Slashdot Mirror

If the law is unfair, then get the law changed.

With the current political climate: good luck with that. You have the "JOB CREATOR" defenders (sorry, I meant FREEDOM) who will do everything they can to give tax breaks to the very rich, and cry about how the media is just biased against them, and that everyone should pay less tax anyway, because tax cuts just magically pay for themselves in hughly unrealistic economic growth that is just waiting to explode when the government just shuts down the IRS.

Then you get a bunch of billionaires running "grassroots" conservative websites, encouraging alternative realities, to gum up government so they can continue to underpay and pollute, and the party faithful will tear around the country claiming to be victims of tyranny, and for some reason they think they are rebels.

As a conservative, I support tax reform, and I appreciate that most liberals want a fairer and simpler tax system. The political incentives are set for the GOP to simply cry about tyranny whilst fighting for Larry Ellison's carried interest tax break.

The fundamental tenet of the gun rights advocates is that, armed citizenry will take down tyrannical governments.

No, the fundamental tenet of gun rights advocates is that self-defense, which includes the right to own the tools of self-defense, is a basic human right. That fact remains true whether tyrants can survive armed populations or not.

Now it is true as a matter of history that one point the "Founding Fathers" considered was that a nation that relied on a militia (armed and trained body of citizens) for its defense, rather than a standing army, had a built-in defense again its government going tyrannical.

These 3D printed cheap plastic guns are going to flood Africa and other such places with very cheap guns.

Guns are already cheap and easy to make. That's the whole design philosophy of the AK-47 -- you can already get them for around $50 in some parts of Africa.

Your link doesn't claim that wealth inequality grew, it claims the income inequality grew (which is true for the US....IIRC within country inequality is mostly growing, worldwide inequality mostly falling). The share of income taken in return on capital (dividends and suchlike) has risen over 10 years in the US, and the share taken by labour has fallen. That can easily happen when, for example, corporate profits are increasing. I can't find an original source, but there's a graph here: http://www.frumforum.com/incredible-shrinking-workers-income

To all the Krugman haters...

http://comparative-advantage.com/documents/Analysis-of-Forcast-Accuracy-in-the-Political-Media.pdf

http://www.frumforum.com/could-it-be-that-our-enemies-were-right

I'm a (r)epublican, but call a spade a spade. He's been a lot righter than most.

Al Gore bought a 9 million dollar ocean-side estate. Can I trust Al Gore's judgement that the coastal areas will be just fine?

I'd contend that there are non-sausage ways to get this done, but that wasn't desired, so it wasn't achieved.

Wasn't desired by whom? Let me quote Bush Sr's former speechwriter:

There were leaders who knew better, who would have liked to deal. But they were trapped. Conservative talkers on Fox and talk radio had whipped the Republican voting base into such a frenzy that deal-making was rendered impossible. How do you negotiate with somebody who wants to murder your grandmother? Or - more exactly - with somebody whom your voters have been persuaded to believe wants to murder their grandmother?

Without a "loyal opposition" willing and able to actually engage and do their best to make majority-party proposals more acceptable, how do you expect this process to happen? If the opposition party digs in its heels and insists that that everyone who disagrees with them is Hitler, then anything will either (1) not happen at all, or (2) happen despite them as if they hadn't been there. That second option is no better than having a single-party government, and it's the opposition's own fault; we need an opposition, but one that's willing to genuinely engage and work in good faith.

Note, especially, his dig at the "news" media and the yelling heads -- essentially, we are in 100% agreement on that point, that people like Limbaugh make money on conflict/controversy, not compromise/consensus, and they are in it for the money.