The Left Does not Reason

[de officiis]

It is not a matter of desire, or of responsibility. Too many people live apart in crappy institutions because the family members that want too, can't because the rent has to be somehow. Families living on awful, unpredictable, low wage jobs often cannot help their relatives. Make it paying job for a member of family. If much of the income in the future might be common from the government, they could just increase the basic income.

Do you have any experience with this? It sounds like you don't.

Assisted living facilities, aka old folks homes, are expensive. Poor people don't put their parents into homes. My elders came from the depression. They didn't put their parents into homes. My great grandmother lived in her home, where just about everyone in the family lived at one point or another, until she died in her nineties. When she got to the point that she needed assistance, it meant one or more of us were there every day for about twenty years. My grandmother is in her eighties. She's lived alone in south Atlanta since Grandpa passed a few years ago. Several days a week, someone is there to clean her house, or take her out to run errands. Growing up, she owned multiple houses in Atlanta that we grew up in. Even in her own house, many of us have spent years living under her roof when times were hard, myself included. When the economy crashed nine years ago, my old man told me he was going to lose his house, so I needed to pack my things so he could put them in storage. I bought the house. I've been trying to get him to come live with me for years, but the Army has always had me so far away from home that he won't do it, because he wants to stay close to Grandmama, which I understand.

It seems to be your proposal that we abandon the idea that families should stick together, and instead make the state the source of care for the elderly. It seems certain, at least, that you are suggesting that the idea that families should stick together is folly, given reality, and we should adjust. I don't agree with either of these suppositions. Statistically, I should be a ruin. Poor kid from the south from a poor family with no education. That kid's fucked. I should be in a trailer park dealing meth. Then I would be what you suggest. A ward of the state. Using my foodstamps to buy booze and dope while defrauding medicaid so I can sell pain pills for spending money. (Again, I know about these things.)

At no point will I consider absolving individuals of their responsibilities to their kin in favor of state assistance. I've seen my entire life what welfare accomplishes. I've seen what it looks like when children don't show reverence to their parents and elders. In white communities, it creates trailer trash. In black communities, in creates thugs. It never creates anything good.

The idea that the government would need to pay people to care for their relatives is as foreign an idea to me as sushi, and I would eat grilled grubs before I ate sushi.

Great post, Okee.

I bolded the sentence in your post that you obviously have no experience with, jbird. I'm not sure how Yankees do it, but in my family too, coming from rural Georgia, sending family members to homes is usually an avenue taken by those who have the money to do it. In my family, the elderly have always been taken care of by their children or grandchildren. I took care of my 90 year old Grandpa in his old age because my Granny couldn't do it herself. That means changing the Depends, making sure he was up and dressed, that kind of stuff.

Any old folk's home I've ever been to has been one where the elderly are shoved into rooms with an old CRT tv with basic cable. They get fed and are allowed to go talk to their neighbors as long as they're able, until they grow so despondent they spend all day in bed, and are ignored by the medical staff.

Anything the government "gives" you comes with a price. Usually a societal one.

Retirement homes and assisted living facilities are the price we're paying for dual incomes. And even with dual incomes, most folks are not getting ahead. Family taking care of family is natural and is deeply rooted in the human condition.

[The Conservative]

That is why I work weekdays and my wife works weekends, we make it so that my son is raised at home, and we save a lot of money in the long run. Once he gets into school, my wife will go back to work via mother hours, and then when he gets old enough, she will be going back full time.

The thing is that it was our choice, also by necessity, since our son was born a premie, no place would take him... so we did the next best thing, which was having us raise him like they used to before both parents worked, and I'll tell you it's the best thing that ever happened...

We may not be flush in cash, but we truly do enjoy this time more than those who put their careers in front of family.

[SuburbanFarmer]

That is why I work weekdays and my wife works weekends, we make it so that my son is raised at home, and we save a lot of money in the long run. Once he gets into school, my wife will go back to work via mother hours, and then when he gets old enough, she will be going back full time.

The thing is that it was our choice, also by necessity, since our son was born a premie, no place would take him... so we did the next best thing, which was having us raise him like they used to before both parents worked, and I'll tell you it's the best thing that ever happened...

We may not be flush in cash, but we truly do enjoy this time more than those who put their careers in front of family.

We run the house on my income alone, and while it's not going to make us rich, it's definitely better for the kids. Maybe there's something to this whole 'stay-at-home-mom' female-slavery thing after all.

[The Conservative]

That is why I work weekdays and my wife works weekends, we make it so that my son is raised at home, and we save a lot of money in the long run. Once he gets into school, my wife will go back to work via mother hours, and then when he gets old enough, she will be going back full time.

The thing is that it was our choice, also by necessity, since our son was born a premie, no place would take him... so we did the next best thing, which was having us raise him like they used to before both parents worked, and I'll tell you it's the best thing that ever happened...

We may not be flush in cash, but we truly do enjoy this time more than those who put their careers in front of family.

We run the house on my income alone, and while it's not going to make us rich, it's definitely better for the kids. Maybe there's something to this whole 'stay-at-home-mom' female-slavery thing after all.

My wife gets weekends off, so lets just consider that I do give her weekends off while I work and then spend time with Peter on the weekends. So you can choose to call it what you want, but I believe that Peter will be better off for it.

[DrYouth]

Scoreboard, Priorities, and "Hold my beer". Scoreboard, Priorities, and "hold my beer." Those are my arguments.

Scoreboard.
Yes there a billion Muslims and most of them are nonviolent but they are irrelevant cause Scoreboard, the violent ones are taking over countries, chopping off heads, and all the rest of it. Yes Hillary won the popular vote but Scoreboard, Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, Reading is fundamental. Yes, you have 8 children in the supermarket and 7 of them are peacefully protesting the $0.10 price hike in arugula but the 1 spilling Orange juice all over the aisles because a grower printed Orange lives matter shirts while elderly ladies are falling and can't get up are going to get the attention cause Scoreboard $0.10<ten of thousands in damages and liability. Yes, most veterans never participated in the Mai Lei massacre but Scoreboard, that doesn't stop Dirty dick from being a disrespectful little shit. For being socialist, collectivist, you guys sure have a problem with the "you are only as strong as your weakest link" concept.

Priorities
Neil Gorsuch will be the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Jeff Sessions will be the next Attorney General, Betsy Devos is in at Education, despite the teachers unions, Tom Price will be in at HHS, and you fuckers have no idea but what catches your ire what gets you angry and out in the streets? A gay immigrant jew that loves black men and will never be a government official saying provocative things on a college campus. If I could write the strategy for my opponent I wouldn't even approach this shit because "there is no way in hell they would go for it."

"Here, hold my beer."
The media and celebrity glitterati are killing you.
What's that? You lost white working class voters in record numbers? How can you beat that?
Here hold my beer. We'll call them "pillbillies." We'll apropos of nothing disparage football and MMA. We'll have a candidate for party chair say her job is to "shut white people down. We'll shoot multiple ads with a white background and D list celebrities playing an improv game of finish my sentence telling people how to think and make sure they get the message by playing bad music even by elevator and dentist office standards and repeating every 5th word because our target audience is 6 years old and Sally Field and that girl from MASH that looks like Janice from the Muppets and inspires a craving for Hidden Valley Ranch, both say "important" like butter.

LVH has admitted his impotence, my insults should serve as Viagra. My insults are poetry and don't hurt anybody because whenever you organize and take back the left from the SJW/Corporate establishment/Media complex they are going to really cut at your core. When they call you racist, they have and they will. When they call you homophobic, they have and they will. When they call you Islamophobic, they have and they will. When they call you all the other -ist and -phobics, and they have and they will. If you wither or all you can muster is a tsk tsk, schoolmarm lecture you will lose, again and the preservation of basic rights and Western Civilization will rest solely on the shoulders of people like me. You don't want that, I am not even sure I want that.

Those weren't arguments...
That was a rant.

But that was a sweet rant... lol

[C-Mag]

A gigantic problem we have is on the ongoing increasing concentration of income, wealth, and therefore sheer power, in the world.

If you look at Oxfam's 2017 report, eight, that 8, people have as much wealth the poorer half of humanity. That's 3,500,000,000 to 8. The top 1% owns as much as the rest of the 99%

https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pres ... alf-world.

A few years ago, it sixty-four people had as much wealth as the lower 3.5 Billion people.

Whatever successful solutions we come up with is going to involve changing this. Whether we like, or not. I also believe those wealthy individuals will resist.

This process is also happening in United States, which one of the reasons the economy is so crappy, and President Trump is our President. Since it is only the top 10% of the population is doing well, and with many of those busy saying it's all the 90% fault. That they are Losers, and Deplorables. I've even read of the lower classes especially, the poor, being referred too as extra, or unneeded, people, like out of some Dickens' novel.

For now there is large of amount of potential work, which would cause unemployment to just collapse, for the money is there, but all the money is locked upped. Even if, and when, the amount of work declines, there is still more than enough wealth to pay those working, or to change the system whereby you could live on fewer hours. Personally, I do not think just giving money to people is a good idea, but since there is a large amount of work still available we could give very good wages. Would you want a happy, well paid, well trained, middle class assistant for you aged relative, or do you want some sullen, untrained, minimum wage, wage slave doing so?

I originally heard this idea from an actual Marxist economist. He pointed out a person's identity, and sense of worth, is usually tied into their job. No job, no sense of worth, bad social conditions.

However, the national, and planetary, economic system has now been rigged to channel almost all the wealth, all the resources of any kind, from an every growing number of people to an ever shrinking number of people.

The changes need not involve the government anymore than it does today. It might involve, in the end less, government. It's not assured, but government usually gets involved, grows, when life gets bad. If more people can meet their needs in a useful way, and are happy, there will be less need for a large bureaucratic government, and a chance to shrink it.

I agree. This is a huge problem, and it's one of our own making. This is the price we have paid for globalism and 'fair trade'. I remember back in the 90's when our leaders were peddling 'fair trade' and globalism they were telling us how much better off we would be not having factory work and industrial work, etc. How much better having a service economy would be. Well, that is largely what the US is now, a service economy. Service Economies SUCK ! I like to use Aspen and Oahu as prime examples of over the top Service Economies. There you see the top 1% with the wealth and the 99% turning down sheets and flipping burgers. The 99% can't even afford to live there, they have to transported to the shitty work.

So for me, the first thing we need to do to fix this is get back to producing and move away from the Service Economy.

[C-Mag]

I can see why Progressivism is seductive, you are hoping for Star Trek: The Next Generation.

I will have to give up my inalienable rights or have them taken from me. Once I do, I will be given a stipend for sustenance. I will have some down time to develop myself. There is going to have to be a very powerful government to make this happen. They are going to have to influence people to go along with putting their future into the hands of governments accepted science and technology. To do all this government needs to be large, have the agencies, personnel and resources to influence and if necessary force people to accept governments utopia.

How are we in disagreement about Progressivism ?

I am looking at the alternative to Star Trek which is widespread unemployment and social unrest.

Why do you think it would be significantly more complicated to stream-line our current bureaucratic labyrinths into a mincome agency than to keep doing what we are now? People would have much more time to keep an eye on their politicians that they do now, making for better governments. Also, I propose a healthy supply of guns for the people to keep the government in check.

Bump! on this discussion.

Please explain the mincome and mincome agency. What I am imagining is everyone gets a stipend from the government. Does everyone get the same amount ?
Does Counselor Troy get the same mincome to sit next to Captain and talk about feelings while not having to wear a uniform as the guy that has to spend his work days crawling through Jeffries tubes on his hands and knees and risking dying from plasma burns in a confined space ?

[apeman]

My insults are poetry

[Speaker to Animals]

Does Counselor Troy get the same mincome to sit next to Captain and talk about feelings while not having to wear a uniform as the guy that has to spend his work days crawling through Jeffries tubes on his hands and knees and risking dying from plasma burns in a confined space ?

I believe that's the dream. Yes.

[C-Mag]

Does Counselor Troy get the same mincome to sit next to Captain and talk about feelings while not having to wear a uniform as the guy that has to spend his work days crawling through Jeffries tubes on his hands and knees and risking dying from plasma burns in a confined space ?

I believe that's the dream. Yes.

Your gonna look awful cute in Counselor Troy's jumpsuit Doc