Where is the answer to this mess?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by spiritgide, Oct 13, 2021.

  1. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only the original five are required, but that included the Postal Service. The Department of Veterans Affairs is necessary, while Homeland Security is not, since it overlaps both Justice and Defense, it is redundant and a waste of precious Capital.

    Not likely. People are generally weak and pathetic.

    There is no way to undo that overnight, or even within a generation.

    It can only be done through civil war where one side crushes or annihilates the other. You might wanna brush up on your history.

    No such grounds you're aware of.
     
  2. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,539
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Funny thing about history is history is ever changing ;)
     
  3. Moolk

    Moolk Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2020
    Messages:
    19,283
    Likes Received:
    14,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You wont get a working answer from this administration, thats for sure.
     
  4. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Without rules that provide uniform freedoms to all- this nation will be lost. That is happening right now as government attempt to us legal means to control dissent and free speech. Different principles for different people. That end does not justify the means. You say "The right believe in smaller government and personal freedoms, even at the expense of the greater public health." In fact, they believe that the threat to public health is grossly distorted and being used to destroy person freedoms. That is a hugely different view- and there is more than probable cause to support it.

    You also say "Once the pandemic is over, our rights will supposedly be restored." You're a smart guy. Have you ever known a time when government really kept it's word, or let go of power once they had it?
    My father told me he heard FDR state that "under the worst case scenario, the social security tax would never be more than 3%". Today- it totals over 12%, and the possibility of that being raised is high; they have already patched and fixed and propped the program up a dozen times. Never trust government to give up an inch of power once they take it.

    As to "who decides what's ethical? " Core ethics are what matters as they control the rest. Lets say for example that we took just one rule for basic ethics of politicians- The Oath of Office they all take.
    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
    Now what if that rule was enforced across the board?

    There is also a set of ethics guidelines for all federal employees, that is also short, simple- and yet comprehensive. In addition to that, there is a condition of law called Fiduciary Duty, which applies to anyone in a position of responsibility for or holds power over other people's property property or welfare. We DO have rules on ethical conduct.

    Shorter is better, by far. As the rules get more complex- the number of loopholes increases exponentially, and politicians love that. The Constitution of the United States is our prime directive and the foundation for all law. It contains 4543 words. Biden's new tax bill- contains over 10,000 pages of words. Nobody will ever truly understand what it means- even if you read it, you could have no definitive grasp of how it worked. This isn't necessity so much as camouflage to provide open ended power. The potential for corruption under that is truly vast.

    I'm not religious, but if you consider the 10 commandments- "Thou shalt not kill" doesn't leave a lot of doubt or wiggle room. Four words, absolutely no question of their meaning.
    I believe we already have the basic definitions of ethics defined in simple straight forward terms- but we totally fail to require they be respected. I don't know if you have children or not, but if you do, and you set rules but fail to apply them consistently, then there are no rules and your kids know it. Your "rules" become cosmetic so you can pretend you have rules, but you have disobedience at will from your kids, and no control as a parent. The only rules that matter are the ones that have power behind them that insures they are kept. So- we don't need to write new rules, and the ones we have are already agreed to by all involved. Why don't we require they be honored?
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  5. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The more complicated you make it, the more that is true. There are other ways....
     
  6. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is grotesque and disgusting.

    What I'm hearing is, "I'm too apathetic to do anything, so I'll pass the buck to others who are equally or even more apathetic than I am in the hope that something eventually gets done before the Sun turns into a Red Giant."

    Congratulations are in order.

    You have admitted that representative democracy is a total and complete failure while simultaneously doing nothing to solve the problem.

    Wrong. Politicians can buy votes because you don't have the courage to do what needs to be done to restore integrity to the system.

    That is nothing short of Wishful Thinking, and squared at that, and it does not solve the problem.

    Yes, and why is that?

    The answer is here.....

    That will never happen -- with "never" meaning at no time ever -- unless and until money is taken out of the equation.

    Once you eliminate money from the equation, you can immediately begin to restore integrity to the political system.

    The most important thing that happens is that candidates flood in.

    Why? Because the playing field has been leveled and you don't need an exorbitant amount of money to run for any political office which is what allows ordinary citizens to get elected.

    Not only do you flood the field with more candidates, you flood the field with more political parties.

