patrick.net

I have never voted Republican, so I guess I get complaining rights. :-)
Yes, I am complaining, and maybe I forfeit my right to complain in your opinion because I have hardly ever voted for a Democrat either.

What I really want is a revolution. I want to see less apathy and a lot more complaining, and even more action behind the complaining.

The coming 10-15 yrs will see an implicit confrontation between millennials and boomers, with 2 key battlegrounds:
- Do we build enough housing for millennials?
- Do we use 'helicopter money' to compensate for boomers shrinking consumption?
Logically we should go from "boomers dominate" to "millennials dominate".

Housing policies resulting in high prices will become unpopular as time goes by.

Call it Crazy says

I'm ready.... Let's Do This!!!!!

*

I'm guessing palming a metallic phallic object reassures you.
It won't help you.

Call it Crazy says

The weak ones always get eaten first, and you're real close to the front of the line....

Hey, but you're the one who is compensating :-)

Hey Juliet,

Seriously, I too want more action behind the complaining, starting with me. But quite honestly, where to begin?

I tried moveon and found it disappointingly candidate endorsement focussed and reliant on media pranks that were so ragtag that they were embarrassing. Also, age seemed very boomer oriented. Representus is another that Id like to try but so far low critical mass in the bay area.

By the time that I spend all that time trying to make meaningful impact on government, I begin to just want to roll all that time into my own family and say to hell with the other. Revolutionizing at the moment seems too lonely! :)

Not giving up, merely sharing my frustration.

Call it Crazy says

Not even close, just making sure I'm at the END of the line....

That's the point: Idiots like you sit on their guns and their truckloads of ammo feeling reassured that nothing can happen to them.

They typically get robbed blind by a statistician on the other side of the country, or a bankster that never got within range.

So, no, you're not at the end of the line. Not even close.

lahossain says

By the time that I spend all that time trying to make meaningful impact on government, I begin to just want to roll all that time into my own family and say to hell with the other. Revolutionizing at the moment seems too lonely! :)

Not giving up, merely sharing my frustration.

This is exactly what happened to my husband and me this morning. We had all these great ideas for change and were reading all these great ideas and then became frustrated and tired. Next thing you know we are planning to go have dinner at the Hay Market, make candels with the boys and tune out the world. So I completly get it. It is frustrating. We are like Jon Stewart said, "..not the Silent Majority as much as the Busy Majority or the Depressed Majority."

It's hard to be proactive when it feels like 95% of the population could care less if we become a plutocracy police state. Plus both parents working, sometimes two jobs, and all our money going to a mortgage or rent, some days it's hard to have any steam. I hear you. It's actually helpful to know we are not alone with our readiness to revolt conflicted with our readiness to go back to bed.

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
― Frank Zappa

hrhjuliet says

It's hard to be proactive when it feels like 95% of the population could care less if we become a plutocracy police state.

100% of the people would care if it was true. The 5% you mention are misinformed, and have no solution even if they were right.
Hey, we missed you.

Stop whining. That's why God invented basements.

hrhjuliet says

Since most of you over forty bought your home when a median home was twice the median income, I find your euphemisms patronizing, at best they reek of propaganda or spin doctors at play.

That crap got 13 likes?!

No I bought after waiting 11 long years and renting at the same fucking place... While the Liberals were touting and justifying high RE prices because of the "GOOD SCHOOL" districts. I bought my house after the crash. And I keep my income over twice your median income, because I work extra hard on my own fucking time to stay relevant in the field I chose to work in.

The more I read pathetic whinny crap like this, the more I'm convinced I'll stay relevant in any field I chose to work in. Because any suitable youthful replacements are too fucking busy whining about my abilities to do so, rather than honing in on their own professional chops to overtake my position.

Keep on whining Blueboy, my future depends on it.

population by year:

(I had no idea the baby boom discontinuity was so great!)

hrhjuliet says

t's hard to be proactive when it feels like 95% of the population could care less if we become a plutocracy police state. Plus both parents working, sometimes two jobs, and all our money going to a mortgage or rent, some days it's hard to have any steam. I hear you. It's actually helpful to know we are not alone with our readiness to revolt conflicted with our readiness to go back to bed.

Quit voting for Dems and Repubs.

EVERYBODY JUST DO THIS!

Stop whoring for Wall Street.
http://www.showrealhist.com/yTRIAL.html
http://patrick.net/?p=1223928

Blurtman says

Quit voting for Dems and Repubs.

Do this if you'd vote conservative. Otherwise, only do this if you don't mind the conservatives winning office for a while, more than they are now at any rate.

Bellingham Bill says

Do this if you'd vote conservative. Otherwise, only do this if you don't mind the conservatives winning office for a while, more than they are now at any rate.

Fear of the other getting in is how the game is propagated. Refuse to play.

Blurtman says

Refuse to play.

Sure. Refuse to play if you're conservative. Split the conservative vote six ways for all I care.

However, if you're not conservative, don't be an idiot like the 500-odd Nader voters in Florida who played their critical part in swinging the national election to Bush in 2000.

I'm sure out of the 97,488 Nader / LaDuke voters we can find 500+ who'd want to go back in time and change their vote to Gore now.

That's the essence of stupidity, regretting the real-world consequences of one's action or inaction.

And elections certainly have real-world consequences!

Like I said, protest voting for a third party that isn't going to win is perfectly reasonable if one actually doesn't mind the "greater evil" -- your typical Bush, Romney, Walker etc -- winning the seat.

LOL, how would a Gore presidency have been different? He was also inclined to invade Iraq in 2003, just like all the big shot Democrats at that time. If there was any false hope wishful thinking in 2008 for Gore victory 8 years earlier, the nearly 7 years of Obama presidency should have cured you of that affliction.

hrhjuliet says

It's hard to be proactive when it feels like 95% of the population could care less if we become a plutocracy police state. Plus both parents working, sometimes two jobs, and all our money going to a mortgage or rent, some days it's hard to have any steam. I hear you. It's actually helpful to know we are not alone with our readiness to revolt conflicted with our readiness to go back to bed.

Just wait till 2025, when automation of more than half the work out there starts to steamroll. And then, neither parents will have any sort of career stability.

Bellingham Bill says

However, if you're not conservative, don't be an idiot like the 500-odd Nader voters in Florida who played their critical part in swinging the national election to Bush in 2000

Don't be a whiner who blames folks who voted their conscience for your candidate's inability to get elected. The dominant two party system has got to go.

Blurtman says

Don't be a whiner

personalizing this like you do above -- playing the man and not the ball -- is what happens when people run out of support for their argument.

My point about Gore in 2000 could equally apply to the 20M Perot voters in 1992, if 25% of them had preferred GHWB remain in the WH instead of Clinton taking over for the rest of the 90s.

The dominant two party system has got to go.

Not really. Politics can be divided into two general camps on every issue -- progressive and conservative.

Progressives want more government intervention in the Holy Market, more forcible redistribution from rich to poor, more personal freedom from top-down behavioral control (pro birth control, pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, pro-recreational drug use, freedom from forcible religious indoctrination, etc), less militarism and overseas military adventures, greater respect and protection for the natural environment, more secularism and just less ideological bullshit overall.

While conservatives want more bullshit -- more military waste, less government interference in how businesses operate, more 19th century social conservatism, more defense of the wealthy from the tax exactions of government, more religious bullshit in the public square, etc. etc.

We could have 535 parties but the polarity of our political discussion wouldn't change a whit in any majoritarian system. Two coalitions form, the majority and the minority.

Nothing much would change if we had more parties -- where the population splits on the issues will determine the policy.

We're just a really divided polity now. There are splits among social and economic axes -- the GOP right has a pro-business typology that is much more socially progressive than their idiot bible-thumper contingent, while the Dems have a sizable urban black protestant / R.C. Hispanic contingent that is much more socially conservative than the across-the-board liberal base. But overall people chose their side that is closest overall to their preference.

All this also doesn't get into the issue that our current electoral system isn't even structured to functionally support a multiparty system, in that it is designed to filter out the minority positions.

Protest-Voting third party -- effectively throwing your vote away -- sure as hell isn't going to change that!

Bellingham Bill says

Protest-Voting third party -- effectively throwing your vote away -- sure as hell isn't going to change that!

Americans can vote for who they want to vote for. It is none of your business. If you don't like it, too bad. Multi-party systems can work. Now, we have a Republican party beholden to the financial industry and a Democrat party beholden to financial industry. Time to break the mold.

Blurtman says

Bellingham Bill says

Protest-Voting third party -- effectively throwing your vote away -- sure as hell isn't going to change that!

Americans can vote for who they want to vote for. It is none of your business. If you don't like it, too bad. Multi-party systems can work. Now, we have a Republican party beholden to the financial industry and a Democrat party beholden to financial industry. Time to break the mold.

Agreed - it's about time for a second party.

Bellingham Bill says

Progressives want more government intervention in the Holy Market, more forcible redistribution from rich to poor, more personal freedom from top-down behavioral control (pro birth control, pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, pro-recreational drug use, freedom from forcible religious indoctrination, etc), less militarism and overseas military adventures, greater respect and protection for the natural environment, more secularism and just less ideological bullshit overall.

What personal freedom is left if one is not allowed to make individual choices, as in a free market place. Religion is irrelevant if everyone is brainwashed into believing the BGASG: Big-Government as Savior God. It's the same bullshit as Stalinist and Maoist religion: replacing existing religious faith with personality cult and government worship.

While conservatives want more bullshit -- more military waste, less government interference in how businesses operate, more 19th century social conservatism, more defense of the wealthy from the tax exactions of government, more religious bullshit in the public square, etc. etc.

19th century was a much more liberal and pleasant place for the world than the 20th century was. Disparate religious practices among the population is a strong antidote against the rise of the far more destructive government-worship. Even the sharia regimes can not hold a candle compared to the genocidal socialist regimes of the 20th century.

Bellingham Bill says

Progressives want more government intervention in the Holy Market, more forcible redistribution from rich to poor, more personal freedom from top-down behavioral control (pro birth control, pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, pro-recreational drug use, freedom from forcible religious indoctrination, etc), less militarism and overseas military adventures, greater respect and protection for the natural environment, more secularism and just less ideological bullshit overall.

Absolutely not. Less militarism is a Libertarian trait, so has been advocating legalizing recreational drug use. In fact the Obama administration raided far far more weed dispensaries than Bush who left the states mostly alone. Also progressives depend on the heavy use of force inside their own country to push through their agenda of cultural marxism which is far more dangerous than any conservative fringe group could ever be.