Gee... nice and hypocritical of you to not call your own lefties obstructionists for not going along with what's good for the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
|
Gee... nice and hypocritical of you to not call your own lefties obstructionists for not going along with what's good for the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You don't know what's good for the country Smoothy, you only know what's good for YOU!
I know what's good for this country... and it isn't Socialism. Its hurt every other country its ever been imposed in... EVER.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The left is insane... because the definition of insanity being trying the same thing over, and over, and over... expecting a different result.
You won't claim your monthly SS check and Medicare coverage when you are in your 60s?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
That's not socialism.. because I've been paying into that expressedly for that since I started working.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
There isn't a welfare or Medicaid deduction for your paychecks... there IS a SSI and Medicare deduction you pay your whole life to collect when you retire.
HUGE difference.
If they refund me everything I've paid into that fund since I started working... then I won't collect it. In fact I wish they would.
My husband, who had a great job for 30 years, had heart surgery several years ago. Medicare picked up the tab to the tune of over $80,000. I'm guessing that wiped out whatever he had paid into Medicare over the years. What if he has another surgery -- will Medicare pay or turn him down?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
WG the same crowd hollering about Medicare back in the 60's is the same crowd hollering now about ACA, same arguments, same actions.
On we roll toward common sense. The 21st century will NOT be repealed.
That's true ;the weight of the nanny state on the backs of the people will collapse social democracies around the world .
And exploiting poor people around the world for cheap labor in the name of capitalism is even worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yeah since most of the world lives on less than a couple bucks a day we'd hate to give 'em a better paying job.
So they don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Jesus in Matthew 25:34-36, NKJV: Then the King will say to those on his right hand, “Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you looked after Me; I was in prison and you came to Me … Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.”Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
DemocracyQuote:
Yet, the diagnostic today is severe: with age, the democratic welfare state as we know it suffers from morbid obesity, and while the remedy is not hard to conceive—rebalancing the relationship between the public to private sector—it seems impossible to administer.
The etiology of the crisis points at the very design of the regime: the patient will not take the cure, voting out any government trying to cut public spending. Foreign donors who bail out bankrupt governments are often slapped in the face by the citizens of those countries. The recent woes of Greece and Cyprus show how the people can lack responsibility and gratitude...
The economic viability of the model depended on continuous growth of the private sector, from which taxes would flow. When that was not enough—which would not be long—the prospect of future taxes served as collateral for public borrowing. GDP did grow, but spending and debt grew even faster: the average OECD ratios to GDP are now around 50 percent for public expenditures and 80 percent for public debt.
With growth structurally slowing down in the most developed countries, appropriations have become a zero-sum game between those who get and those who will have to pay. Yet, familiarity with gigantic deficits—the combined public debt of OECD countries exceeds 40 trillion dollars—gives confidence that the system still has some give in it. Many have come to imagine the state as the custodian of an infinite supply of money, and their democratic rights as a claim to financial entitlements...
By Camille Pecastaing (Contributor to the Working Group on Islamism and the International Order)Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Camille Pecastaing is a senior associate professor of Middle East studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. A student of behavioral sciences and historical sociology, his research focuses on the cognitive and emotive foundations of xenophobic political cultures and ethnoreligious violence, using the Muslim world and its European and Asian peripheries as a case study. He has written on political Islam, Islamist terrorism, social change, and globalization. Pecastaing’s latest publication is Jihad in the Arabian Sea.
And he's handsome! Faculty Directory | Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies - SAIS
Lol I don't have an opinion about his looks... but most of the contributors to 'Defining Ideas ' are worth reading... my favorite is Richard Epstein .
Smoothy doesn't understand he has no idea of an economy that doesn't have greed at its centreQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Again... was Jesus speaking to nations instead of individuals ? I gain nothing by compelling another human to be generous.
Nations are made up of individuals.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Interestingly It is not about you. Jesus example is good for nations just as it is for individuals and it isn't about compelling anyone, if you don't do it out of free will what is the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
There are two economies Tom the hoarders and the givers eventually the economy based on hoarding falls apart
No the economy that taxes to bribe the people falls apart . I have no problem with helping the poor. But the western world has gone way beyond that subsidizing sloth.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Huh? Who taxes us? We tax us.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
No we elect the morons
Alexander Fraser TytlerQuote:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury.
The problem is we forgot the mission, to form a more perfect union. Now the mission is getting rich by any means necessary.
No Tal you forgot to move on from the eighteenth century thinking, a more perfect union was important, even essential then, but what is the use of a man standing up every year and reporting the union is strong when it is falling apart at the most essential level.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I agree with you that the essential that the rich get richer by all means necessary has been with you from the beginning, it is why slavery wasn't stopped when the rest of the civilised world stopped it and it is why your economy can't recover today. You do not have the primary objective of lifting all your people out of poverty, only those who can lift themselves, because in reality you think poverty is something that happens to someoneelse
I think this is a reasonable argument for for how representative democracy has been replaced by ruling elites. However, I would have thought that in order for a society to suffer from, "Democracy's Death-by-Welfare, such a society would need to be democratic in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You are right about the economy that taxes in order to bribe falls apart. In exactly the same way an economy that taxes the people in order to provide for corporate welfare will also fall apart. Don't blame any of this on democracy.
The founders were wary of democracy and tried to add safeguards into the Constitution to prevent the very situation we find ourselves in today. The social democratic model is unsustainable .You know it and I know it . Eventually you run out of other people's money .Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
By "social democratic model", I assume you mean the corporate and public welfare model. The model that also includes unproductive people and unproductive elites of society.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Is this the model you are referring to?
Fabianism
So I can take that as a yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Of course Tom thinks fabianism is socialism, he may be right and if you scratch Obama you might find a fabianist he has been to the right schools, We had one lead the country once, what a disaster that turned out to be, the whole country went though reconstruction and industry fled offshore. This could be why US industries haven't come back they smell a fabianista in the White House
It's not unusual in certain circles to pass off corporatism as Fabianism.
By corporatism you mean state ownership of the means of production, well Obama has found an excuse for some of thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
More accurately I mean neo-corporatism. I call it political corporatism. In economic terms it basically means an arrangement with corporations, labour and the state to create an economy. Although it can mean more than just economicsQuote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
In short the creation of ruling elites. It is this system of ruling elites that creates the real problems for democracy, not necessarily the types of problems highlighted in the article Tom posted previously.
You mean a bailout? Those companies can always buy back their government held stocks. But it's a sham to say the US is a Democracy, or a Republic.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
It's a old European style government where the few control the many for profit. The names have been changed to protect the wealthy.
Yes Bob Hawke did that sort of thing here with his consensus. Fabians originally were for a sort of creaping reform although they did do some radical things like universal health care where as socialists tend to more radical reforms. The US certainly seems to have problems with ruling elites and the corporations that are behind the lobbys. Think about having to deal with 30,000 lobbyists. Britain the home of Fabianism seemed to have a different problem with ruling elites, this is why the fabians tried to reform the house of LordsQuote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
And what blabbering idiot would TRUST the IRS to run Obamacare after the recent illegal activities they have been caught in... passing on private a dn confidential personal and tax information to Liberal activists in ProPublica BY IRS employees at the order of their managers.
Its even worse... Pro Publica... a leftist ProObama organizations was improperly and illegally given private and confidential details from 31 Conservative groups Tax return documents by Obama operatives working inside the IRS.
And they admit it themselves BEFORE it came out during an investigation.
Obama and the heads of the IRS need to go to jail... as well as any other person involved or that had knowledge of these crimes at the IRS.
IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs From Conservative Groups - ProPublica
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...to-propublica/
The tea party groups have taken credit for electing many people to the congress on the state level and that has thrown the fear of god into republicans during there primaries. So how does a political organization even qualify for a special tax status as a social welfare organization?
How do we know Karl Rove isn't behind all these groups popping up in record numbers to hide and funnel money to right wing candidates trying to destroy the government? I don't remember any repubs raising hell when they pulled the same thing in 2000 and 2004.
GOP hysteria over IRS
Quote:
Despite the extra scrutiny that delayed the groups receiving their tax exempt status, there is no evidence that any right wing or Tea Party groups were denied approval. The only group that did not get tax exempt was a Democratic group. That seems to weaken the case that the scrutiny was designed to help Barack Obama.
Selective memory, selective outrage, selective facts. Distractions to NOT do the people work.Quote:
During the 2004 campaign, the IRS audited the NAACP after its president, Julian Bond, spoke against the Iraq War and George Bush at the organization's convention. Democrats questioned the audit but Republicans found no concern let alone outrage.
In addition, the IRS tried to revoke the tax exempt status of a California church when a visiting speaker spoke out against the Iraq War. Democrats in Congress raised the issue but no Republicans found any outrage.
Well for one thing Rove and the Bushies hate the Tea Party .Rove is very much of the Republic insider club.Quote:
How do we know Karl Rove isn't behind all these groups popping up in record numbers to hide and funnel money to right wing candidates trying to destroy the government?
Eric Holder is launching a criminal investigation .Why don't you stop being an apologist and admit that this is an over the top terrible thing for any agency to be doing ,let alone the most powerful bureaucracy in government .Quote:
Despite the extra scrutiny that delayed the groups receiving their tax exempt status, there is no evidence that any right wing or Tea Party groups were denied approval. The only group that did not get tax exempt was a Democratic group. That seems to weaken the case that the scrutiny was designed to help Barack Obama.
Your two isolated examples (and I'll look into them later ) are nothing compared to what appears to be a systemic attempt to intimidate and deny political organizations from their legitimate role in a democracy . Who does the Emperor think he is ? Hugo Chavez ?
I say if heads DON'T roll including Obamas... when we get a president we do the same thing to EVERY Liberal group out there... after all they are arguing its nothing bad... so they will be fine when we do it to them, lets see how they like it happening then, and tossing their same argument back at them when they scream bloody Murder..
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:33 AM. |