Comments

3

Manchin is such a clown and his logic is flawed. The filibuster is used almost exclusively to play political games by both parties. He can go fuck himself with a rusty shovel.

4

@2 - most of them are better members of the community than you, you heartless prick.

6

@4: I wouldn't say heartless, but inelegantly stated. Essentially correct for a signifiant portion of the homeless population.

9

1) The name of the suspect in the South Carolina mass murder: former NFL--and Seahawk--player Phillip Adams. This comes one day after a former New York Giant was formally accused of first-degree murder, and this after a slew of other recent off-the-field incidents, starting with the brutal beating committed by Seahawk Chad Wheeler (and separate incidents involving Broderick Washington, Isaiah Wilson, and many others; the mysterious death of Louis Nix; et al). Yes, other major league sports players have committed their share of off-the-field violence--but that violence pales compared to off-the-field incidents of NFL players. And the horrifying frequency and severity of this year's off-season incidents justifies even deeper suspicion about the psychological effects of playing that game. This can't be written off as a few bad apples acting out. No championship is worth the kind of violence we're seeing this offseason. Roger Goodell, players, coaches, fans: figure it out and do better or let go of this game as an entertainment addiction. 2) Good for Joe Biden. The Stranger's customary passive aggressive condescension ("tepid") notwithstanding, Biden's doing a million times more than Donald Trump would ever do. Good, Joe. Keep it up. 3) Still waiting, Stranger staff, for meaningful--or any--reporting about the tragedy in Myanmar. You've got a Nobel-Prize winning president of a credible democracy winning a landslide victory being usurped by a military junta (committing hundreds, and probably thousands, of murders, including those of children and pro-democracy protesters)--and next to nothing from you about it. Yes, I can find some news about it elsewhere, but shame on you for looking past this story. Myanmar--not the latest Russell Wilson trade rumors or tomorrow's weather or Kshama Sawant's latest criticism of Jenny Durkan--is the biggest story in the world right now after the pandemic. And it could get much worse. Educate your readers about it. It's not going away--and something like it could happen here--and almost did.

16

Geez, with all the vitreol levelled against homeless people in the comments at the slightest opportunity, it seems like jumping the gun to assume this fiery violence could only have been self inflicted.

Granted it was more likely an accident made all the more unforgivable by the inability of the accused to give enough money to landlords or banks for housing, but holy smokes fellas, let's put down the pitchforks and take a deep breath eh?

19

In all the comments about the homeless I've seen over the years, very few of them would fit the "demonizing or dehumanizing" category.

More like blunt talk about reality is what it mostly is, like it our not @ph.

21

I wonder if the union vote is similar to political elections in which lower turnout favors more conservative interests? Seems at least possible, inasmuch as the more motivated folks who'd be driving turnout would stand to be those in favor of shaking up the industry and fomenting change. I wasn't super optimistic they'd be able to pull it off when the effort first launched, but am also just skeptical and rather pessimistic by nature. Fingers crossed though.

22

Everyone wants to get rich but how many of us would spend wisely the moment we were? If you give a homeless person all your money and everything you own, what does that make you? Does being uncomfortable and without shelter eliminate your humanity?

23

That scene from Norma Rae really is great too. I don't know that I could sit thru that entire movie as there's probably a ton of it set in that noisy-ass industrial warehouse and it's so insanely noisy, claustrophobic and gloomy, I feel like it'd grate on me. Fantastic choreography and atmospheric capture in the direction though.

24

@22: ok, I'll bite:

Q: Everyone wants to get rich but how many of us would spend wisely the moment we were?
A: Actually, unless won by lottery or inheritance, the rich got rich by spending wisely in the first place and will get richer by continuing to spend and invest wisely.

Q: If you give a homeless person all your money and everything you own, what does that make you?
A: Perhaps a philosophical and spiritual "vow of poverty" to gain inner peace and wisdom - but other than that, a complete and utter fool.

Q: Does being uncomfortable and without shelter eliminate your humanity?
A: Or course not, no more so than being comfortable in a home.

