"Let The Class War Begin . . ."

You equate the economic theory of capitalism with the political theory of democracy as if the two are mutually and inexorably tied together. I can assure you that they are not. No, they are not natural allies since unrestrained capitalism can enslave a population just as surely as a dictatorship can because unrestrained power will not permit dissent when it sees that dissent as a threat to its continued preeminence.

except democracy does not exist with any other economic platform :D

capitalism is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for democracy to exist

A few observations.

There is no economic system codified within the US Constitution.

Unregulated capitalism does not exist within the US. People may long for it in some philosophical way, but they would not be happy campers if they found themselves in a situation similar to the Midwest and the West back in the 1800s when everyone was at the mercy of the powerful railroads with a gov't that was either unwilling or unable to intervene on the behalf of citizens, small towns, counties, and individual states.

China as a capitalist economic system, but they're a one party communist political system.

a few remarks. Constitution does not have to codify economic platform - the political superstructure is already there and capitalism as economic platform has to be the ONE by a default.

second. Nobody is talking about wild unregulated capitalism - but the government as a bureaucratic machine tends to expand exponentially and serve only itself - therefore needs constant cutting and curbing - and that is what is needed ASAP now.

third. China is NOT a capitalist system it is still socialist economic platform with permission of severely restricted private enterprise in selected areas and under strict one party government control. I would say it resembles most the fascist states, but in a more advanced stage ( neither Italy nor Germany ever had the chance to go that far - 7 years is not enough at all, and war time does not count.)
 
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.

So you were cool with feudalism, then?

You keep working hard on this idiotology of income equality, and you will eventually find yourself in economic slavery. Capitalism is the only economic system that allows for free people to follow their own dreams. The further an economy drifts away from capitalism, the less free are the common people within that system.

The right to make economic decisions, without the permission of government, is the basis of individual freedom. Today the government is telling individuals that they must purchase health insurance, and also what health insurance is acceptable for purchase. Tomorrow they will be telling you what food you must buy, what automobiles you must buy, and what is acceptable as housing.

But, you keep right on envying the rich, and doing your best to destroy them. Feudalism is just a short jump from there.

Seventy percent of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. How is that going to be sustained when the largest segment of the consumer class is realizing less and less expendable income due to over thirty years of flat wages?
 
Advocating class warfare supports what I am saying IE killing and hating our brethren because they have money is not a good thing... yeah not seeing it.

You mentioned the Tea Party. So of course I mentioned Obama. The two are related. The Tea Party supports policies that make people free. Obama, as we have seen the past 5 years, doesn't.

And yes, Romney was a much superior choice to Obama. He isn't the son of aristocracy. There is no aristocracy in this country. We don't have any. You cant be the son of something that doesnt exist. Not to mention when he was born his parents weren't wealthy. If anyone acts like aristocracy in this country it's the current administration.

You have so many little things wrong. You claim the Tea Party is against science and education. Pure nonsense. Even a liberal ivy league professor did a study that conluded we are far more educated in matters of science than the general population. You claim Romney was born the son of aristocracy which is total nonsense.

Why do you believe such crap?

And you're wrong about the 08 election. Obama wasnt elected because of Palin. He was elected because of Bush and McCain.

Sorry. I thought you were reasonably coherent until this last post.

(1) As Buffett remarked, the "class war" is already being waged . . . and the middle class is losing. It's time to buck up and fight back.

(2) The Tea Party does not want to make anyone "free." They are right wing extremists that base their ideology on Christian fundamentalist teaching. They no nothing at all about economics. They can grow often carrots, however.

(3) Romney was/is an aristocrat. I really can't add much to it.

(4) The Tea Party is a continuation of the John Birch society and Nixon's "silent majority." They are the old Dixiecrats. They are know-nothings. They deny human influence in global climate change, oppose environmental protections, and want to defund virtually all forms of public eduation.

(8) Palin was/is an ass clown, and Romney was always unelectable.

1) So you are quoting Buffet as evidence of class warfare. You realize that's exactly what he wants. He wants people divided based on "class" which is completely non-existent. It's an artificial political construct used to divide people. A man who makes more than me is just as much my brother as someone who makes less than me. We are created equal. Im not going to get angry at my brother for doing better financially than me. That's just ridiculous.

2,4) The Tea Party has nothing to do with Christian fundamentalism. It has everything to do with the constitution and sane fiscal policy. And of course we oppose environmental policies based on incorrect science. We understand it. If you don't believe me, Just listen to the liberal ivy league professor who's study completely contradicts your blanket assertions. You can claim all you want about the Tea Party. But if it's not true, we aren't the ones who look stupid by your claims. Especially when you add no evidence.

And if you are going to claim we know nothing about econmics, why are we the ones who understand the very obvious fact that if the Government regulates something, it creates less of it. See the more someone has to work to do something, the less people are going to work to do that thing. It's just common sense.

3) So despite having no aristocracy and the fact that Romney was born to a middle class family before his father made a fortune, you are still going to claim he is aristocracy with absolutely no attempt to actually address any of those points. He's just aristocracy because you say he is. And somehow I am incoherent.

