KingsFourMan wrote: ↑Mar 24th, '23, 12:44
This quote sums up the Biden Presidency perfectly:
"We are now living in and governed by an ineptocracy - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers."
Oh, like how Silicon Valley elites just got their bank deposits guaranteed by the Federal government when their bank went under?
Wake up, dude. Wealthy people in this country get just as many (maybe more?) government handouts as poor people, and both parties are doing the handouts.
What party do you think most Silicon Valley elites affiliate with? Most of them are huge democratic doners, is it any wonder that their bank just got bailed out by the federal government?
You may be right, but doesn't that argue against your original quote as applied to the Biden administration - that members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed are rewarded with goods and services confiscated from producers? I'd argue the Silicon Valley Bank depository guarantees are a government hand out to the members of society most likely to sustain themselves and produce wealth. And it's far from the first time very wealthy people were given government handouts. Look at the bailout of AIG, GM, etc.
To the point of both parties doing it - just look at what happened during covid. A Republican president and Republican-controlled Senate backed bailouts for everyone, from those least likely to sustain themselves to the wealthiest business owners.
KingsFourMan wrote: ↑Mar 24th, '23, 12:44
This quote sums up the Biden Presidency perfectly:
"We are now living in and governed by an ineptocracy - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers."
Oh, like how Silicon Valley elites just got their bank deposits guaranteed by the Federal government when their bank went under?
Wake up, dude. Wealthy people in this country get just as many (maybe more?) government handouts as poor people, and both parties are doing the handouts.
What party do you think most Silicon Valley elites affiliate with? Most of them are huge democratic doners, is it any wonder that their bank just got bailed out by the federal government?
You may be right, but doesn't that argue against your original quote as applied to the Biden administration - that members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed are rewarded with goods and services confiscated from producers? I'd argue the Silicon Valley Bank depository guarantees are a government hand out to the members of society most likely to sustain themselves and produce wealth. And it's far from the first time very wealthy people were given government handouts. Look at the bailout of AIG, GM, etc.
To the point of both parties doing it - just look at what happened during covid. A Republican president and Republican-controlled Senate backed bailouts for everyone, from those least likely to sustain themselves to the wealthiest business owners.
Thats a fair argument, but i think the author of the quote I referenced was speaking more about wealth redistribution through individual taxation rather than corporate bail outs.
As far as the Silicon Valley bank depositors go, there are far more people in Amercian that receive government assistance than the 1 percenters of Silicon Valley that you are referring to, who again are mostly far left leaning liberals.
With respect to the other government bailouts that you reference like AIG, GM, etc., don't forget that if those corporations fail, they take tens of thousands of middle-class and upper-middle class jobs with them both directly and indirectly. Those bailouts are more for those interests rather than the interests of the few that are at the very top of those organizations.
Don't fly Mr. Bluebird, I'm just walking down the road......
KingsFourMan wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '23, 14:50
Thats a fair argument, but i think the author of the quote I referenced was speaking more about wealth redistribution through individual taxation rather than corporate bail outs.
Well that's the problem with the quote. It talks about one kind of transfer of wealth and ignores the other. It also doesn't account for all kinds of other ways in which the wealthy get hand outs in the U.S.
KingsFourMan wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '23, 14:50As far as the Silicon Valley bank depositors go, there are far more people in Amercian that receive government assistance than the 1 percenters of Silicon Valley that you are referring to, who again are mostly far left leaning liberals.
SVB is just one example. There are many more. For instance, google Oil Subsidy or Solar Panel Credits. Musk, hardly a liberal, built his Tesla company on electric car credits. Big tech companies like Microsoft get huge government contracts, and the private companies in the defense industry get billions of dollars every year.
The list goes on and on. Google "subsidies for the wealthy" and see all the many examples that come up. Now mind you, I'm not saying that these programs are all bad policy (though some are). But to characterize what the government is doing as taking from the rich to give to the poor is to ignore a *lot* of what's really happening, because a lot of those funds (perhaps most) get directed to wealthy people.
Last edited by easyrider16 on Mar 29th, '23, 15:47, edited 1 time in total.
KingsFourMan wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '23, 14:50With respect to the other government bailouts that you reference like AIG, GM, etc., don't forget that if those corporations fail, they take tens of thousands of middle-class and upper-middle class jobs with them both directly and indirectly. Those bailouts are more for those interests rather than the interests of the few that are at the very top of those organizations.
SVB is one of the largest banks in the USA and employees around 10,000 people. The depositors of SVB likely employe far more than 10,000.
Let me be clear - I think the SVB guarantee was necessary, and I supported bailouts like the ones for AIG and GM in general terms. But it's inarguable that these policies resulted in many very wealthy people being given tangible financial benefit by the government. These are effectively hand outs for rich people, even of they also were good policy.
Likewise, some programs like medicaid and housing assistance are handouts for poor people, but they can also be good policy.
That's not really how life expectancy statistics work. Life expectancy for a man born today is about 75 years. Life expectancy for a man who has reached age 80 is 7.74 years. See here: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
That said, I'm in full agreement that Biden's age is a problem. I wish we had a better choice, but the Democrats will most likely nominate Biden and the Republicans seem ready to nominate either a lunatic (Trump) or a demagogue (DeSantis). Given the likely options, Biden is the best bad choice.
easyrider16 wrote: ↑Apr 25th, '23, 10:26
That's not really how life expectancy statistics work. Life expectancy for a man born today is about 75 years. Life expectancy for a man who has reached age 80 is 7.74 years. See here: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
That said, I'm in full agreement that Biden's age is a problem. I wish we had a better choice, but the Democrats will most likely nominate Biden and the Republicans seem ready to nominate either a lunatic (Trump) or a demagogue (DeSantis). Given the likely options, Biden is the best bad choice.
It was a joke mr. killjoy, I don't need to be educated on how life expectancy works.
easyrider16 wrote: ↑Apr 25th, '23, 10:26
That's not really how life expectancy statistics work. Life expectancy for a man born today is about 75 years. Life expectancy for a man who has reached age 80 is 7.74 years. See here: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
That said, I'm in full agreement that Biden's age is a problem. I wish we had a better choice, but the Democrats will most likely nominate Biden and the Republicans seem ready to nominate either a lunatic (Trump) or a demagogue (DeSantis). Given the likely options, Biden is the best bad choice.
I wonder what percentage of the people out there really want another Trump/Biden matchup. Or even a DeSantis/Biden matchup for that matter.
Agree however is that this is what is likely and Biden is the least bad choice.
Too bad too - there are plenty of potentially good candidates form both sides. Sunnunu, Baker, Hogan, Yonkin would all be interesting form the Republican side. Roy Cooper, Butigegeg, Jay Inslee could be interesting, as well as others.
It's unfortunate Joe didn't run in 2016. We'd be looking at the end of a second term and someone new, Trump never happens and the Supreme Court would be better off.
No desire to vote for Biden, but I'll never vote for a Republican in a National election again because of the courts. Even Sununu who I voted for governor and think is fantastic will not get a vote from me for Congress or President.
