|
Shbobdb posted:I used to have a more orthodox Marxist view that social issues were essentially reframed (or poorly framed) economic issues but canonical texts like Black Marxism really made me reconsider my stance on that issues and, to use the parlance of our times, "check my privilege". While often related, social and economic issues do occasionally stand alone and it is worth recognizing that. But, look at this thread. People will fight for women gaining access to 30k (national) jobs while making GBS threads on the New Deal. The New Deal sure as poo poo wasn't perfect but it has done a lot more good than access to 30k jobs spread across the country! I'm not a marxist, I'm a capitalist. I recognize that most social issues are an economic dog-whistle. Racial equality? More like, "Tax me to spend on black people." Economic inequality? More like, "Force me to compete against less qualified individuals." And that's how you get the TeaParty. Whether Joe Member can articulate it, social movements are, fundamentally, economic interests. This loving thread, full of folks who don't understand the rules of the game who poo poo on effective policy because it was implementable within the period's racial attitudes. gently caress, you want improved public school funding at the state level? Hire me to unleash a smear campaign to reignite anti-catholic hysteria and I'll protect your well-funded union jobs, your benefits, and your pensions. Unfortunately, there is a lack of real political courage in America. Joementum posted:I don't follow it at all closely (and am not a member of the faith), but I thought one of the things Francis was working on was purging the Vatican bank of the Mafia. Oh, he is. Just like Las Vegas and Havana were emerged in their modern forms out of efforts to make the mob go legit after the end of prohibition. One of the real loving hilarious elements of our world is just how much in tax-exempt holdings are nominally under Holy See administration and management. For instance, take church holdings in latin america and africa: how much land is under administration of individuals with Vatican passports? How much, and in what forms, does energy lie in that land? Hence the movement away from coal and coal-related investments by Vatican organizations: Holy See got gas. It got lots of gas. It got so much gas, it'd be great for corporate income if action were taken on carbon emissions. Reform occurs in the vatican in ways which are hard to discern without a bishophoric guide. Thankfully, Chicago is there to help teach you how to turn your catholic mob ties legit while increasing profitability. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jan 1, 2015 |
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Yeah, but the Catholic Church is still a big deal. And it's weird how it's so regressive when it's a boy's club. Might there be a connection? Ok but if you're out to get a priest job, the Catholic Church is definitely shrinking those jobs (there are 20,917 fewer of them since 44 years ago, and even 1718 fewer than 4 years ago). Priest/minister/equivalent jobs are much more accessible in other religions and sects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Ok but if you're out to get a priest job, the Catholic Church is definitely shrinking those jobs (there are 20,917 fewer of them since 44 years ago, and even 1718 fewer than 4 years ago). Priest/minister/equivalent jobs are much more accessible in other religions and sects. More importantly, where exactly is the Catholic Church streamlining its operations versus where has hiring been accelerating over the past several decades? Catholic Church is having a middle-income shift while reorientating its developed nation operations towards value-added social institutions and away from tithe income.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
effectual posted:They wouldn't be homeless if all jobs gave a living wage. Jobs that won't hire you for being gay, black, trans, a woman, etc. Not to mention you'd need the job before you became homeless. If you lost your home while being employed, getting a job, any job becomes 10x harder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because it isn't up to government to determine eligibility for religious office. Your desire to use it for such purposes is contrary to the intent of American democracy and threatens the sustainability of our national experiment in representative government. It is on the same level as any other job. We allow the government to determine eligibility for other jobs all the time-- you can't say your senior engineer position requires a penis, for instance. All jobs should be held to the strictures of the CRA, no exceptions period. quote:Gays have been allowed in the military so long as they haven't disclosed their gender status. Now, even alien gays and women can enlist in the American military thanks to Democratic policies. DADT was poo poo when it was around, dude. People who were LGBT had to constantly police themselves to make sure some busybody rapture trash didn't figure out they didn't "accidentally" get outed and have their careers ruined. Plus, for a long time it was a less than honorable discharge, which puts it up there with pissing hot. Meaning it would gently caress over your post military employment situation, never mind that any benefits you needed (like VA stuff from when our country broke you during the war) go away. It's all better now that DADT is gone, but like always it took way too long because Democrats want to preserve political capital, whatever that is. You grab everything you can the second you can, because you might never have another chance to. Patience works for people who aren't actively being hosed by the system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Joementum posted:I don't follow it at all