Favourite latest post by previous poster

[Antonio the Sixth]

If Republicans think that being hawkish and starting wars with literally every country is a great solution and will help them winning elections and appeal to moderate and younger voters, they deserve to lose.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ahem...

[Sumner 1868]

Okay, let's try this over.

The obvious solution is to fully privatize the DEA. Or leave it to the states.

LET TEH FREE MARKET DECIDE!!!

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably like this:

[Türkisblau]

The obvious solution is to fully privatize the DEA. Or leave it to the states.

Or abolish it and let local enforcement handle drugs.

No. Local enforcement is generally very incompetent.

But the guys holding Columbian sex parties aren't?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I applaud the initiative shown by Gully Foyle and the Transcendental Democrats to help out an ailing part of our region.

[Sumner 1868]

I live in Ireland

[RFayette]

Given the religious right opposition to zombies, it's possible Eisenhower/Reagan trail the Libertarians and the Constitution Party.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The short answer is absolutely "yes."

Throughout history, there were many Christians in science such as Galileo and Linnaeus.  Evolution and quantum mechanics seem to have taken their toll on scientists' religion faith, and most scientists are now secular according to surveys.  However, there are still some Christian (and even YECers, though usually in a different field) scientists and a ton of Christian engineers/doctors, which I would consider a "scientific life" even though it's technically not a doctorate degree.

[Sumner 1868]

Mostly that will show social acceptability of racism (or equivalents) rather than measure the thing itself... and we have to be careful about these big global surveys for other reasons... but... hilarious patterns anyway.

Still, the social acceptability of racism is in itself is an important phenomenon worth measuring. In some ways, it is actually more significant than racism itself.

[Türkisblau]

Despite how much I hate this kind of post I found this one as one of the best, purely because of the video of the unstable woman.

How has this woman voted since 1964? Here's my guess.

1964: Lyndon Johnson
1968: Hubert Humphrey
1972: George McGovern
1976: Jimmy Carter
1980: Jimmy Carter
1984: Walter Mondale
1988: Michael Dukakis
1992: Bill Clinton
1996: Bill Clinton
2000: Al Gore
2004: John Kerry
2008: John McCain
2012: Unsure

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Are they really on his ass about having someone who served as White House Chief of Staff under Reagan and Bush I, Secretary of the Treasury under Reagan, and Secretary of State under Bush I serving as a foreign policy advisor!?

This is [inks]ing crazy.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thank God!

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Iran is a country without the consent of at least two or three different numbers, the solution, and after 12 years of conflict, the Iranian nuclear program, Reuters employees.

jao

[publicunofficial]

This is stupid.

[ElectionsGuy]

The DEA should honestly be dismantled.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Bushie have you been eating at Sprouts during your lunch break or are you driving to get food?

I actually haven't had anything at lunch except a swig from the water fountain.  I only get 30 minutes for lunch and I want to be off my feet as much as possible during that short break.  I will probably end up bringing my lunch, or I may just get lunch after I get home if I work the early, early shift like I will to start the month of April (4:00-12:30).  I don't really feel like eating a turkey wrap at 8:00 am which would be my meal break, so I may just get a bowl of cereal before I leave for work and then wait to eat until I get home.  It will really be on a day-by-day basis.  I probably won't do the same thing each day because of the variety of shifts I can work.

While it's well known skipping breakfast is bad for one's health, skipping lunch isn't good either.  It slows down your metabolism during the times when your body could be burning the most (active in the daytime) due to 10 hours or so between meals.   You should ideally snack on mixed nuts during your job and have a small lunch packed with protein and veggies but few carbs.  Eating 2 meals a day just kills your metabolism.

[tik 🪀✨]

Obama should make a trollish remark about being glad to be back in his native land or something like that, just to make the birthers foam.

[traininthedistance]

I'm fine with making people go outside or to designated smoking areas... but this country is a stressful and often horrible place to live for a vast majority.  Now the owning classes want to take away that one nice little treat that young wage slaves have to relax and chill them out if that's what they choose?  Most employers are even lenient with allowing smoke breaks so people can rest their weary bodies and minds outside of their woefully insufficient "lunch" (typically a pathetic half hour).  

