Jump to content

What are a few things 'right' and 'left' and 'center' agree on now?


Recommended Posts

I think it's getting pretty shockingly small. If I listed some of the things not on the list, it'd prevent much discussion of what is I'd guess.

 

'Cure cancer'. Well, they'd all say they're glad of that; but, if the cure is expensive, there'd be a lack of agreement on any government role in helping people afford it, and there is a lack of agreement on funding the government research that might actually lead to it.

 

'Don't let another country conquer the USA'. Pretty broad agreement; but putting aside how one side is fine with a hostile country interfering in our election if it's on the side of their guy, there isn't much agreement about the huge overkill in military spending way beyond protecting our country. It's sort of a non-issue as it's not remotely possible.

 

'Public libraries' - I see surprisingly little controversy on this, as the Libertarians seem to choose not to fight about it and Republicans don't seem to mind that 'socialism' much.

 

The constitution - there seems to be pretty broad support it as a document, but very different versions of it on actual specifics. 'Corporations are persons'. 'No, they're not'.

 

Hating that drug guy, Martin Shrkeli. Seems pretty widely agreed, but I'm not sure what the right hates about him since he seems more like he should be their poster child.

 

What else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

'Public libraries' - I see surprisingly little controversy on this, as the Libertarians seem to choose not to fight about it and Republicans don't seem to mind that 'socialism' much.

This Republicans does.  Public libraries are a complete waste.  We have the internet.  We have book stores.  We have free access to all the information once contained in a library for basically free; and easier to find.  Libraries are airconditioned bum-hang-outs.  Tear them down and use them to build the wall!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There really isn't much that Democrats and Republicans have in common.  Except, sometimes, marriage.  Why a decent Republican would ever want to marry a moonbat Democrat is beyond me, but I know of one such couple.

 

Heck no, it's not me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Skans said:

This Republicans does.  Public libraries are a complete waste.  We have the internet.  We have book stores.  We have free access to all the information once contained in a library for basically free; and easier to find.  Libraries are airconditioned bum-hang-outs.  Tear them down and use them to build the wall!

 

I'm a non-Liberal (getting that from your screen info) - and I'm guessing based on your above and my below - that we are of different ages and experiences.

 

I think public libraries are fantastic. While I no longer use them, I have younger kids that do. It's a place where they can meet friends, where they can pick up a book on an almost infinite number of subjects, and read. If the books interesting, they can take it home, and read. My kids are required (by parental choice) to always be reading a book - in addition to their other activities. 

 

You mention the internet - and "easier to find". Is that what life is all about, easier? Is the easiest path always the best path? Or is being challenged a better path, having to search, having to read - having to do something that isn't as easily attainable with a couple of clicks of a mouse? I think it's important for kids to have to do things themselves, to fail, and to have to put in effort to obtain success. While it's a "little thing", it's also a life's lesson. Not everything is free, not everything is easy, the best things in life require constant, focused, and diligent effort.

 

My 11 year old daughter last tested at a 161 IQ - so I'd hardly consider her a bum hanging out. She has a couple of buddies of similar nature, all MENSA students, and they'll get together at the library and challenge each other on a wide variety of topics and subjects - hardly a bum gathering. Do they get that type of interaction sitting at their homes with each on their respective computers? Can "people skills" be garnered through the internet? I think not.

 

For me, as a non-Liberal - instead of "tearing down libraries to build the wall" - if materials are hard to come by - I'd rather see them building more libraries with wall material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have spent many hours in various libraries.  I know from experience that they are a huge waste for the money that goes into them.  A fancy warehouse for old books.  They are "trophies" for cities to erect in their downtowns.   For new books, there are still a few bookstores around, and some even have a social scene if you are into that; of course NOT funded with taxpyer's money.

 

Oh, and anyone in MENSA will tell you that you cannot increase your IQ by hanging out in libraries.  You might increase your knowledge, but not your IQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skans and Leftie's debate aside, public libraries are rarely at the forefront of a debate. Not sure as to why. 

 

Also, national and state parks tend not to be hot button issues. I can't recall the last time that I have had a debate with someone about their existence or the costs surrounding them. That tells me that there is agreement or that neither really care. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skans said:

I have spent many hours in various libraries.  I know from experience that they are a huge waste for the money that goes into them.  A fancy warehouse for old books.  They are "trophies" for cities to erect in their downtowns.   For new books, there are still a few bookstores around, and some even have a social scene if you are into that; of course NOT funded with taxpyer's money.

 

Oh, and anyone in MENSA will tell you that you cannot increase your IQ by hanging out in libraries.  You might increase your knowledge, but not your IQ.

 

I referenced her IQ as a point at the opposite end of the spectrum regarding your "air-conditioned bum hang-out" statement, nothing more.

 

I'm sure we can agree to disagree. I happen to think public libraries are one of the better investments made in our society, it's just unfortunate they're so underutilized these days. They're (theoretically) non-biased, a place where anyone from any walk of life can enter and increase their knowledge, and considering the absurd amounts of money wasted on so many things in this country - inexpensive by comparison. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe there's agreement regarding health care. I think most people agree we could, and should, be doing a better job at a much more sustainable cost - and that healthcare bills should not be allowed to destroy families lives.

 

I also believe the difference crops up in the means to accomplish the above.

 

Am I wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

They're (theoretically) non-biased, a place where anyone from any walk of life can enter and increase their knowledge,

Yes, we can just agree to disagree.  We are from different eras, and I think at one time, libraries were relatively inexpensive and served a purpose.  But, like buggy whips,  car phones, and cathode ray tubes, they just aren't as relevant as perhaps they once were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Craig234 said:

I think it's getting pretty shockingly small. If I listed some of the things not on the list, it'd prevent much discussion of what is I'd guess.

 

'Cure cancer'. Well, they'd all say they're glad of that; but, if the cure is expensive, there'd be a lack of agreement on any government role in helping people afford it, and there is a lack of agreement on funding the government research that might actually lead to it.

 

'Don't let another country conquer the USA'. Pretty broad agreement; but putting aside how one side is fine with a hostile country interfering in our election if it's on the side of their guy, there isn't much agreement about the huge overkill in military spending way beyond protecting our country. It's sort of a non-issue as it's not remotely possible.

 

'Public libraries' - I see surprisingly little controversy on this, as the Libertarians seem to choose not to fight about it and Republicans don't seem to mind that 'socialism' much.

 

The constitution - there seems to be pretty broad support it as a document, but very different versions of it on actual specifics. 'Corporations are persons'. 'No, they're not'.

 

Hating that drug guy, Martin Shrkeli. Seems pretty widely agreed, but I'm not sure what the right hates about him since he seems more like he should be their poster child.

 

What else?

i would rather kick your ass than agree with you on anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Skans said:

Yes, we can just agree to disagree.  We are from different eras, and I think at one time, libraries were relatively inexpensive and served a purpose.  But, like buggy whips,  car phones, and cathode ray tubes, they just aren't as relevant as perhaps they once were.

 

Fair enough...

 

Though I will say I wasn't around for buggy whips - lol - but have flown plenty of aircraft with CRT's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's something that I think might cross party lines.  Stop allowing developers to build apartments, condos and houses that aren't needed.  They come in to small towns and destroy them with franchise restaurants and cookie-cutter houses on postage stamp sized lots and cheap apartments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Craig234 said:

I think it's getting pretty shockingly small. If I listed some of the things not on the list, it'd prevent much discussion of what is I'd guess.

 

'Cure cancer'. Well, they'd all say they're glad of that; but, if the cure is expensive, there'd be a lack of agreement on any government role in helping people afford it, and there is a lack of agreement on funding the government research that might actually lead to it.

 

'Don't let another country conquer the USA'. Pretty broad agreement; but putting aside how one side is fine with a hostile country interfering in our election if it's on the side of their guy, there isn't much agreement about the huge overkill in military spending way beyond protecting our country. It's sort of a non-issue as it's not remotely possible.

 

'Public libraries' - I see surprisingly little controversy on this, as the Libertarians seem to choose not to fight about it and Republicans don't seem to mind that 'socialism' much.

 

The constitution - there seems to be pretty broad support it as a document, but very different versions of it on actual specifics. 'Corporations are persons'. 'No, they're not'.

 

Hating that drug guy, Martin Shrkeli. Seems pretty widely agreed, but I'm not sure what the right hates about him since he seems more like he should be their poster child.

 

What else?

You can take public federally funded libraries off the list.

 

IMLS: Institute of Museum and Library Services
FY 2017 $230 million
FY 2018 $23 million
-90%, effectively eliminated


Administration justification for elimination: “IMLS provides funding to museums and libraries across the country through formula and competitive grant awards. IMLS provides $156 million in formula funds to State Library Administrative Agencies and administers several smaller competitive grant programs for libraries and museums that fund activities such as scholarships for librarian training and digital resources to support educational, employment, and other training opportunities. IMLS’s funding supplements local, State, and private funds, which provide the vast majority of funding to museums and libraries. Furthermore, given that IMLS primarily supports discrete, short-term projects as opposed to operation-sustaining funds, it is unlikely the elimination of IMLS would result in the closure of a significant number of libraries and museums.”

http://www.districtdispatch.org/2017/05/stark-budget-cuts-library-funding/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Skans said:

Here's something that I think might cross party lines.  Stop allowing developers to build apartments, condos and houses that aren't needed.  They come in to small towns and destroy them with franchise restaurants and cookie-cutter houses on postage stamp sized lots and cheap apartments.

 

Not to pick a fight but that seems rather non-free market of you. If someone is willing to pay, why does it matter if it is truly needed?

 

We have the opposite problem here in Northern Nevada. Housing/Desirable land is at a premium and so prices are soaring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

 

Not to pick a fight but that seems rather non-free market of you. If someone is willing to pay, why does it matter if it is truly needed?

 

We have the opposite problem here in Northern Nevada. Housing/Desirable land is at a premium and so prices are soaring. 

 

Interestingly, development is one area I've seen Republicans cross over on - they'll rant about 'greedy developers' that destroy small town atmosphere and increase congestion.

 

There's a NIMBY feel to it, but they sound a bit like Occupy about the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, shintao said:

You can take public federally funded libraries off the list.

 

IMLS: Institute of Museum and Library Services
FY 2017 $230 million
FY 2018 $23 million
-90%, effectively eliminated


Administration justification for elimination: “IMLS provides funding to museums and libraries across the country through formula and competitive grant awards. IMLS provides $156 million in formula funds to State Library Administrative Agencies and administers several smaller competitive grant programs for libraries and museums that fund activities such as scholarships for librarian training and digital resources to support educational, employment, and other training opportunities. IMLS’s funding supplements local, State, and private funds, which provide the vast majority of funding to museums and libraries. Furthermore, given that IMLS primarily supports discrete, short-term projects as opposed to operation-sustaining funds, it is unlikely the elimination of IMLS would result in the closure of a significant number of libraries and museums.”

http://www.districtdispatch.org/2017/05/stark-budget-cuts-library-funding/

 

Ugh.

I was talking more about local libraries, but this is yet another misguided cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Craig234 said:

 

Ugh.

I was talking more about local libraries, but this is yet another misguided cut.

I think not. I have watched local libraries die, so federal funding is an essential element to local communities, as their budgets are gutted. You might want to look into what local community's will say when faced with priority's in their budgets.

 

The amount of funding that a library receives directly influences the quality of its services. ... While the majority of funding for libraries comes from state and local sources, federal funding provides critical assistance, giving libraries across the country the financial support they need to serve their communities. google

 

We are disheartened to report at least two public library closures and a continued decline of school library funding and support.

http://everylibrary.org/library-closures-defunding-2017/

 

The oldest public library in the country, located in Delaware County, is in danger of closing. The Darby Free Public Library has been a community resource since 1743. NBC10's George Spencer has more on the difficult decision the library must make if they cannot find funding. (Published Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2014)

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Oldest-Library-in-the-Nation-in-Danger-of-Closing-272799331.html

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all agree on needing infrastructure, but probably disagree on how much funding to put towards it.

 

We agree people should be educated, and that is all we agree on.

 

We agree we don't like school shootings, but we also agree we are not going to spend the funds to stop the shooters.

 

We agree we don't like troops dying and being pulverized, but refuse to stop spending on wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can agree, though it took over a month, but this report is shit.

 

Quote

 

The Report ... from these guys ...

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/preliminary-analysis-unified-framework/full

 

A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS  OF THE UNIFIED FRAMEWORK

TPC Staff

September29,2017

 

ABSTRACT
The Tax Policy Center has produced preliminary estimates of the potential impact of proposals included  in the “Unified Framework for Fixing Our Broken Tax Code.”
We find they would reduce federal revenue by $ 2 .4  trillion over ten yearsand  $ 3 .2  trillion over the second decade (not including any dynamic feedback).

 

 

(not including any dynamic feedback).

 

 

Yeah, no dynamic feedback.

 

It takes a real moron to think that static ten year economic predictions are valid beyond the first twenty minutes.

 

PMSNBCNN did.

 

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, shintao said:

I think we all agree on needing infrastructure, but probably disagree on how much funding to put towards it.

 

We agree people should be educated, and that is all we agree on.

 

We agree we don't like school shootings, but we also agree we are not going to spend the funds to stop the shooters.

 

We agree we don't like troops dying and being pulverized, but refuse to stop spending on wars.


I DON'T think all the groups on infrastructure. Republicans get a free ride - 'oh, of course they support it' - when the evidence suggests they don't, and use it as a bargaining chip.

 

I DON'T think all the groups agree people should be educated. Textbooks are made to fit right-wing lies, school funding is cut - they LIKE uneducated voters who work cheap and are easy to manipulate.

 

I won't give them not liking school shootings - because while they'll be against a specific act, they won't do much of anything to help prevent them. They don't get troops, because they happily support unneeded and poorly run wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...