Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
njtosd
Participant[quote=utcsox]Check out this article of six tax planning strategies to prepare for a Trump Presidency.
By far the most interesting strategy is to “tender you resignation today” if you are an employee and earn more than $52,000 (if single) or more than $105,000 (if married filing jointly).
Tender your resignation today and become a consultant to your former employer, if that is permitted while maintaining the tax advantage. Or start your own business. Not as attention grabbing as your statement, but more accurate.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]The take away for the elections is that an overt prick can be president but a female prick cannot, eventhough the female is only arguably a covert prick.
By small actions by elitist I mean the little things that some people feel dissed about like the soda tax that people view as a value judgement on their dietary habits. Or Hollywood praising the Prius over the big SUV. Or saying that American sniper was not a good movie (it sucked).
Real alpha males shouldn’t give a shit what coastal liberals think. But the modern American alpha male needs constant reminder that he’s greatest. He needs to fly the flag on his garage and his president better damn well wear a flag pin.[/quote]
Once again, the sweeping generalizations about the non-coastal areas. Areas where, from what I can tell, you’ve never lived.
I do agree that some people resent being told what they should drink or drive more than others. Most men I know hate being told what to do at all. I haven’t noticed it break down along party lines – but maybe that’s so. We are always looking for a balance between independence and social obligations and I don’t think you or anyone else is guaranteed to have the right answer.
And finally, by the way, I find your fixation on (your version of) healthy eating eating a little odd, but so be it. And we’ve never owned an SUV or a Prius, so maybe we’re just out of it altogether.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]i really felt the grab them by the pussy was pretty offensive lite. imagine what he could have said. a little more graphic and brutal and it could have had an effect.[/quote]
The “p word” bothers me – but I have been called oversensitive. And I’m sure he and Bill Clinton have also said worse. We know Anthony Weiner has said worse about to a minor (Although – that girl is really something, if you read about it – she said she was obsessed with Anthony and wanted him to be her Hannibal Lechter . . . ). I know both Bill and Anthony are no longer candidates for public office, but AW didn’t turn into a creepazoid over night – Huma Abedin knew him for years and married him anyway. Etc. Etc. In other words, if you’re looking for the party that only tolerates polite and PC talk, it doesn’t exist.
I think AN’s graphic in another thread explains things a lot more more simply. People are unhappy and they want something different. God knows what different is going to be.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]njtosd, i interesting you should mention women who felt that Trump’s actions were hohum.
What about men who felt disrespected by the small actions of elitist democrats? Could the alpha males be the weak insecure ones who can’t handle a bitch as president?[/quote]
🙂 Case in point. People who wouldn’t dream of using the “n word” think the “b word” (or the”c word, if we’re talking about spdrun) is peachy and kind of hip. Although to be fair Brian you are the most politically (at least) schizophrenic person on this site.
Not really sure what you mean by the small actions of elitist democrats. Nominating a woman as a presidential candidate doesn’t seem small to me, so I’m confused. FWIW – Scandinavia seems riddled with alpha male physical types and is known for its progressiveness in terms of gender issues. Things get worse for women in that area of the world as you go south.
And I never said his actions as a whole were ho hum – I said his language, which is not unlike some things I’ve read on this site, might not be as striking as some might think.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]only betas read poetry, probably to impress girls.
go long on harley davidsons and mancave accesdories.
short hipsters.[/quote]
Thanks for the nice response and your return to the moral high ground.
My husband is 6’2″ and I can’t get my arms all the way around him at the chest (and I’m 5’6″). He was blessed with a football player body and puts on muscle almost effortlessly. It pisses me off. He was the first person to convince me to read poetry. He also likes graphic design, science and switching engines in and out of cars. Women know that men are many things because they always want to tell us about their secret (forbidden) interests – (i.e. poetry or similar). I’ve never heard a woman decide not to go out with someone because he liked opera. My daughter got my husband’s height, long legs and some long lost relatives good looks. She only talks to guys who are in band with her. Most of whom are a head shorter than her.
Men buy Harleys for other men.
Personally, I think the misogyny issue wasn’t so influential in the election because I have heard this sort of stuff (well maybe not as bad as the Trump quote) from every stripe of male – especially when they don’t think women are around. (I worked at a law firm where I was one of the 2 or 3 women lawyers out of 60 or 70). I heard guys say repulsive stuff about their daughters and their wives. And it wasn’t limited to the republicans or democrats. For most women I think Trumps comments were a bit ho hum – although the assault issues were something different.
The population of this country is no different than it was before the election. I think if anything good came out of all of this it shows how misinformed or mistaken the news media is. I think the hand wringing is too much. The Supreme Ct. nominee can’t be any more conservative than Scalia, and even with him there was significant movement in terms of gay marriage, etc. I cried when Reagan was elected (even though I wasn’t old enough to vote) and it wasn’t the end of the world. In fact, the Reagan years were good for a lot of people. The race issue, if anything, seems to have gotten worse under Obama – at least I think so. Maybe people just more willing to talk about it. Not saying any of this is good – just that outcomes can be very unpredictable.
Thanks again for your nice reply. Go to the gym and try to forget about all this crap – that’s what I’m going to do.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]no. america is the almost decent looking chick who happened to fuck the alpha dude thinking maybe he would date her. she listened to his bullshit all night, all about himself. she thought he liked her but really, he was just looking for something to bone. he will ass rape her in the morning kind of consensually, but not really, he’ll just kind of grab it and go for it, and she will just sort of pretend it feels ok. he will come and then move on to fucking other bitches.
but it seemed like he really liked you.
now you have herpes, but on the bright side, its just in your ass.[/quote]
Spoken like a beta dude – sorry scaredy but this is beneath you. I get that you’re trying to expand on Harvey’s charming analogy – but it’s offensive. I know that most women have stopped posting on this site (none of you ever seem to wonder why) but there are a few of us left.
Also, it sounds sadly like the self soothing inner musings of the little guy at the bar who has a hard time with women and, until she left with the alpha male, thought the “almost decent looking chick” was the most gorgeous creature he ever saw. And the little guy doesn’t really know what she sees in the A male nor can he know what will happen between the two of them, but the B male sure would like it if she was subjected to horrible things so that she bitterly regrets not leaving with him.
Participant[quote=millennial]No I get it. I’m just saying that she uses these terms that are based on her definition (for instance intellectual and protest) which makes it difficult to understand her initial post. Using her definition they would not be considered protesting…end of story because there is no goal. But according to mine they are protesting and it’s because they want to show and express their personal emotions and display it as a unified front to those in the south and Midwest. This in my mind is a protest.[/quote]
Funny – in your last sentence you used the words “In my mind”, which are exactly the words I used at the beginning of the first paragraph that you quoted. I started the second paragraph of that quote with the words “in my opinion”. And I guess I should have said “political protest” – I am quite aware of the fact that one can protest against the quality of restaurant service, the theme for 6th grade promotion, the winner on America’s Got Talent or whatever. I never purported to define anything.
Last I checked I was still entitled to my opinion just as you are entitled to yours. IN MY OPINION (and to paraphrase a line from A Fish Called Wanda) calling these marches political protests is an insult to what IN MY OPINION are true political protests, such as those relating to abuses by the police, our continued participation in various wars or even CA’s policies on admission of in state vs out of state vs international students.
These people are grieving and mourning IN MY OPINION, and people don’t usually walk through the streets to do it. For some reason IN MY OPINION they equate a disappointing albeit fair loss with somehow being cheated by someone. Is that better?
Participant[quote=zk]
If by, “this argument” you’re referring to “why people are protesting,” I disagree. I don’t see it. I think they’re protesting because they’re angry and disgusted that we’ve elected a misogynist, racist, xenophobic douchebag as president.[quote=njtosd]
and I think most elections are driven by emotions not logic.[/quote]
Definitely agree.[/quote]
I think you and I are saying something of the same thing. To say it in another way, Clinton voters believe that Trump supporters are ok with all of the bad things that you mention and they are unhappy and disgusted that they will be governed by this deplorable person because of the deplorable voters. Or maybe I’m missing something . .
Re: protests – In my mind, one protests illegal actions by the government. Excessive exercise of government power. Excessive taxation. Utility issues. In other words – things that are being done by the government or with government assistance that are unfair and beyond its reasonable exercise of power.
A protest, in my opinion, isn’t a way to express your extreme disappointment or disdain for something. It’s not a method of sharing with the world the depth of your personal unhappiness about, for example, your team losing (or in the case of the 1984 Tigers, winning) a major sporting event. In other words – protesters generally have a result that they desire and can identify. What is the goal of these protests? To overturn the election? That can’t be done and based on current facts shouldn’t be done. So they are snarling traffic and spewing rhetoric for what? To tell the 4 humans in the world who don’t already know it that this was a very contentious election and that the marchers don’t like the outcome? I think that message has pretty much made it’s way around.
Participant[quote=millennial]
BTW, not sure if you know this but Detroit is a very large city in terms of size. Just like any large city, there are parts that are good and parts that are bad. Downtown is the CBD and the part where revitalization is occurring. Not sure how long and how far this revitalization will go, but being from Michigan I am very optimistic about their progress. If you really are from Michigan you should be ashamed.[/quote]
Huh??? I grew up in the suburbs. My Dad was from Redford. My mom was from Highland Park. She went to McKenzie High (though she wasn’t Catherine Deneuve – ah more proof of my Motor City origins). Why would you have any better idea of the size of Detroit than anyone else? Again – it’s the somewhat ingenuous millennial thing.
The road ahead after bankruptcy is still somewhat unsure: http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/detroit-reborn/2015/11/08/detroit-rising-life-after-bankruptcy/75085252/
In terms of downtown Detroit being like Chicago – after law school I lived in Chicago (Lincoln Park, if you are still doubting – Belden Stratford) for about 7 yrs and there is absolutely NO comparison in terms of well, anything. I’m sorry that’s true but it is true. You’re free to go live in Detroit and do what you want to improve it – but both you and I are here (at least I think you are) and all we can do is be realistic and hope for the best. There’s no shame in that. But there is no point in magical thinking.
Participant[quote=millennial] Despite this, cities like Detroit are now growing again and property values are growing as well. My sister just purchased a refurbished loft style condominium in a high rise for over $250k. Rent comps within the building are running between 2500-3000 a month and the available units get picked up quick. Companies such as Quicken have come in and incentivized workers by paying for their rent, or covering some of the down payment to do so. Anyways, just wanted to say that the those industrial cities are starting to right size and fill up again with professionals.[/quote]
Hmm. The house that I grew up in in the Detroit NW suburbs is now worth (adjusted for inflation) 73% of what it was worth in 1964. I’m not saying that things haven’t improved over the last few years (in fact, in 2009 it was worth about 50% of its 1964 value). But Detroit is a long way (sadly) from pulling itself out of its slide. My guess is your sister is not downtown (or maybe she is?) – last I heard there wasn’t a single chain grocery store within the city limits: http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/22/smallbusiness/detroit_grocery_stores.smb/
Detroit flourished due to the automotive industry. Initially Detroit was nothing – they almost made Calumet the capital, as that was where the big industry, mining, was when Michigan was made a state. The weather sucks – we used to celebrate the one or two sunny weekends in the summer. There is not a lot to pull people in, except cheap rent – especially for those who are looking for art studio space. And the crime rate is legendary – it is currently the 28th most dangerous city in the world by some estimates: http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world.html
People have been trying to re-envision Detroit since the 70s PR campaign “Say Nice Things About Detroit” – but wishing and hoping doesn’t make it so. I wish things were different, but it has a long way to go.
ParticipantIf you search this text string “Any conflicts must be remedied by divestiture, the creation of special trusts,” you get this website from George Bush’s administration (among others):
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/appointments/text/
So it apparently is just recycled.
What I always found interesting was this questionnaire apparently used when Obama was the president elect:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13apply_questionnaire.pdf
It included questions about who had been your cohabitants, religious organizations you were a part of and questions about any medical treatment you were receiving. That struck me at the time as pretty unconstitutional, and many found the questions to be very prying (i.e. questions about diaries) but people were very high on the hope and change rhetoric at the time.
