[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by custar

You, sir, are correct in this.

custar

Always am

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by Ieo

Except it's not just a "degree to the right"....refusing people a basic right in the name of "morality" (gay marriage) and a "survival of the fittest", blame-the-poor attitude toward social welfare is not just a degree to the right....

The candidates themselves are probably pretty moderate, but by catering to some of the more extreme groups in their base they become too far right for the rest of the voting public. The problem is in who the candidates choose to pander to, not the candidates themselves. Well, the good candidates anyway. I still honestly believe Bachmann and Cain are legitimately insane. Anybody who took those fools seriously needs to seriously rethink their lives.

A basic right? If it were so basic, it wouldn't carry so much with it.

And the survival of the fittest thing is laughable. It is obvious to someone that looks at the whole picture that the anger is directed after the moochers, and not the people that actually need help. Those that actually need help are caught in the cross fire, but you'd think they would try to keep the moochers in line. A common phrase to summarize the situation that I heard a lot in the Navy was "one crew, one screw".

I remember, when I was much younger, that someone was ashamed to be on those programs and tried their hardest to either not be on them at all or get off as fast as possible. Motivation.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

It is obvious to someone that looks at the whole picture that the anger is directed after the moochers, and not the people that actually need help. Those that actually need help are caught in the cross fire, but you'd think they would try to keep the moochers in line. A common phrase to summarize the situation that I heard a lot in the Navy was "one crew, one screw".

The problem is a misguided notion of who the moochers are. The right (Fox) is presenting this election as "too many takers; not enough givers" scenerio, as if Obama won because all the moochers voted for him. Mitt Romney gave the impression that 47% of people in this country are moochers. They love to twist this as a character issue. They are portraying it as the result of the moral degradation of society.

If we want to have a real discussion about welfare abuse, we can. Statistically, people tend to come off of unemployment insurance within 7 days of when their ui ends. That's a problem. I would love to fix that. But the right is not presenting a real conversation. They are distorting facts creating a scary twisted worldview, one that a real discussion cannot come from.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

If we want to have a real discussion about welfare abuse, we can. Statistically, people tend to come off of unemployment insurance within 7 days of when their ui ends. That's a problem.

First of all, I'd like to see a source for that. But also, I wonder if it's the problem you think? Remember UI is already a wage cut, so having to stay on it for a long time indicates weakness in the job market. The point of UI is to mitigate that, and insomuch as it is prepaid insurance, there's nothing wrong with a person using as much of it as he or she needs.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

First of all, I'd like to see a source for that. But also, I wonder if it's the problem you think? Remember UI is already a wage cut, so having to stay on it for a long time indicates weakness in the job market. The point of UI is to mitigate that, and insomuch as it is prepaid insurance, there's nothing wrong with a person using as much of it as he or she needs.

It's something my econ professor talked about a lot. Don't have a source but I can look for one.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

It's something my econ professor talked about a lot. Don't have a source but I can look for one.

Let's stipulate to it for now, what does your econ prof say about it?

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

Let's stipulate to it for now, what does your econ prof say about it?

That people tend to find jobs right around when their unemployment insurance ends (assuming that people put off finding jobs until they have to). To me, it seems more likely that people are choosing underemployment when unemployment ends (which is bad) because it is better than nothing. I don't have enough information to say with an accuracy.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

To me, it seems more likely that people are choosing underemployment when unemployment ends (which is bad) because it is better than nothing. I don't have enough information to say with an accuracy.

Okay then you are on more of the same page, my bad. I think you are more correct; sure there are people in both camps but I would say by and large, especially when unemployment is high as it is now, weakness in the job market is what keeps people on UI more than anything else. As I mentioned UI is a drop in pay across the board and especially for higher earners, and UI is always claimed by people who were intending to work, so if there were good jobs available, people would be getting off UI sooner.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Senseless killing to gladiators to football.
Slavery to feudal exploitation to modern economic exploitation (sweatshops).
Etc.

Obviously, he was more concerned with the latter.

Or more elegantly:

I don't think this is the correct trajectory of humankind. I suppose it looks accurate if you buy into the linear progress mythology that has swept our wonderful west.

Originally Posted by Ieo

Except it's not just a "degree to the right"....refusing people a basic right in the name of "morality" (gay marriage) and a "survival of the fittest", blame-the-poor attitude toward social welfare is not just a degree to the right....

Basic right? No. Marriage is a social institution which you may or may not have the privelage of participating in. Blame the poor.....Maybe, if saying we need a more responsible society is blaming the poor. How ever did humanity get along before The Great Society (tm)?

Originally Posted by Ieo

The candidates themselves are probably pretty moderate, but by catering to some of the more extreme groups in their base they become too far right for the rest of the voting public. The problem is in who the candidates choose to pander to, not the candidates themselves. Well, the good candidates anyway. I still honestly believe Bachmann and Cain are legitimately insane. Anybody who took those fools seriously needs to seriously rethink their lives.

Sounds like you are projecting here.