US are the fattest....

[PLC1]

Sorts itself out over time with chronic disease.

It would, but those diseases don't generally kick in until after the reproductive years.

 

[Openmind]

Not sure I understand exactly what you are asking. It seems to me that in european politics, right, center, and left are all socialist in nature...all favor large government...big bureaucracy, program after program, ever burgeoning taxes on working people....the only difference I see between right, center, and left is what the want the ever growing government to do.

Is there a group that could be considered to be solidly within the right....center...left category which is actively calling for smaller government and less intrusiveness into peoples lives?

So. . .how long have you lived in Europe? And in which countries?
You OBVIOUSLy have not been living in the same European countries I had the pleasure of living in!

 

[dogtowner]

So. . .how long have you lived in Europe? And in which countries?
You OBVIOUSLy have not been living in the same European countries I had the pleasure of living in!

Did you not understand his question ?

 

[palerider]

Sorry, I have read the Constitution. . .and I do not share your "interpretation" of a very short, very specific document.

Yes it is..and still it seems that you are incapable of understanding it.

Where did I say that "special rights" should be granted based on sexual orientation? What you seem to call "special rights" are merely EQUAL RIGHTS. . .as you stated, the Constitution does not focus on three inches of "skin" to determine the rights of its citizens!

No...they are special rights...Until recently, I also could not marry a man...even for convenience or reasons of financial gain which are easy enough to imagine...the calls to allow same sex marriage were entirely calls for special rights based on sexual orientation. Further, the constitution doesn't even address marriage and never did...your belief that marriage is somehow in there is clear and undeniable evidence that if you ever read the constitution, you didn't even begin to understand it.

The rest of you rant follows the same path, so it is not worth my time answering everyone of your silly "interpretations!"

Translation = you can't even begin to argue against the rebuttal, so you will just toss up a pretense that you could if you felt like it and run away...interesting psychology at work there.

Enjoy being a bigoted Right winger, stuck in an outdated (and very selective) interpretation of the Constitution.

And finish off with some name calling which you can't even begin to substantiate, and call me a right winger which I am clearly not...and make a reference to a document which you obviously don't understand in the least. Prototypical liberal response to being called on your bullshit.

 

[palerider]

Sorts itself out over time with chronic disease.

Not as quickly as it should due to the socialization of medicine....and the costs just keep skyrocketing what with the working public being expected to foot the bill for insurance that covers every aspect of medical care for people who make little, if any effort to take care of themselves.

A better plan for handling cost of medical care would be out of pocket for routine care and a catastrophic policy for major medical problems.

Can you imagine what your car insurance would cost if it covered oil changes, tire rotations, wash and wax jobs, windshield wipers, air fresheners, etc? That is precisely why medical costs have skyrocketed.

 

[palerider]

So. . .how long have you lived in Europe? And in which countries?
You OBVIOUSLy have not been living in the same European countries I had the pleasure of living in!

Which part of "Is there a group that could be considered to be solidly within the right....center...left category which is actively calling for smaller government and less intrusiveness into peoples lives?" did you fail to understand? I asked a specific question...if you can't even grasp that, then there is little wonder that you have failed so miserably at understanding the Constitution.

By your response, are you somehow claiming that europe is secretive and news and analysis reports of the region are somehow false?

 

[Openmind]

Which part of "Is there a group that could be considered to be solidly within the right....center...left category which is actively calling for smaller government and less intrusiveness into peoples lives?" did you fail to understand? I asked a specific question...if you can't even grasp that, then there is little wonder that you have failed so miserably at understanding the Constitution.

By your response, are you somehow claiming that europe is secretive and news and analysis reports of the region are somehow false?

Sorry, dear. You are an extremist joke. I do not answer to rants from extremists or fools. Ask Doggie!

 

[palerider]

Sorry, dear. You are an extremist joke. I do not answer to rants from extremists or fools. Ask Doggie!

So more of the old liberal dodge when you are unable to actually defend your points...not to worry, that's your history...all one need do is look at your past posts to see that it is your MO...hurl some names, spew some slogans and then run with your tail tucked firmly between your legs. Of course what else could you do when you post a great steaming pile of indefensible rubbish?

Not even a good try..but then none was ever expected from you.

