The Liberal War on the Middle Class

[francoHFW]

To review- Quite an imagination- As if Pubs are going to do ANYTHING but continue to pander tothe rich, and ruin the rest AND the country...see sig pp1...Pub dupes!

Romney's ACTUAL plan- Cut taxes on rich, destroy Medicare/aid, Health Reform, raise pentagon spending, cut regs on Wall St, worry about debt in 2035...BRILLIANT

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So if you have said "make increasing the currency circulation illegal", you would have been closer to accurate.

wow!!!! you've gone from saying that the idea of making inflation illegal was idiotic and impossible to saying its close to accurate!!!
You may call me, Sir!!!

LOL! Well if it makes you feel good and is that important to you, then by all means!

Hello Sir.

Now about those numbers?

why not start over? Why not give us us your second best example of an error in conservative thinking??

 

[IndependntLogic]

wow!!!! you've gone from saying that the idea of making inflation illegal was idiotic and impossible to saying its close to accurate!!!
You may call me, Sir!!!

LOL! Well if it makes you feel good and is that important to you, then by all means!

Hello Sir.

Now about those numbers?

why not start over? Why not give us us your second best example of an error in conservative thinking??

Nice dodge. So in other words, you just made the numbers up. It's okay. I mean you know, it was pretty obvious.
Oh and who specifically are the Republicans who have proposed legislation restricting the right of government to increased the amount of currency in circulation?
We know, that's pretty obvious too.
No one.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nice dodge.

Dear you were the one who said it was perfectly 100% impossible to make inflation illegal and that the very idea of preventing corpoartions from raising prices was socialist and so I was a socialist. You retracted that 100% right?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Nice dodge.

Dear you were the one who said it was perfectly 100% impossible to make inflation illegal and that the very idea of preventing corpoartions from raising prices was socialist and so I was a socialist. You retracted that 100% right?

No, I did not retract that 100% but another nice dodge.
See, someday you you man up like me, you'll be able to answer a question directly. Hell, you might even develop enough character to admit someone with a differing view, has a valid point. For instance, I was able to acknowledge that monetary inflation can definitely be caused by increased currency but you have not had the character to admit that other things can cause it too.
Or to admit that you just made the job numbers up.
Or to admit that not one republican has prosposed what you wrote.

Maybe someday you will have that kind of character.

As it is, you have an obvious weakness that makes you less interesting to exchange ideas with.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No, I did not retract that 100%

So you still think the idea of making inflation illegal is 100% impossible and your very best example of Republican stupidity???


So you still think I am a socialist for advocating it???

So you still think if a corporation can raise prices it is inflationary????

 

[IndependntLogic]

No, I did not retract that 100%

So you still think the idea of making inflation illegal is 100% impossible and your very best example of Republican stupidity???


So you still think I am a socialist for advocating it???

So you still think if a corporation can raise prices it is inflationary????

Nice dodges. Like I said. You have no character so it makes you less interesting to interact with.
You ask me a question.
I amswer you directly and even acknowledge those parts in which you are correct.
I ask you a question.
You dodge.
You ask more questions that really have the flavor of say, a 6th grader.
But you never do what you demand of others.
Seriously, you're like a little child.

Someday, when you have the character to answer questions directly and admit that you are not right about everything all the time, you will be worth further responses.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No, I did not retract that 100%

So you still think the idea of making inflation illegal is 100% impossible and your very best example of Republican stupidity???


So you still think I am a socialist for advocating it???

So you still think if a corporation can raise prices it is inflationary????

Nice dodges. .

actually dear it is you who has dodged the below 4 questions 3 times in a row!!!!! Show us your independent liberal logic!!

So you still think the idea of making inflation illegal is 100% impossible and your very best example of Republican stupidity???


So you still think I am a socialist for advocating it???

So you still think if a corporation can raise prices it is inflationary????

 

[Too Tall]

Modern day liberalism has transformed into a semi-socialist ideology. Libs now call themselves "progressives".
There is nothing liberal( rooted in the concept of Liberty) about the progressive movement which to it's core seeks to create dependency on government. Progressives view the capitalist market based economic system as unfair and criminal. Progressives believe all wealth should be owned by government to be redistributed as it sees fit.
Progressives do not believe in equality. They insist on equality of outcome. That all people are the to be rewarded equally without regard to intelligence or ability. With progressives there is no room for achievement and success. These are to be ripped away from the human spirit because in their view achievement is offensive to the progressive notion that there can be no failure. There can be no one person who builds and creates on their own. There can be no failure and no success.
Progressives support the concept of collectivism and abhor individualism.

Funny thing is that every dictator that rules over an oppressed population is a capitalist. Of course, they see themselves as superior beings and don't believe that the lesser people have the same desires and intelligence they possess. That is why the leaders are always living well while the rest of the people suffer equally.

There will always be those power hungry people who feel they are best suited to tell the rest of the world how to live their lives. They are intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them, but that is typical of narcissists.

They foolishly believe that 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' is a good creed to live by. They have no grasp of human nature and the need we all have to be free. They don't understand why people stop trying to succeed once the rewards are taken away. People will not strive to give to those who are idle and remain their equals. Many are idle by choice and, by choice, have no ability for the government to use for the benefit of others.

The only way the liberal utopia could exist is if people had no free will and if everyone actually would give and take equally. That will never happen. Everyone would also have to be willing to cede all power to an elite group of self-proclaimed rulers of the universe. Of course, the leaders will never live with the restrictions they impose on others.

Every communist or socialist country slowly transferred power from the people to the government by claiming it was for the greater good. Those who resist are accused of being greedy and non-caring. Self reliance and personal responsibility are frowned upon because the government dependents do not possess these traits.

Those who are already dependent on government become cheerleaders as the government seeks to take more from the producers with the promise of delivering more to the takers. They foolishly believe that an endless flow of cash will sustain the programs forever and many have no clue as to how wealth is created.

Obama and the Dems are currently leaning toward socialism. No question about it the way they seek to redistribute wealth and the increasing government intrusion into the private sector.

People are created equal and we have equal opportunities. Not including the disabled, we all have the same chance to make something of our lives regardless of the circumstances we start with. Poor have become wealthy. Middle class can become wealthy or poor, depending on choices. Our own individual choices determine everything. You will only be equal with others who try as hard, or as little, as you. But each of us has to build our own lives, or not, and the government cannot micromanage our lives to ensure that we have equal outcomes. If they try to do that by manipulation, we all lose.

When are you clowns going to get off the "Socialist Bandwagon". While I am sure you can find a few true socialists in the US, your suggestion that liberals and progressives are socialists who want to do away with capitalism is a joke. Wanting better opportunities to improve oneself and making certain that workers have reasonable safety standards in the workplace along with reasonable benefits is not being socialist. And unions are not socialistic. They are there to fight for workers rights so that workers don't get screwed. If some unions have gone too far in their demands, it is only the employers who bowed to them and gave away too much. This is why unions and employers have contract negotiations. If the employers are too dumb and give away the house, that is not the fault of the unions.

Supporting reasonable minimum wage laws, reasonable health standards, reasonable environmental standards and the like, those are not socialist in nature. Supporting regulations that hopefully prevent those in control of banks and the markets from gambling away everything is not socialistic either. And healthcare reform, that is just common sense. Anyone who looks at our system objectively can only come to one conclusion. Americans are getting fucked, and we need to change something drastically, because it is killing us on so many levels economically.

But hey, keep believing that every single registered Democrat is a "Socialist" who wants the government to own and control all businesses and markets and wants to destroy all entrepreneurship, and of course last of all, pay everyone the same exact salary whether they flip hamburgers or are CEO's of major corporations.

I will respond to the highlighted excerpt. An employer that 'gives away the house' will probably go bankrupt. Since many of our governments, Federal, State, County and City have already 'given away the house,' the solution to the problem is the same. Is that what you prefer?

The cliche' most people use is 'give away the store.'

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

When are you clowns going to get off the "Socialist Bandwagon". While I am sure you can find a few true socialists in the US, your suggestion that liberals and progressives are socialists who want to do away with capitalism is a joke. whether they flip hamburgers or are CEO's of major corporations.

a joke????? why do you think the liberals spied for Stalin?? Why do you think the liberals always want more and more government, taxes and welfare no matter how huge the government is? Didn't you notice that BO had 2 communist parent and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders and is trying to socialize the entire health care industry!!!
OMG!! See why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very slow.
!

Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.


This was precisely the tactic of “infiltration” advocated by Lenin and Stalin.[3] As Communist International General Secretary Georgi Dimitroff told the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern in 1935:
"Comrades, you remember the ancient tale of the capture of Troy. Troy was inaccessible to the armies attacking her, thanks to her impregnable walls. And the attacking army, after suffering many sacrifices, was unable to achieve victory until, with the aid of the famous Trojan horse, it managed to penetrate to the very heart of the enemy’s camp."[4]

C. S. Lewis on Diabolical Democracy, Socialism, and Public Education « Conservative Colloquium


Buckley endorsed Chambers’ analysis of modern liberalism as a watered-down version of Communist ideology. The New Deal, Chambers insists, is not liberal democratic but “revolutionary” in its nature and intentions, seeking “a basic change in the social and, above all, the power relationships within the nation.”

 

[thereisnospoon]

Modern day liberalism has transformed into a semi-socialist ideology. Libs now call themselves "progressives".
There is nothing liberal( rooted in the concept of Liberty) about the progressive movement which to it's core seeks to create dependency on government. Progressives view the capitalist market based economic system as unfair and criminal. Progressives believe all wealth should be owned by government to be redistributed as it sees fit.
Progressives do not believe in equality. They insist on equality of outcome. That all people are the to be rewarded equally without regard to intelligence or ability. With progressives there is no room for achievement and success. These are to be ripped away from the human spirit because in their view achievement is offensive to the progressive notion that there can be no failure. There can be no one person who builds and creates on their own. There can be no failure and no success.
Progressives support the concept of collectivism and abhor individualism.

Funny thing is that every dictator that rules over an oppressed population is a capitalist. Of course, they see themselves as superior beings and don't believe that the lesser people have the same desires and intelligence they possess. That is why the leaders are always living well while the rest of the people suffer equally.

There will always be those power hungry people who feel they are best suited to tell the rest of the world how to live their lives. They are intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them, but that is typical of narcissists.

They foolishly believe that 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' is a good creed to live by. They have no grasp of human nature and the need we all have to be free. They don't understand why people stop trying to succeed once the rewards are taken away. People will not strive to give to those who are idle and remain their equals. Many are idle by choice and, by choice, have no ability for the government to use for the benefit of others.

The only way the liberal utopia could exist is if people had no free will and if everyone actually would give and take equally. That will never happen. Everyone would also have to be willing to cede all power to an elite group of self-proclaimed rulers of the universe. Of course, the leaders will never live with the restrictions they impose on others.

Every communist or socialist country slowly transferred power from the people to the government by claiming it was for the greater good. Those who resist are accused of being greedy and non-caring. Self reliance and personal responsibility are frowned upon because the government dependents do not possess these traits.

Those who are already dependent on government become cheerleaders as the government seeks to take more from the producers with the promise of delivering more to the takers. They foolishly believe that an endless flow of cash will sustain the programs forever and many have no clue as to how wealth is created.

Obama and the Dems are currently leaning toward socialism. No question about it the way they seek to redistribute wealth and the increasing government intrusion into the private sector.

People are created equal and we have equal opportunities. Not including the disabled, we all have the same chance to make something of our lives regardless of the circumstances we start with. Poor have become wealthy. Middle class can become wealthy or poor, depending on choices. Our own individual choices determine everything. You will only be equal with others who try as hard, or as little, as you. But each of us has to build our own lives, or not, and the government cannot micromanage our lives to ensure that we have equal outcomes. If they try to do that by manipulation, we all lose.

When are you clowns going to get off the "Socialist Bandwagon". While I am sure you can find a few true socialists in the US, your suggestion that liberals and progressives are socialists who want to do away with capitalism is a joke. Wanting better opportunities to improve oneself and making certain that workers have reasonable safety standards in the workplace along with reasonable benefits is not being socialist. And unions are not socialistic. They are there to fight for workers rights so that workers don't get screwed. If some unions have gone too far in their demands, it is only the employers who bowed to them and gave away too much. This is why unions and employers have contract negotiations. If the employers are too dumb and give away the house, that is not the fault of the unions.

Supporting reasonable minimum wage laws, reasonable health standards, reasonable environmental standards and the like, those are not socialist in nature. Supporting regulations that hopefully prevent those in control of banks and the markets from gambling away everything is not socialistic either. And healthcare reform, that is just common sense. Anyone who looks at our system objectively can only come to one conclusion. Americans are getting fucked, and we need to change something drastically, because it is killing us on so many levels economically.

But hey, keep believing that every single registered Democrat is a "Socialist" who wants the government to own and control all businesses and markets and wants to destroy all entrepreneurship, and of course last of all, pay everyone the same exact salary whether they flip hamburgers or are CEO's of major corporations.

Unions are a perfect example of socialism. Labor organizations are collectives. In each instance ALL workers are the same. They are paid equally. They are one group covered by one contract with the employer. A union member may not go outside the group for any consideration. Not for pay. Not for redress. An individual union member is prohibited from negotiating wages on his or her own.
"Wanting better opportunities to improve oneself and making certain that workers have reasonable safety standards in the workplace along with reasonable benefits is not being socialist.".. That is a contradiction. First you state "one's self". That is an acknowledgement of the individual. This is contrary to the union business model..Then you state "workers" ...That is a plural which indicates the acknowledgement of a group with a common goal where there is no individuality and all members of the group must adhere to the group. That is in and of itself "social"...
Actually unions are businesses. And as such they operate in their own self interest.
Unions will do what they must to remain relevant. Most of their time is spent cultivating relationships with politicians that look favorably upon organized labor.
Case and point. There was a special on HBO about a bread plant in The Bronx, NY. The workers went on strike because the plant's owners refused to sign a new deal unless the union made concessions. The union told the workers this was a bad deal for them and the owners would cave and meet their demands. The union took the plant's owners to court when the owner's locked out the workers. The court granted a stay against the lockout. The union members were shown celebrating. The next day, the owners shut the plant down and sold it. The new owners opened the plant and hired non union workers, which was their right. The former workers got shit on but their union bosses who told the workers to stay the course, went on their merry way. Still collecting money, still giving politicians money. Not one of the union bosses lost a dime.
The point is, while the union leadership will appear to go to bat for the workers, there is no winning or losing for the leadership. They still keep their jobs win or lose.
You have an opinion. You support big government programs. Most liberals do that.
At the end of the day your opinion does not meet up with the facts. That is when government is a the main provider for the population, that is socialism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Every communist or socialist country slowly transferred power from the people to the government by claiming it was for the greater good.

yes this is what makes liberal communism so deadly, they are positive they are right and doing it for the greater good of the stupid masses who must be ruled and recreate anew for their own good.