    You will never -- with "never" meaning at no time ever -- reform either the Republicans or Democrats unless you coerce them and the only way to coerce them is to have competition from dozens of 3rd Parties and you'll never have dozens of 3rd Parties unless and until you level the playing field so that ordinary people don't need take out a 2nd and 3rd Mortgage to run for office plus kiss lots of ass in either of the two dominant Parties, or kiss the ass of people just to get money to run,

    This would be the only possible chance to stave off the coming civil war. I've already got a starter-kit for you:

    Proposed 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution [Annotated]

    Section 1

    No person or entity shall contribute money, or goods, services, tangible property or intangible property in lieu of money, to a political candidate, or to the political campaign of a ballot initiative, who is not a natural born or naturalized United States citizen, and who is not legally domiciled and eligible to vote within the geographical area that an elected official serves or represents, or in which a ballot initiative may be operative.

    Notes:
    1) One does not need to be registered to vote. One need only be lawfully eligible to vote in the place they are domiciled. This bars "snow-birds" from voting in the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida and then voting by absentee ballot in New York, Michigan, Ohio, et al, while they're snow-birding in southern States for the Winter.
    2) If you cannot legally vote for a candidate, then you cannot contribute money to their campaign. That means Soros, and Gates and the Koch Bros can contribute money to presidential campaigns; to the gubernatorial candidates of the State in which they live, but not those in other States; to the Senators in their States, but not other States; to their congressional representative, but not Congress-critters in other States, and not Congress-critters in other districts in their State; to judges and elected county officials in their county, but no other; to mayorial candidates in the city where they live, but to no other; and to ballot initiatives in their city, county, or State, but no other.

    Section 2


    Political parties shall not transfer or distribute campaign funds or monies raised, donated or accumulated within a State to another State or to the several States.

    Notes:
    1) Campaign donations received by political parties in a particular State must be spent in that State. What has been happening for the past 40 years is that if Democrat Senatorial Candidate Ass-clown is gonna win by a hefty margin in Ohio, then the Democrat Party of Ohio dumps money into the campaign of Democrat Senatorial Candidate Ass-wipe in Nevada who is in a close race and might win, if only he had mo' money. Likewise, if Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Doofus is going to win Michigan, then Republicans dump mo' money into the campaign of Gubernatorial Candidate Dork in Iowa to help him win. Section 2 puts an end to that nonsense.

    Section 3


    Any natural person who knowingly or willfully commits a violation of this Amendment shall be imprisoned for not less than 5 years and fined not less than 300 percent of the amount of money, or goods, services, tangible property, or intangible property, contributed to the political candidate or the political campaign of a ballot initiative.

    Notes:
    1) That applies to people, as in human beings.

    Any non-natural person or entity who knowingly or willfully commits a violation of this Amendment shall be placed in receivership for a term of not less than 7 years, and not more than 10 years, and fined not less than 500 percent of the amount of money, or goods, services, tangible property, or intangible property, contributed to the political candidate or the political campaign of a ballot initiative. The United States Bankruptcy Court having jurisdiction over the non-natural person or entity shall appoint a receiver to act as trustee


    Notes:
    1) This applies to all non-humans, including publicly-traded corporations, all for-profit and non-profit entities, including for-profit S-Corps, limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships, limited partnerships, general partnerships (but not sole proprietors), and all non-profit organizations, including unions, think-tanks, political action committees (PACs), colleges, universities, clubs, etc, etc etc.
    2) Since non-human entities cannot be imprisoned, the US Bankruptcy Court appoints a receiver who takes control of the entities finances. For a publicly-traded corporation, its stock price would drop to $0.03/share and it would end up filing bankruptcy anyway, so it's a good thing a receiver will already be in place. The receiver will ensure the 500% fine is paid, and will have total control over every facet of the entity's operation, as receivers normally do.

    Section 4

    The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


    Section 5

    This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date its submission.

    Never forget: States are sovereign.

    Sovereigns have certain inherent powers.

    The several States who are all sovereigns in their own right agreed to forfeit certain powers, namely, the right to: wage war, engage in diplomacy, enter into treaties, issue letters of credit, marquis and reprisal, and to coin money.

    They voluntarily forfeited those powers -- and no others -- in order to speak as one voice in matters of war, diplomacy and treaties, because there really is strength in unity, and to forfeit the right to coin money in order to create, maintain and sustain commercial activities to the benefit of all the States and their residents.

    All other powers inherent to a sovereign State are retained, just like it says in the 10th Amendment.

    When someone who is not a resident of your State dumps money into your State to influence elections and ballot initiatives, that is a clear violation of your State's sovereignty.

    It is a violation of you. You have been violated.

    It is no different than Russia or any other foreign State influencing federal elections in America.

    So, why aren't you angry?

    And, what are you gonna do about it, other than flap your lips?
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  7. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again with you guys...

    The reality of what she tried to do was impose her own standards on a system she didn't fully understand. The outcome was that the group that actually interacts with the system rejected it. Fewer kids ate school lunches. The system reacted to a simple fix with simple changes that completely invalidated the simple solution.
     
  8. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    History does not offer a lot of room for optimism: it shows that the privileged prefer to perish in blood and flame, and to watch their children slaughtered before their eyes, rather than relinquish even the smallest portion of their unjust advantages.
    Right. And the most misguided of those ideas is the idea that there is no such thing as unearned wealth, that any legally obtained wealth must have been earned by commensurate contribution to production, and cannot possibly be the fruits of massive, systematic, institutionalized, and wholly gratuitous injustice.
    The rot is too deep. The greedy, privileged, parasitic, super-duper uber-rich have total control, and they will not be giving it up. Why would they? They will never see where their greed is leading them until it is far too late.
    A little honest introspection on your part might.

    The problem America faces is as obvious and as old as humanity: evil. Greed -- unfortunately mistranslated as, "love of money" -- is the root of all manner of evil. You consistently rationalize and justify greed and the privileges that are its legal instantiation, and seek to blame its victims for what has been done to them. By doing this, you serve evil. I'm not sure there is any clearer or simpler way of explaining that to you.

    But if you live long enough to see greed destroy your beloved America, and see your children and grandchildren slaughtered before your eyes, I want you to remember this message, and that it was your choice to ignore, dismiss, and deny it.
     
  9. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Evolution solves the problem dynamically.
     
  10. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't make it complicated, it simply is. One size does not fit all. In many systems it only fits one.
     
  11. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,752
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have admitted that re-election is a major reason for corruption in the system of representative democracy. I have no control over the problem and, hence, am not expected to solve it. What a bizarre post on your part.
     
  12. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You've provided me with a great example to explore.

    Let me clarify my statement about Michelle not understanding the problem. It's not that she didn't take the time to understand it. It's that it cannot be understood.

    11 million children live in food insecure homes. Did her program, based on daily nutritional recommendations, provide enough food for children, or did it rely on parents providing children with the remaining nutritional requirements at home?

    Cultural differences create different deficiencies in nutrition. Did her program take this into account, or did her program assume everyone was eating the same at home?

    Activity levels create different deficiencies in nutrition. Did her program take this into account, or did her program assume everyone requires the same nutrition?

    Many students have access to many nutritional choices outside of the school nutrition program. Did her program take into account the social impact of forcing some students to eat her way, while others with means could eat as they chose? What do you think the mean kids do with a social lever like that? Not pretty.

    There's no one right school lunch that works perfectly for everyone. The attempt to impose such a program is destined for disaster because you cannot control all of the factors that meet individual need.
     
  13. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Actually quite simple. I'm looking for the right solution, which is readily within our power, will have comprehensive effect, and reverse the negative process we are in.
    Two parts. How we can do it, and how we can get that mechanism in place.
    Most of that is already worked out- just trying to tweak and tune with idea of others.

    Those who say it can't be done- can't do it.
    Those who say it's impossible- can't do it.
    Those who get angry and try to punish everyone- don't have a prayer.
    Those who say it might be a long shot, but we're gonna give it our best shot-
    have a far better chance than anyone else.
    That's what we're working on.
    How many people or groups do you know of that are actually trying to fix this?
    My count... is zero.
     
  14. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    I think you will be pleasantly surprised when this comes together.
     
  15. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope.

    I've had this quote in my sig for quite some time now. It still applies:

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design" - Friedrich Hayek
     
  16. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think you need to hear that I've come to the conclusion that what I think works for me not only doesn't work for everyone, but it doesn't perfectly work for me either. This is how and why we learn and adapt. So even if you think your plan is in my best interests, the actual plan is no plan. Systems, not goals.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  17. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,568
    Likes Received:
    16,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    With all due respect, there is no perfect system of governance nor can there be one because human beings themselves are not perfect. The reset button is always caitalism. Free trade between individuals for perceived mutual benefit. From that you get money or it's equivalent if only because it's easier to carry coins than cows or chickens. Government is always composed of power seekers, and power seeking by it's very nature will ultimately destroy everything it touches including those that would wield it.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  18. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree- you cannot control all the factors that meet individual needs. It's a mistake to try as well. I've been working with a small group of people on this idea for years- basically in the format of a skunkworks; perhaps the most effective creative format we know. Everything has been thrown on the table, and of course most ideas had no chance of success. One thing we found for sure is that most of the time we are dealing with peripherals. By that, I mean focusing on symptoms of the problems, which are endless. Solving it that way would take a thousand tools, a lifetime- and still probably fail.

    Fix the disease. Break the keystone that allows the core issues to continue... cure the disease, all the symptoms cure themselves. Fix a thousand problems in one step- and never have to fight them individually. Cure the disease- and the evolution shift of that does the rest.

    I think every program I've ever seen addressing these things has been an effort to relieve symptoms. Some think they were core focused, but everything that was at all simply traded one problem for another and cured nothing. Gotta do better than that, and we can.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  19. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think you are the only person who knows your best interests. No need for someone to dictate them to you, or to anyone. I think if we got obstacles out of the way- most people would thrive. On their own plan, doing it their way. So long as that way isn't manipulating others or harming their neighbors, it can work.

    Think of this like a poker game you get into, where you discover everyone is cheating. Your options are to cheat, or get out of the game- but, you aren't allowed to leave. Now your options are to lose, or cheat better than the rest of them. As the rules of any game grow, understanding them becomes more and more difficult. Since rules are abused more than they are respected, your chance of even understanding the game are near zero.

    Let's say we can make the game honest, and the rules simple and fair. All the options are open, you know the rules, the choices are open. Bet you could play pretty good then.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  20. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,247
    Likes Received:
    25,255
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A political movement that can credible call for transferring most of the money and power from government to the control of individual members of the productive working class for its critical needs will, IMO, be irresistible.
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  21. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53,247
    Likes Received:
    25,255
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IMO, almost everyone would agree that transferring more money and power to them individually would be in their personal best interests. ;-)
     
  22. independentthinker

    independentthinker Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Messages:
    8,114
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Thou Shalt Not Kill - except in war, self defense, capital punishment, the right of a woman to kill her own fetus, or, in some cases, assisted suicide. I may have forgotten some. Not only is the bible interpreted in different ways by different people but so is the Constitution. In fact, there is a process for changing the Constitution to keep up with the times and we have a court system which tries to figure out grey areas of the Constitution and those courts interpret the Constitution differently based on their party bias.

    I hope you succeed in what you do but you may be being a bit naive or even arrogant in thinking that somehow you can figure out a solution to something that no one else has been able to figure out. Hell, as much as people complain, when it comes down to it, maybe this is the system the extremes want and see no problem with how we are doing it now and probably 75% are on either one side or the other of those extremes. Maybe the bottom line is that you need to take the money out of politics from the top down to the bottom or the bottom up to the top. Another solution would be to get rid of all parties. When you run for a particular office it is John Smith up against Jane Doe. John believes in this, Jane believes in that. Neither would belong to any parties and none could receive any money from a party or from lobbyists. But, these are just some of my fantasies.

