Most in US won't be able to escape 'fiscal cliff'

The zeitgeist is indeed to dismiss points of view different from your own as "intellectually dishonest". Not in the least conducive to constructive debate.

True, but there are realities to face. What we have is an emperor with no clothes, surrounded by 535 court jesters in a kingdom that owes more money than it is willing to repay, although the sheriff is going to raid the pockets of all the villagers, not just the rich ones, so the royals can pretend they are doing something constructive. The villagers are too uninformed to storm the castle with lit torches, however. After all, they were the dummies who made it all possible because they were too lazy to watch the scoreboard. Now what?


Chicken Little was right, "We wuz had."
 
The zeitgeist is indeed to dismiss points of view different from your own as "intellectually dishonest". Not in the least conducive to constructive debate.

Your words:

"I could give this a shot (cuts , corruption, et al ) but having a few friends over for a listening session and for what anyway, i just hate the intellectually dishonesty which is always apart of such discussions ..."

I have to assume you are alluding to the "intellectual dishonesty" of those engaged in "such discussion" that disagree with you. Am I wrong???
 
True, but there are realities to face. What we have is an emperor with no clothes, surrounded by 535 court jesters in a kingdom that owes more money than it is willing to repay, although the sheriff is going to raid the pockets of all the villagers, not just the rich ones, so the royals can pretend they are doing something constructive. The villagers are too uninformed to storm the castle with lit torches, however. After all, they were the dummies who made it all possible because they were too lazy to watch the scoreboard. Now what?


Chicken Little was right, "We wuz had."

I don't disagree. I just don't see any particular side of the argument being more intellectually honest than the other.
 
I don't disagree. I just don't see any particular side of the argument being more intellectually honest than the other.

And, you would be right. What we really need is some sort of reset, but reset to what?
 
-- For the people affected by hurricane Sandy; well, that's just very very double sad. :(

Thank you Republicans! ...They didn't allow to vote on this (wasn't on the table).


For good reason! I do not know how it looks currently; when first brought up it was $17B for aide and the rest of the $60B went to largely unrelated "pork", including a sizable portion that was given to the gov't for unspecified future use.
 
Yes , wrong ...

Your words:

"I could give this a shot (cuts , corruption, et al ) but having a few friends over for a listening session and for what anyway, i just hate the intellectually dishonesty which is always apart of such discussions ..."

I have to assume you are alluding to the "intellectual dishonesty" of those engaged in "such discussion" that disagree with you. Am I wrong???
 
Usually the reset is a war. I hope we can do better than that this time around.

They are much smarter now , look at how the current regime pulled down the ME, Gadaffy's pull down and murder was clinical and clean, alot was learned from the mistakes in Iraq ...

Unfortunately the aftermath is still Washington's achilles heel. No wars , continuous conflicts ....
 
You first ,

As I never pointed to anyone , i said these kind of conversations usually lead to such ....

I never claimed such discussions tend to lead to intellectual dishonesty. Politics and economics are not exact sciences, people see things differently, and "facts" can be interpreted many different ways. I believe 99% of the times, someone making the most idiotic of arguments (according to me) is being intellectually honest in his own mind. So in summary, I see warped logic and incoherent reasoning everywhere I look, but intellectual dishonesty not so much.
 
You know, we're all a pretty smart bunch of guys here (none of the women on WBF have posted to this thread as far as I know), and we're hard pressed to come up with real solutions. I don't think this has much to do with intellect. Sure, you need 'experts' to some degree, but as edorr said, economics, particuarly on a global scale, is hardly an exact science. I also don't have a problem with 'elites' in government in one sense: if they already have money, they don't necessarily go into politics to line their pockets, but ostensibly, are dedicated to public service. (Say what you will about the Kennedy clan, but Joe Sr. pushed them all to 'do something,' and none of them needed a dime, given his fortune).
We do need leadership though, and more of 'what's good for the country' as opposed to 'what's good for my constituents.' That's where the pork comes from, right? Look at the deals that had to get made to get Obamacare passed, even though there was some recognition that something had to be done to address healthcare. (Believe me when I say I'm not a believer in what became law, just that the issue of skyrocketing costs, insurance and the like were real issues that deserved to be addressed without 'pay-off's' to get politicians to act). I'd love to see a requirement that only that which is 'necessary and related' to the core of a piece of legislation is permitted to go through the process; if someone wants something as a 'tag-a-long,' it should be addressed in its own, freestanding bill.
My thoughts are:
1. Mandatory public service of some sort, for 18-24 months after high school, which could include military, infrastructure rebuilding (like WPA) or other socially beneficial programs that provide training as well as man or woman power.
2. Put the money spent on prisons into schools- there was a piece some time ago comparing the facilities of a prison to that of an intermediate,e.g. junior high, school. You would have thought the pictures and captions had been mistakenly reversed.
3. Decriminalize the small stuff, like pot, but treat serious crime seriously.
4. Rethink our mental health support system, including our reliance on pharma as a substitute for real care- and perhaps, change the laws relating to involuntary commitment if necessary.
5. Take a business approach to government - have the department heads figure out where the cuts are, and that includes the morass we call Homeland Security. I'm all for a real defensive and if necessary, offensive capability, but the system is so bloated, it is offensive.
6. Tie government paid 'support' a/k/a 'welfare to job training or work, even if it is basic infrastructure stuff.
7. Revisit the healthcare mess with a hard look at single payor, interstate competition and not just the cost of drugs, but our over-reliance on them. Sure, you get into questions about the government legislating on issues like over-eating, but why do we as a nation support the idea that you can eat crap and medicate your way out of diabetes or high blood pressure?
8. There's been lot's of controversy over the use of drones, but frankly, I'd rather see them used than put our young folks in harms' way if it can be avoided.
9. Change the cultural objective of our society from one which is all about money and celebrity to more constructive goals and role models- I'd love to see more emphasis placed on innovation, science, music and the value of reading, thinking and talking to each other. A common goal or 'mission' brings people together, e.g. the 'space program' of the 60's, which was a race against Russia for the moon, also spawned a huge amount of science and business. Some of this know-how we 'borrowed' from the Germans after WWII, but a lot was homegrown. Let's make good cars, and let the failing companies fail, rather than bail them out.
I'm sure I've got some of these things wrong, and some of it may be wrong-headed, depending on your own view of what's really important, but the thing that caused a 'reset' and that drew people together in times of war was not just the economic demand for materiel, but a common goal that was at some level, selfless.
 