Participant[quote=zk][quote=njtosd] I don’t remember Supreme Court justices threatening to move to New Zealand, or people “protesting” (aka whining) in the streets over the presidential outcome in ’08 or ’12. I think it’s a matter of bruised ego for a lot of the intellectual types.[/quote]
I agree that protesting is ridiculous.
But to say that a “bruised ego” is the reason for it is more ridiculous. Bruised ego isn’t the problem. This is the problem:
[quote=zk]
In addition to the xenophobia and the misogyny, there are all these shocking and disgusting things:
His wanting nuclear weapons to proliferate.
His insistence that the military will follow illegal orders if he gives them.
His threats not to honor our NATO obligations.
His profound ignorance of foreign affairs (“Putin won’t go into Ukraine,” didn’t know what the nuclear triad is).
His desire to commit war crimes (killing terrorists’ families).
His threats not to pay our debts in full.
His birtherism.
. . . .[/quote][/quote]
I don’t think I made myself as clear as I thought – both you and millennial have interpreted my description of “intellectual types” as meaning that they are actually intellectuals. I meant it in a somewhat pejorative sense. But before I say anything – I ended up not voting for Trump or Clinton.
There are very few Americans who voted for Clinton who are familiar with all of the issues that you raise. There are many, many who voted for Clinton because they believe that people who backed Clinton were smarter, cooler and simply better than those who voted for Trump – without reference to issues. To be fair, the Democratic party promoted that position with its party line, celebrities and references to deplorables. (I have many family members who fall into that category – maybe that explains my annoyance. ) Those are the ones that I refer to as “intellectual types”. They feel like they got beaten by their inferiors – that is the bruised ego to which I refer. ( I feel a similar fraction voted for Trump for equally uninformed reasons – the make America great again sort of superficial national pride and abortion gibberish. But that’s not the topic we’re addressing right now.)
My husband is a car guy. To analogize – a lot of people buy expensive cars because they appreciate the engineering – but many more buy them because of ego driven issues. I admire people who have well informed viewpoints – really regardless of the viewpoint. But a lot of this argument is about ego – and I think most elections are driven by emotions not logic.
November 9, 2016 at 11:15 PM in reply to: Electoral College: the disenfranchisement of Californians #803381Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]https://www.google.com/amp/www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/11/07/the-case-against-democracy/amp?client=ms-android-verizon
the case against democracy.
“roughly a third of American voters think that the Marxist slogan “From each according to his ability to each according to his need” appears in the Constitution. About as many are incapable of naming even one of the three branches of the United States government. Fewer than a quarter know who their senators are, and only half are aware that their state has two of them.
Democracy is other people, and the ignorance of the many has long galled the few, especially the few who consider themselves intellectuals. Plato, one of the earliest to see democracy as a problem, saw its typical citizen as shiftless and flighty:
Sometimes he drinks heavily while listening to the flute; at other times, he drinks only water and is on a diet; sometimes he goes in for physical training; at other times, he’s idle and neglects everything; and sometimes he even occupies himself with what he takes to be philosophy….”
we dont want equal voting power. we need to distribute more votes to smarter people, some argue.[/quote]
People also forget that the founding fathers did not want it to simply be one great big country. They wanted the power to be decentralized. The states were considered much more independent, separate and significant. So the electoral votes were not supposed to represent a certain number of people – they were (in part) supposed to represent the significance of statehood.. By the way, you never saw the DNC lift a finger after Gore lost in spite of having the popular vote. The pols like it this way.
And it still bugs me when Americans talk about our right to a “jury of ones peers” (Magna Carta ensuring that nobles were tried by nobles).
Participant[quote=millennial]That’s funny. I said the same exact thing. They must have been freaked out with a black president named Obama.[/quote]
Being unhappy with an outcome is not the same as being “freaked out”. (This is the first time one of your posts has lived up to your screen name, in my opinion. ) I don’t remember Supreme Court justices threatening to move to New Zealand, or people “protesting” (aka whining) in the streets over the presidential outcome in ’08 or ’12. I think it’s a matter of bruised ego for a lot of the intellectual types.
-
AuthorPosts