the_spaniard
-
Posts
1,070 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by the_spaniard
-
-
Well we can't expect our citizens to be considerate when leading presidential hopefuls are not. There is a reason many on all sides of the fence consider this primary season "a race to the bottom". When it comes to behavior of our elected officials, this country (as the article states) has struck a new low. I have been part-time living, working, and traveling overseas for the last 5 years now and the last ten months have been interesting. A lot of people I work with abroad are enjoying our primary circus; it's becoming quite the running joke and we get a lot of pity for it.
There has to be a middle ground between denouncing political correctness and acting like a five-year old.
My favorites from the article:
But now we have struck a new low. A gutter talk so bad that we don’t want children even to watch the news. Now it’s our national leadership who are leading the pack. These valiant types who purport to be the role models of the country. These high-level poobahs who speak from the Olympian heights of business, politics, and public service have long ago sliced and diced not only one another but the character of the country itself.And I share from my own experiences out here:
They feel sorry for us. They wonder what is happening to those decent rank and file citizens, real Christians, genuine intellectuals, committed activists, genuine patriots who are embarrassed by their own political parties.An article with a lot of good points, and a catholic quoting the Dalai Lama to get an important message across. I approve.
-
2
-
-
Trying to blame one party or the other does nothing to fix the problem.
This. All we have now is the blame game and non-compromise from both sides, and where has it gotten us?
-
Please re-read my comment. Specifically the "at SOME level" part.
And please re-read my post on context.
-
For once we agree. But so are a lot of liberal ideals, such as being able to tax your way to prosperity.
Like the fantasy of Republican trickle-down economics.
What we need is the right balance of regulations, government, laws and taxes. Right now nobody wants to compromise on anything.Bingo. Compromise is something we teach our children to do, and not compromising is a textbook sign of immaturity. A shame our elected officials didn't get the memo. I would love to see every single one of them go (of every political affiliation) and get some new blood in there.
It's the number one reason I don't care for extremists on either side. It's much easier to resort to child-like bickering and using terms like demonrats and republicants. When people use anothers political affiliation as an insult, they are part of the problem.
-
It has nothing to do with being wealthy.
Actually, some of it does. Studies show that the wealthy are less compassionate, less empathetic and less generous. Studies have also shown (for a while now) that being poor negatively affects cognitive function. I'm all for personal responsibility but many of the poor have few opportunities to better their situation. Once again, do we have any idea what percentage of the poor are truly freeloading? Please cite some cold hard statistics on that "tiny fraction" of the population.
I don't feel bad for people that simply squander (or balk at) the opportunity to work hard and achieve success (however that is measured), but I know I have seen many poor people all over this country that would prefer to be anything but. The large majority of the poor people I have encountered in my life want to work and want to better their situation, but are limited by location, job availability, etc. I have met a few moochers in my time, but from my experience they are few and far between.
I've never been focused on financial success, but it became a by-product of working hard in a tech career. As I became older and wiser, I realized that hard work and smart decisions are important to success of any kind, but many people simply do not have the opportunities that others do. There is no level playing field.
-
I don't have anything in particular against libertarianism other than it is unrealistic. People are not perfect life forms, and expecting the average person to be just, moral, and have high ethical standards has no basis in history or reality. It's a nice dream, but it is still a dream.
-
It was an analogy that people can become dependent on government handouts in the same way that bears can become dependent on food handouts from park visitors.
That behavior is not limited to poor people - it's a basic trait of all animals.
Cmon, man. Context: Food stamps are specifically referenced. Tell me, does everyone get food stamps or are we just talking about the poor? I understand the analogy completely...the context of the analogy is derogatory, and you really don't have to look far or read into it to get that.
-
Basically there are two (2) classes of criminals: Violent & Non-violent.
Prison is best used to keep violent offenders away from a civilized populous.
If a person commits a non-violent crime then by all means slap and ankle bracelet on them and let them live on their own dime with community service work to keep them busy.
If a person commits a violent offense they should be locked away or put to death if warranted.If they leave prison its in a box or at room temperature.
I never considered prison a deterrent becasue its not. Its best use is to put really bad people away from society.
(Rehabilitation of violent offenders is a joke)
Its sad when a person is assaulted or child goes missing only to discover someone that had prior convictions for similar crimes was involved, gee what a surprise......
Now that I get, but then what do you do with them when they are released? It keeps them tucked away for a limited time in an environment that often in order to survive you have to become a better criminal.
-
About the same number as Socialism success stories..........
Care to list them? I'm not here advocating Socialism.
-
He did not equate poor people with animals. He simply pointed out a behavior that is seen in both humans and non human animals and noted the difference in how it is perceived and addressed.
Humans are animals. It's a biological fact not a derogatory statement.
Always looking to play the victim/offended card.............
He directly compared the poor with animals in his original post, and you saying he didn't does not change his written words on the post above. Its not about a victim syndrome, intentional or not it's a fairly derogatory way to refer to people, and how exactly am I "always" looking to play that card?
Its an interesting world where being wealthy (part of that American Dream) can actually reduce your compassion, empathy and generosity while being poor can impede cognitive function, reduce your opportunities, and make it difficult to become wealthy. Maybe that Jesus fella was onto something when he said that its easier for an elephant to go through the eye of a needle than a rich person getting into heaven. It's not about victim-offender. It's about seeing problems everywhere (not limiting your analysis to political affiliation, social class, etc).
-
Whether we have government or not, we have responsibility. In fact, with government we have the choice of shirking our responsibilities without consequence. In the natural world, we reap what we sow, and this will lead to a stronger superior species. Any institution which seeks to control will subjugate; be it government, religion, parents, employer, you name it. Freedom fosters advancement. It is good to have help until you learn the ropes; but at this point, you need to be free to pursue your own ambitions.
Without government squandering resources and killing ambition, there would be universal prosperity, and high wages with employers out-bidding each other for scarce labor. Any suffering would be taken care of by peoples' natural generosity. As it is now, many have lost that because of government.
While I agree with some of what you say, a populace with a void of central government is troubling. History is not exactly ripe with libertarian success stories. I'd be curious to see what happens after this country fails (which it will at some point - all civilizations do).
-
Depends on what you think prison is for.
I don't know anyone sent to prison who wants to return.
Many cons associate prison with getting caught, as opposed to the crime they commit.
It doesn't really matter what the individual thinks prison is for. Anyone can justify anything in any discussiont. Lets look at what the BOP describes it as:
It is the mission of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to protect society by confining offenders in the controlled environments of prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure, and that provide work and other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens.What part of that is seen as a success in our society, particularly when we incarcerate more people than anyone else in the world? If you consider it as an effective deterrent of crime (reinforcement to alter behavior - within our context here) how can it be seen as anything other than a failure?
-
You find illumination without seeing what was presented.
People and animals are related and very often behave is similar ways. To compare humans to animals is not outlandish. It's common knowledge.
Rats and rabbits, pigs and other non-humans have contributed to the study of the human body and provided life-sustaining assets. We are biologically much alike.
We are genetically related to fruit flies and pond scum.
To say poor people behave in some ways like animals is not lowering humans to the level of animals as much as raising animals to the level of humans.
How often do we assign human emotions to the assumed affections of a puppy, cat and other pets?
So, other than attempting to derail the salient point of my comment, your poorly concealed snide remark doesn't undermine the truth of my comment.
You discount the cognitive differences, which are vast. Anatomically there are similarities, behaviorally, you don't see much in the way of similarities beyond the basics until you get into higher primates. You are still denigrating the poor in the comparison. If you want to spin it as non-derogatory, you would say all people (regardless of socioeconomic status) are like animals. You didn't do that.
Your defense of your remark is really no defense at all, because we are specifically talking about a socioeconomic class, and not people. Rats, rabbits, pigs, puppies, cats, fish, and pond scum do not have a socioeconomic status (the whole point), so I don't really see where that is relevant.
-
Are the poor the same as animals? Maybe at SOME level.
Again, very illuminating thought process. Half of the food stamp recipients in this country are children, and over 5000 active-duty military members are on food stamps.
Conditioning works the same for animals as it does people.
You use either positive or negative reinforcement to obtain the desired behavior.
It's a little more complicated than Skinner or Pavlov might suggest. If it was that simple, the prison/incarceration system in this country would not be the massive failure that it is.
This is what many liberals either don't understand or don't like. I have first hand experience with this growing up in a rural town with a large welfare supported population and with my wife's great aunt. A lot of people are perfectly happy getting by with the bare minimum without any effort. If you gave them the option of having a productive job making $2K/month or getting a disability payment of $1K/month, a lot will choose the $1K for no work.
The "don't feed the bears" analogy is right on. That's why I'm advocating instead of giving people handouts we give them jobs where they have to at least show up every day and if there is some work that the government needs done they do it (pick up trash, paint, clean, etc.). If no work needs to be done they can take online classes or do something else productive for minimum wage. That would give them a lot more incentive to get a better job on their own.
As someone that grew up poor and have lived in/worked in/work in poor areas across the country, I agree with this. Now lets just not complain about a nice tax increase to make this a possibility.
-
I would like everyone to read the "lesson in irony" that I believe says it all--------->
Todays Lesson in Irony!
The food stamp program is administered by the US department of agriculture. They proudly report that they distribute free meals and foodstamps to over 46 million people on an annual basis.
Meanwhile, the National Park Service, run by the US department of the interior, asks us, "please do NOT feed the animals." Their stated reason for this policy being that..........
"The animals WILL become dependent on the handouts, and then they will NEVER learn to take care of themselves."
This concludes todays lesson in irony with an example that even the farthest leftist can understand. Any questions?
While I get what you are saying, it is illuminating that you equate the poor with animals.
-
If you have seen it before, mods please feel free to kill this thread. I am not exactly up on current news.
Turns out Brent Dewar loves his Fusion.
Turns out it is the COO anyway.Oops. Can a nice mod fix my thread title, please?
-
Could "Cleveland Browns" be considered racist since the team is close to half African-Americans?
Red is out. Yellow would surely be out. Blacks....self explanatory. Greens could offend Martians and Irishmen.
Seems like some people need to put on their "Big Girl Panties". Geesh! You are having a National Football League team named after you in recognition of your strength, stamina, prowess, endurance, and power. Kinda sounds like a complement.
If it were the Cleveland Brownies, than yeah they should change their name. And honestly I have a real hard time caring about any team having to rename itself. As I have said before, just a game. And I enjoy watching football. Though slow-paced at least it's not the snooze-fest that baseball and golf are. It's my favorite American sport.
You are assuming that is why they were named Redskins. And regardless of original intent, a slur is a slur. When it comes to Native Americans, I'm pretty sure they have their "Big Girl Panties on". They are still surviving and trying to retain their culture after being decimated by whites, directly and indirectly, having your land stolen out from under you, tens of thousands murdered, and being forced to live on reservations far away from any hope at economic prosperity.
The people that did that to them want to use a racial slur that describes them for a recreational team. So yeah you can see why they may not like it. Many Native Americans live in conditions that would make most Americans cry like babies if they had to endure it for a month.
It can be argued that Snyder is being the baby in all this. He should man up and do what is right. Then again, he has always been a terrible team owner anyway so this isn't very surprising.
EDIT> BTW this is far from a "Suddenly the name is racist?" issue. The name has been protested by native groups since 1972.
-
And words are just that, words.
The line of "offense" will continue to move, until something you care about is affected.
Then we may agree that the PC police are too much.
If not wanting to use a racial slur for a recreation team name makes people the "PC police" lets hope the line keeps moving.
Once again, it's just a game. Fun. Recreation. If they change the name there will still be a Washington team. People will still get to see games. Still follow their favorite players. Who knows Redskins sports memorabilia may skyrocket in value. Maybe they go back to the Braves, honestly who cares? A brand is a brand. I wouldn't care if they renamed "Ford" "Daihjitsudan Purple". And I am a fan of Ford vehicles.
The Redskins don't exactly have the best track record when it comes to respecting diversity anyway. Which team was the last to integrate it's NFL roster? The Redskins. And only under the threat of being kicked out of their own stadium.
-
That is hard to believe. Definitely a car enthusiast and he will be missed. He seemed like a very level-headed guy.
-
The whole issue focuses on the word and not the motivation of the user(s).
If you alter language, you don't alter thought.
It is impossible to focus on the motivation of all the users.
It is possible to not condone the use of a slur by eliminating its use by a popular sports organization.
However, telling someone they're racist or the beneficiary of a racist system, when they have no such underlying thought can only breed animosity.While it may breed animosity, the truth often hurts. People cannot remain blissfully ignorant forever. That is not going to do anything to resolve the underlying issue of inequality.
As I mentioned before this is just football...a game.
-
Not quite retired, but my Harley Ultra is just the kind of riding I enjoy with the "Queen". It's not about the image, but it is also a statement to riding. I refuse to ride a Goldwing. I don't need everything, including a hot tub, when I ride cross country.
Hair in the wind, bugs in the teeth, built-in in vibrator. What else does anyone need?
Hey man, rock on. I always like to hear about low-key Harley guys (my stepfather is one, and he rides a Road King). When I cruised through Annapolis recently it seemed like every Harley guy I ran into was like these guys:
There may be a point when I spring for a VRod, but not yet. When I get all of my performance kick, I would like to get something as angry-looking as this:
-
And just how much sympathy would I get if I decided I was offended by being called a "pale-face", white-man, honky, Caucasian, European, or plain vanilla?
You would get a lot from me. Many of the black folks I have met in southern MD/DC are some of the most racist people I have ever seen. Any form of discrimination is a bad thing. I agree there is a terrible double-standard. The media isn't exactly fair when pointing out racism against white folks....they often treat it like it never happens. It is a frustrating situation for all involved.
I grew up in Southern MD and went to a high school where many white folks hated blacks, many black folks hated whites, and both of those really hated the only two hispanics there...my brother and I. Plenty of racially motivated violence all around that would easily go down in the books as hate crimes today.
-
I didn't buy it during the Bush administration, and am finding hard to swallow for this one as well.
Honestly how long has it been since emails at a business (much less major government entities) were stored locally on the client (users personal computer) side? Any company I have worked at since 1998 (back in the days of Pentium 200s and NT Server) had email servers that were backed up (to tape back then). Hell it was damn near impossible to actually delete an email.
Is it possible the server crashed and burned? Sure. Is it likely that the email was not backed up from the server? Not very likely. Is it possible multiple email servers crashed in different organizations, all losing emails from a specific time period, and none were backed up?
Probably not. It's possible, but reeeeeeeaaaaalllllllyyyy statistically unlikely. I don't buy it.
-
One for three there, mettech.
"White Man Owner, **** Man Players on Land Taken From ********".
You can't refer to the race or physical characteristics of any minority. Only the "White Man" is subject to such treatment. Because he has never done anything good for anyone but himself and he destroys anyone else for his own selfish reason. Any criticism of him for the transgressions of his ancestors is to be tolerated. And all of his progeny shall suffer for eternity for those actions taken by certain members of his race, regardless of any lack of factual evidence that those subject to such criticism and beratement were personally or remotely responsible or guilty of those crimes.
Nah, the white man gets the crap because there is inequality favoring the white man - today, this instant, right now. Eliminate the inequality and there would not be a reason to complain. (Though some people complain about everything I guess)
news coming....
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
And how many of them have the performance or fuel economy of the Tesla? The knife cuts both ways. Electric is the future The FE is there and the performance is there. Ford, GM, and even Harly Davidson think so. I am glad they are all investing in the tech so they don't get left behind.
And remember the Mach E would never exist without Tesla. I can't stand Musk, but the guy has definitely turned the auto industry on its ear. FFS Rivian is about to release a fairly capable pickup the gets to 60 in 3 seconds with a 400-mile range (if it is true). What is the performance going to be like in 10 years?