ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th March 2017, 01:45 PM   #121
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,994
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I won't be the only virtuous person in a fight. There is no benefit. It doesn't even encourage virtue.

Hell, just the fact that you're trying to take ME to task for this given that the entire thread has basically been an exercise in bitching about how evil Republicans are betrays the futility of any such efforts on my part.
I'm taking you to task for your ad hominem.

I also took Tragic Monkey to task for his ridiculous stereotype of Trump voters.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 01:55 PM   #122
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I'm taking you to task for your ad hominem.
First off, you seem confused about what an ad hominem actually means, because that wasn't an ad hom. An ad hom tries to project from the person to the argument. I've done the reverse, I've inferred something about the person from the argument.

Quote:
I also took Tragic Monkey to task for his ridiculous stereotype of Trump voters.
Second, it's not just TM. It's practically the entire thread. Third, to the extent that you did take him to task, you only did so in response to my post, as part of taking me to task, not on its own merits (or lack thereof). You have offered nothing to change my mind. The demands are always lopsided. There is no reason for me to meet them.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 03:03 PM   #123
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,161
What the hell is "virtue signalling," anyway? How does the virtue signalling of a person you disagree with differ from whatever signalling you're doing when you say what you believe? Are you "vice signalling?" In what way is "virtue signalling" a charge of anything but saying what you disagree with?

sorry, but I think this is one of those unutterably stupid terms of political correctness adopted by the sworn enemies of political correctness, like "social justice warriors." Yeah, man, let's not, whatever we do, accidentally stand for social justice and virtue, because some dumphead ex-schoolyard bully will call us names and yell "buttercup" at us.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 03:25 PM   #124
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,440
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
What the hell is "virtue signalling," anyway? How does the virtue signalling of a person you disagree with differ from whatever signalling you're doing when you say what you believe? Are you "vice signalling?" In what way is "virtue signalling" a charge of anything but saying what you disagree with?

sorry, but I think this is one of those unutterably stupid terms of political correctness adopted by the sworn enemies of political correctness, like "social justice warriors." Yeah, man, let's not, whatever we do, accidentally stand for social justice and virtue, because some dumphead ex-schoolyard bully will call us names and yell "buttercup" at us.
Just because term might be used incorrectly here, doesn't make it invalid. Be it "virtue signaling" or "Social justice Warrior". And "political correctness" is when things went from sane to insanity and didn't even bother to stop to think and outright went to cause idiocies and harm. More or less subgroup of irrationality.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 05:24 PM   #125
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 14,938
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
What the hell is "virtue signalling," anyway? How does the virtue signalling of a person you disagree with differ from whatever signalling you're doing when you say what you believe? Are you "vice signalling?" In what way is "virtue signalling" a charge of anything but saying what you disagree with?

sorry, but I think this is one of those unutterably stupid terms of political correctness adopted by the sworn enemies of political correctness, like "social justice warriors." Yeah, man, let's not, whatever we do, accidentally stand for social justice and virtue, because some dumphead ex-schoolyard bully will call us names and yell "buttercup" at us.
In order to use "virtue signalling" in reply to another poster, from what I understand of the actual signal analysis definition, you would need to be a proficient mind-reader. Otherwise, it's akin to poo slinging.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 05:54 PM   #126
Elind
Philosopher
 
Elind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: S.E. USA. Sometimes bible country
Posts: 7,779
I haven't read all these comments, but I would just like to point out that Trump is too stupid to understand the meaning of any of these issues. The real power is the Trump Whisperer Bannon, the self declared nihilist fascist, and Trump's sorry ass spawn.
Elind is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 08:01 PM   #127
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,273
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Just because term might be used incorrectly here, doesn't make it invalid. Be it "virtue signaling" or "Social justice Warrior". And "political correctness" is when things went from sane to insanity and didn't even bother to stop to think and outright went to cause idiocies and harm. More or less subgroup of irrationality.

Ehh. These were all benign labels until the opponents of the folks who took these labels started repeating them with a sneer and a spit.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 08:10 PM   #128
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,392
Originally Posted by Busta Capp View Post
At first glance I like Trump's budget.
I'm interested to see where it leads and if anything will actually change, but I'm skeptical of Washington as a whole and don't really believe any of them actually care about citizens.