closely (and am not a member of the faith), but I thought one of the things Francis was working on was purging the Vatican bank of the Mafia. If so he certainly hasn't been speaking publicly of it. Notice what he was, and was not, talking about in his recent sins of the clergy missive. Ratzinger hated that poo poo and tried to change it but would you look at that, he retired a year or two after his appointments were unable to facilitate change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:It is on the same level as any other job. We allow the government to determine eligibility for other jobs all the time-- you can't say your senior engineer position requires a penis, for instance. All jobs should be held to the strictures of the CRA, no exceptions period. Tell me more about how you want Federal and State government intervention in religion  Hey, muslims? All y'all imams are ineligible for jobs thanks to the "Texas Religious Non-Discrimination Act of 2015" Yeah, no. Better to not intervene in religious hiring than open the floodgates of democratic intervention in religious affairs. Cliff Racer posted:If so he certainly hasn't been speaking publicly of it. Notice what he was, and was not, talking about in his recent sins of the clergy missive. Ratzinger hated that poo poo and tried to change it but would you look at that, he retired a year or two after his appointments were unable to facilitate change. Ratzinger attempted a restructuring too fast, too soon, without enough social goodwill to sustain the task. Make no mistake, Ratzinger wasn't forced out due to his dallying with kiddies, that just helped give the push that extra bit of 'oomph'. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
You cannot separate the Catholic Church from the Mafia. It is impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:You cannot separate the Catholic Church from the Mafia. It is impossible. Yes you can. You don't need mafia as parastatal enforcers any more, the state is developed enough to do that for you. Why pay the extra expenses when you could lobby national governments for less, with lower risk when exposed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm not a marxist, I'm a capitalist. I know and that's unfortunate. But despite our doctrinal differences, I'd rather try to change the world with you than most of the fucks in this thread. Next time I'm in Chicago care to grab a drink near one of the fine MDW hotels?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Tell me more about how you want Federal and State government intervention in religion I'm utterly confused how saying the CRA & ADA apply to religious organizations means that Muslims couldn't get jobs. It would be the exact opposite of that, in fact. Look, religion has been used as a way to keep some of this pre-modern thinking around and acceptable for well over a century now. The entire point of fundamentalism was counter-modernity. At some point, we have to bring them in line with society, because without it all the awesome things like market economies (I think they work fine since I'm for social democracy, not socialism) are going to be constantly fought against. We don't give churches an exception from criminal law (at least not officially-- I get hard just imagining using RICO over the child rape scandal) so why should we do it for employment law? quote:Ratzinger attempted a restructuring too fast, too soon, without enough social goodwill to sustain the task. Make no mistake, Ratzinger wasn't forced out due to his dallying with kiddies, that just helped give the push that extra bit of 'oomph'. When did anyone say Ratzi was a pedo? The guy was a creepy old dude who ran the literal inquisition, but nothing gave any indication he was loving kids. I agree it was the Vatican banking issue that got him out. Everything I've read about it is so drat scummy it's unbelievable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I know and that's unfortunate. But despite our doctrinal differences, I'd rather try to change the world with you than most of the fucks in this thread. Next time I'm in Chicago care to grab a drink near one of the fine MDW hotels? Do you have PMs? Marx is good for understanding the economics of German coal capitalism. The theories which take his name? Bullshit which discounts mezzo-level institutional development and its impact upon the systems dynamics which inform individual agency. What the world needs is more institutional development at a mezzo level within communities, and less pontificating on how policies will make people feel. I tell you what, with increased rates of economic mobility, individuals will feel like spending some money and creating opportunities for making some more money through mezzo-level institutions. rkajdi posted:I'm utterly confused how saying the CRA & ADA apply to religious organizations means that Muslims couldn't get jobs. It would be the exact opposite of that, in fact. People say Ratz is a paedo because Ratz is a paedo. Let's imagine ADA & CRA apply to religious institutions. Do they apply to firing an unmarried woman who gets pregnant from her priestly employment? Now, what are the implications of that? You're dictating religious doctrine of catholics, and if upheld in court (rather than the current court giving ADA and CRA the VRA), what is there to prevent Congress or state leges from amending CRA and ADA to exclude unpopular religious minorities? My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
A livable minimum wage is good, but if I can't even get a job because I'm queer, a woman, or not white, that's a different problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:A livable minimum wage is good, but if I can't even get a job because I'm queer, a woman, or not white, that's a different problem. What if you're a dyke living in Indiana and working in Chicago for minimum wage? Why should Illinois have to assume the costs for your social toleration without your payment of due Illinois rates of taxation? You get the social benefits of Chicago and Illinois acceptance, without assuming the responsibility for the tax implications. Thus the need for regional compacts on issues such as wage and consumption/excise taxation. E: In case anyone isn't aware, Chicago is getting a $15/hr wage long before Indiana ever will. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:A livable minimum wage is good, but if I can't even get a job because I'm queer, a woman, or not white, that's a different problem. And how are you expecting to get the specific job of priest in a religion that's routinely cutting those positions, again, as a means of combating this? Again noting that the requirements for even being accepted to it, assuming all the restrictions on non straight men went away, involve getting first a bachelor's degree in a religious related field (other fields also accepted but they put you way down the acceptability list) and then getting a full graduate degree from a seminary school and basically serving a year as the equivalent of a resident for the progression towards a medical doctor. Oh and on top of that, you have to have spent many years in the place you want to get a priest position in, often before being allowed into seminary, and they can reject you simply for talking weird or looking different than they want you to. And if anyone in the local church hierarchy disagrees with anything you've ever said, you can be effectively banned from trying in that area and then have to put in extended time in another area.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
I wasn't talking specifically about the priesthood; I was raised Buddhist,I don't know anything about that.  Rahm, I have no idea what you're saying. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:I wasn't talking specifically about the priesthood; I was raised Buddhist,I don't know anything about that. Sorry, the whole argument came out of some people demand that the Catholics specifically open up priest jobs to women, because of "equity". I assumed you were in on that as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:I wasn't talking specifically about the priesthood; I was raised Buddhist,I don't know anything about that. I'm saying that the route to 'social justice' is created first and foremost through economics. 'Equality' is, simply, more capital-friendly than inequality, and therefore more profitable. Let shitholes be shitholes while you implement incentives to attract and capture their human capital. For instance, gays give a shitload of money in Chicago. They're part of the machine, and in return for getting with the system, they've earned themselves non-discrimination during hiring and housing practices and also the right to marry. There's been old-guard resistance in social institutions such as black churches and catholic social services, but so what? Do you know how much loving money there is in being globally queer-friendly? There's a fuckload of money, and your corp can attract top queer talent that you just won't get at your Dubai or Indiana office. Now, the issue which impacts the working class is that these queers can enjoy the social progress of our city while residing in Indiana or Wisconsin for tax purposes. So what you do to make your state more attractive is, you implement tolls and taxes upon transit to/from the shitholes of northwest Indiana, southwest Michigan, Rockford, and southeast Indiana. You have tollways which generate shitloads of revenue while also implementing red light cameras so that these folks can't take local streets with the same rush-rush-rush attitude. It makes queer human capital realize they want to stay in the city and pay the Illinois rates for the Illinois lifestyle. At the working-class level, it means increased economic frustration and decreased lifetime upward mobility and capital accumulation due to transit and time barriers to get those sweet-rear end $15/hr service jobs. And when your alternative is a $6/hr service job, $15/hr is goddamn sweet-rear end. Unfortunately, the burden of those economic and spatial barriers fall disproportionately upon minorities. It's sad that you'll have racial riots in northwest indiana due to frustration with Illinois transit policies; the only alternatives are regional compacts and shitholes attempting to compete with real cities through attraction of conservative capital via exclusionary social policies and labor cost-cutting economic policies. What I'm saying is, I don't favor equality for the sake of equality. I favor equality for the loving money first and foremost; the social impact is a decent filler and moral selling point. Nintendo Kid posted:Sorry, the whole argument came out of some people demand that the Catholics specifically open up priest jobs to women, because of "equity". I assumed you were in on that as well. That's loving stupid. What you do is, you implement novel policies which make female priestholders the economically attractive position for the catholic church. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:What if you're a dyke living in Indiana and working in Chicago for minimum wage? Why should Illinois have to assume the costs for your social toleration without your payment of due Illinois rates of taxation? You get the social benefits of Chicago and Illinois acceptance, without assuming the responsibility for the tax implications. What is the cost for not allowing discrimination? Unless you're assuming that there's going to be some huge extra cost at the EEO office.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:What is the cost for not allowing discrimination? Unless you're assuming that there's going to be some huge extra cost at the EEO office. in catholic priestholdership? Well, if you do it at the state lege level, you can say  to the less-than-profitable social services provided by catholics to maintain their exemption from EEO, such as minority/concentrated poverty healthcare, housing, and food distribution practices.You think your loving policy exists in a vacuum. It doesn't. If you want to be a dyke priest, go start your own church or join an institution which will have you. Why do you want to use State government to discriminate against the catholic church without noticable impact? Its just gently caress'n stupid. At least use discrimination against catholics to increase educational funding, impact, and pension solubility, rather than rampaging against catholics just because of personal differences. Use hate strategically to build governing coalitions and reform state economic policy. Don't use hate to push your personal moral agenda. That's just stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:If so he certainly hasn't been speaking publicly of it. Notice what he was, and was not, talking about in his recent sins of the clergy missive. Ratzinger hated that poo poo and tried to change it but would you look at that, he retired a year or two after his appointments were unable to facilitate change. What specific things did he say that bothered you though?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm not a marxist, I'm a capitalist. You're a stooge for the real capitalists unless you've been hiding ownership of a conglomerate from us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:A livable minimum wage is good, but if I can't even get a job because I'm queer, a woman, or not white, that's a different problem. Is that even a big problem currently though? Also I'm not gay but I still can't openly talk in my job about how leftist I am, they'd think I'm crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
effectual posted:Is that even a big problem currently though? It actually is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:You're a stooge for the real capitalists unless you've been hiding ownership of a conglomerate from us. My friend, would you like to invest in social service and technical training provision in an under-capitalized, energy-rich region of the world? I could give you the names of 10 organizations which will accept your tax deduction, while also providing you an opportunity to discuss your issue within their networks. Look, as far as I know, I don't have a Maltese account on record, how could I hide my conglomerate stakeholdership from you? Nintendo Kid posted:It actually is. So move.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:So move. Are you offering relocation funding? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Are you offering relocation funding? Bootstraps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Bootstraps. Those were cut out of the budget in 2007.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:in catholic priestholdership? Well, if you do it at the state lege level, you can say I'm talking about the cost from a state-level ENDA. You were grousing about people living in Indiana and working in Illinois, and implied there was some economic cost in an ENDA for non-religious organizations and businesses-- what is that cost and where does it come from? Honestly, the more I talk to you, the more sad your "machine politician" persona wears thin. You act like I have some hate for Catholics, when all I want is a truly equal society. Even though I am sure equality will gently caress me over in the end (I stand to lose more in white and male privilege than I gain otherwise) I still work for it because it's the right thing to do. Looking at it as some bottom line issue is the most crass thing I've seen someone put forward in this thread, excluding Amergin's trolling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Investiture of women is all about the money, yes. What do you do when your female clergy gets pregnant? Bit discriminatory to expel them for pregnancy and quite the legal liability. That's like, emphatically not true. First of all, the Catholic Church already employs poo poo tons of women. Nuns, lay people, employees of Catholic institutions. Second, that's only really relevant in the glorious capitalist utopia of the United States; which isn't really a big player in the Catholic church. Most other Catholic-heavy countries either have single-payer (by the government, not the church) or there isn't really an expectation that the employer pays for health insurance. Maybe in the Vatican things are different, but they can just shift those costs over to Italy. It's just this one job they have that women are ineligible for because women make terrible transmuters or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:You're a stooge for the real capitalists unless you've been hiding ownership of a conglomerate from us. Check out this cutting, incisive insight. drat, Rodya. drat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:
Well if you have the flu and can't go to the hospital you'll be getting a lot of brow sweat. Unless you die, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
Kitfox88 posted:Well if you have the flu and can't go to the hospital you'll be getting a lot of brow sweat. Unless you die, anyway. Why are you going to the hospital with a flu and not maintaining appropriate quarantine procedures? sullat posted:That's like, emphatically not true. First of all, the Catholic Church already employs poo poo tons of women. Nuns, lay people, employees of Catholic institutions. Second, that's only really relevant in the glorious capitalist utopia of the United States; which isn't really a big player in the Catholic church. Most other Catholic-heavy countries either have single-payer (by the government, not the church) or there isn't really an expectation that the employer pays for health insurance. Maybe in the Vatican things are different, but they can just shift those costs over to Italy. It's just this one job they have that women are ineligible for because women make terrible transmuters or something. Women are ineligible for it and divorce banned because otherwise would concentrate church offices into family hands. The designation of women as ineligible to hold priesthood and priests ineligible to marry comes as a direct evolution of policy in reaction to economic trends towards concentration of church offices, specifically, German bishophorics, within families. There was a reason why the reformation occured, and that reason is FYGM. rkajdi posted:I'm talking about the cost from a state-level ENDA. You were grousing about people living in Indiana and working in Illinois, and implied there was some economic cost in an ENDA for non-religious organizations and businesses-- what is that cost and where does it come from? Sure, state level ENDA with appropriate exemptions is attractive to human capital, however, the existance of tax havens within the Chicago metropolitan region necessitates the imposition of regressive barriers to spatial mobility in order to disincentivize non-capture of human capital. The burden of these barriers fall disproportionately upon working-class and minority populations. You can have ENDA at a state-level; until its implemented regionally, its only logical to impose regressive barriers upon non-state residents. If you're wondering what my point is, its that policies have unintended costs which can hinder upward mobility more than they create. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:What did the pope say that was bad this year? I do't think he's willing to actually do anything positive, but he's at least saying something resembling the right thing. He still hasn't done a whole lot about child abusers in the clergy, unless I'm gravely mistaken (and I hope I am, if it means action has been taken) Now, as to the gender issues in the Catholic Church, I don't feel particularly strongly about the Pope not trying make change in the women-priests or LGBT rights front, because it's the Catholic Church. Gender issues have been so enshrined in that institution that we're probably not going to see movement on it for another couple centuries, if that. This may be more than enough for people to call out the Pope as still being bad, and that's totally understandable as well. The other side of the coin is that for some people, Francis actually speaking out on issues such as income inequality and economic aid to the impoverished, that are within the Church's wheelhouse anyway, is good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:He still hasn't done a whole lot about child abusers in the clergy, unless I'm gravely mistaken (and I hope I am, if it means action has been taken) I know he's defrocking abusive priests and last week he established a commission of clergy and laymen to investigate and root out abusers, apologized and pledged zero tolerance in the future, which isn't much of anything but is marginally better than the status quo (a cover-up) I guess Benedict, meanwhile, still says there was no cover-up and he just happened to not know anything about sex abuse. Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 07:33 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I know he's defrocking abusive priests and last week he established a commission of clergy and laymen to investigate and root out abusers, apologized and pledged zero tolerance in the future, which isn't much of anything but is marginally better than the status quo (a cover-up) I guess Benedict knows that he does not know about priestly sexual abuse. Francis understands that he is aware of sexual abuse in the priesthood, and is acting accordingly. Hence the need for mafia ties: to enforce social order in the catholic church, sometimes, you've got to bash the paedo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Spoke Lee posted:What specific things did he say that bothered you though? His complaints about trickle-down being unChristian or unCatholic or whatever and his promise to push for global action on climate change next year. Not being religious I don't really give a drat about the church's position on gay rights and don't view his reforms in that direction as being all that big a deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 09:18
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:His complaints about trickle-down being unChristian or unCatholic or whatever and his promise to push for global action on climate change next year. Not being religious I don't really give a drat about the church's position on gay rights and don't view his reforms in that direction as being all that big a deal. How do you fault the man for nor following an economic philosophy he can not justify with the teachings of his savior? It's like being miffed that the pope spoke against reincarnation or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:His complaints about trickle-down being unChristian or unCatholic or whatever and his promise to push for global action on climate change next year. So in what ways do you believe proven false economics to be Christian or Catholic, and what upsets you about action on climate change?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:His complaints about trickle-down being unChristian or unCatholic or whatever and his promise to push for global action on climate change next year. Not being religious I don't really give a drat about the church's position on gay rights and don't view his reforms in that direction as being all that big a deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 10:16
|
|
