Am I The Only Person Who Is Considering Leaving The U.S. Because Non-Progressive Policies and Values Have Gone Too Far?

230 posts / 0 new

Comments

Quote classicliblady:

You will never see a prosperous example of a laissez faire ( small government ) because too many humans can't give up the idea that they forever NEED a mommy and daddy. Government can't give them that so they get a pacifier and then are scammed into believing that government is everything. The political hack gets re-elected by it and the herd keeps doing what it has always done. Read the "Millionaire Next Door" for a different take.

ACtually it is because it is inherently social destructive.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

you didn't answer the question. Any internet search will get there.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

When it comes to issues of parenting, I will leave that between classicliblady and jcgood. It is none of my business.

However, a sovereign nation is a group of people who come togther and exchange some of their autonomy for some mutual protection and support. I need to say that to different people "mutual protection and support" can be implemented in different ways, some more effective and some not so effective. If classicliblady made the point that a government can be corrupted and be wasteful, I would concede that it does and can happen. To paraphrase a quote from someone whose name I forget..."The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." Governments work only when the citizens under their protection participate and engage in the political process and society as a a whole. Even though I disagree with what you say, "classicliblady," I admit that you are trying to participate and engage. I thank you for it.

However, I deny the "reality" of the "self made man" concept. People need to be responsible for their actions, but I find nothing wrong with government assistance, on the condition that the assistance has some strings attached to help encourage people to eventually get schooling, community service, or even pay back the assistance money.

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm
Quote classicliblady:

It says EXACTLY as it reads. And pretty darned scary, if I say so myself. Who said democracy leads to socialism? Was it Marx, also? And that is why "they" gave us a republic...if we could keep it. And of course we haven't. It was never really tried and the denizens here can know no different. Our unionized government schools have made sure of that.

Feel free to actually provide the quote and source for "that one Mohammed quote."'

Actaully, Marx's claim is that Capitalism will lead to socialism. It had little or nothing to do with democracy or Republics - which is a false dichotomy by the way. See the thread social spectrum explained for more on that. I am not typing it out again.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote classicliblady:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuCKkOkQcHY&feature=player_embedded 

Progressivism . It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.

Actually this is just bad policy. Easy fix - require him to submit a receipt of rent payment or change the payout from a check to a voucher that the rental office redeems for cash once received.

Sorry, a tennet of Progressivism is not inept administration of programs. That is a separate issue.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote classicliblady:

The SOURCE is the reading of history. Try German history. They had the PERFECT trifecta but they got greedy. Just like all socialists do.

That isn't a source. You have assumed that the racial makeup of those three countries is the ONLY contibuting variable to their changing policy. It's not. Additionally, Sweden in particular hasn't changed policies all that much and they continue to have the fastest growing economy in all of Europe. IE: the system isn't failing, it is doing better than ours. And rather than trying to emulate their success, you are saying we should continue to travel further inthe direction that is serving us so poorly.

There is a history you should be paying attention to - the U.S's. Look at the fiscal policies that were in place right before this recession and also the Great Depression and confront the facts.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

Of course I've been abused on the job. But that doesn't mean I think government should do my battles for me. They only make it worse as evidenced by our current woes. For the life of me, I don't see how you people can't see CAUSE AND EFFECT. Simple grade school teacher quote: for every action there will be a corresponding reaction. The misery index goes up with every single inccident of bureaucratic and political meddling.

Bureaucracy definition, government by many bureaus, administrators, and petty officials

I love this country...it's the government that scares the hell out of me.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote classicliblady:

It wasn't BS when I was a teenager. Jobs were easy to find and quit and refind. Housing was cheap and easy to find. Food and gas were cheap and so forth. Living long enough you come to realize how much government meddling in business has ruined the entire landscape. If you haven't lived it then you can never understand what has been lost due to dumb ideas. Too bad.

I never saw work as coercive. Do African Bushmen see hunting for their food everyday coersive? Or is the energy they expend doing so an expected trade off?