25

@18. Yes, unquestionably: physiological effects are essential in this. That said, the physiological and psychological seem interrelated. What's beyond question is that the NFL's off-the-field violence is horrific this year--worse than any year I can recall, and I go way back. Roger Goodell, coaches, staff, and everyone concerned need to focus on this now--not tomorrow, not as a back-burner issue, not as something to be sort of hushed-up for fear of losing fan support, not as secondary to the draft or trade rumors or gossip about which player dislikes his coach. But off-the-field violence needs to be addressed by the league today. The Phillip Adams horror has to be the last straw. And this one day--one day--after a former NY Giant was formally accused of first-degree murder. One fundamental issue: if this much insane violence is occurring despite all the advancements in equipment safety and rule changes--then can the game actually be reformed to limit the off-the-field violence? If not, does it deserve fan support?

26

Great comment by MarvelUS @9.

Two quibbles:
1. Hard to read without paragraphs.
2. I think you can call attention to the monstrous situation in Myanmar without making this about The Stranger and its skeleton staff. The issue is Myanmar and the western world's response to it, not how some alt-weekly struggling through the pandemic is supposed to pay attention to it.

Having gotten those two quibbles out of the way, I had about the same reaction to the story about that ex-NFL player committing mass murder and then killing himself. Chances are this is traceable to the brain damage inherent to the sport of football. It is simply not possible to play the game in a safe way. It's hard for me to even view it as a legitimate sport anymore. And we'd be best as consumers to let it fade from our attention.

Confession: I did enjoy this year's Super Bowl. Scarcely watched any of the NFL season that preceded it--even my favorite Pittsburgh Steelers.

27

the police are too heavily armed
Defund the police
Queers are subject to violence, oftentimes by the police
Narrative of an outside force coming into cities and kidnapping people, extrajudicial killings by federal law enforcemey (portland, olympia this summer)
Legitimate fears of fascism grow, especially in minority communities.
Take the guns away from the (assumption being) far right, white, owners.
Melt all the guns.

How TF do you think things are going to go if we disproportionately disarm minorities while the spectre of fascism and religious extremism rises before our very eyes all around us? Who is going to take the guns away? Do you think our fair, safe and stable LE community is going comply? What planet are you guys on?

Many POC and queers have guns, and many are buying for the first time. You should interview them.

28

@26. Thanks, Cressona. I appreciate the feedback.

35

Every day there is a mass shooting in America. It's the price we pay for our freeDUMB in this violent and stupid society that cares nothing at all about human life (unless it's a useless, unviable outside of the womb clump of cells).

This country could solve homelessness and every other social problem 10X over with the amount of obscene wealth there is (not even personal wealth, I mean what exactly does the Pentagon spend $2 BILLION a day on when military personnel are on food stamps and make poverty wages and veterans make up a huge proportion of the homeless population)?

I am exhausted by everything and over it all completely. Lucky for me I have a pretty good chance of being murdered by a fucktard with a gun before I die from my motor neuron disease. Either way it's a win-win, am I right?

36

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdSD7JFk3wk

37

@26: No need for myths when we can point to examples. No need for generalizations either.

40

Scott Rudin: a case study in unchecked EGOTism.

42

Of course wealth cannot be inherited if wasn't created by hard work in the first place. Moreover, inheritance wealth still creates economic activity.

Blip's argument is essentially moot.

44

@31
It is in our nature to be fearful and violent at times, so I think you’re right a lot of the violence we see can be chalked up to human nature.
CTE is so well documented to be linked to these sorts of behaviors, that this case is one we might be able to fit into that 3% though (after all how many people are footballers).

I think our society needs to grow a lot to be able to identify and heal people who are in desperate situations. There may be a policy that can drive it but ultimately it’s individuals reaching out and supporting one another which is difficult in this automated world.

46

rainmist @31, I'm confused. You seem to be willfully misconstruing my point @26. Nowhere did I say that Phillip Adams was not criminally or morally liable for his actions.

I'm curious now. Why did you feel compelled to put those words in my mouth?

47

@34 ok bro I'll just melt all my gay guns, and tell all my gay friends to melt theirs. It's not pandering. I am armed and so are a lot of the queers and POC round you.

Anyway, enjoy trusting the police.

48

@45: Your stereotypes don't negate the fact that hard work can lead to success so they don't elevate your argument.

57

blip, multiple things can be true at this same time. Yes, upward mobility is unfortunately on the decline but that doesn't mean that successes are still not occurring. It's not all negative.

Nobody is shitting on the homeless and destitute. That is the myth you need to recognize. You and the angry professor use it to perpetuate false arguments, and it's really getting old.

58

@FiftytFuckingFour

bingo.

59

@35 -- no it isn't.
I'd prefer you
Stuck around.

61

wealthy Heirs have
Agency. in
spades
Whilst
others
seek
TP.

63

junkies are merely the Symptoms
guesty the Disease is Winner
take ALL capitalismd

and Heartless
'republicans.'

Respect the MILITARY!
they Shreik whilst
avoiding their
Stares on our
Sidewalks.

64

@63: So everything terrible is because of capitalism and heartless republicans? Anything else you want to add to this blame list?

For extra credit, write your answers in iambic pentameter.

65

a. Yes
b. no
c. just You

68

@67:Characterizing taxation of the wealthy as "redistribution" is a conservative talking point, not an accurate description of this form of Keynesian spending. The idea is not to just take X dollars from the richest 1% and hand it to the poor. The idea is for them to pay taxes that are then spent on things that enhance quality of life and, yes, mobility, for everyone from the bottom to the top. Things like education, infrastructure, etc.

When tax rates in the US were highest, back in the 1950s and 1960s, the revenue was spent not just on New Deal era social welfare programs, but on publicly-funded research -- including the research that led to the creation of entire sectors of the modern commercial economy. It was spent on infrastructure programs from rural electrification to hydroelectric dams to the freeway system, which opened up new markets for consumer goods -- it's hard to sell a washing machine to someone with no electricity -- and literally provided the roads upon which goods were shipped. It was spent on things like the G.I. Bill, which led to unprecedented levels of home ownership and higher educational attainment than ever before for millions of Americans.

These initiatives certainly benefited the poorest Americans, but they also allowed for unprecedented levels of entrepreneurship and wealth accumulation at the very highest strata. Try telling the Ford Motor Company that publicly-funded highways were stealing something from them (in the form of taxes) and giving nothing back. Or try telling Amazon that government-funded programs like DARPA, which gave birth to the modern internet, were somehow robbing from the rich to give to the poor.

There are two reasons why progressive taxation -- meaning people with more money pay a higher percentage-- makes sense. First, the obvious: A person who earns $25,000 a year who paid 10% of their income would have to live on $22,500 a year. That missing $2,500 is a paltry sum in the grand scheme of government spending, but a significant burden for that person. A person who earns $2,500,000 a year can still live quite comfortably on $2,250,000 a year, and they contribute the equivalent revenue to 100 of those $25,000/year earners. Put simply: it's not about how much one pays in percentage terms, it's about how much they have left in absolute terms that determines ability to pay.

The second reason is less obvious: the very wealthy benefit disproportionately from government spending. Those semi trucks that Amazon uses to ship goods around the country cause considerably more wear and tear on the roads than ordinary cars do. Corporations reap exponential ROI for tax dollars spent on everything from electrical grids to the programs that made communications satellites and modern microcomputers possible. Does an average citizen have the means to monetize the results of the publicly funded Human Genome Project? No, but billionaire Venture Capitalists certainly do! And these disproportionate benefits to the wealthy apply to less obvious government spending too -- there are large swaths of the legal system, for instance, that individual private citizens never use at all. And yet without the means to enforce contracts, patents, etc, business would grind to a halt.

Since Reagan, the trend has been for those at the very top of the income and wealth spectrum to try to achieve true free rider status, reaping all the benefits of public spending while bearing none of the costs. That is what a return to a fairer and more progressive -- not in the sense of "politically liberal," in the sense of "those with more to spare pay more" -- is about. From previous examples there is every reason to believe that it will increase both mobility for those at the bottom and profitability for those at the top.

It is not a zero-sum game.

69

@35 xina and @54 blip: Agreed and seconded with kristofarian @58 & @59.
Keep rocking the house, all of you! :)


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.