Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yeah...

Kind of makes one wonder if the Civil War was about the "good guys" in the North trying to end slavery like we were taught in public school, huh?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yeah...

Kind of makes one wonder if the Civil War was about the "good guys" in the North trying to end slavery like we were taught in public school, huh?

---

There would still be Confederate States if President Jefferson Davis had been content with just controlling the Southern States. But Jeff Davis, overly proud of himself, got persuaded by his Confederate Generals that they could conquer the North. And it looked like Davis's Generals could, at least until Lincoln promoted Grant and Sherman to be his new Generals and fired the incompetent ones.

There were abolitionists in the North, but the North went to war with the Confederacy to save itself, not for love of the slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation came later, as an afterthought by Lincoln, and it did not free slaves in slave states that did not join the Confederacy. Northerners, except the few abolitionists, disliked blacks. That didn’t change with winning the Civil War and was on the mind of Martin Luther King Jr. when he was killed for being black.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You do surprise me on occasion Second. I think that might be 3 posts you've made in the last week that we're in agreement on either in large part or in full.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You do surprise me on occasion Second. I think that might be 3 posts you've made in the last week that we're in agreement on either in large part or in full.

---

If you looked at that MLK article you'd see that MLK correctly identified what is wrong with America today. Martin Luther King’s Radical Anti-Capitalism www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/01/15/remembering-martin-luther-kings
-radical-class-politics/

I'm a big fan of Capitalism because it benefits me, but I receive those benefits only because I understand how it works in America, as did MLK Jr. who was aware of how American-style Capitalism did not benefit the poorer 50% of the population.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I agree with capitalism on paper, but not in practice... at least how it is done in America.

I'm not anti-Capitalist at all. I'm anti-Predatory-Capitalism, which is what the current structure is. We're allowed to live with an illusion of a Capitalistic society, but only those with true wealth are allowed to thrive and continue to consolidate power.

I don't know what the fix for this is. Communism certainly isn't a viable option.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'd like to see three things happen. One we've already talked about.

1. Eliminate the Social Security/Medicaid tax on anybody for the first $100,000 and force all companies to give the half they were paying to the employees. This would be an instant 15.30% pay increase to every single one of the working class that are in poverty all the way up to those making $100,000 per year. Make this $100,000 number tied completely to inflation, so it never decreases in real life.

2. Then, end the top half of this equation and remove the cap completely on income. Everyone making over $100,000 per year will have to pay it on every dime they make over $100,000.


3. Most importantly, make this a constitutional amendment that no person in political power can EVER change this or remove it.


This would not solve all of societies woes, but I think it would be an amazing start.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'd like to see three things happen. One we've already talked about.

1. Eliminate the Social Security/Medicaid tax on anybody for the first $100,000 and force all companies to give the half they were paying to the employees. This would be an instant 15.30% pay increase to every single one of the working class that are in poverty all the way up to those making $100,000 per year. Make this $100,000 number tied completely to inflation, so it never decreases in real life.

2. Then, end the top half of this equation and remove the cap completely on income. Everyone making over $100,000 per year will have to pay it on every dime they make over $100,000.


3. Most importantly, make this a constitutional amendment that no person in political power can EVER change this or remove it.


This would not solve all of societies woes, but I think it would be an amazing start.

---

I'll take you seriously. I think #2 could not get even one vote from the GOP in Congress, but if it did pass by a miracle I think #3 could not get approval from the state governments controlled by the GOP. That would kill the amendment because the legislatures of three-fourths (presently 38) of the states need to ratify. It takes only 13 states voting NO! to stop an amendment and the GOP controls 32 states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_legislatures

But it's always a game won by numbers. For an unexpected example from today:

Democrats just picked up a Wisconsin state Senate seat. Though Donald Trump had won the rural district by about 17 points in the 2016 presidential election, Democratic nominee Patty Schachtner defeated her Republican opponent for the open seat by a comfortable margin of about 10 points.
www.jsonline.com/story/news/2018/01/16/wisconsin-voters-chose-legislat
ors-tuesdays-special-elections/1038687001/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

As you say, it's a game won by numbers. The People that would be positively effected by this outnumber those that don't by a very large margin. The problem is, nobody ever talks about it.

Sure, they bitch about Social Security for many different reasons, but never talk about what I'm talking about specifically. I never got this idea from anyone, because nobody ever talks about it. I just thought of it.
. . .

I like that you're not disagreeing with me about the merits of this idea anymore, only the probability that it could ever happen. I don't think that having the correct amount of Democratic seats would do it, because they never talk about it either. I think the first step in getting this to happen would be to raise awareness of it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
While 6ixStringJack is adjusting Social Security tax on wages: You wouldn't put all your 401K money into US Treasury bonds, would you? Doing that would lower your retirement income. But since the beginning of the Social Security program, all securities held by the trust funds have been issued by the Federal Government. Could you please fix that by investing in something that pays higher interest?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Unexceptionalism: A Primer...
PHASE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Unexceptionalism: A Primer
By E. L. Doctorow, April 28, 2012
www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/unexceptionalism-a-primer.ht
ml

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

It's interesting that the 'primer on unexceptionalism' was written in 2012. In 2009, 2010, and 2011 democrats controlled both Congress and the White House. You'd almost think some of the diatribe was pointed at democrats, who twiddled their thumbs while shoveling money at the banks, failed to investigate and prosecute fraud, expanded the surveillance state, prosecuted more whistleblowers than previous administration COMBINED, 'intervened' in Libya, failed to close GITMO ...

"Starting January 2009, at the beginning of the 111th Congress, in the month that Barack Obama was inaugurated president, the House of Representatives was made up of 257 Democrats and 178 Republicans. There is no question that Democrats had total control in the House from 2009-2011."

---

Quote:

---

Now these perfunctory valuations abound, underpinning tens of billions of dollars of home deals. Sometimes the process is outsourced to India, where companies charge real-estate agents a few dollars to come up with U.S. home values by consulting Google Earth and real-estate websites. BPOs have been used to value collateral in the more than $20 billion of bonds sold by institutional landlords, such as Blackstone’s Invitation Homes Inc., and in the fast-growing business of lending to individual house flippers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
There are no quick political cures in two years; there is only moving slowly away from a mess created by Republicans, a mess the GOP did NOT want fixed. Closing GITMO was one of your examples of failure. Don't you remember how the GOP fought 8 years the Democrats over that? The GOP loves and protects every mistake it every made and fights the Democrats to the death to keep the mistakes alive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Another difference between Democratic politicians and GOP: The Wall Street Journal reports that banks are getting tired of performing actual appraisals for high-volume home loans — the kind that get packaged into mortgage-based securities — and are turning instead to less rigorous broker price opinions:

Quote:

---

Now these perfunctory valuations abound, underpinning tens of billions of dollars of home deals. Sometimes the process is outsourced to India, where companies charge real-estate agents a few dollars to come up with U.S. home values by consulting Google Earth and real-estate websites. BPOs have been used to value collateral in the more than $20 billion of bonds sold by institutional landlords, such as Blackstone’s Invitation Homes Inc., and in the fast-growing business of lending to individual house flippers.

---

What could go wrong? “Their popularity,” says the Journal, “shows how Wall Street is finding ways to adapt to government efforts to crack down on some of the excesses that contributed to the housing crisis.”

It’s remarkable how fast we’ve decided to ignore the lessons of the great housing bubble and the subsequent crash. Republicans, of course, never wanted to learn any lessons from the very start, but Wall Street stayed cautious for at least a few years. Now even that’s receding into the rear view mirror, a mere decade after the second-worst recession of the past century. Republicans are naturally happy to help this process along, because the market is always right, even when the market is wrong. Plus the finance industry is generous to politicians who let them do whatever they want.

It took upwards of 50 years to unlearn the lessons of the Great Depression. The Great Recession took only ten.

www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/01/a-decade-after-the-great-recess
ion-were-outsourcing-home-appraisals-to-india/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
“I wasn't ever taught not to trust anyone. It was a learned behavior.” - 6ixStringJack
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=62170&mid=10450
61#1045061

Decide who you can trust. Or trust that people you know will fail in predictable ways. I trust that I know exactly how a Republican will fail. Democrats are trickier to predict because sometimes they do not fail. Sometimes there are improvements. Sometimes they do not mislead you and sometimes keep promises that are beneficial.

There is a spectrum between completely untrustworthy and worth-trusting-with-your-life. I know where all Texas Republicans are on that spectrum, while Democrats are spread across it from worst to best. With Democrats, you have to sort the rotten from the good.

---

Like


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
“I wasn't ever taught not to trust anyone. It was a learned behavior.” - 6ixStringJack
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=62170&mid=10450
61#1045061

Decide who you can trust. Or trust that people you know will fail in predictable ways. I trust that I know exactly how a Republican will fail. Democrats are trickier to predict because sometimes they do not fail. Sometimes there are improvements. Sometimes they do not mislead you and sometimes keep promises that are beneficial.

There is a spectrum between completely untrustworthy and worth-trusting-with-your-life. I know where all Texas Republicans are on that spectrum, while Democrats are spread across it from worst to best. With Democrats, you have to sort the rotten from the good.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Once again, you're only half delusional. How can you believe that one side is ALL BAD? I don't believe that about Democrats. In fact, I agree with a lot of traditional Liberal beliefs. It's the fucking wack jobs and extremists that have co-opted the party and subsequently taken control of it that I'm very wary of. The ones who make no bones about it that I am part of the problem simply because of my color and my gender.

It really must be nice having so much money that you feel that you can vote against your own personal well being. Most of us don't have that luxury.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Once again, you're only half delusional. How can you believe that one side is ALL BAD? I don't believe that about Democrats. In fact, I agree with a lot of traditional Liberal beliefs. It's the fucking wack jobs and extremists that have co-opted the party and subsequently taken control of it that I'm very wary of. The ones who make no bones about it that I am part of the problem simply because of my color and my gender.

It really must be nice having so much money that you feel that you can vote against your own personal well being. Most of us don't have that luxury.

---

I'll give you a real-life example (and some make-believe examples) about how NOT "voting against your own personal well being" can ruin a democracy.

In Houston, Hurricane Harvey only flooded 15% of the houses and businesses. Those 15% of local people want flood control, which will cost billions for nearly perfect control, but the cost for perfect control is only a third of the cost of damages from Harvey. It seems like a tremendous bargain! But on the other hand, the 85% who had no flood damage will get no direct benefit from perfect flood control. That 85% keep voting NO! to flood control bonds. This happens year after year. The only reason Houston has any flood control at all is Federal government money, which doesn't need popular approval.

Same thing with flood control happens with poverty. Locally 15% of the population live in poverty and that is no problem for 85% of Houstonians. The money for antipoverty comes from the Federal government because the local 85% will vote NO! to spending their money.

Or I could go on with the 50% at the top of incomes vote NO! to helping the 50% at the bottom of incomes.

With enough NO! votes a country can be wrecked. But the only thing the NO! voters are doing is voting against what doesn't benefit them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Well great. Until you fix the Democratic Party, my two options are to vote for the party that loudly villianizes me every chance they get, or the one that lies to me on a daily basis.

It's why I'm probably voting for J0 in 2020 if we can come to an understanding on the For The Record topic.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Well great. Until you fix the Democratic Party, my two options are to vote for the party that loudly villianizes me every chance they get, or the one that lies to me on a daily basis.

It's why I'm probably voting for J0 in 2020 if we can come to an understanding on the For The Record topic.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

GOP versus Democratic Party. Cain versus Abel. Remember that Cain is the survivor and liar in the story, while Abel is the goody-goody who gets his brains bashed in with a rock. God does not protect Abel. (“Where is your brother Abel?” asks God. “I don’t know,” Cain replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”)

The account of Cain and Abel is remarkable for its unique combination of brevity and depth. In a few short sentences, it outlines two diametrically opposed modes of being -- both responses to the emergence of self-consciousness and the knowledge of good and evil detailed in story of Adam and Eve.

Cain's mode of being -- resentful, arrogant and murderous -- arises because his sacrifices are rejected by God. This means that his attempts to give up something valuable in the present to ensure prosperity in the future are insufficient. He fails, in consequence, to thrive, as he believes he should, and becomes bitter, resentful and murderous.

Abel's mode of being is characterized, by contrast, by proper sacrifice -- by the establishment of balance between present action and future benefit. This ensures his personal and social success, accruing over time. Unfortunately, it also makes him the target of Cain's malevolence.

This great short story is relevant personally, on the level of the family, and politically, all with equal force, all simultaneously.

www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+4&version=NIV

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

So we're comparing the GOP to Cain and the Democrats to Abel now?

Wow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
“Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.”

Harry Truman


T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Huh....

Well, I'm for tying the minimum wage to inflation immediately, and removing the social security tax on anyone making under 100k. This means 1 of 2 things.

1. I'm not Republican.

or

2. #NotAllRepublicans

Pick one.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Huh....

Well, I'm for tying the minimum wage to inflation immediately, and removing the social security tax on anyone making under 100k. This means 1 of 2 things.

1. I'm not Republican.

or

2. #NotAllRepublicans

Pick one.

---

Your suggestions are exactly what an unthinking Republican legislator would suggest: Make some huge changes in the law that you are pretty sure will benefit yourself. Then do not work out the calculation on paper to see what the consequences are for the rest of the nation or business or the national debt or, really, anything because you have already done the mental calculation of "What's in it for me?" Republicans have contempt for experts that could do a real calculation because the sum total might be: "Don't Do It!" The recent tax overhaul, for example, did not wait for the experts to tell Congress how the National Debt would change if the law changed.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Bullshit I haven't thought about it. Don't make an accusation and then offer nothing to back it up. If you have a problem with my tax plan and my idea to tie the minimum wage to inflation, then specifically state what it is or shut the fuck up.

---

Quote:

---

Bullshit I haven't thought about it. Don't make an accusation and then offer nothing to back it up. If you have a problem with my tax plan and my idea to tie the minimum wage to inflation, then specifically state what it is or shut the fuck up. - SIX

6ix, what you got is not what a real plan looks like, you know, a plan that will be a success. You have nothing: no calculations, no URL's to several experts and their calculations, no economist praising your idea.= SECOND

---

Quote:

---

You've got nothing but a high opinion of yourself, which makes you perfect material for a GOP legislator.- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Admit it: you are a natural-born Republican, despite your strong protest that you are not.

---

Quote:

---

And you ending your comment with "or shut the fuck up" is the GOP cherry on top. Those guys are ultra-sensitive babies when called out on their half-ass plans.

---

Quote:

---

This is what a real minimum wage law should look like, if only Congressmen would take real responsibility and stop faking it for what they do: Every year, every Congressman submits his number for the minimum wage. He has to explain in writing to his voters about where his number came from. The final decision is the median, not the average, of all the numbers from all Congressmen. There should be no automatic change with inflation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

SECOND, dood, you have not debated SIX's idea, merely re-stated your preference that only WEALTHY people- such as yourself- should influence the conversation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

And despite all of J0's and my differences, Second, he seems to think that I'm on to something here. Unlike you, who would most definitely have something to lose if this plan were ever enacted, he sees the merits of it and is willing to not only discuss it here, but to bring it to other places he posts and presumably is running his platform on. Say what you will about me, but J0 is most certainly nothing like a Texas Republican.

Your original tactic was to cut me off at the knees on my idea by quoting what FDR had to say about it, to which I altered the plan to also call for an Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit future politicians from reversing it or dismantling Social Security altogether. I assume that was a good idea because you completely changed tactics and are now baselessly attacking my character and comparing me to Texas Republicans, of not a single one have I ever met in my entire life.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I think you're afraid.

You probably should be.

I don't blame you for wanting this idea to never see the light of day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
I just answered my own question about crappy political policy. Whatever policy is important to the 1% is pushed slowly and resolutely toward making sense by the 1%. Whatever the 99% want will be pushed hither and yon by the turbulent emotions of the 99% during election season. And that is where the number game comes in. What is the emotion that the majority are feeling on election day? That makes the voter King For A Day. But when election season is over, the 1% will be pushing whoever got elected, either D or R politician, for things to go their way on what they care about. Slow and steady wins for the 1%.

---