8)(not sure what happened to 5-7, but whatever) - Calling Palin names doesn't change the fact that Obama won in 08 because McCain and Bush suck. Nor does it change the fact that Obama sucks more than Bush and Romney. the 2012 Election is over. You guys dont need to lie about Mitt anymore.
 
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.

So you were cool with feudalism, then?

Feudalism was the system of patronage whereby the monarch rewarded loyalty by granting titles and land. Much like democrats so today. The monarch/presidunce grants titles with somewhat different names. Instead of Earl, we have Secretary of Defense, instead of Duke, we have Economic Czar. Feudalism had very little to do with actual wealth. Skilled tradesmen were known to be wealthier than poor nobles.
 
A few observations.

There is no economic system codified within the US Constitution.

Unregulated capitalism does not exist within the US. People may long for it in some philosophical way, but they would not be happy campers if they found themselves in a situation similar to the Midwest and the West back in the 1800s when everyone was at the mercy of the powerful railroads with a gov't that was either unwilling or unable to intervene on the behalf of citizens, small towns, counties, and individual states.

China has a capitalist economic system, but they're a one party communist political system.

Why would they codify an economic system in the Constitution? The Founders didn't think the people were stupid. Quite the opposite. They thought we could govern ourselves. I agree. Man can govern himself. That is why they limited the power of government. That's also why I agree with them in doing so.

Why did they make the free market system our economic system? Answer: They didn't. The Free Market is the natural economic system. In order to force other economic systems on people, we have to ignore the restraints that exist on the Constitution and empower government with powers they were never meant to have.

The free market occurs when people are free to make their own economic choices. If I have wood and you have nails and we voluntarily agree to work together to create furniture, that is the free market at work. This is a very natural relationship. It doesn't take a government to force this to happen. People see how working together will mutually benefit one another and provide service to the community. In the Free market, people become wealthy when they see a need or want and find a way to serve as many people as they can with that need or want. The truly visionary are the ones who can see the desire before the customer knows of that desire.

When the government gets involve it burdens the natural process.
 
Typical , you seem to think individuals like you are the only ones that have ever done something how you are describing.
Stay locked in your closed mind about this country and how we all should live.
Walking around thinking that you are so above everyone shows how little one can be.





There is no way to discuss this rationally with someone that has never had to fight or sacrifice to gain anything.

Oh, you mean like someone who works 90-hour weeks to get his small business up and running, as opposed to someone who wants what other people earned?

Someone who served for 20 years in uniform, willing to give his life in defense of the nation, as opposed to someone who thinks he deserves free money from the government in return for nothing?

Someone who provides jobs for other people, as opposed to someone who demands a job without offering his employer any effort?

You're right. There is no way to discuss this rationally with someone that has never had to fight or sacrifice to gain anything.
 
Last edited:
Typical , you seem to think individuals like you are the only ones that have ever done something how you are describing.
Stay locked in your closed mind about this country and how we all should live.
Walking around thinking that you are so above everyone shows how little one can be.
Man, you sure do get pissy when you're shown to be full of shit, don't you?
 
Its going to happen. Its the cycle of human history. Power and resources gradually get condensed into a smaller and smaller % of upper elites, until the rest of the people revolt. Chaos ensues. Then, the cycle restarts.

We're still a few decades off from it though.
 
Has anyone seen the GM story? For years, GM denied a problem with their ignition which directly resulted in 13 (known) deaths. GM received public funds to remain in business and still ignored this problem, putting the public at risk.

There is a class war going on in the US and the 1% is winning.

When do Americans get tired of being puppets for money and demand justice? HSBC funded terrorism against our soldiers during war and they paid a fine. George W. Bush thought he could legalize torture and the Supreme Court backed him up. Obama killed an American teenager by drone strike without charges or evidence.

This is a class war, so when do poor people start fighting back?
 
Now those with all the money(regardless of party affiliation) are able to give as much as they want to the political process thereby inevitably buying the political system. This is plain wrong. Our forefathers would not recognize this system we have now. Those who believe class warfare is not good need to get used to it as it is only going to become more visible and evident and if the average working person doesn't see it then that means they are playing right into what the uber wealthy want, which is control of those who don't have the money. There really is nothing we can do about it now. Its too far gone. I couldn't care how much money one has or how they got it. But more money should never ever equal more political influence. And it has been happening since I have been alive. Yet we declare Freedom and this and that. What a joke.
 
There is something we can do about it.

Build a national arsenal of personal drones, arm them with video cameras with live feed to the internet, and remotely record every shady billionaire transaction with criminals, terrorists, drug cartels, politicians, and each other.

Tell Big Brother, "We are watching you."
BYOD | DJI Innovations, JDrones, 3DR, SparkFun UAV Auto Pilots, First Person View Parts & More
Those of us with ballots that offer third party congressional candidates can FLUSH dozens or hundreds of DC incumbents in a single news cycle. Very little of substance changes by "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican in the voting booth.
 

Forum List

Back
Top