A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 317 of 725
Quote:Unlike unemployed 6ix, who is in his prime years for working, I have an actual job to do, despite being 67. Get off the internet, 6ix, and earn money. I got to go do the same.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol. You're a tough guy too, huh? You do a lot of working out in that fake ivory tower of yours, do ya? Maybe regular swimming in your Scrooge McDuck vault of gold coins to cool off after bench pressing pallets of cash?
Wow. You're scary dude. lol
You're a joke, and you are the punchline.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Prime Working Age Population Data For U.S. Counties
Those considered to be of prime working age are between the ages of 25 and 54.
www.governing.com/gov-data/census/prime-working-age-population-data-fo
r-counties-local-areas.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Unlike unemployed 6ix, who is in his prime years for working, I have an actual job to do, despite being 67. Get off the internet, 6ix, and earn money. I got to go do the same.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol. You're a tough guy too, huh? You do a lot of working out in that fake ivory tower of yours, do ya? Maybe regular swimming in your Scrooge McDuck vault of gold coins to cool off after bench pressing pallets of cash?
Wow. You're scary dude. lol
You're a joke, and you are the punchline.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Prime Working Age Population Data For U.S. Counties
Those considered to be of prime working age are between the ages of 25 and 54.
www.governing.com/gov-data/census/prime-working-age-population-data-fo
r-counties-local-areas.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
In three years you've never gotten off the internet or done any work.
I'm happy that I could finally help you grow as a person.
You're welcome.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
T 
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Wow, and you think the wealth gap is caused by Republicans?
SIGNY: Instead of looking for areas of disagreement, is it possible for you to look for areas of agreement?
SECONDRATE: How about abolitionists and slave-owners finding "areas of agreement"? The disagreement ran four score and seven years, ending with a million dead. That takes precedence over "areas of agreement".
SIGNY: Well, show me the slave owners! They don't exist, do they?
So what is THE intractable division between Americans? Surely it's not slavery, or water fluoridation!
SECOND: I will show you the modern slave-owners.
The old time plantation slave-owners were the richest people in America! The top 1% of slave-owners owned 90% of the slaves. The top 10% owned 99% of the slaves. A funny thing happened -- the people who owned one or no slaves volunteered to fight for the people who owned all the slaves.
Oy vey.
A]I know I've posted this before but ... in any long-term trend chart of wealth inequality, you can't tell where Democrats or Republicans are in charge, The only consistent trend (besides wealth inequality going up) is that the gap tends to close when there is a significant financial upset. You really see this in 2008, but also in 2000 (the dot-com bubble). I'll see if I can find a better chart, but from a distance you can't tell when Carter or Bill were in the WH versus Bush1 or Bush2.
The SOURCES of much of this wealth inequality is several-fold but includes
The offhshoring of jobs by transnationals. All of those trillions and trillions of dollarss formerly circulating in the USA are now circulating in China. This has been a project of Presidents since Richard Nixon and his visit to China, but was was really pushed forward by Bush1, Bill Clinton, Bush2, and Obama.
Increasingly finacialized wealth generation, and access to near-zero percent loans by the wealthy for speculation. It was Bill Clinton who "reformed" the financial system which made financial speculation by "savings" banks possible (eliminate Glass Steagall), and promoted speculation in derivatives thru his CFMA which made scams like Enron possible. It is the Fed (which can be influenced by the President) creates money out of thin air and lends it at near-zero interest rates to the wealthy. NO President, Democratic or Republican, has made any moves to limit financial speculation as a source of wealth.
Increased monopoly size. Amazon. Time Warner/Comcast. Bayer/Monsanto. GlaxoWellcome/SmithKlineBeecham. Microsoft. Comcast/AT&T. Exxx
on/Mobil. Facebook. Whether homegrown or the result of M&As/ LBOs, NO President has stood in the way of monopolization. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_mergers_and_acquisitio
ns Obviously, the bigger the pile that you'reon top of, the wealthier you're going to be.
Tax breaks for the rich. This is something associated with Republicns, but Kennedy and Johnson were the first to cut taxes on the wealthy, from 90% to 70%. Ronald Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy (70% to 50% and then to 28%), but so did Bill Clinton (capital gains tax cut from 28% to 20%). It seems like the record is not as clear-cut as you would think, and tax-cutting is a bipartisan love affair.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Wow, classic SECONDRATE
SIX: That doesn't even seem to be a reply to my quote. Are you having a stroke?
SECOND: If this was real life, I'd pick you off the ground by your shirt and we'd continue this conversation with you fearful I'd hurt you if you lied to me
a) I doubt you could beat SIX in a hand-to-hand fight.
b) It sure didn't take you long to resort to threats!
SIX I don't know how you managed but you REALLY got under SECOND's skin. Congrats!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We like to have fun here. 
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, SECOND, let's take another running start at a reasonable (rational, responsive to facts and logic, non-threatening) discussion.
UNLIKE YOU, I credit most people with honest motives, even those I disagree with strongly. JO and his RUSSIA!RUSSIA! fixation. Bless him, his brain has been hijacked by Rachel Madcow but I believe he wants the best for Americans. SHINY, another brain hijacked by the liberal media, but he too wants the best for America, and Americans. Someone (who shall remain nameless) was formerly fixated in Iraq WMD but HE TOO wants the best for America, and Americans. Even THUGR wants what is best for America, and Americans. People may be driven to extremes by fear, but not hate.
We probably mostly agree on what is "best" for America (I can name five existential things we all likely agree on) but we might disagree on how "best" to get there. Wherever we disagree could probably be solved by calm discussion; I honestly believe we can work out almost everything thru some combination of mind-changing, compromise, and win-win negotiating, because we all want what's best for America and Americans. It may take ten years to figure this all out, but that's a lot better than spending ten years bickering and dreaming up ways to divide and fight over artificial things.
There are only a few people I credit with either unintentionally warped or dishonest motives: You (warped, you hate America); WISHY (warped, she hates certain ethnic groups and sexes); and CC (probably a paid bot, certainly intentionally and repeatedly dishonest).
I would LIKE to say that I can trust your motives but you're clearly driven by hate. If you can't credit most people with honest motives ... even if biased (you think) information... then you can't discuss anything. And trust has to go both ways. I'm willing to trust you with honest motives if you're able to demonstrate that I should; so far you've done the opposite. Are you willing to trust me?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
America’s politics of epiphany
If President Donald Trump is defeated, the GOP is going to want to work with Democrats again, making an ambitious agenda possible. That, at least, is former Vice President Joe Biden’s theory of the case. “You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends,” he said in November. “Mark my words.”
Biden was mocked for these comments, and rightly so. There will be no Republican epiphany if Biden is elected, just as the fever didn’t break when Barack Obama was reelected. Biden came of political age in the Senate of the 1970s and ’80s, when the political parties were ideologically mixed and bipartisanship was common. He yearns for a political structure that no longer exists and hasn’t for some time.
But Biden isn’t alone in running on an unlikely theory of change. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg are all running on a theory in which the force of their personality, or the strength of their movement, or the popularity of their agenda breaks the polarization that has gridlocked US politics.
In many countries, this whole conversation would be puzzling. Parties run on agendas, and if they win, they implement those agendas, or at least a substantial part of them.
That’s not the case in America, where divided government is common, the filibuster forces supermajority levels of consensus in the Senate, electoral geography dilutes the power of popular majorities, and polarized parties make compromise impossible. Here, parties run on ambitious agendas and, when they win, typically find themselves foiled in their efforts to pass much of anything at all. Elections then devolve into bitter games of blame-shifting, in which the question isn’t how the public feels about what did happen but who the public holds responsible for what didn’t happen.
Many voters don’t know who controls the Senate, much less the role of the filibuster. Trump can talk about the ‘do-nothing Democrats’ while House bills gather dust in a corner of McConnell’s office! Voters are completely uninterested in process explanations. They don’t want to hear about how candidates can’t actually do things. But if you win, the opposing party will have a veto over most of the things voters care about.
More at www.vox.com/2020/2/10/21128617/sanders-biden-buttigieg-2020-democratic
-primary-warren
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So SECOND: You hate Americans so much you won't discuss "What are Americans' interests"?
If JO, CC, WISHY, SHINY etc are reading this, please remember: SECOND hates you.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It has been discussed. The choice is 1) California Republican Party Platform
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So SECOND: You hate Americans so much you won't discuss "What are Americans' interests"?
If JO, CC, WISHY, SHINY etc are reading this, please remember: SECOND hates you.
or
2) California Democratic Party Platform
www.cadem.org/our-california/platform
There are other states that have discussed this in great detail, working on their list of "interests" for many years. With 100 different versions, 2 for each state, does America really need version #101 and #102? Or version #329,276,001? Pick a state. Pick a party. Limit yourself to one out of the official 100. If the Green Party or other third parties or you have a wish list, it can be ignored since only Democrats and Republicans have the numbers to imaginably make their list a reality. Actually I don't think either party has the numbers to do anything since it take a super-majority to accomplish anything in American government at the Federal level.
www.texasdemocrats.org/our-party/texas-democratic-party-platform/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME