Ban the over 50's from Voting

reply to post by alpinestar


Yo alpinestar...

Fools like you are so damn obvious that I already knew you wouldn't trust books, or anything else that I might source to. That's the REAL reason I said to "Do your own damn research". I want to see references that support your version of US History, so "put up or shut up"!

As for your question about the atom:
You don't trust me to give you an ACCEPTABLE answer, so ask an alien or something!

Hey..., do you "channel"?

I'm looking forward to seeing your references, whatever they may be, so please hurry.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed


Good one! Your turn:

Show which ones on the same list you had anything to do with!

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed

 

Good one! Your turn:

Show which ones on the same list you had anything to do with!

See ya,
Milt

Well played, you went off topic with an ad hominem. Game over, you win, I quit.

Originally posted by alphabetaone
The only thing I want to add to that is, that even though all generations have visited this phenomena in their life, I have yet to see where a generation wants to actually erode constitutional rights in their fervor to push their agenda. In fact, it's always been somewhat the opposite; fighting FOR them.

It's in no small part an offshoot of the Previous and current Obama campaigns. You need only look at who he has surrounded himself with and who he has associated with. Obama is too young to be one of the organizers, but was clearly taken fully under their wings.

I'm used to people not agreeing with my moderate stance. Moderates are always like a Yo-Yo between the two radical sides. We look to common sense and critical thinking instead of going with one side or the other. It maddens some we can't be pegged into a hole on the Right or the Left.

I expect to see things like is in this thread often until the next election. Obama is clearly placing his main hope in manipulating the young crowd as they are easier to fool. It's all about dividing us to control us and both sides have their ways of doing that. With Obama it's pitting the young against the old, rich against poor and then scaring Seniors.

I'm not surprised that we Independents are now the majority, nor am I surprised that the older the age group, the more likely they are to be Independent.

The problem with idea's and ideals like the concept of a global government, progressiveness, socialism and even communism is that on their face they sound like good idea's and they are. Problem is once you add in the Human Factor, they fall on their face. None of those idea's work because when you make it possible to survive without participating or being productive, to often the Human Animal will take the route of apathy. To young minds the idea of something for nothing sounds great. The idea of hard work and going the extra mile not so good.

We saw the end result of a society like they think they want as the Soviet's collapsed. Young Progressive have the view of history that it is not a lesson to learn from, but that these idea's failed in the past because they were not implemented right. Due to that, history has no meaning to a Progressive. In a way Narcissism is a must to even be a Progressive.

We have right now a bad point of view regarding young people that is unrealistic in fact. It's a fact that the Frontal Lobe does not even fully develop until about the age of 25. In reality it would be a more sensible idea to limit voting to those over that age, contrary to the nonsense in this thread. But then logic has left the building in this new PC world and the bad folk are taking great advantage of the nonsense.

Next the see-saw will go the other way as it appears to be a fact of life. A Progressive generation will produce Conservative offspring and then the pendulum will swing the other way again. Young adults will always take the side of rebellion and I think it is genetically hardwired into us. It's likely a survival tool that it is this way. If one side gains too much control for too long it would be likely a bad thing.

I'm over 50 and don't scare easily.

I run a technology support help desk, so don't think that you know more about technology then me just by virtue of your age.

I often suspect that people under the age of 30 should not be allowed to vote. They think too much with their hearts and not enough with their brain. We don't have enough money to solve all the problems that face us today.

reply to post by BenReclused


I was simply making the point that you should be careful about what you claim to "know". True knowledge is experiential...everything else is a collection of beliefs and slef-made agreements. Period. For you to even ask for references, (from some writing we can both substantiate) is no different than the new agers hanging on the words of channels. No I'm not one of those.......your intuition (or lack) is apparent. Find YOUR truth and you won't have beat your intellectual chest on a conspiradcy site to feel good about yourself. The way you see it is just that.......

Originally posted by alpinestar

I was simply making the point that you should be careful about what you claim to "know". True knowledge is experiential...

Not ALL true knowledge needs hands-on experience to be "true".

Some laws of mathematics and physics require zero hands-on for it to be knowledge that isn't just assumed. Sure you have to be "careful about what you know", this is why texts have references in the first place.

Originally posted by alpinestar
everything else is a collection of beliefs and slef-made agreements. Period.

No, it isn't. Period. See Above.

Originally posted by alpinestar
Find YOUR truth and you won't have beat your intellectual chest on a conspiradcy site to feel good about yourself. The way you see it is just that.......

In case it wasn't already outwardly apparent, I get the feeling he is doing it SIMPLY for the levity value and nothing more.

reply to post by alpinestar


Alright;

I'm ready to get back on topic. I've already been lured off of it a couple of times.

Could you please explain what this, or even your other post, has to do with whether, or not, 50+ "old farts" should vote?

Thank you for your insight, but I already have my own.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Blaine91555


Blaine, I gave you a star for this as it's a well thought out response, but I have to say this much, you can't lump all rebellion into the same category any more than you can lump all human beings into one.

Rebellion A: Older folks are WAYYYYY out of touch because they won't save the whales! Let's stick it to em!

Rebellion B: Older folks should have their Constitutional right to vote revoked and their driving privileges revoked because, well because they don't agree with anything we do.

One has (conceptually) has a measure of validity, while the other is simply toxic.

Let's suspend all our belief in reality for a moment (because I think we ALL know the OP itself poses no threat and would never amount to a thing), but let's suppose in that, that it gained enough traction to become a reality in this new technological socialization that embraces mediocrity....at that point would you be voicing concern the same way? Or would you be outraged?

reply to post by BenReclused

Can you say "Heil Hitler" I'll bet you can!

Again, reductio ad Hitlerum fallacy..
Considering Hitler came to power precisely because of the flawed equal vote weight democracy, when ignorant and easily manipulated majority overvoted educated (and far more jewish) minority, the irony of your post is staggering. If anything, geniocratic/meritocratic system would be LESS likely to vote dictators into power than current democratic one.

reply to post by angus1745

Ban the over 50's from Voting

Ever see the movie, Logan's Run? Yeah, it's an oldie but... dang sure spot on with this kind of thinking.

The older I get, the happier I am that I am no longer young enough to know everything.

reply to post by alphabetaone

You said it, I just imagine a world where you would want it to continue on it's present course of deterioration of rights.

In other words, blatant slippery slope logical fallacy.

Bring one example to the table of a possible correlation, between unemployment and ignorance.

Long term unemployment correlates inversely with education level (excluding unusual circumstances like recession). Education level correlates with ignorance, or ability to determine good political programs from bad ones (which is important for us).

The unemployed have to pay taxes, when they DO collect unemployment, and when they DON'T the last thing you want is voter's who will maintain the status quo such that those unemployed can REMAIN unemployed, you want voters and votes from the boots on the ground...the ones who can help shape a difference. Their votes may actually be MORE important.

Since benefits itself come from taxes, once your only income is benefits, you dont pay taxes, if you take the net effect.
And you assume those paying taxes want more unemployed people so they would have to pay them more benefits and have higher taxes, and you assume long term unemployed people would vote to change the status quo for more jobs instead of more entitlement benefits payed from other people money..

reply to post by alphabetaone

You said it, I just imagine a world where you would want it to continue on it's present course of deterioration of rights.

In other words, blatant slippery slope logical fallacy.

Bring one example to the table of a possible correlation, between unemployment and ignorance.

Long term unemployment correlates inversely with education level (excluding unusual circumstances like recession). Education level correlates with ignorance, or ability to determine good political programs from bad ones (which is important for us).

The unemployed have to pay taxes, when they DO collect unemployment, and when they DON'T the last thing you want is voter's who will maintain the status quo such that those unemployed can REMAIN unemployed, you want voters and votes from the boots on the ground...the ones who can help shape a difference. Their votes may actually be MORE important.

Since benefits itself come from taxes, once your only income is benefits, you dont pay taxes, if you take the net effect.
And you assume those paying taxes want more unemployed people so they would have to pay them more benefits and have higher taxes, and you assume long term unemployed people would vote to change the status quo for more jobs instead of more entitlement benefits payed from other people money..

reply to post by alphabetaone

You said it, I just imagine a world where you would want it to continue on it's present course of deterioration of rights.

In other words, blatant slippery slope logical fallacy.

Bring one example to the table of a possible correlation, between unemployment and ignorance.

Long term unemployment correlates inversely with education level (excluding unusual circumstances like recession). Education level correlates with ignorance, or ability to determine good political programs from bad ones (which is important for us).

The unemployed have to pay taxes, when they DO collect unemployment, and when they DON'T the last thing you want is voter's who will maintain the status quo such that those unemployed can REMAIN unemployed, you want voters and votes from the boots on the ground...the ones who can help shape a difference. Their votes may actually be MORE important.

Since benefits itself come from taxes, once your only income is benefits, you dont pay taxes, if you take the net effect.
And you assume those paying taxes want more unemployed people so they would have to pay them more benefits and have higher taxes, and you assume long term unemployed people would vote to change the status quo for more jobs instead of more entitlement benefits payed from other people money..

Translation: Ban all those from voting who dare think differently than I.

reply to post by Maslo

Again, reductio ad Hitlerum fallacy..
Considering Hitler came to power precisely because of the flawed equal vote weight democracy, when ignorant and easily manipulated majority overvoted educated (and far more jewish) minority, the irony of your post is staggering. If anything, geniocratic/meritocratic system would be LESS likely to vote dictators into power than current democratic one.

Again... A classic case of:
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh!t.

I'm certainly baffled!

Note to Guidance.Is.Internal:
I concur!

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Yea, +1 to this...

Maslo, let's start with the first thing....I have no idea what location SlovaKIA is, but I know it isn't in the US, as such, this hardly pertains to you.

However, if it did...everything you said, amounts to nothing...I gave you fact (the unemployed pay taxes) and you give me fictitious numbers (well, if a / b goes equally into the square root of how many times I hit the submit button to try and get a point across, then clearly the unemployed are living off of taxed taxes).

You're not making a point, you're arguing TO argue, and I'm not going to play into your little imagined multiplicity of mental masturbation.


Good luck, tell the SlovaKIAns I said hello.

reply to post by BenReclused

For the record...I totally disagree with OP. I stated that early in the thread. My comments were in response to a pattern I saw in comments by older folks saying how wise they are simply because of the years they've lived. I see far too many unenlightened seniors out there rigidly fixed to out dated ideas. In contrast, I have had the pleasure of meeting and studying from some truly wise seniors who all share on thing that I've seen...the embracing of the energy and ideas of younger people. Also, they seem content with themselves and don't feel the need to pound the drum of the "good ol days" and tell everyone why they are so knowledgeable.
Wisdom is NOT a right of passage...it is sought and earned through humility, patience and determination. Good luck...there's still time!

milt, your vote matters...your ideas matter. Just not more than anyone else's.

reply to post by alpinestar


Hi alpinestar,

I'm glad you posted back! I owe you an apology, so I hope you accept when I say: I am sincerely sorry!

I agree 100% with what you just said! Unfortunately when I first responded to you, I thought I was responding to one of the "youngsters" that thought the 50+ crowd were too old to... well... too old to live.

When I received your previous reply, it made me start thinking. That's when I realized my mistake. I reckon one's never too old to be a dumb ass!

Once again, I'm sorry, and I WILL pay more attention in the future. Thank you for being patient with me.

See ya,
(sheepishly) Milt

reply to post by angus1745


And so...you came to this country because of why again? Why not stay in Scotland? Just curious....
Oh...and smart people Angus....dont have to go around telling others they are...smart...as you have.
Bump>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>