New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#776 2017-03-22 01:50:24

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

Rob,

Education - If that's actually true, then that's one more reason to add to the list of reasons why our federal government should not have federal tax money allocated to education.  If there is no federal money for state and local politicians to abuse, for which they are accountable to the federal government vs state or local government, then there is one less opportunity for unscrupulous politicians to abuse the tax payers.  Apart from setting standards for curriculum, education is not an issue that the federal government needs to be involved in.

Housing - Congress enabled the banks to make egregiously poor lending decisions that would not otherwise have been legally permissible.  That was my point.  Every time government makes a new law, corporations find ways around the law or find ways to pervert the original intent of the law.  This goes back to my point about the government that governs effectively and efficiently is best.

Military - We're not asking for military spending advice from a country that can't adequately defend itself if its primary adversary ever attacks.  We could certainly close all of our overseas military bases, which are egregiously expensive to maintain, and that would cut at least $100B from our military budget, if not $150B.  I completely agree with the sentiment that the US does not need to maintain military bases overseas.  If a country wants us there, then it can pay to have us there.  If their citizens don't want us there, then we should leave.  If the world changes overnight, and it will if we leave, then the few who live will understand what not having us there is like.

We also have no way of knowing exactly what Russia or China actually spend on their militaries.  Those two nations are the only credible threats to US sovereignty, but the objective of our defense spending is to achieve capabilities overmatch rather than simply out-spending everyone else.  That said, we can still maintain overmatch without spending so much.

Regarding who can start wars and when, are you unfamiliar with the War Powers Act?  POTUS may legally conduct military operations for up to 90 days prior to receiving written approval from Congress.  That was a bad idea, in retrospect.

Regarding ways to reduce military spending, I provided a number of proposals for doing that.  I have communicated this information to our representatives, but I may as well be talking to a wall.  If anyone is interested, I'll post some tidbits from my proposals.

Offline

#777 2017-03-22 03:45:37

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

Governance is very much compounded by the seperation of state and federal control plus laws for each that should be unified from state to state but are not. To which the federal is to be the voice of the people from each state and not there own respective lifer voice which is why if we are to keep a federal level of government then we need to do term limits for all three branches of it. Also if you believe that we are indeed a united level of states then there should be only one law that matters and not serveral different ones depending on state, county and city or town levels of government in addition to the federal.

I agree with the general principle of simplification and unification of state and federal laws, but there are so many discrepancies between state and federal laws that state/federal unification of law is mostly fantasy.  There is also tremendous inequality in how the law is applied.

SpaceNut wrote:

What I see is the democrats and Republicans are doing a poor job of trying to create a unified level of laws that equalize the nations differences in each state. That is were the rub is as the only method that is be pushed is to employ them in governments positions in these states but that is not enough as the low end wage earner is still in poverty even when they work like a dog, not just a 40 hour week but closer to the 60 or 70 hour level just to raise there heads above water. That said we subsidize the poor which has bread those that take advantage of the helping hand. To correct that we need a work requirement of at least 20 to 30 hours a pay period (weekly) to make it so that we stop it from being taken advantage of as if you do not work you get no help. Sure there may be a few exception but we can limit it.

The only people who should receive tax money without work are those who are truly disabled.  Even if you broke your leg and can't stand, we'd give you clerical work.  If you want to go to college but have no money, then you work for your community for some small number of hours during the week when class is in session and during your summers you pick produce in the fields, plant trees for the parks, work on construction sites, or otherwise trade your time for money, just as you would if you were employed.  At the end of your college course work, you have a small student loan, but no insane sum of money that takes a couple decades to pay off.  If you're a prisoner, then work is mandatory.  If you want to eat, then you work.  You can go to college, you can go to the military, you can go to prison.  Any path you choose, we're going to teach our children the value of hard work and perseverance.

SpaceNut wrote:

Health care is apart from ethics is a pricing difference for the same care from place to place and for doctor to doctor with in a states border but also from one state to the next. The charges are to be the same across the board. The rates for the insurance and its coverage is to be the same as well. Do not play games with this parts of the body is covered by this policy while the others are covered by another insurer's policy type.

It's a racket for sure, but we must make it work for everyone.  I'm fully aware that that's easier said than done.

SpaceNut wrote:

Infrastructure is a problem even at the town or city level as they will nickle and dime them as to keep property taxes from rising which actually causes it to eventually cost way more to implement later than had they done it in the here an now instead. This is not just for the roads we drive on as the county and state will do the same when it comes to replacing bridges and expanding the widths of current highways to make them safer and to allow for short commute times as stop and go would be reduced if they were design correctly. When we talk this we are also talking about water, sewerage, waste water runoff and power this is not just an only in the remotest area of the town, city, county or state which towns also do a little as needed for the most concentrated areas of there land.
The same action is used to control costs as it on the tax payers backs for state and property for these.

There are some good reasons why most public works are designed the way they are, but an engineer's design criteria for a project and the user's design criteria can be and often is quite different.  With respect to stop-and-go traffic, you'll never see the end of that until self-driving cars are accepted by the public.  All the mass transit systems I've seen merely create congestion points in different places.  The transit speeds are typically slow, but admittedly still better than nearly dead stop bumper-to-bumper traffic.

As far as taxation for municipal and state public works is concerned, that's a very complicated issue.

SpaceNut wrote:

I agree that the banks were not totally at fault for the collapse of housing but a cause to want to get a home is the ever increasing rent which is just money being flushed down a toilet which means they are not saving enough and have not learned to tighten the belt to be able to sustain owning the home either as when the first item needs repair they have not set aside funds to make the repair possible.

I honestly think prices are ridiculous, as are modern home and lot sizes.  I don't need a yard.  I need enough livable space in a floor plan that's efficient and practical.  It's not art work, it's just an enclosed space for me to store the crap that my wife buys.

SpaceNut wrote:

Energy is a consumption problem where it is to easy to make use of it rather than doing it the hard way with your back or not at all...It is ever to convenyent to keep adding more and more devices that use power to the equation. The energy takes on also other forms in coal, oil, gas, gasoline, tar ect....with the same net results of more consumption and more devices, more vehicles ect...until we work closer to home we are stuck with the ever rising costs. Solar, wind, water, ocean wave technology and thermal while not as effiencent in supply as nuclear do make up for it by its steady flow of the energy created from the sum of them collectively. Nuclear would be fine if it was less hazardous and was more like the standard smoke detector for safety. That is why science is looking at the isotopic generation by several different effects.

The show stopping problem with solar and wind is not those technologies themselves.  It's the nowhere near as efficient batteries to store the generated electricity.  We don't have batteries with energy densities sufficient to store gigawatt-hours of electricity for any reasonable cost.  The land use is also excessive.  Even if a solar panel exists that can produce 1kWe per square meter, one 30mm ball of Uranium or Thorium still represents a lifetime energy supply for the average person.

Offline

#778 2017-03-22 04:46:29

elderflower
Member
Registered: 2016-06-19
Posts: 603

Re: Politics

Best available technique for energy storage seems to be Hydro pumped storage where water is pumped to a high level reservoir when there is surplus power available and released when there is a deficit. This is fairly efficient and can be done on a large scale. Suitable sites are difficult to find and good luck getting one past the nimby/ greenies.

Offline

#779 2017-03-22 08:22:37

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

if we kill enough of them, they will get the message that killing Americans is a bad idea!

You realize they have the same idea. You kill them, they kill you. When does the cycle stop?

When they are dead! Since they are not afraid of dying, we are going to have to kill them in order to get them to stop, it is a shame really, most normal people know when to stop when they feel that continued fighting will almost certainly get them killed, not these fanatics. Fanatics need to be killed, as we can't convince them that they won't go to Heaven when they die, we just have to remove them from the board so they can no longer threaten us!

When Bill Clinton was president, the cycle with al-Qaeda escalated until it became 9/11. ISIS hasn't attacked the US on American soil...yet. Do you want to push them until they do?

Funny, that wasn't the Bill Clinton I remembered. The Bill Clinton I remembered didn't have a lot to do with the Middle East, he bombed the Iraqis to protect the Kurds in the north, he got involved in the Balkans to save the lives of Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs, that wanted to rape and murder them. (The Serbs were Russia's allies, it was with the Balkan conflict that we got the first inklings that there was something wrong with the Russians!) Bill Clinton didn't actually do much to the Muslims, many Muslims were immigrating to the United States, and they were conservatives that were trending Republican until the 9/11 attack! And after the 9/11 attack, the Democrats suddenly realized they needed to stand up to the religious rights of Muslims not to be discriminated against! The Democrats didn't think much about them before, except that one was the assassin of Robert F. Kennedy! After 9/11 the Democrat suddenly saw this disadvantaged group that was facing prejudice because of public perceptions in the immediate aftermath of that attack, instead of thinking about protecting Americans, they were thinking about protecting Muslims from a backlash in the aftermath of that attack. Their priorities were backwards! They even go around trying to bring in more Muslims into the Country, Chuck Schumer does that while at the same time demanding more money for Homeland security. It occurs to me, maybe they wouldn't need as much money for Homeland security if they weren't trying to stop Trump from banning people from 6 dangerous Muslim majority countries, they want t bring them in here, and the wan Federal money so the Government can keep an eye on them, all without profiling! Does this make any sense?

