Why are liberals so emotional and irrational?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#151 Posted by MrPraline (21321 posts) -
[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

Lai, do you know why Morgoth is so evil?

Laihendi
Because he doesn't respect the individual rights of others.

rofl
#152 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Well, when FDR took office the country was in a depression, and by the time he died... no more depression. Sounds kinda good to me.

The depression just got worse for years until world war 2 started, and then once it ended there was another recession in 1945.

Except that's wrong. The economy was recovering after around 1932.

If the economy started recovering in 1932 then why was there another recession in 1937-38?
#153 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

Right, citing a vague nonspecific group of people as holding a consensus proves that FDR and JFK were among the best presidents. The fact that you can't even explain what was good about them proves that you don't know what you're talking about. This is just like when you say that the constitution shouldn't be followed because the people who wrote it owned slaves, and then claim you aren't making an ad hominem attack.Laihendi
blah blah blah more word babble blah blah blah

im still waiting for you to address how those three presidents prove liberals in general are emotional and irrational.

#154 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Please tell me what FDR and JFK did that makes them among the best presidents. Both of their presidencies were disasters.

Laihendi

Well, when FDR took office the country was in a depression, and by the time he died... no more depression. Sounds kinda good to me.

The depression just got worse for years until world war 2 started, and then once it ended there was another recession in 1945.

lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

#155 Posted by Abbeten (2898 posts) -
those are authoritarian data points statist-ics
#156 Posted by MrPraline (21321 posts) -
[QUOTE="Abbeten"] statist-ics

rofl
#157 Posted by DroidPhysX (17089 posts) -
[QUOTE="Abbeten"] statist-icsMrPraline
rofl

#158 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
If the economy started recovering in 1932 then why was there another recession in 1937-38?Laihendi
You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb. [QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] statist-ics

rofl

#159 Posted by BossPerson (9475 posts) -

I mean just look at the shire.

look at how individualistic all those peeps are.

#160 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Well, when FDR took office the country was in a depression, and by the time he died... no more depression. Sounds kinda good to me.-Sun_Tzu-

The depression just got worse for years until world war 2 started, and then once it ended there was another recession in 1945.

lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.
#161 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

It's ironic that Lai is attempting to call people out on fallacies when the entire thread is based on a loaded question and anecdotal evidence, but I wouldn't expect less from him.

#162 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb.Ace6301
I have talked to many Americans who lived during the great depression and they all said that living conditions did not improve for them at all until world war 2. These are people living in several different regions of the US at the time.

#163 Posted by PannicAtack (21037 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] The depression just got worse for years until world war 2 started, and then once it ended there was another recession in 1945.Laihendi

lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.

A job's a job. People could work and get paid for it.
#164 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Right, citing a vague nonspecific group of people as holding a consensus proves that FDR and JFK were among the best presidents. The fact that you can't even explain what was good about them proves that you don't know what you're talking about. This is just like when you say that the constitution shouldn't be followed because the people who wrote it owned slaves, and then claim you aren't making an ad hominem attack.Aljosa23

blah blah blah more word babble blah blah blah

im still waiting for you to address how those three presidents prove liberals in general are emotional and irrational.

I already did. They are renowned as great orators when every speech any of them has ever given is completely vacuous.
#165 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

PannicAtack
Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.

A job's a job. People could work and get paid for it.

There was no demand for the jobs, no need for them. For example a bunch of people started working on state parks that no one else actually cared about. The jobs did nothing to generate wealth, they were just used as an excuse to redistribute wealth.
#166 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.Laihendi
A job's a job. People could work and get paid for it.

There was no demand for the jobs, no need for them. For example a bunch of people started working on state parks that no one else actually cared about. The jobs did nothing to generate wealth, they were just used as an excuse to redistribute wealth.

Citation needed.

#167 Posted by Abbeten (2898 posts) -
except for, you know, all the roads and bridges and levees and irrigation ditches and sewers and water mains and sidewalks and schools and airports and libraries hospitals and reservoirs and piers they built but you're right, none of that generated wealth
#168 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] The depression just got worse for years until world war 2 started, and then once it ended there was another recession in 1945.Laihendi

lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.

lol

First I just have to say that most of the work people do at their jobs is just seemingly "worthless busywork".

Secondly, who the fvck are you to call these jobs worthless? To the people that worked them they were anything but worthless - they were the means that allowed them to put food on the table so that they and their families wouldn't starve and so they even had a table to put food on in the first place. And more generally, how is the construction of schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, ect. pointlessendeavors?

#169 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb.Laihendi

I have talked to many Americans who lived during the great depression and they all said that living conditions did not improve for them at all until world war 2. These are people living in several different regions of the US at the time.

Sucks for them I guess because the overall economy improved.
#170 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb.Laihendi

I have talked to many Americans who lived during the great depression and they all said that living conditions did not improve for them at all until world war 2. These are people living in several different regions of the US at the time.

the plural of anecdote is not data.

#171 Posted by Abbeten (2898 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb.Laihendi

I have talked to many Americans who lived during the great depression and they all said that living conditions did not improve for them at all until world war 2. These are people living in several different regions of the US at the time.

ladies and gentlemen, the light of rational inquiry illuminating this dark den of ignorant statism
#172 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]You do know that production and profits before that recession were nearly pre-depression values, right? Also there's various reasons as to why but to say there wasn't an economic recovery because there was a recession half a decade the turnaround of a horrific economic disaster is, well, dumb.Abbeten

I have talked to many Americans who lived during the great depression and they all said that living conditions did not improve for them at all until world war 2. These are people living in several different regions of the US at the time.

ladies and gentlemen, the light of rational inquiry illuminating this dark den of ignorant statism

I once talked with a man who claimed to have evaded the Vietnam war by being abducted by aliens. The man in question was 4 years older than me. I was born in 1989. Historical fact: Vietnam war was a recent thing and statists have moved it further into the past with historical revision to make conservatives look bad. Also Canada took part and had a draft for it.
#173 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Right, citing a vague nonspecific group of people as holding a consensus proves that FDR and JFK were among the best presidents. The fact that you can't even explain what was good about them proves that you don't know what you're talking about. This is just like when you say that the constitution shouldn't be followed because the people who wrote it owned slaves, and then claim you aren't making an ad hominem attack.Laihendi

blah blah blah more word babble blah blah blah

im still waiting for you to address how those three presidents prove liberals in general are emotional and irrational.

I already did. They are renowned as great orators when every speech any of them has ever given is completely vacuous.

The bolded, please

#174 Posted by pie-junior (2846 posts) -
The most upsetting thing about laihendi's posts is his insistence on bastardizing micro-economic rethoric, while disregarding completely bits about economic theory he doesn't like.
#175 Posted by brucewayne69 (2861 posts) -
Gonna play it straight, don't wanna be banned but Lai Why do you keep doing this
#176 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
This thread keeps getting better and better.
#177 Posted by brucewayne69 (2861 posts) -
This thread keeps getting better and better.nocoolnamejim
Jim.
#178 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

Gonna play it straight, don't wanna be banned but Lai Why do you keep doing thisbrucewayne69

Like I've said before, he's a special kind of stupid.

#179 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]blah blah blah more word babble blah blah blah

im still waiting for you to address how those three presidents prove liberals in general are emotional and irrational.

Aljosa23

I already did. They are renowned as great orators when every speech any of them has ever given is completely vacuous.

The bolded, please

Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.
#180 Posted by brucewayne69 (2861 posts) -

[QUOTE="brucewayne69"]Gonna play it straight, don't wanna be banned but Lai Why do you keep doing thisGuybrush_3

Like I've said before, he's a special kind of stupid.

Tell me about it He's actually pretty much account suiciding
#181 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] lol lai

do you know what "worse" means?

Before FDR's first new deal unemployment was well over 35%

At the time the US economy was mobilizing for war the unemployment rate was a little more than 20%.

Just a quick reminder:

20 < 35

-Sun_Tzu-

Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.

lol

First I just have to say that most of the work people do at their jobs is just seemingly "worthless busywork".

Secondly, who the fvck are you to call these jobs worthless? To the people that worked them they were anything but worthless - they were the means that allowed them to put food on the table so that they and their families wouldn't starve and so they even had a table to put food on in the first place. And more generally, how is the construction of schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, ect. pointlessendeavors?

I am just repeating what the private sector says. State parks don't do anything to increase the standard of living in this country but thousands of people were paid to build them and are still paid to operate them anyways. And if there was a demand for those schools, hospitals, etc. then they would have been built without prompting from the government.
#182 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] I already did. They are renowned as great orators when every speech any of them has ever given is completely vacuous.Laihendi

The bolded, please

Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.

FDR: 1. Ended the Great Depression 2. Passed the New Deal policies (which, whether you agree with them or not are historic achievements that changed the course of our nation and became permanent fixtures in our societies) 3. Won the most important war ever fought in human history Lai: "FDR never had anything substantive or intelligent to say."
#183 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Laihendi
A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

#184 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Aljosa23

A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

Civil Rights Act of 1964 was actually Lyndon Johnson if I recall correctly. Though JFK first proposed it in 1963.
#185 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]The bolded, pleasenocoolnamejim
Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.

FDR: 1. Ended the Great Depression 2. Passed the New Deal policies (which, whether you agree with them or not are historic achievements that changed the course of our nation and became permanent fixtures in our societies) 3. Won the most important war ever fought in human history Lai: "FDR never had anything substantive or intelligent to say."

FDR didn't win that war, the soldiers fighting it did. And Truman gave the order to bomb Japan to end it anyways. Again FDR had nothing to do with the great depression because his new deal policies of wealth redistribution did nothing to actually generate wealth, which is why the economy was horrible until world war 2 started. And the fact that some of FDR's policies have become permanent just makes him an even worse president because he is still screwing everyone over 68 years after he died. Social security is a disaster.
#186 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Aljosa23

A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?
#187 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Laihendi
FDR: 1. Ended the Great Depression 2. Passed the New Deal policies (which, whether you agree with them or not are historic achievements that changed the course of our nation and became permanent fixtures in our societies) 3. Won the most important war ever fought in human history Lai: "FDR never had anything substantive or intelligent to say."

FDR didn't win that war, the soldiers fighting it did. And Truman gave the order to bomb Japan to end it anyways. Again FDR had nothing to do with the great depression because his new deal policies of wealth redistribution did nothing to actually generate wealth, which is why the economy was horrible until world war 2 started. And the fact that some of FDR's policies have become permanent just makes him an even worse president because he is still screwing everyone over 68 years after he died. Social security is a disaster.

Not a single thing of what you just said is even remotely true outside of your libertarian bubble.
#188 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] FDR: 1. Ended the Great Depression 2. Passed the New Deal policies (which, whether you agree with them or not are historic achievements that changed the course of our nation and became permanent fixtures in our societies) 3. Won the most important war ever fought in human history Lai: "FDR never had anything substantive or intelligent to say."

FDR didn't win that war, the soldiers fighting it did. And Truman gave the order to bomb Japan to end it anyways. Again FDR had nothing to do with the great depression because his new deal policies of wealth redistribution did nothing to actually generate wealth, which is why the economy was horrible until world war 2 started. And the fact that some of FDR's policies have become permanent just makes him an even worse president because he is still screwing everyone over 68 years after he died. Social security is a disaster.

Not a single thing of what you just said is even remotely true outside of your libertarian bubble.

If the economy improved so much during the great depression, then why was that entire length of time one massive depression?
#189 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Laihendi

A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?

For starters, prior to Social Security a majority of our nation's senior citizens lived in poverty.
#190 Posted by Yusuke420 (2793 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Again, I have already answered that. FDR and JFK never had anything substantial or intelligent to say and even their defenders like you can't even explain what good they did and just resort to hazy appeals to authority. Despite this, liberals revere them. You have to be emotional and irrational to revere someone like that without any particular reason for why.Laihendi

A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?

Address the Civil Right's act you piece of human refuse! JFK advocated for it, FDR just did the heavy lifting (bacause someone like you killed JFK).

#191 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] FDR didn't win that war, the soldiers fighting it did. And Truman gave the order to bomb Japan to end it anyways. Again FDR had nothing to do with the great depression because his new deal policies of wealth redistribution did nothing to actually generate wealth, which is why the economy was horrible until world war 2 started. And the fact that some of FDR's policies have become permanent just makes him an even worse president because he is still screwing everyone over 68 years after he died. Social security is a disaster.

Not a single thing of what you just said is even remotely true outside of your libertarian bubble.

If the economy improved so much during the great depression, then why was that entire length of time one massive depression?

Refer to Sun's posts from earlier. Also, look up the difference between "Great Depression" and "Ordinary recession".
#192 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?Laihendi
What ignorance? That bill was JFK's brain child. LBJ signed it sure but JFK was the one that orchestrated it.

#193 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]A lot of what I'd say you would consider bad anyway lol it's just awful to have a decent conversation with you.

FDR = New Deal, regulated banks, labour unions, social security etc.
JFK = Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results

nocoolnamejim
JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?

For starters, prior to Social Security a majority of our nation's senior citizens lived in poverty.

Because they were too irresponsible to save money for retirement. And now the government steals our money to fund military campaigns in 3rd world countries and claims they'll pay us back later when in reality that program was only sustainable for as long as the baby boomers were in the work force. Even if I do get paid back for it, they will just be paying me back with more money they stole from someone else.
#194 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

Aljosa23
Please explain how the new deal and civil rights act improved this country. I am waiting.

Address the Civil Right's act you piece of human refuse! JFK advocated for it, FDR just did the heavy lifting (bacause someone like you killed JFK).

Yusuke420

That is absolutely despicable that you would compare me to an assassin just because you dislike my politics. This is a new low for this place.

#196 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] JFK died in 1963 so you are just proving your ignorance of American history. Anyways liberals always cite the new deal as proof of FDR's greatness, but they never seem capable of explaining how the new deal actually made this country better. Perhaps you can?

For starters, prior to Social Security a majority of our nation's senior citizens lived in poverty.

Because they were too irresponsible to save money for retirement. And now the government steals our money to fund military campaigns in 3rd world countries and claims they'll pay us back later when in reality that program was only sustainable for as long as the baby boomers were in the work force. Even if I do get paid back for it, they will just be paying me back with more money they stole from someone else.

Ideology, ideology, ideology. You asked for one thing that the New Deal did that made society better. I answered. It reduced the poverty rates among senior citizens to virtually nothing. And it's been sustainable enough that it's lasted for about 70 years now. And what on earth does the New Deal have to do with military campaigns in 3rd World Countries? Talk about irrational.
#197 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
Also, most of the Senior Citizens who were reduced to poverty DID save for retirement...and lost pretty much all of their life savings when the stock market crashed leading to the Great Depression. As a direct result of Gilded Age policies.
#198 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Those jobs were worthless busywork given by the government to justify a wage paid by wealth redistribution.Laihendi

lol

First I just have to say that most of the work people do at their jobs is just seemingly "worthless busywork".

Secondly, who the fvck are you to call these jobs worthless? To the people that worked them they were anything but worthless - they were the means that allowed them to put food on the table so that they and their families wouldn't starve and so they even had a table to put food on in the first place. And more generally, how is the construction of schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, ect. pointlessendeavors?

I am just repeating what the private sector says. State parks don't do anything to increase the standard of living in this country but thousands of people were paid to build them and are still paid to operate them anyways. And if there was a demand for those schools, hospitals, etc. then they would have been built without prompting from the government.

The private sector is an inanimate abstraction - it never "says" anything.You're just talking out of your ass as usual.
#199 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] lol

First I just have to say that most of the work people do at their jobs is just seemingly "worthless busywork".

Secondly, who the fvck are you to call these jobs worthless? To the people that worked them they were anything but worthless - they were the means that allowed them to put food on the table so that they and their families wouldn't starve and so they even had a table to put food on in the first place. And more generally, how is the construction of schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, ect. pointlessendeavors?

-Sun_Tzu-
I am just repeating what the private sector says. State parks don't do anything to increase the standard of living in this country but thousands of people were paid to build them and are still paid to operate them anyways. And if there was a demand for those schools, hospitals, etc. then they would have been built without prompting from the government.

The private sector is an inanimate abstraction - it never "says" anything.You're just talking out of your ass as usual.

Yes, obviously it wasn't literally speaking words, just as a book doesn't literally talk to people and tell them things. There is still a clear message to be gained from it. You are floundering right now.
#200 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

Please explain how the new deal and civil rights act improved this country. I am waiting.

Laihendi

I did mention a bit earlier and Sun provided that graph but if you want to read more here you go:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_deal#Evaluation_of_New_Deal_policies

If I need to explain how civil rights act improved the country you're more sociopathic than I thought