TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Where do you stand???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Where do you stand??? - Page 4

post #91 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by c1atsite View Post
I don't know what I am. My mom and dad are both union so I never have an unfavorable view toward unions (I should say was union (past tense) for mom because she retired. dad can retire too ----he just doesn't want to)

And here's a weird view I have (see purple text) and I don't know if I'm the only person in America that thinks this way ... here goes - I'm pretty sure I believe in income disparity (example: a part-time janitor should make less than a full-time sanitation worker), but I am not sure where I stand on outrageous/wild income disparity (example: a hedge fund manager making 11 million a year or a sports star making over 14 million a year (cough, cough, Eli Manning ). I think the extreme income disparity in America makes young kids strive to be in sports or Hollywood or finance (and Harvard, Princeton, Wharton, to get into the latter), but if they end up flipping burgers at McD's, then they stumble into self-hate and alcoholism and crime and all that jazz simply because of the pressure they feel to prosper in society. So I guess I'm saying let's stabilize income disparity because right now, if we were to create graphs to visually see the current situation, those graphs would reflect how insane we are as a nation where some people make 13,000 a year and others make 13 million a year. I don't know what I am politically. I do sense the status quo makes kids today "look down on" blue collar work (hello, cleaning buildings and streets are SUPER IMPORTANT JOBS! we as a nation need to show more respect! (and not just lip service) and it all starts with our values/national culture) so with this mentality, American youths strive to be the next Carrie Underwood, Christina Aguilera, Jay Z, etc. (just look at the sea of turnout when American Idol has auditions) This nation puts to much emphasis on "fun", imho. I feel as a nation, we're like a big ole amusement park. Am I nutso?

When I say let's stabilize disparity, imagine a sandwich after it comes out of a panini grill. It's flatter and the layers are closer together. That's a simple metaphor I can think of re: income disparity. A tall club sandwich which is not pressed and the top slice of bread is far from the bottom slice would be the opposite and the way things are today. Please be clear ---I'm NOT saying everyone should make the exact same amount (that would be communism (puke)), but let's manage the "wildness/outrageous extremes" better. White collar workers should be glad they get paid for their brainpower- meaning their bodies don't need to take a daily beating like blue collar workers. That should be a reward in of itself (imo)! I've met many blue collar workers who are nice sweet people and shouldn't they have enough for a sane mortgage and enough to support 2 kids with their wife/husband? Isn't that fair?
How do we "stabilize income disparity"? Are you saying you want to put limits on people's income? That doesn't seem to democratic IMO.
post #92 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
How do we "stabilize income disparity"?
I don't know how we do it exactly, but IMHO the first thing we need to do as a nation is to be appalled at the extremes. someone being paid 14 million a year for playing football?
post #93 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I don't believe in the THEORY of Evolution but I do not think that dinosaurs walked on earth with people. I have noticed this is a common statement by young educated liberals, that if you don't believe in the THEORY of Evolution, well, then, you just aren't very smart. IMO, this feels like another jab towards us uneducated, ignorant folk. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way.
I don't know about you but there was someone on here that posted in another thread that they believe in evolution but humans have existed on earth since day one and so dinosaurs and humans did coexist. I wasn't joking about this.
post #94 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty8723 View Post
How about if we believe that it's probably either a combination of the two or something entirely different that no one has thought of yet?
nice post, a combination of the 2 would be too cool for words
post #95 of 113
i would appreciate someone telling me what i am politically (or how i "lean") cuz i honestly dont know. many conservative values resonate with me for sure. here is a little about me: http://www.thecatsite.com/forums/sho...31#post2695031
post #96 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by c1atsite View Post
I don't know how we do it exactly, but IMHO the first thing we need to do as a nation is to be appalled at the extremes. someone being paid 14 million a year for playing football?
Oh, believe me, I am appalled at the amount of money sports stars make.

And the money Hollywood actors make also. And CEO's of failing companies also.

But (aside from the CEO's of failing companies) it is always what the market will bear. If the market is there and it is, people will get paid these obscenely big pay checks. One can only hope that many of them give a huge chunk to charity.
post #97 of 113
I normally don't begrudge folks the money they make. The salaries of movie stars and athletes doesn't bother as much as the government propping up failing businesses so they can put more strain on the economy and slow down recovery.

I'm more appaled that we have a government that doesn't do the will of the people, but rather the will of the lobbys and the party line.
post #98 of 113
I think their MAY be a little bit of evoluation theories in creationism, but to think or say we came from fish in the sea or from monkeys..........well that I will not "swallow" as being true!
post #99 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
One can only hope that many of them give a huge chunk to charity.
Amen to that

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post

But (aside from the CEO's of failing companies) it is always what the market will bear. If the market is there and it is, people will get paid these obscenely big pay checks.
Then I'm tempted to point my finger at today's culture and what we value collectively as a nation (fun, fun, fun, trashy fun, insipid fun, entertainment, entertainment, entertainment, etc.) as huge culprits because they (the stuff in green text) have much too much impact on our economy and we need to get a better handle on both or else we'll turn into a nation with a majority (gasp! voting bloc!) of "children in adult bodies". France already thinks America's pretty insipid and they're not entirely wrong.
post #100 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Going Nova View Post
You can count me in with those who believe in evolution, but I wouldn't call it a proven fact. It's a theory (based on empirical observations), not a law, which means it can be disproven and it can be modified. Science is dynamic.
I have to correct this. Theories don't just reach a point where they become a law. Most of out 'laws' come from the 19th Century and earlier, but just because something is called a 'law' and not a theory doesn't mean it's an indisputable fact. For example, the old "Law of Conservation of Energy" is wrong. Energy can in fact be created or destroyed by converting it to mass. After Einstein developed his Theory of Special Relativity with its famous E=mc^2 equation, we had to combine the laws of Conservation and Mass into a Law of Mass-Energy Conservation, and even though that's still called a law doesn't mean we won't some day prove it's wrong as well.

Also, just because you find a situation when a given theory doesn't work, doesn't mean that you throw all the old observations out the window. For example, take a basic physics class and in the first semester you'll work with Newton's laws of motion. In 99.99% of the applications we normally encounter (moving cars, falling baseballs, etc) they work fine, but there are situations where they fail and we have to use Special/General Relativity. The GPS Satellite constellation is an excellent example. These have to correct for Special and General Relativity effects or the GPS in your car would give you the wrong answer every time. But just because we have shown that Newton's laws of motion are incorrect doesn't make his observations wrong. Apples still fall down - gravity is a fact. Just because our explanation for it changes, the fact of gravity does not.

Another bit [not directed towards your post]: The Theory of Evolution can most succinctly be described as "Populations change over time". The theory of the beginnings of the Universe(s) is The Big Bang (or a variant thereof) and the theory of how life began is Abiogenesis. These aren't part of the Theory of Evolution, though some dishonest creationists often like to conflate them.

Last, if you want to start a poll, you probably need at least the following categories:
  • Young Earth Creationist (YEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' 6-10,000 years ago
  • Old Earth Creationist (OEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' over a period of millions - billions of years
  • Creationist (Other) - Covers other types of creation beliefs from non-Abrahamic religions
  • Theistic Evloutionist - Believes that species evolved under the influence of divine guidance
  • Scientific Evolutionist - believes that species evolve over time through completely natural processes
  • Unsure/undecided

There are lots of other options, but should cover most people.
post #101 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grogs View Post
I have to correct this. Theories don't just reach a point where they become a law. Most of out 'laws' come from the 19th Century and earlier, but just because something is called a 'law' and not a theory doesn't mean it's an indisputable fact. For example, the old "Law of Conservation of Energy" is wrong. Energy can in fact be created or destroyed by converting it to mass. After Einstein developed his Theory of Special Relativity with its famous E=mc^2 equation, we had to combine the laws of Conservation and Mass into a Law of Mass-Energy Conservation, and even though that's still called a law doesn't mean we won't some day prove it's wrong as well.

Also, just because you find a situation when a given theory doesn't work, doesn't mean that you throw all the old observations out the window. For example, take a basic physics class and in the first semester you'll work with Newton's laws of motion. In 99.99% of the applications we normally encounter (moving cars, falling baseballs, etc) they work fine, but there are situations where they fail and we have to use Special/General Relativity. The GPS Satellite constellation is an excellent example. These have to correct for Special and General Relativity effects or the GPS in your car would give you the wrong answer every time. But just because we have shown that Newton's laws of motion are incorrect doesn't make his observations wrong. Apples still fall down - gravity is a fact. Just because our explanation for it changes, the fact of gravity does not.

Another bit [not directed towards your post]: The Theory of Evolution can most succinctly be described as "Populations change over time". The theory of the beginnings of the Universe(s) is The Big Bang (or a variant thereof) and the theory of how life began is Abiogenesis. These aren't part of the Theory of Evolution, though some dishonest creationists often like to conflate them.

Last, if you want to start a poll, you probably need at least the following categories:
  • Young Earth Creationist (YEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' 6-10,000 years ago
  • Old Earth Creationist (OEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' over a period of millions - billions of years
  • Creationist (Other) - Covers other types of creation beliefs from non-Abrahamic religions
  • Theistic Evloutionist - Believes that species evolved under the influence of divine guidance
  • Scientific Evolutionist - believes that species evolve over time through completely natural processes
  • Unsure/undecided

There are lots of other options, but should cover most people.
Wow, maybe you should start the poll ! A lot of what you just said went right over my head- too complex for my brain cells to compute I wish I was that "smart"! Come to think of it, most of what I can remember learning in high school/middle school is from the 19th century and before. But then again, I went to public school so a lot of what I learned was quite one-sided and geared towards old scientific "facts", with no other sides talked about. That may be where my views of evolution came from- public school basically teaches that evolution is how everything happened. I'm not saying that public school is bad, just very one-way.
post #102 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ut0pia View Post
I don't know about you but there was someone on here that posted in another thread that they believe in evolution but humans have existed on earth since day one and so dinosaurs and humans did coexist. I wasn't joking about this.
I knew people like that growing up. In fact, I still know a few, although their protests seem to be growing more and more feeble. But I wasn't there, so I can't be positive what actually happened.

I know people who think God put the dinosaur fossils in the strata just as a joke, to test our faith. While I think any god might have a sense of humor (look at the platypus, after all!), I doubt that particular idea.
post #103 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
I'm more appaled that we have a government that doesn't do the will of the people, but rather the will of the lobbys and the party line.
Just as a minor point, lobbyists and the party are both representing people, and as such, they are making sure your interests are represented. For example, PETA has lobbyists, but so does the meat industry. The auto manufacturers have lobbyists, but so do the unions who work there. The insurance companies have lobbyists, but so does the AARP. Most industries, religious groups, business, and interest groups have lobbyists. Your congressman can't see 5,000 car dealers, but he can see the lobbyist for the auto dealers. This is the way it has always been, from the time of the founding fathers. It is probably the way it has to be, for our republic to work.
post #104 of 113
Hi,

I beleve in the theory of Evolution, as it fits to the evidence we have to date and I honestly don't think its even remotly likely that it will be replaced by an new theory.

But quite frankly- what really sells it to me is the sheer beauty of Evolution as a mechanism. I'm not religious in the slightest, but Evolution is one of the few things which could possibly convince me that there's a god of some sorts.

regards,

Chriostine
post #105 of 113
Friends, all this discussion of evolution is interesting, but it IS off-topic. Please can we get back to the OP's question -- seems it was about political leanings, and fairly clearly so. Thanks.
post #106 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel47 View Post
Friends, all this discussion of evolution is interesting, but it IS off-topic. Please can we get back to the OP's question -- seems it was about political leanings, and fairly clearly so. Thanks.

Someone please tell me what I am politically or how I lean

http://www.thecatsite.com/forums/sho...31#post2695031

I'm not big on gun control (unless thoroughly convinced otherwise) because I think a black market will pretty much always exist there

Need more info? Just ask me
post #107 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by c1atsite View Post
Someone please tell me what I am politically or how I lean

http://www.thecatsite.com/forums/sho...31#post2695031

I'm not big on gun control (unless thoroughly convinced otherwise) because I think a black market will pretty much always exist there

Need more info? Just ask me
Maybe you are still evolving, politically, that is.


Sorry, Rapunzel.
post #108 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Maybe you are still evolving, politically, that is.
As we all are, every day.
post #109 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Being Canadian, I am neither Democrat nor Republican. Having said that, in Canadian politics, I tend to evaluate what each party believes, how it is good (or bad) for us, the taxpayers. I don't generally care which party they are from if their platforms are something I agree with. I have voted for all three parties at different times in my life, depending on my state of mind at the time.
THAT is how it should be!
post #110 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grogs View Post
Another bit [not directed towards your post]: The Theory of Evolution can most succinctly be described as "Populations change over time". The theory of the beginnings of the Universe(s) is The Big Bang (or a variant thereof) and the theory of how life began is Abiogenesis. These aren't part of the Theory of Evolution, though some dishonest creationists often like to conflate them.

Last, if you want to start a poll, you probably need at least the following categories:
  • Young Earth Creationist (YEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' 6-10,000 years ago
  • Old Earth Creationist (OEC) - believes species (kinds) were created 'as is' over a period of millions - billions of years
  • Creationist (Other) - Covers other types of creation beliefs from non-Abrahamic religions
  • Theistic Evloutionist - Believes that species evolved under the influence of divine guidance
  • Scientific Evolutionist - believes that species evolve over time through completely natural processes
  • Unsure/undecided

There are lots of other options, but should cover most people.
The only problem with this is how would we phrase a question? I agree with you that most people who dismiss evolution don't even know what sort of process the theory of evolution explains, and the process is that populations change over time. And I think that process in itself is accepted as a fact at least in the scientific community at the moment. Although personally I do not believe anything is a fact because facts are extremely variable and sort of impossible to define. The word fact itself implies complete objectivity which is something I believe doesn't exist at all, no one can be purely objective. But I know of several experiments done of people observing finches at an island over multiple generations, and actually witnessing them change. Also, viruses are a perfect example of a change in populations. They evolve in less than years. The idea that populations change is not disputed from what I know, it is the theory of HOW it happened( and happens), where the uncertainty is. Anyways. I think the biggest flaw in people's perceptions is associating evolution with the origin of life like you mentioned, which it has nothing to do with. The scientific community doesn't have any theories to explain how life originated, how all of these inorganic molecules came together to form a cell. It has never been done in a lab although it has been attempted many times and there are many hypothesis but they are nowhere near formulating a theory based on these hypothesis.
post #111 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel47 View Post
Friends, all this discussion of evolution is interesting, but it IS off-topic. Please can we get back to the OP's question -- seems it was about political leanings, and fairly clearly so. Thanks.
WOOT WOOT!!! Thank you so much! I have kinda been hinting that we needed to get back on topic, but apparently I was ignored.

Maybe someone should start a thread on evolution, so we can move all this discussion over to that thread? I think it would be an interesting thread (a little over my head, but none the less interesting). I would love to learn more about it, as it seems like many on here know MUCH more than I do about the subject!
post #112 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Just as a minor point, lobbyists and the party are both representing people, and as such, they are making sure your interests are represented. For example, PETA has lobbyists, but so does the meat industry. The auto manufacturers have lobbyists, but so do the unions who work there. The insurance companies have lobbyists, but so does the AARP. Most industries, religious groups, business, and interest groups have lobbyists. Your congressman can't see 5,000 car dealers, but he can see the lobbyist for the auto dealers. This is the way it has always been, from the time of the founding fathers. It is probably the way it has to be, for our republic to work.
I don't totally agree with you. I think politicians are extremely out of touch with the people who elect them. Politicians tend to go in the direction of who offers them most money.

I'd be willing to wager that the "blue dog" Democrats who were against the health care but now support did so because some tool at the DNC told them they have to tow the party line or lose campaign funding.

Lobbying has been around since the dawn of civilization, it's not going anywhere, but it doesn't mean I have to like them.
post #113 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mismaris777 View Post
WOOT WOOT!!! Thank you so much! I have kinda been hinting that we needed to get back on topic, but apparently I was ignored.
Unfortunately that's what happens in IMO, especially if you ask a question that will provoke strong responses I generally stay away from IMO since I don't particularly like conflict, and know that there's VERY strong opinions from both sides of the spectrum and people will not change their views.

My thoughts and values are definitely aligned with the Democrat party. I don't think I have anything in common with Republican views on life.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Where do you stand???