Capitalistic greed is the main problem in the U.S.

[Wry Catcher]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

A capitalist republic, democratically elected. But with money in play, and members of Congress spending hours each day soliciting money, and two supreme court decisions (CU and McCutheon) what makes you think our government is of the people, for the people and by the people, not the power elite?

 

[Conservative65]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

If what the socialism supporters said about capitalism as an economic system being the cause of greed were true, that would mean greed wouldn't exist in a socialist system.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Another cop out answer... I've said multiple times that the government owns a big part of the problem. But you keep painting me with that ignorant partisan brush... I'm about done with you

Since gov is supposed to control capitalism so the free market greed style of capitalism doesnt take over the world...the gov is 100% of the problem. Capitalism is just doing what unchecked unregulated free market capitalism does...ruins economies, lives and countries.

You can't pass 100% of the responsibility to the government. We all have individual responsibilities and as citizens and business owners to follow the law and promote a healthy society. The better we do the less the government will need to intervene.

Unless the government has the delegated authority to do so, they should not intervene at all regardless of how much you think they should.

So when floods, fires, hurricanes, earthquakes overwhelm a state, it is your callous opinion that the Federal Govenment should not help?

In 1906 an Earthquake and fire struck the SF Bay Area, leaving tens of thousands homeless. In three days the US Army delivered every tent they had to the Bay Area to house the displaced. In your ideological opinion, as a callous conservative, you feel this act of kindness was illegal, immoral and unnecessary. Is that about right?

It's no wonder pragmatic, educated and caring Americans disagree with you, and the first time you experience such a targic event, you will demand the government do something. There are no conservatives stuck in a collapsed building.

Why shouldn't the State do it based on the 10th Amendment? Why do you oppose going by the Constitution?

What's callous about going by what the Constitution says?

I will demand the government do something? Do you say that as a prediction or fact? I bet you think if I lost my job I'd use social welfare, too?

Your bore me.

 

[Conservative65]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

A capitalist republic, democratically elected. But with money in play, and members of Congress spending hours each day soliciting money, and two supreme court decisions (CU and McCutheon) what makes you think our government is of the people, for the people and by the people, not the power elite?

What makes you think a social democracy would correct what you say isn't happening? Are you saying elitism would go away if a democratically elected, capitalistic republic no longer existed?

 

[Conservative65]

Since gov is supposed to control capitalism so the free market greed style of capitalism doesnt take over the world...the gov is 100% of the problem. Capitalism is just doing what unchecked unregulated free market capitalism does...ruins economies, lives and countries.

You can't pass 100% of the responsibility to the government. We all have individual responsibilities and as citizens and business owners to follow the law and promote a healthy society. The better we do the less the government will need to intervene.

Unless the government has the delegated authority to do so, they should not intervene at all regardless of how much you think they should.

So when floods, fires, hurricanes, earthquakes overwhelm a state, it is your callous opinion that the Federal Govenment should not help?

In 1906 an Earthquake and fire struck the SF Bay Area, leaving tens of thousands homeless. In three days the US Army delivered every tent they had to the Bay Area to house the displaced. In your ideological opinion, as a callous conservative, you feel this act of kindness was illegal, immoral and unnecessary. Is that about right?

It's no wonder pragmatic, educated and caring Americans disagree with you, and the first time you experience such a targic event, you will demand the government do something. There are no conservatives stuck in a collapsed building.

Why shouldn't the State do it based on the 10th Amendment? Why do you oppose going by the Constitution?

What's callous about going by what the Constitution says?

I will demand the government do something? Do you say that as a prediction or fact? I bet you think if I lost my job I'd use social welfare, too?

Your bore me.

Translation: I can't refute anything Conservative65 said related to the Constitution.

What bores you. Is it that I stated what the Constitution SAID and you don't like it? It is that I don't support what you support and you either can't understand why or simply don't like it? Is it that I called you out on a claim you made for which you have absolutely no proof?

 

[Divine Wind]

11 million Native Americans were slaughtered in the name of Jesus.

Are you claiming Jesus is responsible for the genocide of Native Americans?

 

[Divine Wind]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

If what the socialism supporters said about capitalism as an economic system being the cause of greed were true, that would mean greed wouldn't exist in a socialist system.

Exactly. Which is why those socialist supporters are either lying or stupid.

 

[Divine Wind]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

A capitalist republic, democratically elected. But with money in play, and members of Congress spending hours each day soliciting money, and two supreme court decisions (CU and McCutheon) what makes you think our government is of the people, for the people and by the people, not the power elite?

Power elite? Like this politician?:

We need election reform to fix the problems of "professional politicians" in Congress constantly running for reelection.

 

[Onyx]

So how does this happen in our system? What are the steps?

Also, who leads the volunteers, surely you agree that there needs to be some for of leadership, individuals who are responsible for making decisions when there is debate, organizing actions, managing budgets, etc etc etc. with a volunteer force, who leads? How do these people make a living, are they paid?

Officers in the reaction can be decided several ways. Through soldier assemblies and appointment. The former I would be skeptical about, but it worked for the RIAU and CNT.

Leadership is important. Rulership is not. A leader derives all his power from voluntary support and his own influence.

A voluntary mutual governance can be organized in many different ways, and the only rule of which is keeping force separate from governance. This narrows down the role of the voluntary mutual governance into being purely directional.

Essential management positions can be decided through appointment. Remember, the only rule here is that force is kept separate from governance.

It could be important for a local militia to have a clear leader. That person should be decided through assembly of the local militiamen.

Soldiers have fought for no money many times in the past. Thankfully, you can easily supply, maintain, and pay a defensive armed force purely through voluntary dues from the population, even if less than a third of the population chose to pay.

 

[Onyx]

[
There are those to whom I dictate actions. They're called employees to which I pay for doing a job. I dictate when they show up to work. I dictate what they do when they're here despite giving a lot of discretion. I dictate when they leave. I dictate, to some degree, what they wear. And, so on. That's not a double standard because I don't dictate that they have to work for me. I give them the entire choice in the matter. However, if they choose to do so, dictating all those things is because I pay them with MY money.

Not my point.

If you believe in politics or are supporting a politician, then you dictate others actions all the same as Slade.

 

[320 Years of History]

Capitalistic greed is a problem, but it's not "the" main problem in the U.S. In fact, there is no "the" main problem in the U.S.; there are, in all likelihood, several that are of equal importance. One of them is that the nation has too many nitwits who, for as much as think capitalist democracy is the best economic-political combination, those very same people's exhibited inability to compete successfully in that model evinces their greater suitability for just about any system that is far more socialistic, even command.

Capitalist democracies are best suited to leaders -- people who take responsibility for their successes and failures rather than looking elsewhere to place blame; people who make their own opportunities instead of waiting for them to fall into their laps; people who "read the writing on the wall" and heed it. Of course however, capitalist democracies need a polity comprised of some share of followers. Therein, if there be any single U.S. problem, is it found: there are too damned many follower types and not enough leader types.

 

[Conservative65]

[
There are those to whom I dictate actions. They're called employees to which I pay for doing a job. I dictate when they show up to work. I dictate what they do when they're here despite giving a lot of discretion. I dictate when they leave. I dictate, to some degree, what they wear. And, so on. That's not a double standard because I don't dictate that they have to work for me. I give them the entire choice in the matter. However, if they choose to do so, dictating all those things is because I pay them with MY money.

Not my point.

If you believe in politics or are supporting a politician, then you dictate others actions all the same as Slade.

According to you but you're using you as a source. Faulty and invalid.

 

[Onyx]

[
There are those to whom I dictate actions. They're called employees to which I pay for doing a job. I dictate when they show up to work. I dictate what they do when they're here despite giving a lot of discretion. I dictate when they leave. I dictate, to some degree, what they wear. And, so on. That's not a double standard because I don't dictate that they have to work for me. I give them the entire choice in the matter. However, if they choose to do so, dictating all those things is because I pay them with MY money.

Not my point.

If you believe in politics or are supporting a politician, then you dictate others actions all the same as Slade.

According to you but you're using you as a source. Faulty and invalid.

No, man. I am using the English language as my source.

Do you believe in politics? If so, then you believe in dictating people the same as Slade.

 

[Conservative65]

[
There are those to whom I dictate actions. They're called employees to which I pay for doing a job. I dictate when they show up to work. I dictate what they do when they're here despite giving a lot of discretion. I dictate when they leave. I dictate, to some degree, what they wear. And, so on. That's not a double standard because I don't dictate that they have to work for me. I give them the entire choice in the matter. However, if they choose to do so, dictating all those things is because I pay them with MY money.

Not my point.

If you believe in politics or are supporting a politician, then you dictate others actions all the same as Slade.

According to you but you're using you as a source. Faulty and invalid.

No, man. I am using the English language as my source.

Do you believe in politics? If so, then you believe in dictating people the same as Slade.

You're using a WORD in the English language and dictating that the rest of us apply it the way you think is should be.

I believe the government has a limited role in society and it's responsibility is to protect those rights not tell you how to use them. You must be one of those anarchists?

 

[Divine Wind]

.....Essential management positions can be decided through appointment. Remember, the only rule here is that force is kept separate from governance.

It could be important for a local militia to have a clear leader. That person should be decided through assembly of the local militiamen.

Soldiers have fought for no money many times in the past. Thankfully, you can easily supply, maintain, and pay a defensive armed force purely through voluntary dues from the population, even if less than a third of the population chose to pay.

1) The big turd in the punch bowl: "Essential management positions can be decided through appointment". Who decides what is "essential" and who makes the appointments? The Politburo? The Central Committee? Big Brother?

2) Yes, "local militia". A destroyer or aircraft carrier at sea isn't "local militia". Nor is a battalion of border guards or beach patrol. Do you think that if we dissolved our military and simply had local militia, all the other nations of the world would do the same? Do you believe in rainbows and unicorns? Fairydust?

3) Only to defend their homes. I doubt you'll have many sailors volunteer to man a ship at sea for 6 months every 18 months just for room and board...or should they provide that too?

 

[Wry Catcher]

You have no understanding of the words you use.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 21:12-13 - New International Version - UK

Matthew 21:12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

Why Did Jesus Drive the Money Changers From the Temple?

Q. What can we infer from Jesus?

A. Jesus was the first regulator of Capitalism.

Sane, non-partisans fully understand there is a wide difference between regulated capitalism and the socialist state the far Left is seeking to install.

Psychologically and sociologically, socialism doesn't work in a world of limited resources. Greed exists as part of the human condition, not as part of an economic system. This is why every socialist system above the level of a tribe or village has failed. People can dream about a Star Trek Federation society based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", but that won't work until the human race develops fully renewable "free" energy. Until then, a capitalistic republic is the best form of human society on the national level.

A capitalist republic, democratically elected. But with money in play, and members of Congress spending hours each day soliciting money, and two supreme court decisions (CU and McCutheon) what makes you think our government is of the people, for the people and by the people, not the power elite?

Power elite? Like this politician?:

We need election reform to fix the problems of "professional politicians" in Congress constantly running for reelection.

You have simple solutions to complex issues, no wonder you're not a Democrat.

 

[Onyx]

1) The big turd in the punch bowl: "Essential management positions can be decided through appointment". Who decides what is "essential" and who makes the appointments? The Politburo? The Central Committee? Big Brother?

None of those. Instead through majority voting within the framework of a voluntary society.

And the key note here is that government should never be tied with force. That kind of fascism exists when you give government power derived from force.

2) Yes, "local militia". A destroyer or aircraft carrier at sea isn't "local militia". Nor is a battalion of border guards or beach patrol. Do you think that if we dissolved our military and simply had local militia, all the other nations of the world would do the same? Do you believe in rainbows and unicorns? Fairydust?

Clearly you were not following.

The common defense constitutes the reaction. The public defense constitutes the militia.

There needs to be an organized armed force to protect a free and independent society.

3) Only to defend their homes. I doubt you'll have many sailors volunteer to man a ship at sea for 6 months every 18 months just for room and board...or should they provide that too?

They will and they have. The army is the place for those that cannot fit into any other society than the one they are fighting for. My father never took a single penny for himself during his military service, besides food and a bed to sleep on.

 

[Onyx]

You have simple solutions to complex issues, no wonder you're not a Democrat.

Government should not be complex. The role of the state was expanded past the necessary level. (being that it shouldn't exist at all)

 

[Onyx]

I believe the government has a limited role in society and it's responsibility is to protect those rights not tell you how to use them.

Do you believe in prisons, laws, and a police force that acts as a paramilitary for those two things.

Dictation

 

[Divine Wind]

And the key note here is that government should never be tied with force. That kind of fascism exists when you give government power derived from force....

....There needs to be an organized armed force to protect a free and independent society.....


.....The army is the place for those that cannot fit into any other society than the one they are fighting for. My father never took a single penny for himself during his military service, besides food and a bed to sleep on.

1. Agreed government shouldn't rule by force. Ergo, the citizenry need to posses the force which is why, in the US, we have the Second Amendment.

2) Local militias are fine, but who controls them? The local town? Themselves? What if several militias compete for "turf"? Who intervenes, if anyone? Would you consider the Crips and the Bloods militia? Do you see the problems here?

3) Thanks for shitting all over career military professionals. Interesting that you think senior officers and senior enlisted personnel are social misfits too incompetent to serve in any other capacity. I'm guessing you didn't serve. If so, I'm sure it didn't appeal to you and you left ASAP.