US Politics: midterm elections are nigh: do you know where your voting rights are?

[Shryke]

I remember, back in 2010, being sure the GOP would at some point try to impeach Obama, but I think I had that wrong. Clinton gave the GOP a pretty good opening, but even that didn't work out so well for them; Republican approval ratings tumbled and Clinton's soared. So you have to figure that any impeachment against Obama would be similarly disastrous, and would likely take place while the Republican primary was in swing. That means every Republican with his eye on the White House is going to have to take a position on the issue, and that's a red mess. So I think Boehner and McConnell will stay their hands, if only out of self-interest.

That's explicitly the reason they've given for not doing it.

[ThinkerX]

Can't say anything about the rest, but at the moment, I figure Sullivan will win Alaska...by a razor thin margin. I'm really hoping this don't turn into a runoff, not with the holidaze fast approaching. Then again, the Alaska Native Association came down for Begich - and that bunch usually stays out of election year politics, plus they carry a lot of weight in the hinterlands. Plus, even some republicans are really ticked off at the Koch brothers dumping massive amounts of cash into Sullivan's campaign.

[Suttree]

According to suttree, this never happened.

Do you really not understand how ironic this statement is?

[TrackerNeil]

Should the GOP win, I am actually very curious what kinds of bills they'll send to the White House. I don't recall the Dems sending a litany of bills Bush's way in 2007, but am I misremembering?

I'm still trying to decide if the Obamacare repeal will happen. Not because the GOP actually wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act -- I think they know that bird has long since flown -- but because it would be a chance to vote for a repeal without the slightest chance of it actually being enacted into law. On the other hand, however, smart Republicans know that the repeal talk has to be allowed to die out before 2017; otherwise, if a Republican takes the White House the wingnuts might actually demand that they follow through. So I'm torn.

I think we could definitely see some minor ACA tweaks like repeal of the employer mandate or the medical device tax, but since Obama won't sign these into law without concessions that the GOP won't offer, they'll be DOA.

[TerraPrime]

Terra Prime was being a bit glib to conclude you thought exploitation was "OK".

But if the report of previous conversations is correct, it does not seem to me that it would be a non sequitur to say that you hold that exploitation, though bad, is much LESS bad than coercion, because it seems that you believe that no amount of coercion is ever justified even in cases of the most grievous exploitation.

Athias and I had gone rounds on "okay" and "acceptable" before on a different issue (healthcare, I think?). The bottom line is that accepting the existence of exploitation without taking steps to end it is tantamount to being "okay" with its continued existence. The distinction between "accepting" and "being ok" is thinner than thin when the effort it takes to do something to end the exploitation is both feasible and available.

To use an example, I am ok with thousands of children of the world dying and suffering from malnutrition and preventable diseases, because I don't really actively contirbute to charity or relief efforts targeted to help them, even though such venues of donation are both available and not impossible to engage. I am prioritizing my own comforts and the comforts of my immediate loved ones over the survival and well-being of those who are suffering. While I would rather that they not suffer, I am also not doing what is reasonable for me to do, i.e. donate to NGOs that help them, to alleviate their sufferings. So yes, my actions say that I am okay with their continued suffering.

By that same standard I characterize Athias' political stand as one where she's okay with exploitation and/or with the perishing of people unable to secure charity for food and health care in the United States.

[MerenthaClone]

Athias; I apologize for the delay in reply. So, lets say that I accept your definition: that you, dangling from a cliff, are not coerced by me when I offer to help you up in return for all your worldly possessions, but are instead exploited.

I have some hypothetical questions to elaborate (assume, except where specified, that everything about the scenario remains the same):

1. There is a ladder to your side that could help you up. You notice it as I arrive, and before you can use it, I pull it out of your reach, denying you its use. Am I coercing you now?
   
2. I built the cliff intending to trap man-eating tigers, not people. You fell into it wholly by accident, but I, nonetheless, created the cliff that you are hanging off of. Is it now coercion?
   
3. I hire another man to step on your fingers, without telling you that I did so. Am I coercing you?
   

Independent of those three questions, is coercion ever acceptable? And finally, do you think that exploiting an unfair situation can ever be worse than creating an unfair situation? That is, can exploitation ever be worse than coercion?

[daskool]

Athias; I apologize for the delay in reply. So, lets say that I accept your definition: that you, dangling from a cliff, are not coerced by me when I offer to help you up in return for all your worldly possessions, but are instead exploited.

I have some hypothetical questions to elaborate (assume, except where specified, that everything about the scenario remains the same):

1. There is a ladder to your side that could help you up. You notice it as I arrive, and before you can use it, I pull it out of your reach, denying you its use. Am I coercing you now?
3. I built the cliff intending to trap man-eating tigers, not people. You fell into it wholly by accident, but I, nonetheless, created the cliff that you are hanging off of. Is it now coercion?
5. I hire another man to step on your fingers, without telling you that I did so. Am I coercing you?

Independent of those three questions, is coercion ever acceptable? And finally, do you think that exploiting an unfair situation can ever be worse than creating an unfair situation? That is, can exploitation ever be worse than coercion?

No one should be compelled to help another person. For example first responders are not compelled to save you from a burning building or put their lives on the line to defend you from a criminal, given that an employer should not be compelled to provide work for the destitute because some people think it fair.

[MerenthaClone]

No one should be compelled to help another person. For example first responders are not compelled to save you from a burning building or put their lives on the line to defend you from a criminal, given that an employer should not be compelled to provide work for the destitute because some people think it fair.

I am legally compelled to help people if there is nobody else qualified to do so, under certain circumstances. I am also legally compelled to continue to help people if I ever initiate care, regardless of circumstance. Neither of these things bother me in any way. The fact that ethics committees have routinely upheld my own right to self-preservation does not abrogate either of the above requirements. I still need to provide care to the best of my ability while preserving my right to protect myself.

edit: None of those are pertinent responses to my questions, incidentally.

[Mr Fixit]

No one should be compelled to help another person.

I don't know about US law, but many countries in Europe have laws that legally oblige people to help others in certain situations, if they're not putting themselves at risk. Theoretically one could end up in jail for failing to render assistance!

[ThinkerX]

So, Athias, Daskool, and Prince-who-wasn't-promised:

When you find yourselves stuck in a minimum wage job with zero prospects of higher paying employment elsewhere, will you be able to pay the bills? Would living such a life for a few years change your attitude about the minimum wage and employers being coerced?

[Larry of the Lawn]

So, Athias, Daskool, and Prince-who-wasn't-promised:

When you find yourselves stuck in a minimum wage job with zero prospects of higher paying employment elsewhere, will you be able to pay the bills? Would living such a life for a few years change your attitude about the minimum wage and employers being coerced?

Well I for one would sleep better knowing that my corporate overlords and my upper-caste betters are living free from coercion, despite whatever trivial sufferings i was forced to endure such as hunger, dead end job, crippling debt, and lack of access to health care and political input.

[awesome possum]

So you can't, that's all you had to say bro.

Hey bro, you planning on answering my rebuttals to your claims any time soon?

Here are the links to the posts in question, to make it easier for you:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/119665-us-politics-midterm-elections-are-nigh-do-you-know-where-your-voting-rights-are/?p=6411920

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/119665-us-politics-midterm-elections-are-nigh-do-you-know-where-your-voting-rights-are/?p=6412329

If you can't answer those rebuttals just say so, bro. It's okay to admit that you don't know what you're talking about.

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

I cited unemployment rates, to which summah replied that's always been the case. Proving my point that Obama hasn't done anything to better the loyalist of his base. It's actually worse with the rates I provided. It's all there if you just read man

[daskool]

So, Athias, Daskool, and Prince-who-wasn't-promised:

When you find yourselves stuck in a minimum wage job with zero prospects of higher paying employment elsewhere, will you be able to pay the bills? Would living such a life for a few years change your attitude about the minimum wage and employers being coerced?

Yeah been there done that. The answer is no with one caveat, I support welfare payments and even a minimum wage not because it's moral or economically justifiable but because it's expedient and likely helps keep the peace.

Well I for one would sleep better knowing that my corporate overlords and my upper-caste betters are living free from coercion, despite whatever trivial sufferings i was forced to endure such as hunger, dead end job, crippling debt, and lack of access to health care and political input.

Funny thing but your corporate overlords are all in favor of coercion by the government to supposedly help the poor, they make a shit ton of money from it. Anyway who cares what the minimum wage is when you can employ an undocumented worker?

Besides you're trying to close the barn door when the horse has already done a massive shit and kicked you in the head. Why are people in their late twenties and thirties stuck in dead end minimum wage jobs? That's the question you should be asking.

[Suttree]

Anyway who cares what the minimum wage is when you can employ an undocumented worker?

Classic. Is this where you start parroting the debunked myths of immigrants not paying taxes, stealing our jobs and being bad for the economy?

Why are people in their late twenties and thirties stuck in dead end minimum wage jobs? That's the question you should be asking.

Indeed, and it's a solid question. Would be pretty interested in hearing what you think. Cheers.

[awesome possum]

I cited unemployment rates, to which summah replied that's always been the case. Proving my point that Obama hasn't done anything to better the loyalist of his base. It's actually worse with the rates I provided. It's all there if you just read man

You cited unemployment rates for black people. If you think unemployed black people make up the entirety of the Democratic base, well, that speaks for itself and your ability to parse basic arguments. Not to mention it kind of fits with the casual racism on display in your rebuttal (that apparently all black people expected free stuff when Obama was elected).

However, that was one of several rebuttals. Let's go through them, shall we?

Your assertion: Unemployment rates for AA and Latinos are still high.

My rebuttal: A link to a google search showing Republicans filibustering jobs bill after jobs bill.

Your assertion: No balls to do anything about immigration.

My rebuttal: Link to the immigration bill that was passed with bipartisan support in the Senate last year.

Your assertion: And the economy still stinks.

My rebuttal: Link showing that the economy is actually growing at its best pace in 9 years

Your assertion: The usual effects of liberalism

My rebuttal: A link showing that the economy is on average worse when Republicans are in charge.

This shouldn't be hard. You either come up with your own rebuttal to my rebuttals or you admit you're wrong and can't really speak beyond basic far right talking points.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I cited unemployment rates, to which summah replied that's always been the case. Proving my point that Obama hasn't done anything to better the loyalist of his base. It's actually worse with the rates I provided. It's all there if you just read man

What Summah pointed out to you is that the black unemployment rate has always been worse than the white unemployment rate. This was in response to your racist assertion that black voters erroneously expected Obama's election would mean they'd no longer have to pay for their houses or vehicles.

Now let's look at unemployment under Obama:

Here's the overall unemployment rate under Obama, falling.

Here we see the unemployment rate divided by African Americans, Hispanics, and Whites, falling for all groups. This chart isn't up-to-date, and the black unemployment rate has fallen further still since then.

[daskool]

Classic. Is this where you start parroting the debunked myths of immigrants not paying taxes, stealing our jobs and being bad for the economy?

Nothing to do with paying taxes.

Indeed, and it's a solid question. Would be pretty interested in hearing what you think. Cheers.

Liberals have chosen to completely ignore the actual reason why the economy has been gutted of decent paying jobs for unskilled and semi skilled workers? It's not even debated any more.

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

Yeah been there done that. The answer is no with one caveat, I support welfare payments and even a minimum wage not because it's moral or economically justifiable but because it's expedient and likely helps keep the peace.

Funny thing but your corporate overlords are all in favor of coercion by the government to supposedly help the poor, they make a shit ton of money from it. Anyway who cares what the minimum wage is when you can employ an undocumented worker?

Besides you're trying to close the barn door when the horse has already done a massive shit and kicked you in the head. Why are people in their late twenties and thirties stuck in dead end minimum wage jobs? That's the question you should be asking.

Bingo

[Suttree]

Nothing to do with paying taxes.

Ok since you seem to understand they do pay taxes, let's move on to the others.

Liberals have chosen to completely ignore the actual reason why the economy has been gutted of decent paying jobs for unskilled and semi skilled workers?

I asked you specifically to give an opinion on what some of the underlying causes are. Look forward to hearing a response.

Oh and before we move the goal posts too far, what did you think about those helpful facts on minimum wage I provided a bit back. Useful info for a business owner yeah?

ont]

This shouldn't be hard. You either come up with your own rebuttal to my rebuttals or you admit you're wrong and can't really speak beyond basic far right talking points.

What talking points one may ask? "All of them!"