Recent posts by BombCog on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bernie Sanders fatal flaw.


Gee willikers, thanks for the Serious Discussion, jhco!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

The businessmen at the top didn’t build the factories. Construction workers did. Architects did. Engineers did. The factory workers did. The businessmen at the top provided permission and sucked up the profits. And don’t dare try to say that they provide the money: the banks did, funded by millions of little guys with their bank accounts and their tax dollars. They don’t even provide risk, thanks to Too Big To Fail exploitations. So I ask you again, cite your data and stop trying to reframe every conversation as the big bad liberals conspiring against your People’s Truth.

Age doesn’t provide life experience. I know dozens of twenty somethings with hard eyes that have been through more, seen broader, and endured longer than sixty year old idiots squatting on sprawling land and congratulating themselves for each easy day passing by. Struggle provides life experience. And friend, I’ve got years of forum reading that says you haven’t struggled as much as you think. “Common sense” is just what the passive call their assumptions.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

The producers in a modern economy are those that you call “sheep.” Those at the top do not produce anything. So as I ask you so often, if you want to make wild claims, cite them. I can match tit for tat if we’re just going to spout ideology.

Age is not wisdom.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Even Egypt knows Democrats and Obama are total jokes.

All those jobs in the public sector must be an illusion. If only there was some way we could see exactly when and how unemployment began healing or who is helped by the Affordable Care Act (first proposed and put into action at the state level by a conservative, and passed by a conservative dominated legislative branch, but apparently these facts are inconvenient to your propaganda) but to see data like that we’d have to have access to some kind of network of multiple databases whose function is to store and disseminate that information in an easily understood way. Some kind of… outerweb.

Would it be too much to ask that you cite any of your claims with actual data?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bernie Sanders fatal flaw.

Who doesn’t understand that? That’s been said outright. What has been said is that for all of his childish insults on television and bold promises, he’s provided not a single actionable plan for any policy, ever.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American wymyn will soon be forced to sign up for the draft

Who cares what the general desire is? Most men don’t want to be on the draft. All or nothing, jhco, that’s justice. You were so eager to take a snipe at “them liberals” that you shot yourself in the foot. If you’ll read the thread, too, you’ll see those liberals (including vikaTae) advocating for identical and objective standards. Are you so bitter that you’ll argue even with people that are openly agreeing?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

Rush Limbaugh does not deal in facts. He will often misquote surveys, disregard evidence as a conspiracy (even when it’s gathered by multiple political rivals), and openly lie. He is not a credible source and has done nothing to reform his process in order to become a credible source. You may not be sure what a “fact” is at this stage. A fact is “a thing that is indisputably the case; the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.” It is so objective as to be inarguable. If it is arguable, it is not a fact, but an opinion. And while some subjects can only ever deal with opinions, we shouldn’t begin to confuse those interpretations and inclinations with the noble standard of fact. If you could show a time using the forum’s search function when you presented an indisputable fact free from deception from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, I would be quite happy to support you against unfair treatment in this forum. As I feel is plainly obvious in some of my (let’s admit it) ranting, I quite sympathize with the abused underdog.

But while I can remember several times you used a plainly fictitious source or cherry-picked minutiae away from its context and used it to justify something else entirely and even mistook an opinion piece for factual evidence, try as I might I can’t find what you’re talking about at all. So as one who tries very hard (and fails admittedly often) to be rational, allow me to be skeptical that you’re doing anything more right now than playing the victim in order to harass another poster.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

That is quite the story, Frostbringer. It is, of course, appalling that a lout could do so much with so little in order to ruin the days of those around him. How did he get such a position without being functionally literate, anyway? It reminds me of a certain kind of “businessman” in the United States that rides through school on the reputation of his father, begins professional life on Daddy’s dollar, and squirms his way into whatever level of government he may and dole himself out money from the public funds through bank schemes or road work or, ahem, casino empires. Part of me almost wishes we had the whole title system in the US, if only to be able to identify when one of these worms is coming through so we can brace ourselves for the abuse. It’s not like the lack of formal Lords has stopped the caste from appearing, and it would give us a flamboyant new cuss.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

KKK he lists price in Euros and asks how college is functional in “your country” if the price statistic is true. He’s certain not American, not just detached from the realities within it. Which makes it even more bewildering why he’s adopted the tone and tact that he’s had so far, in a thread ostensibly about party politics in the United States.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / An Ideal Democracy

We could go on for pages arguing if the representatives in the United States are freely elected, even down to the most local level. I think most in the underclass are willing to believe that the U.S. is as much a democracy as the U.S.S.R. was a commune.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

For God’s sake, you’re not even American and you’re preaching about what opportunities are here?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Originally posted by Tulrog:
It’s not like there are a few people who have it all and the rest doesn’t have anything.

Except that is exactly how it works. There is a wealth gap between the poor and the middle class, too. 40% of the United States population owns less than nothing. Why can’t you understand that?
And different situation have different options to improve those situations.
So it would be logical to say that not all situations have options that can efficiently improve that situation, but you repeatedly deny this as a possibility. And when you’re living hand to mouth by necessity, efficiency is the only word in survival. I grew up in a household where not everyone got to eat at every meal. This was so housing could be afforded. Not every child went to college, and those that did depended heavily on scholarships, grants and loans. That means that some of my own siblings are never going to escape poverty and it will be a gamble if their children will, especially considering the wealth and access gaps are accelerating. And you have the gall to tell me that this reality doesn’t exist, because of your own doubt? You can choke on your doubt, the people are there and the data is clear.

What makes me think this way? Has anyone replied to my numbers on smoking and lottery yet?

That’s a hopeless red herring. It has nothing at all to do with economic politics. It is at best a symptom of the systems of exploitation that the very wealthy use to keep the very poor in bondage.
That’s a lot of money to make all sorts of personal improvements.

Improvements that even the middle class rarely has access to. A self-help book isn’t worth the expense to wipe yourself with, because all it does is bouy self-esteem if you don’t have access to the opportunities it encourages you to be taking.

And once again. I’m not trying to say people should do this or that. But numbers like this make me doubt the image of the helpless poor non rich man is a completely correct one. Part of the wealth gap problem is that people chose to set different priorities.

No, it’s that they have to set different priorities, in order to live through tomorrow. This isn’t complicated, but your denial is telling. Bootstrapping is as impossible and accusatory as it was in the Great Depression. Self-improvement is a luxury of the wealthy, and they dole out this luxury quite rarely to the poor out of the sole kindness of their hearts. You’ve bought into a toxic myth. Every time there’s an actual, relevant, direct citation of a statistical reality that influences the economic politics of the United States, you openly ignore it and plop down some stupid thing about smoking or television and blame the situation on that instead. You routinely put the cart before the horse. The poor aren’t keeping the television on and thus they are poor, they can do little else except try to recuperate from their second job by passively listening to the television. Your entire argument is like that: divorcing context and reversing blame. How could a sane policy ever come from a fantastical premise?
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Tulrog, what exactly does a rich person spend their time creating, instead of consuming? I can dig up a dozen recent articles about the very wealthy taking four month vacations, the actual content of their “80” hour work weeks (spoiler: large amounts of leisure time), and even yachting when they’re supposed to be in court for the crimes they commit on a scale that makes the most accomplished bike thief look like a good Samaritan. They don’t labor in the factories, they don’t till the soil, they don’t stand for 18 hours straight to deal with customers, they don’t create marketing campaigns, or even provide loans and crooked financial schemes. What, pray tell, do the billionaires create?

The very wealthy do not produce. They “manage.” They don’t make anything, they pay people to do that on their behalf. What the wealthy possess are the immensely powerful products of political influence and economic opportunity. These are things that are not created, but cornered. What the wealthy pander is access and this is an exploitative and parasitic exchange. The top 5% of wealth holders create nothing but rules that prolong this unfair exchange, because their only real skill provided to the global economy is stacking the deck. Correcting this frankly evil status quo is what most people mean by narrowing the wealth gap. I really can’t feel like I can emphasize this enough, because it keeps getting brushed aside: the gap between the rich and the poor is the largest it has ever been, in all of human history, in every place and in every previous time. It has never been this bad, and the systems in place only serve to make it worse.

PAH just said that

[corporations] are not the arbiter of justice and social “fairness.”
But they used to be. The ridiculous obsession with wealth for its own sake is the very first thing that we must change in our societies before things like democracy, class justice, and free enterprise can even occur. There was a time when companies and the wealthy thought that they had a responsibility to risk profits in exchange for people and social benefit. This is no longer the idea, because of propaganda mills that glorify the wealthy as capable of saving us all: and yet, they don’t. The poor are more charitable than the rich. Effort does not correlate with wealth. The poor do more production per hour than the wealthy, and yet aren’t benefiting from technological multipliers to this production. The wealthy are actively working against a fair system and disproportionately gaining from a dying lower and middle class. And those at the bottom rarely see a way out.

Because there isn’t any.

And that’s bullshit.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Originally posted by Tulrog:

BombCog skim through this article to see examples where people “won” despite a “rigged game”.

Extreme outliers. The very fact that it is so notable shows how they are exceptions, statistical anomalies that happen in any large enough sample. Note also that even though they used the same strategies as millions of others, they succeeded where others failed: showing the extreme amount of luck involved.

But that’s also beside the point. If you want to completely close the wealth gap you say something like “Everybody should have the same amount of money”.

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. I am not advocating for a communistic, direct flattening of all current wealth. As you said, and I never disagreed, the existing systems would swiftly stack the deck all over again. I was merely pointing out your faulty assumption that supports your argument. The rich aren’t rich because they are inherently better people.

“The lazy deserve to be rich”. Sentences like this won’t get us anywhere.

Indeed they won’t. So why do you keep offering up the platitudes yourself? Both are sourced from you. That you offered up the second is especially telling, because it’s clearly not far off from what you believe is your opposition. The rich are not rich because of special effort, and the poor are not lazy. That is as hateful as it is inaccurate, considering how plagued the poor are by overwork and painful lives.

As for your monopoly example. I think this is a great way to highlight some aspects.


First in monopoly your actions are random. Which is somewhat similar to reactive behavior. Instead of deciding what to do next you let life decide what will happen to you and just complain about the result. The situation you are in is a result of your decisions not a series of random dice rolls.

Magical thinking at its purest. I would argue that there is no actual thing as a “decision” but that’s a subject for its own thread. How is decision making not reactive? And considering the intricacies and mass of the systems you’re interacting with, how on earth are the results anything except random? Further, the point of the Monopoly example is that the currently wealthy cannot be trusted to reflect on the methods of their success or the conditions with which they started, so they cannot be trusted to determine their own tax burdens and social responsibilities, etc. They are quite literally functioning under partial minds.

And none of this is in any way related to Donald Trump having a better start by being born into a rich family.

It indicates that he, and the money-saturated base of the dwindling Republican party, have inherently untenable economic propositions. They don’t even remember how money works with society. It’s actually unthinkable.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

That would be a reasonable argument if every person started off at the same level playing field when they were born. They got the same monetary support from their parents, the same funds flowing through their community, the same schools, the same social programs, the same opportunities after mass education is done, and so forth. But they don’t.

Even in openly rigged games of Monopoly, the winners with grossly advanced starting positions insist they won fairly and were better players. The richer you are, the less capable you are — physically — of empathy and moral behavior. The rich don’t even have the same monetary stresses.

In this age, the age in which the gap between rich and poor is the highest it’s ever been, where even a “low” rich has more money than the Sultans at the height of their extravagance, in which you aren’t considered wealthy until you can outspend most nations, there is simply no logical justification for thinking the poor “deserve” to be poor.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Well, it already is such that those holding Congress seats can’t benefit from a salary change until the next term. It’s not technically their fault that the return rate for federal politicians is 90%.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

It only has that tone because you boldly forced it upon them. This is a very shallow appeal.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American wymyn will soon be forced to sign up for the draft

I think it’s more reasonable to have a minimum health spec, and minimum fitness bar, and mostly vitally a minimum level of mental health. If you pass the three, then who cares, you’re in. Color, creed, sex, age, whatever. Doesn’t matter. Are you fit? Are you sane? Are you healthy? You can join the military. If my 80 year old great-grandfather can run as long as a 20 year old fresh recruit, is as distantly prone to sociopathic fits, and doesn’t have any indicators of failing health, then I’m sure there’s some biologists that want a few samples but beyond that he can rejoin the force no further questions asked. All of these guesses are far too old-fashioned. We have better and more precise instruments in the new millennium, so let them be used.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bernie Sanders fatal flaw.

Originally posted by Bobneson:

Say what you will about him, but you can’t deny that a man of such wealth will do strongly in the economy. That’s what many most like about him.

I fully deny that a man who has had every advantage and still pisses it away is doing strongly at anything. He’s propped up by cronies. What most people like about him is that he’s a pandering blowhard using rowdy populist appeals to leverage a subset of the population that will never be convinced by such silly things as “fact” or “consistency” and instead see conspiracy and mayhem everywhere they look. He’s cultivating a base that’s been rightly ignored by responsible politicians.

Originally posted by Bobneson:

….

To me, we need a President that will do much more than “NOT take this anymore!” Someone that funds their own campaign, buys their OWN stuff and not from valuable tax payer money. And someone that will make us as a country respectable.
Someone like Ronald Reagan.

I’m sorry, like who? Is this the actual Reagan, who struggled constantly to interact with foreign leaders as more than the Cowboy Picture Man and was funded extensively and some would argue quite shadily indeed. Or is this the mythological Reagan that did the actual opposite of everything the historical president ever did? The one that tore down borders and lowered taxes and never ever lied to the public? He was a capable enough politician that it’s just upsetting how his name and actual deeds are constantly besmirched by sycophants and hustlers. Reagan was an extremist that spent his whole run in compromise: that’s leadership. But he was a mortal man, and the things you ascribe to him are plainly false.

If this is the state of the typical Trump supporter, then any rational citizen of the United States should be in a cold sweat right now. Waiting for the marching boots echoing off from the horizon.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American wymyn will soon be forced to sign up for the draft

Now all they need to do is make PT standards identical, and we’ll have actual gender equality in the military.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The first plasma: the Wendelstein 7-X fusion device is now in operation

Originally posted by Bobneson:

We need to focus on medicines or improving current technology more than some theoretical power source.

This is pure hogwash. There is no need to force people away from their interests and aptitudes in order to focus on fields that aren’t demanding the extra hands. And more importantly, and actually quite vitally, it is most efficient to diversify research efforts across societies because a breakthrough in one field can mean little to nothing to it (say, petroleum engineers discover a way to cheaply make plastic) and absolutely everything to another, totally unrelated field (medical doctors can develop pristine and flexible bags in order to transmit fluids to a patient.) Research is not zero sum and it is impossible and foolish to say that focus on one field in particular is what is most beneficial for people as a whole.

Finally, how on Earth do you justify that research into a new power source is not improving current technology? From portable energy to magnetic manipulation to wire efficiency, this whole project is nothing but improving current technology.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

Noted, and also very interesting.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

Originally posted by issendorf:

I’ll leave this here without comment: Robot marriages.

Cybernetic life cannot yet provide consent. Completely different issue.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United Nations SD Goals

Social services are not only some of the most unfunded and low-budget programs on the federal payroll, they’re also one of the few budget items that come directly from tax dollars and not debt trolling, foreign investments, or corporate interests. Can’t say that about, say, the massively overblown military budget.

So what does that have to do with the thread topic? Seems to me you’re trying to start a tangential pissing contest.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

Now this, this is hyperbole. “Declaring war on our food sources”? Patently ridiculous. The United States government spends massive amounts of money undercutting private business in order to foster profitable ranching and farming. Your links are sensationalist garbage, pure propaganda, complete with bold lies that contradict the publically available record.