Americans for prosperity back at it

[Michchamp]

keeping threads on track is a noble cause indeed.

it irks me when someone posts something with a number of points or information, and someone comes along to cherry pick one (1) minor point they disagree with, or that might be an assumption or a stretch... and then the thread goes off the rails arguing that point.

whether the Kochs are successful businessmen or not (and you could argue that point) is immaterial here... being a successful businessman doesn't mean you know shit about the economy, public policy or what's best for society. it shows you know how to make money for yourself. period. the freakonomics "I took econ 101 crowd" has been successful at confusing the two in public opinion, which is a damn shame.

 

[Sbee]

Go ahead and make the distinction. Sbee's example isn't an argument of equivalence. It just points out that you can't just point to wealth as an indicator of achievement. What have the Koch brothers done that's so great that we shouldn't criticize them for asserting their influence over the Detroit settlement?

Correct, being wealthy because you were born wealthy and didn't squander it is hardly something you should be praised for. i used the saudi example because they profit off of a birthright claim to non renewable resources.

I think Mack is defending the Koch brothers just because liberals hate them

 

[turok]

Since this thread has gone off-topic a bit, let ,me add my .02:

Lobbyists pervert the democratic process as well in DC. For example, the quasi-public USPS whom I worked for over 15 years, introduced machinery to more rapidly process mail, with some having optical character readers that IDed the delivery addresses to sort the mail down to the carriers' actual route or walk-sequence. All mail, regardless of it being First Class or "Junk" (bulk) is combined so that carriers can more efficiently deliver them as well as periodicals, magazines, parcels, packages, and flyers.

However I noticed that the Postal Service was offering presort postage discounts to mass- mailers, if their mail was sent to the distribution centers in varying degrees of sortation. But I knew that all mail had to be "unsorted" when ran through their automated machinery, and presorting it any further than the 5-digit zip code was redundant.

When I pointed that out to management, they investigated and later told me that there was nothing that could be done about it, b/c the bulk mailers lobby in DC was too powerful.

But considering that First Class mail has all but disappeared since the turn of the century, due to broadband internet, direct deposit. bill paying online, and email, along with faxed documents becoming legal paperwork, junk mail has become the USPS "bread and butter" which is likely why it lost ~6B last year.

 

[Michchamp]

I love getting postage-paid return envelopes in the mail with magazine or credit card offers.

I consider it my patriotic duty to stuff them with as much crap as possible and send them back, adding obscene notes to whoever has to open them. The Capital One offers go back to Utah, and I always imagine some polite guy opening my envelope and getting a note that reads "Thanks for the offer, $h!t eating c#&^@ m&^@&*f_^#%$!" and fainting.

 

[Spartanmack]

Correct, being wealthy because you were born wealthy and didn't squander it is hardly something you should be praised for. i used the saudi example because they profit off of a birthright claim to non renewable resources.

I think Mack is defending the Koch brothers just because liberals hate them

Of course you're presenting it as an equivalent but it is of course, false. The saudis' wealth goes up and down almost solely on the price of oil and natural gas which they attempt to manipulate through OPEC. The Koch brothers took a small fortune and turned it into a massive empire. In 1996, they were each worth $2bln, tied for 185th place when oil was trading just below $26 per barrel (that's up ~80% from their estimated net worth when they bought out their brothers in 1983 - a time period where oil prices DROPPED by >15% - but it was just daddy's oil $). West Texas Intermediate Crude is currently trading at $104.55 - that means that if they just did nothing and sat on their oil wealth, they'd each be worth about $8bln. The change in oil prices would only account for about $6bln of the $40bln increase in each of their net worth and they're now tied for 6th place on the worlds richest list.

Of course, these are facts and facts never sway you from your factless conclusions - they will always just be birthright billionaires trying to buy the country with daddy's oil money. But you're partially right about why I'm defending them. I've learned from experience that whenever you make accusations like this, particularly when you're so emphatic about it, it's best to do a little fact checking and learn the truth.

 

[turok]

This.

Sad that people who volunteer to donate their organs and/or...uhh...their cadavers to medical research/education, and to help save lives or restore the bodily functions of those still living, are in jeopardy of potentially having their bodies/parts stolen and sold illegally @ a profit. Might even convince many scrappers in the city of Detroit to reconsider their "vocation" and become (fresh) grave robbers instead or as well.

