And I guess it was our fault as well in the years prior to 06? The biggest problem we have is the disintegration of the family caused, primarily, by a decline of Christian values.


https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...ionChart02.gif

Attachment 49142Well it might have been, you caused so many, but the point is, we had overcome the days of bad leftist spend policies and got it below zero and along came another american engineered depression. But I don't think you can even read the graph you presented, In the years prior to 08 we were trending down but why don't you compare it to your own debt level, it is instructive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And I guess it was our fault as well in the years prior to 06? The biggest problem we have is the disintegration of the family caused, primarily, by a decline of Christian values.


https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...ionChart02.gif

---

Notwithstanding you Christians elected the absolute worse example of Christian values, what does that have to do with the recession caused by the rich guys screwing up the money? You do realize that the world is tied together by OUR money, so when we screw up we screw up everybody else. Our debt is tied to those screw ups and recovery from it, and repubs brilliant idea that we can add to it and have nothing in return since they gave a huge chunk of that deficit funded tax cut to the rich guys who screwed us in the first place, which by now you have realized that your tax cuts were deficit neutral and temporary which means they are short lived as a benefit to ordinary folks, while the dufus and rich guys extract the wealth from the economy in perpetuity, or until somebody wakes up and makes some drastic changes.

Like an election. Where we don't squander a strong recovery by adding debts instead of paying them down. Where we can get qualified people to govern and not the self enriching appointees by the dufus. Or the appointees that are rewarded for protecting rich pedophiles and child abusers.

You call those Christian values?

Quote:

---

You call those Christian values?

---

What are you raving about? there is nothing Christian about the capitalist system, in fact it is the anthesis of Christianity, predicated on greed.

What alternative would you suggest? There is no economic system set forth in the New Testament, and capitalism is the basic system of the OT. So what economic system not based on self profit would you suggest?

Quote:

---

Like an election. Where we don't squander a strong recovery by adding debts instead of paying them down.

---

So were you saying that when Obama was doubling the national debt during his eight years??

Quote:

---

[FONT=Arial,geneva,lucida,"lucida grande",arial,helvetica,sans-serif][SIZE=3][COLOR=#b00000]

What are you raving about? there is nothing Christian about the capitalist system, in fact it is the anthesis of Christianity, predicated on greed.

[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

---

ok I'll wait for the biblical support for state run socialism .

I guess I'll wait for the biblical justification for capitalism. This better be good!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

What alternative would you suggest? There is no economic system set forth in the New Testament, and capitalism is the basic system of the OT. So what economic system not based on self profit would you suggest?

So were you saying that when Obama was doubling the national debt during his eight years??

---

Well, you may recall in Acts we are told that the early Christians had everything in common and looked after everyone, so as a New Testament version of a Christian economy is offered but it is not personal property and striving after wealth but a system based on community. I know you would call this communism, but communism is predicated on state ownership, so I'm not suggesting that.

You see God's economy is based on giving, not accumulation, and this is so foreign to our western ideas that we would not consider it. Your capitalism is based on self, and Christian ideals are not, thus there is a constant pressure not to adopt such ideas

Quote:

---

Well, you may recall in Acts we are told that the early Christians had everything in common and looked after everyone, so as a New Testament version of a Christian economy is offered but it is not personal property and striving after wealth but a system based on community. I know you would call this communism, but communism is predicated on state ownership, so I'm not suggesting that.

---

One great feature you have completely neglected to mention. It was based on voluntary giving. Another great neglected feature is that the ownership of the means of production was PRIVATE. Thus, it was capitalism. I completely agree with your call for loving generosity, but capitalism refers to the private ownership of the means of production and has no inherent connection to greed. That is an issue of the human heart. The two are not synonymous. For that matter, the desire for profit is not the same as greed. They are worlds apart.

Yeah just as I thought . Freedom is the recurring theme of the bible ,and capitalism is nothing more that the free exchange of goods and services .Capitalism's emphasis of the dignity of the individual makes it more Christian than socialism. When encouraging charity the bible encourages a voluntary act ….not coercion by the state . And make no mistake about it ;socialism's basic tenet is that the state's power is the main source of human rights ;and what the state gives ,the state can take away .

2 Cor 3:17 and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

The free market system is built on Biblical ideals like property rights, reward and incentive .

1 Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house,he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel

2Thessalonians 3:10

For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.

Deuteronomy 8:18 But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your ancestors, as it is today.

I Corinthians 9:24 Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize.

2 Corinthians 9:6 But this I say He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.

Capitalism 101, you want a wall on the southern border, then fair market price don't cut it! My land is worth 10 times what you're offering so pay up, or see you in court buddy. Give it up or talk to my lawyer!

Go mess with Arizona or New Mexico, but don't mess with Texas! You been warned you NY a$$hole!

That's the way it goes in AMERICA, free market and all!

Quote:

---

That's the way it goes in AMERICA, free market and all!

---

Whatever made you think the market is free, you can't just rock up and start flogging your wares

In his testimony Cohen has lashed out at Trump but does not confirm Russia links, I guess it was all for nothing

Nothing like getting sworn testimony from a convicted liar . What did we learn today ? That Trump paid off a porn star to get a NDA . WE knew that already . We'll see if he ges treated fairly under the law because campaign finance violations usually get an administrative slap on the wrist in fines .

Nice post

If that's all he did Tom, you could be correct, if he cooked the company books to accomplish his end though, he may have an even greater legal exposure, and it may well be a smaller part of a criminal conspiracy. You never know what Mueller has on that subject, or NY prosecutors, but I cannot imagine that the dufus had all those half slick grifters around him and knew NOTHING.

Repubs hollered liar, despicable immoral and a few other choice attacks on the convicted bad guy Cohen, in short character attacks, but not one had one inquiry into the substance of his allegations or testimony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

If that's all he did Tom, you could be correct, if he cooked the company books to accomplish his end though, he may have an even greater legal exposure, and it may well be a smaller part of a criminal conspiracy. You never know what Mueller has on that subject, or NY prosecutors, but I cannot imagine that the dufus had all those half slick grifters around him and knew NOTHING.

Repubs hollered liar, despicable immoral and a few other choice attacks on the convicted bad guy Cohen, in short character attacks, but not one had one inquiry into the substance of his allegations or testimony.

---

Give them time, when Mueller reports they can start another witch hunt and try Trump in the court of public opinion, and we all know what opinions are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Nothing like getting sworn testimony from a convicted liar . What did we learn today ? That Trump paid off a porn star to get a NDA . WE knew that already . We'll see if he ges treated fairly under the law because campaign finance violations usually get an administrative slap on the wrist in fines .

---

Trump paid off Daniels because she threatened to go public a few weeks before the election. The payoff is a felony. Trump continued the felonious activity by reimbursing Cohen for the payments he made on Trump's behalf to Daniels while Trump was president.

Since the crime was committed before the election and arguably promoted Trump's election chances, the DOJ rule against indicting a sitting president does not apply - you can't commit a crime to get elected and then claim immunity from prosecution.

Then there's the question of how the payments were recorded. As a campaign expense? Crime! As payment for false invoices? Crime!

It would be good to see Trump's tax returns for answers, but that will take a while yet. By now, everybody knows that Trump invented the audit excuse. It's a matter of proving it.

In what way was paying Daniels to remain quiet a felony? It would have been a violation of campaign finance laws to use campaign donations to pay her off, but that does not seem to have been the case.

Why does the right wing think for one minute that campaign finance law is the only thing the lying cheating dufus has crossed a legal line on? Or is it that you don't want to know? I suspect if your heads exploded after Cohen's testimony, maybe you should just skip the NEXT witnesses.