US POLITICS SPRING 2011: Let's just call off this country.

well, there's personal responsibility and then there's "personal responsibility"

the former is recognizing that your actions have consequences and accepting them, the latter is bullshit like "her kid deserved to die because they were jaywalking, lock her up longer than the blind, high and drunk hit-and-run driver who hit her"

and none had ever taken a bus in metro Atlanta

Tbf, it's getting harder and harder to FIND a bus to take in the first place, thanks to cutbacks.

the hypocrisy of it bothers me less than the contempt for compassion that accompanies it

― max, Wednesday, July 20, 2011 8:30 PM (47 minutes ago) Bookmark

dingdingdingding

funny thing is, i don't remember a lot of this "personal responsibility" blather until about the late 1980s/early 1990s ... and it was always in the context of such fun topics as welfare, negligent-to-nonexistent child support, crack babies and general drug use, etc. in other words, behaviors stereotypically associated with poor, urban blacks and latinos.

and yeah, fuck the prosecutor for pressing these charges in the first place.

yeah prosecuting pedestrians for being pedestrians was sorta the inevitable next step w/r/t our legal system and drunk drivers.

It's Cobb County too, which is significant (I went to hs there).

I mean it's disgusting but it's not even surprising!

Can we start a new thread, mods? It's summer, and this thing is unwieldy.

Another friend was just killed by a drunk driver a month ago, in Atlanta, in Little 5 Points, which is the touristy and supposedly pedestrian-friendly part of town. RIP.

A few weeks ago one of my friends in Cabbagetown got hit by a car that swerved into her front lawn, knocking her down and stealing her stuff before driving away. The police of course didn't believe her and gave her shit. This lines up with my experience with Atlanta police. Fuck Atlanta police.

I've lost so many friends to drunk drivers. Many more than I've lost to terrorists, communists, and Satanists combined.

i object to that thread title!

why cant we have "your tweets on screen" for ever title

"@newtgingrich is trending in washington, dc"

yeah cmon we can do better

let's just call off this thread

Imagine the uproar if Barack Obama, in the middle of this historic revenue crunch and "We're so broke the world is going to end tomorrow!" debt-ceiling hystgeria, decided to declare a second “one-time tax holiday” for, say, unwed single mothers, or recipients of public assistance? Middle America would be running through the streets firing shotguns out its truck window, waving chainsaws in mall lobbies, etc.

But see, Google and GE shouldn't pay taxes because they create jobs and blerrrugggh, whereas the recipients of public assistance are bringing the economy down without contributing to it and aaablleeruurrrreghg, blleeruughachacachhhh

sorry, i can't get into that mindset without throwing up on the keyboard, but i think that's supposed to be the counter-argument

i never get why the 'they create the jobs' argument/thoughtlet passes by without provoking some good old american reactionary anti-elitism. we're supposed to be all grateful and servile because the wealthy deign to 'let' us make more money for them?

you don't understand, everybody in America thinks they personally are a "wealth creator"

What never fails to astound me is the moralistic aspect of the argument against (neo)keynesianism.

Well, this is true in a sense, but they are not creating it for themselves.

They do create jobs. Jobs in China.

at the moment I'm a chicken and asparagus creator.

My added value comes in the form of all of those gloryholes I'm always drilling in public restrooms

But see, Google and GE shouldn't pay taxes because they create jobs and blerrrugggh

they sure are ... in India and China.

xpost

What never fails to astound me is the moralistic aspect of the argument against (neo)keynesianism.

that's easy to account for (wr2 people with little to no knowledge of economics). Keynesianism is kind of counter-intertuitive at least to sound (if superficial) financial practice for individuals in that if someone loses a job (or has to accept a paycut) one cuts expenses. of course, it takes some explaining to counter such a viewpoint: that government finance is not the same as household finance (someone should tell Obama this too while we're at it), that it's superficial b/c cutting discretionary spending to something that may pay off later on (education, job training, etc.) is counterproductive.

anyway, the bottom line is that the GOP just doesn't want to raise taxes no matter what and GOP politicians will pull any argument outta their asses to justify not raising taxes ever.

^^^^truth bomb

Great. Let's close this thread.

agreed

US POLITICS SUMMER 2011: The Rise of Neo-Gabbnebism

Mods...?