 

[dogtowner]

So more of the old liberal dodge when you are unable to actually defend your points...not to worry, that's your history...all one need do is look at your past posts to see that it is your MO...hurl some names, spew some slogans and then run with your tail tucked firmly between your legs. Of course what else could you do when you post a great steaming pile of indefensible rubbish?

Not even a good try..but then none was ever expected from you.

It's hard to defend the indefenseable so she invariably wanders off.

 

[PLC1]

It's hard to defend the indefenseable so she invariably wanders off.

What's so difficult about defending the indefensible? The Trumpeteers do it all the time.

 

[The Scotsman]

Not sure I understand exactly what you are asking.

Yeah.. sorry about that it was rather vague.

It seems to me that in european politics, right, center, and left are all socialist in nature...all favor large government...big bureaucracy, program after program, ever burgeoning taxes on working people....

Fundementally yes that's a pretty fair description of the landscape, but if you look at the nuances of political dymanics I think that the Kantian model of cosmoplitan federation being adopted by the EU as a foundation for future inter-statal co-operation/integration (in terms of trade, defence and law etc) is, arguably, begining adopted worldwide therefore I would argue that "large" government is a thing that the US is going to have to look forward to? The US is a very young country and has been moving inexorably away from its original ideals for a number of generations now; ultimately I think that the US is heading down the same route as Europe (for better or worse). For example successful people aspire to do greater things not only for themselves but for those around them (Bill Gates) - they appreciate the place they came from but want to elevate those that are in it... out of it. In other words that have found a route out of the limitations of their backgrounds and feel that have a moral duty (if that's the right phrase) to assist others to do the same. The success for the individual in determining how, where, when to act is exhilarating until something goes wrong and when one is in a state of adversity and you do not have the well of resources to fall back on then the sense of "community" is missing.

The EU is a superstate example of that ideal. Europe has been at war since the time of the Romans and post WWII the direction of travel has been to try and eliminate that threat, therefore, how do you do this? You integrate countries as in Kants model thus the "self" is transformed to the "community" as in times of adversity the "self" is exposed whilst the "community" is protected. Turning to your thoughts on "big government" IMHO I think the US is already on that path and is only going to go further down it. One of the centre pieces of Trump's campaign policies was to dismantle ACA which so far has not happened, I have the feeling that within the next generation Medicare/Aid/ACA will all be rationaliased into one national "socialised" medical scheme for the benefit of the "community" perhaps along the lines of the European models? You arleady have a model which is FEMA designed to respond when a state declares an emergency the "self" i.e. the State becomes exposed therefore the "community" responds.

Personally I think political terms of right, left centre are moribund. I think for better or worse the "community" is going to replace the "self" as we have seen during the financial collapse countries needed assistance from the community in order to be socially viable. As I said I don't disagree with what you are saying I just think that to rationalise in those terms is not the point anymore.

 

[palerider]

Yeah.. sorry about that it was rather vague.


Fundementally yes that's a pretty fair description of the landscape, but if you look at the nuances of political dymanics I think that the Kantian model of cosmoplitan federation being adopted by the EU as a foundation for future inter-statal co-operation/integration (in terms of trade, defence and law etc) is, arguably, begining adopted worldwide therefore I would argue that "large" government is a thing that the US is going to have to look forward to?

Agreed...liberal politics has pushed the US into socialism "light" since FDR...and it is getting heavier all the time...but just because that is the way things are going doesn't make it anything other than socialism.

The US is a very young country and has been moving inexorably away from its original ideals for a number of generations now; ultimately I think that the US is heading down the same route as Europe (for better or worse).

Definitely for the worse. I have tried and can't think of a single thing that I can do anymore that doesn't involve some sort of government interference either local, state or federal without going into the most mundane aspect of my life. The trouble with that is that government is very seldom the answer to problems and is damned near always the cause...the more involvement, the more problems that they simply can not fix.

For example successful people aspire to do greater things not only for themselves but for those around them (Bill Gates) - they appreciate the place they came from but want to elevate those that are in it... out of it.

The cases where government assistance in the form of welfare has lifted anyone out of poverty are as scarce as chicken teeth...the cases where welfare has produced angry people, stuck in poverty and generational dependence on government handouts are legion....and the taxes that must be collected to hand out to those in need invariably end up hurting exactly those people. When you tax the rich in an effort to redistribute wealth to the poor, the rich who are the ones who provide the means of production don't pay those taxes out of their pockets, they increase the cost of the goods that they produce, which inevetably increases the cost of living for the very people who can afford it the least.

