What is privilege?

[Ralph]

Privilege is paying 49% of the taxes, but getting 63% of the spending...

Propping up the boonies, Atlanta’s thankless burden
Back in 2009, researchers from Georgia State University found that the 10-county metro Atlanta region had 43 percent of the state's population and generated 53 percent of the state's taxable income. That area contributed 51 percent of state revenue but got back just 37 percent of state expenditures. In essence, each metro Atlantan cut a check for $500 each year for every resident elsewhere.
https://www.ajc.com/news/local/torpy...Q6Oi4QC5AsOHM/

Privilege is having other people work while you eat without working or earning. You want to see WHITE PRIVILEGE? Just look at the number of WHITE LIBERAL ASSHOLES that are supporting the Maxrist riots. None are working as they show up every day to riot and loot. And they expect THE PEOPLE to take the side of individuals that have never worked a day in the lives, that live off the TAXPAYER and their PARENTS bank accounts? Again.....the 2nd greatest danger facing this republic, just behind the fake media and its propaganda......WHITE LIBERALS. It appears the majority of the blacks in this nation are so gullible they do not comprehend they are being used and will be tossed aside and taken for granted as they have since the 1960s by these white liberal assholes when their usefulness is over........

[Doc Dutch]

Calm down, dude. No need to get all screechy just because you talked yourself into a rhetorical corner.

It's funny, you toss out claims like "socialism failed", but then when pressed, you immediately retreat to posts like these...which makes me think you're full of shit. So you cannot defend your "socialism failed" nonsense and you try to gaslight anyone who challenges you on it.

If you're not up for this debate, at least be honest about it. But to posture as you're doing now...that's just disappointing.

LOL.

Socialism doesn't work and I know you disagree. Are you claiming the faltering economies of Greece, Italy and Ireland a few years ago were Socialist successes? If not, what do you think they were?

Dude, I'm willing to debate. Are you claiming this was a debate comment?:

"I have never, never, never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever been in a single debate on JPP with either a Conservative or bOtHsIdErIsT where they didn't devolve the debate into a collection of vague, ambiguous, and laughably unverifiable anecdotes."

[Bill]

Privilege is being allowed to commit crimes and never get arrested.

& wallstreet, trump etc etc etc..........

[LV426]

Yes, but thanks for backpedaling by qualifying your statement with "here".

Here's the thing...I've been around this block before. Many times. In my previous line of work, part of my responsibilities were to verify sources and secure confirmations for pieces that would run in the media. Now, I happened to be doing this work from 2007-2014 and what I found was that whenever I needed to reach out to a Conservative for verification and confirmation, I almost always ran into an instance of embellishment followed by intransigence.

This was omnipresent in three distinct cases; Sam Wurzelbacher, Ashley Todd, and Julie Boonstra, though every single GOP politician I ever had to reach out to also was evasive with verifications and confirmations. What I learned was that was intentional. The intent of people embellishing and exaggerating is to muddy the credibility waters so much that they end up flipping simple verification back onto me. This happened to an explicit degree with Julie Boonstra.

You might remember Boonstra's name...she was the woman that the Koch Brothers put in an ACA attack ad where she claimed that the ACA caused her health insurance premiums to "skyrocket". Obviously, this was major news at the time because it was ahead of the 2014 midterm election and Republicans were making hay about it. Well, when I called old Miss Julie up to verify what she said in her Koch video, her first response was to hang up. Then, I called back and she started laying into me about how the media twists and contorts things out of context. I asked her what context would she like to have around her claim that the ACA caused her premiums to spike? She couldn't say, but went back to her "I hate the media" thing as I was merely seeking validation of her quotes in a media video she made. Sensing I wasn't going to get anywhere, I decided to verify whether or not her premiums could have spiked because of the ACA. So I called her insurance company, and they told me that no one's premiums increased because of the ACA and, in fact, most premiums went down.

So, after getting that bit of insight, I reached back out to Boonstra who insisted she wasn't lying, then said that she "perhaps may have read the insurance policy wrong" (seriously, she said that on the phone...which is almost exactly word-for-word what anatta/dukkha said about the (not a) (un)solicited mail-in ballot). But you and I both know that's bullshit, and so did she. So she refused to verify her own quote, and we went to print without her.

So you see, I can totally accept if someone is what they claim to be...I just need verification because I'm a skeptic thanks to the years I had to spend working with bad faith actors like Boonstra, Todd, and Joe (not his real name) the Plumber (not his real job, or any job he's ever had).

[LV426]

I tend to believe people unless there's a reason not to believe them. Most are honest, but sock puppet addicts do seem to live in a fantasy world. That said, why do you believe it's impossible for a person to claim to have had a 147 IQ over 20 years ago but appears to have an average or less IQ now and/or is mentally ill?

It's not impossible to make that claim...whether or not that claim is true...well...isn't that the heart of the issue?

Do you think it's possible for a person to be smart, ambitious and successful in their 20s and 30s but suffer a brain injury or malady in their 40s?

I don't think there's a brain injury that causes you to consciously choose to lie and embellish on the internet for effect.

Do you understand age is a factor which is why I'm always curious about the age of the person with whom I'm chatting; to compare if their behavior matches their age. Do you understand most active members here are over 50, of most of them are over 60? How do you think age plays into your theories?

