Are you a domestic terrorist?

[kandrathe]

According to the Missouri Information Analysis Center, I am a likely suspect, and so are hundreds of thousands of my fellow "politically active" citizens if they happen to be white, Christian, against abortion, against excessive taxation, and against illegal immigration. The owners of the Corporations who govern us seek to draw a division between those understand the chains of power, and those that do not. It was this way a century ago, and it is this way now.

Recently one of their reports(February 20, 2009) leaked out which summarizes almost all of the liberty seeking organizations along with Neo-Nazi skin heads. As if, all the angst of an enslaved America is expressed in those purile, ignorant, angry buffoons. Just lump them all together, round them up (as eppie suggests) and toss them into Gitmo (and toss in some water boarding for effect).

The clarion call was made in 1913, when Woodrow Wilson wrote "THE NEW FREEDOM -- A CALL FOR THE EMANCIPATION OF THE GENEROUS ENERGIES OF A PEOPLE"<blockquote>"For we Democrats would not have endured this long burden of exile if we had not seen a vision. We could have traded; we could have got into the game; we could have surrendered and made terms; we could have played the rôle of patrons to the men who wanted to dominate the interests of the country,—and here and there gentlemen who pretended to be of us did make those arrangements. They couldn't stand privation. You never can stand it unless you have within you some imperishable food upon which to sustain life and courage, the food of those visions of the spirit where a table is set before us laden with palatable fruits, the fruits of hope, the fruits of imagination, those invisible things of the spirit which are the only things upon which we can sustain ourselves through this weary world without fainting. We have carried in our minds, after you had thought you had obscured and blurred them, the ideals of those men who first set their foot upon America, those little bands who came to make a foothold in the wilderness, because the great teeming nations that they had left behind them had forgotten what human liberty was, liberty of thought, liberty of religion, liberty of residence, liberty of action."</blockquote><blockquote>"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson</blockquote>I think the MIAC do recognize the beginning of a movement, but one that has been slowly building for a century. It's taken that long for the power mongers to get too comfortable, and make such obvious abuses of power where even the most simple of school children can see the right from the wrong. An abuse of power that unifies the citizens whether they be Democrats, or Republicans. Something is wrong, and it is obvious now, and can no longer be hidden. The mountain of debt is growing faster than GDP, and bigger than two, three, or more generations of excessive taxation can ever eliminate. We our bound to this debt, and it is obvious.

[Jester]

Persecution complex... total failure to understand the use of irony on the part of those who disagree... totally absurd, ahistorical invocation of slavery... bizarre tendency to trace things back to Woodrow Wilson (?!?)...

I think this was asked before, but ... are you Glenn Beck?

-Jester

[Chesspiece_face]

"Now who could argue with that? I think we are all indebted to Gabby Johnson for clearly stating what needed to be said. I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age."

[kandrathe]

I think this was asked before, but ... are you Glenn Beck?

No, Gabby Johnson.

[eppie]

I think this was asked before, but ... are you Glenn Beck?

-Jester

I just googled this guy....what an enormous moron. I know you have your political differences with kandrathe but please let's keep things nice here.

Why is it that people trust alcoholic drug using divorcees once they start going to a certain church? (the George Bush complex??)

[Vandiablo]

How timely.

Even though I'm trying not to post anymore this weekend (cuz life's too short) I came here to post about the fact that ELF knocked down two radio towers in Washington state. The following opinion is a reaction to the AP item.

To ELF: Unacceptable. While violence or vandalism against an oppressive government may be acceptable, that is not the case here, not even close. Furthermore, your vandalism causes those opposed to you to harden their positions and, worse, causes those who have been sympathetic to your cause to be less so. Please, knock it off.

Now, back to kandrathe. I am not familiar with MIAC, but here's what I'm feeling:
-There are large numbers of conservatives "worked up" right now;
-Some of the reasons they are worked up is pure stupidity, theirs and those that are stoking them (examples: birth certificate, secret muslims, death panels, indoctrination)
-They won't believe the "left" that these are stupid things
-Unfortunately, the more intelligent conservatives are not speaking up to say "knock it off" (some GOP finally addressed birthers, but it took a while; McCain did stop the "Arab" comment during the campaign)
-Glenn Beck has taken misinformation and outrage to a dangerous level
-The right wing nutjobs tend to be more heavily armed than left (after, say, the early 70's)

So it is scary times, but mostly because some people think it is scary times. If only the GOP had a strong leader to say "knock it off". (Yeah, I know, I know, you have a list in your hand of the things a strong leader on the left should condemn as well.)

You live in a mostly Democrat state (except that crazy lady's district I suppose) and I live in a mostly GOP state. In my state, when I was an undergrad, a student group formed that monitored the non-conservative things professors would say. (This was during the Reagan years.) I guess the poor things couldn't handle hearing things they disagreed with. They must have written letters to the president to ask how they could help him. okay, i'm rambling, time to stop, and go back outside, it really is beautiful... B)

-V

(edit: two typos)

[kandrathe]

Some of the reasons they are worked up is pure stupidity, theirs and those that are stoking them (examples: birth certificate, secret muslims, death panels, indoctrination)

Agreed. What we should be irritated about is that the workers will pay over a billion dollars a day just on servicing the National Debt.

[Jester]

Agreed. What we should be irritated about is that the workers will pay over a billion dollars a day just on servicing the National Debt.

Divided among a labour force of about 155 million people, that's what, $6.50 a day each? Not cheap, but hardly backbreaking. It would be nice to pay it down, but "a billion dollars a day" sounds a lot scarier than it actually is.

-Jester

Edited for slightly more accurate numbers.

Afterthought: To take the callous edge off, this is not accounting for any progressivity in the tax system. Most people for whom an extra six fifty a day would be rather important aren't paying anywhere near six fifty in taxes servicing the debt.

[kandrathe]

Edited for slightly more accurate numbers.

Afterthought: To take the callous edge off, this is not accounting for any progressivity in the tax system. Most people for whom an extra six fifty a day would be rather important aren't paying anywhere near six fifty in taxes servicing the debt.

"The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $66,532) earned 68.7 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.6 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $410,096) earned approximately 22.8 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid more in federal individual income taxes than the bottom 95 percent of tax returns."

For those earning over $66,532 a year...

155,000,000 * .25 = 38,750,000
1,000,000,000 * .687 = $893,100,000 / 38,750,000 = $23 / day or $690/month or $8280 / year.

What bill do you have that exceeds $690 / month? House payment/rent perhaps.

Much less callous indeed. The government spends more per day to service debt than I spend on myself. Note that is not the part they actually spend forcing me to be benevolent, just the interest on the debt they incurred forcing me to be benevolent. If we had the delusion of having a balanced budget, then our 4 trillion *.687 = (2,748,000,000,000 / 38,750,000 ) = $70,916.13 / year or $194.29 per day for those of us making $66,532 a year or more. That would be say if it would even be possible for someone earning $66,532 to pay $70,916.13 in taxes in order to have a balanced budget.

[Jester]

"The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $66,532) earned 68.7 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.6 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $410,096) earned approximately 22.8 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid more in federal individual income taxes than the bottom 95 percent of tax returns."

Yup. Means that the poor folk on the bottom of the pyramid don't get stuck paying taxes they can't afford, and instead, the burden is shouldered by those that can. The marvels of progressive taxation!

For those earning over $66,532 a year...

155,000,000 * .25 = 38,750,000
1,000,000,000 * .687 = $893,100,000 / 38,750,000 = $23 / day or $690/month or $8280 / year.

Sounds about right. Your taxes at work! You still pay less of them than nearly any other developed country. Of course, you also get less for them, notably in health care. But we've already had that thread.

What bill do you have that exceeds $690 / month? House payment/rent perhaps.

Me? Yeah, rent is more than that. But I live in London. Food and drink come out to something around there, maybe a little less. (Okay, quite a bit less.)

Much less callous indeed. The government spends more per day to service debt they incurred forcing me to be benevolent than I spend on myself.

Hey, you wanted the Iraq war, remember? The WMD you were so darn convinced were there? Look at that table you showed - Bush very nearly *doubled* the national debt. (Reagan did the same - the only other guy on the big spenders list is FDR, and he had what you might call "a good excuse".) Bush sure didn't spend all that scratch on poverty reduction and foreign aid.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

Yup. Means that the poor folk on the bottom of the pyramid don't get stuck paying taxes they can't afford, and instead, the burden is shouldered by those that can. The marvels of progressive taxation!

The bottom 50% of workers pay nothing, or actually get more back than they pay in.

Sounds about right. Your taxes at work! You still pay less of them than nearly any other developed country. Of course, you also get less for them, notably in health care. But we've already had that thread.

My frying pan is less hot. How nice.

Hey, you wanted the Iraq war, remember? The WMD you were so darn convinced were there? Look at that table you showed - Bush very nearly *doubled* the national debt. (Reagan did the same - the only other guy on the big spenders list is FDR, and he had what you might call "a good excuse".) Bush sure didn't spend all that scratch on poverty reduction and foreign aid.

I'm not picking sides here. All of the politicians are complicit in feeding the beast. Oh, and to clarify, I still am convinced the WMD were in Iraq at one point. I was not in favor of the occupation, and the nation building portion we were sucked into. Then again, perhaps you shouldn't break it if you don't want to buy it.

[Jester]

My frying pan is less hot. How nice.

It's not exactly torturous living in, say, Canada. It might not be ideologically to your liking, but the actual living of life is really quite pleasant.

It's this kind of exaggeration that makes people roll their eyes at Objectivists... the constant whining that, despite living in the most pleasant, least dangerous, highest standard-of-living era in history, with more freedoms, more wealth, less oppression - a better life by almost any metric - they keep insisting on using metaphors of torture, slavery, and horror to describe their (comfortable) fate. It's no more attractive when you do it.

I'm not picking sides here. All of the politicians are complicit in feeding the beast. (...) Oh, and to clarify, I still am convinced the WMD were in Iraq at one point. I was not in favor of the occupation, and the nation building portion we were sucked into. Then again, perhaps you shouldn't break it if you don't want to buy it.

The pottery barn rule- Powell was right about that much.

What I'm saying is that it's not just politicians, running off with taxpayer dollars. It's people, yourself included, demanding that they be spent in one way or another, from health care to bombing the snot out of a middle eastern country. I'm no minarchist, I have no problem with democratic nations running debts and accomplishing various goals. But that particular choice of goals was foolish, and extremely expensive. And if you (as you seem to constantly imply) are utterly against raising taxes to fund it, there is no choice: you go into debt to buy your guns just the same as to buy your butter.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

It's not exactly torturous living in, say, Canada. It might not be ideologically to your liking, but the actual living of life is really quite pleasant.

It's this kind of exaggeration that makes people roll their eyes at Objectivists... the constant whining that, despite living in the most pleasant, least dangerous, highest standard-of-living era in history, with more freedoms, more wealth, less oppression - a better life by almost any metric - they keep insisting on using metaphors of torture, slavery, and horror to describe their (comfortable) fate. It's no more attractive when you do it.

You must speak for yourself. I don't see that many happy people in my life. There is no free lunch, and life didn't suddenly get easier to live. I'd disagree with everything on your list. I see less freedom, mountains of public and private debt, lowering standards of living. As far as dangerous, well I don't think the crime rate is better for my generation than my fathers, and water, soil, and air contamination is much higher. You say our masters are good to us, and we should be thankful.

And if you (as you seem to constantly imply) are utterly against raising taxes to fund it, there is no choice: you go into debt to buy your guns just the same as to buy your butter.

Or engage in better diplomacy.

As far as slavery. There were horrible abusive masters, but I'd bet 90% of slave owners were pretty decent to their slaves. They probably treated their slaves as good as their horses, or other livestock. The point of Wilson's essay was that in his time he saw the end of entrepreneurial business, and the rise of the corporation. He witnessed the transformation of the employee/employer relationship; <blockquote>"We have come upon a very different age from any that preceded us. We have come upon an age when we do not do business in the way in which we used to do business,—when we do not carry on any of the operations of manufacture, sale, transportation, or communication as men used to carry them on. There is a sense in which in our day the individual has been submerged. In most parts of our country men work, not for themselves, not as partners in the old way in which they used to work, but generally as employees,—in a higher or lower grade,—of great corporations. There was a time when corporations played a very minor part in our business affairs, but now they play the chief part, and most men are the servants of corporations." </blockquote>Yes, most men are still servants of the corporations. Just try to figure out a life without them, and at every turn in our lives they have inserted themselves as a requirement. How much of our 10 trillion dollar debt went directly into the pockets of corporations, and in fact those corporations that favored particular politicians and their rise to power? But, the citizen, is given only the illusion of freedom with the only means of escape from bondage being not to participate in the society at all. What have my sons done to deserve carrying their share of the burden of 10 trillion dollars of debt? Your advice is to tell them not to whine, and that the injustice and dearth of freedom is worse elsewhere.

Wilson also said, "I would rather belong to a poor nation that was free than to a rich nation that had ceased to be in love with liberty. "

[Jester]

You must speak for yourself. I don't see that many happy people in my life. There is no free lunch, and life didn't suddenly get easier to live.

Not suddenly, gradually. Where and when would you rather have been born? If you were just a random child, coming into this world today, you have something like a 95% chance of being worse off than the average American, and about a 50% chance of being far worse off, to the point of halving your lifespan. If you were born at a random point in history, that's something like a 99% chance of being far worse off, probably to the tune of being a subsistence farmer somewhere or another who pays almost all their surplus production to the classes above them.

You live at a comfortable time. Medical technology has never been better. People live long. Your chance of being murdered is far lower. The rule of law is universal and non-corrupt in a way that you could not possibly expect in most countries even today, and certainly not anywhere in the world two hundred years ago. Computing technology has revolutionized our lives, from education to gaming to this discussion we're having right now.

You may not think life is comfortable today, but for pretty much all of recorded history, it's been a hell of a lot worse.

I'd disagree with everything on your list. I see less freedom, mountains of public and private debt, lowering standards of living. As far as dangerous, well I don't think the crime rate is better for my generation than my fathers, and water, soil, and air contamination is much higher.Or engage in better diplomacy.

I don't know when your father's generation was, but I'm going to assume somewhere between 1940 and 1970. Lower standards of living is simply laughable - real GDP per capita has grown enormously, to the order of nearly tripling since WWII, and more than ten times since the beginning of the 1900s. That's actual purchasing power. We are overwhelmingly richer, and if we're further in debt, we also have far greater ability to service that debt.

War and peace looks a lot nicer today, at least in the first world. We don't have world war two, or world war one for that matter. The Soviets are no longer around to point nukes at you. If water, soil and air contamination more than make up for the staggering advances in science and medicine that have us living longer and enjoying better quality of life by far, then I'm not sure what to say except that I disagree, and so does all the data.

As far as slavery. There were horrible abusive masters, but I'd bet 90% of slave owners were pretty decent to their slaves. They probably treated their slaves as good as their horses, or other livestock.

Sure. They were fed enough to survive, fattened when they were needed at market, beaten when they were unruly, caged, forced to work, forbidden to leave the land, and their descendants belonged to their owners. They, or their relatives, were used as sex slaves. They had their franchise both stolen and devalued, and were usually considered as innately inferior. Aside from all that, I'm sure there life was just peachy - the kind of thing you'd totally compare with your situation today, what with having to pay *taxes* and all.

Just try to figure out a life without them, and at every turn in our lives they have inserted themselves as a requirement.

It's kind of like roads. Once an economy grows beyond a certain size, it's really, really hard to make it work without some kind of legal, corporate company structure. I'm no big fan of corporations, but good luck turning back the clock on that one.

How much of our 10 trillion dollar debt went directly into the pockets of corporations, and in fact those corporations that favored particular politicians and their rise to power? But, the citizen, is given only the illusion of freedom with the only means of escape from bondage being not to participate in the society at all.

And yet, you still have a vote. You can still accumulate wealth, and invest it more or less as you please. You can work in whatever job you choose for yourself, if you can earn it. The American dream is still alive and kicking, and still looks really good to people who didn't have the privelege to grow up thinking middling tax rates constituted serious oppression.

What have my sons done to deserve carrying their share of the burden of 10 trillion dollars of debt? Your advice is to tell them not to whine, and that the injustice and dearth of freedom is worse elsewhere.

What does a Bangladeshi child do, to deserve a life where American technology, citizenship, public goods, education, medical care, rule of law, and everything else your sons enjoy just for being in the good old US of A, are all out of the question? Children do nothing to deserve their fates. They are simply born into them - this is possibly the single largest reason I am *not* a libertarian. Too much about us is a context we never chose, but were born into anyway.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

If you were born at a random point in history, that's something like a 99% chance of being far worse off, probably to the tune of being a subsistence farmer somewhere or another who pays almost all their surplus production to the classes above them.

Forget peasants, look at kings. One of the (many) memorable scenes in A Lion in Winter is when O'Tool, playing Henry II, breaks the ice in the basin for his morning wash. Sure, the Louis had Versailles, but Versailles had no running water -- and I suspect the basins in the bedrooms froze there, too. The average modern American lives better than the average European monarch ever dreamed of.

Beyond that, this discussion has devolved into an argument about the liquid level in a glass.

--Pete

[Hammerskjold]

As far as slavery. There were horrible abusive masters, but I'd bet 90% of slave owners were pretty decent to their slaves. They probably treated their slaves as good as their horses, or other livestock.

On further reflection, I think it's enough to say that I agree with Chesspiece face Johnson agreeing with Howard Johnson agreeing with Gabby Johnson.

[Swiss Mercenary]

And 90%, I mean, 80% of the population of the USSR did not end up in a gulag. I'm not sure how that's a meaningful statement.

[eppie]

The bottom 50% of workers pay nothing, or actually get more back than they pay in.My frying pan is less hot. How nice.I'm not picking sides here. All of the politicians are complicit in feeding the beast. Oh, and to clarify, I still am convinced the WMD were in Iraq at one point. I was not in favor of the occupation, and the nation building portion we were sucked into. Then again, perhaps you shouldn't break it if you don't want to buy it.

Don't forget that your (the US people's) lifestyle (extreme consumption pattern) has been made possible by all that debt you have. The rich (those poor people that pay so much taxes) benefit from every bottle of coke you buy...even when you can't afford it. They maintain their exaggerated life styles and nobody minds (because it is the American dream and therefor not very patriotic to complain about that).

I hope you realize that not you (the American people) are the one that can complain.....you consume too much and don't have the money for it. Any idea who is going to pay that in the end??

[Jester]

Beyond that, this discussion has devolved into an argument about the liquid level in a glass.

I'm an economic history student. Arguing about the liquid level in glasses is what I do. B)

Now, if this were an argument about the *interpretation* of a given level, that would be futile. But this is actually "how full is your glass", not "is the glass half full, or half empty?"

-Jester

[Vandiablo]

Now, if this were an argument about the *interpretation* of a given level, that would be futile. But this is actually "how full is your glass", not "is the glass half full, or half empty?"

Durn, I thought it was a "how empty is your glass" argument. My mistake.

BTW my vessel contains equivalent volumes of air and liquid.

-V