You know, we're all a pretty smart bunch of guys here (none of the women on WBF have posted to this thread as far as I know), and we're hard pressed to come up with real solutions. I don't think this has much to do with intellect. Sure, you need 'experts' to some degree, but as edorr said, economics, particuarly on a global scale, is hardly an exact science. I also don't have a problem with 'elites' in government in one sense: if they already have money, they don't necessarily go into politics to line their pockets, but ostensibly, are dedicated to public service. (Say what you will about the Kennedy clan, but Joe Sr. pushed them all to 'do something,' and none of them needed a dime, given his fortune).
We do need leadership though, and more of 'what's good for the country' as opposed to 'what's good for my constituents.' That's where the pork comes from, right? Look at the deals that had to get made to get Obamacare passed, even though there was some recognition that something had to be done to address healthcare. (Believe me when I say I'm not a believer in what became law, just that the issue of skyrocketing costs, insurance and the like were real issues that deserved to be addressed without 'pay-off's' to get politicians to act). I'd love to see a requirement that only that which is 'necessary and related' to the core of a piece of legislation is permitted to go through the process; if someone wants something as a 'tag-a-long,' it should be addressed in its own, freestanding bill.
My thoughts are:
1. Mandatory public service of some sort, for 18-24 months after high school, which could include military, infrastructure rebuilding (like WPA) or other socially beneficial programs that provide training as well as man or woman power.
2. Put the money spent on prisons into schools- there was a piece some time ago comparing the facilities of a prison to that of an intermediate,e.g. junior high, school. You would have thought the pictures and captions had been mistakenly reversed.
3. Decriminalize the small stuff, like pot, but treat serious crime seriously.
4. Rethink our mental health support system, including our reliance on pharma as a substitute for real care- and perhaps, change the laws relating to involuntary commitment if necessary.
5. Take a business approach to government - have the department heads figure out where the cuts are, and that includes the morass we call Homeland Security. I'm all for a real defensive and if necessary, offensive capability, but the system is so bloated, it is offensive.
6. Tie government paid 'support' a/k/a 'welfare to job training or work, even if it is basic infrastructure stuff.
7. Revisit the healthcare mess with a hard look at single payor, interstate competition and not just the cost of drugs, but our over-reliance on them. Sure, you get into questions about the government legislating on issues like over-eating, but why do we as a nation support the idea that you can eat crap and medicate your way out of diabetes or high blood pressure?
8. There's been lot's of controversy over the use of drones, but frankly, I'd rather see them used than put our young folks in harms' way if it can be avoided.
9. Change the cultural objective of our society from one which is all about money and celebrity to more constructive goals and role models- I'd love to see more emphasis placed on innovation, science, music and the value of reading, thinking and talking to each other. A common goal or 'mission' brings people together, e.g. the 'space program' of the 60's, which was a race against Russia for the moon, also spawned a huge amount of science and business. Some of this know-how we 'borrowed' from the Germans after WWII, but a lot was homegrown. Let's make good cars, and let the failing companies fail, rather than bail them out.
I'm sure I've got some of these things wrong, and some of it may be wrong-headed, depending on your own view of what's really important, but the thing that caused a 'reset' and that drew people together in times of war was not just the economic demand for materiel, but a common goal that was at some level, selfless.

Most of what you are suggesting here makes sense, and is clearly inspired by pragmatism (with the exception of (9) which is vintage social engineering). The reason you can strike almost every one off your list as "won't happen" boils down to the very two things that are preventing good governance. The first is "ideology" and the second is "special interest".
 
Check your store receipts carefully for a few weeks! There have already been instances where improper implementation of the tax software in store computers has charged customers a "medical excise tax". This tax is reserved for medical device purchases, but has accidentally been added to regular purchases. One such receipt, for hiking boots, etc., has been circulated on the net, showing approx. 2% tax being added to bill as "medical excise tax". The improper taxes will be refunded, according to posted info, but we should be vigilant during this transition.

Lee
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing