Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Nov 18th, 2003, 07:56 PM        Conservatives are so greedy. Just look at Bush states.
Intriguing, isn't it?
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Perndog Perndog is offline
Fartin's biggest fan
Perndog's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Snowland
Perndog is probably a spambot
Old Nov 18th, 2003, 08:06 PM       
These are ranks, in order from most generous to least generous. The top 20 most generous states voted for Bush.

I just thought I'd clarify, since I was too dumb to get it at first and I didn't want others to be confused too.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Nov 18th, 2003, 08:33 PM       
God, what bullshit. At least it isn't from the fucking Cato Institute this time.

Tell me, is the only charity worth measuring that which is tax deductable...? Apparently so, according to this retarded "give-o-meter," or whatever.

And you're not a conservative OAO, you're a traditional liberal, so what gives? Charity is for suckers who don't read Ayn Rand, right???
Reply With Quote
  #4  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Nov 18th, 2003, 08:35 PM       
Quote:
Intriguing, isn't it?
No, not really. Unless you're foolish enough to believe that only those who voted for Bush made charitable contributions, which is what this fellow's site most certainly tries to imply.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #5  
The_Rorschach The_Rorschach is offline
Mocker
The_Rorschach's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
The_Rorschach is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 12:17 AM       
Yes well, Republicans traditionally favour big business, big business favours tax shelters and kick backs.

I didn't see anything shocking about this at all, but then, I simply read the comments rather that the article itself. I make charitable donatives too, but I sacrifice of my time and ability as my assets are anything but monetary.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
derrida is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 11:13 AM       
Sociologists have long observed that charitable initiatives are heavily supported by conservative social movements. I think the logic goes something like this: charity serves to acknowledge inequality but doesn't challenge its underlying causes, thus serving to perpetuate the existing order. In addition, charity makes a nice political token, regardless of the fact that it does very little to remediate the problem of poverty.

There is a distinct difference between Charity and Justice.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
The_Rorschach The_Rorschach is offline
Mocker
The_Rorschach's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
The_Rorschach is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 11:36 AM       
Sociology is not a science, it is a stastic based superstition. Sociologists carry about as much weight with me as members of the Catholic clergy.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 11:52 AM       
Sociology bashing aside, I would only find this Bush states Vs. Generosity chart 'intriguing' if it was cross referenced with

Bush states VS Tomato consumption
Bush states VS Child Pornography arrests
Bush states VS Shoe size
Incidence of Psoriosis VS Generosity
Abidexterous High schoool dropouts VS. Generosity
People named Dave VS Generosity
Reply With Quote
  #9  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
derrida is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 04:06 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rorschach
Sociology is not a science, it is a stastic based superstition. Sociologists carry about as much weight with me as members of the Catholic clergy.
Wow! 3DGY! Look out, folks, we've got a real iconoclast here!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 04:24 PM       
You can still make a fairly good educated guess if the statistics are fairly consistent. Matter of fact, they used statistics generously in quantum physics due to the nature of subatomic particles and the results are fairly successful when the sample set of trials is significantly high.
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 04:27 PM       
I'm banking that most of these states have low taxes.

Lower taxes mean people can give more to charity, which is what conservatives have been saying all the time.

The point is that charity does not have to be forced by the government in the form of welfare, etc.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
The_Rorschach The_Rorschach is offline
Mocker
The_Rorschach's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
The_Rorschach is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 09:41 PM       
Depends upon who you ask, really OAO. President Lincoln, President Theodore Roosevelt and President Reagan felt it was the responsibility of the government to do for individuals what individuals could not do for themselves. Hence programs for veterans, disabled and otherwise, foster care and the Career Services Centre where unskilled, unemployed civilians can be taught a trade on the governments dime.

There is a fine line behind helping people who cannot help themselves and helping those who simply refuse. To be honest with you, I have trouble seeing it myself sometimes, so I tend to be a little bit more reserved when criticizing issues like welfare. You're not punishing the mother by refusing her financial aide, you're punishing the child, and that seems a bit Draconian to me, and hardly the benchmark of a civilized society.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
camacazio camacazio is offline
Mocker
camacazio's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
camacazio is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 09:46 PM       
That's why FDR's approach to the Great Depression was so ingenious. He didn't give things to people, he provided all sorts of ways for people to get things for themselves. I agree with this method heavily: don't make people dependant. There needs to be some level of help, and even some level of giving, but making people dependant on those kinds of things isn't good.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
The_Rorschach The_Rorschach is offline
Mocker
The_Rorschach's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
The_Rorschach is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 09:48 PM       
Rothbard was right, Franklin Roosevelt was a socialist sycophant and Gary Glitter is a fucking nancy. You're an idiot, go away.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Nov 19th, 2003, 11:50 PM       
syncophant like a fox!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
The_Rorschach The_Rorschach is offline
Mocker
The_Rorschach's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
The_Rorschach is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 12:47 PM       
I couldn't tell if you agreed or were being sarcistic Kev, so I felt motivated to reply. . .My God, I believe this is my first real post here in like six months or something

Communism is like a virus, according to Marx it is the inevitable conclusion of all democratic and republican countries ("What the bourgeoisie therefore produce, above all, is its own gave diggers. Its fall and the victory of the Proletariat are equally inevitable", the Communist Manifesto), according to Lenin it is a philosophy which must eclipse any extant government for the good of all men ("The capitalists will supply us with the materials and the technology which we lack. They will restore our defense industry, which we need for our future victorious attacks upon our suppliers." V.I.Lenin, 1921). These are tenants which were espoused by the Soviet Union until its dying day ("The leading and guiding force of Soviet Society . . . is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union [which is] armed with Marxism-Leninism and imparts a planned systematic and theoretically substantiated character to their struggle for the victory of Communism." Article 6 of the constitution of the USSR adopted October 1977 ).Unlike any other polity which seeks only to care after its governed, communism is imperialistic in narure -And it is that nature which prompted Germany animosity during World War 2, and the cold war waged by our own country. Roosevelt wanted to involve himself in the war as early as 1938 when Czechoslovakia fell to Germany, but there was no public support. None, and for good reason. Germany was never a threat to us. Herr Hitler actually found himself in open admiration of the US, both as a political and economic institution which prompted him to emplace National Socialism, not to be confused with communism or modern socialism, seeing that the real enemy to any peaceful country's existance would be communist imperialism.

This is not a defense of Hitler, I'm ommitting quite a bit purposely, however it is important to note that while Germans and Americans looked upon Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili's (Stalin's real name, for those who don't know it) manner of leadership with open disgust and contempt, Roosevelt never did. Despite the overwhelming evidence presented to him. We all remember the show trials right? There were four key trials from 1936 to 1938, The Trial of the Sixteen was the first (December 1936); then the Trial of the Seventeen (January 1937); then the trial of Red Army generals, including Marshal Tukhachevsky (June 1937); and finally the Trial of the Twenty One (including Bukharin) in March 1938. But his barbarism didn't stop there, even after his power base was ensured, he went on to order assassination of Trotsky in Mexico, 1940 -Trotsky having been a severe impediment against his rise to power years before.

What he did to his own populace was worse - terrorizing large segments of the Soviet population, such as the Kulaks, and orchestrating massive famines in the places such as Ukraine whereby an estimated 5 million people died - yet ever to Mr Roosevelt would he be considered "Uncle Joe." I won't mention Roosevelt's socialist policies enacted domestically, as we have laboured over those points in the past, and I'm sure OAO could contribute them as readily as a I, but if this doesn't qualify Franklin Delano as a socialist sycophant, I don't know what does [/i]
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Protoclown Protoclown is offline
The Goddamned Batman
Protoclown's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Richmond, VA
Protoclown is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 12:50 PM       
this thread is boring
__________________
"It's like I'm livin' in a stinkin' poop rainbow." - Cordelia Burbank
Reply With Quote
  #18  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 12:54 PM       
Once is enough, what the hell kind of economist are you going to make if a simple chart graphing two totally disperate sets of facts against each other with no attempt to explain a correlation is meaningful to you in any way? I can't believe you have the audacity to fault other people for posting bad writting. Giving to charity vs, voting for President? Which charities, what household percentage of giving, who's the governor, what's tha average individual donation how many donations, what were the giving statistics in years the states voted democrat, who did the research, how was it done? You realize, don't you that the comparison graph was posted by pundit who did NO RESEARCH at all as to causal correlatives here, right? That the graph is absolutely without any merit in any argument at all and that if I was teaching a high school research class and got that graph I'd have given the kid a D becuase he made an effort but in no way understood what research was?

See, I think you actually DO know all that. I think you hold the avergare intelligence here in disdain, you underestimate it, and you think you're somehow scoring points by being an agent provocateur. I hate it when people play stupid, especially people who aren't as smart as they think they are to begin with.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 03:18 PM       
Quote:
"Sociology is not a science, it is a stastic based superstition."
So is quantuum physics, but both fields do a pretty good job of making prediction models for their subjects of study. :P
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 03:27 PM       
Know what's a good, hard science. Economics. I think economists have every right to look down a sociologists. I mean, once you've established a really good set of totally provable theorems and an ability to acurately predict outcomes, like economics has, you can really thumb your nose.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 04:27 PM       
That is great and all, but then there is the fact that is a message board - not a high school.

This wasn't intended to actually prove anything, it was just something to make you go "hmmm..."

It was more of a smack into the face of people who claim all conservatives and/or neoconservatives are greedy, self-centered, and don't care about their fellow man.

Throwing in the thing about lower taxes = more willing to donate to charity was fairly assuming, built around a postulate that those states which came out Republican have lower taxes. I don't have time to look up all of this, and it is not such an illogical thought if you consider the tax rates in average.

Now, does that prove that there is a correlation between taxes and donation to charity? No. I would laugh my head off if someone tried to say that, or anything similar. But, it is something to make you go "hmmm...," and it doesn't defy logic or theory.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Anonymous Anonymous is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Anonymous is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 04:27 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Know what's a good, hard science. Economics. I think economists have every right to look down a sociologists. I mean, once you've established a really good set of totally provable theorems and an ability to acurately predict outcomes, like economics has, you can really thumb your nose.
No way. My economics teacher tried to explain why buying a season pass to an amusement park is more expensive than going to the park often enough to overshoot the cost of a season pass, and to this day, I still don't understand why. It's because of that that I can never bring myself to go to Six Flags any more.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
kellychaos kellychaos is offline
Mocker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
kellychaos is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 05:01 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Know what's a good, hard science. Economics. I think economists have every right to look down a sociologists. I mean, once you've established a really good set of totally provable theorems and an ability to acurately predict outcomes, like economics has, you can really thumb your nose.
Actually, not only are both linked by a somewhat common theme but also considered "soft sciences" due to their heavy reliance on probability and statistics in their approach. That's not to say that economics does not make use of proveable mathematical tools.
__________________

Wherever you go, there you are.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 07:28 PM       
Am I the the only one who saw that burbank was being sarcastic?

Kelly, not all forms of economics have heavy reliance on complex mathematical equations (Neoclassical trains of thought do, which most people simply equate to economics), but you are correct that they are soft sciences.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Nov 20th, 2003, 07:37 PM       
So wait, is it something to make you go "Hmmmm..." or a slap in the face?

Cause mostly slaps in the face don't make me go "Hmmm..."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:55 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.