http://thelobbyist.net/lobby/archives/3761 Mon, 02 May 2011 18:06:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://thelobbyist.net/lobby/archives/3761/comment-page-1#comment-4086 RJ Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:57:13 +0000 http://thelobbyist.net/?p=3761#comment-4086 Sebastian, I am, of course, appreciative of your response. However, I wish you had kept them more meaningful with regard to policy and the topic at hand, and less about grasping at straws for something to criticize, while giving lack-luster support for those criticisms. So you decided the most important thing to spend a paragraph on is my smart-assed quip about creating value (or wealth) out of thin air. That is what we have been doing to try and combat the loss of value in our currency and economy. Gold, however, has held a value far longer than the greenback, so yes, though gold is useless until we posit a value to it, but it is more valuable inherently than dollars or Euros. Thanks for the worthless digression. Mandatory community service, yes Sebastian, if you receive Teir V unemployment benefits that you did not pay into. Stalin? So everyone who is expected to work for a paycheck is at the mercy of a “Stalin”. Reductio ad Stalinum now? It is an awful lot like FDR’s programs. Please tell me where we are better off just giving away free money for 99 weeks, instead of getting some sort of investment out of it? That’s jumping to a wild conclusion? As for your wishful thinking point: I cannot even figure out what your criticism is here. Wishful thinking? Don’t we wish thinks will work out from our plans? The point of the article was to state that if people are receiving extended benefits, they can do a little work. It’s not a job, and they stop when they get a real job. I am of the opinion that the article lays out a fairly good argument for why we should tie extended benefits with some form of community service for the betterment of everyone involved, including the community; as well as creating value in one way or another. I am afraid, you failed to read the article thoroughly, otherwise you certainly would have given me better than a C. Nevertheless, C’s means degrees… Sebastian, I am, of course, appreciative of your response. However, I wish you had kept them more meaningful with regard to policy and the topic at hand, and less about grasping at straws for something to criticize, while giving lack-luster support for those criticisms.
So you decided the most important thing to spend a paragraph on is my smart-assed quip about creating value (or wealth) out of thin air. That is what we have been doing to try and combat the loss of value in our currency and economy. Gold, however, has held a value far longer than the greenback, so yes, though gold is useless until we posit a value to it, but it is more valuable inherently than dollars or Euros. Thanks for the worthless digression.
Mandatory community service, yes Sebastian, if you receive Teir V unemployment benefits that you did not pay into. Stalin? So everyone who is expected to work for a paycheck is at the mercy of a “Stalin”. Reductio ad Stalinum now? It is an awful lot like FDR’s programs. Please tell me where we are better off just giving away free money for 99 weeks, instead of getting some sort of investment out of it? That’s jumping to a wild conclusion?
As for your wishful thinking point: I cannot even figure out what your criticism is here. Wishful thinking? Don’t we wish thinks will work out from our plans? The point of the article was to state that if people are receiving extended benefits, they can do a little work. It’s not a job, and they stop when they get a real job.
I am of the opinion that the article lays out a fairly good argument for why we should tie extended benefits with some form of community service for the betterment of everyone involved, including the community; as well as creating value in one way or another. I am afraid, you failed to read the article thoroughly, otherwise you certainly would have given me better than a C. Nevertheless, C’s means degrees…

]]> http://thelobbyist.net/lobby/archives/3761/comment-page-1#comment-4059 Sebastian Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:38:33 +0000 http://thelobbyist.net/?p=3761#comment-4059 All money, by its very nature is Nietzschean by your definition. The greenback has no intrinsic value and, really, never has. Gold, which Fox News loves to advertise for as that end all and be all for value is mostly worthless unless you're making wires. I mean seriously, what value does that extremely malleable, shiny metal hold for people should a cataclysm occur? It has value only because enough people declare it so, not from any inherent usefulness it has. Also, mandatory community service? Great idea, Stalin. It sounds an awful lot like FDR's programs though: create money and demand for labor and then employ the unemployed to build infrastructure (community service). Also, besides for a bunch of wishful thinking, can you provide any evidence that people will do anything remotely resembling what you're proposing once they have jobs? This article puts a bunch of facts together and then wildly leaps to conclusions and then declares them related (I suspect by virtue of the fact they're in the same post together). I rate it a C. It adequately informs a reader about many facts on the topic without providing any rational insight derived from those facts. All money, by its very nature is Nietzschean by your definition. The greenback has no intrinsic value and, really, never has. Gold, which Fox News loves to advertise for as that end all and be all for value is mostly worthless unless you’re making wires. I mean seriously, what value does that extremely malleable, shiny metal hold for people should a cataclysm occur? It has value only because enough people declare it so, not from any inherent usefulness it has.
Also, mandatory community service? Great idea, Stalin. It sounds an awful lot like FDR’s programs though: create money and demand for labor and then employ the unemployed to build infrastructure (community service). Also, besides for a bunch of wishful thinking, can you provide any evidence that people will do anything remotely resembling what you’re proposing once they have jobs?
This article puts a bunch of facts together and then wildly leaps to conclusions and then declares them related (I suspect by virtue of the fact they’re in the same post together). I rate it a C. It adequately informs a reader about many facts on the topic without providing any rational insight derived from those facts.

]]>