I heard about the one guy who was arrested (he getting charged or are the media and the prosecutors going to quietly forget about him?) on weapons charges (he's a convicted felon), but what about that guy? That's obviously offering payment for kidnapping, and that's obviously got to be illegal. I'm positive they'd lock my ass up if I did it. He hasn't been arrested, has he?

There's also the possibility that they're just asking tough questions to appear to have given the issue critical thought, when they intend to allow this gross violation of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Not particularly likely, but backlash has been buffered against by this sort of thing before. I couldn't tell you by who or when, but it's what the talking heads said. Again, not particularly likely, but it's possible.

Fortunately for both of us, my posts are filled with too much scathing commentary for that!

...okay, thanks for the warning. It probably would have happened eventually. Or "BUUUUUUULLSHIT" with about 400 million more U's.

xeno syndicated:
"If it is true that maintaining a thriving middle class is the objective of nation states, and yet we have not been able to sustain as proportionately large a middle class as the Ancient Greeks  were able to more than 2000 years ago, how can we say our civilizations have made any real progress at all since 300 BC?"

You have limited data available for comparison.

And dishonesty upsets me and offends me, so I'm going to be blunt about this next point:

Even accepting whatever numbers you've chosen, your claim that we have a smaller middle class, by proportion, is either dishonest or stupid.

The numbers referenced in that paper are only for citizens--a minority of the population. And a privileged one at that, disproportionately wealthier than slaves/women/aliens. Nowhere can you conclude that a great % of Greeks were in a "middle class" than modern states today. You're either lying, hoping to be perceived by idiots as making a "point," or you don't understand that the paper you've linked in absolutely no way provides a basis for claiming ancient Greeks of any city-state had a higher portion of their population in the middle class than any modern nation.

This is not a matter of opinion. You either don't understand the simple numbers referenced or you're lying.

Your comments on slaves are, again, either offensively ignorant or outright lies. You've already demonstrated that you have absolutely zero knowledge of ancient Greece. In your opening post you didn't specify a city-state or time period. Here, again, you make a massive generalization which is absolutely false. This is just offensive. You know you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, yet you continue to just make things up and post them anyway.

"I think this is rather shocking, isn't it? "

What's shocking is that you don't understand the numbers you're referencing, you don't understand this, and you continue to embarrass yourself anyway.

Zarf BeebleBrix:

xeno posted "BULLSHIT" and it was not edited. As this is a word I would like to use a lot in reference to dishonest and ignorant posters, I shall take note and this word will surely appear frequently in my posts.

xeno:
"If all the BULLSHIT we have gone through as a civilization over the last hundred years WASN'T about establishing a strong middle class, then, what was it all for?  Was it for making a few rich, and keeping the vast majority at subsistence levels?"

It was about freedom and people being rewarded for their productivity. We've achieved this and have a proportionally much larger middle class than any city-state in ancient Greece ever had.

"I thought the whole point of civilization was the middle class."

It's not.

"Again, why is it that in this regard, we can't seem to do much better than the Ancient Greeks in spite of all our technologies, wars, constitutions, laws, etc., blah, blah, blah?
Why can't we have a as big (proportionately) a middle class as the Ancient Greeks?"

Ours is bigger. The question is what was so faulty in your education. The paper you referenced refers to "citizens" about a thousand times. It'd be hard to read and not understand that none of its numbers applied to women, slaves, nor aliens.

Additionally, your claims about slavery are absolutely laughable. While, just like anywhere else, not all slaves lived in as horrible of conditions, your comparisons are just ridiculous. This is just trolling, because you could find 100 sources to back me up and 0 to support your claims in an hour.

" That their "slaves" were probably wealthier relative to the wealth distribution of their society than most of are today relative to the wealth distribution of our societies, is a very sad state, for, if anything, the middle class of our day and age should be far larger a proportion to any society, especially one that had slaves. 
I mean, their SLAVES were apparently better off than most of us today."

hahahhahahaha! hahhahahahahhhahahahahhaa! Oh my god this is retarded. Nobody is prohibited from voting today because they're poor or on welfare. 0 slaves could vote or take part in politics. Most people on welfare today have cable tv, cell phones, and air conditioning. Slaves had... hahahhahahahahahhahaahha!

You can't be serious. This is possibly the dumbest bullshit I have ever read in my entire life. It's not like you're talking about a minority opinion held by some scholars/archaeologists/historians. You're just making up some of the dumbest drivel I've ever seen. You're repeatedly lying about numbers used in the paper you referenced--This isn't a matter of opinion: The paper does not back up any of your claims, it dismisses them.

hahahahaha this is so stupid.

Am I the only one offended by everybody crying "RACIST!"?

As far as I can see, there's no evidence to suggest Zimmerman was a racist.

People are saying video evidence suggests he wasn't so terribly injured, the "kid"'s mom is a dumb [itch], some are saying this wasn't an official neighborhood watch... etc etc. I'm not claiming to know what happened and I, like every other sensible human being, hope that the facts determine the course of action.

