Fear of the Left . . .

[Guest]

Since Schmo believes in good ole-fashioned fascist oppressive censorship as manifest by "Ignore" on a free speech site

Deleted

Hypocrite much?

- Doc

Holy Christ. I'm seeing this subs quote for the first time, and I'm again impressed with just how stupid he is/wants everyone to think he is.

I suppose I'm a fascist to myself for censoring for myself what I don't want to read for myself.

How many ways can we say moron to describe this moron?

[_Maksutov]

Since Schmo believes in good ole-fashioned fascist oppressive censorship as manifest by "Ignore" on a free speech site

That's rich. There's a certain poster here who is such an aflamed coward he might've gotten Big Daddy Liberal Government to do his job for him and now this poster is enjoying this Liberal board liberally deleting comments about said Conservative's cowardice.

Hypocrite much?

- Doc

Ignoring subbie is "fascist oppressive censorship". So not listening to defenses of Nazism is Nazism. The troll demands that we feed and pet it.

I hope that dear Ceeboo doesn't truly feel fear.

[_canpakes]

So, Kim David did not enforce a law and got persecuted by Democrats...fair enough.

Oh, did you misspell, ‘prosecuted’? ; )

Do you look at everyone who violates the law in the same way, or just the snowflaky conservative lawbreakers who are in tantrum mode for not being able to impose their religious will on someone other than themselves?

[_Some Schmo]

Ignoring subbie is "fascist oppressive censorship". So not listening to defenses of Nazism is Nazism.

The guy defends Drumpf, so he either doesn't know what fascism is or loves it and is a blatant hypocrite.

Tough choice, there, but I'm going to go with ignorance (in this case - we've witnessed his hypocrisy too).

[_Xenophon]

Subs ridiculous assertion of "fascist censorship" aside, I should clarify my point.

What I was agreeing with on Schmo was more the idea that upward mobility is a problem, less with the overt causes. I don't really want to delve into it here because it is already strayed pretty far off-topic but a quick high level breakdown would suggest that concentration of wealth in the hands of few (both people and companies), education barriers, access to health care, ridiculously high incarceration rates and probably several more reasons all factor into mobility (who knew economics could be so complex?). I think there is even plenty of argument to be made that mobility isn't the "only" thing to consider either and that things like prosperity, income inequality, wage stagnation and others are all pretty important metrics to look at too, lest we only focus on the zero-sum game.

[_Some Schmo]

Xen, I think there are several contributing factors as well. I just stated what I think is the biggest and most obvious one. I'm not sure how small businesses are supposed to thrive when they have to compete against large corporations with a corner on any given market and millions in lobbying dollars to ensure the control they already have.

[_Chap]

Subs ridiculous assertion of "fascist censorship" aside, I should clarify my point.

What I was agreeing with on Schmo was more the idea that upward mobility is a problem, less with the overt causes. I don't really want to delve into it here because it is already strayed pretty far off-topic but a quick high level breakdown would suggest that concentration of wealth in the hands of few (both people and companies), education barriers, access to health care, ridiculously high incarceration rates and probably several more reasons all factor into mobility (who knew economics could be so complex?). I think there is even plenty of argument to be made that mobility isn't the "only" thing to consider either and that things like prosperity, income inequality, wage stagnation and others are all pretty important metrics to look at too, lest we only focus on the zero-sum game.

I am not a Marxist, but the reason that Marxism continues to be attractive to some people is in part because it addresses political issues in a way that other ways of thinking don't.

So after reading Xenophon's elegant paragraph on the problems that arise from the increasing perception by many Americans that the dream of upward mobility for all willing to work is ... just a dream, I feel that I must quote the epitaph on Marx's tomb in Highgate cemetery in North London:



In case that is not clear, it says:

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."

Or as Lenin once put it:

"What is to be done?"

[Guest]

.

[_schreech]

I think Conservatives have a very deep fear of Liberals. I just learned [violation of Universal Rule #3 deleted]. Some might say that it was a hair fire reaction of the former to being outed by the latter, but I would say it's because Stalin killed millions of people.

- Doc

Either that or he is just lashing out at people that actually have hair.

[_Some Schmo]

I think there is even plenty of argument to be made that mobility isn't the "only" thing to consider either and that things like prosperity, income inequality, wage stagnation and others are all pretty important metrics to look at too, lest we only focus on the zero-sum game.

The main point of asking the question, what makes America great (or any country, for that matter) is exactly to find out what people's criteria for greatness are.

It's like asking what makes a good driver. What are the criteria? Safety? A history of no accidents? Or being able to drive the car on two wheels and jump it over a series of buses to land without killing yourself?

In my opinion, what the criteria should be for a country is the general standard of living for the greatest number of citizens (obviously, including mobility). How good is the infrastructure? Ya got parks? How safe is your country to live in? How efficient are your agencies? How good are the public services (police, fire, libraries, etc)? What's the economy/how is it structured? Can most people get a decent job? How good is the food? How clean is your country? How's people's access to decent health care? How decent is your health care?

...and probably a few hundred other questions like that, all relating to the general well-being of the country's population. I think America does really well in certain areas and is way behind the rest of the first world countries in others. I generally prefer American sports and entertainment over other countries, although not so much American music, for example. So, ya know. Every country's got their things. That's all I'm saying.

PS: I was just about to post this and saw Ceeb's response. Thanks for that, Ceeboo. I liked your post (the end was a bit disappointing though - you keep asserting the US is the best, and I guess I'll just agree that you believe that). If we're talking football, then yes, America is #1!!