'He must be stopped': Missouri candidate's children tell voters he's basically an asshat There's no question that fatherhood brings immense responsibility. From the moment they come into the world, children think you are immortal, an aeons-old genius – nay, a god. However, two of US Republican Steve West's kids didn't get the memo – maybe they've grown up? – having explicitly told the Missouri electorate not to …
Indeed, good to see his children have seen through his shit and are brave enough to say so in public.
Apples don't fall far from the tree, as they say. It won't surprise me a bit that this grandstanding by his children is just the distraction so we don't notice how one asshat reproduced and created several more asshats (even if their asshattery appears different than their sire's).
Other racists support people like him because people like him validate how they feel and give them implicit approval even to act out on their feelings.
Jeezus, I once thought we had moved beyond this crap. But his kids are right, and kudos to them for speaking up.
Beam me up Scotty, this place sucks.
(R) behind the name, is enough for them to support anybody, no matter how vile the candidate is. That (D) stands for "evil socialism" and most of us know how destructive "evil socialism" is, because... Taxes! Never mind that those type of (R) people have no clue of how those taxes benefit them... Til they don't., then hear them scream.
people have no clue of how those taxes benefit them
Some people have no idea nor memory of when we did just fine without many taxes. Nor how only 10% of taxes collected actually provide any kind of benefit -- not a very good return on investment.
Til they don't., then hear them scream.
They scream, anyway. So let them.
Smart people work from home.
If you've got enough good land for a productive smallholding then, yes, maybe. But if you're talking about working over the Internet then you'd better pray that some telecoms company somewhere sees you as worth connecting up, because your teeny weeny ickle wickle tax-starved government sure as fuck isn't going to make them connect you up as part of a move for the common weal.
'Nor how only 10% of taxes collected actually provide any kind of benefit -- not a very good return on investment'
Do sane people really believe this kind of rhetoric? Is the intention to hook those too lazy to question this kind of ludicrous statement? Or is it just mindless repetition of soundbites that fit baseless beliefs?
What complete and utter nonsense.
Some people have no idea nor memory of when we did just fine without many taxes. Nor how only 10% of taxes collected actually provide any kind of benefit -- not a very good return on investment.
Indeed. The tax base is near all time highs and the upper limit of what is possible to extract from the economy (commonly understood to be 40%).
The sad reality is that Labours Liam Byrne was right in his note "Sorry, there's no money left". It's already spent and there is simply no more money left for the public sector to consume. Given the weaponised nature of the NHS, the government are right not to touch it - leave it for the next labour government to enforce reforms upon, for reforms will have to be enforced.
The national debt, even ignoring the trillions public sector workers feel they are due in pensions, has hit the stage where interest at generational low rates, is costing £50 Billion per year. So there's no more taxes to take and no more debt to accrue.
The state, all of it, is going to have to find a way to function while consuming a lot less money than it does at present or we are all going to have to find a way to function without the state. There's no magic money tree, nothing left to tax, and nobody to borrow from.
@Lucrelout
Where you say 'indeed' I assume you agree with the quoted statement.
The rest of your post touches on big numbers, political points and finally points out that the state needs to budget. I think most people know that.
Vitally, what is missing is any indication of what constitutes a 'benefit'.
I put forward a simple argument, I would say it is anything gained over and above the cost of accruing it and in this case the cost is certainly not 90 % of the total.
Maybe a bit of a simple outlook because I failed to make a political point or take a dig at a section of society however I subscribe to the KISS principal, it's served me well over the years.
@Killing Time
Where you say 'indeed' I assume you agree with the quoted statement.
Yeah, I should have been clearer - I agree we did just fine without many of the taxes we now have to endure. That most of it is wasted I also agree with. I don't agree that its of the order of 90% wasteage though - it's probably closer to 50-50 between things of use done badly and things not of use at all. Very little done by the state is done well and delivers real value - parts of the military, foreign bribes (they call it aid but lets have it right), but the rest if in dire need of reform.
Maybe a bit of a simple outlook because I failed to make a political point or take a dig at a section of society however I subscribe to the KISS principal, it's served me well over the years.
My intention wasn't to have a dig at public sector workers - badly designed systems, low skilled management etc are not their fault. What is their fault is the lack of drive, flexibility, and their utterly appalling union reps. These things underpin a lot of the problems.
Most public secotr working practices date right out of the 1970s, and most of the union members actually think that is a good thing. Unfortunately, since public sector workers don't pay tax (they're paid from tax) they see little need to reform to deliver greater value to the tax payer. And that has led us where we are.
@Lucrelout
Firstly, I don’t work in the public sector though I have some experience of the sector as a contractor and I can’t comment on your level of ‘experience’ but I have been around quite a few years and with the exception of a few VAT increases, I don’t recall any significant changes in the general level of taxation in the UK. I would go further and posit that the vast majority of the population of a working age haven’t actually seen major changes either.
Where headline taxes have been reduced, targeted taxes have been introduced or refined (CCL or vehicle excise tax, for example) to impose incumbent government policy. Despite my aversion to any loss of income, however distasteful, I can see that at least I have an element of control in the tax I pay.
The stark reality is that whatever your political beliefs, the UK’s taxation level is unlikely to change over the longer term (several terms with opposing parties in power) as is the requirement for a public sector and the need to attract people of the required capability that it doesn’t grind to a halt. For every entrenched numpty in the public sector you will see their equivalent in the private sector, however they either move around a lot or are lucky enough to be ‘carried’. Whatever sector they are in, they don’t really contribute.
You are going to be taxed and as a rule of thumb, more so on what you enjoy.
As to where we are? We live in a first world democratic country with functioning national infrastructure, comparable with the the top tier of global nations and a health service which will give a citizen access to 95 % of treatments available without some form of payment.
I can live with that and use my general nouse to work out the most tax efficient way to do so.
@LucreLout
The biggest problem — in my opinion, obviously — is the (mis)management problem in the public sector. The current government (and even some in Labour) has a mantra for the public sector: Privatise. Privatise! PRIVATISE!!!!
Under ideal conditions (I'll come back to that later), the only real ways for a private company to be more efficient than a public service is by having a "secret sauce" that cannot be implemented by the public service, as the private company — all else equal — needs to pay its owners/investors/shareholders on top of the expenses for delivering the service. A private company should thus be less economical than a comparable public service. For pure services it is very hard to have a "secret sauce" as there is only so much you can do to be more efficient without somehow entering the realm of exploitation or fraud. When a doctor needs to see his patients and there are few ways of doing it more efficiently than it is currently done, whether it is a privately employed doctor or a publicly employed. You can obviously try to automatise some of the processes (remote visits by webcam, electronic records, automatising administration, ...) but those are not in the "secret sauce" realm as they are equally available to private companies and public services.
So, when getting down to the basics, the main (only?) reason public services seem to lag behind private companies in efficiency seems to be a matter of proper leadership ... or rather a lack of it. My partner is a public employee and I have had a few, miserable years there too. Miserable exactly because of the poor management and the huge management pyramid (think about it, it starts with a minister, via civil servants, going on in maybe ten layers or more). Management in the public service is often farcical, even beyond the "Yes Minister" level. Unfortunately I know this first hand as I still work for public services, though now as a contractor, which has its benefits as long as I am not hit by IR35.
And, coming back to a more direct response to your post, most Union Reps are doing a good job (disclaimer: I was a union steward for several years) ... within their abilities. Union Reps are mostly just elected from within the people working in the organisation, i.e. with not specific knowledge of all the intricate aspects of the law, apart from what training they receive, and they are mostly dealing with everyday problems like bullying, harassment, grievances, policy issues, ..., not how to actually improve the services. The people higher up in the organisation will partly deal with efficiency and management issues but their remit is really to improve the conditions for their members, which often boils down to a matter of getting them as much money as possible.
So yes, there is a lot that could be improved and it is mostly by managing the public services better, which would reduce waste and thus cost. And the ideal conditions are therefore a public structure with few, efficient management levels and a public workforce that understands that they have to deliver the best possible service at the lowest possible cost without compromising their own income and well-being.
Oh, and regarding the work ethics of public workers, I have met and impressive amount of people that go well beyond what could rightfully be expected of them, often helpful to a fault (especially within the health sector). I have also met people that were overzealous and went beyond the reasonable without any consideration of the people they are serving (Public Servants, remember!) — HMRC and DWP are you listening?
Oh dear, that became a long rant.
No magic Money Tree?! Paff.. Paff my good sir, you must have forgoten about the Federal Reserve. (Whom are as about as Federal, as Federal Express, and the European Central Bank). Both of whome are fully able to keep blowing though all that HP Ink to make sure there's more than enough Money to go 'round. So who cares if say the US Dollar has in fact lost something like over 90% of its value in the 105 Years of the Federal Reserves History.
So how "English" is the Bank of England?
by not slurping up their father's bullshit, like so many kids do
Actually it is normal for kids to take the opposing view to their parents. Going as far back as the ancient Greeks (documented) and prior to that (undocumented).
It is the grandkids one needs to worry about... Minus multiplied by minus results in a sign reversal.
Famously Missouri elected a dead man rather than elect a Republican asshat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Missouri%2C_2000
Asscroft was the _incumbent_ and _lost to a dead man_. Herr West might want to start looking for a nice deep fuhrerbunker.
Sounds like a good precedent: maybe the Democrats could nominate a dead man (or woman!) as their next Presidential candidate.
As long as their candidate is not now nor ever has been a Clinton, they'd probably find they do rather better. The world is tired of the Clintons and Bushes playing Hatfields & McCoys over the Whitehouse.
Cannot a constitutional amendment be scheduled to disallow candidacy from any Presedential relations? We could time limit it to say 250 years? I'd love to see the same thing over here - how many Kinnocks does politics need? Have we not earned a rest?!
"You mean Hillary is ~still alive~?!"
I thought that she was a zombie powered by the DNC (Feinstein and Pelosi definitely are...) until I saw Bill Nelson. If there's a personification of the walking dead, that's him. Skeletor Scott will win the Senate seat in Flori-duh, if only because he still has a pulse. (He stole it, of course.)
I hate Skeletor Scott. He plead nolo contendere to his company's looting Medicare of billions and walked away with a multimillion dollar golden parachute. He loved the Mango Mussolini right up until being a Friend of the Don became a liability in parts of Flori-duh that he needs to win to win the election, and now he's putting distance between himself and He Who Bends Over for Shirtless Bronies. But unless Bill Nelson manages to claw himself out of the grave he's dug for himself, Skeletor is going to be a senator.
""Hitler was right"
er, he was actually right about a thing or two, you know..."
Yes, but when people say "Hitler was right" they don't mean "Adi was right about how the background of this painting washes out the foreground colours, leaving it looking unstructured." Normally it's about the Jews.
Perhaps it’s all a big conspiracy of the MSM or whatever. Probably fake news. SAD! Or perhaps his children are (shudder) SJWs. Or maybe snowflakes are virtue signalling* with their own dark Zionist agenda in league with the Deep State (and possibly aliens or lizard people**).
* Yes, I jest. Besides, I prefer virtual signalling to twat signalling.
** An alien anal probing might explain Dad?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