    Let me ask you a chicken or the egg question. Are the politicians on the extremes dividing Americans or was America divided already and simply electing politicians to represent them, causing divided politicians? Which came first, divided Americans or divided politicians? And, let's not forget the media and social media's role in all of this.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2021
    Adfundum likes this.
  23. mitchscove

    mitchscove Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    7,870
    Likes Received:
    4,479
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Push Back! Schumer, Maxine Waters, Pelosi, (Reid) and Andrew Cuomo amassed 80% of responsibility for the Great Recession that put Obama in office. Richard Baker tried to avert a systemic meltdown in his Capital Markets Subcommittee that started holding hearings in 1998 in response to a 1997 GAO report on OFHEO's lack of effectiveness in regulating Fannie & Freddie. Baker attempted to install an independent regulator to replace OFHEO, but was impeded by Maxine Waters in his committee and Schumer in the Senate Financial Services Committee. Andrew Cuomo was HUD Secretary and was responsible for funding OFHEO --- and failed. Instead, Cuomo wrote this:
    HUD No. 99-131, July 29, 1999

    CUOMO ANNOUNCES ACTION TO PROVIDE $2.4 TRILLION IN MORTGAGES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 28.1 MILLION FAMILIES

    WASHINGTON - Housing and Urban Development Secretary Andrew Cuomo today announced a policy to require the nation's two largest housing finance companies to buy $2.4 trillion in mortgages over the next 10 years to provide affordable housing for about 28.1 million low- and moderate-income families.

    Cuomo said the historic action by HUD raises the required percentage of mortgage loans for low- and moderate-income families that finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must buy from the current 42 percent of their total purchases to a new high of 50 percent - a 19 percent increase - in the year 2001. The percentage will first increase to 48 percent in 2000.

    https://archives.hud.gov/news/1999/pr99-131.html

    In the early to mid-2000's, 5 year ARM's started resetting and we would hear about a mortgage default crisis. Snooze. After Bush vetoed HR2, an early attempt, Pelosi and Reid held Katrina victims and Veterans hostage to pass an economy crushing minimum wage increase that went into effect on July 24, 2007. The rest is history.

    Lack of vocal Push Back allowed Schumer, Maxine Waters, Pelosi, and Andrew Cuomo to ride their crushing failure to more power than they ever deserved.

    In 2010, two Gallup polls pinned the population of 'Liberal' Progressives at 5.2%. Today, they own a major Party albeit because they are some of the nastiest people to ever curse this country.

    How do we push back now that we allowed them to hang their Great Recession around our necks? I'll guarantee you, it isn't by letting the party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow and Segregation hang racism around the necks of the Party that fought to free their slaves. The Patron Saint of Progressivism, Woodrow Wilson, was the first post bellum President to Segregate the Civil Service. Have you ever heard anyone push back with that fact? No.
    They'll claim that we changed places and bring up Nixon's Southern Strategy as proof. Yes, they claim the same Nixon that gave us the EPA, OSHA, and the Clean Air Act was really a conservative.
    Mussolini was a socialist before realizing that socialism was too egalitarian --- didn't give him the tools to shove his socialist ideology down the throats of his subjects. So he adopted fascism.

    Have you ever heard any push back from Americans when socialists, who fancy themselves as progressive, call fascism right wing?

    We have allowed progressives to call January 6 an insurrection, and we allowed the fascists to persecute protesters, yet not a single person had a gun and not a single person was charged with insurrection. On the other hand, Bernie Sanders so enraged his cult that a Sanders assassin attempted to kill lawmakers who stood in the way of Bernie's socialist agenda. Where's the push back?

    Garland's son-in-law has a multi-million dollar business selling radical curricula to school systems. To protect his family business, Garland is using the DOJ to threaten parents who complain with charges of domestic terrorism. Where is the special prosecutor?

    Biden is on video bragging that he used $1B in taxpayer aid to force Ukraine to fire the prosecutor that stood in the way of Biden family enrichment. Where is the special prosecutor?

    While we may feel good about being above the tactics used by our socialist opponents, think about the people who lost family members to Andrew Cuomo's predictable incompetence as governor ,,, because we were remiss in pushing back years ago.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2021
    roorooroo likes this.
  24. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,670
    Likes Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Many would agree. That doesn't mean it would contribute to their best interest.

    Ask a group of addicts. Many will say yes. Some will say no. Many of those that say yes will money and power themselves into coffins.

    You don't even have to be an addict. Do you know what your chances are of going bankrupt 5 years after winning a lottery? It's not pretty.

    Someone without a good moral system (which cannot be imposed in a plan) has little chance of navigating most of societies complexities.
     
    crank and Ddyad like this.
  25. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    7,341
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    So unless you do it perfectly, you should not do it at all. Got it.
     

Share This Page