Rob's House

I wouldn't be caught dead wearing one of those things.

I think you misunderestimate my ilk. We're well aware that some level of free enterprise & enforceable property rights are prerequisite to the situation BF was describing. I won't be smoothed over by ilk, silk, a bedspread, or a quilt...

They're a step below cronies and above ilk, all of which are on a plateau far beneath that of minions. Minions is where it's at.

This made me laugh to beat the devil. In all seriousness though, you can't fairly analogize the situation & opportunity of those living under warlords in subsaharan Africa to those living in a free civilized society.

I meant to give you a nod in that post. I remembered you were around for that.

Not that he needed any, but you just gave Tom vindication & then some with this post.

I still can't get over the gall of the dad. This guy comes in not to find shaving cream in the mail box and toilet paper on the house. He walks in to find the place ransacked with $40k worth of damage done. This pu$$y should thank this man for not beating his kid to a bloody pulp. This just runs all over me.

I share some of your sentiments here, but I'm afraid the devil is details. Personally, I'd be just fine with menial workers making more and top earners earning less, provided the menial workers were putting in the work and the top earners are still reasonably free to reap what they sew. Logistically however, I just can't conceive of any way in which that is possible to implement. Every way I can conceive of will, I believe based on history and intermediate studies of economics, lead to a lower standard of living for all involved. If you have a theory on how this could realistically work I'd honestly like to hear it. As far as incentives go, part of the problem is not with incentivizing someone to want to undertake the initial burden that will reward them with riches, but often to continue providing a service to all. For instance, the d-bags that started Google or the guy that started Amazon would have likely undertaken the task even if the potential reward was significantly less than what they've reaped. But once they've maxed out on their reward, what is their reason to continue to expand and improve their service? What is the reason for any company to continue to build, produce, or service more once it maxes out or when the marginal return becomes slight?

DMB is always an interesting topic to me because they were a local band in my hometown when I was in high school and then blew up immediately after, so I've always had a bit different perpective on them. I think it's fair to say they're talented, but not in a substantial way. They have a lot of songs that are catchy when you first hear them, but after a dozen or so times the magic's gone. And to answer JW's question, Ants Marching is what launched them - catchy little song that was great the 3rd - 8th times you hear it and not much after. I also miss the regular shoutbox declarations of DMB's suckitude.

I thought you guys were going a little overboard until I read the article. $40k in damages? Those little ***** are lucky to still have teeth. And that one dad quoted in the story need look no further than the mirror to find out how his son turned out the way he has. I'd like to prosecute those little bastards.

In his mind if you have more than I do and I made $200 today & you made $1000 I'm worse off today than I was yesterday because the wealth disparity between us grew.

...more than one meaning.

This word...I don't think it means what you think it means.

I got a chuckle out of that one too. It reminded me of my Marxist friend from Chapel Hill (a place where Dennis Kucinich could come off as moderately conservative) saying that the public has roundly rejected fracking. The public he's exposed to had.

How's that working out for you?

I wonder if this !@#$ rag considered the contrapositive of this equation. What effect might it have on others to know that you're no longer allowed to defend yourself from an attacker repeatedly beating you about the head if the attacker is black. I know the race baiters have this garbage coded in their DNA and can't help but stir racial **** whenever and wherever the possibility of doing such exists, but on the whole this case I believe will prove counter-productive. Why? Because no one outside the circle of pu$$ies that see racism everywhere they can, really believes this is a racial incident. Most people see this for what it is - an opportunity to exploit a situation for personal and/or political gain. I generally turn a deaf ear to cries of racism because in my life, for every legitimate claim of racism I've heard there have been a dozen bogus claims before it. I'm not alone on this. This kind of sentiment has no real value besides creating strife and resentment between races; and it's of the variety that leads to violence rather than harmony. And anyone who speaks of "black and brown" people is a blow hard d-bag who should do the world a favor and die.

This is where I am - not sure what to believe

I'm not sure I trust that they're not recording the web stuff. All this stuff creeps me out. If they're limited to real time surveillance I'm not as concerned because they don't have the resources to effectively monitor 300 million people simultaneously, but can you imagine how much power you would have if you could access every phone call, email, web search, etc. that anyone has made over the course of a lifetime? I think a lot of people miss the point on this. I remember simple minded reporters parroting the concerns they were told to have about the poor innocent Americans that had their phone calls eaves dropped on during the Bush years. While I agree that sucks, and have/had other reservations about warrantless wiretaps, these dipshits didn't seem to understand why it was a problem. They were on the right side of the issue, but not because they had any sense or rational basis for arriving there, but rather they blindly just happened upon it. I'm not worried about some NSA dick finding out what offensive jokes I've made or strange porn I may have looked up; I'm concerned about the ability of those in power to readily and easily destroy anyone who becomes a problem for them. And I'm fairly certain that most everyone has said, done, or searched for something that could be very damaging if brought to light. And when you're in power, and have the ability to destroy anyone who becomes a threat to that power, the potential for tyranny is fairly obvious.

I've been too busy to delve too deeply into the details, so you may be right, but I was under the impression that all phone calls, emails, text messages, web searches, etc. were being logged in a massive database. Are you sure this isn't part of the program?

which program are you referring to?

Something like Jem? I think Prism fits the bill.

You have to admit, it is change.

I found this feel good story in my local paper http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news/article_38cea046-ba7d-11e2-a38c-0019bb30f31a.html

There are a few key aspects you're overlooking. First, regardless of abuses, the Fed govt has never been anywhere near as big and pervasive as it is now. Even under FDR the level of Federal involvement that is taken for granted today, even by most conservatives, was highly controversial if not unfathomable. Also, technology changes the landscape entirely. In generations past it was physically impossible to monitor individuals in ways now possible. It is now conceivable that a person's entire life - every phone call, text message, email, IM, web search, web post, etc. can be recorded, logged, and stored such that anyone with access to that database could perform directed searches for anything and everything that could damage that person. Forget unsealed divorce records, damn near anything would be available to destroy anyone who became a problem. Or they could perform directed searches to identify who the problem people are. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Add in camera's everywhere recording everything, with facial recognition software, perhaps audio to go with these tapes so you can scan the database to see where anyone was at any time, what they were saying, etc. These are real possibilities that shouldn't be taken lightly. In the landscape of history, America is very young. It's fairly naive to think our government couldn't become totalitarian over the course of the next century.