The Celente solution to the government shutdown. Wall or no wall

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, that would also be evidence that I'm correct. I'm a reasonably well informed person. But there are all sorts of policies I am terribly unqualified to be setting with a vote.

Then if you didnt feel qualified to vote, you would not have to vote. Nor would all complicated issues go before the public for a vote; only important issues.

Personally Id rather accept some public ignorance voting versus today's expert advice anyway. Considering it comes from highly biased lobbying firms paid by big money. Because I think I know whats best for me better than what I trust coming from them.

I know I always get people to vote regarding my medical ailments and how they should be diagnosed and treated. Doctors today are beholden to big business and can't be trusted.

 

[RVonse]

Then you disagree with 50 years of cognitive science showing that even when given accurate information, most people are incapable of sound reasoning and highly subject to emotional ideological biases that undermine how they use that information.

If you mean people are too ignorant I do agree with you that the media is doing a very poor job today. It became monopolized under the Clinton regime and should go back to smaller competitive organizations like before. Basically just undo everything that Clinton did. But that discussion goes beyond the scope of this thread.

So, in your fictional universe, prior to 1992, the media was not an ever increasing consolidation of monopolizing power with shared corporate agenda?
The vast majority of news outlets in the US were under under control of a handful of corporations well before Clinton, and they were/are the same corporations who dominate most major industries from fossil fuels to war (which I realize are highly overlapping, but most corporate interests overlap with War). And Reagan was the king of corporate consolidation, which skyrocketed under his near total dismantling of regulation, the FTC, and Antitrust enforcement. What occurred under Clinton was an inevitable result of that momentum and the anti-regulation courts and precedents that Reagan created.

Oh, and our dad's generation was just as if not more ignorant and irrational. They were the idiots who supported a government that paved the way for a monolithic press devoid of accountability for outright lies and misinformation. They didn't bother to attend to relevant facts even when they were available. So the problems with today's press are more of a byproduct and enhancer of the problem of public irrationality than a cause of it.

We at least agree that the media sucks, it is only a matter of what should be done to better inform the public going forward.

 

[Ford]

Building a wall will have little to no impact on how many immigrants enter this country,.

It obviously will have an impact. If walls did not work, you would not see them anywhere.

You're leaving out a very important part.

I have a wall around my yard. To the best of my knowledge, my neighbors have not jumped over it.

Now, put a large pile of money in the middle of my yard, and a sign in front of my house which reads "large pile of money in back yard...first come, first serve."

I suspect that someone would jump over the wall and take the money. Does the wall still work?

That's essentially what we have at the US border. We have a rather large pile of money in the yard that we pay out to laborers who are willing to make the journey across. There is an enormous amount of money (enough to keep millions employed) and an enormous demand for that labor. A wall may slow down some of those who make the trip, but it does nothing to address the enormous demand or the large pile of money part. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: We don't have an illegal immigration problem in this country. We have an illegal employment problem. A wall does not solve that.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This blockchain voting idea sounds like a great way to go. How could it be any worse than what we have now? And no more government shutdowns.

Well, the false dichotomy springs to mind.

Building a wall will have little to no impact on how many immigrants enter this country, so it will have little to no impact on my costs for the social needs of each immigrant entering this country.

So a YES vote is a vote for BOTH the cost of the wall AND the cost of immigrants. That is not made clear in the example.

Exactly. My only opposition to the idea of a wall is that it would be a symbol of oppression, akin to the civil war statues erected long after the war.

My opposition is practical--few cross out in the wilderness far from civilization. Put a wall for some miles around wherever civilization exists, let nature provide the rest of the wall. That's basically what we have already done, if there are spots where it hasn't the build there, don't build across vast tracts of desert.

 

[funinspace]

What a fuckwit poll. How about this poll? You can pick only one.

A) Do you prefer to go down on your mother; or
B) Do you prefer to butt fuck your daughter?

What's wrong with this poll, and you will know what is wrong with this thread's poll.



Besides, the 2018 mid-terms answered the Wall question pretty well as to what the voters want or don't want Wall wise.

 

[RVonse]

What a fuckwit poll. How about this poll? You can pick only one.

A) Do you prefer to go down on your mother; or
B) Do you prefer to butt fuck your daughter?

What's wrong with this poll, and you will know what is wrong with this thread's poll.

The current focus is that the federal shut down is a condition due to Washington not being able to agree on whether to spend 5 billion on security wall funding. Do you not agree with that? So the poll simply turns that issue into a binary vote. You are either for building the wall or you are not for building the wall. Its really nothing more than that with costs of each option added.

You can disagree with funding the wall or not. But the main point to be made is that through block chain voting your vote counts directly and in so doing the federal workers would go back to work. Because either way, a vote would be taken and a decision would be made.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What a fuckwit poll. How about this poll? You can pick only one.

A) Do you prefer to go down on your mother; or
B) Do you prefer to butt fuck your daughter?

What's wrong with this poll, and you will know what is wrong with this thread's poll.

The current focus is that the federal shut down is a condition due to Washington not being able to agree on whether to spend 5 billion on security wall funding. Do you not agree with that? So the poll simply turns that issue into a binary vote. You are either for building the wall or you are not for building the wall. Its really nothing more than that with costs of each option added.

You can disagree with funding the wall or not. But the main point to be made is that through block chain voting your vote counts directly and in so doing the federal workers would go back to work. Because either way, a vote would be taken and a decision would be made.

But it is more than that. The premise requires that there be an actual distinction between the two choices, which means that building the wall would effectively reduce illegal immigration to the extent that it would have a noticeable effect on the amount paid for social services for illegal immigrants. Given that this is not the case, A and B are not two things in conflict with each other where only one or the other would be viable.

 

[Keith&Co.]

You can disagree with funding the wall or not. But the main point to be made is that through block chain voting your vote counts directly and in so doing the federal workers would go back to work. Because either way, a vote would be taken and a decision would be made.

The problem is the connotations added change the binary vote.

Compare:

Do you want to teach sex education in schools?
[_] Yes
[_] No.

Public school sex education?
[_] Yes, I want to decrease teen pregnancy, teen STDs, and fight the various myths kids are telling each other.
[_] No, I would rather teens remain ignorant harm themselves through that ignorance.

Public school sex education?
[_] Yes, I want to create sluts and whores and teach children that faggotry is okay.
[_] No, I would rather that schools preserve the moral fiber of the nation.

If you're going to reduce complicated issues to a binary choice, then make it a binary choice without an attempt at spin.

 

[RVonse]

Building a wall will have little to no impact on how many immigrants enter this country,.

It obviously will have an impact. If walls did not work, you would not see them anywhere.

You're leaving out a very important part.

I have a wall around my yard. To the best of my knowledge, my neighbors have not jumped over it.

Now, put a large pile of money in the middle of my yard, and a sign in front of my house which reads "large pile of money in back yard...first come, first serve."

I suspect that someone would jump over the wall and take the money. Does the wall still work?

That's essentially what we have at the US border. We have a rather large pile of money in the yard that we pay out to laborers who are willing to make the journey across. There is an enormous amount of money (enough to keep millions employed) and an enormous demand for that labor. A wall may slow down some of those who make the trip, but it does nothing to address the enormous demand or the large pile of money part. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: We don't have an illegal immigration problem in this country. We have an illegal employment problem. A wall does not solve that.

You are absolutely right Ford. Instead of throwing money at the fence we should be prosecuting the people hiring illegals, I could not agree more.

But that can never happen. That can never happen because the real owners of this country do not want that to happen. They want their cheap labor and they want middle America to pay those costs.

So the real question is should we do the next best thing (improve the wall) or nothing at all. Its a judgement call that I believe the average American is smart enough to make regardless of what Jimmy Higgins says.

 

[jonatha]

Blockchain is useless for distributed voting.

The only thing a blockchain does is make it impossible for someone to alter the recorded data after it is added to the blockchain.

It says absolutely nothing about the reliabilty of the data that was added (in the case of bitcoin this is established by non-blockchain means - you look at the coins that are being spent and ensure the person authorizing the transaction received those coins in a prior transaction) or about the authenticity of the entity adding the data (in the case of bitcoin this does not matter - in the case of voting, it sort of does...)

 

[funinspace]

What a fuckwit poll. How about this poll? You can pick only one.

A) Do you prefer to go down on your mother; or
B) Do you prefer to butt fuck your daughter?

What's wrong with this poll, and you will know what is wrong with this thread's poll.

The current focus is that the federal shut down is a condition due to Washington not being able to agree on whether to spend 5 billion on security wall funding. Do you not agree with that? So the poll simply turns that issue into a binary vote. You are either for building the wall or you are not for building the wall. Its really nothing more than that with costs of each option added.

You can disagree with funding the wall or not. But the main point to be made is that through block chain voting your vote counts directly and in so doing the federal workers would go back to work. Because either way, a vote would be taken and a decision would be made.

Like others have already said, the above is clearly not what you poll provides. My vote is no funding for a FFvC type Wall with what you now say. There is no 'crisis' as the Dotard projects...

Just curious have you ever spent much time within say a 100 miles of the southern boarder? I was within 15 miles of the Mexican border 2 years for a wedding, I didn't notice any hordes... I tend to visit the area roughly once a year.