Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:03 pm

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:How about this idea: if a Supreme Court Justice is consider to no longer be suitable to sit on the bench, the President puts it up to a popular vote. It wouldn't be simple majority, no. The people would vote, and if 2/3 of all voters vote to boot a judge from the bench, they lose their job. A new judge could be determined as normal.


It does have a high requirement but still, leaves open the problem of allowing the populace to override the protection the judiciary offers.

Shi wrote:So if a SCOTUS judge makes a decision the President disagrees with he can put that judge up for a popular vote? and if the majority of America agrees with it (regardless of its constitutionality) they can boot the judge?


As far as I can tell, yes but only with a two thirds majority which does provide a potentially difficult threshold to throw the judge out.
DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:I honestly can't figure out how anyone could be duped into thinking corporate tax breaks help the average citizen. That thinking is absolutely insane.


This is the kind of thing that doesn't really help build your case. You disagree with corporate tax breaks, a lot of very smart and honest men in business, journalism and politics are in favour of the idea. That doesn't mean they are right, some very smart and honest people also disagree with it, but it would suggest the idea isn't insane either.

All your doing is setting out that you hate the idea then throwing out insults on the basis that you disagree with the idea so ergo 1) it must be folly, 2) anyone who disagrees with you must have a failing of mental or moral kind. Your not making the case, your not addressing the subject.
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 17039
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby DreamGoddessLindsey » Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:34 pm

I'd even go to 3/4 majority (like for Constitutional Amendments) for booting a judge if mob rule is that much a problem. That way, most people have to be in agreement. I just want to get rid of lifetime appointments because it doesn't allow for them to answer to anyone, not honestly.

As for corporate tax breaks, I'd say it's insane because all the evidence we currently have show the economy growing weak when corporations get what they want, and the reverse also seems to be true. Corporate tax breaks allow too few people to be in charge of too much of the wealth. It's already bad enough how much money and power the 1% has (and abuses). Corporate tax breaks exasperate the problem. Trickle down economics is a proven failure, and corporate tax breaks are one of the theories in trickle-down economics.

http://arran.wordpress.com/2007/04/13/t ... e-failure/

That shows the failure of trickle-down economics.

So it is insane to think it helps the average person. The definitely of insanity is trying something over and over again while expecting different results. This always ends badly. Ergo, insane. That a bit better?
DreamGoddessLindsey
Banned
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:50 pm

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:01 am

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote: That way, most people have to be in agreement. I just want to get rid of lifetime appointments because it doesn't allow for them to answer to anyone, not honestly.


This is a repetition of an earlier statement which is patently untrue. Again, ask Samuel Chase. They may be impeached and the laws they apply may be altered to render their power miniscule.

Corporate tax breaks allow too few people to be in charge of too much of the wealth. It's already bad enough how much money and power the 1% has (and abuses). Corporate tax breaks exasperate the problem. Trickle down economics is a proven failure, and corporate tax breaks are one of the theories in trickle-down economics.


Corporate tax breaks may or not be helpful for an economy, but it wouldn't prevent wealth being concentrated in a small group.

So it is insane to think it helps the average person. The definitely of insanity is trying something over and over again while expecting different results. This always ends badly. Ergo, insane. That a bit better?


Slightly, yes. However, the idea is not insane. While it may not play out as intended (and I believe it doesn't) tax breaks theoretically could provide employers incentives to spend more money and hire more employees. That is not the definition of insanity, it is an expression tied to the word. Insanity merely means someone of unsound mind, unreasonable, or suffering from a disorder. Many educated economists who believe in theories you do not agree with are not unsound of mind, do not suffer from mental disorders, or are not unreasonable merely because you don't agree with the theory for economic success.

I'm sure of them would suggest that their ideas were never implemented correctly.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:52 pm

Shikanosuke wrote: That is not the definition of insanity, it is an expression tied to the word. Insanity merely means someone of unsound mind, unreasonable, or suffering from a disorder. Many educated economists who believe in theories you do not agree with are not unsound of mind, do not suffer from mental disorders, or are not unreasonable merely because you don't agree with the theory for economic success.

I'm sure of them would suggest that their ideas were never implemented correctly.


Yeah, that was why I objected to the word insanity.

As for corporate tax breaks, there are those who don't agree with trickle down economics but support corporate tax-breaks. They aren't the same thing.
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 17039
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:51 am

Shikanosuke wrote:
Corporate tax breaks allow too few people to be in charge of too much of the wealth. It's already bad enough how much money and power the 1% has (and abuses). Corporate tax breaks exasperate the problem. Trickle down economics is a proven failure, and corporate tax breaks are one of the theories in trickle-down economics.


Corporate tax breaks may or not be helpful for an economy, but it wouldn't prevent wealth being concentrated in a small group.


Any more than the existence of chartered corporations in the first place? Yeah, I'll agree with that. It seems from recent history that both supply-side and Keynesian economic theories are the favoured tools of theorists who see no problem with a massive wealth gap (they merely disagree about how it should be enforced and within which constraints).

Shikanosuke wrote:
So it is insane to think it helps the average person. The definitely of insanity is trying something over and over again while expecting different results. This always ends badly. Ergo, insane. That a bit better?


Slightly, yes. However, the idea is not insane. While it may not play out as intended (and I believe it doesn't) tax breaks theoretically could provide employers incentives to spend more money and hire more employees. That is not the definition of insanity, it is an expression tied to the word. Insanity merely means someone of unsound mind, unreasonable, or suffering from a disorder. Many educated economists who believe in theories you do not agree with are not unsound of mind, do not suffer from mental disorders, or are not unreasonable merely because you don't agree with the theory for economic success.

I'm sure of them would suggest that their ideas were never implemented correctly.


Well, but wouldn't that put them on the same plane of intellectual respectability as the unreconstructed Marxists in the West? (That is, the ones whom one often hears claiming that communism was never implemented correctly.) But I agree with you that it doesn't make them insane - it would, in this instance, merely make them utopian ideologues.

The Laffer curve may be appropriate at certain rates of taxation, but generally speaking, for most of the twentieth century those rates of taxation have been - by American standards, at least - incredibly high (as in upwards of 65%) - but it has been used to justify policies which have arguably gimped the government's ability to raise revenue and sent it spiralling into deficit spending. It would seem to me, therefore, that the problem is not that economists are insane, but that they have willingly sold their integrity to political institutions and processes which wilfully distort their ideas for public consumption.

Anywho... back to Putin...

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:I'm not saying he's not popular in Russia. That doesn't make him less bad, it makes the citizens of Russia overall bad. Sadly, I don't know how to change a whole country.


Yeah, this analysis is not helpful at all, and on the same level of sophistication as the new 'Yellow Peril' arguments about China. Writing off a whole nation as 'bad' and ignoring the reasons why Putin's popularity remains so high is little more than a dolled-up form of bigotry.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby bodidley » Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:14 pm

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:If it were up to me, there wouldn't be any agreements and we'd be over there stopping that sick bastard from conquering more territory.


Frankly, starting foreign war with Russia might cause a civil war at home.
"We can't mortgage our childrens' future on a mountain of debt," - Barack Obama
bodidley
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:33 am
Location: I'm an everywhere man

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby bodidley » Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:20 pm

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:Thing is, American warmongering doesn't really have any relevance as to Putin's maneuvering and attempts to expand.


Putin is not really interested in expanding geographically. He's savvy and understands what power in the modern world is. It's not all about having a larger jurisdiction but about controlling access to trade.
"We can't mortgage our childrens' future on a mountain of debt," - Barack Obama
bodidley
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:33 am
Location: I'm an everywhere man

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:50 am

bodidley wrote:
DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:If it were up to me, there wouldn't be any agreements and we'd be over there stopping that sick bastard from conquering more territory.


Frankly, starting foreign war with Russia might cause a civil war at home.


Really? Not heard the idea that US would split if they got in a fight with Russia
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 17039
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:42 am

Dong Zhou wrote:
bodidley wrote:
DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:If it were up to me, there wouldn't be any agreements and we'd be over there stopping that sick bastard from conquering more territory.


Frankly, starting foreign war with Russia might cause a civil war at home.


Really? Not heard the idea that US would split if they got in a fight with Russia


Nor have I, and I live here. If anyone is hearing 'civil war' in America then they're tuned into some right-wing communities or sources.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: Obama vs. Putin - Ukraine a Modern Day Guan Du?

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:54 pm

I agree with Shik. In the short run, fears of a civil war are groundless.

But I do have a certain degree of anxiety about the long run. Partially because our politics are becoming more (if they haven't actually been for a long time) a matter of symbolic-cultic identity rather than of principle. For example, there's a stereotype of the latte-drinking, bespectacled, button-down Birkenstock-wearing vegetarian hipster who eats only organic food, lives in an urban centre or college town, and drives an electric-hybrid. And then there's the stereotype of the gun-toting, plaid flannel-wearing red meat-eating redneck who likes to go range-shooting and has a King James Bible in the glove compartment of his four-wheel drive pickup truck.

Each of these things is more a cultural signal than it is a political stance. In fact, politically, on a broad range of issues, these two people are probably more similar than they would likely imagine, and both operate from similar political axiomatic principles - only applying them in different ways.

On the one hand, regarding national cohesion in the short run, this is probably helpful. People identifying more along the lines of cultural signifiers than along the lines of politics means that these groups are going to be less activist or likely to foment rebellion against each other. But in the long run, culture trumps politics. Culture forms the basis of the language which we use to describe our politics. And if there is an unresolved cultural divide in our country, there are likely to be dire consequences in the long term as the meanings of commonly-held political vocabulary change and as irreconcilable tribal narratives congeal.

Again, this is probably very long-term and likely won't happen in our lifetimes (assuming for the moment that we're mostly in the 18-35 demographic). But sudden, critical shifts have been known to happen before.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved