Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Dr. MID-Nite]

The fact that humanity wants to do the fascism thing all over again...less than a 100 years later...just depresses me beyond belief.

[Lord Liaden]

Humanity never stopped doing the fascism thing. It's just been under cover, except in less prominent parts of the world. Now it's fashionable again.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

 

Fine then....the fact that humanity thinks it's "fashionable" again less than 100 years later is still pretty depressing. We learn....nothing. Sigh...

[unclevlad]

1 hour ago, Dr. MID-Nite said:

 

Fine then....the fact that humanity thinks it's "fashionable" again less than 100 years later is still pretty depressing. We learn....nothing. Sigh...

 

I think we learn.

 

Then we forget.

Love may be a stronger motive than hate or fear, but the latter two are much, much easier to access and manipulate.  So, if you want some hope?  It's maybe not that we forget, but that fear- and hate-mongering is now far easier to do than ever before, and on a massively larger level.

[Lord Liaden]

I do believe humanity has learned. The fact that so many people -- social historians, politicians, media -- are warning us that this is where the United States is headed if the course isn't corrected, demonstrates it. Many Americans have forgotten, yes, and some elected leaders actually want it. But it's not the same fertile soil as in the early Twentieth Century, and that gives me hope.

[unclevlad]

14 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I do believe humanity has learned. The fact that so many people -- social historians, politicians, media -- are warning us that this is where the United States is headed if the course isn't corrected, demonstrates it. Many Americans have forgotten, yes, and some elected leaders actually want it. But it's not the same fertile soil as in the early Twentieth Century, and that gives me hope.

 

This argument doesn't hold up that well for me.  The hatemongers have far greater reach;  the Cassandras have the same reach.  What is less clear is the reception of the messages from each side. This is only a couple weeks old:
 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/28/politics/poll-qanon-election-conspiracies/index.html

 

The Cassandras can't break the absurd belief that Trump won the election.  There's a dangerously high belief in the QAnon BS.  So...yes, the ground is different compared to, let's say as late as the start of WW II...but much of that, IMO, was the speed of communication.  It was easier to hide things;  it was easier to exert tight control in a limited area because it was harder to get a message out.  OK, this changed starting in the late 60's, with live or near-live TV feeds.  This was a big issue in Viet Nam;  we saw the problems directly, and that hugely energized the anti-war protests.  What got Ray Rice booted from football?  The elevator video.  Pictures are massively, immediately impactful;  words often aren't.

 

The other aspect:  the basic ground might not be as fertile, but the hatemongers have been working that ground for over 20 years.

[archer]

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

 

[archer]

3 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

 

As amusing as that might be, I don't think it proves much if anything.

 

What I've heard of China's healthcare system:

 

People who are ill are still expected to show up to work.

 

Multiple horror stories about pregnant women having to pedal themselves to the hospital while in labor.

 

Decades of horror stories about women having a forbidden second child showing up at a Chinese hospital and the kid getting a lethal injection as soon as it crowns, while it's still inside the mother.

 

 

I mean, a news organization is welcome to come by and film my impressions of the Chinese healthcare system and post it up for the world to see. But it wouldn't prove anything because even though I'm a certifiable news junkie, I don't have any particular expertise when it comes to the Chinese healthcare system.

[Lord Liaden]

I'm afraid I don't see the relevance of your comparison. Nobody in this video is from China. The Chinese system isn't under discussion. The United States is not supposed to be an authoritarian regime engaging in clandestine oppression, it's the wealthiest country in the world, supposedly the land of opportunity. These people are reacting to information that's freely available, from the perspective of their own experiences. The average cost of American health care, and the average lifespan of Americans, compared to all the other countries on that list, are objective statistical facts. The systems these global citizens live under have functioned for decades, in many cases generations. You don't need to be an expert on America to recognize these profound disparities, and that with America's vaunted wealth and resources it doesn't have to be that way. These people are collective proof that it doesn't have to be that way.

[unclevlad]

Mind...there are some nasty criticisms I've heard about both the Canadian and British health care systems.  It isn't all sweetness and light to have a national health care system.  But ours is a hot mess, to be sure.

 

Life expectancy?  We're 46th.

https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/

 

The gap isn't narrowing, it's growing:

https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-life-expectancy-compare-countries/#item-le_total-life-expectancy-at-birth-in-years-1980-2017_dec-2019-update

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

19 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Mind...there are some nasty criticisms I've heard about both the Canadian and British health care systems.  It isn't all sweetness and light to have a national health care system.  But ours is a hot mess, to be sure.

 

No argument. We Canadians often criticize the flaws in our health system, and rightly so. But I can assure you that not one Canadian citizen hesitates to see a doctor for an illness or injury out of concern over paying for it. And practically no Canadians would trade our system for yours.

[unclevlad]

11 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

No argument. We Canadians often criticize the flaws in our health system, and rightly so. But I can assure you that not one Canadian citizen hesitates to see a doctor for an illness or injury out of concern over paying for it. And practically no Canadians would trade our system for yours.

 

Well, it depends on how much money you have.  Our system works fine for the top 10%.

[Lord Liaden]

Hey, if I'm in the top 10% in my country, I'll be thinking about many things to spend my money on. But health care won't be one of them.

[Lord Liaden]

But seriously, there's a strong habit in capitalist societies to use money as the measure for all intrinsic quality. I.e. the more money something is "worth," the better it is. That extends to people as well, e.g. the work someone does must be superior, must contribute more to society, the more they're paid for it. Along with that comes the common assumption, often unconscious and rarely spoken aloud, that people with a lot of money have it because they deserve it, and poor people would have more money if they were better people. However, I have noticed that last part is being expressed openly and directly by those who have money more often than it used to be, particularly in the States.

[unclevlad]

Oh, I wasn't being deeply philosophical, or saying the top 10% was any better.  Quite the opposite;  it was intended as very cynical.  They just don't care about the health care costs, because they more often have high-end insurance...and that also tends to give them high-end access.  

 

The American system isn't that bad...so long as you have the money to pay for it.  But recognize just how large a qualifier that is.  And what it says about American priorities.

[DShomshak]

If you're really rich, you can have "concierge medicine" with a private doctor. All part of a trend toward the "concierge society" where the super-rich don't have to care about maintianing roads because they go everywhere by private helicopter, or (for the less exorbitantly wealthy) pay to drive in the carpool lane while the wage slaves creep along in the other lanes. Or. rock used to be the music of the people, but now only the rich can go to concerts: Computers buy most of the tickets the instant they go on sale, for resale at 10 times the price. Skyboxes at sports stadiums: games are for corporate officers to entertain foreign guests while they cut deals, while the plebes watch on TV. And so on.

 

Granted, naked plutocracy has a certain refreshing honesty compared to concealed plutocracy.

 

Dean Shomshak

[TrickstaPriest]

17 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

If you're really rich, you can have "concierge medicine" with a private doctor. All part of a trend toward the "concierge society" where the super-rich don't have to care about maintianing roads because they go everywhere by private helicopter, or (for the less exorbitantly wealthy) pay to drive in the carpool lane while the wage slaves creep along in the other lanes. Or. rock used to be the music of the people, but now only the rich can go to concerts: Computers buy most of the tickets the instant they go on sale, for resale at 10 times the price. Skyboxes at sports stadiums: games are for corporate officers to entertain foreign guests while they cut deals, while the plebes watch on TV. And so on.

 

Granted, naked plutocracy has a certain refreshing honesty compared to concealed plutocracy.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

Yeah, and this (building schools,hospitals,roads,infrastructure) is one of the things that separates a democratic free society from a dictatorship.  As in, as long as the upper class actually need the lower class, they have to invest in them... 😕

[Lord Liaden]

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Oh, I wasn't being deeply philosophical, or saying the top 10% was any better.  Quite the opposite;  it was intended as very cynical.  They just don't care about the health care costs, because they more often have high-end insurance...and that also tends to give them high-end access.  

 

The American system isn't that bad...so long as you have the money to pay for it.  But recognize just how large a qualifier that is.  And what it says about American priorities.

 

That isn't just a qualifier, though. It's a profound qualitative distinction. If the "American system" is means-based,  what it really means is that the great majority of people born in America, living and working in America, paying taxes in America, having official American citizenship, aren't really Americans, because the benefits of the American system are beyond them.

[unclevlad]

3 hours ago, DShomshak said:

If you're really rich, you can have "concierge medicine" with a private doctor. All part of a trend toward the "concierge society" where the super-rich don't have to care about maintianing roads because they go everywhere by private helicopter, or (for the less exorbitantly wealthy) pay to drive in the carpool lane while the wage slaves creep along in the other lanes. Or. rock used to be the music of the people, but now only the rich can go to concerts: Computers buy most of the tickets the instant they go on sale, for resale at 10 times the price. Skyboxes at sports stadiums: games are for corporate officers to entertain foreign guests while they cut deals, while the plebes watch on TV. And so on.

 

Last year, Rolex released an updated Oyster Perpetual (OP) 36.  2 basic dial colors, 5 new, bright colors, that hadn't been seen from Rolex in ages.  MSRP is not cheap...$5600 IIRC...but asking price for the more popular bright colors...still around $12K or so, even after 9 months.  Pretty much the same story for the new Rolex Explorer model released in, IIRC, April.  The Patek Nautilus 5711 in steel, a classic watch...ok, list is around $20K, but these are going for closer to $70K.    Ming Thein is a highly respected watch photographer.  He decided to start a watch company oh...4, 5 years ago I think.  It is WIDELY acclaimed, with 2 major prizes to its credit.  It's extremely small and they strive to maintain their standards...so almost all the releases have been small batches.  They go on sale online, and sell out in literally 5 minutes.  Yes, speculator purchasing was rampant, because asking prices for several models is 3-4x the original purchase price.

 

In ultra-high-end Bourbons, the elite names commonly fetch > $1000...and sometimes WELL over.  Cognac has that too, but usually for cognacs featuring very, very old components.  

 

When products with relatively scarce availability suddenly become Hot Items, yes...the price explodes.

 

Skyboxes have actually always been more for corporate types.  They aren't the issue;  the issue is personal seat licenses.  Here's a link to a license brokering site:
https://www.pslsource.com/buy_dallas_cowboys_psl

 

Scroll down the offers;  hover and you will see where the seats are.  Then look at the prices.  Note that this is NOT the cost of a season ticket;  it's the cost to have the right to BUY the season ticket.  

 

Several years ago, there was an article about the major shift in the crowd enthusiasm at Cowboys home games.  The problem...the basic fan got squeezed out.  The diehards got replaced by the money guy...or the guy who viewed it as an investment and sold several individual-game tickets for spot prices.  The common opinion was that the feel of the crowd was just not the same at all.

 

And heck, one can argue that season tickets, even for the NFL and its short season, are something of a luxury.  But single game?  Average ticket price, league-wide is a bit over $100 per.  For MLB, it's about $30 per.  Plus parking, if you drive, and concessions at the captive-audience hijacking prices.

 

Are these connected?  Actually, yes.  Those ticket prices go to paying players' skyrocketing salaries...the insane contracts for the top few, pull up the salaries for the 2nd and 3rd tier players too...and into the owners' pockets.  The mega TV contracts...guess what?  If you have cable or satellite, you're paying for them.  The broadcasters pay the leagues insane amounts...then turn around and charge the cable and satellite companies an insane amount.  And that's passed on to the customers.  

 

The inequality of wealth distribution is consistently growing more and more extreme.  And as it concentrates into the hands of relatively few, markets skew to accommodate their desires.  Which, yes, tends to leave the everyday person behind.

Just now, Lord Liaden said:

 

That isn't just a qualifier, though. It's a profound qualitative distinction. If the "American system" is means-based,  what it really means is that the great majority of people born in America, living and working in America, paying taxes in America, having official American citizenship, aren't really Americans, because the benefits of the American system are beyond them.

 

Bingo.  It is moving that way.

 

[Lord Liaden]

I would say it's already that way, and has been for a long time. It's just getting more egregious.

 

With systemic bias against the poor, many of them will never have access to the means to advance their position within society, effectively creating a permanent underclass.

[BoloOfEarth]

7 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

But seriously, there's a strong habit in capitalist societies to use money as the measure for all intrinsic quality. I.e. the more money something is "worth," the better it is. That extends to people as well, e.g. the work someone does must be superior, must contribute more to society, the more they're paid for it. Along with that comes the common assumption, often unconscious and rarely spoken aloud, that people with a lot of money have it because they deserve it, and poor people would have more money if they were better people. However, I have noticed that last part is being expressed openly and directly by those who have money more often than it used to be, particularly in the States.

 

I had a theory that a person's income is in inverse proportion to their worth to society (at least in the US).  If all the star athletes, the megacorporation CEOs, and movie stars disappeared tomorrow... life would go on.  But if all the farmers, or all the firemen, or all the police officers, or all the long-haul truckers disappeared... society wouldn't last long.  

 

The main thing that killed that theory was doctors (who generally make decent money but are very important to society).

[Matt the Bruins]

Skilled RNs, engineers, safety inspectors, etc. contradict as well.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

4 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I would say it's already that way, and has been for a long time. It's just getting more egregious.

 

With systemic bias against the poor, many of them will never have access to the means to advance their position within society, effectively creating a permanent underclass.

 

Capitalism desires...and dare I say...requires...a permanent underclass.

[BoloOfEarth]

23 hours ago, Matt the Bruins said:

Skilled RNs, engineers, safety inspectors, etc. contradict as well.

 

Note that I did say "the main thing," not "the only thing."