The budget makes Democrats scream the same thing ... Old people will die, kids will starve and everyone's getting deported.
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Democrats lost because of their PC Culture run amok, their blatant ignoring of every demographic of any substantial proportion instead focusing on the left handed, transgender, dairy farmer artist demographic, and the fact that Obama essentially accomplished nothing in his 8 years other than some fantastic photo ops and vacation pictures.

Couple all that with the taxing to death of the middle class and the ridiculous way the money is spent/redistributed and it's a recipe for disaster.

Good luck in 2024.
Critical thinking. The forum is devoted to critical thinking. Were you not aware?

Welcome, anyway.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 08:13 PM   #129
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,392
Originally Posted by Busta Capp View Post
Substantial is misleading in the fact that California and New York are the only two states you can point to to back your claim.

Two states should not be able to decide what happens in the entire country regardless of the size of their populations.
A person's vote is a person's vote. States don't "decide."
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 08:23 PM   #130
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 61,948
GOP talking point: we want to be fair to the taxpayer too.

OK, great, don't spend my tax dollars on corporate subsidies or the profits of the military industrial complex.

Don't tell me that you are doing me a favor by not funding social services and giving huge tax cuts to the rich. And while you are at it, how about taxing hedge fund managers at the same rate as the rest of us?

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 19th March 2017 at 08:24 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 09:45 PM   #131
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 61,948
Originally Posted by Busta Capp View Post
At first glance I like Trump's budget.
I'm interested to see where it leads and if anything will actually change, but I'm skeptical of Washington as a whole and don't really believe any of them actually care about citizens.

The budget makes Democrats scream the same thing ... Old people will die, kids will starve and everyone's getting deported.
Lather, rinse, repeat....
You like all that excess spending on military hardware while ignoring the budget that promotes diplomacy?

How about corn subsidies? You like those?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 09:57 PM   #132
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,345
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
GOP talking point: we want to be fair to the taxpayer too.

OK, great, don't spend my tax dollars on corporate subsidies or the profits of the military industrial complex.

Don't tell me that you are doing me a favor by not funding social services and giving huge tax cuts to the rich. And while you are at it, how about taxing hedge fund managers at the same rate as the rest of us?
I have a solution where both of you will be satisfied that the government isn't spending money on something you oppose.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 10:40 PM   #133
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Busta Capp View Post
At first glance I like Trump's budget.
I'm interested to see where it leads and if anything will actually change, but I'm skeptical of Washington as a whole and don't really believe any of them actually care about citizens.

The budget makes Democrats scream the same thing ... Old people will die, kids will starve and everyone's getting deported.
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Democrats lost because of their PC Culture run amok, their blatant ignoring of every demographic of any substantial proportion instead focusing on the left handed, transgender, dairy farmer artist demographic, and the fact that Obama essentially accomplished nothing in his 8 years other than some fantastic photo ops and vacation pictures.

Couple all that with the taxing to death of the middle class and the ridiculous way the money is spent/redistributed and it's a recipe for disaster.

Good luck in 2024.

What have you got against dairy farmers?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 11:04 PM   #134
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,210
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
I grew up listening to people complain, "The government doesn't help me, why do I have to pay taxes to help other people? I may not be in poverty but I'm certainly not rich."

It's a tough issue, there's no easy answer.
Nonsense, the solution is very simple - just make taxes voluntary, then nobody can complain about what they are used for. Every individual pays for his own healthcare etc. unless he decides to pay the government to provide it. Of course poor people won't be able to afford healthcare, but that's their fault for being losers.

With reduced income the government might struggle to maintain essential services, but there's a simple solution to that problem too. Bring back the draft, but allow anyone to buy themselves out for 1 million dollars. Then the government will have enough money and soldiers to wage war against other nations and plunder their wealth.

It's the only solution that's fair to all real Americans.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2017, 11:30 PM   #135
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,406
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Cutting Medicaid, home heating oil for the poor, public housing, will lead to a massive victory for the Democrats in 2018.
And that would be bad.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 06:17 AM   #136
Armitage72
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,593
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
What are the chances this proposal is even approved - somewhere near zero? Presidential budgets rarely get passed.

Those are other Presidents' budgets. Trump's budget is the greatest, most perfect budget in the history of budgets. Nobody would ever reject it. Anyone who tried would be un-American.

More seriously, expect another Twitter meltdown over being told "No".
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 06:29 AM   #137
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,503
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Cutting Medicaid, home heating oil for the poor, public housing, will lead to a massive victory for the Democrats in 2018.
I wouldn't bet on it. I no longer think its possible for this country to get any less stupid.

Trump voters are the lowest of the low. The most retarded morons history has ever seen. All the pain and suffering they are about to experience due to their inept agenda against the black president and would-be woman president will be blamed on the black guy, and said to be much better than what the woman would do.

They'll vote in more republitards and re-elect Trump, regardless of the situation of the country.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 07:24 AM   #138
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
What the hell is "virtue signalling," anyway?
If you don't know what a term means, then why are you so sure it's nonsense?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling
"Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values by an individual done primarily with the intent of enhancing that person's standing within a social group."

Quote:
Are you "vice signalling?"
Tell me what you mean by the term and I can answer that. But right now, I don't know what you mean by it. I can't assume that it's simply an inverse of "virtue signalling" (which wouldn't make much sense anyways) since you admit you don't even know what "virtue signaling" means.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 07:43 AM   #139
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,161
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If you don't know what a term means, then why are you so sure it's nonsense?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling
"Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values by an individual done primarily with the intent of enhancing that person's standing within a social group."



Tell me what you mean by the term and I can answer that. But right now, I don't know what you mean by it. I can't assume that it's simply an inverse of "virtue signalling" (which wouldn't make much sense anyways) since you admit you don't even know what "virtue signaling" means.
Of course I have a pretty good idea of what "virtue signalling" is meant to imply, but I believe it is a very stupid term, since it is used, quite obviously, by anyone who wishes to discredit a statement by implying that the person making it is a liar and a hypocrite, without taking responsibility for the statement, and that it is made, more often than not, without any real thought, but rather as a shibboleth identifying one's political orientation. Of course any time you state something expressing moral values, you state the moral values you wish to state!
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:06 AM   #140
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Of course I have a pretty good idea of what "virtue signalling" is meant to imply, but I believe it is a very stupid term, since it is used, quite obviously, by anyone who wishes to discredit a statement by implying that the person making it is a liar and a hypocrite
No. My point isn't that anyone was lying or being a hypocrite, but that most of the posts here are basically substance-free. There's no real argument being made about the actual merits of funding (or not funding) these various programs. All of that is taken as a given. That's not a lie on anyone's part, but it's still... lacking.

Quote:
without taking responsibility for the statement
Except that I've obviously taken responsibility for the statement.

Quote:
and that it is made, more often than not, without any real thought, but rather as a shibboleth identifying one's political orientation.
Given that this is basically a description of the virtue signalling which has gone on in this thread, it's a little ironic that you're only pointing this at me.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:36 AM   #141
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,745
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
And that would be bad.
Worse than cutting Medicaid, home heating oil for the poor, and public housing?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:38 AM   #142
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,838
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Trump might say it's a starting point, being a so-called skilled negotiator. Or he is trying to disrupt and/or split the GOP. To me his budget looks like a blueprint for a severe recession and maybe depression. If he disrupts the GOP enough he never has to sign anything so nothing's on him - he can blame Congress.

I guess he does have to sign off on a budget eventually. Or keep vetoing it, forcing bipartisan cooperation. "I wanted to cut spending, but Congress wouldn't let me do it." Also it keeps career government employees from getting too uppity.
Does he though? People keep saying Trump of course has to do something and then he doesn't. What is to stop him from vetoing the budget and demanding congress pass his budget?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:41 AM   #143
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,838
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Abolishing the NEA won't get rid of museums and libraries. Libraries and museums are funded locally;
Dibs on the spirit of saint louis when the Smithsonian starts auctioning off their collection.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:45 AM   #144
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,838
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
He wants to cut:

-the home heating oil for the poor program.

-public housing.

-Medicaid.

I guess he wants to lose all those poor white voters he got in 2016.
They are cool with all those, after all they will have all those coal jobs now.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:51 AM   #145
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,838
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Demonizing/virtue signaling wont get us very far. I certainly don't want poor people to suffer
And having them starve to death is going to cut back on that suffering. That is why ending meals on wheels is so important. We don't want them to suffer just die.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:54 AM   #146
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,838
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
What the hell is "virtue signalling," anyway?
It means caring about people other than yourself. Like a straight person who cares about gay rights.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 08:54 AM   #147
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,047
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If you don't know what a term means, then why are you so sure it's nonsense?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling
"Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values by an individual done primarily with the intent of enhancing that person's standing within a social group..."
That sentence you quote was written by a Wikipwedia user called Wowaconia. Do you know who that is, I don't. Did you follow any of the reference links? Here's one from a Boston Globe article from 2015:
Quote:
That type of insulting generalization is discussed in The (Scotland) Herald, where Catriona Stewart wrote, “The charge of virtue-signalling is a lazy tool of those on the right to condemn the left as woolly-thinking and naïve.”
Link
In your last message you're complaining that too many posts here are substance-free. Yet skimming through your last half dozen messages they are mostly critiques of other posters. Mostly of the 'He said, I said,' variety. What does any of this have to do with the budget the Trump administration is proposing?

It seems to me if you don't like the way a discussion is going you should try and push it in a different direction. Try and get it back on course. Merely complaining about only makes it worse.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:03 AM   #148
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 61,948
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I have a solution where both of you will be satisfied that the government isn't spending money on something you oppose.
Your solutions ignore human nature and are unrealistic, ergo they are useless.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 20th March 2017 at 09:10 AM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:09 AM   #149
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
In your last message you're complaining that too many posts here are substance-free. Yet skimming through your last half dozen messages they are mostly critiques of other posters.
Hey, I'd have moved on long ago if anyone else had. But nobody, including you, seems to want to. Nobody seems to want to start providing actual evidence for the efficacy of federal funding for the arts, etc. Instead, people just want to get outraged about the budget cuts, and then get outraged at anyone who doesn't agree with your outrage.

Quote:
It seems to me if you don't like the way a discussion is going you should try and push it in a different direction.
I can't make people support their claims.

Quote:
Merely complaining about only makes it worse.
And blaming it all on me helps how? I have no interest in playing by your lopsided standards. Take your own advice.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:33 AM   #150
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,047
Take my own advice? I have been, you're the one doing all the complaining about other posters. Yesterday I was involved in a discussion in this thread about-

The effects of the Trump budget cuts will mostly fall on low income people, yet low-income white voters helped elect him. I don't think it's possible to know exactly but at least some evidence is, while many low income white voters did vote for Trump it might not be the majority.

One article looked at the vote in one of the poorest counties in Kentucky which happens to be overwhelmingly white. In that county Trump did get 80% of the vote but the turnout was barely 25%. In other counties with a very low per capita income and a large white voting population Trump got 40% of the vote. Surveys show that among voters making less than $50,000 a year Hillary Clinton won the majority. That tends to support the notion that Trump's biggest group of supporters are white working class/middle income voters. I explained why I tend to agree with that.

White working class/middle income voters don't want anything from the government but they don't want anyone else to get anything either. They are not moved by pleas to not cut subsidies for low income families who can't afford adequate supplies of home heating oil. At least the Trump supporters I know would say, "Yes I feel sorry for them but why do I have to help pay for their oil? I can barely afford my own!"

As I said, it's not an easy issue and it's one I think Trump is exploiting.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:44 AM   #151
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Take my own advice? I have been, you're the one doing all the complaining about other posters.
I'm doing all the complaining about other posters? This very post, in which you complain about me, contradicts you. That's why I can't take your objection seriously.

Quote:
The effects of the Trump budget cuts will mostly fall on low income people, yet low-income white voters helped elect him.
And how much are the cuts to the NEA going to hurt them? Hell, are the cuts to the NEA going to hurt them at all?

Nobody seems to be able to say. Quite peculiar.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:52 AM   #152
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,198
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
IMO the best way to help poor people is to fix the programs in place, not just stop funding them. Throwing out the baby with the bath water doesn't help anybody, least of which the baby. Before funding for programs that are at least on paper supposed to help poor people, the elderly, and children is cut because they aren't effective, I'd prefer an alternative that WILL work at least be defined, and even put into place.

I understand that to a good many conservatives Trump's budget is a wet dream come true, but I'm a little wary.
Wouldn't it be better to get the millions not working, working?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 09:54 AM   #153
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,392
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I can't make people support their claims.
It is a wonderment, I agree.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:01 AM   #154
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 61,948
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Take my own advice? I have been, you're the one doing all the complaining about other posters. Yesterday I was involved in a discussion in this thread about-

The effects of the Trump budget cuts will mostly fall on low income people, yet low-income white voters helped elect him. I don't think it's possible to know exactly but at least some evidence is, while many low income white voters did vote for Trump it might not be the majority.

One article looked at the vote in one of the poorest counties in Kentucky which happens to be overwhelmingly white. In that county Trump did get 80% of the vote but the turnout was barely 25%. In other counties with a very low per capita income and a large white voting population Trump got 40% of the vote. Surveys show that among voters making less than $50,000 a year Hillary Clinton won the majority. That tends to support the notion that Trump's biggest group of supporters are white working class/middle income voters. I explained why I tend to agree with that.

White working class/middle income voters don't want anything from the government but they don't want anyone else to get anything either. They are not moved by pleas to not cut subsidies for low income families who can't afford adequate supplies of home heating oil. At least the Trump supporters I know would say, "Yes I feel sorry for them but why do I have to help pay for their oil? I can barely afford my own!"

As I said, it's not an easy issue and it's one I think Trump is exploiting.
And yet they don't seem to notice:
What they are actually paying in taxes for some of them is state taxes that aren't part of Trump's budget, or they only pay FICA which is also not part of the Trump budget (at least not technically)

And all those taxes going to corporate subsidies and the military don't seem to be addressed in the budget, or in the case of the State Department, it looks to be denying that ounce of prevention and going for the pound of military cure.
People just buy the GOP false framing without question like little ducks following Mother Duck. And the Democrats, once again, don't/can't get their talking points together to fight back.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:02 AM   #155
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,134
Still waiting for a defense of the NEA/NEH that isn't just an appeal to emotion or a simple statement to the effect that "we need it." Even if it could be argued that the arts are important (and I certainly don't disagree with that) I still don't see a cogent argument that federal funding is needed.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:05 AM   #156
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
And all those taxes going to corporate subsidies and the military don't seem to be addressed in the budget, or in the case of the State Department, it looks to be denying that ounce of prevention and going for the pound of military cure.

People just buy the GOP false framing without question like little ducks following Mother Duck.
... she said, as she repeated Democrat framing like a little duck following Mother Duck.

Where's the evidence that State Department funding that might get cut actually reduces conflict? You don't have any. You just accept it as an article of faith, because that's how it's been framed for you.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:11 AM   #157
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,745
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Still waiting for a defense of the NEA/NEH that isn't just an appeal to emotion or a simple statement to the effect that "we need it." Even if it could be argued that the arts are important (and I certainly don't disagree with that) I still don't see a cogent argument that federal funding is needed.
Wait, I gave you a defense. Namely, providing resources to local museums/libraries to provide exhibits and services that they might not otherwise have the capacity to provide. I know you counter argued that those aren't necessary and that those institutions may have found the funding in other ways, but they might not have either. It remains a perfectly valid argument.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:28 AM   #158
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,745
And, back to my OP, no one has justified why we need dramatic increases in military spending.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:44 AM   #159
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
And, back to my OP, no one has justified why we need dramatic increases in military spending.
The increases simply reverse some of the sequestration cuts. And we need it because our readiness has fallen behind because of those cuts.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 10:48 AM   #160
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,503
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The increases simply reverse some of the sequestration cuts. And we need it because our readiness has fallen behind because of those cuts.
That would be splendid if it were relevant.

How does our readiness stack up against potential adversaries? Shouldn't that be the measuring stick?
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.