Perhaps this also could be a method to mollify angry rightwingers who resent their so-called "tax dollars" allegedly being used to support lazy and shiftless liberals who are sucking on the teat of the "govmint" dole. (Never mind that the US is 16+ T in debt and their tax dollars instead simply vanish into that massive "red" hole)

For example, every citizen over 18 or illegal, who is receiving govmint assistance could be obligated to donate their bodies in the event of their untimely or sudden deaths, or @ least until/if they become legal and productive citizens. This coukl also apply to convicted felons, income tax scofflaws, child support absconders, and college tuition assistance debtors.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Sad that people who volunteer to donate their organs and/or...uhh...their cadavers to medical research/education, and to help save lives or restore the bodily functions of those still living, are in jeopardy of potentially having their bodies/parts stolen and sold illegally @ a profit. Might even convince many scrappers in the city of Detroit to reconsider their "vocation" and become (fresh) grave robbers instead or as well.

Perhaps this also could be a method to mollify angry rightwingers who resent their so-called "tax dollars" allegedly being used to support lazy and shiftless liberals who are sucking on the teat of the "govmint" dole. (Never mind that the US is 16+ T in debt and their tax dollars instead simply vanish into that massive "red" hole)

For example, every citizen over 18 or illegal, who is receiving govmint assistance could be obligated to donate their bodies in the event of their untimely or sudden deaths, or @ least until/if they become legal and productive citizens. This coukl also apply to convicted felons, income tax scofflaws, child support absconders, and college tuition assistance debtors.

There might be more demand for those bodies in the near future. (This is a real product.)

http://soylent.me/

 

[Spartanmack]

Go ahead and make the distinction. Sbee's example isn't an argument of equivalence. It just points out that you can't just point to wealth as an indicator of achievement. What have the Koch brothers done that's so great that we shouldn't criticize them for asserting their influence over the Detroit settlement?

They've done plenty but that shouldn't stop anyone from speaking out against undue influence. But I'm not defending their actions politically - i'm disputing his attempt to discredit them by claiming they just inherited all their wealth.

I don't pay taxes in Michigan but if I did, I would need to know more about it. Off the cuff, i'd say I would probably be against using more taxpayer money to fund the bailout, just like I was against the bailouts of the banks, AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc. Giving unions special treatment in bankruptcy with taxpayer money is not something I would support. Maybe if people bitched about unions spending hundreds of millions of dollars on political activities, the unions would have the money to bail out their pensioners themselves.

 

[turok]

There might be more demand for those bodies in the near future. (This is a real product.)

http://soylent.me/

So will it turn GREEN once pureed human "meat" is added to it?

Did the company receive permission from the MPAA and the owners/writer of the movie to use that name? (they have provided an email addy to ask ?s so I suppose I could try to find out)

Only 8 years early, apparently:

Disclaimer: I have never actually seen this movie that debuted waaay back in the spring of '73.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Disclaimer: I have never actually seen this movie that debuted waaay back in the spring of '73.

I've seen the last 5 minutes. Can't imagine how they drag the rest of it out.

I wonder if it would be good if you could watch it without know the ending. That spotless mind service would be good for that. How much would you pay to not know Vader is Luke's father and get to watch Star Wars again?

 

[turok]

I've seen the last 5 minutes. Can't imagine how they drag the rest of it out.

I wonder if it would be good if you could watch it without know the ending. That spotless mind service would be good for that. How much would you pay to not know Vader is Luke's father and get to watch Star Wars again?

I always posted on movie fan websites that I thought the movie "Blade Runner" as directed by Ridley Scott deserved a sequel. Now it appears that it may come to fruition with Harrison Ford reprising his role as Replicant hunter "Deckard": (IMO, he is too gray around the gills for the role now, but w/e)

http://www.cnet.com/news/harrison-ford-considered-for-blade-runner-sequel/

 

[Michchamp]

Nothing at all but again, I'm not defending their actions politically - i'm disputing his attempt to discredit them by claiming they just inherited all their wealth.

I don't pay taxes in Michigan but if I did, I would need to know more about it. Off the cuff, i'd say I would probably be against using more taxpayer money to fund the bailout, just like I was against the bailouts of the banks, AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc. Giving unions special treatment in bankruptcy with taxpayer money is not something I would support. Maybe if people bitched about unions spending hundreds of millions of dollars on political activities, the unions would have the money to bail out their pensioners themselves.

You'd need to know more about it... but regardless, you'll take the opportunity to bitch about unions for no reason at all.

 

[Spartanmack]

You'd need to know more about it... but regardless, you'll take the opportunity to bitch about unions for no reason at all.

I'm not bitching about unions I'm saying I'm against using taxpayer money to give preferential treatment to unions in a bankruptcy settlement (i.e. bailing out unions and telling other creditors of equal or possibly higher standing to get stuffed). if you think that's union bashing for no reason at all you're either being dishonest or stupid, and probably both, as usual.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I'm not bitching about unions I'm saying I'm against using taxpayer money to give preferential treatment to unions in a bankruptcy settlement (i.e. bailing out unions and telling other creditors of equal or possibly higher standing to get stuffed). if you think that's union bashing for no reason at all you're either being dishonest or stupid, and probably both, as usual.

And in your world funding a pension plan = bailing out a union?

That's goofy.

Unions negotiate to get pension agreements. They don't pay them. The city agreed to fund those pensions. It's not the union's responsibility. Investments are risks. You profit because you assume the risk.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Here's a summary of the bankruptcy adjustment.

http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/EM/Announcements/Summary_PlanOfAdjustment.pdf

I can't find the section explaining how much money will be used to bail out unions.

 

[byco42]

I love getting postage-paid return envelopes in the mail with magazine or credit card offers.

I consider it my patriotic duty to stuff them with as much crap as possible and send them back, adding obscene notes to whoever has to open them. The Capital One offers go back to Utah, and I always imagine some polite guy opening my envelope and getting a note that reads "Thanks for the offer, $h!t eating c#&^@ m&^@&*f_^#%$!" and fainting.

You clearly have too much time on your hands. And lashing out at complete strangers for no important reason suggests an imbalance or deep-seated issue you are working through.

 

[Michchamp]

You clearly have too much time on your hands. And lashing out at complete strangers for no important reason suggests an imbalance or deep-seated issue you are working through.

Have mercy on me. I will try to do better.

 

[turok]

I have mailed back blank postage paid inserts for subscriptions to magazines in the past, b/c they used to be attached to the spine by a perforated tab, but now they are just inserted loosely so that 2 or even more fall out when reading. I found that to be a unnecessary nuisance, especially considering that in most cases, I already was a subscriber. I understand that many are sold individually @ newsstands, bookstores, gas stations or grocery stores, but I felt that it was part of my job security to mail them.

But now I no longer subscribe to any magazines...why spend $$ on them when I can get basically the same info for gratis online?

 

[Spartanmack]

And in your world funding a pension plan = bailing out a union?

That's goofy.

Unions negotiate to get pension agreements. They don't pay them. The city agreed to fund those pensions. It's not the union's responsibility. Investments are risks. You profit because you assume the risk.

Yes, funding a bankrupted city pension plan with state tax dollars is a bailout to the City's union workers. What risk are they assuming if they're getting bailed out by the state?

 

[Spartanmack]

Here's a summary of the bankruptcy adjustment.

http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/EM/Announcements/Summary_PlanOfAdjustment.pdf

I can't find the section explaining how much money will be used to bail out unions.

From the OP's link:

The organization, formed to fight big government and spending, is contacting 90,000 conservatives in Michigan and encouraging them to rally against a plan to provide $195 million in state money to help settle Detroit pension holders’ claims in the case, a key element of the deal.

Then a little further down there's this:

Republican House Speaker Jase Bolger has warned that the bills may not advance unless the city workers’ unions agree to kick in some cash toward the settlement. Snyder must also persuade Democrats despite their unhappiness with his use of his executive powers to take over control of Detroit’s finances.

Is $195mm without $ from the union not a bailout of the union in your world?

In the real world, some unions do manage members' pensions and at a minimum they have representation on the pension management and investment committees.