Political Thread Of Fail And AIDS (Geeto ahead!)

[BStowers023]

Who can't protect themselves?

 

I believe everyone is entitled to live their life by their means. I can't control the decisions they make or where they come from. Everyone is given a dealt a different hand and I don't believe issuing the same hand is even remotely realistic.

[BStowers023]

Obama was literally a "middle ground" president when you look at his 8 years. But try getting anybody right of center to say that.

 

 

 

 

Prove this. Seriously. I have been listening to this "participation trophy" bullshit for years and the only proof I have ever seen is one study that constantly gets misinterpreted to support this logic (as opposed to all the other scientific studies on this issue that show positive results come from encouragement, that kids aren't confused about a participation award being a lesser trophy, and that social encouragement actually instills a stronger work ethic).

 

This is one of those old man "get off my lawn" nonsense outrages that isn't actually true and helps to promote a position of moral superiority when it isn't warranted.

 

 

I have friends and family friends who have kids growing up and they have mentioned receiving trophy's for coming near last place. I don't know how to prove this. I am not going to go to their house and take pictures just to prove that it happens :dumb:

[LJ]

I have friends and family friends who have kids growing up and they have mentioned receiving trophy's for coming near last place. I don't know how to prove this. I am not going to go to their house and take pictures just to prove that it happens :dumb:

 

I am 32 years old and we received a trophy for participating in little league from t-ball until travel ball in 5th grade.

 

My 4 year old played soccer last year and get his individual pic and a team pic, but no trophies.

[greg1647545532]

As for the sports are killing politics, I actually agree with you. Our society has moved from winners and losers to only winners in childhood sports. I don't agree with that at all. Sports can be a great lesson for kids growing up and a great way for kids to stand out and become leaders and begin to understand how some aspects of life works. The problem is, there are groups of people that truly believe everyone is a winner and everyone should get a trophy, even the kid/team that comes in last place. That's complete bullshit. You're raising a generation of kids that believe it's okay to suck and lose. No, you get fucking better and you win. This country didn't become great because we gave everyone a pat on the back for effort. Life won't give you a pat on the back for effort when you fuck up or you're just not good enough. If I have a son or daughter someday and they play sports and get a trophy for losing, I will take it away and tell them to earn it.

 

Great! Common ground -- participation trophies are dumb!

 

Where I disagree with you is all of the conclusions you're drawing from that. I'm 37, which means I grew up in the 80s sometimes getting participation trophies from well-meaning baby boomers. Even as a child I knew they were stupid, so they all ended up in the trash. They affected me not one whit. I didn't grow up not know the difference between winning and losing. On the contrary, no participation trophy could ever make up for the crushing embarrassment of literally never making contact with a pitched ball in the 2 years I played baseball, or never having my teammates pass me the basketball because, honestly, I'd just fuck it all up.

 

Of course, the trophies I earned didn't affect me one whit either. When my high school chess team was doing well, what was satisfying was looking into someone's eyes the moment they knew they were done. The medal we got at the end of the day is now also in the trash, because it was just a dumb medal.

 

If we're basing opinions on anecdotes, I'd say that trophies in general hold absolutely no power over how children grow up to view the world. If we're going to draw sweeping conclusions about the effect they have on whole generations of children growing up in vastly different environments, we're going to need some data.

 

Sadly, the data is pretty thin, but I don't think it supports the position you're taking here. Here's an example.

 

So: should we give our kids participation trophies?

 

To be honest, it depends. As an unexpected surprise for someone’s unwavering dedication and effort – absolutely! As a meaningless gesture for just “showing up”—maybe not. Kids are smart, and they know that being handed a participation trophy isn’t the same as winning.

 

In short, yes, I agree with you that trophies are silly, but I don't smash my kids' participation trophies because I don't think they're a big deal.

[greg1647545532]

I have friends and family friends who have kids growing up and they have mentioned receiving trophy's for coming near last place. I don't know how to prove this. I am not going to go to their house and take pictures just to prove that it happens :dumb:

 

I think he means, prove that it has the sweeping deleterious effects that you think it has. I'm sure participation trophies are a thing because my kids have them on their dressers, and I have some in a landfill somewhere. But we're all fine. My kids are smart as shit and highly motivated to do well. Those trophies have not broken them.

[Geeto67]

Who can't protect themselves?

 

I believe everyone is entitled to live their life by their means. I can't control the decisions they make or where they come from. Everyone is given a dealt a different hand and I don't believe issuing the same hand is even remotely realistic.

 

Is this a serious question? For starters: The elderly, the disabled, The sick, children, the poor...I mean yeah there are always going to be leveraged situations for individuals and government doesn't even attempt to correct for that, but it does try to correct for wide sweeping disadvantages that affect large groups in the population similarly. This is why we have laws against fraud....tell me how repealing fraud regulations would make it easier for people to live life by their means?

 

 

I have friends and family friends who have kids growing up and they have mentioned receiving trophy's for coming near last place. I don't know how to prove this. I am not going to go to their house and take pictures just to prove that it happens :dumb:

 

I am not saying prove that participation trophies exist:dumb:. I am saying prove that it has the negative effects you are claiming it does. Show me empirically, how someone getting a participation award has eroded their character in a way that wasn't in past generation. Support your statement with evidence.

[BStowers023]

Is this a serious question? For starters: The elderly, the disabled, The sick, children, the poor...I mean yeah there are always going to be leveraged situations for individuals and government doesn't even attempt to correct for that, but it does try to correct for wide sweeping disadvantages that affect large groups in the population similarly. This is why we have laws against fraud....tell me how repealing fraud regulations would make it easier for people to live life by their means?

 

 

 

 

I am not saying prove that participation trophies exist:dumb:. I am saying prove that it has the negative effects you are claiming it does. Show me empirically, how someone getting a participation award has eroded their character in a way that wasn't in past generation. Support your statement with evidence.

 

 

Government has it's place. I just don't think it needs to be as large as it is and control people's lives as much as it does. A Government big enough to give you everything you want is a Government big enough to take everything you have away.

 

 

I'm not trying to solely link participation trophies to entitlement, I'm just saying it's one of the causes in my opinion. I did not bring up sports, I just gave my belief on the comment "Sports are ruining politics." You don't have to agree with me, and I don't know how exactly to prove my belief to you as it's an opinion? I don't think they have data out there that can directly link participation trophies to entitlement because there are a lot more variables that come into play, but I think it's definitely one of them.

[LJ]

Government has it's place. I just don't think it needs to be as large as it is and control people's lives as much as it does. A Government big enough to give you everything you want is a Government big enough to take everything you have away.

 

 

I'm not trying to solely link participation trophies to entitlement, I'm just saying it's one of the causes in my opinion. I did not bring up sports, I just gave my belief on the comment "Sports are ruining politics." You don't have to agree with me, and I don't know how exactly to prove my belief to you as it's an opinion? I don't think they have data out there that can directly link participation trophies to entitlement because there are a lot more variables that come into play, but I think it's definitely one of them.

 

Personally I think participation trophies have their place and can encourage people to continue on rather than quit and maybe we should take a page out of little league sports and encourage people more often.

[greg1647545532]

I'm not trying to solely link participation trophies to entitlement, I'm just saying it's one of the causes in my opinion. I did not bring up sports, I just gave my belief on the comment "Sports are ruining politics." You don't have to agree with me, and I don't know how exactly to prove my belief to you as it's an opinion? I don't think they have data out there that can directly link participation trophies to entitlement because there are a lot more variables that come into play, but I think it's definitely one of them.

 

To be clear, I said team sports is ruining politics, by which I mean that even people who aren't card-holding Democrats, Republicans, or Libertarians still pick a "team" to side with, which makes it easier to group, stereotype, and ultimately dehumanize your opposition. Issues that should have a smattering of opinions from all walks of life end up getting distilled down into two sides, and people often have either no opinion on an issue, or a nebulous position, until their team picks a position, then they fall in line. This is just part of being human, but it's a part that we need to strive to overcome.

 

I didn't literally mean that sports are ruining politics.

 

I will note that you seem awfully sure of your opinion that participation trophies have caused some sort of entitlement problem in the face of a complete dearth of evidence. Why are you so convinced you're right? What would change your mind?

[BStowers023]

This is like me saying, prove to me that team sports are ruining politics. You haven't stated any facts, only opinions.

[greg1647545532]

This is like me saying, prove to me that team sports are ruining politics. You haven't stated any facts, only opinions.

 

That's fair, I'll provide some. You can measure polarization in politics -- that is, how willing politicians are to vote against the majority of their own party. All indications are that polarization is getting worse. That is to say, Republicans and Democrats are increasingly "falling in line" behind a single position on an issue, and less likely to dissent and/or reach across the aisle. This is what I mean by team sports. There are my links to back it up. This is my opinion, based on evidence that I've seen. I will change my opinion if presented with convincing evidence to the contrary.

[Geeto67]

Government has it's place. I just don't think it needs to be as large as it is and control people's lives as much as it does. A Government big enough to give you everything you want is a Government big enough to take everything you have away.

 

Large in what way? Keep in mind we actually have three independent governments that stack inside each others' boundaries like Russian nesting dolls: Federal, State, and Municipal. Which would you like to see get "smaller" and in what way?

[BStowers023]

That's fair, I'll provide some. You can measure polarization in politics -- that is, how willing politicians are to vote against the majority of their own party. All indications are that polarization is getting worse. That is to say, Republicans and Democrats are increasingly "falling in line" behind a single position on an issue, and less likely to dissent and/or reach across the aisle. This is what I mean by team sports. There are my links to back it up. This is my opinion, based on evidence that I've seen. I will change my opinion if presented with convincing evidence to the contrary.

 

I took your comment about team sports ruining politics in a literal sense. I agree with your above post and the points made.

 

Large in what way? Keep in mind we actually have three independent governments that stack inside each others' boundaries like Russian nesting dolls: Federal, State, and Municipal. Which would you like to see get "smaller" and in what way?

 

You ask this question like there is a quick easy answer. Federal government if you're asking me. You want me to break down the nearly $4,000,000,000,000 federal budget?

 

I'll ask an easy one for ya. Why is marijuana federally illegal? Why is alcohol federally legal? What's the difference between the two (I'll leave it broad since we're asking broad, vague questions here)? That's just one example.

[Geeto67]

You ask this question like there is a quick easy answer. Federal government if you're asking me. You want me to break down the nearly $4,000,000,000,000 federal budget?

 

you said it like there was an easy answer. Trimming line items from a budget is not the same thing as a "smaller" government. We could fund or de-fund all sorts of programs right now and the "size" of government wouldn't change an inch.

 

I'll ask an easy one for ya. Why is marijuana federally illegal?

 

Historically? because the government was running a campaign against mexican immigrants in the 1920's and 1930's and it was an easy way to criminalize them due to the widespread use among Mexican immigrants.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/harry-anslinger-the-man-behind-the-marijuana-ban/

 

The second component to Anslinger’s strategy was racial. He claimed that black people and Latinos were the primary users of marijuana, and it made them forget their place in the fabric of American society. He even went so far as to argue that jazz musicians were creating “Satanic” music all thanks to the influence of pot. This obsession eventually led to a sort of witch hunt against the legendary singer Billie Holiday, who struggled with heroin addiction; she lost her license to perform in New York cabarets and continued to be dogged by law enforcement until her death.

 

it's the same stupid conservative, anti-Mexican racism we are dealing with now, except now instead of drugs it's border walls. It's almost the same approach Nixon took with Heroin in the 1970's.

 

Still, if the current opiate crisis has taught us anything it is that all addictive substances have social costs that can't just be ignored by an outright legalization.

 

 

Why is alcohol federally legal?

Because when the US outlawed it in 1913, it cut the tax revenue down by 1/3 and when the great depression hit in 1930 the government realized they needed the tax revenue back to make up for the shortfalls caused by the market crash. It's legal because it was so popular the government couldn't afford to live without it.

 

there are actually so many political motivations tied up with prohibition you can't even imagine:

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/10/137077599/prohibition-speakeasies-loopholes-and-politics

 

What's the difference between the two (I'll leave it broad since we're asking broad, vague questions here)? That's just one example.

It's a pretty unique example and not really relate-able in total to other examples in the government (although there are pieces that are similar). Point is, the reasoning behind these things are not always as they appear and while I agree that bureaucracy moves slow it does sometimes move forward.

[BStowers023]

it's the same stupid conservative, anti-Mexican racism we are dealing with now

 

Greg...

[BStowers023]

Kerry, so alcohol was made legal for government profit? Could they not justify the same for marijuana currently or is the federal government keeping it illegal because they have their best interest in me? You can't say they don't need the tax revenue if that's the argument

[greg1647545532]

it's the same stupid conservative, anti-Mexican racism we are dealing with now, except now instead of drugs it's border walls.

 

Greg...

 

On it.

 

Be part of the solution. If you find yourself about to make a comment about "liberals" or "conservatives" as a giant group, just stop.

[BStowers023]

On it.

 

:thumbup:

[SpaceGhost]

http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/

[Geeto67]

Kerry, so alcohol was made legal for government profit? Could they not justify the same for marijuana currently or is the federal government keeping it illegal because they have their best interest in me? You can't say they don't need the tax revenue if that's the argument

 

Of course they could justify the same, and to a certain degree we are heading that way, but right now there is more intrinsic value to politicians looking to attract socially conservative voters.

[Geeesammy]

Looks like trump paid taxes

[Geeto67]

Looks like trump paid taxes

 

for 1 year at least.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html?_r=0

 

The issue of whether he paid taxes or not is kind of a red herring. It doesn't actually matter whether he paid them or not - the issue is that he has taken a stance that purposefully opaque.

 

In order for the people to trust their politicians, they have to provide some form of transparency, or at least the appearance of transparency. Even Richard Nixon understood this and he was probably more paranoid than the"Papaya Pinochet" currently residing in the oval office. It doesn't matter whether they find anything or not - it is symbolic that he recognizes he owes a duty to the American people and failure to do so is just a giant fuck you to everybody in America.

 

His lack of transparency doesn't seem to bother the bulk of his supporters, just as his regime's tacit empowerment of white supremacy doesn't seem to bother them either. It just gives credence to the theory that most of his supporters aren't really interested in a politician working for their interests so much as they are interested in a politician who is perceived to troll and screw over this fictionalized stereotype of "liberals" they have in their heads. As long as he is fucking over the democrats he can profit from this office all he wants. Who said politics isn't a team sport?

[BigOxley]

Looks like trump paid taxes

 

 

 

REEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! Drumpf needs to release them all!!! He needs to pay 90% of his income!!!!! He's not a billionaire!!!!! This is distracting from RUSSIA!!!! He didn't report his loans from Germany!!!!!!!

 

/s

[BStowers023]

just as his regime's tacit empowerment of white supremacy

 

Proof?

[Geeto67]

Proof?

 

you understand the word "Tacit" means implied without being stated, right? I don't mind being challenged (in fact I enjoy it) but try to make it count mmmkay? don't just do it because I did it to you earlier.

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/world/americas/trump-white-populism-europe-united-states.html

 

http://time.com/4569129/racist-anti-semitic-incidents-donald-trump/

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/hate-on-the-rise-after-trumps-election

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/01/donald-trump-and-david-duke-for-the-record/?utm_term=.822c99983993

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/donald-trump-hate-groups-neo-nazi-white-supremacist-racism

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/22/donald-trump-steve-bannon-alt-right-white-nationalist-disavow

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38069469

 

 

I will save you the time on reading all of these....although he has made statements "Disavowing" racism, he has been fairly weak on the issue. He refused to repudiate the Klan by claiming he "didn't know anything about them" which let's be honest you have to be pretty fucking sheltered in American to not know anything about them. He has been completely silent on anti-Semitic acts carried out in his name and on the rise of such acts in general.

 

And then there is Steve Bannon. It's a little hard to claim you are not associated with the alt-right and White Supremacy when when of your closest advisors runs one of the major news outlets catering to that audience.