Hilarious. So when you were a kid and the top tax rate was what? And minimum wage was what? And how many unions were there?

Has governmental involvement in the private sector expanded or contracted over the last 30 years? And as you note it was easier to find a job back then. That is because when you regulate capitalism and support labor, you lessen the power of capital to coerce labor. It is really that simple.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

The people in that Youtube vid are real and they are legion. The judge and the bailiff both know this. Back when FDR pushed his WPA, no one would have acted like these two idiots. Now the users are in your face. They actually believe they are entitled to what others have worked for. I find this completely alarming.

When the takers out number the makers, what do you think will be the outcome? It cannot be pretty. Just the law of averages makes it very clear.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote classicliblady:

The people in that Youtube vid are real and they are legion. The judge and the bailiff both know this. Back when FDR pushed his WPA, no one would have acted like these two idiots. Now the users are in your face. They actually believe they are entitled to what others have worked for. I find this completely alarming.

When the takers out number the makers, what do you think will be the outcome? It cannot be pretty. Just the law of averages makes it very clear.

Uh this had nothing to do with what you claim you are responding to. Simply put, if you design programs correctly, fraud lessens. This is a product of poorly designed policy, not the concept of providing housing assistance for students.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

rules, regulations, laws. The bigger the government the more laws. This stiffles invention, industriousness and entreprenourship. Name ONE government bureaucratic agency that has done well.

Schools are a disaster, Post Office is bankrupt, energy dept is a mess. Border Patrol? What Border Patrol? Medicare, loser, Social Security ( which was NOT supposed to be in the General Fund ) is bankrupt. Mr. Madoff should have lots of company in that jail cell if you ask me. But it's all legal if the gubbermint does it.

When our big cities start to burn, thank government for lighting the match. I'll refer you back to that You Tube vid. They say America follows just about 20 years behind England. I think we're about to catch up.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote classicliblady:

It wasn't BS when I was a teenager. Jobs were easy to find and quit and refind. Housing was cheap and easy to find. Food and gas were cheap and so forth. Living long enough you come to realize how much government meddling in business has ruined the entire landscape. If you haven't lived it then you can never understand what has been lost due to dumb ideas. Too bad.

Jobs of all sorts were easier to find when I was a teenager and even into my 20's though it was getting progressively worse.

Why is this so? You're proving our point by this admission that things were better before; and before is a much less right wing corporate world than today.

This is not because of any liberal or progressive ideas or modes of governance because we are far more neoconservative and neoliberal than we were 30 years ago.

Since the ascension of McReagan, the nation has steadily moved to the corporate right for 30+ years while The New Deal has been dismantled piece by piece with the aid of brain dead morons like you. We have not had a true move back to the center since then but just a constant march to the right to the tune of the corporate pied pipers like Reagan, Cheney, Rove, and virtually EVERY Republican. We had a little slowdown under Clinton but he is guilty of embracing policies like SHAFTA- err I mean NAFTA.

I know because I've seen it and lived it.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote classicliblady:

rules, regulations, laws. The bigger the government the more laws. This stiffles invention, industriousness and entreprenourship. Name ONE government bureaucratic agency that has done well.

Schools are a disaster, Post Office is bankrupt, energy dept is a mess. Border Patrol? What Border Patrol? Medicare, loser, Social Security ( which was NOT supposed to be in the General Fund ) is bankrupt. Mr. Madoff should have lots of company in that jail cell if you ask me. But it's all legal if the gubbermint does it.

When our big cities start to burn, thank government for lighting the match. I'll refer you back to that You Tube vid. They say America follows just about 20 years behind England. I think we're about to catch up.

Once again pure bullshit and hyperbole.

Anything empirical bottom lip biter?

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

**Simply put, if you design programs correctly, fraud lessens. This is a product of poorly designed policy, not the concept of providing housing assistance for students.**

Look, I see you mean well...and in another world your ideals sound pretty but government is made up of FLAWED HUMANS. Just like you and me. And government is force. Put those two together and you have a mess. Lord Acton figured it out. Why can't all we utopians?

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote ah2:
Quote classicliblady:

It wasn't BS when I was a teenager. Jobs were easy to find and quit and refind. Housing was cheap and easy to find. Food and gas were cheap and so forth. Living long enough you come to realize how much government meddling in business has ruined the entire landscape. If you haven't lived it then you can never understand what has been lost due to dumb ideas. Too bad.

I never saw work as coercive. Do African Bushmen see hunting for their food everyday coersive? Or is the energy they expend doing so an expected trade off?

Hilarious. So when you were a kid and the top tax rate was what? And minimum wage was what? And how many unions were there?

Has governmental involvement in the private sector expanded or contracted over the last 30 years? And as you note it was easier to find a job back then. That is because when you regulate capitalism and support labor, you lessen the power of capital to coerce labor. It is really that simple.

I don't think a mouthbreather will ever understand despite its simplicity and logic.

This one is one of the craziest I've seen here and that speaks volumes.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another’s wealth but also the desire to see another’s wealth lowered to the level of one’s own. Socialism’s teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said Mussolini, is " a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests…realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

Despite the intellectuals’ psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

Previous attributed to:

Socialism vs. Capitalism:
Which is the Moral System

On Principle, v1n3
October 1993

by: C. Bradley Thompson

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote jcgood1984:

...And your motivation for mocking is.....? you live in loserville?

No the reason is your arrogant attitude. Nice hat!

PeeWee Returns's picture
PeeWee Returns
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Tax rates were between 75 and 91% . GDP was 3.7%. Minimum wage was about 90 cents or a dollar. Go back to THAT level of government.. ALL government and you'll have a winner once again. Of course a whole lot of paper pushers will have to go find a REAL job. Welcome to the REAL world.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29861648/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/how-tax-... Maybe you'll want to check this writers numbers. I can only give what I've experienced. Seems too many here don't much care for experience. Too bad.

How the tax burden has changed since 1960Treasury relies less on excise, corporate taxes, more on high-income people

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm
Quote classicliblady:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29861648/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/how-tax-... Maybe you'll want to check this writers numbers. I can only give what I've experienced. Seems too many here don't much care for experience. Too bad.

How the tax burden has changed since 1960Treasury relies less on excise, corporate taxes, more on high-income people

So you're point here is?

If you want to say that the portion of the tax burden that corporations pay is far less now than in 1960 then it's pretty damn hard to understand why you wouldn't agree with MOST progressives that we need the corporations (who have more cash than ever) to start paying their share again.

It seems we were doing much better as a nation when corporations and not individuals were a bigger part of our tax base.

Also, Teabag diety McReagan is the one who increased the payroll tax burden on the poor and middle class.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

IN RESPONSE TO POST #108

Well, I do believe in letting the government fight my battles for me, that is the job of government. If someone is next door playing music loud enough to keep me from sleeping, I will go to their door and ask them to turn it down. If they don't, I will call the cops and have them "coerce" the homeowner to turn it down. In a business, if the owner is making me do something that they are not allowed to do by LAW, I will not just ask them to stop, because that will get me all kinds of negative attention from the management. I will just call the government hotline and have the authorities "coerce" the business owner into not making the workers do things that hurt them and potentially others. That is the job of government, and I will not give it up just so that you can feel "uncoerced."

If you dislike laws and regulations that protect people from harm due to YOUR economic/social activity, all I can say is "too bad, get used to it." I refuse to give up my protection under the government just so I can be part of a "for profit compact" that will supposedly protect me when it serves the bottom line to do so. If you do not like this, all I can say is "tough."

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

And why then would anyone risk everything they own to start a business? Governments responsibility is to make it safe for the business owner and potential employee to make a contract. That is all. Anything else makes YOU and GOVERNMENT partners with that business owner. If THAT is what you want, then pony up. Or start your own business.

Have you ever been a business owner?

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

The classic conservative line is that laws and regulations hurt businesses. Well, if the business is doing something illegal I want that business to be interfered with. Laws and regulations exist in the world to protect people. I can understand how laws that protect "people from their own selves" are bad because it would be an invasion of privacy. So, when people like classicliblady complain about laws and regulations, I can only half agree. Yes, regulations protecting people from their own self need to get the boot. However, regulations and laws designed to protect other people not only need to be increased, but also made stronger. Classicliblady may disagree with this and that's fine, that is her right. However, I have rights too, and I will not give them up to make life easier for classicliblady.

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

In response to post #124:

No, I have never owned a business, but I do not care. If you are making me do something illegal in the process of work, then I will seek government aid in stopping you from hurting me by having do things that are illegal. There is a difference between work that is dangerous or stressful and work that involves breaking the law. Besides, I would never sign a contract with you that would weaken my ability to get government help if you are making me do things that are illegal just so you can make a profit. And if you did try to make me sign such a contract, I would call the government hotline on you.

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

You're great at the name calling. Clue: how much is the debt? How much is spent on social constructs? I.e, Medicare/Medicaid?? Did you know that you could tax all corps 100% and still fall way short? Or tax all millionaires 100% and never come close? Tax everyone in the world 100% and you STILL won't fix this country. Congratulations. You must have been a math genious.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

I am at a complete loss here. Give me an example of a business owner forcing you to do something illegal. You agree to do a certain job for X $$ and for X hours. What is so difficult about that? Illegal? Like getting someone a cup of coffee and that's not in your job description? I'm thinking the current crop of working stiffs are completely pampered and helpless. How sad.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

I have a question for all: How come you people never demand as much from government as you do from private business? Business doesn't have near the power that government does. Unless they get into bed with government. Which is what you have with socialism. The enemy IS government. Always has been, always will be. you people want to cedee all this power to government. WHY? It is always made up of worse people. Amazing!

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

"Did you know that you could tax all corps 100% and still fall way short? Or tax all millionaires 100% and never come close?" cll

Do you enjoy this...posting false arguments and arguing from same...over and over and over and......?

How long did it take and under which policies did the deficit get created? Reagan/Clintonomics much?

Repeal the Reagan tax cuts and tax corporations as they should and the deficit would be taken care of in less time than it took to create it. Place a fee of 1/10-1/5 a cent on stock transactions, reduce the military budget to something approaching sanity, close the majority of military bases, stop all illegal/immoral wars, hold corporate criminals accountable for their actions..etc. etc....and there would be enough left over for the US to join the more civilized societies in providing some sort of universal health care for all, no cost education/vocational training for everyone, and pay teachers enough for a decent wage.....

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I am talking about laws and regulations that are designed to protect workers when, for example, when a business deliberately tries to make a worker work more than 8 hours in a day with no overtime pay. I am talking about when a business makes a worker do something that is already within the lawbooks that government prohibits, mostly out of safety reasons, for example. I am not against businesses being creative, efficient, or showing courtesy. What I am against is a business ordering a worker that either compromises their safety, or that compromises their fair wages as defined by law. Also, I am against contracts that are made between a business and a worker that attempt to reduce the liability of a business should a worker get hurt on the job, or have concerns for how their wages are calculated (for example).

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

You have a point! Yes, we need to hold government more accountable. "Who gaurds the gaurdians?"

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

And what happens when a worker CHOOSES to work MORE than 8 hours? You don't see the reverse happening here?

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

I'll go along. and shut government back to it's 60s era and size while we're at it. There'll be a whole lot of people who won't know what to do with themselves, I'm afraid. But it would be delicious to see.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

If a worker chooses to work for more than 8 hours, they should be paid overtime, unless you deliberately send them home before they can work those hours.

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

For the life of me...if anybody here who ever writes a check to the federal and state government and watches as it is thrown down a rat hole of waste and fraud and never flinches, I'll put in with ya. You all ought to be mad as hell!

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

and if any business ran itself like the feds and state do...they'd OUT of business and in jail. Why the double standard????

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

You are correct. The government does need to be held as accountable as business. Thank you for the point!

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

You have a great point! I was having a double standard between business and government when it came to safety and wages on the job. The government needs to be held accountable just as much as business! Thank you, classicliblady for bringing it to my attention! I will adjust my thinking and paradigms to make sure that I do not commit this double standard anymore. Thank You!

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 4:57 pm

And thank you Micah....I know I go off on tangents but aren't we all in the same fix? We're being ripped off and left with no future and none of us have the power to stop it. Found this by a poster ( Chuck Milner ) to a blog. Thought it was hilarious.

Let's do the math then:
The US debt (not deficit) is estimated at $14 trillion.
Do we have enough rich people to pay this off?

We only need 14,000 billionaires. But I don't think there are that many in the world.
The total net worth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans is only around $2 trillion.
So we take all their money, that leaves $12 trillion.

Ok, so how about the millionaires?
We need 12 million of them.
We don't have that many.

The problem with taxing the rich is, there aren't enough rich people.
The Russians figured this out shortly after the communist revolution. They killed the czar, took all his money, and all the money of everyone else, and when it all got divided up, it turned out they were all poor.

The real trick is, you have to make the poor richer, not make the rich poorer.

classicliblady's picture
classicliblady
Joined:
Aug. 7, 2011 2:26 pm

your arrogance is astouding...you assume I haven't read the llibertarian talking points...I was mocking Hong Kong...because....it's Hong Kong......lol ....an overcrowded mecca of madness where I would have to work two days ( $300 Euros ) just to buy an average day's food and drinks.....seriously mediocre...

But nice try. thanks for the laugh....I hope you can do better than that

jcgood1984's picture
jcgood1984
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2011 10:17 am

seriously flawed logic......who pays their debt off all at once? Nobody...10, 20, 30 + years to pay debts off..

Thats perfect....all the richest 1% can each pay 1.4 Trillion each year for 10 years......debt paid.

It would be wiser to think for yourself instead of regurgitating non-fact-checked talking points.

With your logic, only rich people could buy a home...with cash ...all at once... brilliant!

jcgood1984's picture
jcgood1984
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2011 10:17 am
Quote classicliblady:

I have a question for all: How come you people never demand as much from government as you do from private business? Business doesn't have near the power that government does. Unless they get into bed with government. Which is what you have with socialism. The enemy IS government. Always has been, always will be. you people want to cedee all this power to government. WHY? It is always made up of worse people. Amazing!

This statement just shows how ignorant you are.

Not only are you condescending and arrogant , you are also ignorant of basic facts.

The merging of business intrests and corporate interests are NOT what socialism is about.

It's known as corporatism; under Mussolini, Hitler, and Tojo, fascism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_capitalism

See #9 on the list.

http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

Also instead of bloviating and blowing smoke out your ass, why don't you ever produce something factual and empirical instead of rhetoric and hyperbole.

Quit mouthbreathing.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote ah2:
Quote classicliblady:

The people in that Youtube vid are real and they are legion. The judge and the bailiff both know this. Back when FDR pushed his WPA, no one would have acted like these two idiots. Now the users are in your face. They actually believe they are entitled to what others have worked for. I find this completely alarming.

When the takers out number the makers, what do you think will be the outcome? It cannot be pretty. Just the law of averages makes it very clear.

Uh this had nothing to do with what you claim you are responding to. Simply put, if you design programs correctly, fraud lessens. This is a product of poorly designed policy, not the concept of providing housing assistance for students.

I'm seriously wondering if this person is schizophrenic or have mental issues because they often make contradictory statements and post in a disjointed manner as well as responding in mysterious ways.

Am I the only one who thinks this?

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

Congratulations! With this post you have come out of the closet as an Anarchist.....Do you throw molotov cocktails...too?

"The enemy IS government." really?

Do you realize that you agree with Timothy Mc Veigh?......scary

I'm done here...you can't have a serious political discussion with someone with authority issues....

jcgood1984's picture
jcgood1984
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2011 10:17 am
Quote jcgood1984:

Congratulations! With this post you have come out of the closet as an Anarchist.....Do you throw molotov cocktails...too?

"The enemy IS government." really?

Do you realize that you agree with Timothy Mc Veigh?......scary

I'm done here...you can't have a serious political discussion with someone with authority issues....

As I stated above I think I'm done because she really seems like she may have serious mental issues.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

you being an anarchist, I don't think you would have liked the tax rate in the 60's....very progressive....up to 91% marginal income tax rate..... and people are freaking out now with 35%.... greed kills

jcgood1984's picture
jcgood1984
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2011 10:17 am
Quote classicliblady:

rules, regulations, laws. The bigger the government the more laws. This stiffles invention, industriousness and entreprenourship. Name ONE government bureaucratic agency that has done well.

Well, let's start with the obvious: CIA, FBI, Pentagon, and all other branches of the armed services. Social Security did really well until they thinned the line between it and the general budget. Medicare did really well until they changed it to allow drug companies to define their own rates and made the doughnut hole with Part D. I'll throw in the interstate highway system. The cap and trade program. The GI Bill. NASA. hmmm... It is just so hard to remember them all.

Schools are a disaster, Post Office is bankrupt, energy dept is a mess. Border Patrol? What Border Patrol? Medicare, loser, Social Security ( which was NOT supposed to be in the General Fund ) is bankrupt. Mr. Madoff should have lots of company in that jail cell if you ask me. But it's all legal if the gubbermint does it.

Schools aparently did okay with you... Post Office is bankrupt because of a technological transition and there being a fundamental tension between maintaining the system that has been a valuable and SUCCESSFUL public good for several generations and the continued transition to electronic forms of communication. The solution is probably really simple (cut the amount of days they are open) but there are some ethical questions about that tactic which are legitimate. Medicare would be fine if they would just get the damn private corporations out of it. Social Security isn't in the general fund but it is borrowed against and you and I agree that is also a problem. There is a really easy fix to that too - don't allow them to borrow against the fund.

When our big cities start to burn, thank government for lighting the match. I'll refer you back to that You Tube vid. They say America follows just about 20 years behind England. I think we're about to catch up.

Yes, when the cities start to burn... lol

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote classicliblady:

**Simply put, if you design programs correctly, fraud lessens. This is a product of poorly designed policy, not the concept of providing housing assistance for students.**

Look, I see you mean well...and in another world your ideals sound pretty but government is made up of FLAWED HUMANS. Just like you and me. And government is force. Put those two together and you have a mess. Lord Acton figured it out. Why can't all we utopians?

Aparently you are under the impression that if you take these same people and put them in the free market, they all of a sudden become flawless. Aparently there are more utopians here than we thought...

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote classicliblady:

The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another’s wealth but also the desire to see another’s wealth lowered to the level of one’s own. Socialism’s teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said Mussolini, is " a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests…realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

Despite the intellectuals’ psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

ah yes, the classic libertarian tactic. Say "socialism" but then talk about Fascists. Brilliant.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

I'd say that we are 30 years behind the regressive reactionary policies of the Reagan/Bush crime regimes.......

jcgood1984's picture
jcgood1984
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2011 10:17 am

Currently Chatting

Largest Climate March Ever!

On Sunday, the world's largest climate march took over New York City. In addition to the 400,000 people who showed up to demand change in the Big Apple, hundreds of thousands more joined events in at least 156 counties. From London to Rio to Melbourne to New York, people around the world joined together to demand action on climate change.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system