Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Talking politics around here and some changes

host · 06-29-2006, 11:22 AM

Looks to me that what we have here, is another politics thread that centers on "feelings based" opinions.

Other examples of the clash between "feelings" driven posts and detail driven posts, can be observed recently on the <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=105988">An interesting experience with a soldier</a> thread.

A poster who says he is a soldier serving in Iraq, posted that the insurgency is comprised primarily of foreign fighters. Opposition to this premise was provided in the form of linked citations to comments of U.S. military generals made between 2003 and late 2005 that state that the Iraqi insurgency is comprised of, at most, ten percent foreign fighters. Citations included links to quotes on DOD web pages.....

The response to these citations, in the "feelings" based posted opinions, was that the post that contained the quotes of generals and their details, were not worth reading, and that the post of the member serving in Iraq was more credible....and no supportive documentation, that could be examined by the rest of us was provided.....and it's similar to that kind of exchange....over and over....

On the minimum wage thread, the "feeling" in some posts, is that the government has no business setting a minimum wage. Those who "feel" that way, tend to oppose progressive taxation and inheritance taxes. They advocate a prohibition on the majority using it's superior numbers to levy progressive taxes on the richest, who are fewer in numbers.

There was no response on that thread to the documentation that I posted from a Federal Reserve web page, that shows statistics that tell us that. even with the progressive taxation and the inheritance taxes in place, up to 2004, the richest one percent held 34 percent of the wealth, the next nine percent held 36.1 percent, the next forty percent held 27.4 percent, and that the bottom half.....150 million people, held only 2-1/2" percent of the total wealth in America....and that their share was dropping.

There was no response, that contained any references that could be examined....... to a report from a consumer watchdog org that showed that the 18 wealthiest American families had originated and funded a secret deceptive campaign....spending their millions to influence passage of "inheritance tax" reform.

It seemed to me that a "system" that already allowed the wealthiest 30 million to hold 70 percent of the total wealth, and the poorest 150 million, just 2-1/2 percent of the total wealth, certainly would not be jeopordized by a legislated raise in the minimum wage, or by leaving current inheritance tax laws in place.
It also seemed that "trickle down" politics....where the employer is freed from government regulation to provide more and better jobs, if the figures of wealth distribution are any measure....are a failed premise. The "feelings based" POV, saw no need to acknowledge or discuss the wealth distribution figures, let alone provide any referenced information that is contrary to those
figures.....

In short....."feelings based" posts put me at an extreme disadvantage, because I can only know what I learn from my research and the research that backs the opinions of other posters. "Feelings based" posts provide nothing for me to check and verify. These posts have more of a religious flavor than a political one....as they take so much "on faith".

A solution would be to divide this forum into two sections....a "feelings" or "faith based" posting section, where everyone "knows what they know", but can't or won't supply the sources of where they learned what they "know", and a section for those who endeavor to post every link and documented excerpt that supports our opinion and leads others to examine validity and reliability for themselves.

I'm sick of doing so much research, then sharing it, and then being told in response, that I don't know as much as a responder who won't direct me to where he gets his "facts". I feel like I'm running in place.....I'd rather engage people who bring their evidence to the table.....then defend it....a process that might actually lead to conclusions, consensus....agreement!

06-29-2006, 11:22 AM	#11 (permalink)
host Banned	Looks to me that what we have here, is another politics thread that centers on "feelings based" opinions. Other examples of the clash between "feelings" driven posts and detail driven posts, can be observed recently on the <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=105988">An interesting experience with a soldier</a> thread. A poster who says he is a soldier serving in Iraq, posted that the insurgency is comprised primarily of foreign fighters. Opposition to this premise was provided in the form of linked citations to comments of U.S. military generals made between 2003 and late 2005 that state that the Iraqi insurgency is comprised of, at most, ten percent foreign fighters. Citations included links to quotes on DOD web pages..... The response to these citations, in the "feelings" based posted opinions, was that the post that contained the quotes of generals and their details, were not worth reading, and that the post of the member serving in Iraq was more credible....and no supportive documentation, that could be examined by the rest of us was provided.....and it's similar to that kind of exchange....over and over.... On the minimum wage thread, the "feeling" in some posts, is that the government has no business setting a minimum wage. Those who "feel" that way, tend to oppose progressive taxation and inheritance taxes. They advocate a prohibition on the majority using it's superior numbers to levy progressive taxes on the richest, who are fewer in numbers. There was no response on that thread to the documentation that I posted from a Federal Reserve web page, that shows statistics that tell us that. even with the progressive taxation and the inheritance taxes in place, up to 2004, the richest one percent held 34 percent of the wealth, the next nine percent held 36.1 percent, the next forty percent held 27.4 percent, and that the bottom half.....150 million people, held only 2-1/2" percent of the total wealth in America....and that their share was dropping. There was no response, that contained any references that could be examined....... to a report from a consumer watchdog org that showed that the 18 wealthiest American families had originated and funded a secret deceptive campaign....spending their millions to influence passage of "inheritance tax" reform. It seemed to me that a "system" that already allowed the wealthiest 30 million to hold 70 percent of the total wealth, and the poorest 150 million, just 2-1/2 percent of the total wealth, certainly would not be jeopordized by a legislated raise in the minimum wage, or by leaving current inheritance tax laws in place. It also seemed that "trickle down" politics....where the employer is freed from government regulation to provide more and better jobs, if the figures of wealth distribution are any measure....are a failed premise. The "feelings based" POV, saw no need to acknowledge or discuss the wealth distribution figures, let alone provide any referenced information that is contrary to those figures..... In short....."feelings based" posts put me at an extreme disadvantage, because I can only know what I learn from my research and the research that backs the opinions of other posters. "Feelings based" posts provide nothing for me to check and verify. These posts have more of a religious flavor than a political one....as they take so much "on faith". A solution would be to divide this forum into two sections....a "feelings" or "faith based" posting section, where everyone "knows what they know", but can't or won't supply the sources of where they learned what they "know", and a section for those who endeavor to post every link and documented excerpt that supports our opinion and leads others to examine validity and reliability for themselves. I'm sick of doing so much research, then sharing it, and then being told in response, that I don't know as much as a responder who won't direct me to where he gets his "facts". I feel like I'm running in place.....I'd rather engage people who bring their evidence to the table.....then defend it....a process that might actually lead to conclusions, consensus....agreement! Last edited by host; 06-29-2006 at 11:29 AM..