I get conservative guys point about public assistance

[agent00f]

Not for nothing, but it's clear when people are being racist, even when they're blowing their dog whistles through a fabric softener and crisp not-yet-worn white sheets.

I think what Jhhnn is getting at is that by calling them what they are over and over, it loses its meaning.

What I try to do, is include it as an aside, or use a more broadly-encompassing term; i.e. they don't care if the middle class gets gutted, as long as those people have it worse / bigotry.

More subtle, effective, and gets at the underlying tribalism, rather than pigeonholing them as racist, which frankly, they may not be.

Trust me, there are plenty of conservatives who aren't racist in the sense of the term, but fucking hate anyone who isn't a member of their conservative tribe. Here, bigotry is a broader term that includes their ignorant hatred of people who they don't consider members of their own tribe.

Be more inclusive in your argument, by being less specific about who you're arguing with. Plus, they don't get the automatic talking point rebuttal of: no, YOU'RE the real racist / everyone that disagrees with you is a racist.

It's a categorical fact that race resentment is pretty much the best predictor for party affiliation. I was quite surprised myself upon discovering this research, but it is what it is.

Also as a matter of history the southern strategy is why american political lines are where they are, and I wouldn't necessarily say for the worse because there came to be a clear division between liberal and conservative parties. Of course not ALL conservatives are racist, but the venn diagram of GOP constituent interest groups approximate a circle; what's why the king of birthers is their head honcho.

 

[agent00f]

Is that your come back line? Talk about pathetic weak sauce. Keep lying and telling yourself about excel intellectually and academically. LOL x 10000000000.

Oh, one more thing, what will I be (white/black/green/purple/etc.) tomorrow per you and your kind so I can act accordingly.

No, I'd say ingratiating yourself to white nationalists by adopting their racial slurs is pretty weak.

 

[nickqt]

It's a categorical fact that race resentment is pretty much the best predictor for party affiliation. I was quite surprised myself upon discovering this research, but it is what it is.

Also as a matter of history the southern strategy is why american political lines are where they are, and I wouldn't necessarily say for the worse because there came to be a clear division between liberal and conservative parties. Of course not ALL conservatives are racist, but the venn diagram of GOP constituent interest groups approximate a circle; what's why the king of birthers is their head honcho.

No matter how true that is, it doesn't change what I said.

 

[Jhhnn]

No matter how true that is, it doesn't change what I said.

Agreed. If they are racist & you say it'll hurt black & brown people they'll say "so what?" If you say it'll hurt Americans it shifts the perspective.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Agreed. If they are racist & you say it'll hurt black & brown people they'll say "so what?" If you say it'll hurt Americans it shifts the perspective.

Yeah, then they ask "*which* Americans".

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, then they ask "*which* Americans".

Please. They know there are poor white Americans like in the OP.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Please. They know there are poor white Americans like in the OP.

Other than rhetorically they generally tend not to give much of a damn about them either. Even when 'they' is 'them'.

 

[Jhhnn]

Other than rhetorically they generally tend not to give much of a damn about them either. Even when 'they' is 'them'.

For white racists, white people always matter more. Talk about them to have a more effective argument. Harping on race is too often just dog whistling for Libs.

 

[Victorian Gray]

For white racists, white people always matter more. Talk about them to have a more effective argument. Harping on race is too often just dog whistling for Libs.

I don't argue/debate with racists/nazis/fascists/alt-assholes. These are not people who give a damn what I believe or have to say (and often hate me for it) and I sure as hell don't care about their shitty views. They hate me for my beliefs and declare me their enemy. I can't be bothered to hate. Can't rouse much more than some disdain and, very rarely, pity. They want me 'gone' from their world ("America. Love it or leave it!"). I would just like them to keep their shit to themselves and not bother the rest of us with it. Fuck 'em.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

The point is that welfare/assistance/entitlements is addressing symptoms, not the sickness.

And, we're unable to actually address the sickness because then right-wing political correctness kicks in, and it's just shouts and screaming about THEFT and COMMUNISM.

That's the god damn problem in a nutshell.

There are plenty of solutions that can rein in how much money is lost on fraud, and how to best help people who need it. But until the conversation can even begin, the POWERFUL RICH fuck over the system for billions in large amounts to relatively few, while some poor people screw over the system for chump change in a larger numbers, and we're stuck...still...with the BothSidesDoIt™ apathetic attempt to go back to the Articles of Confederation, which didn't work the first time, rather than discussing the actual problem.

Because addressing the problem and working out solutions costs a lot of people money, power, and the ability to continue controlling the conversation which, no shit, nets them lots of money and power.

And what do you believe the real sickness is? The powerful rich screwing everyone over? If those powerful rich are such a big problem, how is it that some can rise out of poverty? After all, shouldn't their fate be sealed by those rich bastards so they can never get their share? btw, as I've also pointed out, many powerful rich people are Democrats and lefties. Surely you mean it's only the rich righties that are the problem?

imo, and in ime, the biggest problem with the poor is a lack of core family to give poor youth direction and discipline. When you look at hose who are successful in life, that's a massively huge factor. Even the young poor who don't have a core family to guide them often find success when the encounter a mentor in life to guide them and provide purpose. But the PC left prevent anyone from addressing that as a solution.

So again, both sides do it. Both sides ignore it too and point at the other as the root of the problem, just like you did.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

What it comes down to, TLC, is that you're a somewhat socially tolerant conservative who really doesn't understand the nature of hierarchical society & how our own has changed over the last 40 years. You don't integrate available information into your thinking.

I posted this in another thread, but it applies here as well-

Conservatives simply do not understand what's happened to the economy. Working people have been losing in the top down class warfare waged by the Rich for decades. Since 1980, the share of national income going to the lower 75% has fallen by a quarter, ~11% of the total, while the share going to the top 1% has more tan doubled, rising by ~11%.

Table 5-

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2015-update

It's not just poor people who need assistance. It's the heart of the middle class, too.

But do go on white knighting for the greedy Rich.

Erm, OK. You've been all over the place in this thread and this is yet another example of that. This thread isn't about the middle class. Feel free to start another if you want to discuss that issue.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

No, I'd say ingratiating yourself to white nationalists by adopting their racial slurs is pretty weak.

The resident P&N racist is harping on race again?

/shocker

 

[Jhhnn]

Erm, OK. You've been all over the place in this thread and this is yet another example of that. This thread isn't about the middle class. Feel free to start another if you want to discuss that issue.

A variety of social welfare programs benefit people who aren't poor. SNAP, earned income credits & ACA exchange subsidies among them. I argue that poor & working people in general need more of that merely as an issue of economic self defense. The only way to offset the the loss of taxable income among the lower 75% is with taxes at the top & various forms of redistribution. Otherwise, the beatings will continue.

It's also a good way to get some of the big money out of politics. They can't spend what they don't have.

 

[nickqt]

And what do you believe the real sickness is? The powerful rich screwing everyone over? If those powerful rich are such a big problem, how is it that some can rise out of poverty? After all, shouldn't their fate be sealed by those rich bastards so they can never get their share? btw, as I've also pointed out, many powerful rich people are Democrats and lefties. Surely you mean it's only the rich righties that are the problem?

imo, and in ime, the biggest problem with the poor is a lack of core family to give poor youth direction and discipline. When you look at hose who are successful in life, that's a massively huge factor. Even the young poor who don't have a core family to guide them often find success when the encounter a mentor in life to guide them and provide purpose. But the PC left prevent anyone from addressing that as a solution.

So again, both sides do it. Both sides ignore it too and point at the other as the root of the problem, just like you did.

You fucking torched that carefully crafted strawman, bro!

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

A variety of social welfare programs benefit people who aren't poor. SNAP, earned income credits & ACA exchange subsidies among them. I argue that poor & working people in general need more of that merely as an issue of economic self defense. The only way to offset the the loss of taxable income among the lower 75% is with taxes at the top & various forms of redistribution. Otherwise, the beatings will continue.

It's also a good way to get some of the big money out of politics. They can't spend what they don't have.

I'm pretty sure, at least for SNAP, that anyone earning over 130% gross and 100% net poverty level income does not qualify, with a few exceptions for the elderly. So I'd say that is pretty limited to the poor and has no direct impact on the middle class. With few exceptions, it's not much different for other social welfare programs either.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

You fucking torched that carefully crafted strawman, bro!

Hey, you fucking owned with that response...bro.

lol.

 

[nickqt]

Hey, you fucking owned with that response...bro.

lol.

A rare moment of lucidity on your part. Congratulations.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

A rare moment of lucidity on your part. Congratulations.

So many babies in here.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm pretty sure, at least for SNAP, that anyone earning over 130% gross and 100% net poverty level income does not qualify, with a few exceptions for the elderly. So I'd say that is pretty limited to the poor and has no direct impact on the middle class. With few exceptions, it's not much different for other social welfare programs either.

Lots of single earner families qualify for tanf/snap when laid off & seeking employment. There are lots of different programs that benefit low income families, particularly if they have senior members or special needs children. It all helps American families lead better lives.

None of it is driving Rich people into the poorhouse.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Lots of single earner families qualify for tanf/snap when laid off & seeking employment. There are lots of different programs that benefit low income families, particularly if they have senior members or special needs children. It all helps American families lead better lives.

None of it is driving Rich people into the poorhouse.

And I don't have a problem with those programs.

btw, "rich" people is a constantly evolving pool. Look at the Forbes 400 list. Look how much of that is new money, new rich, and not the trust-fund babies of old money that so many whine about in here. Many of them have been and are people that drive technology and innovation and elevate plenty of others along with them in the process. Let's face it. Without the innovations from the "rich" like Gates and Jobs (cough...Wozniak), many of us in AT would likely still be working in some dull manufacturing job, if we were lucky, just like the smiling-face, Swanson frozen dinner eating masses of the 50s.

 

[jackstar7]

So many babies in here.

I mean there are, but it's weird that you don't see how you're one of them when you can't participate in a discourse without being deliberately obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

I mean there are, but it's weird that you don't see how you're one of them when you can't participate in a discourse without being deliberately obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

You mean like the post above, where I put names and faces on the rich that so many on the left have an vast disdain for...until they realize they are the people that ultimately provide jobs for them, so they can earn money to live, buy computers, and bitch on the internet about the rich?

And when will you speak up against those attempting to slime me with incredibly pathetic reasoning and piss poor logic; people like Hazuki, or Agentoaf, when you know damn well they are acting like children?

You support the babies in here by your inaction. So don't preach to me until you put your actions where your mouth is. When that happens I might take you seriously. Until then you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[Jhhnn]

And I don't have a problem with those programs.

btw, "rich" people is a constantly evolving pool. Look at the Forbes 400 list. Look how much of that is new money, new rich, and not the trust-fund babies of old money that so many whine about in here. Many of them have been and are people that drive technology and innovation and elevate plenty of others along with them in the process. Let's face it. Without the innovations from the "rich" like Gates and Jobs (cough...Wozniak), many of us in AT would likely still be working in some dull manufacturing job, if we were lucky, just like the smiling-face, Swanson frozen dinner eating masses of the 50s.

Back at #751 you argued that such programs shouldn't help people in perpetuity when some do, like ACA subsidies & EITC. A huge number of people in this country will never earn enough money to not benefit from them.

As for the rest of it, so what? Strivers & innovators do what they do regardless of their personal income tax rates or taxes on their estates. The greediest squeal the loudest when the society that nurtured them wants something back.

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...o-is-behind-the-push-to-repeal-the-estate-tax

 

[jackstar7]

You mean like the post above, where I put names and faces on the rich that so many on the left have an vast disdain for...until they realize they are the people that ultimately provide jobs for them, so they can earn money to live, buy computers, and bitch on the internet about the rich?

And when will you speak up against those attempting to slime me with incredibly pathetic reasoning and piss poor logic; people like Hazuki, or Agentoaf, when you know damn well they are acting like children?

You support the babies in here by your inaction. So don't preach to me until you put your actions where your mouth is. When that happens I might take you seriously. Until then you don't have a leg to stand on.

If you don't know how to use the ignore function, that's on you. I'm talking about people engaging in discourse. If you want to spend more time on noise than signal, own it. Yeah, noise. That's how I describe anyone not contributing, including the pages of pointless bickering.

As for your Job Creators argument... you gotta be kidding right? Data > anecdotes.

 

[agent00f]

No matter how true that is, it doesn't change what I said.

If the focus is on what works, it's evident that illustrating their relationship to racists works on people who don't care for that sort of thing, or at least find the social stigma undesirable. Of course it doesn't work on hardcore racists at heart, but then against not much does. Best to merely use them as tools against the rest.

The difficult part of this broader political problem isn't actually with conservatives, but rather at least a plurality of american liberals who honestly do not believe the degree to which racial resentment runs the show. Even with the election of a president primarily on race resentment rhetoric (who "nobody" thought was electable, due to this ingrained erroneous belief) people are unwilling the face the reality of it. And so they'll go on about their business of rehashing pointless econ arguments, oblivious to how the ecosystem works.

If we've learned much from science & such in the last few hundred years, it's that solutions are scarce without appreciable understanding of underlying mechanism.

Agreed. If they are racist & you say it'll hurt black & brown people they'll say "so what?" If you say it'll hurt Americans it shifts the perspective.

I have literally never seen what you do work in the least.

The resident P&N racist is harping on race again?

/shocker

Great job showing how much you behave just like @chucky2 and @Roflmouth, your collegial hardcore racists who you predictably do not consider so for obvious reasons.