Jump to content

Us Politics For Betting (Not Talking About Politics)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I was going to let this slide, but I just watched the video in question again and I just can't.   You watched a black man almost moved to tears as he passionately talked about an election and a coun

Most of you know that I am a fiscal conservative. If you didn't, you know now. I didn't vote for Trump and Im pretty sure I wouldn't have voted for Bernie Sanders. Would have looked for a 3rd candidat

My aunt used to foster parent children. I don't know how many she had, but I'd guess a few.   The last one she had she ended up adopting and now she's my cousin and she's awesome. She's early in he

I disagree on taking things that far

 

In the morning I agree it's maybe it's too far. But then stuff comes out like Trump insisting that the media is covering up acts of terror (like they wouldn't be all over that for the ratings), etc, etc, etc.

 

And you have to think... this is week 2 of 208 -- what's the endgame of this administration's intent that they need to move the yardsticks so fast? (ie: normalization of the absurd, by a team that is sucked in by Breibart and Infowars).

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In the morning I agree it's maybe it's too far. But then stuff comes out like Trump insisting that the media is covering up acts of terror (like they wouldn't be all over that for the ratings), etc, etc, etc.

 

And you have to think... this is week 2 of 208 -- what's the endgame of this administration's intent that they need to move the yardsticks so fast? (ie: normalization of the absurd, by a team that is sucked in by Breibart and Infowars).

 

It is a bit extreme, but the way he has talked about judges he disageees with, complete disregard for anything that gets in his way, like...judicial independence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously don't get how it's extreme. It's symbolism. He's not literally cutting the head off of women dressed as lady liberty. He is literally destroying our values as a country and Lady Liberty is our mascot for those values. It makes a great and powerful point. Good for them.

 

The things this govt has been doing and trying to do for the last 12 days is way more offensive to me than a cover of a German magazine. The magazine has no tangible effect on me or well anyone but the administration does. That is what's offensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a bit extreme, but the way he has talked about judges he disageees with, complete disregard for anything that gets in his way, like...judicial independence.

 

Saying that the US in a war against Islam (note even Bush post 9/11 spoke at a Mosque to denounce that), massively demphasizing surveillance of white supremacist groups, etc. Definitely encouraging religious based terrorist attacks (of either direction) to use an excuse ramp up "protection".

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's mostly frustrating because it's effective. You can only say so many times that the process for refugees and immigrants is already extremely slow and challenging before you get tired of repeating yourself. And amidst all the other lies is stuff about bad people "pouring in" that doesn't get denounced because it's so obviously false. Like, they had to make the travel ban immediate and without notice because all those terrorists who had spent years pretending to be refugees would just push up their flights by a week to get in if he gave notice? It's funny because it's so stupid, and yet the President is using it to keep tens of millions of voters in a state of willful ignorance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Matthew Teague ‏@MatthewTeague 4h4 hours ago

I'm fascinated by Trump. But much more interested in why half the people believe him. Augustine of Hippo wrote this 1600 years ago:

 

C4zUof0WIAAzoSr.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shits about to get real.

 

DJT tweets about fake news and attacks media. Comey has closed door meeting with the senators on the Intel committee about what they've found in looking at Russia's ties with the election and administration. Then spineless Rubio tweets after meeting that they are going to basically go hard now and investigate Putins interference in the election and influence in the administration.

 

What a complete joke.

 

Can we also must quit with the old wives tale that business men would make better presidents. Took less than 30 days to prove that one wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that government should be run like a business is doing a lot of harm to society.

 

The analogy works a bit better if you look at the whole country as business (with a crazy union) and the government as a cost center like HR.

 

And I guess it also helps if you think of your "company" as being knowledge workers instead of some service industry rubes that can be hired and fired on a whim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost every business I've ever heard of tries to maximize revenues.

 

go back to Economics and think about both business and government maximizing utility and it allows you to wrap your mind around the concept a little bit easier.

 

Both governments and business make investments and spend money on operating costs. Rather than making a financial profit the output for the government is the magic "util" from economics theory and that can range from an increase in human capital such as education, an increase in physical capital such as a bridge or spending that increases the well being of society such as paying our friendly neighbourhood firefighter to eat smoke for us.

 

Both governments and businesses have limits on their resources and have to make decisions to maximize the benefits from using those resources.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true.

 

It's just that those who talk the most about running government like a business are the ones who seem to have the least sense of overall value of the alternatives they're deciding between.

 

We have the data to show how to maximize benefit for the money spent, but those "fiscally conservative" types like to ignore it.

 

It would be great if we could run the government more effectively. Using data a knowledge to decide how to invest and spend scarce resources. Those who want to "run it like a business" have no interest in doing that, seemingly, and instead like to push their archaic ideologies in the face of evidence and data.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I'm veering municipal, not federal but...

 

Mr "run the city as a business" John Tory buried business case reports done by a consulting firm (not the one I work for) which, presumably, shows how terrible the investments he plans on making are.

 

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2017/02/18/taxpayer-funded-transit-report-kept-secret-by-city.html

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Governments will never be run like a business. Because the principal goal of every government is to get re-elected. Toronto is a perfect example. There hasn't been a single politician in the past 40 years that doesn't understand the infrastructure of this city is ****ed. But launching a Boston Dig sized project requires long term planning ad expenditure. And chickenshit politicians don't want to the elected official that spent the money that will increase taxes for current residents without seeing a concrete outcome in the very near future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Governments will never be run like a business. Because the principal goal of every government is to get re-elected. Toronto is a perfect example. There hasn't been a single politician in the past 40 years that doesn't understand the infrastructure of this city is ****ed. But launching a Boston Dig sized project requires long term planning ad expenditure. And chickenshit politicians don't want to the elected official that spent the money that will increase taxes for current residents without seeing a concrete outcome in the very near future.

 

That kind of thinking actually is in a lot of businesses too these days where CEO's only worry about their next quarterly report and what the share price is doing since that will trigger some bonus clause in their contract. It's a real problem that the incentives for the decision makers are so often at odds with what is best for the stake holders.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just that those who talk the most about running government like a business are the ones who seem to have the least sense of overall value of the alternatives they're deciding between.

 

The issue is short-term versus long term value. ie: a CEO is looking a couple year window... a country should be looking at a 50 year window.

 

The pros and cons of every decision needs to be evaluated completely differently.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...