I don't really care how old someone is...what I care about is whether or not they used their time on this earth to gain perspective. Unfortunately, most older people don't evolve their perspectives.

But I think that is wholly different than someone exaggerating their own personal station to impress or silence or gaslight people on anonymous message boards. No one does that by accident. It's entirely intentional.

[LV426]

Privilege is having other people work while you eat without working or earning

Paying 47% of the taxes, but getting 63% of the spending is people getting something for nothing.

[LV426]

Socialism doesn't work and I know you disagree.

Because Canada doesn't work? The UK doesn't work? Denmark doesn't work? South Korea doesn't work? Israel doesn't work? Japan doesn't work?

Do they all know that?

Are you claiming the faltering economies of Greece, Italy and Ireland a few years ago were Socialist successes?

No. They're capitalist failures, specifically the European Central Bank's failures.

And there are plenty of socialist countries that didn't have faltering economies, like South Korea, Germany, Canada, Belgium, Luxembourg (rated #1 place to live in the world), Scandinavia, Holland, etc.

But you never mention those as having faltering economies because of "socialism". How come? How come you don't talk about those countries? And do you honestly think that our current system works?????? A system that has produced a recession, 40M out of work, and 30 million uninsured? How's that working out for us? Or are you just going to pretend none of that happened?

[LV426]

"I have never, never, never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever been in a single debate on JPP with either a Conservative or bOtHsIdErIsT where they didn't devolve the debate into a collection of vague, ambiguous, and laughably unverifiable anecdotes."

I stand by that comment because it's true, and I even gave you examples.

What you haven't done is given me examples that prove otherwise.

So why is it incumbent on me to provide proof, but not you? Because you don't act in good faith, duh.

[LV426]

re you claiming the faltering economies of Greece, Italy and Ireland a few years ago were Socialist successes?

Interesting you bring up Ireland because that country had cut its taxes so low that it became an offshore haven for multinationals. It didn't last long, though, because the Irish realized pretty quickly that cutting taxes forces budget deficits which causes haphazard spending cuts that end up tanking the economy. It's what happened in the US during Bush the Dumber, happened in Kansas during Brownback, and recently happened in Ireland.

For years, Conservatives held up Ireland as some sort of "free market" blah blah to follow. Guess it didn't work out, huh, if you're saying Ireland sucks now?

[Doc Dutch]

It's not impossible to make that claim...whether or not that claim is true...well...isn't that the heart of the issue?

I don't think there's a brain injury that causes you to consciously choose to lie and embellish on the internet for effect.

I don't really care how old someone is...what I care about is whether or not they used their time on this earth to gain perspective. Unfortunately, most older people don't evolve their perspectives.

But I think that is wholly different than someone exaggerating their own personal station to impress or silence or gaslight people on anonymous message boards. No one does that by accident. It's entirely intentional.

Yet you continue to believe they are liars meaning people who consciously and with full presence of mind intend to decieve. If you're as old and wise as you claim to be then you should be old enough to know better.

[Irish]

& wallstreet, trump etc etc etc..........

Do that justifies assaulting police.

[Doc Dutch]

Because Canada doesn't work? The UK doesn't work? Denmark doesn't work? South Korea doesn't work? Israel doesn't work? Japan doesn't work?

Do they all know that?




No. They're capitalist failures, specifically the European Central Bank's failures.

And there are plenty of socialist countries that didn't have faltering economies, like South Korea, Germany, Canada, Belgium, Luxembourg (rated #1 place to live in the world), Scandinavia, Holland, etc.

But you never mention those as having faltering economies because of "socialism". How come? How come you don't talk about those countries? And do you honestly think that our current system works?????? A system that has produced a recession, 40M out of work, and 30 million uninsured? How's that working out for us? Or are you just going to pretend none of that happened?

The fact you are claiming those are socialist countries is fascinating. Do you have a source that labels them as socialist?

My source doesn't. Example:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...ds/296.html#UK

[LV426]

Yet you continue to believe they are liars meaning people who consciously and with full presence of mind intend to decieve.

Yeah...have you not been paying attention to the examples I've shared?

[LV426]

The fact you are claiming those are socialist countries is fascinating. Do you have a source that labels them as socialist?

Ah, so what you're now saying is that the type of society we want to emulate through programs like universal health care and universal public education are, in fact, not socialist (weird, those are socialist programs in those countries, which would make them socialists, right?) because of those things, therefore you have nothing to worry about when it comes to the "socialism" we want here.

[LV426]

The fact you are claiming those are socialist countries is fascinating. Do you have a source that labels them as socialist?

My source doesn't. Example:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...ds/296.html#UK

So the definition of "socialist" seems fungible to you.

So OK, so then when you claim we want socialism here, you're lying. You're lying because you know that what we are talking about is socializing certain parts of our country and economy, just like they do in other countries. What is the difference between Greece and Germany? Nothing when it comes to socialism. Both countries have socialist programs, yet you only call the failure "socialist". Even though Greece's failure is much more complex than mere "socialism", specifically having to do with the Eurozone currency, the European Central Bank, and the EU.

But you devolve it to mere "socialism" because you just don't want to put in the effort to be informed on this subject, and it's easier for someone like you to just carelessly lob "socialism" as the excuse for an issue which is far, far more complex than Greece's welfare state -which bears a striking resemblance to Germany and Canada's welfare state. But again, you wouldn't know that because you aren't putting in the effort. Which is disappointing.