The only government program that I can think of that has been a resounding success in moving people up the social ladder has been the GI education bill. It is a program where by spending time in the military, you are afforded assistance with furthering your education...service is required in order to qualify so one not only serves one's country but is given the opportunity and motivation to develop a good work ethic...then when you begin using the benefit, you are required to succeed..that is if you drop classes they want their money back...if you drop out of school, they want their money back, at least for the semester in which you dropped out...if you flunk out then the benefit stops.

Requiring service of some sort in exchange for government assistance is good for both government and the people who receive the assistance. When you simply hand money or goods over, people develop an entitlement attitude and almost always come to hate the hand that feeds them.

In other words that have found a route out of the limitations of their backgrounds and feel that have a moral duty (if that's the right phrase) to assist others to do the same. The success for the individual in determining how, where, when to act is exhilarating until something goes wrong and when one is in a state of adversity and you do not have the well of resources to fall back on then the sense of "community" is missing.

You should read a book called Outliers, by Malcom Gladwell. It takes an in depth look at the people who have risen to the top of their chosen professions...and rarely did they "find" a way out of their circumstances. In most instances, their route to the top was thrust upon them without the knowledge of themselves or the people who did the thrusting. In most cases, it wasn't money, or someone pushing them to succeed that resulted in an individual being propelled to the top of his field, it is unique circumstances and an internal "thing" that no amount of assistance will ever provide.

The EU is a superstate example of that ideal. Europe has been at war since the time of the Romans and post WWII the direction of travel has been to try and eliminate that threat, therefore, how do you do this? You integrate countries as in Kants model thus the "self" is transformed to the "community" as in times of adversity the "self" is exposed whilst the "community" is protected.

And now europe is in the beginnings of a war with an enemy that lives within...an enemy who wants us all dead and who is himself protected by the very institution you though would make you safe...and he kills indiscriminately. So what option do you have other than to either become what he wishes you to be, or give up the illusion that government can make you safe?

Turning to your thoughts on "big government" IMHO I think the US is already on that path and is only going to go further down it. One of the centre pieces of Trump's campaign policies was to dismantle ACA which so far has not happened, I have the feeling that within the next generation Medicare/Aid/ACA will all be rationaliased into one national "socialised" medical scheme for the benefit of the "community" perhaps along the lines of the European models? You arleady have a model which is FEMA designed to respond when a state declares an emergency the "self" i.e. the State becomes exposed therefore the "community" responds.

No doubt we will...because a tipping point has been reached where there are more voting people exempt from the taxes that are required for such services than there are people who pay for it. That road, however, is a dead end and no one is sure, or even cares in so far as I can see exactly how long that road is and what is at the end.

I think for better or worse the "community" is going to replace the "self" as we have seen during the financial collapse countries needed assistance from the community in order to be socially viable. As I said I don't disagree with what you are saying I just think that to rationalise in those terms is not the point anymore.

If one can't put a name to a threat, then one can't begin to address it. Political correctness is demonstrating that truth in spades everywhere it exists.

 

[The Scotsman]

Political correctness is demonstrating that truth in spades everywhere it exists.

In that and much of the rest of your post I would agree. Political correctness is the basis of the legal and social morality under which cosmoplitan nations strive to attain and under which the EU uses to underpin its political and social model without understanding the inherent problems that that creates. One of the central points of the Kantian hypothesis was that like "states" would group together based on, inter alia, trade, law and a shared "morality" - in Kants words they would be "cosanguinious". This like mindedness is bourne from ashes of the Westphalian model which Kant, Adam Smith and the post WWII political philosophies did not wish to embrace. It was counterintuitive to amalgamant ones economic and political systems and allow territorial integrity at the same time. Which is one of the reason I voted for Brexit.

You mentioned the issues with "big" government and I would again agree with your basic point that government is not the best broker of resources. Unfortunately in Europe the argument is now moot on that point as institutions are so far advanced that to countenance a roll back would be beyond the thought of most poeple; in this I am a dinosaur. It would be tilting at windmills to suggest suporting aything other than a National Health System or a fundemental change to redistributive taxation. It woudn't happen. As you said "the cases where welfare has produced angry people, stuck in poverty and generational dependence on government handouts are legion" is not wrong, thus what options are avaliable? Brexit was in interesting example of what, I think, the people thought of large and remote and inflexible government. This mega-parliament in Brussels who's systems and laws trump that of their own Nation's is systematic of the direction of travel. Greater integration, greater power and less national identity and less self-determination... we are all good little well adjusted morally sound Europeans now.

If one can't put a name to a threat, then one can't begin to address it

The threat is a philosophical one and requires people to understand it and demand a coherent and structured narrative so that they understand the direction of travel. These are not short term journeys they last generations and before you realise it you are locked into a system which cannot be changed. Personally I think the UK was incapable of having that discussion because we were/are to bound up in our perochial discussions about short term national issues to grasp the significance of what was happening around Europe and the rest of he world. The UK joined the EEC (Common Market) in 1973 - it was a trade agreement only at the time, but over time, and through insidious legal treaties beyond the wit and ken of most people soverign powers were slowly abrogated to European Union, until now. Brexit was when as a country we said "when"! Enough.

The US is trying to isolate itself from the international community and I would argue that that is not the way to go. Understanding the world and educating your people to appreciate the sublties of it allows for a sensible discussion on how you want to be a part of it and on what terms.

 

[palerider]

The US is trying to isolate itself from the international community and I would argue that that is not the way to go. Understanding the world and educating your people to appreciate the sublties of it allows for a sensible discussion on how you want to be a part of it and on what terms.

Alas, without taking an isolationist stance (with brass knuckles) I doubt that there is any chance of educating people to appreciate anything. Our educational system has tipped so far to the left that kids are graduating not only from primary schools, but college itself without the first hint of real critical thinking skills...and in order to look at a suggested political system and even get a glimpse of what it will look like given the opportunity to proceed to its logical end requires a substantial set of critical thinking skills.

We need to go back to the fundamental principles that made us what we were in the earlier part of the 20th century without the racial undertones. A black president should have put an end to the race baiting but I am afraid that it, and being offended has become a cottage industry in this country and till such time as social pressure can put an end to it, the practice will continue.

There is still time and a slim chance that we can put a stop to the political correctness train, and at least set the entitlement engine back a couple of decades. But to do so, we can't be part of the "go along to get along" train of thought. That sort of thinking isn't what made America great, that sort of thinking is what has led to our decline into socialism and all the ills and absolute stupidity on the part of government that go along with it.

I fear that we will never get back to our rugged individualist roots more's the pity, but I don't think that we have past the point of avoiding the trap of full blown socialism.

If you were to ask me how to do that in a generation, I would say that education is the only way..and a very specific sort of education. I would suggest that schools hire top shelf educators in the field of practical finance and put many of the educators that teach less worthy courses out to pasture...pay these financial teachers handsomely because they would, in fact, be the best hope for the future.

Put 1000 dollars into an account for each child entering school and begin sound financial education at the first grade level...and demand that an acceptable grade in financial education be achieved in order for the student to progress to the next grade...and each grad should teach more in depth financial management techniques....no exceptions. Allow the child to work with the money in his account but not withdraw it till such time as they graduate from high school.

Whether or not they move on to secondary education, there would be every probability that they will have enough financial education that they could be successful even if they never earned a great deal of money. One doesn't have to make a lot of money in order to end up with a lot of money if one knows what to do with money in the first place. At present, in this country if you took all the money from everyone, and divided it equally between every citizen, in 5 or 10 years, most everyone would be right back in the financial position they were before the "great division" took place. People who know what to do with money will inevetably be successful and those who do not will not.

A generation of students who actually know the nuts and bolds of being financially responsible could change the future for the next 5 generations at least.

Any change, that is any meaningful change in the political realm must begin with an educated populace that is prepared to depend on themselves and not government...and sees government as an impediment to their future rather than the key to their future.

 

[dogtowner]

I have hope that the snowflake epidemic will fade in the votes of average Joe people nationwide who are just saying no to the purveyors of that thinking. Trump is the engine for that as he is delivering prosperity unlike what has been seen in a generation or two. People understand prosperity and they like it. A lot. I 2as reading about a guy in Erie PA who may well unseat the dems which hasn't happened in ages.
Things are changing. Won't change NYC or LA but the rest of the country is changing. And it's not blue or red. It's, for lack of a better term, American.