Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 297

Thread: How exactly was "Life better in the past"?

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    You really do not get it.
    Said denseness is intentional. But I don't think his bosses are particularly impressed, or he'd still be here doing battle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Maybe the R in PRB stands for Sir Robin...
    Sir Robin of Bitchalot, yes
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  4. #63
    Here's my take. I'm relatively young. I basically only watch TV shows that were before my time. While I like some new music, I prefer older music. I'd take hanging out with my grandparents over friends any day.

    The only thing better today is the technology, though not all of it is positive. I believe I would go back in time, if given the choice.

  5. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    First of all, I'm just as anti-tax and anti-federal reserve as the rest of you.
    Since you know not the first thing about me, you open with either a lie or a telltale of your blithering ignorance. But let me try not to prejudge you too harshly - let us examine what else lies under your hood.

    But I don't think I need nostalgia or conspiracy theories to advocate for a sound and responsible monetary policy, and freer economic policy.
    Don't think? That does not sound very positive at all. And of course there is the tacit implication that people here do need these, and yet you provide no basis for this lovely little bit of innuendo.

    I don't see how "conspiracy theories" or "nostalgia" in any way relate in a necessary way. The fact that one recognizes the abundance of conspiracies in this political world does not render his views invalid, nor does his feelings of so-called "nostalgia" for those things from days past that were, in fact, better in his estimation. That nostalgia does not imply that ALL things were better back when, yet this is a fairly clear implication of what you wrote, painting yourself as either dishonest or in dire need of a clue.

    I keep hearing, over and over, mostly from conservatives, that somehow life was better in the past.
    That is a subjective assessment and as such it is perfectly valid. Some people prefer vanilla, others like chocolate. More FAIL. Do you get paid to do this?

    I still don't understand why, to me, most of the arguments are based on cherry picking the favorite traits of the individual,
    What a load of baloney, to tacitly imply that this is invalid... as if your apparent ideal of purity should drive the lives of all men. Weak.

    a bit like people saying "poor people have better lives than me" which if true, one should logically give up his wealth to pursue the alleged "better and poorer" lifestyle he claims he admires or is jealous of.
    Yes, because I hear people saying this so very often. I ask again: are you getting paid to post this embarrassing nonsense? If so, I hope you're getting paid a lot because I would not make this large a fool of myself for chump change.


    Here are the common arguments and explanations I hear a lot

    1. Population was lower, population density was lower
    It was. What's your point?

    2. Less government existed, people had more rights
    The former was true, the latter is ignorance or bad wording by anyone saying so.

    3. Cost of living was allegedly lower
    There is some validity to this. The issue is not quite simple.

    4. People supposedly worked less or more people were employed
    Assuming you actually hear this, of which I am inclined to doubtfulness, what is your point?

    What seems to be conveniently ignored are
    1. Blacks and gays had less rights
    Ignorant and wholly false assertion. Rights are rights and all are equal regardless whether certain people with fancy titles, perhaps badges and maybe even guns respect them. Denial/violation of rights does not equate with not having them but only with not being able to exercise them. Equating the squelching of rights with not having them is a major league failure of reason based on fallacy.

    2. Less diversity and interaction between people of different skin color
    As if that were necessarily a bad thing. Free people are free to choose with whom to hang. If they don't want to be "diverse" and you don't like it, tough poo.

    3. Cost of living while higher today, so are salaries
    So sadly ignoring the centrally important reasons why this is the case. FAIL^FAIL

    4. People CAN still be employed today if they were not so picky about what they wanted to work as
    Oh, well that makes everything just dandy fine, eh? Seriously, are you an idiot or just this corrupt?

    5. Consumption is everything but static
    6. Technology has put so many people out of work, and tools obsolete
    Not even sure what your points are for these last two.

    The only thing, on balance, that I can personally think of, which would have a net "better" for any time in the past vs today, in US, would be higher cost of medical care today. That's close to a deal breaker, everything else, as far as I can tell, are better. But I'm willing to listen to what I'm missing.
    You sound like you are young, meaning you were not here when things were different. I was and I know better. Not everything was better. I do like word processing software better than typing on a typewriter using carbon paper if copies were needed. Certain states of medicine are definitely better than before. But there is a vast number of aspects to modern life that suck ass when compared with days past. One example would be police behavior. Sure, there were plenty of corrupt cops since cops have existed, but back when they almost universally kept their corruption under tight wraps, whereas today they flaunt it.

    You see, the grand inference to be made from all this nonsense you have spewed forth here is that life today is so much better than it was before. This is a bald-faced lie. Some aspects are better, but on the whole life is a good shade $#@!tier than it was before.

    You don't know what you're talking about, that much is very clear.
    Last edited by osan; 08-19-2014 at 11:09 PM.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I don't see how "conspiracy theories" or "nostalgia" in any way relate in a necessary way. The fact that one recognizes the abundance of conspiracies in this political world does not render his views invalid, nor does his feelings of so-called "nostalgia" for those things from days past that were, in fact, better in his estimation. That nostalgia does not imply that ALL things were better back when, yet this is a fairly clear implication of what you wrote, painting yourself as either dishonest or in dire need of a clue.
    Whaaaaaat...? You don't agree that because polio is bad, believing in sound currency and non-centralized, state-level regulation for a better economy and less corruption nationwide is emotional nostalgia? You don't believe that progress is a package deal, and we have to take the new be it good or bad without choosing the good and discarding the bad? Surely you jest!

    But forward is good, right? Even if it's forward to poverty and tyranny? At least it's, like, forward, so...
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  8. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    this is just semantics.
    Here he exposes his deep ignorance, as do so many other poorly-dressed (dare I call it this?) "intellects". Your statement, if seriously forwarded, indicates a profound absence of understanding of "semantics", which were you in possession thereof, you would never qualify as "just", all else equal.

    There is nothing mere about semantics. Semantics is the very understanding of everything you know, or think you know, in your life. How is that "just"?

    Go get yourself a friggin' dictionary and read it, for pity's sake.

    So change the word to privileges and I care not what your assumptions are, the facts tell what people were legally allowed to do.
    It is the preponderance of this brand of rank stupidity that dooms the race of men. You're like the progressive liberal who clenches shut his eyes, plugs his ears with his fingers, and runs in place while shouting "I can't hear you" over and over again as his timid and oh-so-narrow little mind clings with desperate ferocity to notions of a "right world" according to the masturbatory fantasies of his arrested pre-pubescent ego.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  9. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I ask again: are you getting paid to post this embarrassing nonsense? If so, I hope you're getting paid a lot because I would not make this large a fool of myself for chump change.
    Nope, not paid at all.

  10. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Whaaaaaat...? You don't agree that because polio is bad, believing in sound currency and non-centralized, state-level regulation for a better economy and less corruption nationwide is emotional nostalgia? You don't believe that progress is a package deal, and we have to take the new be it good or bad without choosing the good and discarding the bad? Surely you jest!
    No, I didn't say you have to take the package deal, but if you're going to tell me life in the past was overall better, rather than only better in some aspects, then you're the one who wants the package deal, not me.

    But forward is good, right? Even if it's forward to poverty and tyranny? At least it's, like, forward, so...
    I reject your premise that we're moving forward to more poverty and more tyranny.

  11. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Less manufactured distraction. A more intense concentration on the now and present.
    it's still, and the end of the day, or life, "living in fear of death" vs "not living in fear of death" no matter how you make it sound romanticized, isn't it?

    A hospital wasn't a taxpayer taxi ride away.
    Where was it? A walk away? As abundant as Starbucks today? Too far that not everybody could get to?

    Do modern distractions and conveniences leave you free from worry?
    Not completely free, but definitely free from many fears I'd have, starting with a shorter lifespan.

  12. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulConventionWV View Post
    Let's take a look at these:

    Blacks yes, gays no. Gays have and have always had the same amount of actual rights as anyone else. They are just now receiving equal government "priviliges", which are really just a cover for more government control over your life. Yeah, great liberty victory there. Gays can finally have their marriage approved by the government!
    Tell that to the people arrested under sodomy laws.

    Pffft. Who's keeping track of this stuff besides some "diversity coordinator" at a liberal college or something?
    Good to know you don't care. Glad I'm white like you.

    But are they increasing at the same rate? No, they're not.
    I'd agree they are not, does that mean salaries increased slower?

    That's right, you'll take your 20 hours a week at McDonald's and you'll like it! There's nothing wrong with the system! Now get to work, you lazy bum! Yeah, this is why I'm moving out of the country. $#@! American jobs.
    Whatever makes you happy.

    Yes, because consumption is the answer to everything. It doesn't matter what we're producing as long as people are buying stuff. Are you a Keynesian by any chance?
    I'm not a conspiracy theorist or nostalgist. Wait, so consumption is NOT the answer, but complain about everything costing more???!
    Complain about poverty, but not advocating consuming?

    What's your point?
    Uhhh, that technology has made life better rather than worse.

    I think life is getting worse for people. Your measurements don't mean $#@!. My quality of life can't be quantified. It's people like you that are ruining this country by reinforcing the status quo. Again, another reason I'm leaving.
    In what ways are they getting worse?

  13. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    No, I didn't say you have to take the package deal, but if you're going to tell me life in the past was overall better, rather than only better in some aspects, then you're the one who wants the package deal, not me.
    'Life is getting harder, even as technological progress should be making it easier, because in some key areas we're no longer doing things that worked and instead doing things that don't.'

    'Oh, if you say life is getting harder, that means you want to turn back the clock and throw away the good with the bad.'

    What sort of a so-called logic class did you learn that goofy crap in? I surely hope you didn't pay for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I reject your premise that we're moving forward to more poverty and more tyranny.
    You haven't so far demonstrated a sufficient grasp of history to understand that even desegregation was something of a tradeoff, and you expect us to look at you saying 'I reject your premise...' without a shred of an attempt at argument (much less documentation to back you up) and say, oh, gee, that's convincing, I think I'll just forget everything I know and place all my faith in the person who can't even seem to prove to us he's not an ignoramus?

    Holding your breath?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    it's still, and the end of the day, or life, "living in fear of death" vs "not living in fear of death" no matter how you make it sound romanticized, isn't it?
    So when are you going to learn to speak English?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Where was it? A walk away? As abundant as Starbucks today? Too far that not everybody could get to?
    Where are the hospitals today? As common as coffee shops? Within walking distance of everyone? Do you have a point? Are you capable of making it?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Not completely free, but definitely free from many fears I'd have, starting with a shorter lifespan.
    If you had lived in the past, you'd be just as grateful that the life expectancy of the age was the longest in recorded history.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Tell that to the people arrested under sodomy laws.
    You mean the same people who weren't arrested for smoking some seven-leaf plant they found growing by the stream?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Good to know you don't care. Glad I'm white like you.
    But, of course, you're assuming you know what color his friends are. Which makes an ASS out of U, not ME.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I'd agree they are not, does that mean salaries increased slower?
    Whose salaries? Warren Buffet's? Yes. Everyone else's? No.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Whatever makes you happy.
    Really? So you'll help us restore sanity to this nation so he doesn't have to go? Mighty kind of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I'm not a conspiracy theorist or nostalgist.
    Is that seriously what you think 'Keynesian' means? Well, now, we are well informed.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Wait, so consumption is NOT the answer, but complain about everything costing more???!
    Complain about poverty, but not advocating consuming?
    Does a person really need to advocate eating?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Uhhh, that technology has made life better rather than worse.
    Why do you keep pretending that we're saying the opposite? Why do you keep pretending that only technology has any effect on the quality of life? Do you think technology's relentless march made life rosy and peachy in Uganda, so even Idi Amin Dada couldn't cause it to go downhill?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    In what ways are they getting worse?
    If we put it on a tape loop, do you promise to leave it playing by your bedside all night? Because you've steadfastly refused to read and acknowledge everything we've asked and everything we've said on that subject so far. Do you really expect us to cut and paste all night long? Do you figure this is some variation on a dance marathon, where if you keep your blindfold on until we all go to bed, you win?
    Last edited by acptulsa; 08-20-2014 at 12:00 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  14. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    'Life is getting harder, even as technological progress should be making it easier, because in some key areas we're no longer doing things that worked and instead doing things that don't.'
    Who said that?

    'Oh, if you say life is getting harder, that means you want to turn back the clock and throw away the good with the bad.'
    Ok, I make a distinction between life getting harder from today to the future vs life is already harder than the past.

    If life is harder or worse than the past, then going back IS ONLY a package deal. If you want to keep the good in the past while keeping the good of today, you can't say you want to go back, or that life is better in the past.

    You ONLY say life is better in the past IF you think the package is overrall better. so do you or do you not?

    What sort of a so-called logic class did you learn that goofy crap in? I surely hope you didn't pay for it.
    Didn't pay to learn logic.

    You haven't so far demonstrated a sufficient grasp of history to understand that even desegregation was something of a tradeoff, and you expect us to look at you saying 'I reject your premise...'
    I understand desegregation is a tradeoff, is it worth it or not?

    without a shred of an attempt at argument (much less documentation to back you up) and say, oh, gee, that's convincing, I think I'll just forget everything I know and place all my faith in the person who can't even seem to prove to us he's not an ignoramus?
    No, tell me what you know, don't forget it. I asked for it, and I'm still listening.

    Holding your breath?
    Nope.
    Last edited by PRB; 08-19-2014 at 11:57 PM.



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Who said that?
    Maybe if you stuffed some cotton in your ears there would be something there to keep what is said in one ear from passing directly out the other ear.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Ok, I make a distinction between life getting harder from today to the future vs life is already harder than the past.

    If life is harder or worse than the past, then going back IS ONLY a package deal. If you want to keep the good in the past while keeping the good of today, you can't say you want to go back, or that life is better in the past.

    You ONLY say life is better in the past IF you think the package is overrall better. so do you or do you not?
    I bought socks and shoes at Sears today. I like the shoes but the socks are scratchy and thin. So, I'm not allowed to return the socks or throw them away unless I return or trash the shoes too?

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Didn't pay to learn logic.
    You definitely got what you paid for--and not a scrap more.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I understand desegregation is a tradeoff, is it worth it or not?
    Depends if your business was sunk by it, I guess. Since I'm not old enough to remember it, and since history is slanted, I don't believe I'm the right person to ask. I'm just glad the crowd at the restaurant is more interesting than homogeneous. That much I can say for sure--works for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    No, tell me what you know, don't forget it. I asked for it, and I'm still listening.
    Then why have you not acknowledged more than half of what we have said here, and in other threads? That's your idea of being attentive?

    You haven't shown the slightest sign of noticing anything you haven't thought (usually incorrectly) you could attack. Not once.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  17. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    I bought socks and shoes at Sears today. I like the shoes but the socks are scratchy and thin. So, I'm not allowed to return the socks or throw them away unless I return or trash the shoes too?
    You are allowed to, but you'd be lying if you said "I was better off in every way possible before I went to Sears today"

  18. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Depends if your business was sunk by it, I guess.
    I guess we don't need to ask the blacks, who were highly unlikely able to open a business to begin with prior to CRM.

  19. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Then why have you not acknowledged more than half of what we have said here, and in other threads? That's your idea of being attentive?

    You haven't shown the slightest sign of noticing anything you haven't thought (usually incorrectly) you could attack. Not once.
    I acknowledge people say things, I just don't accept them as fact or have to agree that cherry picking facts make the package better or worse.

    if you admit the package deal is overall better today, we have no disagreement, I am more than happy to agree with you that there are some better while some worse aspects in both times. But if you want to claim the package deal is worse today, I want to hear it all, and you too have to acknowledge what I say, or correct whatever mistakes I made.

  20. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I guess we don't need to ask the blacks, who were highly unlikely able to open a business to begin with prior to CRM.
    Where?

    And what the hell is CRM? Customer Resource Management? As I pointed out, a much, much larger percentage of the black population in the Deep South owned businesses in the Coolidge administration than today. Maybe that also went in one ear and out the other with nothing to slow it down, I don't know. But the only way that was more unlikely before CRM is if CRM stands for 'the Close of the Renaissance Movement.'

    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    I acknowledge people say things, I just don't accept them as fact or have to agree that cherry picking facts make the package better or worse.

    if you admit the package deal is overall better today, we have no disagreement, I am more than happy to agree with you that there are some better while some worse aspects in both times. But if you want to claim the package deal is worse today, I want to hear it all, and you too have to acknowledge what I say, or correct whatever mistakes I made.
    No. I don't have to sit here repeating myself until Kingdom Come. You refuse to acknowledge what we say, and you keep asking for the same things we've already told you. Yet we have to extend a courtesy to you that you refuse to extend to us? No.

    If you agree that there are some worse aspects of the present as compared to the past, then we are in disagreement in one area only--you say we cannot reclaim those good things without giving up the good things that have come since. And I say that attitude is full to the brim with $#@!.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 08-20-2014 at 12:26 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  21. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Where?

    And what the hell is CRM? Customer Resource Management? As I pointed out, a much, much larger percentage of the black population in the Deep South owned businesses in the Coolidge administration than today.
    I meant civil rights movement.

    I admit I missed this if it was mentioned in any previous posts.

    Much larger percentage of blacks owned businesses in a select area under the Coolidge administration. So that means it was not overall true throughout the country, to say the least.



    If you agree that there are some worse aspects of the present as compared to the past, then we are in disagreement in one area only--you say we cannot reclaim those good things without giving up the good things that have come since. And I say that attitude is full to the brim with $#@!.
    No, I did not say "you say we cannot reclaim those good things without giving up the good things that have come since. " (which would only be true IF you wanted to go back to the past, which wouldn't allow you to cherry pick) I completely agree that such an attitude is full of $#@! and ridiculous, which is why I phrased the question as, to only people who claim "life was better in the past" in the overall sense.

  22. #79
    How is it better now , in anything I would value ?

  23. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    How is it better now , in anything I would value ?
    how was it better then, in anything you value?



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    how was it better then, in anything you value?
    I am a simple man. The things I value are not better , that I see . Crap like cell phones , TV's do not matter to me . Smokeless powder is good . Things I value , like electricity KWH , motor oil , gasoline, bacon have gone up . Incomes , will not , that I expect

  26. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    I am a simple man. The things I value are not better , that I see . Crap like cell phones , TV's do not matter to me . Smokeless powder is good . Things I value , like electricity KWH , motor oil , gasoline, bacon have gone up . Incomes , will not , that I expect
    if you don't value cellphones and TVs, you probably have no problem saving what you didnt spend on this "crap" to make up for the increase costs of things you DO buy.

  27. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    if you don't value cellphones and TVs, you probably have no problem saving what you didnt spend on this "crap" to make up for the increase costs of things you DO buy.
    Um, just out of morbid curiosity, what part of those are the things he values most that all went up is it that you're pretending not to understand?

    Thirty years ago, a time many of us here remember personally, working men and women could earn a comfortable wage. The rich had more than they could spend, even if they quit their jobs and spent full time. But they didn't have thirty times what they could possibly spend. There was a middle class, and it was large and thriving. As the decade wore on, America discovered what it was to be completely decoupled from gold and completely at the Fed's mercy. It wasn't pretty. My father kept telling me he wanted to teach me the value of a dollar, but for the first time in his life he could no longer keep track of what that was, it was shrinking so fast. And the average real world working stiff mean wage has been shrinking ever since. Yes, electronics are getting cheaper and more miraculous. But you know what? There's more to life than toys.

    People ate genuine steaks once in a while. And when I say people, I mean black ones, too.

    Hell, cars had hip room and shoulder room. Trucks did, too, like now. But back then, so did cars. The government changed all that. Suppose I said to you, cars back then had crumple zones, overlong hoods and big trunks, and today's cars have a stronger steel cage immediately around the cockpit instead. Suppose I said, those were as safe as these, about the same weight and roomier, and could (with modern engines) still use less fuel than light trucks. Relax certain safety regulations and CAFE standards and we can ditch rollover-prone trucks for more efficient large cars.

    Would you even think about it? Or would you simply curse it out of hand as 'cherry picking'? Would you argue that to regain that--to learn the lesson and repeal a bad law or two--meant we had to give up every advance civilization has made since 1970?
    Last edited by acptulsa; 08-20-2014 at 02:57 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  28. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    No, I didn't say you have to take the package deal, but if you're going to tell me life in the past was overall better, rather than only better in some aspects, then you're the one who wants the package deal, not me.
    Your logic fails again. "Better", being subjective, is a matter of personal view. You may prefer this world. Others prefer what was, overall. That does not imply that everything about one era was better than another.

    I reject your premise that we're moving forward to more poverty and more tyranny.
    Your statement once again indicates a lack of direct experience with the world as it was. There are numerically objective bases that support the fact that people were relatively wealthier in, say, 1960 than they are today. There are qualitative factors as well - more subjective, but nonetheless valid.

    If you were not alive and aware of circumstances in those days, you cannot possibly understand the difference. I lived through the changes - I am a first-hand witness to the transition from what-was to what-is. I have heard more than a few people attempt to justify their view that life is better now because we have cell phones and internet and all that. If that is their criteria, it is valid.

    I must, however, point out the cringing and clinging nature that likely underpins such a viewpoint. This is the worldview of minds too meek and dependent upon what is provided them through third parties, mostly mere conveniences with little if any of it essential in nature. It is not a viewpoint of one who values his inherent rights above that of the crumbs that fall to him from the tables of others. It is not the viewpoint of one whose spirit seeks its own apex in living by his own just command and supported with his natural abilities, developed skills, personal vision, and determination. Rather, it is the viewpoint of what is essentially the dependent at best, the outright slave at worst, and the serf in the middle case, the latter being essentially a slave minus any of the overhead costs to the whipmaster. It is the view point of the man who gratefully, resignedly, or fearfully accepts the station assigned him as one whose existence is qualified and bounded by the arbitrary, often capricious, and almost universally viciously enforced whim of those who presume to reign over him. It is the view of the man too timid or lazy to make his own way in life, content to be directed by others and to pay the price of what can only be characterized as his voluntary servitude through the default of unchallenging acceptance.

    That is how I see such positions.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  29. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    Wages have not risen in proportion to cost of living.

    Middle class is more or less gone.

    30-40 years ago a person could leave high school and go right into a well paying factory or blue collar job. They could support a family on one income and own a home.

    All that is gone.
    when i went to high school we had all the normal classes , but we also had -- woodworking--welding -- electrician--roofing--plumbing--brick laying .

    every year our classes built a house , sold it and used the money to pay for the sports programs . we could get a job anywhere as there was a lot of factories .

    now days it doesn't take much to get a job a mcdonalds , unless you go to college and get a bs or masters degree , with the masters you could be day shift supervisor , bs degree you get night super .

    things will only get worst .

  30. #86
    How exactly was "Life better in the past"?
    You didn't have to fill out paper work for every human action.
    "The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles." —Jeff Cooper

    Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars.

  31. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by TaftFan View Post
    The only thing better today is the technology
    Yeah, about that....

    Since you mentioned older music, have you started a vinyl collection yet?
    Not all technology is objectively "better".
    Smaller, cheaper, lighter, more portable... but by the single standard we're supposed to be judging it by - how it sounds - that particular technology is inferior in its modern form.

    Consider film. When was the last time a Lawrence of Arabia came out? Or an Apocalypse Now?
    The technology that goes into movies is clearly superior, but by the standard we're supposed to be judging it by - whether or not it qualifies as art - modern movies don't hold up at all. It's become nothing more than an exercise in turning dollars into CGI to ejaculate into our eyes at predetermined intervals over the course of 100 minutes.
    It's clearly not "better".
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  32. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    No, I didn't say you have to take the package deal, but if you're going to tell me life in the past was overall better, rather than only better in some aspects, then you're the one who wants the package deal, not me.



    I reject your premise that we're moving forward to more poverty and more tyranny.
    Isn't that the whole reason this forum exists? When there's tyranny, there's going to be more until it is stopped. This is the whole point of Ron Paul's campaign, of the liberty movement in general. Of course, with tyranny comes a decreasing quality of life for the serfs.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by PRB View Post
    Maybe because they moved up, but why do you say that?




    So the fact less people need to work blue collar jobs to support a family is a DOWNSIDE??

    They didn't move up, they didn't have any blue collar opportunities so they are on the dole now.

  35. #90
    Trying to argue this with old timers would be like an eight year old telling me the new pokemon games are better than Red and Blue.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Rand's "bold" and "aggressive" stand -- Life at Conception Act
    By VoluntaryAmerican in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-11-2013, 12:36 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 06:08 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-16-2012, 06:24 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-16-2012, 05:49 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-18-2007, 01:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •