The Sam Spade Memorial Good Post Gallery

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

Ah, but you see - Ron Paul also falsely predicted about 50 non-crises. BECAUSE DEBT = BAD, YOUSE GUISE

[Badger]

I gotta stop reading through old threads, but this deserves recognition as a classic post. This thread was so bad.

I just want it to pop soon. It'll really screw over lots of suburbanites when it does.

Dolt

If the housing market where to *collapse* (like it did over here in the early '90's) it isn't just suburbanites that get effected; the overwhelming majority of Americans live in households that own their own home. Every single one of those families gets hurt (often very badly) and it could well plunge the entire economy into a pretty bad recession. And if the U.S economy has a bad recession, the rest of the world has a worse one.
Besides do you know what sort of family gets hurt hardest by a housing market collapse? Without putting too fine a point on it, it isn't rich people.

Discouraging to see BRTD hasn't changed a lick in 10 years.

[Mr. Morden]

I gotta stop reading through old threads, but this deserves recognition as a classic post. This thread was so bad.

I just want it to pop soon. It'll really screw over lots of suburbanites when it does.

Dolt

If the housing market where to *collapse* (like it did over here in the early '90's) it isn't just suburbanites that get effected; the overwhelming majority of Americans live in households that own their own home. Every single one of those families gets hurt (often very badly) and it could well plunge the entire economy into a pretty bad recession. And if the U.S economy has a bad recession, the rest of the world has a worse one.
Besides do you know what sort of family gets hurt hardest by a housing market collapse? Without putting too fine a point on it, it isn't rich people.

Discouraging to see BRTD hasn't changed a lick in 10 years.

I wouldn't say that.  He did find Jesus.

[Türkisblau]

The Democrats need to play hardball here and outright refuse to work with the Republican Party as they are unfit to govern. All Democratic Presidential candidates should be required to sign a pledge saying they will not invite any Republican Congressional leaders to the White House for the next 4 years, acknowledge any questions shouted by them during the State of the Union, make any eye contact with any of them in passing, and automatically veto anything they try to sponsor. It's time to really drill this issue to the forefront of the news cycle how truly incompetent and unworthy of anyone's respect these people are.

[Simfan34]

After conducting some initial research into the basis of rights, I've concluded that animals cannot have rights and that this is a category error. Using Rawls' "original position", I'd claim that there can be no basis for animal rights because humans cannot be born as animals; there's no intuition that allows for a defense of animal rights rooted in practical reason that's removed from contingent concerns or utilitarian logic, which can't properly be the basis for rights. In my view, Rawls' addition to Kantian logic allows for a full defense of rights for the disabled that does not locate rights in autonomy alone but rather the potential for autonomy: rights are considered on the basis of a position where individuals cannot know whether they will be born disabled or not. This logic is quite sensible: the disabled should be protected by rights, not because they're capable of autonomous decision-making beings, but rather because there's some sort of abstract consensus that this is a virtuous decision, guided by the intuition that any one of us could have been born disabled or become disabled given different contingencies.

In short: there's no basis for applying deontological ethics to animals because there's no manner of applying "pure reason" to determine principles or rules for treating animals. This is the case because deontological ethics are rooted in some idea about being able to independently appraise the value of some act on the basis or rubric of a "de-situated self". We cannot imagine or abstract or reason through what it would be like to be an animal; there's no intuition we can access for that.

Why does this matter? I'd argue that rights must be considered through the lens of deontology, a utilitarian defense of rights is contradictory and supposes that rights are useful instruments or conventions, which defeats the logic of rights as overriding principles designed to govern communities.  The case for animal rights has to be seen in some form of utilitarian logic. Animals are "sentient" beings and therefore must be taken into consideration when measuring utility. That's all well and good but utility can't be a basis for the overriding guiding principles that rights are intended to be.

I'll take this a step further and critique the very attempt to apply utilitarian logic to animals: how can we ever attempt to measure the "utils" of an animal's life? What kind of scale can be applied to animals? Are chickens worth more than frogs? Are dogs worth more than pigs? Does the quick execution of some farm animal create less disutility than the entire process of factory-farming? I'd argue that even the logic of utilitarianism can't be reconciled with a concern for animal welfare: there's no way to measure or assess the value of pain inflicted on sentient beings because we can't survey an animal or understand an animal; we probably lack that intuition and we certainly anthropomorphize animals when we engage in this process.

Note: I'm not attempting to throw the kitchen sink at animal rights. I'm pretty committed to the practical use of reason to determine rights in a manner that isn't based on the contingencies of everyday life. I just can't comprehend how animal rights makes any sense. I do think that concern for animal welfare makes sense; there's some sort of value to human beings when we apply our altruistic sensibilities to the natural world, I think that it promotes some sort of virtue. Obviously, there are still prudential reasons to place strict restrictions on industrial farming: it's bad for human beings when poop lagoons pollute streams and methane is released into the atmosphere. Again, I'd separate this concern from concern for animal welfare. It's certainly not sufficient to justify a duty for vegetarianism or whatever.

