Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Stephen King swears at Republicans rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Matt Thrower
United Kingdom
Bath
Somerset
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I thought this may interest/amuse:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/30/stephen-kin...

And in between the swearing he seems to be making a sound argument in my opinion.

Also this rather perceptive piece on the difference between what "far right" is perceived to mean in Europe and the US:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/...

Which I find hard to argue with (it seems a matter of observation rather than discussion) but does beg the question of why there is such a difference between otherwise very similar political landscapes.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Citrom
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Matt, I read the first article; total waste of my time. It's stereotypical Lefty boilerplate. What do oil production regulations have to do with paying more in income tax? SK seems to be saying that he would simply write a huge cheque to the IRS but the money isn't being spent correctly, so he's not. Therefore, it's a question of paying more tax plus the entirety of the Left agenda including an all-powerful Democratic government. The article is actually full of errors in reasoning, IMO, including the usual Lefty history started today.

What I did learn is that one can be brilliant in one area, such as creative writing, and have as little insight as anyone else in another.

And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed. Since his money is not being distributed 1/4 cent per American citizen, therefore he can't give more to the organizations he does promote, such as libraries and fire departments. Huh, what?!

I'd be on a healthy cheeseburger-free diet. But, since everyone else isn't and there is no law obliging me, I can't.
.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MGK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
isaacc wrote:
And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed.


Given that he said exactly the opposite of this you might want to reread it: his entire point is that private donations cannot replace government spending because wealthy individuals are not typically good at assessing need versus "what I want to be a need."

Which is extremely true. I know somebody who works for a private school: they have no problem getting donations from alumni to go towards sports or computers or other sexy things, but what the school really needs is to refurbish the cafeteria. But none of the alumni want to spend money on that, because, well, it's a cafeteria.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
I read that article yesterday. King is a radical left wing liberal. Oh, and a 1%'er to the max. He's pissy because rich republicans don't use their charity in a manner that suits him. Oh, and he's stupid. Just as stupid as anyone who actually believes taking more money from rich people will somehow "solve" America's financial crisis.

In fact, that level of ignorance and stupidity is so deep and so clueless that I often wonder how anybody can say shit like what King says with a straight face. They must be truly stupid.

I did like "The Stand" though and I enjoyed the Dark Tower series and King wrote a superb book on the subject of writing books. He's talented, but still, ideologically, a retard.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Citrom
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mightygodking wrote:
isaacc wrote:
And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed.


Given that he said exactly the opposite of this you might want to reread it: his entire point is that private donations cannot replace government spending because wealthy individuals are not typically good at assessing need versus "what I want to be a need."

Which is extremely true. I know somebody who works for a private school: they have no problem getting donations from alumni to go towards sports or computers or other sexy things, but what the school really needs is to refurbish the cafeteria. But none of the alumni want to spend money on that, because, well, it's a cafeteria.


No, I read it just fine, thanks. One proposition does not follow from the other. Indeed, his thinking is all over the place. I understood his political stance about assessing needs at the national level. It has no bearing on him cutting a cheque right now, even for only those things that he is assessing. What are you and he trying to say; that his $10 million is going to make problems worse? When one says things as categorical as tax me more, less talk and more pen motion.

I especially like the bit about how wealthy benefactors don't cough up the 50% including himself. What kind of high school logic is that? Then do so since you're so adament it ought to be so. In fact the first bit of the article ought to be, "I just sent off a cheque to the IRS for half of my last year's earnings. This is why I think everyone in my position should to do the same:"
.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clay
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was with him until the end, where he implied that the rich were in some sort of peril regarding a future revolution. Pretty sure that ship had sailed with the advent of modern weaponry. It's one thing to overwhelm some guys equipped with swords and armor through sheer numbers and improvised weapons, it's quite another to get a clear shot on the guy directing the guided rocket from inside a bunker. We will never have another successful rebellion in the first world.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clay
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
isaacc wrote:
mightygodking wrote:
isaacc wrote:
And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed.


Given that he said exactly the opposite of this you might want to reread it: his entire point is that private donations cannot replace government spending because wealthy individuals are not typically good at assessing need versus "what I want to be a need."

Which is extremely true. I know somebody who works for a private school: they have no problem getting donations from alumni to go towards sports or computers or other sexy things, but what the school really needs is to refurbish the cafeteria. But none of the alumni want to spend money on that, because, well, it's a cafeteria.


No, I read it just fine, thanks. One proposition does not follow from the other. Indeed, his thinking is all over the place. I understood his political stance about assessing needs at the national level. It has no bearing on him cutting a cheque right now, even for only those things that he is assessing. What are you and he trying to say; that his $10 million is going to make problems worse? When one says things as categorical as tax me more, less talk and more pen motion.

I especially like the bit about how wealthy benefactors don't cough up the 50% including himself. What kind of high school logic is that? Then do so since you're so adament it ought to be so. In fact the first bit of the article ought to be, "I just sent off a cheque to the IRS for half of my last year's earnings. This is why I think everyone in my position should to do the same:"
.


The point is that the current income from taxes is insufficient and while a sizable donation wouldn't hurt it would also be insufficient. However, if all of these people were forced to provide the contribution in unison it would actually produce a meaningful shift. That's the logic, at least. You can argue over how sound it is, but there's nothing hypocritical about someone holding those assumptions and not donating the money.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
"This is a really weird game, and you’ll find that most people will not want to play this."
Avatar
mb
DWTripp wrote:
He's talented, but still, ideologically, a retard.
I thought society was trying to cut back on the "You're a retard" stuff.
What's next, "Stephen King is so gay?"

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Citrom
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Message wrote:
isaacc wrote:
mightygodking wrote:
isaacc wrote:
And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed.


Given that he said exactly the opposite of this you might want to reread it: his entire point is that private donations cannot replace government spending because wealthy individuals are not typically good at assessing need versus "what I want to be a need."

Which is extremely true. I know somebody who works for a private school: they have no problem getting donations from alumni to go towards sports or computers or other sexy things, but what the school really needs is to refurbish the cafeteria. But none of the alumni want to spend money on that, because, well, it's a cafeteria.


No, I read it just fine, thanks. One proposition does not follow from the other. Indeed, his thinking is all over the place. I understood his political stance about assessing needs at the national level. It has no bearing on him cutting a cheque right now, even for only those things that he is assessing. What are you and he trying to say; that his $10 million is going to make problems worse? When one says things as categorical as tax me more, less talk and more pen motion.

I especially like the bit about how wealthy benefactors don't cough up the 50% including himself. What kind of high school logic is that? Then do so since you're so adament it ought to be so. In fact the first bit of the article ought to be, "I just sent off a cheque to the IRS for half of my last year's earnings. This is why I think everyone in my position should to do the same:"
.


The point is that the current income from taxes is insufficient and while a sizable donation wouldn't hurt it would also be insufficient. However, if all of these people were forced to provide the contribution in unison it would actually produce a meaningful shift. That's the logic, at least. You can argue over how sound it is, but there's nothing hypocritical about someone holding those assumptions and not donating the money.


Clay, I'm still not seeing it other than do as I say, not as I do. As you rightly point out, the issue can be debated. That SK's $10 million (arbitrary number) is today going to go to every library and volunteer firestation in New England, versus the general national fund tomorrow, is neither here nor there. Just write the bloody cheque.

What I'm strongly sensing is that if everyone [all wealthy people] is not going to suffer with me, then I'm not coughing up. Well then, par for the course.

A first cousin of mine is a well-to-do obstetrician in Boston. During 2011's Haiti earthquake he did not yak a lot about what everyone else ought to be doing. He immediately closed down his practice for a month and went down to Haiti, hooking up with a foreign field hospital. I think his picture is somewhere on CNN in an article about how other NGOs were sending their serious medical cases to that field hospital.

We lead by doing.
.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
True Blue Jon
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Message wrote:
I was with him until the end, where he implied that the rich were in some sort of peril regarding a future revolution. Pretty sure that ship had sailed with the advent of modern weaponry. It's one thing to overwhelm some guys equipped with swords and armor through sheer numbers and improvised weapons, it's quite another to get a clear shot on the guy directing the guided rocket from inside a bunker. We will never have another successful rebellion in the first world.


Never say never again.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
fightcitymayor wrote:
DWTripp wrote:
He's talented, but still, ideologically, a retard.
I thought society was trying to cut back on the "You're a retard" stuff.
What's next, "Stephen King is so gay?"



Society? Society is so gay it's retarded.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
Society? Society is so gay it's retarded.


Retarded like a... like a... um... poltroon!

High five tip three-corner hats Tripp!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Okay, to be fair to S. King, who I already agreed is a darned good writer. How else would he be worth like 100 million bucks anyway? So, to be fair... he is terrible at math when it's connected to his childish ideology. No doubt he can count words, pages and perhaps even the number of over-priced downloads of his works off of Amazon. But the guy gets an F on this whole tax-the-rich ploy.

Unless you want to tax the rich just to "soak them fuckers casue they got more than me" it makes zero sense to tax them in order to solve the fiscal crisis. This is from a WSJ article last year:

Quote:
Consider the Internal Revenue Service’s income tax statistics for 2008, the latest year for which data are available. The top 1% of taxpayers—those with salaries, dividends and capital gains roughly above about $380,000—paid 38% of taxes. But assume that tax policy confiscated all the taxable income of all the “millionaires and billionaires” Mr. Obama singled out. That yields merely about $938 billion, which is sand on the beach amid the $4 trillion White House budget, a $1.65 trillion deficit, and spending at 25% as a share of the economy, a post-World War II record.

Say we take it up to the top 10%, or everyone with income over $114,000, including joint filers. That’s five times Mr. Obama’s 2% promise. The IRS data are broken down at $100,000, yet taxing all income above that level throws up only $3.4 trillion. And remember, the top 10% already pay 69% of all total income taxes, while the top 5% pay more than all of the other 95%.


So, seeing as how there are plenty of you here in RSP who have smugly crowed about your 6-figure incomes, are ya'll on board with Stephen King? Will you be the first to write a check for half your excessive $114,000+ riches? Or hell, just give it all to America and hope that Buffett, King and David desJardins follow your lead.
3 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clinton Smith
United States
Port Arthur
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

isaacc wrote:
I'd be on a healthy cheeseburger-free diet. But, since everyone else isn't and there is no law obliging me, I can't.



A better analogy would be: I'm in a sinking boat, but since most of the passengers are not bailing water out fast enough, and I can't save the boat by bailing faster by myself, I might as well ask the dude with the gun to force the bastards to bail faster.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
quozl wrote:
The Message wrote:
I was with him until the end, where he implied that the rich were in some sort of peril regarding a future revolution. Pretty sure that ship had sailed with the advent of modern weaponry. It's one thing to overwhelm some guys equipped with swords and armor through sheer numbers and improvised weapons, it's quite another to get a clear shot on the guy directing the guided rocket from inside a bunker. We will never have another successful rebellion in the first world.


Never say never again.


*ugh*
I HATE that Bond movie. Absolutely awful. Thunderball- the film that its essentially a remake of- was better.

Though it was cool seeing Klaus Maria Brandauer as the villain. He's always been one of my favorite character actors.

Darilian
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
True Blue Jon
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Darilian wrote:
quozl wrote:
The Message wrote:
I was with him until the end, where he implied that the rich were in some sort of peril regarding a future revolution. Pretty sure that ship had sailed with the advent of modern weaponry. It's one thing to overwhelm some guys equipped with swords and armor through sheer numbers and improvised weapons, it's quite another to get a clear shot on the guy directing the guided rocket from inside a bunker. We will never have another successful rebellion in the first world.


Never say never again.


*ugh*
I HATE that Bond movie. Absolutely awful. Thunderball- the film that its essentially a remake of- was better.

Though it was cool seeing Klaus Maria Brandauer as the villain. He's always been one of my favorite character actors.

Darilian


Absolutely awful except for that part you liked. I think perhaps you should not talk in absolutes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
quozl wrote:
Darilian wrote:
quozl wrote:
The Message wrote:
I was with him until the end, where he implied that the rich were in some sort of peril regarding a future revolution. Pretty sure that ship had sailed with the advent of modern weaponry. It's one thing to overwhelm some guys equipped with swords and armor through sheer numbers and improvised weapons, it's quite another to get a clear shot on the guy directing the guided rocket from inside a bunker. We will never have another successful rebellion in the first world.


Never say never again.


*ugh*
I HATE that Bond movie. Absolutely awful. Thunderball- the film that its essentially a remake of- was better.

Though it was cool seeing Klaus Maria Brandauer as the villain. He's always been one of my favorite character actors.

Darilian


Absolutely awful except for that part you liked. I think perhaps you should not talk in absolutes.


I absolutely believe that it is pointless to talk about movies in absolutes.



Darilian
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clay
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
isaacc wrote:
The Message wrote:
isaacc wrote:
mightygodking wrote:
isaacc wrote:
And, by the end of the article, I still don't understand SK's reason for not writing a cheque for 50% of his income last year, especially since he knows precisely to where it ought to be directed.


Given that he said exactly the opposite of this you might want to reread it: his entire point is that private donations cannot replace government spending because wealthy individuals are not typically good at assessing need versus "what I want to be a need."

Which is extremely true. I know somebody who works for a private school: they have no problem getting donations from alumni to go towards sports or computers or other sexy things, but what the school really needs is to refurbish the cafeteria. But none of the alumni want to spend money on that, because, well, it's a cafeteria.


No, I read it just fine, thanks. One proposition does not follow from the other. Indeed, his thinking is all over the place. I understood his political stance about assessing needs at the national level. It has no bearing on him cutting a cheque right now, even for only those things that he is assessing. What are you and he trying to say; that his $10 million is going to make problems worse? When one says things as categorical as tax me more, less talk and more pen motion.

I especially like the bit about how wealthy benefactors don't cough up the 50% including himself. What kind of high school logic is that? Then do so since you're so adament it ought to be so. In fact the first bit of the article ought to be, "I just sent off a cheque to the IRS for half of my last year's earnings. This is why I think everyone in my position should to do the same:"
.


The point is that the current income from taxes is insufficient and while a sizable donation wouldn't hurt it would also be insufficient. However, if all of these people were forced to provide the contribution in unison it would actually produce a meaningful shift. That's the logic, at least. You can argue over how sound it is, but there's nothing hypocritical about someone holding those assumptions and not donating the money.


Clay, I'm still not seeing it other than do as I say, not as I do. As you rightly point out, the issue can be debated. That SK's $10 million (arbitrary number) is today going to go to every library and volunteer firestation in New England, versus the general national fund tomorrow, is neither here nor there. Just write the bloody cheque.

What I'm strongly sensing is that if everyone [all wealthy people] is not going to suffer with me, then I'm not coughing up. Well then, par for the course.

A first cousin of mine is a well-to-do obstetrician in Boston. During 2011's Haiti earthquake he did not yak a lot about what everyone else ought to be doing. He immediately closed down his practice for a month and went down to Haiti, hooking up with a foreign field hospital. I think his picture is somewhere on CNN in an article about how other NGOs were sending their serious medical cases to that field hospital.

We lead by doing.
.


Alright, look at it this way. Let's say we need to push a boulder up a hill, right? Currently there are a bunch of weak nobodies trying to push it, they can each get it a few inches before having to switch off and together they make some sort of progress but it clearly isn't going to make it all the way up. Now, there are some crazy strong dudes milling around, right? Stephen King is totally ripped, he could probably push it a good 40-50 ft before needing someone else to take over, yeah? However, the slope is much longer than that and while his contribution would make a noticeable difference it wouldn't get things done and due to gravity any position gained would be lost over time. No, we need more of those strong dudes to pitch in for this to work. Sure, King could make a show of it but it wouldn't really do anything and there's no shame in saying "y'know, unless I know you guys are going to come take over when I run out of steam I probably won't waste the energy getting it up there only to find out you weren't impressed enough to join in."

Does that at least make sense within its own vacuum? Do you see how someone capable of "so much" might not actually be able to make a worthwhile difference alone, even for the sake of flaunting their ideals? Now apply that to the financial situation and that's the argument he is using. Again, you can disagree as to the nature of the situation, but it absolutely isn't hypocritical based on the assumptions provided.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.