Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-05-2009, 09:11 AM   #81
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
This thread is becoming circular and repetitive, and its wheels are spinning in the mud. Can we find some different ground to trod on, since it's obvious this particular item is going nowhere?
Before I answer, can I assume that comment was from ziggy the poster, not ziggy the moderator?

My answer will not be inflammatory (actually meant to close out my part of the conversation), but I just don't want to take the chance that I'm going to be told I'm violating community rules by commenting on moderation. Since you guys/gals don't always make the distinction in your posts, I need to ask.

Thanks, -ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 03-05-2009, 09:13 AM   #82
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Before I answer, can I assume that comment was from ziggy the poster, not ziggy
This is only my personal opinion. I've already chimed in on this topic as a participant so I'm not inclined to moderate anything in it unless there's a clear violation of the Community Rules. Having said that, it just seems obvious to me that this is a dead horse beating beaten to its second death and there's no new ground being covered.

"Is too!" "Is not!" "Is too!" "Is not!" ...
__________________

__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 09:41 AM   #83
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
This thread is becoming circular and repetitive, and its wheels are spinning in the mud. Can we find some different ground to trod on, since it's obvious this particular item is going nowhere?
I'm just hoping to hear a *specific* answer from ChrisC to my *specific* questions posed in those scenarios.

I really don't see how I can take it any further. I don't think there is anything left. Every possible scenario regarding this topic has been covered with the tip jar analogy.

If he doesn't get it, he doesn't get it. As I said, if that is the case I'll make a note that future economic discussions (not ALL discussion: no "ignore list" for me) with him are futile. I'm sure we can find common ground, or at least intelligent debate somewhere, on some other subject.

It just seems there is sometimes a tendency to stifle a thread just as it is coming to a conclusion. I'd like to see this one played out. I'm amazingly optimistic about some things, maybe I will be surprised.


OK, I'll also spin this pendulum to a new angle and back to the original topic - The Constitutional term "for the common good" seems to get stretched in some people's opinion. AFAIAC, it should be stretched far enough to require a test in order to have the right to vote. I think voters have a basic responsibility to understand basic concepts, or their votes may unknowingly go towards supporting things that are not "for the common good".

As armor99 pointed out, reasonable people can disagree about whether they think 100 degrees F is comfortable or uncomfortable, but if you don't know how to read a thermometer, you shouldn't be allowed to make decisions that depend on knowing how to read a thermometer. And I say if a voter does not understand the very basics of economics, they should not be allowed to vote on candidates who propose one economic theory over another.

And I don't thing the pendulum will swing, until a higher % of voters is more educated on the basics.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 12:46 PM   #84
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
It comes to that old saying: Put up or shut up.

Now, tell me where there is anything wrong with any of that thinking. I think it is EXACTLY correct, and EXACTLY an analogue to the tax situation.

Show me you are not just pulling our legs, and set me straight if I am off the mark.

-ERD50
I like your style ERD50, but unfortunately, you're conjuring up positions I haven't taken. I never said it wasn't facially hypocritical to say you want to contribute more in taxes to the Government and, at the same time, not make a voluntary contribution to reduce the public debt or make any other contribution that would increase revenues to the Government. What I said was that this is the same hypocrisy as someone finding the federal deposit insurance program or any other government program to be abhorrent or despicable and, at the same time, having has his hand out for the program. The distinction between the two appears to be contrived, or the differences between the two are without any distinction. In one case, someone says I like X and does not voluntarily do X -- you find that hypocritcal, right? In the other case, someone says I can't stand X and yet voluntarily takes advantage of X -- isn't that equally hypocritcal? But you and others plead that in the latter situation, it's not hypocritical because you have to pay for X. And I simply shrug my shoulders and say so what -- no one is forcing you to take advantage of X. And no one has really addressed this latter situation; you've just served up other examples of hypocrisy -- well, demonstrating hypocrisy in one case or example does not necessarily disprove it in another case.

Your examples might show the presence or absence of hypocrisy in those examples, but they fail to deal with the basic point I'm making: why isn't it hypocritcal for someone to abhor something and then voluntarily partake in the benefits of an abhorrent program? might be idiotic in many cases, but no less hypocritical.

Your examples are causing my brain to lock up; I never said it was hypocritical to use something you don't like paying, which I think is what your example 2 would have me say! It's hypocritical to say the lunch sucks and is not worth $10 and then have the termity to sit down with others, when given the choice and you're not starving, and eat the box lunch that you bad-mouthed earlier; yes, that's two-faced to me.

Yep this is a dead-horse from my standpoint.
__________________
Someday this war's gonna end . . .
ChrisC is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 01:00 PM   #85
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
And I say if a voter does not understand the very basics of economics, they should not be allowed to vote on candidates who propose one economic theory over another.

And I don't thing the pendulum will swing, until a higher % of voters is more educated on the basics.

-ERD50
As with most things. eduction cures almost everything. What you really need to do is set up the system in such a way that it becomes advantageous for you to be educated in our society. I believe with all of the social programs we currently have, it is far too easy for people (with little or no negative reprecussions) to allow others to think for them, and not bother developing their capacity for thinking for themselves.

If you encourage the rules of the game such that if you continue to make poor choices and the govt continues to "help" you, then it encourages more of the same behavior. It has always bothered me the reasoning... or rather lack of reasoning some people have used for voting for the president. I think it should bother most people if someone says they voted for the current president because they thought he was "handsome". Or they did not vote for the other candidate because he was "old". These are the thoughts and motivations of a child, not the complex mental calculations that an adult would ned to make to arrive at a good decision.

People are and should be free to vote for whoever they wish, I just hope we are not trning into a society where one day it will be .... "vote for candidate X and win a free DVD player....". Thinking about that one makes me sad....
__________________
armor99 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 01:22 PM   #86
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
If he doesn't get it, he doesn't get it. As I said, if that is the case I'll make a note that future economic discussions (not ALL discussion: no "ignore list" for me) with him are futile. I'm sure we can find common ground, or at least intelligent debate somewhere, on some other subject.

AFAIAC, it should be stretched far enough to require a test in order to have the right to vote. I think voters have a basic responsibility to understand basic concepts, or their votes may unknowingly go towards supporting things that are not "for the common good".

And I say if a voter does not understand the very basics of economics, they should not be allowed to vote on candidates who propose one economic theory over another.

-ERD50
I was trying to keep this as civil as I could be, but I really find this too much to handle. You think I'm an idiot when it comes to basic economics -- you're entitled to that opinion, but you really have no basis for that opinion other than, what I consider to be a screwed-up assessment of my posts here in this thread, taking things entirely out of context and not carefully reading what I have said. So, now you advocate that I and others who don't meet your criteria for understanding basic economics should not have the right to vote!
__________________
Someday this war's gonna end . . .
ChrisC is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 01:31 PM   #87
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
Yep this is a dead-horse from my standpoint.
Well, ziggy will be happy to see that I agree!

All I can leave you with is, if you *are* sincere, re-read the posts. It's all been said, in a few different ways, by a few different people. There really is nothing to add, my mountain of metaphors are beaten down to a mere mound, my analogies stretched like a piano string, the bus is out of gas, the people on the bus are all napping after all those lunches, and the driver went home and kicked the dog after getting stiffed out of his tip. It's done.

When you re-read, focus on these two lines you just gave:

A)
Quote:
I never said it was hypocritical to use something you don't like paying,
B)
Quote:
What I said was that this is the same hypocrisy as someone finding the federal deposit insurance program or any other government program to be abhorrent or despicable and, at the same time, having has his hand out for the program.
WE PAY FOR THOSE PROGRAMS!!! B=A. Maybe you are injecting "despicable", where we are just saying "we would prefer that it was not a govt program"

OVER AND OUT!!!!


- ERD50 What's for lunch?
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 01:34 PM   #88
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
I was trying to keep this as civil as I could be, but I really find this too much to handle. You think I'm an idiot when it comes to basic economics -- you're entitled to that opinion, but you really have no basis for that opinion other than, what I consider to be a screwed-up assessment of my posts here in this thread, taking things entirely out of context and not carefully reading what I have said. So, now you advocate that I and others who don't meet your criteria for understanding basic economics should not have the right to vote!
Sorry, I don't mean to come across as un-civil, and I apologize if it was read that way.

I'll get you a fuller answer in a minute, I want to get that apology out there, OK?

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 01:59 PM   #89
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
So, now you advocate that I and others who don't meet your criteria for understanding basic economics should not have the right to vote!
Yes, I know that is a somewhat controversial stance to take, but I do believe in it. Here is what I believe, and note that these are very carefully chosen words, that is why I wanted a bit of time:

I do not want to DENY anyone their vote. I also believe that it is a RESPONSIBILITY. There can be reasonable limits to our rights. Sometimes rights must be earned. Why do we have to be 21 to vote? There must be a reason. We can put reasonable restrictions on this right, and we already do.

I wouldn't DENY anyone a vote. Only they could do that, by not taking and passing the test. The kind of test I'd be talking about is one that most anyone could study for and pass with just a little effort. No trick questions.

It's similar to driving a car. There are some basic skills and knowledge you must demonstrate to get your license. Would you say that *I* denied someone of their drivers license if they couldn't pass the test, or would you say the regulations helped keep potentially dangerous drivers off the road? If you can pass a "Rules of the Road" test, you could pass my vote test. It's dangerous to have unskilled drivers on the road. I think it is dangerous to have people voting who don't understand some of the basic cause/effect relationships of their vote.

We can disagree on this point, it is my opinion. The economic stuff we talked about was fact, I can't agree to disagree on that.

Thanks for the challenges, I'm kind'a sorta enjoying the exchange, certainly no harm intended. I hope you feel the same.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 02:52 PM   #90
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
We can disagree on this point, it is my opinion. The economic stuff we talked about was fact, I can't agree to disagree on that.

ERD50
That's the sad part of your entire discourse here; it's not fact. You confuse concepts of finance (funding and credit in which the lender does not pay for stuff -- he gets a return back on the advance of credit) with the economic cost of consumer goods; and you got so inflexible about your understanding that you couldn't see that you could be wrongheaded about things; same thing about the hypocrisy issue, where you got your logic twisted -- look at the examples of A and B in your last post about this issue -- they are not logically equivalent!

Oh well, in your opinion I'm fairly twisted and deficient in understanding some basic concepts, but ya ever think that it might be you that's wrongheaded about things!
__________________
Someday this war's gonna end . . .
ChrisC is offline  
Old 03-05-2009, 03:04 PM   #91
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
It's becoming abundantly clear that this thread is going nowhere and has simply become contentious and potentially flammable, so we think it's time this thread is locked -- speaking to no individual in particular.
__________________

__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm back Sheryl Young Dreamers 37 05-24-2006 07:55 PM
Welcome back, JG Martha Other topics 5 06-21-2005 07:50 AM
I'm Back grumpy Life after FIRE 3 02-10-2005 09:36 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:31 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.