But where's the evidence of racism? Zimmerman identified the person he saw to the 911 operator with a sensible descriptor they'd want/ask for. He'd called before about people of other races just as often.

Everybody who's positive this was a racially motivated killing offends me. Where's the evidence? Maybe Zimmerman's a weirdo wannabe neighborhood watch captain who killed Trayvon in cold blood. But where's the evidence of racial motivation?

^

It's really disingenuous. It's also an open admission that he has and/or will be deceitful to the American people in campaigning for reelection.

Regardless of political views, anyone not offended is too stupid to know why they should be.

It also embarrasses him and, by extension, us. Our foolish novice president pretending anyone on earth should presume he'll be reelected and treat him accordingly is just more amateurish embarrassing behavior. He's already spouted off about some sort of restart with American-Russian relations enough that they're probably still laughing at him/us.

They probably think he's the funniest guy in America.

Simon, while people undoubtedly make terrible decisions, they make terrible decisions for themselves. When they surrender decision-making power to government, government makes much worse decisions and makes them for everybody.

That people often make bad decisions is no justification for letting anybody else make decisions for them. That is a cultural problem, and there's no government agency that could ever handle it.

Everything The Riddler has said here is right. If you disagree, you are wrong.

I'm the poster waiting for a high enough bidder, FYI.

"I think Zarf just proved you weren't even bothering to comprehend what I stated."

No. Taking you at your word that you're just having faith, we have established that we have nothing to discuss. I was clear about this in my last post. If you're not going to read my posts, then I'm just going to make fun of you like this. Don't act like Xeno. Are you retarded? Legit question. Are you retarded? Because I cannot think of a reason to post such juvenile nonsense.

I understand your vague condemnations of 100% of the system and everything it has ever done. We're discussing that system. We obviously understand your position and obviously have nothing more to discuss with you on it. What part of that is hard for you to grasp? This is a really stupid point to get stuck on repeatedly.

"So I quite agree with you. If you aren't going to bother understanding my position, then we have nothing further to discuss."

Your position is that the system is 100% corrupt and it can do absolutely nothing right. You have failed to provide a solution or alternative, though I have asked you several times.

"I think transparency could be improved enough to make those corrupt sleazeballs have an incentive to at least be adequately accountable."

While you've here started to actually provide alternatives which can be discussed, I'm V.Kemp and discussed means rubbished. So let's do this.

We already know who they're prosecuting and what evidence they produce at trial. That the people and the media are too lazy and apathetic to hold local leaders and attorney-generals accountable is on us. They already give us all the relevant information on what they're doing. That we don't care whether they do an honest job is on us. Obviously the dishonest ones aren't going to hold themselves accountable.

You're vaguely blaming the system for its people's failing. When there's levels of corrupt bureaucracy in justice departments, the solution is not to add more bureaucracy to oversee operations. The solution is for the people to care and hold them accountable. Nothing can substitute for this. The people not giving a damn, being bribed with their own tax money, and repeatedly electing trash into office isn't the fault of any justice system lacking "transparency."

"Whether or not you agree with me that the law is being selectively applied in the case of Planned Parenthood, do you agree that transparency is an effective way to expose corruption and can be greatly improved upon?"

You seem be to asking for somebody to hold your hand. We already know who they're prosecuting and on what charges with what evidence. If there are others who should be prosecuted, it's the people's (the media's) task to expose such hypocrisy and demand (with their votes) accountability and justice.

Unless you want everyone and every organization investigated 100% of the time, it's the task of the media to point out shortcomings of and hypocrisy of justice departments and the people's task to vote in change.

You vaguely call for "transparency." What do you mean by this? What do you want to know that you do not have access to now? We already know who they prosecute, why, and on what evidence.

They obviously can't share evidence they collect and do not prosecute on. They'd ruin it for future use and cause harm to innocent people and organizations.

So what are you asking for? It's not any district attorney's job to investigate everyone and explain why he didn't prosecute particular people/organizations. If you allege real crimes being ignored, you need to back it up with real facts and examples. Your "I take it on faith" basis for your position again hinders discussion. You want transparency, but you don't describe what information you seek and you provide 0 examples of where it'd be/have been useful.

"But more importantly, I was shocked anyone would demand evidence that most politicians and the individuals and organizations associated with them are scum."

The point made earlier was that prosecutions rely on evidence. While I agree there's a ton of corruption in the US (everywhere, really), acknowledging this fact is not a solution. Just prosecutions require evidence. In the absence of evidence, we're just vaguely whining and making generalizations which don't point to real solutions. Seems a little childish.

People do and should demand evidence that a politician and the people/organizations associated with them are scum before prosecuting them. And that's the point that was made to you earlier. The poster wasn't saying they needed evidence to support your position, but that evidence is needed to prosecute. Posting that you have faith they're all (19/20) dirty (let's be honest, they probably are) is a far cry from having evidence to prosecute. You clearly did not comprehend what they stated.

Genetic experiments are producing some things from creatures which normally wouldn't produce those things, but... *has Aliens nightmares for decades*

The only thing we need in space is huge weapons. Lots of huge weapons.