No, I don't support taking cigarettes away from the young working classes while Mr. Boss Man puffs his Cubans in his office without fear of any consequences despite any laws he might be breaking.  

I don't see the owning class calling for cigarettes to be outlawed anywhere, do you? Typically these proposals are from health groups and just ordinary people who hate smoking. And now, well, what I really want to do is highlight how the "relax and chill" effects of smoking are typically just the cessation of withdrawal symptoms and all the relief you feel is a farce. In addition to being a wage slave, you're also wasting your pitiful penance on something that will, in the long run, have an immensely negative effect on the quality of your life, and that all along you've been under its control, and you cannot stop, making you doubly the deluded slave.

BUT, you know, I've been there, big time. I remember running off when I had a spare five minutes to have that little joy. Now that I don't smoke anymore, I realise I was full of sh**t.. but I still remember what you described. And I so won't mention anything else, as I'm sure you know all of what I've said, and people like me are only an irritation, trying to take away your moment of relief. You stay in control, buddy.

[Torie]

For a man from the left side of the tracks, Train is actually quite rock solid - and knowledgeable - about economics.

so, the question always is, where to draw the line.  the most convenient answer for the politicians is to tax the product at point of sale.  tobacco taxes are extremely regressive.  a sugar tax would be regressive, albeit less so.  

I'll simply say that "convenience" is far from the only reason that excise taxes are chosen as a solution.  They make solid Pigouvian sense even in the absence of political constraints, and in a very real sense constrain the liberty of the consumer less than other approaches such as outright bans, rationing, the sorts of state monopolies set up for alcohol after Prohibition, etc.

That consumption taxes (certain specific luxury goods excepted) tend to be regressive in practice is an issue, yes. But it's one that needs to be balanced against the severity of the externality problems, and also one that can and should be remedied in other parts of the code instead.  For most things, I'd be willing to entertain arguments that a proper balancing test of the external consequences vs. distributional pain should keep rates low.  Fossil fuels and tobacco are, however, the two shining examples where the harm is so urgent and pervasive that high-to-punitive rates are a moral imperative.  Eh... with tobacco, it might in fact be high enough already.  I'm plenty anti-tobacco, but this is a battle that has been largely won, at least in our neck of the woods.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yikes!  This is the downside of course of government assistance. The powers that be can abuse the system, and start to unduly interfere in one's private life. The amount of money here is pennies relatively speaking, so it does seem animated by spite. I have serious doubts frankly about the Constitutionality of such a provision. It is unduly intrusive into one's privacy.  It is one thing for money to have some strings attached, another to make those strings unduly coercive and intrusive. There is a body of SCOTUS case law on that when it comes with strings attached to federal money to the states, and that certainly should apply even more so to individuals.

[Goldwater]

Senator Terence N. Fulbright (D-KY): 33.7%, 211 EV
Governor Ronald W. Fayette (R-IA): 28.1%, 161 EV
Congresswoman Ann B. "Evergreen" Persson (I-MA): 17.4%, 84 EV
Governor Joshua E. Daniels (L-VA): 20.8%, 82 EV


Even though Democrats have just retaken the House, the State-based voting system, coupled with Governor Daniels' endorsement, allows Fayette to narrowly reach an absolute majority:

Fayette: 26
Fulbright: 16
Persson: 6
Tie: 2

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

No (Supports free speech)

[Sumner 1868]

HA HA HA GOTCHA RAND UNQUALIFIED LOLZ

[Mr. Smith]

LOL NO, without LBJ poverty would be much worse. Vietnam was unfortunate but many Presidents have killed more.

You are wrong. You know what stops poverty: People getting a good education(Something which is getting worse year after year) , The Economy is good, people grow up in good families ,  people who have good work skills

You know whats the problem now

1. US education system getting worse
2. Employers no longer willing to train employees which can let them move up into a good position
3. War on Drugs
4.  Less people growing up in good families

I agree with that but how did LBJ effect that? School started getting bad after the 1980s. Families started degrading around that time too, with the crack epidemic and the deadbeat dads gaining prominence.