Election advice

[Tolya Ugajin]

14 hours ago, Orwar said:

   To be honest, I'd rather live under the Czar than the murderous maniacs that took over.

Excellent!

/me puts down Orwar as his first citizen.  "How about Minister of Justice?"

[Roxy Couturier]

On 12/13/2019 at 12:29 PM, Tolya Ugajin said:

You seem to have ignored the part where he routinely offers to debate people who are not "unprepared college kids" - and they decline because they know they will lose.  He routinely has people from the other side of the aisle on his show to debate, and they do so civilly and rationally.

 

Or, they might not want to lend a two-bit blowhard any legitimacy.

Here;s AOC's response:

“I don’t owe a response to unsolicited requests from men with bad intentions. And also, like catcalling, for some reason they feel entitled to one.” 

Shapiro is a demagogue, not a debater.

[Roxy Couturier]

On 12/13/2019 at 2:18 PM, Matty Luminos said:

Maybe we need a "PRS" (Politics, Religion, Society) subforum. Allow these discussions, since they affect us all, but keep them separate so those who don't want to follow them can choose not to.

NO

[Roxy Couturier]

On 12/13/2019 at 2:23 PM, Tolya Ugajin said:

It's happening throughout the West today, including America.

No, quite the opposite in fact. Services to and for the poor are being cut, largely by Republican controlled legislatures.

Food stamps for one most recently in the news. Certainly in my area cuts are happening to any and all services. Generally the type of thinking you exemplify with those tidbits are of the 'hey I don't use it why should I pay for it?' mindset. Here's the rub, until you need it, you don't need it.

Here, where I live, one service being chipped away at is public bus lines. Lines are being cut or with 'reduced service' typically in low income areas. If you've never had to rely on Public Transportation, then you don't know what it's like to be poor. plain and simple. When I used to use it, it typically took an 90 minutes to get within a 20 minute walk to work. Rain or shine. Of course on Sundays add to that an extra hour because of reduced service that had me walking that hour to the nearest active stop. So that's an extra couple hours each way. Of course, I also had to take the one that would get me to work an hour early, because the next bus would make me 15 minutes late.

So, my days working an 7 hour shift would take up roughly 12 hours of my day. No time to look for, let alone work a 2nd job. But I guess my needing food stamps was just my lazy butt milking the government for a free handout. I'm glad I don't need them anymore, because in the same circumstances then juxtaposed onto today, I'd never qualify for them.

TL;DR: Social safety nets aren't there for when you don't need them. They're there for when you do.

[Tolya Ugajin]

7 hours ago, Roxy Couturier said:

No, quite the opposite in fact. Services to and for the poor are being cut, largely by Republican controlled legislatures.

Food stamps for one most recently in the news. Certainly in my area cuts are happening to any and all services. Generally the type of thinking you exemplify with those tidbits are of the 'hey I don't use it why should I pay for it?' mindset. Here's the rub, until you need it, you don't need it.

Here, where I live, one service being chipped away at is public bus lines. Lines are being cut or with 'reduced service' typically in low income areas. If you've never had to rely on Public Transportation, then you don't know what it's like to be poor. plain and simple. When I used to use it, it typically took an 90 minutes to get within a 20 minute walk to work. Rain or shine. Of course on Sundays add to that an extra hour because of reduced service that had me walking that hour to the nearest active stop. So that's an extra couple hours each way. Of course, I also had to take the one that would get me to work an hour early, because the next bus would make me 15 minutes late.

So, my days working an 7 hour shift would take up roughly 12 hours of my day. No time to look for, let alone work a 2nd job. But I guess my needing food stamps was just my lazy butt milking the government for a free handout. I'm glad I don't need them anymore, because in the same circumstances then juxtaposed onto today, I'd never qualify for them.

TL;DR: Social safety nets aren't there for when you don't need them. They're there for when you do.

While I cannot respond at a local/state level, not knowing which would apply to you and unable to respond for all 50 states. this is simply untrue at a federal level.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/

Go to table 3.1.

Projections over the 4 fiscal years of the Trump administration show a 22.5% increase in non-medicare health program spending - around triple the rate of inflation.  Medicare to go up 20%, Social Security 24%, veteran's benefits 32.7%.

You can use table 3.2 to get a different breakdown, and there you will indeed see a decrease in food assistance programs - but considering those programs were 25% higher at the end of the Obama administration than during the height of the great recession, one would think some decrease in spending would be appropriate, given the economy is far stronger and the need for those programs would have declined.  On the other hand, federal spending on transportation continues to increase at about the rate of inflation.  But, most transportation programs are local.  Now, which party controls most large city governments?  Hint, it ain't the Republicans.

[Seicher Rae]

If I had all the money and SL lands, or even 7000 prims, and if I wanted to blow up the forums, or at least one thread, I think I'd create an OP that asks: Are all the straight men in SL Republicans?

ETA: Or whatever the similar party is in your country.

Edited December 15, 2019 by Seicher Rae

[Prokofy Neva]

On 12/12/2019 at 10:01 AM, SkylabPatel said:

This is a must-read for all UK residents. Britain is going to the polls today and Brexit may become a reality. In the next few hours, all UK residents should seriously consider converting all GBP - all life savings - to Linden Dollars on the Lindex.

If the pound sterling crashes tomorrow, at least your money will be safe and you will be able to convert it to US$. Please pass this message on to everyone you see inworld, and even ask non-SL residents to consider making an account and converting all their money into Linden Dollars.

You may not get this chance tomorrow!

I could never advise anybody to do such a thing, even in Russia where the currency crashes way more terribly than in England, because the value here has gone down steadily and is liable to plunges as well.

Terrible about the Labour Party which was a party I could respect 30 years ago and count some of its activists even as friends. This is what happens when you adopt the worst sort of Soviet Marxism with all its antisemitism and support for terrorism, instead of socialism with a human face for which Britain used to be famous. When you let tankies take power in a free society then you get a buffoon and a nationalist populist like what you got -- and like what we got, by the way, here in the States. May God have mercy on us all.

[Beth Macbain]

2 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

Are all the straight men in SL Republicans?

Mine isn't!

He wouldn't be mine if he was.

[Roxy Couturier]

2 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

While I cannot respond at a local/state level, not knowing which would apply to you and unable to respond for all 50 states. this is simply untrue at a federal level.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/

Go to table 3.1.

Projections over the 4 fiscal years of the Trump administration show a 22.5% increase in non-medicare health program spending - around triple the rate of inflation.  Medicare to go up 20%, Social Security 24%, veteran's benefits 32.7%.

You can use table 3.2 to get a different breakdown, and there you will indeed see a decrease in food assistance programs - but considering those programs were 25% higher at the end of the Obama administration than during the height of the great recession, one would think some decrease in spending would be appropriate, given the economy is far stronger and the need for those programs would have declined.  On the other hand, federal spending on transportation continues to increase at about the rate of inflation.  But, most transportation programs are local.  Now, which party controls most large city governments?  Hint, it ain't the Republicans.

How wonderful for someone with money. Do you have any idea the legal hoops you have to jump through to get disability on any of those programs you mentioned? SSI disability pretty much requires you to have an attorney, it's that labyrinthine. And you might get it before you die. maybe.

I'm a vet. I get seen by the VA. My costs are going up. I'm not even going to get into the quality of care except to say that after having seen a Doctor at the VA (for something, I'd had before* and had to seek emergency care for mind you) I had to go to an emergency clinic and received better, faster and more comprehensive care.

*The first time because it was a holiday and the VA was closed the second time because after telling the VA Doc exactly what it was I was under-prescribed the necessary antibiotics. I have the luxury.. LUXURY! of being financially stable now and able to afford that emergency care. I weep for my brother and sister soldiers who cannot.

And if you really want to talk about the 'responsibility' of Repug governments, how about importing yourself some of Flint's finest tap water. That's all due to Repug oversight punishing a Democratic stronghold. Stupid is as stupid does.

Oh and as for you last stab in the dark, it's Repug on city, county and state level where I'm at. I'd love to live in any of the Dem controlled urban areas. I do have hope however. The projections are that by either 2020 or 2024, the state will turn blue.

Oh and while I'm at it, let me give you an example of 'voting against your interests'. I work in healthcare. When the state had a Dem Governor, and healthcare for mom and dad was superimportant, A law was made that had a maximum on how many patients per CNA. Well in the years since that number has increased and increased under R lawmakers not-at-all-influenced-by-lobbiests. The state I live in has a huge retired population that vote R. Yet they continue to vote in people that, eventually will make their lives a horror show when they're at their most vulnerable. That's just one small example of voting against your interests.

Here's who's been harmed by Repug policies and 'lawmakers': The young, the old, the sick, the poor, the middle class (whatever is left of them), the LBGTQ community .. you know? I'm finding it hard NOT to find someone harmed by them. But hey, as long as it's someone else and not me, amirite?

[Orwar]

15 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

Are all the straight men in SL Republicans?

   I honestly can't tell the difference between Republican and Democratic US politicians. I wouldn't want to vote for either side, from the little I've paid attention to.

   I vaguely describe my political alignment as libertarian, but also value some aspects of socialism (i.e. what we here consider the basics; schools, hospitals, eldercare, infrastructure, etc.). So I guess from a 'Murrican point of view, I'm a communist. Whilst from a Swedish point of view, I'm a super-conservative nationalist.

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

You can use table 3.2 to get a different breakdown, and there you will indeed see a decrease in food assistance programs - but considering those programs were 25% higher at the end of the Obama administration than during the height of the great recession, one would think some decrease in spending would be appropriate, given the economy is far stronger and the need for those programs would have declined.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/opinion/snap-food-stamps.html

[Luna Bliss]

And health care:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/19/politics/trump-two-years-changing-health-care/index.html

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

given the economy is far stronger

?

You mean for the wealthy?

[Tolya Ugajin]

25 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

?

You mean for the wealthy?

Actually over the last couple years incomes at the bottom end have grown faster than the rich.  Oh, and the number of people moving into the upper class is twice that moving into the lower class.  The idea that only the wealthy are benefiting is a myth.

[Tolya Ugajin]

37 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/opinion/snap-food-stamps.html

Your responses to hard source data are a couple of opinion pieces from highly biased sources?

[Tolya Ugajin]

45 minutes ago, Roxy Couturier said:

How wonderful for someone with money. Do you have any idea the legal hoops you have to jump through to get disability on any of those programs you mentioned? SSI disability pretty much requires you to have an attorney, it's that labyrinthine. And you might get it before you die. maybe.

I'm a vet. I get seen by the VA. My costs are going up. I'm not even going to get into the quality of care except to say that after having seen a Doctor at the VA (for something, I'd had before* and had to seek emergency care for mind you) I had to go to an emergency clinic and received better, faster and more comprehensive care.

*The first time because it was a holiday and the VA was closed the second time because after telling the VA Doc exactly what it was I was under-prescribed the necessary antibiotics. I have the luxury.. LUXURY! of being financially stable now and able to afford that emergency care. I weep for my brother and sister soldiers who cannot.

And if you really want to talk about the 'responsibility' of Repug governments, how about importing yourself some of Flint's finest tap water. That's all due to Repug oversight punishing a Democratic stronghold. Stupid is as stupid does.

Oh and as for you last stab in the dark, it's Repug on city, county and state level where I'm at. I'd love to live in any of the Dem controlled urban areas. I do have hope however. The projections are that by either 2020 or 2024, the state will turn blue.

Oh and while I'm at it, let me give you an example of 'voting against your interests'. I work in healthcare. When the state had a Dem Governor, and healthcare for mom and dad was superimportant, A law was made that had a maximum on how many patients per CNA. Well in the years since that number has increased and increased under R lawmakers not-at-all-influenced-by-lobbiests. The state I live in has a huge retired population that vote R. Yet they continue to vote in people that, eventually will make their lives a horror show when they're at their most vulnerable. That's just one small example of voting against your interests.

Here's who's been harmed by Repug policies and 'lawmakers': The young, the old, the sick, the poor, the middle class (whatever is left of them), the LBGTQ community .. you know? I'm finding it hard NOT to find someone harmed by them. But hey, as long as it's someone else and not me, amirite?

Wow.  Just, wow.

It must not be THAT hard to get SSDI - the number of recipients grew 25% from 2007 to 2014.   https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2016/charts-text.html#chart2

I'd love to point out that the VA is the ultimate example of government provided health care, and likely what we'll all end up with under a Dem controlled Congress and White House.  Oh, and the spending on VA programs has gone up very quickly (see prior post)

Flint: You want to blame the water in a Democratic controlled city (every mayor since 1975) in a mostly Dem-controlled state on the Republicans?  Despite the fact that the $120M to fix it came under Trump?

I'm sorry, there is simply no point in debating politics or policy with someone who argues purely from an individual perspective devoid of facts.

 

 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

2 hours ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Flint: You want to blame the water in a Democratic controlled city (every mayor since 1975)

But it only became a problem because they switched from the City of Detroit water to the Flint River under a Republican-appointed city manager. The Flint River is caustic enough that it pulled lead from the old supply pipes - mostly because the Republican-led state environmental department didn't see fit to require corrosion inhibitor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_water_crisis

in a mostly Dem-controlled state

Michigan hasn't been completely Democratic-controlled since at least 1992. And for many of those years it's been completely Republican controlled.

https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Michigan_state_government

on the Republicans?

 

2 hours ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

I'm sorry, there is simply no point in debating politics or policy with someone who argues purely from an individual perspective devoid of facts.

That's what she said.

Edited December 15, 2019 by Theresa Tennyson

[Roxy Couturier]

1 hour ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

I'm sorry, there is simply no point in debating politics or policy with someone who argues purely from an individual perspective devoid of facts.

Fox News is not a credible source of facts. Like Fox, while part of what you wrote was technically true, it isn't the full story.

As Theresa pointed out above, Governor Rick Snyder, a Repug, appointed a (Repug) supervisor over Flint. Pretty much suborning the actual will of the people and gave them Legionaire's, lead filled water and an excess of carcinogens. I'm always astounded by the almost cartoonish level of villainy displayed by Repugs at almost every turn. But you be you boo.

[Alyona Su]

48 minutes ago, Roxy Couturier said:

Fox News is not a credible source of facts.

My only comment with regard to this is: Most news organizations are not (always) a credible source of facts by way of omission (only reporting the part of any story that suits their self-admitted agendas). There also are "talking head" programs and "News" programs, Fox, CNN, MSNBC all rely heavily on those talking head programs and that that all opinion-based rhetoric. I do not watch BBC, Sky, and many others all that much, though I get the impression they, at least, seem to tell a more complete story than most of the U.S. organizations (including BBC America).

The best way to get the news: Peruse many of the sources, including the ones that you believe favor opposite views of your own. Otherwise, just as Google has already admitted, you are only getting like-minded information and that is a disservice to oneself. If you watch MSNBC, you very much should share time with FOX and CNN also - so you get a truly balanced story. Especially the portions of any story that each side omits.

Edited December 15, 2019 by Alyona Su

[Roxy Couturier]

So, it's been said I have no 'facts'.

Trump on Social Security
https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2019/08/23/trumps-second-term-plan-for-social-security-starve-the-beast/#211c7c7f3794

Trump on SSDI, Medicaid and Medicare
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/12/18260271/trump-medicaid-social-security-medicare-budget-cuts

Trumps VA spending
https://www.veterans.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2019 budget one pager.pdf

https://www.stripes.com/key-veterans-groups-blast-trump-s-va-budget-proposal-as-falling-short-of-veterans-needs-1.572485

Sure, there are short term gains, but there will be long term losses if he gains a second term. As explained in the articles, it's an old Repug strategy. Cut taxes to the point where the deficit requires cuts to 'entitlement programs'.

These are four different outlets all reporting virtually the same thing.

Let's not forget the cuts to other departments that independently oversee inspections and compliance.

Putting up charts is disingenuous as they fail to show the actual shortfalls. To not equivocate, the budget crisis is a direct result of the tax cuts. Tax cuts that peter out for most Americans except for the ultra rich.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/29/18642928/trump-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-analysis

*drops mic*

[Orwar]

3 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

Being all sensible and whatnot.

   Only trust mustachioed news anchors!

[Beth Macbain]

4 minutes ago, Orwar said:

   Only trust mustachioed news anchors!

 

Nope.

[Lindal Kidd]

11 hours ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Your responses to hard source data are a couple of opinion pieces from highly biased sources?

There's a problem with that comeback, Tolya.  ALL the "news" sources today are "highly biased".  I have repeatedly seen two different networks report on the exact same event; and yet they put 180 degree different spins on it.  And that's the supposed "news" articles, not the "opinion" pieces.

So, the Democrats sneer at Fox News and National Review and dismiss them as "highly biased sources"...while the Republicans do exactly the same with CNN and MSNBC.

Note, I'm not saying you are wrong.  "Hard source data" is about the only thing we can rely on these days...and we can't even rely on THAT without carefully checking how that data was obtained, what was left out, and looking for other sneaky numbers manipulation.

[Akane Nacht]

36 minutes ago, Lindal Kidd said:

I have repeatedly seen two different networks report on the exact same event; and yet they put 180 degree different spins on it. 

This is nothing new. I think they are still debating whether the RMS Lusitania was carrying munitions or not... 

[Tolya Ugajin]

9 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

There's a problem with that comeback, Tolya.  ALL the "news" sources today are "highly biased".  I have repeatedly seen two different networks report on the exact same event; and yet they put 180 degree different spins on it.  And that's the supposed "news" articles, not the "opinion" pieces.

So, the Democrats sneer at Fox News and National Review and dismiss them as "highly biased sources"...while the Republicans do exactly the same with CNN and MSNBC.

Note, I'm not saying you are wrong.  "Hard source data" is about the only thing we can rely on these days...and we can't even rely on THAT without carefully checking how that data was obtained, what was left out, and looking for other sneaky numbers manipulation.

The source I used was the ultimate hard source on federal spending - the US Office of Management and Budget.  Also, there is also a slight difference between actual data and what is clearly labeled "opinion". 

Regarding networks and MSM reporting, you're completely correct - which is why it is important to get your "news" from multiple sources and keep an eye/ear open for signs of bias.  I tried to find a link to a great article on spotting bias in reporting, but alas all I could find were links to articles from conservatives ranting about MSNBC and CNN.