Look. The US supported general Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Look how well that turned out. The US supported Osama bin Laden against Soviets in Afghanistan. Again, didn't that work? Iran elected a Prime Minister in 1951, had a modern liberal democracy. An Anglo-American coup in 1953 overthrew that government, installed the Shaw who was corrupt. This isn't sounding good, is it?

The US didn't support Saddam Hussein when he was invading Kuwait, in fact we actively opposed him! What is your point? What we don't have a crystal ball so we can see who is going to betray us next? Does anyone have such a crystal ball? Benedict Arnold was an important part of the cause for American Independence before h betrayed it to he British, should we have known he was going to be a traitor? How? We try to find allies wherever we can, we don't know what they are going to do in the future, Saddam Hussein was one such ally.

Now there's ISIS. Bad guys. The only reason they have any chance is the ongoing civil war in Syria. The fight between Syrian army and rebels ties up all their resources. If that wasn't ongoing, they Syrian army would have long ago gotten rid of ISIS. And you realize ISIS gets most of their weapons by intercepting weapons drops by the US intended for rebels.

And the Syrians are the good guys? I recall decades after decades of them launching missiles into Israel targeting civilians, why should I care if these bad guys defeat the other bad guys? I want to defeat them both! If that devastates Syria, then too bad, they chose to be bad guys, so that tends to leave their cities in ruins, just like the Germans and the Japanese!

Offline

#780 2017-03-22 08:30:40

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

if we kill enough of them, they will get the message that killing Americans is a bad idea!

You realize they have the same idea. You kill them, they kill you. When does the cycle stop?

When Bill Clinton was president, the cycle with al-Qaeda escalated until it became 9/11. ISIS hasn't attacked the US on American soil...yet. Do you want to push them until they do?

Look. The US supported general Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Look how well that turned out. The US supported Osama bin Laden against Soviets in Afghanistan. Again, didn't that work? Iran elected a Prime Minister in 1951, had a modern liberal democracy. An Anglo-American coup in 1953 overthrew that government, installed the Shaw who was corrupt. This isn't sounding good, is it?

Now there's ISIS. Bad guys. The only reason they have any chance is the ongoing civil war in Syria. The fight between Syrian army and rebels ties up all their resources. If that wasn't ongoing, they Syrian army would have long ago gotten rid of ISIS. And you realize ISIS gets most of their weapons by intercepting weapons drops by the US intended for rebels.

Their objective is to get us to surrender, convert to Islam and be conquered by them, you are forgetting we are a superpower, have nuclear weapons and the largest economy on Earth, and they are in the Third World with third world poverty and a lot of fanaticism. I do think that he chances of our crushing them are a lot greater than their chances of crushing us. What stops us is people like you who are always sympathizing with the underdog, they are in an extremely disadvantage position relative to us, and you think that is unfair, that they should have as equal a chance of destroying us as we have of destroying them. What this accomplishes is prolonging the war with them, they can't defeat us, and because of people like you, we keep pulling our punches and are not defeating them. Like World War II, they need to be defeated quickly with whatever it takes, so the war can end, that is the most merciful thing we can do, we need to kill these "rabid dogs!" Put them out of misery so we can get on with peace and prosperity, and of course colonizing space!

Offline

#781 2017-03-22 09:36:57

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

Curious, while I was posting my last message, it appears there was something going on outside the Parliament building in London, UK. Some guy in an SUV started driving on the sidewalks, running over people, he was shot at by armed police, he crashed into the railings outside of the Parliament building, got out side his car, and attempted to stab the police with a knife and was shot dead. Given this information, I am predicting that this person was a Muslim, after all, who else would he be? No sane person would do a thing like this, it could only be a Muslim, or someone who was truly psychotic! What is your prediction? Are you beginning to understand the Brexit vote now?

Offline

#782 2017-03-22 13:01:46

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,541
Website

Re: Politics

To be honest, I don't think we voted for Brexit because we were worried about terrorism. It was more of a sovereignty issue, as well as problems surrounding uncontrolled immigration.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#783 2017-03-22 22:24:58

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

Terraformer wrote:

To be honest, I don't think we voted for Brexit because we were worried about terrorism. It was more of a sovereignty issue, as well as problems surrounding uncontrolled immigration.

You mean psychos coming in from a sick part of the World, that is the Middle East, that other Europeans felt sorry for because they were such underdogs! Do you think Londoners regretted electing a Muslim as Mayor? Having a Muslim mayor didn't make them immune to terrorism. I wonder why Princess Diana wanted to date a Muslim? I don't think she would have looked good in a veil or a burka. Trump wanted to date her, but she preferred the Muslim, too bad!

Offline

#784 2017-03-22 23:07:14

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

Tom,

Give it a rest.  Whatever it is that Londoners think about their mayor is, quite frankly, none of our business.  The Brits can decide what it is that they must do to protect themselves.  They don't need any criticism in the wake of an attack on their people.  Sooner or later everyone will figure out on their own that some people are simply not your friends and may never become your friends, irrespective of what you want to believe about your relationship with them.

Offline

#785 2017-03-23 08:08:16

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

I believe there is a lesson to be learned here which can be applied to us, since the culture of our country is related to theirs. There is a phenomenon that I call "White Guilt" the British had their Empire in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries, and they feel like they hae to make amends for all the injustices wrought by that Empire, but it seems to me that the British Empire also did a lot of good, which they are discounting, and not all evil in the World stems from past white exploitation of other races. Whatever made that bearded Asian go crazy and run people over in his SUV and stab that police officer, was not because of something white people had done to him, it was not slavery or Imperial Exploitation or the Opium trade in the 19th century, those are just excuses. I am trying to be helpful. the Brits aren't doing me any favors by letting themselves be vulnerable to terrorists or by fighting them, I just figure we have something in more common with the British People than with Middle eastern fanaticism. There are parts of this World that are just sick, and those people did it to themselves, we are not responsible for the way they are.

Offline

#786 2017-03-24 09:18:40

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

Tom,

I don't feel the least bit guilty over the color of my skin and it's not something I need to apologize for.  I just don't give a damn about peoples' skin color.  I've met enough people from enough different parts of the world to know that appearances count for very little, attitude counts for substantially more, and irrespective of appearances and attitudes, behavior is very nearly all that matters.  Diatribes against various people with varying amounts of melanin in their skin misses the readily discernible issues with value systems.

At this point in human history, Islam is a religion with a substantial number of followers who practice violence towards non-believers and different sects of the same religion.  If we were living a few centuries back in time, I would have had a similar opinion towards Christianity.  However, in 2017 I haven't seen very many Christians, Buddhists, or Jews intentionally driving motor vehicles into people or blowing themselves up in the middle of shopping malls.  There will be someone along shortly to point out that what's generally true is not universally true, but what's generally true is still generally true and my point still stands.

With respect to politics, I think that the application of generalization to belief systems is what separates liberal thinking from conservative thinking.  As it pertains to thought process, the liberals are sorting for similarities and the conservatives are sorting for differences.  That explains nearly perfectly why liberals can't differentiate generality from universality (they're options people) and why conservatives are constantly trying to differentiate people / places / things (they're procedural people, like you, Tom).

Let's illustrate how this works in the exchange of ideas between you and Rob:

Rob asked when the cycle of violence would stop.  That question clearly illustrates that he believes that his actions determine the actions of other people.  To the extent that he interacts with rational people, that's certainly true.  That's sorting for similarities.  However, human behavior is seldom rational and behaviors tied to religious practices are typically highly irrational.  In your responses to Rob, you keep pointing out what's different between them / us.  Rob makes a statement and then you counter with how the detail or circumstance of an event was "different" from whatever Rob stated.  That's sorting for differences.

You two speak the same language and you come from the same culture / society, but you can't communicate with each other in any meaningful way.  Imagine that you don't speak the same language and come from a completely different culture.  That'd be why nobody over here really understands what's going on in the Middle East.  The "similarities" people think they're just like us and the "differences" people think they're completely different from us.  Unfortunately, the answer is "no" to both ideas.  They're not "just like us", nor are they're "entirely different" from us, either.

Offline

#787 2017-03-25 15:32:32

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 2,746
Website

Re: Politics

Thanks,  kdb512,  your insightful analysis just above was a most welcome change to most of the wild idiocy I see in this thread. 

I also see the problems generated by adherence to belief systems instead of verifiable fact.  They are everywhere around us. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#788 2017-03-25 19:56:18

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

kbd512 if there is that much discrepancies between state to state laws that we can not unify them we might as well call us the anything but United States of American as you are saying we will end up being closer to that of Europe as we are not getting our states to talk in English and every where I turn we are catering to the county of orgins native language...that is not what our founding fathers did when they chose English over all of the languages that were here in the colonies....

As for you broke your leg and can't stand, it may also mean that you can not drive to that desk job let alone get to another means of transportation but all in all I agree with only the disable should be garenteed help without work.

As for going college but have no money, why not add 2 years to highschool at a college level for the associates in your own community by your self funding means of community work program. This would instill pride with in there community rather than trashing it....

Health care is a racket for sure but is socailism for medical care the only way to correct this or is there another way to remove the greed of price gouging and corruption.

The traffic stop n go conjestion are due to exits and entrances that are along a short distance where the vehicle volume and lane count for time can not handle it. The exit and entrances are lane reducing amd this starts the issue snowballing. Lane merges have the same effect.

The taxation for municipal and state public works is one of viable property value to gather the fees for the work other wises its through the tolls one might pay to use the road, I have heard that some include a road use fee as part of vehicle registration as another method to raising funds for road work. The infrastructure of water and sewer are another problem where the viable property is born by those that own and through higher rental fees to the land owner.

The battery technology and effieciency only is an issue for the off grid application but the affordable size of uranium or thorium is not enough to even produce power with unless someone can come up with life time financing....

Offline

#789 2017-03-25 20:27:57

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

House Intelligence committee goes to war with itself over Russia investigation

an investigation that is squashed while in action is no investigation at all.

Schiff: New evidence shows possible Trump-Russia collusion

Schiff explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just "circumstantial evidence of collusion," suggesting "it's the kind of evidence" that a grand jury investigation would want to consider.
The tension on the Intelligence Committee comes a day after CNN reported that the FBI has information that may indicate associates of Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives.
The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those US officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing.

U.S. needs to stop Russian electoral interference, NSA’s top civilian leader says

The NSA, with 35,000 civilian and military employees, gathers intelligence on foreign targets overseas through wiretaps and increasingly by cyberhacking. Its other mission is to secure the government computers that handle classified information and other data critical to military and intelligence activities.

Now you see what Snowden is all about taking refuge in Russia....

Offline

#790 2017-03-26 10:08:58

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 2,746
Website

Re: Politics

Connections between Team Trump and Russia are long confirmed (for one thing the Russian mafia is one of The Donald's biggest investors).  Collusion between Team Trump and Russia to sway voter's opinions with fake news stuff:   lots of smoke,  no fire.  Worth continuing to dig,  though,  just because of the smoke.  As for monkeying with vote tallies,  it's scary:  they could have done it,  but the evidence says they did not.  Yet.

The fake news thing is a serious threat,  and is partially attributable to the dumbing-down of education in recent decades.  Few today could pass a 3rd grade test from a century ago.  Stupid people are easier to rule,  and to fool with propaganda:  that's why the dumbing-down was done.  That needs reversal,  but it will take generations to fully correct.  Until it is corrected,  idiotic political ideologies will continue to substitute for practical policy suggestions,  and we will continue to be awash in venal politicians,  with no statesmen around at all. 

Monkeying with vote tallies (by anyone,  foreign or domestic) is stopped by using paper ballots.  It may be slow and inconvenient,  but it cannot be hacked,  if no computers are involved.  But it has to be done right:  no more of that hanging-chad or misprinted butterfly-ballot bullshit.  Graphite marks in ovals on paper can be read pretty reliably.  There ought to be some sort of national standard for ballot format that the states can use,  improve-on,  and enforce for themselves. 

As for Russian tampering-by-hacking or fake newsdissemination,  may "tit for tat" is something we should do. 

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2017-03-26 10:14:53)


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#791 2017-03-26 17:05:38

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

I have posted before about the Analysis | Nearly 1 out of every 3 days he has been president, Trump has visited a Trump property

For the eighth weekend in a row, President Trump has visited a property that bears his name. He has done so on 21 of the 66 days he has been in office, meaning that for the equivalent of three full weeks of his just-over-nine weeks as commander in chief, he has spent all or part of a day at a Trump property — earning that property mentions in the media and the ability to tell potential clients that they might be able to interact with the president.

These are very expensive trip to property that is his and he gets to charge the government for his visit and the income is tax free so long as he is president...To be fair we might be overworking him... not...
Since when does the employer pay for your weekend get aways?
That has led to the Democrats to want to have transperancy on the costs of these.....

Make Access Records Available to Lead American Government Open ActDemocrats Introduce ‘Mar-A-Lago Act’ To Make Trump Meetings More Transparent

The bill’s authors say Americans have a “right to know” who may be reaching out to the president at his private resort. This would require that the Trump administration publish visitor logs from the White House and any other place where the president “regularly conducts official business.”
“It’s simple: the American people have a right to know who has access to the president and who has leverage over this administration,” Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said in a statement.

We should know this as including once with the Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe; a visit that became highly publicized after it was revealed President Trump and Prime Minister Abe reviewed classified documents in full view of ordinary guests at the Palm Beach resort.

The so called “Winter White House,” Is a Major Conflict of Interest ... a place where anyone can gain access with the purchase of a $200,000 membership fee and based off froom 2013 information, each visit to Mar-a-Lago costs taxpayers about $3 million.

The Obama administration began keeping visitor logs at the White House in 2009 — noting the names of 6 million visitors during the presidency — after a lawsuit by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

So what was good for Obama is the same for Trump to do.....

Offline

#792 2017-03-26 21:25:33

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

Death threats for judges that have gone against Trumps ban...
Judge gets death threats after blocking Trump travel ban: report having next to nothing with regards to national security.

The federal judge who acted first to block President Donald Trump’s most recent travel ban has received numerous death threats since the ruling, prompting authorities to give him a 24-hour protection detail, according to a report.

Quite the opposite it has happened to create home grown terrorists in Trumps name....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-blocke … 19759.html

Consequently, the FBI will provide U.S. District Judge Derrick Wilson with heightened security detail as it looks into the threats, according to a statement from the U.S. Marshal Service, which was spearheading the investigation.

Federal judge in Virginia sides with Trump on revised travel ban “Fortunately, this decision does not alter the injunctions that are already [in place]," an immigration advocate said Friday. Trump's revised order -- designed to stand up to legal scrutiny -- was blocked by courts in Maryland and Hawaii on the grounds that it seeks the same type of discriminatory justification as the first order.

Offline

#793 2017-03-26 21:29:34

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

SpaceNut,

There is only general legal consensus on fundamental legal principles.  For example, rape / robbery / murder are felonies in every state of the union, but legal definitions for such and punishments all vary.  It can vary between different municipalities in the same state.  It would be beneficial to everyone involved but the liars, I mean lawyers, if there were single definitions and punishments.

Apart from major crimes, I'd be nice if tort laws were uniform between the states.  Every state could still have their own civil laws, but anything normally classified as a felony should be consistent.  Why is domestic abuse a misdemeanor in some places when assault, which is what all domestic abuse is, normally classified as a felony?  It shouldn't matter what state you lived in if you were beating your wife.

* De-criminalize alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana possession, for both adults and minors, or maybe make it a misdemeanor offense that doesn't rate jail time; fines are a more effective deterrent in a society driven by the almighty dollar
* De-criminalize prostitution, at the very least for the prostitutes, so they can get a better job at some point later in life

The community service to pay for college is what I proposed.  I'm not dead set on the details of how the work-for-education program is implemented, so long as the program gets implemented.  Young people need to learn to respect each other and the value of hard work.  Nobody should get handed things simply because of who their parents are.

Some form of socialism is required for universal health care legislation to work and not break the bank.  Off the top of my head, price controls and published prices for goods (medical supplies) and services (tests and procedures) are required.  All government-run health care services I've ever seen are unmitigated financial disasters.  The people living with those systems may not see it as such because they've nothing to compare it to.  I've worked for a health care services company.  Trust me when I say this is not something you want our government running.  Maybe some other country's government would do a much better job, but we're not talking about that "other" country's government.

The Affordable Care legislation is already failing.  If President Trump manages to pass the American Care legislation, then that will fail, too.  Apart from forcing providers to accept patients with pre-existing conditions and tort reform, the only other constructive thing our government can do for health care is implementation of price controls, which is something President Trump has already hinted at.

Toll roads pay for construction and maintenance.  The costs borne by the contractors seems to incentivize high quality roads.  Here in Texas we've discovered that "make it properly the first time because we're (contractor) paying for it" contracts vs "cost plus because they're (the public) paying for it" contracts work quite well.  Toll roads won't mitigate traffic issues, though.  Only computer-controlled vehicles that cooperatively work with each other to facilitate swift and efficient movement will stop that with the number of vehicles presently on our roads.

With respect to utility grade electrical power production, electrical energy storage is a major problem from renewables, unless you want to solve that climate change problem with more coal and petroleum products.  We have already incidentally mined enough Thorium to provide enough electricity to power the entire US for 12 years.  We can remove it from the radioactive waste storage sites and use it any time we want to.  Every time we mine for rare earth materials or Uranium, extraction of Thorium is nearly unavoidable.  We need one 30mm golf ball for every American, assuming we just burn it up (which is stupid, but what we do right now) instead of continuing the fuel cycle (which is what we should be doing).

Offline

#794 2017-03-27 10:30:22

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,541
Website

Re: Politics

Re. energy storage, could we make Trump Wall into one big pumped hydro storage system? 100 metres high, 10 metres deep, 20 metres wide, and 3.2 million metres long. That would give us ~18 GWh of energy storage. Basically it would be a big earthwork with a very long canal on top of it. It would also be a program to create Green Jobs.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#795 2017-03-27 11:24:57

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

kbd512 wrote:

Tom,

I don't feel the least bit guilty over the color of my skin and it's not something I need to apologize for.  I just don't give a damn about peoples' skin color.  I've met enough people from enough different parts of the world to know that appearances count for very little, attitude counts for substantially more, and irrespective of appearances and attitudes, behavior is very nearly all that matters.  Diatribes against various people with varying amounts of melanin in their skin misses the readily discernible issues with value systems.

At this point in human history, Islam is a religion with a substantial number of followers who practice violence towards non-believers and different sects of the same religion.  If we were living a few centuries back in time, I would have had a similar opinion towards Christianity.  However, in 2017 I haven't seen very many Christians, Buddhists, or Jews intentionally driving motor vehicles into people or blowing themselves up in the middle of shopping malls.  There will be someone along shortly to point out that what's generally true is not universally true, but what's generally true is still generally true and my point still stands.

With respect to politics, I think that the application of generalization to belief systems is what separates liberal thinking from conservative thinking.  As it pertains to thought process, the liberals are sorting for similarities and the conservatives are sorting for differences.  That explains nearly perfectly why liberals can't differentiate generality from universality (they're options people) and why conservatives are constantly trying to differentiate people / places / things (they're procedural people, like you, Tom).

Let's illustrate how this works in the exchange of ideas between you and Rob:

Rob asked when the cycle of violence would stop.  That question clearly illustrates that he believes that his actions determine the actions of other people.  To the extent that he interacts with rational people, that's certainly true.  That's sorting for similarities.  However, human behavior is seldom rational and behaviors tied to religious practices are typically highly irrational.  In your responses to Rob, you keep pointing out what's different between them / us.  Rob makes a statement and then you counter with how the detail or circumstance of an event was "different" from whatever Rob stated.  That's sorting for differences.

You two speak the same language and you come from the same culture / society, but you can't communicate with each other in any meaningful way.  Imagine that you don't speak the same language and come from a completely different culture.  That'd be why nobody over here really understands what's going on in the Middle East.  The "similarities" people think they're just like us and the "differences" people think they're completely different from us.  Unfortunately, the answer is "no" to both ideas.  They're not "just like us", nor are they're "entirely different" from us, either.

The two major religions in our culture, Christianity and Judaism, originated in the middle east, these two religions were spread by the Roman Empire when in conquered the middle east, it was spread throughout Europe, North Africa, and western Asia, and then Rome fell, in the Dark Ages came a new religion, this one is called Islam, its founder is named Muhammad, it was Muhammad and his religion that made Middle east culture alien to our own, prior to the arrival if Islam, middle easterners didn't think that much differently from ourselves. Christianity defended itself from the onslaught of Islam during the Crusades, Islam managed to conquer the Middle East, North Africa, and made inroads into Europe itself, with Spain and Turkey being Islamic colonies. The Spaniards fought back and drove the Muslims out of their country  prior to 1492, other than that, and despite the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Islam held onto its gains, the Christian World, unlike in Spain, did not try to rechristianize them. It is odd that the main religious denomination of the Democratic Party are Muslims. Muslims are the only group within the Democratic constituencies that take their religion seriously! You have a lot of "Cafeteria Catholics", you have your "Atheist Jews" that are "cultural Jews" only, kind of like Bernie Sanders, but the only devout group within the Democratic Party are Muslims, they pray five times a day, the women cover themselves, their beliefs are largely conservative, they don't believe in women's rights, they think gay people ought to be put to death, and prior to the 9/11 attack, they would have tended to be Republicans, but now because of their associations with terrorists, they have fallen into the Democratic Camp. Why is this exactly? The set up is like this: a bomb goes off, killing a bunch of westerners, some Muslim takes credit for setting off this bomb and says he did it for Allah, and naturally these westerners get quite angry with Muslims for being a apart of this, and there is a backlash against them. Liberals tend to be only concerned with this backlash against Muslims, and not for the victims of these Islamic attacks, because they are so filled with White Guilt, they figure white people had it coming and don't need defending, and instead believe that the World needs to be defended against white people, so whoever strikes out against white culture and receives a backlash, needs defending, but white people themselves are presumed guilty by them.

Offline

#796 2017-03-27 11:34:06

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

GW Johnson wrote:

Connections between Team Trump and Russia are long confirmed (for one thing the Russian mafia is one of The Donald's biggest investors).  Collusion between Team Trump and Russia to sway voter's opinions with fake news stuff:   lots of smoke,  no fire.  Worth continuing to dig,  though,  just because of the smoke.  As for monkeying with vote tallies,  it's scary:  they could have done it,  but the evidence says they did not.  Yet.

The fake news thing is a serious threat,  and is partially attributable to the dumbing-down of education in recent decades.  Few today could pass a 3rd grade test from a century ago.  Stupid people are easier to rule,  and to fool with propaganda:  that's why the dumbing-down was done.  That needs reversal,  but it will take generations to fully correct.  Until it is corrected,  idiotic political ideologies will continue to substitute for practical policy suggestions,  and we will continue to be awash in venal politicians,  with no statesmen around at all. 

Monkeying with vote tallies (by anyone,  foreign or domestic) is stopped by using paper ballots.  It may be slow and inconvenient,  but it cannot be hacked,  if no computers are involved.  But it has to be done right:  no more of that hanging-chad or misprinted butterfly-ballot bullshit.  Graphite marks in ovals on paper can be read pretty reliably.  There ought to be some sort of national standard for ballot format that the states can use,  improve-on,  and enforce for themselves. 

As for Russian tampering-by-hacking or fake newsdissemination,  may "tit for tat" is something we should do. 

GW

The connection between Trump and the Russians is fake news, it all stemmed from a single joke Trump told when Hillary Clinton couldn't or wouldn't account for 30,000 missing e-mails, so Trump suggested that Vladimir Putin probably had them, and suggested that he come forward, what happened next was pure McCarthyite tactics by the Media, and they blew up up into a Russian-Trump conspiracy that didn't exist, all from that single joke Trump told! The Democrats have nothing on Donald Trump, all they can do is spread fake news through their control of these media outlets and that is what they are doing!

Offline

#797 2017-03-27 16:18:46

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 1,251

Re: Politics

Tom,

White people are not guilty of doing anything more egregious than the things the muslims have done.  The liberals think we can appease the muslims with the right words or gestures.  They're every bit as wrong as the British were about the Nazis, but they're either too ignorant or too stubborn to admit that some people can't be appeased.  More importantly, some people shouldn't be appeased.  Anyone who attempts to rape, rob, or murder their neighbors for any reason need not be appeased by anyone else.  If any particular religious person or group doesn't demonstrate that they actually accept those basic tenets of civilized society by following them, then we don't need those people in our society.

Liberals have this inclusiveness personality trait that prevents them from acknowledging the fact that Islam is not an inclusive or altruistic religious group and many muslims don't want to assimilate.  The muslims who follow the teachings of the Koran will believe and practice the vile nonsense in their book.  The cafeteria muslims, who aren't really muslims according to their own book, only share pieces of flair in common with their less civilized adherents.  I can't simply look at someone and tell the difference and neither can you or anyone else.  Therein lies the problem.  I can't condemn someone who truly wants to come here to live a better life.  I also can't ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of the terrorists we import seem to share a particular religion.  Ultimately, the muslims will force us to choose between civility and existence.  In fact, I think they already have.

Offline

#798 2017-03-27 20:11:55

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

Muslims themselves will need to take care of their own terrorist problem, it is their problem, not ours! We need to show the Muslims that terrorism won't work, they won't get what they want from us if they resort to terrorism, thus we should not show weakness.

Offline

#799 2017-03-27 22:11:52

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

Devin Nunes actions the day before his announcement that he saw information suggesting that communications of then-President-elect Donald Trump and his advisers may have been swept up in surveillance of other foreign nationals. The attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced to recuse himself from the Russia investigation and Nunes' actions mean he can't conduct an impartial investigation into potential Trump-Russia ties either. He should do likewise after running to anyone that was not part of the congressional panel about what was seen. Devin Nunes Met Source On White House Grounds Day Before Claiming Trump Team Was Surveilled. Nunes met the source on White House grounds in order to view sensitive information in a “secure location,”. The House Intelligence Committee chairman’s allegations about the Obama administration’s spying operations keep getting weirder.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nun … 2eaab61087?

....The wikileaks is also guarding its side of the involvement as well, distancing itself from longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone. Talking To Guccifer 2.0, Doesn’t Mean I Colluded With Russians On Election. No you broke the law with regards to hacking collusion which is still a crime....During a speech in Florida last August, after Wikileaks printed hacked DNC emails, Stone said he had “communicated” with Assange and predicted that more documents would be leaked in an “October surprise.”  Which is knowing the facts of what you have done and that is collusion....

Offline

#800 2017-03-27 22:33:29

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,843

Re: Politics

Rex Tillerson May Be in Hot Water Over ExxonMobil Emails

Decades ago, Exxon's own scientists concluded that carbon dioxide emissions, an inevitable byproduct of burning fossil fuels, are causing climate change. Yet the company buried those findings and instead funded pseudo-scientific studies purporting to deny or downplay legitimate science.

We have alsp seen the protests in Russian now the the shoe is on the other foot they do not like it... Why Russian protests are making the Kremlin rethink 2018 presidential elections

Then again the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley Wants To Know Who Ordered Trump Dossier reportedly has compromising information on Trump, including on his sexual escapades, financial dealings and alleged collusion with Russia.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB