patrick.net

KimJongUn says

...but they don't contribute to SS.

And they don't collect SS

joeyjojojunior says

The 1% starts at a salary of $456,000. I don't think you'll find many teachers or government workers in that range no matter what their pension is.

OK - they are 2 percenters. Still a fuck-ton of money to many low skilled employees.

Even people making $456K a year can't count on a guaranteed 6 figure pension FOR LIFE starting at 55. Many government workers also get free healthcare FOR LIFE.

At least in California, we have some of the worst infrastructure in the country, terrible educations scores, high number of cities facing bankruptcy and very high taxes - while our government employees are paid very well and have huge bankrupting pensions.

Leave it to Democrats to think the solution is MOAR taxes without demanding reform.

joeyjojojunior says

fyi--they contribute to those pensions

There is no way in hell that they contributed enough to make 90% of their final pay for the rest of their lives starting after 30 years of service (typically 55).

I keep hearing about CA gov workers being overpaid. Why don't more people go for those jobs? Why isn't the free market working?

socal2 says

There is no way in hell that they contributed enough to make 90% of their final pay for the rest of their lives starting after 30 years of service (typically 55).

Of course not.. Just like you didn't contribute all of your 401K either.

There are company contributions and investment gains.

joeyjojojunior says

Of course not.. Just like you didn't contribute all of your 401K either.

There are company contributions and investment gains.

Of course - but my 401K is not a guaranteed defined benefit. If the stock market tanks, so does my 401K value. This is not the case with government pensions.

Do you know what a "Defined Benefit" is? Do you know why all these cities are facing bankruptcy because they are having to divert more and more general fund money that should go to infrastructure and better schools to shore up these massive pension obligations?

States like California and Illinois have enshrined public sector pensions in the State Constitution. So when a city goes bankrupt, they have to raise taxes, reduce services and shaft bond holders while the government worker 2 percenters get to keep their lavish pensions.

joeyjojojunior says

KimJongUn says

...but they don't contribute to SS.

And they don't collect SS

Duh!

Rew says

Trump won because not enough Americans were well informed

Rew says

American people were emotional and ignorant, and Trump capitalized and exploited

Rew says

Ignorance won Trump the vote

Rew says

Trump won because he embraced and elevated what I believe to be the worst in America and in people: anti-intellectualism

This is EXACTLY the type of thinking that will lead the left to lose again in 2020. The left has embraced this insane idea that the right is not with them because they are ignorant or ill-informed. If only they could be guided towards the light surely they would have voted Hillary! I see this false arrogance repeated constantly in political debates. The truth is that the right is not with them because the right has a different set of values and a different view of the role that government should play in people's lives.

Being convinced that a candidate won because his supporters are ignorant and ill-informed is unbelievably arrogant and ignorant in itself.

BayArea

BayArea says

The left has embraced this insane idea that the right is not with them because they are ignorant or ill-informed.

Oh, do we have to be politically correct now? Is it not OK to point out that Trump won non college grads by 7 pts and lost college grads by 10 pts?

BayArea says

Rew says

Trump won because he embraced and elevated what I believe to be the worst in America and in people: anti-intellectualism

This is EXACTLY the type of thinking that will lead the left to lose again in 2020. The left has embraced this insane idea that the right is not with them because they are ignorant or ill-informed. If only they could be guided towards the light surely they would have voted Hillary! I see this false arrogance repeated constantly in political debates. The truth is that the right is not with them because the right has a different set of values and a different view of the role that government should play in people's lives.

Being convinced that a candidate won because his supporters are ignorant and ill-informed is unbelievably arrogant and ignorant in itself.

100% agree... this type of thinking will keep the dems out of the white house.

joeyjojojunior says

Oh, do we have to be politically correct now? Is it not OK to point out that Trump won non college grads by 7 pts and lost college grads by 10 pts?

Of course not. You can be anything you want to be. You can also point out anything you want. You can also lose again in 2020.

komputodo says

Of course not. You can be anything you want to be. You can also point out anything you want. You can also lose again in 2020.

I doubt it.

Seriously--just look at all the Trumpcucks that can't even formulate a coherent response on this site. All they do is post cartoons. It's not OK to call them out?

BayArea says

Being convinced that a candidate won because his supporters are ignorant and ill-informed is unbelievably arrogant and ignorant in itself.

No it's not. It's exactly what Jefferson and Madison believed. The mob is ignorant and ill-informed and this has been the case for thousands of years. If more than 1 in 10,000 ever bothered to read Machiavelli, Wealth of Nations, and the Social Contract, maybe we'd have a chance but that isn't the life people live anymore. This is the great failing of democracy and it will be the end of it in America.

#nemoipresident

BayArea says

The truth is that the right is not with them because the right has a different set of values and a different view of the role that government should play in people's lives.

That is true to a point. The 1% votes Republican because they own the party. Look at the tax "reform" bills being talked about--those are the reason that the 1% votes Republican. They are intelligent and know exactly what they are purchasing with their contributions and votes.

And the different set of values that these Republicans hold is "got mine, f*$( you" whereas the Dems think differently.

socal2 says

I've been working with Public Sector workers for nearly a quarter century in California. Many of them with 6 figure pensions are in the 1%.

Then based on your long experience you should have no trouble telling us what percentage of public employees in CA have 6 figure pensions and what types of positions they held. I for one would be very curious to know.

It all comes down to social tendency. Democrats tend to be more trusting of society in general and want to be involved with forming a stronger and more pervasive social structure. This is fine, but doesn’t account for the fact that a good percentage of people are independent minded and want to do things by and for themselves. Both sorts of people are both useful and necessary to make civilization work. Neither side should be marginalized or lose rights or opportunities or they become resentful. When one side becomes so arrogant that they try to completely disenfranchise and negate the other side, this sets society as a whole up for dysfunction and civil strife. That is exactly what’s been happening in america for the past couple decades, however, and it boils down to a simple difference in attitudes.

If Democrats were as enlightened as they claim to be, they wouldn’t attempt to marginalize the other side, but rather attempt to accommodate and incorporate their wishes into the greater machine of society. This whole Trump thing is the result of Democrats actually being very stupid and UNenlightened, and the pushback catching them with their pants down.

Quigley says

This whole Trump thing is the result of Democrats actually being very stupid and UNenlightened, and the pushback catching them with their pants down.

That's what you'd like to believe and portray but it's not what actually happened. Trump told a bunch of lies like brining coal jobs back or keeping Carrier in the US, and combined it with a bunch of lies designed to scare people ("thugs" in Chicago, Muslims, Mexican rapists) and was lucky enough to have a horrible Dem opponent that the media hated. It was a perfect storm.

The truth is that the right is not with them because the right has a different set of values and a different view of the role that government should play in people's lives.

——————-

And then I ask you what that is, and one of two things happens: either you don’t know what they are, so you don’t/can’t answer, or whatever your answer is, none of those ideas, values, or preferred role of government align with Trump/Republicans actions.

Quigley says

It all comes down to social tendency. Democrats tend to be more trusting of society in general and want to be involved with forming a stronger and more pervasive social structure. This is fine, but doesn’t account for the fact that a good percentage of people are independent minded and want to do things by and for themselves. Both sorts of people are both useful and necessary to make civilization work. Neither side should be marginalized or lose rights or opportunities or they become resentful. When one side becomes so arrogant that they try to completely disenfranchise and negate the other side, this sets society as a whole up for dysfunction and civil strife. That is exactly what’s been happening in america for the past couple decades, however, and it boils down to a simple difference in attitudes.

If Democrats were as enlightened as they claim to be, they wouldn’t attempt to marginalize the other side, but rather attempt to accommodate and incorporate their wishes int...

Ok. So you’ve spent a lot of time focusing on why you hate Democrats, but why does that make voting in an all Republican Government a good solution? We’ve lived with Republican rule and a system of Republican law for decades, what is it you see being different this time?

errc says

Ok. So you’ve spent a lot of time focusing on why you hate Democrats

Wrong! Try again! I was saying that both conservative and liberals are necessary! And when one group tries to dominate the other as has happened recently, there’s natural pushback and strife!

Quigley says

If Democrats were as enlightened as they claim to be, they wouldn’t attempt to marginalize the other side,

Quigley says

Wrong! Try again! I was saying that both conservative and liberals are necessary! And when one group tries to dominate the other as has happened recently, there’s natural pushback and strife!

Do you actually live on the same planet as I do? You haven't ever seen fox news, listened to am radio, read breitbart, browsed the right wing blogsphere, or seen any of tpb/cic posts somehow? Marginalization of the left has been a very well financed and well organized campaign going on for 50 years that is more and more successful.

bob2356 says

Quigley says

If Democrats were as enlightened as they claim to be, they wouldn’t attempt to marginalize the other side,

Quigley says

Wrong! Try again! I was saying that both conservative and liberals are necessary! And when one group tries to dominate the other as has happened recently, there’s natural pushback and strife!

Do you actually live on the same planet as I do? You haven't ever seen fox news, listened to am radio, read breitbart, browsed the right wing blogsphere, or seen any of tpb/cic posts somehow? Marginalization of the left has been a very well financed and well organized campaign going on for 50 years that is more and more successful.

Damn liberals!

It’s all their fault!

Quigley says

It all comes down to social tendency. Democrats tend to be more trusting of society in general and want to be involved with forming a stronger and more pervasive social structure. This is fine, but doesn’t account for the fact that a good percentage of people are independent minded and want to do things by and for themselves. Both sorts of people are both useful and necessary to make civilization work. Neither side should be marginalized or lose rights or opportunities or they become resentful. When one side becomes so arrogant that they try to completely disenfranchise and negate the other side, this sets society as a whole up for dysfunction and civil strife. That is exactly what’s been happening in america for the past couple decades, however, and it boils down to a simple difference in attitudes.

If Democrats were as enlightened as they claim to be, they wouldn’t attempt to marginalize the other side, but rather attempt to accommodate and incorporate their wishes int...

Democrats tend to be....

If Democrats were enlightened....

Trump is a result of Democrats being very stupid....


So good job. You make valid criticism of the Left, sure. But how on Earth is the answer simply “so we blindly vote and support Republican rule!”, as if we all don’t know that’s what has made it all hell on Earth with their retard base of Christians electing any nitwit that runs as a Republican

errc says

But how on Earth is the answer simply “so we blindly vote and support Republican rule!”

Yah I’ve never advocated for that either. Elitist corporatist GOP are just as much the enemy as elitist Leftists. Ideally, I’d like to see a reform of both parties to bring them more in line with voters wishes, while retaining their differing perspectives that create diversity of thought.

Quigley says

It all comes down to social tendency. Democrats tend to be more trusting of society in general and want to be involved with forming a stronger and more pervasive social structure. This is fine, but doesn’t account for the fact that a good percentage of people are independent minded and want to do things by and for themselves.

Here's my view of the role gov should play.

Capitalism (includes free trade) combined with free speech/free press is great. It motivates people to work hard and lets them keep the benefits of that labor. However, unrestrained capitalism means that people can pollute for free, which imposes costs on society. Also, capitalism can lead to mountains of poor / homeless if there is an abundance of labor. The private sector is great at small improvements (local optimiztion), but not always great at major innovation or scientific breakthroughs. Things like landing on the moon, inventing nuclear power, and nuclear weapons are examples where private sector money has not been enough. Major scientific breakthroughs of the last 100 yrs have been at Universities for the most part. Also, the gov is great at safety nets. Unless we want to let people die in the streets or eat cat food in old age, we need gov programs.

Some people want us to rely on church and family for those functions. For the most part, religious people want Churches to be the only safety net. They don't want to pay a tithe to the church and extra money in taxes. Also, they'd just assume force people into the Church's grip out of desperation instead of relying on people choosing the Church for the religion. Personally, I prefer secular norms and morals, so I prefer that the safety net is done at the societal level rather than through the Church. As far as the tax rate, I think that there is a Goldilocks point, where too little won't pay for the services that we expect, and too much will stifle growth. The Goldilocks rate depends on economic conditions. IMO, we are too low at the moment given the needs of the country, the wealth disparity is too high, and our rates are lower than the competition (so people will not flee).

I think that the real breakdown of whether you are Dem or Republican these days is if you are a conservative Christian. If you are, then the ongoing culture war between Christian conservatives and the rest of society is going to keep you voting for Republicans even if the vessel is Trump. I don't think that Trump believes in any of that stuff. In fact, rumors are that he makes fun of the Veep for it. However, he fights for that viewpoint.

YesYNot says

Also, the gov is great at safety nets. Unless we want to let people die in the streets or eat cat food in old age, we need gov programs.

That's the problem, we DON'T need safety nets, that just makes people lazy and entitled. We need programs that teach people to be self suffcient and to be responsible for themselves. Unfortunately, Dems don't believe in Personal Responsibility and like pandering to the welfare class for votes.

Remember the saying "give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime"?

YesYNot says

I think that the real breakdown of whether you are Dem or Republican these days is if you are a conservative Christian. If you are, then the ongoing culture war between Christian conservatives and the rest of society is going to keep you voting for Republicans even if the vessel is Trump.

Good post in general. Very thoughtful, unlike our resident jojo troll. This paragraph was the only one I felt I could add to. I think a good chunk of republican voters are this way, but a lot are just independent and individualistic, or maybe want a tax break or feel the government overstepped with Obamacare. We need these people too, to be engaged and offering ideas. They might not always be ideas we love, but it’s better to have options and input to help craft a solution that makes as many people satisfied as possible. Also these individuals are the ones who tend to be pioneers, leading the way for the innovation and science. It takes individualistic people with big fat egos to break from the bonds of normality, make great leaps of thought, and advance our understanding. 10,000 scientists rehashing the same tired ideas for crumbs of new applications can’t compare to ten scientists with revolutionary ideas.

Sniper says

That's the problem, we DON'T need safety nets, that just makes people lazy and entitled. We need programs that teach people to be self suffcient and to be responsible for themselves. Unfortunately, Dems don't believe in Personal Responsibility and like pandering to the welfare class for votes.

Yes, that worked so well in 1930.

Quigley says

Good post in general. Very thoughtful

Thanks, though I don't see Jojo as a troll at all. Most of his points are in agreement with my own.

Quigley says

10,000 scientists rehashing the same tired ideas for crumbs of new applications can’t compare to ten scientists with revolutionary ideas.

It's true that most innovation comes from a small number of people. However, in general, most of those scientists are going to be working for other scientists. They are like tradespeople working for a contractor - just a much higher trained and specialized version. The best scientists still need gov funding. Find me a physicist who would rather work out of his garage than at CERN. Sometimes, you need the budget to buy big equipment and hire people to do the leg work. Plus, you cannot predict which scientists are going to be the 10 really successful ones anymore than you can predict which businessperson is going to start the next Microsoft/Apple/Google or whatever. As a country, we spend a small portion of our budget on science, and it's pretty critical to our success as a country. I don't see it as a good target for waste reduction.

As for Obamacare, I'm all for conservatives trying to find a replacement, and there might be some good ideas coming out of it. There are surely ways to make healthcare cheaper at the margins. My main gripe is that the ones in office now want to pretend that they have a solution for paying for people with preexisting conditions that doesn't cost a bunch of money. Outside of a major overhaul in how we practice medicine, there is no free lunch. Be honest about letting certain people die early to save money or help figure out how to pay for it.

It's sad to see a site devoted to calling out the excesses and greed of banks suddenly turn 180 degrees and start praising a president who is furiously dismantling the last few protections we have left. You can say goodbye to the consumer financial protection bureau as well as any other laws hindering banks in any way. This is a radical change from how Democrats ran things.

Patrick, when did banks suddenly become the hero? If you're correct that one liberal criminal will throw the election despite everything else, doesn't that mean Republican voters aren't competent to be voting?

joeyjojojunior says

Sniper says

That's the problem, we DON'T need safety nets, that just makes people lazy and entitled. We need programs that teach people to be self suffcient and to be responsible for themselves. Unfortunately, Dems don't believe in Personal Responsibility and like pandering to the welfare class for votes.

Yes, that worked so well in 1930.

Are there more or less now than in 1930?

Sniper says

Are there more or less now than in 1930?

More or less of what? You said we don't need safety nets. Presumably at all.

Jan: If there was Russian Collusion, Bad
April: We're gonna find out so much about Trump's Collusion with Russia
July: Any minute now Mueller's gonna bust Trump!
Sep: Dotard's Russian Collusion must be punished, in the name of the Rule of Law!
Oct: Collusion with Russia isn't such a big deal. Let's move on!

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Jan: If there was Russian Collusion, Bad
April: We're gonna find out so much about Trump's Collusion with Russia
July: Any minute now Mueller's gonna bust Trump!
Sep: Dotard's Russian Collusion must be punished, in the name of the Rule of Law!
Oct: Collusion with Russia isn't such a big deal. Let's move on!

Just curious--who says collusion with Russia isn't such a big deal? I haven't seen anyone say that.

joeyjojojunior says

Just curious--who says collusion with Russia isn't such a big deal? I haven't seen anyone say that.

Democrats - when they are pressed on the Obama/Clinton Uranium dealings, Podesta's contracts representing Russian interests, and Hillary Clinton and DNC "colluding" with Russian operatives with the Fusion GPS dossier.

And don't forget this. www.youtube.com/embed/QS2a44F5TgM

Face it - the Democrats have been soft on Russia and Commies forever. They only butched up on Russia in the last year trying to use it to discredit their election losses.

joeyjojojunior says

Just curious--who says collusion with Russia isn't such a big deal? I haven't seen anyone say that.

Scoops just said it so it has to be true.

socal2 says

Democrats - when they are pressed on the Obama/Clinton Uranium dealings, Podesta's contracts representing Russian interests, and Hillary Clinton and DNC "colluding" with Russian operatives with the Fusion GPS dossier.

I'm looking for some names and specifics.

If we all work for government nothing will get done ever, economy will collapse.

CA government is a drain on society, cost outweighs the few benefits.

YesYNot says

I keep hearing about CA gov workers being overpaid. Why don't more people go for those jobs? Why isn't the free market working?