So the bar trip has actually begun and is in full swing. Besides enjoying the adventure and relaxation that accompanies each day, I find myself startled by how long I’m going to be living out of this single suitcase…and how much can happen in 7 days…as well as how friggin’ long 50 more days abroad is going to be. Of course, it will all come screeching to a halt soon enough, as I begin my career as a corporate attorney in New York…so I’m going to enjoy it while I can…
Thus far, I am still on the European leg of the trip: We flew into Zurich and spent our days wandering the old cobblestone streets, drinking large large beers with each and every meal (and between meals), and basically wandered the streets, cathedrals, and museums of the city for 8 hours a day, punctuated only by episodes of South Park, The Office, the Olympics, and large quantities of alcohol. I would offer some in-depth analysis of how I feel about the astounding efficiency of modern European cities when compared to their American counterparts, as well as what a shame it is that America’s reigning perspective of “America is the best, thus no one can do anything better” prevents us from experimentation or *gasp* learning from other cultures…but instead I will offer a much more important conclusion I reached about Europe: Beautiful girls date very substandard men in Europe. That’s all. Tons of hotties paired up with an equal number of “really?s”
After three days in Zurich, we had initially planned a trip to Northern Italy. We were going to hit Milan, Genoa, make a few day trips, and manage to shunt our way down to Florence/Tuscany before making our way back to Geneva for our respective flights out. However, after being informed that Milan fucking blows by ILYIWWMWBJ, and realizing that I have very little interested in Milan except to see where those delicious little cookies come from, and/or witness twig thin model/hags wearing clothes that I don’t comprehend with my fashion illiterate mind,…we managed to settle on scrapping everything and instead bought overnight tickets to Rome…a prospect which actually excited me.
At the moment then, I am on my way to Florence…sitting next to a B.O. machine of epic proportions who seems to fancy himself quite the handsome young devil. I disliked him immediately. And his eyes-too-close-together compatriot who continued to wear his sunglasses inside the train because…well he just looked cooler.
And now, just for the sake of keeping things up to date, I'm in a hostel in Geneva preparing to go to Istanbul...where I will begin a 17 day jaunt at 11 pm tonight. Whoo hoo! (Ohmygodit'sonlybeen10daysandi'mexhausted)
10 comments:
ADM - know your pain. I've been on the road a month, and I'm living out of a suitcase for 45 days. In D.C. now, heading to Newport News tomorrow. A reposting of Jeff's post follows, and then my response.
RS
HAH! A Slate article? You can't be serious. Although if you think race is a non-issue, you've clearly never been to West Virginia.
I'm not sure what "side" you're on but I guarantee you that the "side" you seem to think is spouting nonsense is the one that's going to save this country from the upper 1% and the moron radicals that follow them blindly, hoping for a cut one day.
I think the psychological term for the defensive mechanism you're using is "projection." You toss aside your [party's] mistakes and accuse someone else of making them. Or even "transference," the unconscious redirection of feelings onto another. Two important things you need to understand about transference is 1)you aren't aware of doing it and 2)the feelings aren't necessarily related- in other words, for example, a male person born with minuscule genitalia decides a single mother with 3 children doesn't deserve the advantages of universal healthcare because the deadbeat father (who surely as been gifted with a colossal member) ran off. And so FUCK 'EM! If they can't manage it's not the government's problem. I don't live in this slum! I live in a nice house with an unsatisfied wife addicted to pain killers. And let's not forget the hoors. Oh, the hoors! If there were no slum, there'd be no slutty, disgusting, multi-racial women accepting money to make me feel like my member is worthy. I'm not saying you are this example, no, no. I'm just saying that psychology is fun. Also, conservatives have no dicks. Then try make up for it with deep pockets and rockets and bombs.
But hey, I'm still not sure what you stand for, RS. Nor am I able to fathom how any republican could possibly continue to stand behind their party right now. Or for the last 8 years really.
ADM, I'm more into politics right now than I was during the primaries. Hilary did her best to get her supporters off the bandwagon and back into the battalion last night. I love Biden and I can't wait to see whatever schmo McBush puts up there as veep try to take Biden on in the debates. Biden will shred them to pieces and feed them back to the Conservative machine like gruel.
"NOT FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE MONTHS!! FOUR MORE MONTHS!!!"
Jeff,
Your previous post presents more invective than rational argument, complete with detour into pop psychology (which, if you want to open the psychology door, what is your obsession with the male phallus all about?). Despite the lack of logical consistency in your argument, let’s talk about one of the points you raise, saving the country from the top 1%.
All the information I cite comes directly from the IRS.
The top 1% you castigate pays 40% of this country’s tax burden. The top 10% pays 71% of the country’s taxes. Further, income mobility data indicates that a very large percentage of the top 10% of income earners are new rich (first generation), not inheritors. Now although the top 1% paid 40% of the nation’s tax burden, they only earned 22% of all reported income. Essentially, the top 1% pays a share of taxes double their share of income.
Barack Obama says he's going to cut taxes for the bottom 50% of income earners. But IRS figures indicate that those below the median income only paid 2.9% of the total tax burden. Further he contends that he is going to do another stimulus package (in addition to the $1000 fuel credit from “windfall” profits). Now, given that 1% pay 40% in taxes, and the lower 50% pay 2.9% in taxes, the money for Obama’s stimulus package must come from the top 1%; as the lower 50% don’t contribute enough in income to cover the stimulus package.
This raises two questions, which in the spirit of debate, I request you answer.
1.) Obama states "It is time for folks like me who make more than $250,000 (ed: the top 5% or so of income earners) to pay our fair share." Well and good. But what is that fair share? If the top 10% is already paying 71% of the taxes, is 80% more fair? 90%?
2.) This year, or at the latest next, I plan on being in the top 5 to 10% of income earners. I’ve worked incredibly hard thus far, and have to continue to do so if I am going to have the kind of life that I want, and the kind of income I want.
Now, that income mobility data cited above indicates that the vast majority of the top income earners in the country have done exactly what I have, worked hard to get to the top. I can’t contend to know your financial situation, but I’m willing to guess you are somewhere in the bottom 50%. You, and Obama, contend that these top income earners and myself, should, nee must, give some of the results of our labor to those in the bottom 50%.
Essentially, what you contend is that I, someone from the top 10% as a result of my own labor, owe you, someone from the bottom 50%, something. Why? Have you earned a share of the results of my labor in some way? Is it merely because you exist? Under what moral principal am I required to give something that I worked for, to you?
Oh, and Jeff, I was in West Virginia Thursday.
RS
ADM- I am jealous, it has been far too long since I left this country for the globe. Been to Italy, to Rome and Verona, the latter of which I absolutely adore. Small, old country villas with fresh food, no tourist traps, and hills to walk. Italia is one of my first destinations when I get to a comfort level and I can travel.
RS- Hi. My name's Jeff. Nice to meet you. I don't think you've got the gist of me yet. Let's take this nice and easy...
First off, I've studied more psych than you both in academia and in my spare time. Learn this. Accept it. You can try the reversal, calling this phallus obsession mine instead of humanity's- I don't particularly care. I was just having a laugh at the expense of politicians with bastard children and whore habits (which occurs regardless of party lines.) Hah. I laugh. It's good for the soul.
Second, you can throw IRS stats at me all you like. I will read them and use them to throw arguments back in your face. That is what stats are for. One can bend and twist stats to whatever end.
The upper percentiles pay percentages of annual taxes. What are the annual taxes? Didn't mention that, you're only talking percentages. I'd like to see the country's deficit to the world and China. How's our credit? What's our budget? What percentage of that annually is represented in taxes? What percentage of the annual budget goes to the Defense Dept. and contractors? See, flies back in your face. In any case, thank you for the IRS stats, they are truly bland and don't shed any light onto the state of what's actually important in the country's economy. But I don't claim to know! Let's avoid the ad hominem crap right out of the gate. I don't claim to know. You most likely know more than me, but selectively provide information as it helps you make a point, which I rarely do for sake of maintaining a healthy world gloss, or model, of reality.
And yes, I am pissed that for the third or fourth straight quarter, the 3-5 largest oil companies in the world are posting record profits due to an artificial shortage caused by a needless war, and that my government is paying private contractors NO-BID CONTRACTS on the most lucrative remaining oil fields on the planet with these tax dollars. But hey, Saddam's out and Al-Qaida has all the fuel they need for the next thousand years of Holy Jihad. Give and take, right?
At this point I will forcefully answer your questions in order and with a serious face.
1)The top 5-10% pays 71% of taxes. This could also mean that the upper tenth owns so much land, so many vehicles, and so many houses that they just pay that much anyway. I digress. So what, you want me to cry for them? I save my tears for when man actually manages to create something of beauty, not profit from destruction, collapse, and horror. How much is fair? Well you're measuring in the most convenient way. How many people is 10%? How many people in the top 5%? What percentage of the population has what percentage of the wealth? Look that shit up and get back to me. And therein is my answer. How much is fair? How much have you got? If you've got lots, pay lots. The measure should be income and total accounts and interest on an individual basis, not "who's paying % of how much?" Therefore your question is bunk and the only thing I can offer is- have more = pay more. And why not? Do you really need all that fucking money? Life is a zero sum game.
2)Congratulations. I hope to make it there myself by doing what I love. God bless the US of A. You worked hard to get there? Here. Have a fucking cookie. Millions of people work thrice as hard as you and get paid shit wages. I know because I've seen it. I know because I've done it. Now let's make an important distinction. If you work your ass off and make bank, then get taxed more, and you sit here in all seriousness and ask why your money should go to help the people in the lower 50%... First of all, how very charitable of you. It's that type of greed that makes capitalism what it is today- clean, efficient, cutthroat, and entirely devoid of empathy for fellow man. Hey, if that's your boat go sail it. But you better get used to the idea of paying taxes on that boat. You know why? That money doesn't go to me or the poverty stricken. It' doesn't flutter like migrating butterflies into the pocket of the weak or the weary. It goes to the government. Committes, institutions, incentives, projects, development. What, you have a problem helping your country pay off debt? You don't want to help build schools and hospitals, get clean food and water? Hell, you don't want to pay for new types of weapons to kill people in the name of Freedom? Tsk. Even I'm more patriotic than that, and who the hell knows what side I'm on.
Anyway, yes- you don't know my financial situation (I do just fine) but even if you did, you make it sound like it might change your mind. Like if suddenly you learned that I make 300k+ a year then all of the sudden this would be a different argument; it wouldn't. If I make it into the upper 1% one day you can be crystal fucking clear on this point: I won't be a greedy little shit like you and complain about paying a significant percentage of my income to the country that got me there.
If you offered me money of your own free will I would take it just to burn it on your lawn.
You don't want to pay for lower class people to get by (for ANY reason) that's fine. That's your lack of imagination. You can't see what some of these people can do. Not what they NEED to GET BY, but what they CAN DO. And you don't even want to offer them the chance. Fine. Well I don't want to fund wars that kill tens of thousands of women and children civilians so that some people can make a buck. I guess we're both stuck eating shit. One's on stoneware the other's on silver. The bigger difference is that you're eating shit to cling to a lifestyle, I'm eating shit to try and better this sorry planet. And I get the added bonus of watching your world burn if I can't achieve my goals.
I don't pretend a full bank account makes me happy.
So, RS, call me a what you want. I'm not on your side. But I'm not on their side either. I'm on my side, and all I see is a world ripe with in-fucking-justice and nobody with the balls to stand up and do something. Anything. Anything at all that someone can look at and say, "Yes. Above all else, they have done some good."
That's why I'm voting Obama/Biden 2008.
I don't expect the blinders to be lifted for you my friend, but don't look at me like I'm the blind one, because what I adhere to something bigger than you. And you should at least know it. Please, just... Think for yourself for once. You can do that for free, I promise.
Peace.
You guys are funny.
Wait, why are you traveling? Is the lawsuit?
The question I have for you Jeff, is how you can endure this. I spend hours upon hours digging and trying to make heads/tails and figure out is going on and what the fuck we can do about it. And all it does is make me want to murder a large proportion of my fellow humans who now seem so disconnected from anything that seems reasonable and decent...that I am forced to hold onto hope and live in flabbergasted fury or give up. Any ideas?
You two can disagree, and that's well and good. I think there are two reasonable sides to most arguments, and the discussion is valuable for the individual and society.
However, I note that RS and those on his side have not attempted to impose their decisions on others. They have not demanded that Jeff and those who think like him NOT give money for the betterment of others, of society in general.
It is one thing to believe in something, but wholly another to believe one has the right to FORCE that belief upon others. Why do Jeff and those who think like him believe they have the moral right to force their viewpoint on others? Why is it okay to require RS by force of law to give his property because Jeff thinks it is proper? Why should Jeff not be happy to abide by his beliefs in this regard, and RS by his?
It is obvious in a practical sense: without RS, Jeff's system falls apart. A redistributive tax would be destroyed if the wealthy, upon whom its burden falls, were given the option to opt out.
Should they not be allowed to opt out, because it would be somehow blameworthy to put their own interests above those of the poor? One could say that the poor are also acting in self-interest by supporting the redistributive tax. Not surprisingly, both sides are fully acting in self-interest. Why should the government, then, compel one side to act in the interest of the other?
I do not pretend to have given this as much thought as either of you. I am interested in your thoughts however.
TK
Because the obvious outcome in a democratically structured society with massive inequality is that the will of the wealthy is forced upon the poor. It's just FORCED by the power of the dollar instead of being FORCED by the power of self-governance.
I don't understand how anyone can think that extreme wealth and poverty can be reconciled with genuinely democratic or humane principles. Thus, I tend to think that they don't...they just don't give a shit.
That's pretty conclusory. If you could elaborate on the obvious state of affairs wherein the will of the wealthy is forced upon the poor, I might be able to respond. I could already respond to your second paragraph, but would prefer to hear your full thoughts first.
TK
Post a Comment