America Before the Entitlement State

[bripat9643]

Wasn't a Democrat in office then?

I suggest you read a bit of history, start here and see my replies. http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/180822-i-welcome-their-hatred-fdr.html

Or go straight to it: Timeline of the Great Depression and Summary

A simple "yes" would have been sufficient

 

[The T]

Can we get down to brass tacks? NO ONE deserves a thing in this world but what they work for and the blessings of the liberty, and satisfaction that comes with that liberty?

Why are there so many wishing the Government declare the terms of Liberty when that battle was fought so long ago?

We have already been given the answer. Why does the Gubmint as we know it now wish to reneg, and not defend what we already have posession of?

 

[Steelplate]

Ummm... because you seem to worship Mel Gibson... an anti-semite and a racist? Seems like that flies in the face of Liberty.

Let me ask you something.... how much MORE liberty would we have if we didn't have to worry about health care? How much MORE would your employer be able to increase your wages because he/she no longer had to provide it? How much would that potential increase in pay help your situation?

That's just ONE example. I think you have a flawed or skewed definition of "liberty". And no... paying taxes is not Communism or dictatorship... that's bullshit logic.

 

[Greenbeard]

Yes, and it is also a strongly Marxist concept that should be rejected by all who value and love freedom. We can get the bad money out of politics without taking away anybody of any socioeconomic position's rights to support or promote anybody they please. Without taking away a single freedom or liberty from anybody.

Ah yes, now clean elections are Marxist.

I'll tell you, though, what we ought to do is get rid of this "one man, one vote" thing. It's deeply Marxist. Instead of voting, folks should be allowed to buy shares in a particular office. That way, hardworking folks with more disposal income get a proportionately louder voice in public affairs. For lower-income folks who want a voice in government? Well, they've got bootstraps, they better start pulling!

 

[Dragon]

Ummm... because you seem to worship Mel Gibson... an anti-semite and a racist? Seems like that flies in the face of Liberty.

Let me ask you something.... how much MORE liberty would we have if we didn't have to worry about health care? How much MORE would your employer be able to increase your wages because he/she no longer had to provide it? How much would that potential increase in pay help your situation?

That's just ONE example. I think you have a flawed or skewed definition of "liberty". And no... paying taxes is not Communism or dictatorship... that's bullshit logic.

Exactly. There is no liberty without property.

 

[rightwinger]

Can we get down to brass tacks? NO ONE deserves a thing in this world but what they work for and the blessings of the liberty, and satisfaction that comes with that liberty?

Why are there so many wishing the Government declare the terms of Liberty when that battle was fought so long ago?

We have already been given the answer. Why does the Gubmint as we know it now wish to reneg, and not defend what we already have posession of?

What a rambling bunch of nonsense

I have no idea what you just posted

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, and it is also a strongly Marxist concept that should be rejected by all who value and love freedom. We can get the bad money out of politics without taking away anybody of any socioeconomic position's rights to support or promote anybody they please. Without taking away a single freedom or liberty from anybody.

Ah yes, now clean elections are Marxist.

How does government money make elections "clean?" If anything, it makes them far more corrupt.

I'll tell you, though, what we ought to do is get rid of this "one man, one vote" thing. It's deeply Marxist. Instead of voting, folks should be allowed to buy shares in a particular office. That way, hardworking folks with more disposal income get a proportionately louder voice in public affairs. For lower-income folks who want a voice in government? Well, they've got bootstraps, they better start pulling!

As opposed to what we have now where people who have no skin in the game get to dispose of the income and savings of the people who make this country run.

Yeah, that's a big improvement.

 

[bripat9643]

Exactly. There is no liberty without property.

Right. I think some Jews who survived Auschwitz might care to dispute that idiocy.

 

[Steelplate]

Exactly. There is no liberty without property.

Right. I think some Jews who survived Auschwitz might care to dispute that idiocy.

well... if you have to revisit that travesty of humanity to prove a Conservative point...You've already lost the argument.

 

[Greenbeard]

I'll tell you, though, what we ought to do is get rid of this "one man, one vote" thing. It's deeply Marxist. Instead of voting, folks should be allowed to buy shares in a particular office. That way, hardworking folks with more disposal income get a proportionately louder voice in public affairs. For lower-income folks who want a voice in government? Well, they've got bootstraps, they better start pulling!

As opposed to what we have now where people who have no skin in the game get to dispose of the income and savings of the people who make this country run.

Yeah, that's a big improvement.

Definitely!

And we haven't even gotten the NASCAR-style sponsorships yet. I can't imagine anything more American than the Daniel Webster Senate desk with a Doritos logo on it.

 

[bripat9643]

Ummm... because you seem to worship Mel Gibson... an anti-semite and a racist? Seems like that flies in the face of Liberty.

Let me ask you something.... how much MORE liberty would we have if we didn't have to worry about health care?

That's like asking how much more freedom we would have if we lived in Cloud-Cuckoo land. The answer is "none." You will always have to worry about healthcare, no matter who provides it. You think Canadians and the British aren't worried about healthcare?

How much MORE would your employer be able to increase your wages because he/she no longer had to provide it?

Less than the additional taxes you will have to pay to fund the government boondoggle.

How much would that potential increase in pay help your situation?

You have to be truly gullible to believe that government healthcare will increase your take-home pay

That's just ONE example. I think you have a flawed or skewed definition of "liberty". And no... paying taxes is not Communism or dictatorship... that's bullshit logic.

Your definition of liberty means government makes all your decisions for you. And you think his definition is flawed?

The graduated income tax is most definitely communist. Karl Marx coined it himself.

 

[bripat9643]

Exactly. There is no liberty without property.

Right. I think some Jews who survived Auschwitz might care to dispute that idiocy.

well... if you have to revisit that travesty of humanity to prove a Conservative point...You've already lost the argument.

Who made-up that rule, some liberal getting his ass kicked in a debate?

 

[Greenbeard]

The graduated income tax is most definitely communist. Karl Marx coined it himself.

Was Lincoln a communist? Revenue Act of 1862 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[The T]

Exactly. There is no liberty without property.

Right. I think some Jews who survived Auschwitz might care to dispute that idiocy.

well... if you have to revisit that travesty of humanity to prove a Conservative point...You've already lost the argument.

And since most travesties of Humanity are caused by Tyranical regimes...Leftist regimes throughout history.

 

[bripat9643]

The graduated income tax is most definitely communist. Karl Marx coined it himself.

Was Lincoln a communist? Revenue Act of 1862 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lincoln was a great admirer of Karl Marx.

 

[daveman]

but don't get me wrong... I support workers engaging in collective bargaining and Unionization in general.

But as far as political influence? no... I think ALL money should get the hell out of politics and I fully support Publicly Funded elections. If you like... Have a check box on your 1040 telling where you want that part of your tax dollars to go.

Personally, I'd rather have my tax dollars get split up between all parties and have a level playing field where the the issues take the forefront and party politics goes by the wayside.

I could get behind that, though it runs afoul of the First Amendment.

A political contribution is a form of free speech...even though we may not like or agree where it comes from.

True. That's why I said it runs afoul of the 1st.

 

[The T]

I could get behind that, though it runs afoul of the First Amendment.

A political contribution is a form of free speech...even though we may not like or agree where it comes from.

True. That's why I said it runs afoul of the 1st.

Simpatico.

 

[daveman]

but don't get me wrong... I support workers engaging in collective bargaining and Unionization in general.

But as far as political influence? no... I think ALL money should get the hell out of politics and I fully support Publicly Funded elections. If you like... Have a check box on your 1040 telling where you want that part of your tax dollars to go.

Personally, I'd rather have my tax dollars get split up between all parties and have a level playing field where the the issues take the forefront and party politics goes by the wayside.

I could get behind that, though it runs afoul of the First Amendment.

Yes, and it is also a strongly Marxist concept that should be rejected by all who value and love freedom. We can get the bad money out of politics without taking away anybody of any socioeconomic position's rights to support or promote anybody they please. Without taking away a single freedom or liberty from anybody.

All we have to do is make it illegal for Congress or the President to use the people's money to dispense favors, benevolence, or benefit to ANYBODY without doing the same for EVERYBODY regardless of political affiliation or socioeconomic standing. The leftist reject that immediately because it puts the power back with the people instead of the government and the leftists trust government more than they trust the people to do the right thing.

Give the proles power? No way. They're too dumb to do their own thinking.

Right, USMB lefties?

It could sure catch on with conservatives though if we can just promote the vision and concept. I think basically, even if they aren't aware of it, the conservatives outnumber the leftists by a pretty large margin.

2 to 1, if I recall correctly.

Leftists, of course, reject that, saying people aren't capable of self-identifying correctly. They need liberals to decide what they believe.

Right, USMB lefties?

 

[daveman]

Ummm... because you seem to worship Mel Gibson... an anti-semite and a racist? Seems like that flies in the face of Liberty.

Let me ask you something.... how much MORE liberty would we have if we didn't have to worry about health care? How much MORE would your employer be able to increase your wages because he/she no longer had to provide it? How much would that potential increase in pay help your situation?

That's just ONE example. I think you have a flawed or skewed definition of "liberty". And no... paying taxes is not Communism or dictatorship... that's bullshit logic.

Who's paying for this healthcare?

 

[Steelplate]

Right. I think some Jews who survived Auschwitz might care to dispute that idiocy.

well... if you have to revisit that travesty of humanity to prove a Conservative point...You've already lost the argument.

And since most travesties of Humanity are caused by Tyranical regimes...Leftist regimes throughout history.

Well, thank God we are a DEMOCRACY to prevent such tyrannies from happening here.

My point was that the "T" used Auschwitz as an example to promote the idea of liberty without property. Of course the survivors of the Holocaust were happy to escape with their lives and be liberated. I am sure that the people in Darfur, Burma, and other hot spots around the globe would feel much the same.

Your post is just an attempt at a sucker punch because you don't have anything else in your bag. I swear to God, some of you Conservatives remind me of high school bullies who pick on the weak kids, but when someone stands up to them, they flail and cry like the cowards they are. That's exactly what your strawman of "tyrannical regimes" is...