[they don't love you like i love you]

dead0man surprisingly makes it in here:

People see Columbus Day more as a symbol of Italian heritage and exploration, than about the man himself. 

I think Enrico Fermi could replace Columbus and everyone would be happy with that.

^^^^^

Only racists and Italians are attached to Columbus Day. I can't say that I'm concerned about the racists but I think that Italian-Americans deserve some sort of celebration for their contributions to American society, Enrico Fermi seems like a good choice.

Why do Italian-Americans deserve a holiday?  Is there another group of _____-Americans that have a Federal holiday? (the answer is no if you were wondering...unless you think MLK jr day is one for African-Americans, which wouldn't be a crazy thing to think)  More Americans have German heritage than any other, what are the odds we get a German-American federal holiday? zero.  German culture in America was beaten to an inch of it's life during WWI, and then put out of it's memory during WWII.

[Türkisblau]

I think DeadPrez, haven't you got that assways?  A Trump supporter?  Figures!...playing fast & lose with the facts, no back up to statements or claims made....you are learning well from that blow-hard.  Trump is by far the biggest fraud that there is. He says or does anything to main viability.  I will tell you this, America is in deep trouble if it thinks that shylock will be an improvement over that nincampoop currently occupying the Oval Office. I mean people actually want a phony baloney misogynist egomaniac in the Oval Office?  Give me a break. Trump is a hack with a trophy wife bimbo. Look at that face and his dress sense is worse. Doesn't have a coherent idea on anything and thinks going bankrupt 4 times and indulging in name calling are qualities that qualify him to sit in the White House? 😁😂😃😑😂😂😂....that's hysterical if you think that DeadPrez😂😁. ...TRUMP IS A LOW-RENT FRAUD! it's all about him....you actually think he gives a fig about America or you for that matter. If so, maybe if you are that addled and stupid,  you shouldn't have the vote. Support someone who can lead and is not a Johnny come lately. Do yourself that favor!

Good post? DIAF.

[DavidB.]

I think DeadPrez, haven't you got that assways?  A Trump supporter?  Figures!...playing fast & lose with the facts, no back up to statements or claims made....you are learning well from that blow-hard.  Trump is by far the biggest fraud that there is. He says or does anything to main viability.  I will tell you this, America is in deep trouble if it thinks that shylock will be an improvement over that nincampoop currently occupying the Oval Office. I mean people actually want a phony baloney misogynist egomaniac in the Oval Office?  Give me a break. Trump is a hack with a trophy wife bimbo. Look at that face and his dress sense is worse. Doesn't have a coherent idea on anything and thinks going bankrupt 4 times and indulging in name calling are qualities that qualify him to sit in the White House? 😁😂😃😑😂😂😂....that's hysterical if you think that DeadPrez😂😁. ...TRUMP IS A LOW-RENT FRAUD! it's all about him....you actually think he gives a fig about America or you for that matter. If so, maybe if you are that addled and stupid,  you shouldn't have the vote. Support someone who can lead and is not a Johnny come lately. Do yourself that favor!

Good post? DIAF.

Yeah, it's a very bad post. Given the extreme flood of low-info posters, insane hackery, and general nonsense on the 2016 Presidential Elections board, however... sure, I'm not even surprised that this post has been promoted to this thread anymore. There is a difference of lightyears between the American Politics boards and the International Politics boards in terms of quality.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I think DeadPrez, haven't you got that assways?  A Trump supporter?  Figures!...playing fast & lose with the facts, no back up to statements or claims made....you are learning well from that blow-hard.  Trump is by far the biggest fraud that there is. He says or does anything to main viability.  I will tell you this, America is in deep trouble if it thinks that shylock will be an improvement over that nincampoop currently occupying the Oval Office. I mean people actually want a phony baloney misogynist egomaniac in the Oval Office?  Give me a break. Trump is a hack with a trophy wife bimbo. Look at that face and his dress sense is worse. Doesn't have a coherent idea on anything and thinks going bankrupt 4 times and indulging in name calling are qualities that qualify him to sit in the White House? 😁😂😃😑😂😂😂....that's hysterical if you think that DeadPrez😂😁. ...TRUMP IS A LOW-RENT FRAUD! it's all about him....you actually think he gives a fig about America or you for that matter. If so, maybe if you are that addled and stupid,  you shouldn't have the vote. Support someone who can lead and is not a Johnny come lately. Do yourself that favor!

get outta here with that crap

[Antonio the Sixth]

I tend to harp on this point, but it's for a reason.  In 2009, Senator Grassley refused to vote for the stimulus package even though he said he agreed with 90% of the bill.  Once the establishment GOP takes that kind of posture in governing, it's a little hard to turn around and tell caucuses like the FC that they should compromise for the good of the party.  The establishment GOP made its electoral deal with the devil in order to mount a viable resurgence in 2009-2010, and they got their wish.  Now comes the piper--actually, the piper has showed up quite a few times already.  Leadership doesn't just mean being in power all the time; it sometimes, when one is not in power, requires one to make a choice about whether one will be loyal opposition or sheer opposition, and the standards of that culture, once established, will seep through everything.     

[Simfan34]

Would northern and southern United States be better off going their separate ways?

After all, their economies differ significantly. In the north, what you have is an economy that's shifting towards industrialization, while the south seems Hellbent on sticking with 'King Cotton'. Economies aside, the south is culturally and political different as well. While you have the planter elite, slaves, and 'crackers' below the Mason-Dixon line, to its north is a much more open, free, and diverse society. Slavery, obviously, is one of the big issues that divides these two different regions, but there is much more.

If you look at the last election, it could be said that the country isn't even holding the same elections! While Lincoln battled Douglas in the north, Bell was Breckenridge's only opposition for the slave states.

Ultimately, I think that the north and the south should simply part on good terms. They obviously are too different to form one nation, and I don't think anything's going to ever change that."

You could say that the south is more socially conservative while the north is more fiscally conservative.

An oldie but goodie.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Welfare states are a form of collective insurance. You pay into them with your taxes when you are working and you (or your children) can use them when studying, sick, unemployed, retired etc. It does create bad will when people who haven't paid the "insurance premium" gets ahead in the queue (so to speak) to fx housing or hospital treatment or too many non-payers use the systems and fx hospital waiting lists go up. You may find this selfish, but its a natural sentiment.

Tender didn't say anything about why most Middle Eastern countries malfunction (which is a complex issue).

That's an interesting view of the welfare state. While that may be the view used for electoral reasons, there's an entire philosophic tradition rooted in Anglo-American left-liberalism that has justified the welfare state on an entirely different basis. Furthermore, intellectuals in the socialist tradition have tended to make broader claims to welfare than "insurance", which is pitiful way to justify systems that are clearly not insurance but rather intended to promote "the common good" or a sense of justice.

The insurance premium argument doesn't really hold up. No one believes that a 22 year old who has suffered a terrible accident deserves care "because she paid into the system" but because she suffered bad luck. No one believes that young dislocated workers deserve unemployment benefits because "they paid into the system" but because they are human beings. I could offer more examples.

Furthermore, it's not self-evident that the sentiment that you're describing is "natural". For one, "the welfare state" isn't natural nor are nation-states or large political communities. The moral intuitions relating to these forms are obscured and hard to argue about: Germans are perfectly willing to accommodate "Volga Germans", who have never paid into the system, but are not willing to help third-generation Turks in the same way, even if "they've paid into the system". Again, there's no "natural" here, we're talking about abstract political terms and the reactions of people vary quite dramatically in every sense.

Basically, I'm calling you out for attempting to shut down a necessary conversation by using bad social science and bad political theory.

[Türkisblau]

I just don't get it. Many claim that Iowa is a swing state or even a socially conservative state, but in reality it is one of the most consistently liberal Democratic states in the country. Iowa has voted Republican once in the past thirty years, and barely did so that time. In what way is a state that voted for Dukakis and Gore a swing state? In 2012, Iowa voted to the left of Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, which many regard as solidly Democratic states. Nevada was slightly more Democratic than Iowa, and yet it is still much more of a true swing state, given that it voted for Bush in 2000.

No wonder the liberal trolls in Iowa always try to get joke candidates like Huckabee, Santorum and Carson nominated. Thank God we have real swing states like New Hampshire and Nevada to set the nomination process back on track!

Even so, I think it would be wise to get rid of the Iowa Caucus as soon as possible. The party of Lincoln, Coolidge, Eisenhower and Reagan doesn't deserve to be held hostage by a bunch of hippies lounging around in a cornfield.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Having said that, her run is historic and it will be an important watershed for women in public life. The issues she is campaigning on are, universal, but are based on her being a woman and her experiences. You cannot divorce her gender from her campaign. There is a way to do it well and right, because it risks alienating just as many, particularly along the lines of enthusiasm, if she starts to back-pedal too hard.

To me, what is interesting is that most female elected leaders run on the basis that their gender is, incidental, but one thing I'm enjoying is seeing a female-positive campaign. Being a woman is core to what she cares about and why. But she cannot risk putting people on the defensive unnecessarily. I suppose when someone is called "harpy" "shrill" "bitch" and "shrew" including by many so-called progressives, I kind of get why people are hyper-sensitive to anything that appears gender-based.

[RINO Tom]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

Ah, but you see - Ron Paul also falsely predicted about 50 non-crises. BECAUSE DEBT = BAD, YOUSE GUISE

No, that's ridiculous.  Money grows on trees, and once we run out, we just take more from people who have "enough."  Duh.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

An economy without debt would entirely end Capitalism as we know it, so I'm not really sure what you're exactly talking about.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

Ah, but you see - Ron Paul also falsely predicted about 50 non-crises. BECAUSE DEBT = BAD, YOUSE GUISE

No, that's ridiculous.  Money grows on trees, and once we run out, we just take more from people who have "enough."  Duh.

Businesses are gonna have a real swell time operating without debt. People are gonna have a real easy time finding a place to live without a mortgage. Towns are going to have a real picnic trying to attract people and bysiness without infrastructure. These are basic capitalist concepts. That statement was actually more right wing than my typical economic statements.

[Rockefeller GOP]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

Ah, but you see - Ron Paul also falsely predicted about 50 non-crises. BECAUSE DEBT = BAD, YOUSE GUISE

No, that's ridiculous.  Money grows on trees, and once we run out, we just take more from people who have "enough."  Duh.

Businesses are gonna have a real swell time operating without debt. People are gonna have a real easy time finding a place to live without a mortgage. Towns are going to have a real picnic trying to attract people and bysiness without infrastructure. These are basic capitalist concepts. That statement was actually more right wing than my typical economic statements.

I think it was pretty clear (at least to me) that he wasn't saying all debt was bad but rather mocking your constant ragging on libertarianism by pointing out that their opponents also have fairytale like views on economics.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

AL PREDICTED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, IS HE THE VINCE CABLE OF ATLAS

I believe you mean the Ron Paul of Atlas.

Ah, but you see - Ron Paul also falsely predicted about 50 non-crises. BECAUSE DEBT = BAD, YOUSE GUISE

No, that's ridiculous.  Money grows on trees, and once we run out, we just take more from people who have "enough."  Duh.

Businesses are gonna have a real swell time operating without debt. People are gonna have a real easy time finding a place to live without a mortgage. Towns are going to have a real picnic trying to attract people and bysiness without infrastructure. These are basic capitalist concepts. That statement was actually more right wing than my typical economic statements.

I think it was pretty clear (at least to me) that he wasn't saying all debt was bad but rather mocking your constant ragging on libertarianism by pointing out that their opponents also have fairytale like views on economics.

Judging by interactions with him elsewhere, I don't think so. It's not like I support left wing policies so it's hard to attack me using that line at least. But whatever...I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

a national treasure

[Extrabase500]

a national treasure

I see you changed your name to make fun of me, not cool man! Look theirs serious evidence that "Obama"'s not even Kenyan even his "half" brother says that its possible and he wants a DNA test. The fact "Obama" threw out his adoptive Kenyan family like dogs just shows how much of a cold blooded monster he is regardless of weather what i'm saying is true.

You can't make this stuff up!

[The Other Castro]

a national treasure

I see you changed your name to make fun of me, not cool man! Look theirs serious evidence that "Obama"'s not even Kenyan even his "half" brother says that its possible and he wants a DNA test. The fact "Obama" threw out his adoptive Kenyan family like dogs just shows how much of a cold blooded monster he is regardless of weather what i'm saying is true.

You can't make this stuff up!

Clearly you can.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

What the hell has this thread turned into?   post something good or stfu

[Crumpets]

After having an honest conversation with a psychologist/researcher on this issue, I want to issue a full apology for some of my comments. I strongly oppose any kind of housing or employment discrimination against anyone, though I do think the bathroom issue is a legitimate concern. I sincerely apologize to anyone who may have been offended by my comments, and I humbly ask for your forgiveness.

It's not a legitimate concern.  And, you should read this book.  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/books/review/becoming-nicole-by-amy-ellis-nutt.html?ref=review

Listen, we don't need to understand what is in a transgender person's head.  Of course we don't because we're not transgender.  Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with feeling weird about transgender people.  Sometimes you feel weird when you see someone with a birth defect because it's out of the ordinary.  Some people feel weird around gay people because it's out of the ordinary.  Those feelings are OK, but they're not a guidepost for your treat people or make public policy.

You see, it's incumbent upon us to love each other, regardless of our differences.  It's incumbent upon us to look out for people who face discrimination.  We need to go the extra mile to help transgender people and understand their challenges, even if that initially makes us uncomfortable.  Transgender people face real challenges, the least we could do is treat them with kindness and create an accepting environment for them. 

All transgender people want is to be treated with dignity and fairness.  They just want to live their life, they're not on some sort of crusade to make people uncomfortable.  I would bet that they hate that people notice them as different.  They just want to be normal people like you and me who aren't treated as lepers and shunned.  I think everyone deserves that base level of respect and dignity.