatments available. I have an issue with sanctifying services people provide one another, like health care, as "rights". We have the right to free speech, meaning the gov't won't stop us from speaking. If it does, it violates our rights. If we have a right to education, does that mean if gov't can't find the money to pay for education, it is violating our rights as badly as if it made on popular speech illegal or banned basic weapons?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
            "If we have a right to education, does that mean if gov't can't find the money to pay for education, it is violating our rights as badly as if it made on popular speech illegal or banned basic weapons?" This is exactly the sort of question around which the debates will revolve. This question seems to be from a Risk Management point of view rather than from an Equal Rights point of view. In other words, what will it cost us if we fail to provide the right? I prefer the Equal Rights point of view - If His/her child has access to basic education and basic health care, why doesn't mine? This is what the discussion will ultimately be - that these things are, in fact, rights.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
              You would say that a non producer should have the same health care as someone who earned the money to pay for his own needs. To rectify this so called inequity you would steal from someone else.
              That is bull shit!
              As for education you probably were for Bernies Free college . When something is free it is worth
              less, your socialist collectivists have already ruined the public education system. All to make sure the test scores from the no study no effort kids are similar to the kids who do the work.
              Your kind is winning but that doesn't make it right.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                If you file your taxes with only W2s as proof of income, ie, you are an employee, you are NOT a producer. You are a consumer. The U S constitution does NOT give any special rights of citizenship to business owners. To argue that it should is bullshit. It is in the best interest of every town in America (and the world) for the children in those towns to grow up with access to high quality preventive medical and dental care. ALL of the children in EVERY town.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                  You sound like the evil hag and her "It takes a village to raise a child".

                  If an individual chooses to trade value for value i.e. Be an employee he is a producer in my book. The taxes and how he is required to report it is theft by collectivists. I never said anyone or business should get special rights.

                  My wife and I had 3 children by the time we were 27 .We both choose to sacrificed our own personal interests and time to provide for them , we paid from our own work our earnings to house,educate, feed, and we paid for their healthcare and dental and never got a dime from the state or federal govt. We never expected any either. My wife had her tubes tied after the third because we understood the responsibility to care for our own and are ability to do so.

                  You are right that it is in all our best interests that children are cared for! The best way to have access to high quality Healthcare or increase the standard of living is for a govt. to allow laissez fare capitalism to enrich the community. Period.

                  You ,who claim to have such an interest in the 100 -200 year history of the definition of socialism would be better served to study the 200 year history of the most successful
                  Country in the world in terms of standard of living progress , innovation rather than promote ideas that are destroying the USA's ability.

                  It is not my responsibility to care for anyone else's children , I do choose to donate to St Joseph's Indian School in So. Dakota .That school , solely on donations provides for room and board , education and healthcare. The kids are asked to do chores and to Learn. I have also volunteered my time working with kids as well as mentoring many young adults.

                  I gave you a point +1 with the hope you will understand the flaw of your philosophy and Because you like kids.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                    Well said, Dobrien. I've been staying out of this particular fully unexpected quarrel because I really don't have time for it despite this a thread I created.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                      Thanks Dino,
                      How is Daniel doing?
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                        He's hanging in there for us 5/31 yesterday walking from a procedural surgery admittance appointment to the ER where we after waiting for four hours bagged a three-vial syringe loaded steroid shot and two prescriptions for more meds to relieve my son's crippling back pain. No one will pre-op prescribe opiates due to the current opiate junkie epidemic.
                        We're told opiate medication is usually prescribed after surgery to fix a herniated disk.
                        I just hope and pray for my son to need nothing for pain or be lying about in bed after his surgery this coming Tuesday.
                        Right now Daniel can stand at times on or off his crutches or lie across a car's back seat thus without a seat belt en route to a medical appointment but he can't sit straight up in the chair of a waiting room. So he wearily stood on crutches in that ER for four hours to end up doing particularly good tonight. I can hear him in his room having a good time with his PC, but he's still in bed lying on one side.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          What kind of physician can't see his
                          Pain and condition? To me it is like they are sacrificing him for the greater good.
                          You must have shown great restraint from showing those idiots what pain feels like.
                          Wishing him a successful surgery anda speedy recovery :)
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            To answer your question, when it comes to opioids, it appears to be none.
                            The so-called "health insurance industry" that doctors these days kowtow to may have much influence on that.
                            My ex and Daniel's mother, who is still an active nurse, suggested we try the ER to seek the stuff of poppies.
                            The ER doctor referred to the current opioid epidemic and said he would not work against the decisions of both Daniel's doctor and the neurosurgeon.
                            For now the non-opioids the ER doctor prescribed has removed much of the pain. Yesterday Daniel twice walked without crutches to the kitchen, though with a slightly crooked posture.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          "We're told"
                          I would use the active voice. "Some person told you," because some person's bad decision is responsible for this problem. I would avoid a hospital that won't treat the pain and/or does not have a pro-active service attitude. They probably won't provide good service is other areas. I would shop other providers. I know most providers seem to mindlessly follow government guidelines, but there are providers who care about their customers. It sucks to have find them while someone's suffering.

                          I am so sorry to hear it. I think you should politely and firmly tell him five (5) more days in pain is unacceptable. I'm not sure I would be able to maintain the equanimity to do that if my son were suffering.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            I know what would happen. My ex would call off work and take our son, who would go more than willingly, to get to that operation Tuesday.
                            There's no way around that for a fact.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                    "The best way to have access to high quality Healthcare or increase the standard of living is for a govt. to allow laissez fare capitalism to enrich the community. Period"

                    There is ONLY one way that laissez faire capitalism can enrich a community or nation: The capitalists must reinvest their profits in the community. J Paul Getty understood this when he wrote "How to Be Rich". Not How to get rich, How to BE Rich. But laissez faire means that there is no external compulsion. The capitalists must do so of their own volition. And they used to do so. Many do not do so and there are vast pools of capital that have been siphoned out of the economy thanks to you and me and all of the other consumers doing exactly as we are programmed to do, but these vast pools of capital are NOT being reinvested or taxed. They don't enrich the community. These capitalists have been impoverishing the nation and the communities within the nation because they have been "laissed" to do whatever they wish thanks to trickle down Reaganomics, which has been reinforced since it was instituted and which absolutely FAILS to cause a trickle down, but instead causes a fountain of capital up to the wealthiest corp owners/major stockholders that never re-enters the US economy. THAT is the cause of any stagnation in the nation's economic growth far more than any so called government intervention.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                      "The capitalists must reinvest their profits in the community. "
                      Do you agree they must either spend it or invest it? Even if they attempt to "save" it, the banks lend out that money or if they buy precious metals they drive the price up. I don't understand how what we choose to do can be right or wrong.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                        spending it does not enrich the community. reinvesting it in new or expanded business is what creates jobs = enriching a community
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          Spending stimulates the economy.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            spending stimulates an economy, somewhat, unless it is debt spending, but it takes profit reinvestment in new and expanded business to truly stimulate an economy through increased jobs which produces increased spending at a higher order of magnitude.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by  $  3 months, 3 weeks ago
                              Yeah, increased jobs increases spending. Whoever is collecting interest on a debt such as a mortgage is making money also.
                              I'm not talking about the idiotic national debt. That will never be paid off.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                                I guess I should have been more specific. Credit Cards, Mortgages, Student Loans. These ultimately retard economic growth and can cause occasional crashes. These are what I meant by debt spending, not the ND. Oddly enough, Bonds can produce long term growth even though they are a form of debt spending.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          "spending it does not enrich the community. reinvesting it in new or expanded business"
                          Yes. This is how I understand it too. Spending is needed when there's unused productive capacity. Wealth comes from investing in new factors of production.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • -1
                    Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                    "The best way to have access to high quality Healthcare or increase the standard of living is for a govt. to allow laissez fare capitalism to enrich the community. Period. " Maybe you haven't been paying attention to the economy since 1980. If What you call "laissez fare capitalism" is what we have had since Reagan, you should be able to recognize that what it has produced is a Pottersville where every Bedford Falls used to be. Two people can't produce the lifestyle choices for their family that one person could produce 60 years ago. The Capitalism that we are enduring right now is enriching some major corporations, their owners and some of their shareholders. It isn't enriching any community that I can think of. Not in the USA anyway. But I believe that payday loan check cashing centers are thriving and the credit card companies are doing quite well on the consumption/debt based import economy that has been forced upon us to replace the manufacturing export economy that we once had..

                    We were the most successful country in the world once and we used to be able to boast innovation thanks to a superior educational standard. We can hardly make those boasts today.

                    The question isn't about your (personal) responsibility to care for other people's kids. It is a parent's job to care for their kids. But the question is why does one child have more right to health and education than another? And please don't suggest that the opportunity to access either is equal for all children.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                      Thanks for making my case for me. Capitalism has been strangled by government.

                      Economic growth in the United States has, on average, been slowed by 0.8 percent per year since 1980 owing to the cumulative effects of regulation:

                      If regulation had been held constant at levels observed in 1980, the US economy would have been about 25 percent larger than it actually was as of 2012.
                      This means that in 2012, the economy was $4 trillion smaller than it would have been in the absence of regulatory growth since 1980.
                      This amounts to a loss of approximately $13,000 per capita, a significant amount of money for most American workers.
                      That my friend is enough to pay for a child's healthcare and dental along with private education.
                      Even with those shackles on our economy people still risk their lives to come to America
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                        There has been nothing wrong with economic growth. DOW is at an all time high. The problem is the disparity between the incomes of the corps and the incomes of their rank and file. The problem is the value of the dollar with the FED doubling the currency in circulation every decade with nothing backing the dollar.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          Wrong, the DOW or precisely the DOW Jones industrial average is a weighted average of 30 industrial stocks.
                          Economic growth is the increase in the inflation-adjusted market value of the goods and services produced by an economy over time. It is conventionally measured as the percent rate of increase in real gross domestic product, or real GDP, usually in per capita terms.
                          When you say corps I must assume you mean Top Management vs Rank and file. The income disparity is obscene, I would agree with that. The FED 's increase of the money supply many have argued and I agree has caused an asset bubble and part of the strong increase in the value of the DJIA.
                          "But the question is why does one child have more right to health and education than another?" More Right to health and Education
                          These are not rights. Just like anything of value it is created. By your way of thinking every child should have a swimming pool in his backyard because some other kids do.
                          Go to Venezuala
                          Chavez and Maduro promised to equalize everything to be elected and the result is people starving to death.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            "The best way to have access to high quality Healthcare or increase the standard of living is for a govt. to allow laissez fare capitalism to enrich the community. Period"

                            There is ONLY one way that laissez faire capitalism can enrich a community or nation: The capitalists must reinvest their profits in the community. J Paul Getty understood this when he wrote "How to Be Rich". Not How to get rich, How to BE Rich. But laissez faire means that there is no external compulsion. The capitalists must do so of their own volition. And they used to do so. Many do not do so and there are vast pools of capital that have been siphoned out of the economy thanks to you and me and all of the other consumers doing exactly as we are programmed to do, but these vast pools of capital are NOT being reinvested or taxed. They don't enrich the community. These capitalists have been impoverishing the nation and the communities within the nation because they have been "laissed" to do whatever they wish thanks to trickle down Reaganomics, which has been reinforced since it was instituted and which absolutely FAILS to cause a trickle down, but instead causes a fountain of capital up to the wealthiest corp owners/major stockholders that never re-enters the US economy. THAT is the cause of any stagnation in the nation's economic growth far more than any so called government intervention.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                  " you are an employee, you are NOT a producer"
                  Employees are the producers, the doers.

                  I agree with the rest of your post, but fundamentally I think employees who are doing the work as produces.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                    If only the tax code agreed with us on that. It only sees business owners as producers. I think that is also how Ayn Rand sees it, if her protagonists are any indication.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                      " It only sees business owners as producers. I think that is also how Ayn Rand sees it"
                      You have it backwards. In Fountainhead the heroic producer was out of a job or working a menial job to make ends meet most of the book. The wealthy business owners were total sellouts, troubled that they weren't producers.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                        lol, I guess the appropriate response is Who is John Galt? I don't believe that I have it backwards at all. The protagonist/producers of Atlas Shrugged are predominantly business owners. John Galt is a creative/inventive mind-producer as is the protagonist in Fountainhead. An uncompromising, nonconformist architect/builder. You gotta see the Gary Cooper film. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swOxK...
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                          Thanks for sending the clip, but I don't see how it relates to your claim Ayn Rand sees only business owners as producers.
                          BTW, I did not downvote your comment.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            That is to say, Fountainhead is only relevant if you are willing to acknowledge that all it takes to become an employee is a willingness to endure mediocrity, while it takes various degrees of exceptiinalism to put your capital and reputation at risk to attempt to start a business, not to mention enduring and overcoming all the challenges that come with trying to break with the herd. In that cases I would say that Fountain reinforces what I said but from a different angle.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
                            The clip is just a recommendation to see a film. Fountainhead is not about producers vs takers. That is Atlas Shrugged. Fountainhead is about the war between mediocrity and exceptiinalism. So not really relevant here.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
              "In other words, what will it cost us if we fail to provide the right? "
              I see it as a good idea but not technically a right. Maybe it's just semantics.
              I don't see it as a "right" because it is a service one person provides for another. Calling it a right moves closer to the idea that people have a moral obligation to put others' needs ahead of their own, which I think is evil.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by evlwhtguy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
          You do seem to have some entrenched preconceptions....I would respectfully suggest that the .." People who would rather turn over their right to think to some organizational label" might actually number you amongst their ranks. You sir are the one using labels and shibboleths to describe large swaths of people. You, in your second paragraph go on to assume I am speaking of Republicans when I talk about the politically conservative American. As to your contention that "That means Education, Health Care, Protection of the law, etc. NONE of these should be more available to a monied (sic) elite than they are to the rest of the population." ....The politically conservative American also has these same rights too. All too often we see the so called liberals in the country today, hell bent on denying no only the aforementioned rights and privileges to this group but also an attempt to deny the average producer in this country, the fruits of his own labor.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  trogwolf 3 months, 3 weeks ago
            I'm not sure that I have posted enough times in this forum for anybody to accurately conclude that I have any "entrenched preconceptions". Anybody reaching such a conclusion would necessarily have to be drawing on their own eps..

            I forgot that people still used the word shibboleth. It is funny that you use it here. Based on this definition: "A shibboleth is (either) a saying that people repeatedly cite that is wrong" the commonly used definitions of liberal and socialism/st are the most often repeated shibboleths I can think of. Speaking of people who would rather turn over their right to think to some organizational label and use labels to categorize others, because it is too much work to think for themselves and consider ideas on their merit, that is.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 3 months, 4 weeks ago
    This seems like an internal contradiction: "My most conservative of brothers is not a wimp at all and likes to talk about the lib behind his back." In my experience, wimps do this wheres as non-wimps will actually talk- face-to-face.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 4 weeks ago
      That occurred to me too. It's all about peace being "conserved" during the few times we get together.
      My most conservative brother lives half an hour away on the other side of Birmingham, the lib moved from California to Delaware two years ago, another lives in Tennessee and the wimp lives in North Carolina.
      No one wants trouble during a somewhat rare family reunion.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo