Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats. (https://www.miataturbo.net/)
-   Current Events, News, Politics (https://www.miataturbo.net/current-events-news-politics-77/)
-   -   Why does Major Bloomberg want to kill off the homeless? (https://www.miataturbo.net/current-events-news-politics-77/why-does-major-bloomberg-want-kill-off-homeless-64988/)

Braineack 04-09-2012 11:00 AM

Why does Major Bloomberg want to kill off the homeless?
 
I thought "his people" were all about helping our fellow man?


what's with the recent trend of banning feeding and donating to the homeless?

hustler 04-09-2012 11:06 AM

This way when the homeless are mobilized to vote, they'll remember who fed them.

Joe Perez 04-09-2012 11:15 AM


Originally Posted by Braineack (Post 861301)
Why does Major Bloomberg want to kill off the homeless

Supposing that your premise is true (that Mayor Bloomberg does wish to kill the homeless) I would posit that his intentions would be to decrease the secondary costs associated with a large homeless population (unpaid ER bills, litter removal, shopping-cart theft) and to improve the quality of life for productive members of society, by reducing the amount of fecal material deposited in subway stations and on public sidewalks, removing obstructions to pedestrian traffic (homeless camped out on sidewalks and near the Metrocard vending machines), etc.

Putting aside any fanciful notions of morality (eg: eugenics is "evil") it sounds like a net positive for society, and as a person who spends a fair amount of time in Manhattan and would prefer an end to sleeping homeless folks taking up an entire row of seats on the train during rush hour, I'd support such a program.

Braineack 04-09-2012 11:20 AM

so it's okay to sacrfice a few for many?

Joe Perez 04-09-2012 12:53 PM


Originally Posted by Braineack (Post 861314)
so it's okay to sacrfice a few for many?

Yes. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

This the whole underlying concept of proxy warfare, progressive taxation, representative democracy, and Star Trek II.

Scrappy Jack 04-09-2012 01:19 PM

Is it an urban legen that Bloomberg once offered one-way train and plane tickets to the homeless in an effort to allow them to voluntarily vacate NYC?

Savington 04-09-2012 01:27 PM


Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack (Post 861416)
Is it an urban legen that Bloomberg once offered one-way train and plane tickets to the homeless in an effort to allow them to voluntarily vacate NYC?

Apparently not:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/ny.../29oneway.html

RattleTrap 04-09-2012 01:31 PM


Originally Posted by Braineack (Post 861301)
what's with the recent trend of banning feeding and donating to the homeless?


The fear if an area has a 'social welfare program', either public or private that benefits the homeless, the knowledge of that will spread resulting in an influx of homeless to that area.
Cities/counties do not want to incur expenditure on services provided to those who do not pay taxes.
Makes it hard to balance the budget and be seen as a hero.
So it's easier just to make it someone else's problem.

Today, one cannot successfully run an election campaign on an 'increasing taxes' platform, even if it were the solution to our problems.

Btw: I include Joe's assessments of costs as 'services provided.'

Rabbit-trail: Our government was not originally intended to take care of all the social ills that inevitably come along with a society. It was assumed that 'the people' would address these problems (in an ethical manner) thus not burdening the 'gov't' and themselves further.

"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

If we claim to genuinely embrace Liberty, then we are compelled to satisfy the obligations due it. Today, we are a nation concerned with approaching 'government' as the panacea for all ills. We see these obligations as personal hindrance and impediment.
When we ignore, or demand another to fulfill, our obligations, we relinquish that Liberty we hold so dear and thrust ourselves as indentured servants to an unpredictable master.

The burdens of Liberty are obligation and responsibility.
Only in Liberty is there true freedom,
Only in freedom is there choice.

Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he knew how much we've indebted ourselves to China; that is, if he hadn't expected us to be this way eventually.



The Canadians and Germans see what's happened...

blaen99 04-09-2012 01:47 PM


Originally Posted by RattleTrap (Post 861427)
Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he knew how much we've indebted ourselves

Urban legend.

China owes an absolutely miniscule fraction of our overall debt, and only owns a minority of our foreign-held debt.

If they immediately dumped all of the U.S. debt at a massive loss to them, it wouldn't amount to much more than a blip in our financial system realistically. Plus, this makes no sense. Why would China dump our debt to take a massive loss, unless we assume they are willing to substantially hurt themselves in order to hurt us? Or are we assuming China is some kind of psychopath?

/Drive-by posting, gotta get back to work.

RattleTrap 04-09-2012 02:02 PM

The point I was trying to make is we shouldn't have indebted ourselves to anyone.
Not trying to turn this into a 'China/US' thread, it's just the principles are the same whether internal or abroad.
Jefferson seems to expect this kind of behavior from human beings.
Opportunism is oppression.

blaen99 04-09-2012 02:10 PM

What "power" do they have over us? In what way are we indebted to them, beyond them having the power to say "We won't buy your debt anymore!"

/I admit that I do wish for that last part to happen. It'd be a wonderful wakeup call to our politicians.

Braineack 04-09-2012 02:26 PM

it's actually a clever way to deincentivize homeless from staying in NY. I'd be pissed if I couldn't get free bagels anymore. Ask Lars.

shuiend 04-09-2012 02:29 PM


Originally Posted by Braineack (Post 861457)
it's actually a clever way to deincentivize homeless from staying in NY. I'd be pissed if I couldn't get free bagels anymore. Ask Lars.

You do love you some bagels.

rleete 04-09-2012 04:44 PM

"Why does Major Bloomberg want to kill off the homeless?"

Why are you against it? If we process the carcasses correctly, we have a new source of protein for Meals on Wheels, too.

Braineack 04-09-2012 05:24 PM

gotta make sure the FDA approves it first. or the EPA. or Wildlife preserve...

blaen99 04-09-2012 05:28 PM

It's obviously a conspiracy against Brainy's bagels.

Joe Perez 04-09-2012 05:39 PM

Ironically, the city had a plan last year to feed all of the Canada geese (which are routinely rounded up and executed en masse) to the homeless, but the plan stalled as "there was no regulator framework in place with which to do so."

Instead, all the NY geese get shipped to Pennsylvania, as they are able to process Geese for Bums.

In the long term, however, I'd posit that the time and money spent delivering and processing goose carcasses (as opposed to dumping them into the east river) exceeds what it would cost to simply slaughter all the homeless and be done with it (presupposing that habeas corpus is suspended for the purpose of same.)

blaen99 04-09-2012 05:48 PM

What's this? NY supports boiled goose for bums?


RattleTrap 04-09-2012 11:10 PM


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861452)
I admit that I do wish for that last part to happen. It'd be a wonderful wakeup call to our politicians.

IDK if you've noticed or not, but we've been in an 'economic' war with them for the last sixty years or so.
My 'China' comment was just an aside to express the lengths we'll go to in order to make our obligations/responsibilities 'someone else's problem.'
(Btw, my first post addresses your signature as well.)

Brain addressed my overstated point quite succinctly.

While this all seems to cast local governments as unfeeling or uncaring, there are even more insidious motivations afoot. But not by governing bodies.

The new trend is that duplicitous organizations will exploit the homeless by providing seemingly charitable acts in order to garner publicity for their own agenda, which usually has nothing to do with homelessness and everything with funding their cause..
These events are usually somewhat publicized ahead of time and are designed to be 'friendly' to local media. If they get arrested, even better. Martyrdom sells.

Organizations that have an actual interest in caring for those homeless are usually not seeking media coverage, and do so much more than one lunch or shoes. They are also usually closely working with or alongside local government and community leaders, while being funded by corporate and individual donations raised somewhat separately on their behalf.

Then there's the Soylent Corp solution...

blaen99 04-09-2012 11:48 PM


Originally Posted by RattleTrap (Post 861753)
IDK if you've noticed or not, but we've been in an 'economic' war with them for the last sixty years or so.

Sixty years?

I could see past decade, maaaaayyybe past two. Three's right out, and four? Don't get me started. But six decades?

Bro, China was nothing but a pissant third world country no better than Somalia today 60 years ago (Granted, slight hyperbole, but not much here).

Where are you getting this stuff from? It completely baffles me.

It sounds an awful lot like you are hearing what someone else is telling you, and are taking it at face value without thinking about it. But that's just IMO.

RattleTrap 04-10-2012 12:23 AM


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861765)
It completely baffles me.

I know. I take it you were born after 1985?


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861765)
It sounds an awful lot like you are hearing what someone else is telling you, and are taking it at face value without thinking about it.

Not my style.
My father was retired Navy. He was in China when we were kicked out. (Late forties.) One of the last with the 'China Service' medal.

Source.

Retreat to Taiwan

In October 1949 Chairman Mao's communists took control on the mainland and Chiang Kai-shek withdrew his Kuomintang army to Taiwan, taking with him China's entire gold reserves. More than 1.5 million refugees fled with him adding to resentment among native Taiwanese against what they saw as a mainland invasion.

In December Chiang declared Taipei the temporary capital of China, vowing that he would eventually "recover the mainland". He also issued a decree imposing perpetual martial law - an order not rescinded until 38 years later. As part of the claim to represent all China, all the institutions of mainland government were transferred to Taiwan, including the parliament, which had representatives for all mainland provinces.

Chiang's government imposed harsh restrictions on civil and political liberties, jailing or executing thousands of opponents and clamping down on the use of native Taiwanese dialects.

Initially the US kept well out of the stand-off between the two Chinas. But with the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 and Chinese troops fighting in Korea, Taiwan was seen as part of the west's bulwark against communist expansionism. The US poured in money and military supplies. A planned communist invasion in 1950 was thwarted when President Truman ordered the US 7th Fleet into the Taiwan Straits.

blaen99 04-10-2012 12:26 AM


Originally Posted by RattleTrap (Post 861772)
I know. I take it you were born after 1985?

Before, actually.


Not my style.
My father was retired Navy. He was in China when we were kicked out. (Late forties.) One of the last with the 'China Service' medal.

Source.

Retreat to Taiwan

In October 1949 Chairman Mao's communists took control on the mainland and Chiang Kai-shek withdrew his Kuomintang army to Taiwan, taking with him China's entire gold reserves. More than 1.5 million refugees fled with him adding to resentment among native Taiwanese against what they saw as a mainland invasion.

In December Chiang declared Taipei the temporary capital of China, vowing that he would eventually "recover the mainland". He also issued a decree imposing perpetual martial law - an order not rescinded until 38 years later. As part of the claim to represent all China, all the institutions of mainland government were transferred to Taiwan, including the parliament, which had representatives for all mainland provinces.

Chiang's government imposed harsh restrictions on civil and political liberties, jailing or executing thousands of opponents and clamping down on the use of native Taiwanese dialects.

Initially the US kept well out of the stand-off between the two Chinas. But with the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 and Chinese troops fighting in Korea, Taiwan was seen as part of the west's bulwark against communist expansionism. The US poured in money and military supplies. A planned communist invasion in 1950 was thwarted when President Truman ordered the US 7th Fleet into the Taiwan Straits.
How does any of this have to do with the economic war you earlier alluded to? Specifically, China 'owning' us via US debt they've purchased?

JasonC SBB 04-10-2012 12:40 AM

Economic war?:

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/feat...rtarian-style/


"Common sense economics" is a phrase used to describe the eco-nomic reasoning of the proverbial man in the street. In many in-stances, this knowledge may rest on principles that are essentially correct. For example, we have that old truism that there are no free lunches.

Tariffs Are Taxes

A tariff is a special kind of tax. It is a tax paid directly by impor-ters for the right to offer foreign products for sale on a domestic market. Indirectly, however, the tax is borne by a whole host of people, and these people are sel-dom even aware that they are pay-ing the tax.

Trade War, Statist Style

One advantage of the direct sub-sidy to protected industries is that such subsidies would not normally result in trade wars. When one nation sees its products discrimi-nated against by another State, it is more apt to retaliate directly. It threatens to raise tariffs against the offending country’s products unless the first country’s tariffs are reduced. If there is no re-sponse, pressures arise within the threatening country’s State bu-reaus to enforce the threat. That, it is argued, will frighten other nations which might be consider-ing similar moves. So the tariff war is born. The beneficiaries are the inefficient on both sides of the border and the State bureaucrats; the losers are all those involved in trade and all consumers who would have liked to purchase their goods at lower prices. This kind of war is therefore especially pernicious: it penalizes the productive and subsidizes the unproductive.

Tariff War, Libertarian Style

When some foreign State de-cides to place restrictions on the importation of goods from another country, what should be the re-sponse of that latter country’s eco-nomic administrators? Their goal is to make their nation’s goods at-tractive to foreign purchasers. They should want to see the inter-national division of labor main-tained, adding to the material prosperity of all involved. If this is the goal, then policies that will keep the trade barriers at low levels should be adopted. Instead, there is the tendency to adopt re-taliatory tariff barriers, thus sti-fling even further the flow of goods. This is done as a "warn-ing" to other nations.

If the 1930′s are anything like representative years of such warn-ings, then we should beware of conventional tariff wars. In those years a snowballing effect was produced, as each nation tried to” out-warn" its neighbor in an attempt to gain favorable trade positions with all others. The re-sult was the serious weakening of the international specialization of labor and its productivity. At a time when people wanted cheaper goods, they imposed trade restric-tions which forced prices upward and production downward.? Pro-fessor Mises’ old dictum held true: When a State tries to improve economic conditions by tampering with the free market, it usually succeeds in accomplishing pre-cisely the results which it sought to avoid (or officially sought to avoid, at any rate).

The best policy for "retaliation" would be to drop all tariff barriers in response.

gearhead_318 04-10-2012 12:50 AM


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861765)
Bro, China was nothing but a pissant third world country no better than Somalia today 60 years ago (Granted, slight hyperbole, but not much here).

You are seriously overestimating Somalia.

How old are you?

blaen99 04-10-2012 12:52 AM


Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16 (Post 861779)
You are seriously overestimating Somalia.

How old are you?

FFS Shear, if I say I'm using hyperbole, I'm using hyperbole bro. I even made sure to spell it out for people that time.

Here, Shear, from dictionary.com for you...


hy·per·bo·le
1.
obvious and intentional exaggeration.
2.
an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

gearhead_318 04-10-2012 12:56 AM

I have trouble ignoring such inaccuracy, I could have let it slid if you used N. Korea instead. I just can't help being an ------- sometimes.

blaen99 04-10-2012 12:57 AM


Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16 (Post 861781)
I have trouble ignoring such inaccuracy, I could have let it slid if you used N. Korea instead.

:squint:

gearhead_318 04-10-2012 01:00 AM


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861782)
:squint:

http://literalminded.files.wordpress...pg?w=300&h=225

blaen99 04-10-2012 01:07 AM

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...jpg?1295725757

RattleTrap 04-10-2012 01:10 AM


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861765)
Sixty years?
I could see past decade, maaaaayyybe past two. Three's right out, and four? Don't get me started. But six decades?

Where are you getting this stuff from?


Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861773)
How does any of this have to do with the economic war you earlier alluded to?

You asked. I told. Do try to keep up...

Originally Posted by blaen99 (Post 861765)
Bro, China was nothing but a pissant third world country no better than Somalia today 60 years ago (Granted, slight hyperbole, but not much here).


Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16 (Post 861779)
You are seriously overestimating Somalia.

And severely underestimating the Chinese. I'm beginning to believe Blaen is is either extremely jingoistic, xenophobic or just outright racist.

gearhead_318 04-10-2012 01:10 AM

1 Attachment(s)
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1334034657

blaen99 04-10-2012 01:15 AM

1 Attachment(s)

Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16 (Post 861786)

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1334035011



Originally Posted by RattleTrap (Post 861785)
You asked. I told. Do try to keep up...

Incorrect. You tried to make an incorrect and wildly paranoid statement that China owns a majority of our debt, and has substantial control over us. I corrected you, noting that China owns a miniscule amount of our debt (It's in the single percentage digits, even).

You then went off on a tirade about the communist days, of which has little-to-no relevance to your earlier premise (Specifically, that the Chinese 'own' us.), then tried to tie it in with your earlier exceedingly paranoid post about an economic war of over 60 years. Unfortunately, none of it had any particular relevance with respect to your original premise (The chinese 'own' us!!!!), and paranoid rantings are merely paranoid rantings.


And severely underestimating the Chinese. I'm beginning to believe Blaen is is either extremely jingoistic, xenophobic or just outright racist.
....And now, to copy Shear.

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__...ull_retard.jpg

Scrappy Jack 04-10-2012 08:18 AM

I have to back blaen up, here. RattleTrap - China sends us real goods and services, we send them either pieces of paper with old dead white guys on them or (more commonly) electronic 0s and 1s that get stored in their checking account at the Federal Reserve earning 0.25%.

They can do whatever they want with that checking account, but they typically take a bunch of it and move it to a savings account which pays just a little bit more and has almost no risk of loss of (nominal) principle. That savings account is called US Treasury securities.

Germany has an entirely different monetary system from the US. They are like US states. Canada does have a system very similar to the US.


Most of the US debt outstanding is owed to...



The US (public and private). If you'd like to learn more, send me a PM or visit my thread "Let's bore each other to death." :D I'm leaving the monetary system discussion here, otherwise I will end up being "that guy."


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:27 AM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands