PoliGAF Debate #3 Thread of Hey Joe, where you goin' with that plunger in your hand

Status
Not open for further replies.
ToxicAdam said:
If you were such a an anti-globalist, you wouldn't be supporting Obama. You are only aware of these issues because of this current election and your favored candidate.




Why do you hang your hat on that brief moment of a budget surplus as some kind of ultimate talking point. Much of those windfalls were due to Clinton "sliding the scale" on tax increases that Bush Sr. passed in the previous administration. Then couple that with the revenues brought in on capital gains during the tech stock explosion and the spending restrictions brought upon by the recently passed BBA of 97 and it's no surprise that money was coming in hand over fist.

We'll just ignore the hemmoraging of jobs in the inner cities and the median wage of the manufacturing worker that was still declining. No, no, no. THERE WAS A BUDGET SURPLUS, BITCHES! Singlehandedly created by the will of Bubba's charm and policies.

DEMOCRATS WIN. OUR TEAM WON! RAH RAH
Erhm, just because I disagree with some fiscal policies, it doesn't mean I'm anti-globalist.

But hey, me being a European born, naturalized US citizen obviously must mean I am an anti-globalist. Yeah. That's exactly it.

Do you think a country like Germany [one of the top exporters in the world] would allow a company like Braun or Bayer to take their headquarters and jobs to another country?

"Brief budget surplus?" Really? That's like saying Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr had a "brief budget deficit."

Hemorrhaging of jobs? 22mil new jobs created during his presidency is HEMORRHAGING of jobs?

But of course, keep hanging on to your bullshit "anything positive a democrat does, is because of the great policies of the previous republican president. Anything negative a republican president does, is because of the shitty policies of the previous democratic president."

Then again, intellectual dishonesty and ToxicAdam go hand in hand. Keep telling yourself that all of the fuck-ups over the past eight years can be equally blamed on democrats.
 
The Lamonster said:
Joe the Plumber kinda looks like that guy who used to work at Bungie



:p
Frankie? lol

I assure you Frankie and Joe have... lets say, "dissimilar" views when it comes to politics if his past posting here is any indication. (Frankie's, not Joe's)
 
Hey guys, Joe the Plumber isn't running for office here. Whether he's related to Charles Keating or not doesn't fucking matter.

What matters about Joe the Plumber is that the argument is fundamentally flawed, both because Joe the Plumber doesn't make $250,000+ AND that very few people would consider $250,000 a year to be middle class.
 
JayDubya said:
How in Jesus Haploid Christ's crucified hand holes does the motherfucking commerce clause apply here?

Congress could pass a universal health care law under the Commerce Clause. Lets put it this way, if Gonzales v. Raisch can get a majority decision under Commerce Clause, there isn't anything stopping universal health care from being Constitutional.

At what point, JayDub, do you argue that the Supreme Court's Commerce Clause jurisprudence went off track?


edit: beaten by Numble to the 'Raisch' punchline
 
camineet said:
I'm not really for Obama, yet I'm not for McCain either, but, I predict a Reagan1980-like landslide for Obama. I mean, the writing is on the wall.
undecidedvote.jpg
 
JayDubya said:
Since that doesn't apply to Texas, by all means bring on the sinkhole. If Kentucky or whatever wants more revenue, tax the people of Kentucky more, or cut Kentucky programs.

Any Republican running on such a platform could never get elected.

Hopefully they make it part of their platform immediately.
 
prodystopian said:
I'm not arguing for JayDubya or against Obama. What I am saying is that just because Obama has a great education and may know everything about the Constitution and its history, does NOT preclude him from having shitty ideas about what to do with the country.

And Charlie would agree. He's only arguing that JayDubya doesn't really know enough to judge whether Obama's plans are truly fucktarded or not.
 
A strict interpretation of the Constitution in support of a free market as imagined by the Framers is as utopian and unrealistic as the founding of communist states was.

There are reasons we slipped from that vision of the USA and only very few of them were the result of the baser instincts of the populace and their elected representatives.

This is the real world. The real world requires dealing with what's here and now, and using the ideals and the *workable* principles of the founders to guide us.
 
Frank the Great said:
Guys, you're not going to change Jaydub's mind. We've been through this all before, stop shitting on the thread.

I usually don't care much on the topic of Jay/Gaborn, but his post today really hit a nerve with me today and I think revealed a bit of his character.

I have a minor in mathematics; I've studied it extensively and I'm pretty good at it. But I don't have a graduate degree in mathematics, I have never taught mathematics at any level. If you asked me, I would say "Yes, I'm good at math". If you asked me if a proof published in an academic journal is a joke or not, I'd say "Way out of my league".

I would never, without some sort of merit, credential, or fact to back up my assertions, say that I'm smarter on any given topic than person X. I know my intellectual limits and I know that I don't know everything with the depth of knowledge required to be called an "expert". Heck, even the things that I do know, I wouldn't call myself an expert on any topic without some sort of credential or merit (books? lecturing? wealth?).

Jay? Not so much. Seems like he thinks that if he can understand the "basic principles", then his view is as valid as a graduate of Harvard Law, a practicing lawyer, and a professor of constitutional law.

So Jay-- in my book, even more so than before.
 
BrokenFiction said:
It's just breaking in blogs - right and left - Google News is already indexing the links:

http://gawker.com/5064474/who-is-joe-the-plumber


http://macfaux.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/was-anti-proletariat-petite-bourgeoisie-joe-the-plumber-wurzelbacher-a-secret-agitprop-plant-for-right-wing-reactionary-propaganda-outlet-fox-business-news/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/02217/845

Nothing proven yet but the issue was first raised online by Martin Eisenstadt - "an expert on Near Eastern military and political affairs...works alongside Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign, offering advice...prior to that, he consulted on the Rudolph Giuliani campaign"
thanks I guess its not a big deal unless proven and hits MSM
 
ToxicAdam said:
If you were such a an anti-globalist, you wouldn't be supporting Obama. You are only aware of these issues because of this current election and your favored candidate.




Why do you hang your hat on that brief moment of a budget surplus as some kind of ultimate talking point? Much of those windfalls were due to Clinton "sliding the scale" on tax increases that Bush Sr. passed in the previous administration. Then couple that with the revenues brought in on capital gains during the tech stock explosion and the spending restrictions brought upon by the recently passed BBA of 97 and it's no surprise that money was coming in hand over fist.

We'll just ignore the hemmoraging of jobs in the inner cities and the median wage of the manufacturing worker that was still declining. No, no, no. THERE WAS A BUDGET SURPLUS, BITCHES! Singlehandedly created by the will of Bubba's charm and policies. Ignore the other hands that had their part in that occuring. The winner and their sheep write the history books.

DEMOCRATS WIN. OUR TEAM WON! RAH RAH

So, lets keep blaming the "failied policies of the libertarians" when the Dems/Repubs have their fingerprints all over the actions that have got us to this point.

So... how do you explain the massive net average boon to economy that's occurred when democrats come into power, relative to republicans?

How do you explain the fingerprints of republicans all over the deregulation that was a direct cause for the CDOs that caused the massive greed and willful recklessness and subsequent implosion of the financial industry?

Our fundamentals ideal of managed/regulated capitalism is simply far better than the libertarian fundamentals of unmanaged free market.

And it's because we have a lot more options to work from; it may be managed, but the extent to which its managed can vary a lot depending on situation, circumstance and need. The free market dogmatism expressed by a lot of libetarians is a fundmanetalist position that worships that position without respect for results
 
Don't get me started on fucking Gonzales v. Raich.

Furthermore, that case is perhaps the best example of the dangers of the "living document."
 
So why isn't it called "Big Government" when we spend so much money on the Department of Defense?
 
JayDubya said:
Don't get me started on fucking Gonzales v. Raich.

Furthermore, that case is perhaps the best example of the dangers of the "living document."


I think Raich has more to do with moralistic high-horsing than the 'living document' dilemma.

Even Justice Thomas (a wingnut) had the balls to call that decision trash.
 
The healthcare proposals are primarily a series of tax code adjustments, I don't really see how you can claim them to be unconstitutional. I guess you could argue that the Federal Government has no authority to mandate that parents buy health care for their children?
 
so_awes said:
:lol :lol stop ignoring CharlieDigital

Well, we still agree on the awesome that is Vagrant Story and Einhander :P you don't need to be an expert to know that those were awesome games.

And if you don't agree with that, you're truly fucktarded.
 
Health care is an industry. Industry is a type of commerce.

Back in the 18th Century, commerce was highly local with slower means of transporting goods, making people available for services, and communicating in general. As time and technology has progressed since then, localities have become more interdependent with markets expanding to encompass almost the entire populated world with rapid transport and instant communication. I can place an order over the internet with a mom and pop shop in Wyoming and have it shipped to my doorstep by the very next day. That the federal government has more control over the economy today than it did 200 years ago is a natural result of more commerce falling under its purview, even without any expansion of powers.

So yes, commerce clause.
 
mckmas8808 said:
So why isn't it called "Big Government" when we spend so much money on the Department of Defense?

Because defense is one of the Prime Directives of the Federal Government, where as education and welfare should be the responsibility of the states.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/16/campaign.wrap/index.html

Obama is the man.

Sen. Barack Obama cautioned supporters Thursday morning against becoming complacent during the final days leading up to the election, noting he lost the New Hampshire primary despite a lead in the polls.

"For those of you who are feeling giddy or cocky and think this is all set, I just [have] two words for you: New Hampshire," the Democratic presidential nominee said during a fundraiser breakfast in New York. "You know I've been in these positions before where we were favored and the press starts getting carried away and we end up getting spanked. And so that's another good lesson that Hillary Clinton taught me.".....
 
Hey, nobody answered my question. I know my fair share of how it works and what system works better, but I do have a question on Joe the plumber.

If, let's say his business makes $270,000, what would be the tax rate for every dollar earned past the exempted income?

Because this is how I learned how the difference between marginal and averate tax rates:


Quote:
A $13,000 per taxpayer basic personal exemption
A 17% tax rate on every dollar earned past that $13,000

Take a man who earns $20,000 a year. His marginal tax rate is 17% because if he earns an extra dollar that is the rate at which he will be charged. His average tax rate will be different, as he is exempt from paying taxes on the first $13,000 he earns. Thus he has to pay 17% on the remaining $7,000, for a tax bill of $1,190

So what number would I subtract from Joe's $270,000, and what would be the tax rate?
 
mckmas8808 said:
So why isn't it called "Big Government" when we spend so much money on the Department of Defense?

Because a large portion of DOD spending is directly put back into the economy via defense contracts with private companies.

Defense spending is a legit way to stimulate new technology, etc... But since it is tied to jingoism and manic patriotism, it has become so horribly bloated that it needs to be slashed.

To McCain's credit, bloated defense spending is something that he has been vocal about over the years.
 
Hitokage said:
Health care is an industry. Industry is a type of commerce.

Back in the 18th Century, commerce was highly local with slower means of transporting goods, making people available for services, and communicating in general. As time and technology has progressed since then, localities have become more interdependent with markets expanding to encompass almost the entire populated world with rapid transport and instant communication. I can place an order over the internet with a mom and pop shop in Wyoming and have it shipped to my doorstep by the very next day. That the federal government has more control over the economy today than it did 200 years ago is a natural result of more commerce falling under its purview, even without any expansion of powers.

So yes, commerce clause.

I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?" I guess if there were no doctors in Texas, I'd have to drive to Oklahoma. :P
 
The Lamonster said:
Awesome. I will (probably, without knowing it) see you there!

Cool. Me and the wife plan to drive from Chicago; it's a 5 hour drive (without traffic) so we'll probably leave in the middle of night. We were thinking of taking the train, but tickets were $80 per person.

Lamonster or anyone in the know have any advice for parking/getting around St. Louis? I haven't been. Ideally, I'd like to find parking semi-close to the event. The Edward Jones Dome looks like it is pretty close, so I'm hoping there's ample parking.
 
JayDubya said:
I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?" I guess if there were no doctors in Texas, I'd have to drive to Oklahoma. :P
Is the insurance agency that you pay every month for health insurance located in your state?
 
JayDubya said:
I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?" I guess if there were no doctors in Texas, I'd have to drive to Oklahoma. :P
Health insurance is usually offered by national corporations with contacts in multiple states.
 
JayDubya said:
I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?"


Now you are just being obtuse.

Look, your position has to be tied to some historical significance. You argue that the original conception of the Commerce Clause wouldn't allow regulation of health care, but why does some random judges' definition of 'commerce' from 1820 have more legitimacy than a 2008 definition?

Even Rehnquist, one of the great conservatives of the Supreme Court, has said that it is stupid to literally construe the words of the Constitution. If friggin' health care transactions are not interstate commerce, what is? Do I have to literally throw cash across a state border to create an interstate transaction?
 
CharlieDigital: At the same time though, one should never be afraid to question something simply because it's given from a position of authority. Normally though, this would open a debate on the matter and differences in views can be investigated and examined on their merits. The onus is on the challenger to get his arguments in order to conclusively demonstrate that authority is indeed wrong and the challenging view is right, and this includes acknowledging, understanding, and responding to the support behind the established view.

On the other hand, producing your own contrarian dogma, declaring your opinion to be supreme, and summarily rejecting all who dissent is hardly productive.
 
CharlieDigital said:
Are all the drugs dispensed by the doctor or pharmacist also manufactured in your state?
Drugs? What about the equipment used to diagnose him?
 
JayDubya said:
I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?" I guess if there were no doctors in Texas, I'd have to drive to Oklahoma. :P
Chances are your insurance company is not headquartered exclusively in your state.
 
JayDubya said:
I can't make you make sense when you post, but I request that you try.

When I go to my doctor and pay for healthcare service, how does that impact "interstate commerce?" I guess if there were no doctors in Texas, I'd have to drive to Oklahoma. :P

There's a difference between not making sense and avoiding legitimate arguments.

*cough*
 
reilo said:
Is the insurance agency that you pay every month for health insurance located in your state?

You may have missed the whole debate about even allowing people to get insurance from out-of-state companies. :lol
 
Hitokage said:
CharlieDigital: At the same time though, one should never be afraid to question something simply because it's given from a position of authority. Normally though, this would open a debate on the matter and differences in views can be investigated and examined on their merits. The onus is on the challenger to get his arguments in order to conclusively demonstrate that authority is indeed wrong and the challenging view is right, and this includes acknowledging, understanding, and responding to the support behind the established view.

On the other hand, producing your own contrarian dogma, declaring your opinion to be supreme, and summarily rejecting all who dissent is hardly productive.


*nods head*
 
JayDubya said:
You may have missed the whole debate about even allowing people to get insurance from out-of-state companies. :lol
My car insurance company is headquartered in Wisconsin.

Should I drop them and go with a local company, because it would be more constitutional [in your own twisted view]?

And before you say "what does car insurance have to do with anything", remember that it is required by law if you want to operate a vehicle.
 
JayDubya said:
You may have missed the whole debate about even allowing people to get insurance from out-of-state companies. :lol

We got him cornered; grab the tranq gun and set up the Clockwork Orange de-programming chair. We will cure this man of libertarianism!!
 
Hitokage said:
CharlieDigital: At the same time though, one should never be afraid to question something simply because it's given from a position of authority.

Agreed. As a man of science, this is the only way new discoveries are made; all prior knowledge is questionable (to a reasonable limit and dissenting view -- lulz @ Intelligent Design).

On the other hand, producing your own contrarian dogma, declaring your opinion to be supreme, and summarily rejecting all who dissent is hardly productive.

This is pretty much the heart of the matter. Normally, Jay doesn't bother me much, but his response today intrigued me. I was genuinely curious; perhaps Jay was actually a lawyer or a professor of law or a well known writer on the subject of the Constitution. Perhaps he really does know more about legal history than Obama.

::shrug::

As I said earlier, reading about the Theory of Relativity is pretty straightforward and I could probably explain it to a 10 year old. But whether I could do anything with that knowledge? Whether I could actually use it to build more knowledge? No way am I qualified or knowledgeable enough to do it.
 
Joe's got a voting problem LOL


http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081016/NEWS09/810160418/-1/NEWS

Would Joe be thrown off the rolls if he registered in Ohio today?

The Toledo Blade reported today that "Joe the Plumber's" name appears on Ohio voter registration rolls with a slight misspelling -- as Worzelbacher, not Wurzelbacher.


And that sort of data-entry error might be enough -- were Joe a new registrant -- to have him disqualified from voting in Ohio, Florida, or Wisconsin this year, depending on the outcome of ongoing litigation.

Purging voters or blocking their registration because of data errors is disenfranchisement by typo," said Michael Waldman, the executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice, a liberal legal group involved in litigation in those states. "Joe is a perfect example. If he were anew voter, he would be being challenged right now as not eligible to vote."

"Joe the Plumber is not committing voter fraud by having his name spelled differently on two different lists," he said.

Republicans have argued that there are safeguards against improper purges, and state officials say their lists are more accurate, and their purges more careful. They also note that voters whose registration is challenged can vote by provisional ballot.

National Review's Jim Geraghty wrote that "if there's a typo in the voter rolls, I trust local election officials to sort it out and ensure that that provisional ballot is used and subsequently counted once it's certain that the voter in question is the person on the registered voter list."

"Provisional ballots are not a substitute for actually voting," said Waldman, who pointed to data suggesting provisional ballots are rejected at a high rate, and that voters who are told their names don't appear on the rolls often simply walk away.

And he produced cases in which typos similar to the one affecting Wurzelbacher have knocked citizens off the rolls.

For instance, Florida officials in 2006 removed the name of Jose Lopez-Sandin, after officials typed his name in as "Joseph Lopez-Sandin." They also removed the name of Anne Nguyen after election officials typed her name as "Ann Nguyen."

"Because he’s the famous 'Joe the Plumber' it seems like an obvious typo, but this is the sort of error that will keep people from voting," Waldman said.
 
The biggest selling point McCain has right now is one he's not talking about. Most voters don't want a democratic president, a huge democratic house, and a filabuster proof democratic senate. It's a combination for disaster. And yes, I would say the same thing if it happened on the other side. It's bad news.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom