News of the day

thellama73 wrote: I don't buy into this notion that when fighting a war you should use exactly the necessary amount of force and no more. War is war. It is terrible and should be avoided at all costs, but once you're in one, you're in it to win it. Trying to be kind and gentle about it just leaves you with wars that go on forever. Burn everything, raze the countryside, leave no one alive. Finish it in a matter of days, not years. The notion that war is somehow less horrible when we do a half-assed job of it is silly.

So you should be discriminant when going into war, but then once engaged throw good sense into the wind?

If fighting a long half-assed war is so inconvenient, then just don't get into the war in the first place.

Even the criminals are getting lazy these days:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/28/us-usa-newyork-crime-idUSBRE8AR18S20121128

Although I do believe there should be limits, in some ways I agree with Logan.  If you're going to war it should be done in a manner to be over with as quickly as possible.  War is dirty, ugly and gosh darnit, not very nice.  That's why it should be avoided if possible and made as short as possible if it isn't.  Reminds me of the Star Trek episode "A Taste of Armageddon" where war had been made "nice" and it had dragged on for 500 years because it was so "nice" there was no reason to try to end it.

One of my favorites as well.

http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/best-places-born-2013-175300116.htmlHmmmm...lots of Scandinavian socialist countries with high taxes on this list.  But no USA with all of our vaunted "freedom".  Go figure. 

Well, since those Scandinavian countries have much larger social safety nets than us, yet don't have the debt we do, the reason for our great debt must come not from our meager social safety net programs, but rather from lavish military spending and huge tax breaks for the rich and corporations.  When we had a 70% top marginal rate, we had much less in the way of debt, because not only did the higher tax rate bring in revenue, it also made the economy stronger and kept people working. 

High tax rates on the wealthy inhibit runaway greed and make it pointless for greedy CEO to pay themselves multi-million dollar bonuses when it will be taxed at 70%.  It also makes exorbitant profits, errr, ummm, unprofitable.  No incentive to ship jobs overseas, no incentive to slash labor costs so the CEO can give himself a huge bonus, etc.  Therefore, the wealth is spread more evenly and everybody pays taxes because everybody has at least some money with which to pay taxes.  And that's exactly what progressive tax rates are intended to do.  It was only when Reagan ramped up military spending and slashed the highest tax rates and the capital gains tax rates that the debt started to spiral out of control.  I would think we both agree that a robust economy is the only way we are going to get out of this mess.  Tax the s*** out of the wealthy and you will have a robust economy, higher tax revenues and also less expenditures on social safety programs as they will be far less necessary with the wealth more evenly spread. 

Those poor rich folks.....my heart breaks for their predicament.

Here's some smelling salts for you Doc.

And if you care to read more, there is tons of info out there debunking the Scandinavian utopian myth.   But lets face it, what is and what is not the best model depends on how we as individuals would prefer to live our lives, and little more.  The model of Scandy is better to you, because you want what they offer.  Others prefer a model that allows one to keep more of what they earn, and of course they will get less goodies too. 

The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: The Doctor wrote: Well, since those Scandinavian countries have much larger social safety nets than us, yet don't have the debt we do, the reason for our great debt must come not from our meager social safety net programs, but rather from lavish military spending and huge tax breaks for the rich and corporations.  When we had a 70% top marginal rate, we had much less in the way of debt, because not only did the higher tax rate bring in revenue, it also made the economy stronger and kept people working.  High tax rates on the wealthy inhibit runaway greed and make it pointless for greedy CEO to pay themselves multi-million dollar bonuses when it will be taxed at 70%.  It also makes exorbitant profits, errr, ummm, unprofitable.  No incentive to ship jobs overseas, no incentive to slash labor costs so the CEO can give himself a huge bonus, etc.  Therefore, the wealth is spread more evenly and everybody pays taxes because everybody has at least some money with which to pay taxes.  And that's exactly what progressive tax rates are intended to do.  It was only when Reagan ramped up military spending and slashed the highest tax rates and the capital gains tax rates that the debt started to spiral out of control.  I would think we both agree that a robust economy is the only way we are going to get out of this mess.  Tax the s*** out of the wealthy and you will have a robust economy, higher tax revenues and also less expenditures on social safety programs as they will be far less necessary with the wealth more evenly spread.  If I were a rich person under your governorship, I would leave.  Which is exactly what happens.  I would say let them leave, but the country's wealth stays put.  In other words, you can pack up a suitcase, and catch a bus with nothing but the clothes on your back and a suitcase full of personal items.  Heck, we'll even throw in a one-way plane ticket to anywhere you want to go.  Coach, of course.

And you're going to get my wealth from me how exactly?


Edited by Epignosis - November 29 2012 at 19:12

Who are we to say how hard a CEO works, or a football player, or an actor.....I tend to agree they are overpaid a bit, but they likely worked their ass off to get where they are....and in my opinion that IS harder than pushing a broom.  I couldn't do it.  No matter how hard I worked, I could not *handle* the pressure CEOs have on their shoulder.  I could not hack what an NFL lineman hacks, or act to save my life.  It takes hard work and sacrifice to get a high income....if it didn't, all of us would have one.

Sorry you don't like my choice of words....I don't care for all the characterizations made in these pages either.