Paulitics' Cycle

[manifold]

Tyranny --> Revolution --> Freedom --> Prosperity --> Dependancy ---> Tyranny
--------------------------------------------------- | We are here | ------------


I've thought about Paulitics' signature (which I hereby dub Paulitics' Cycle) a few times now, as it does offer interesting fodder for thought. I'm left each time with a handfull of unanswered questions.

Is it accurate?

If so, is it a given?

If it is not a given what can be done to break (or slow down) the cycle?

If it is a given, how much time before the return of tyranny?

What do you think?

 

[jillian]

Tyranny --> Revolution --> Freedom --> Prosperity --> Dependancy ---> Tyranny
--------------------------------------------------- | We are here | ------------


I've thought about Paulitics' signature (which I hereby dub Paulitics' Cycle) a few times now, as it does offer interesting fodder for thought. I'm left each time with a handfull of unanswered questions.

Is it accurate?

If so, is it a given?

If it is not a given what can be done to break (or slow down) the cycle?

If it is a given, how much time before the return of tyranny?

What do you think?

The whole "dependency" thing is a made up construct.

The "tyrannical" things about our government have more to do with warped priorities like people concerning themselves with someone telling them they have to have health coverage, but blindly allowing the government to violate the 4th amendment with warrantless searches.

 

[manifold]

I understand. If I was certain about everything, I probably wouldn't take the time to fully consider another's point of view either.

 

[manifold]

Maybe this is one of those things for which serenity deals best. You know, like the prayer.

 

[Annie]

Good lord! I thought Paulitics was menstruating or something.

 

[Ravi]

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Paulie]

The whole "dependency" thing is a made up construct.

The "tyrannical" things about our government have more to do with warped priorities like people concerning themselves with someone telling them they have to have health coverage, but blindly allowing the government to violate the 4th amendment with warrantless searches.

Right jill, because there aren't millions of people dependent on their entitlements and subsidies from the government to live their lives. That's only one example.

And who's telling you that you have to have healthcare? Far as I know, that's Edwards and Hillary's plan. The fact that 66% of people actually FAVOR that, tells me that people are pretty damn dependent on the system. The fact that significant portions of Americans favor having our government raise taxes to pay for a socialized program to offer, or even mandate citizens have healthcare shows just how dependent so many people have become.

You know as well as I do that this is not the extent of the tyranny you see in our government.

My thoughts exactly.

Your thoughts on what, exactly?

 

[Ravi]

Kathianne's comment.

 

[Paulie]

Kathianne's comment.

If you have a problem with me feel free to air it out, brother.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not your brother, bro.

I was just chuckling over the thread title, chill!

 

[AllieBaba]

I shall share a little secret about how states determine whether the people "need" gov't healthcare or not.

They open up the application process for free gov't healthcare for a limited number of people, and then go to the legislature with the numbers of applications they receive and say, "SEE? We have a huge need for state provided health insurance".

Now, if you were offered free healthcare, wouldn't you apply? So is that an accurate representation of the "need" for government sponsored health care?

Is wanting the same as needing?

And how's the healthcare system in Canada doing these days? You want to see how well it works, look to the countries that have it, and ask yourself, why do they come to the US for medical care, and why is our health care better?

BECAUSE IT ISN'T SOCIALIZED.

 

[midcan5]

Interesting question. I disagree with his 'cycle' as you name it, and I probably lean more towards a concern with jobs, education, infrastructure, manufacturing base, and the widening separation between the rich and all others.

On another note, I am starting Naomi Wolf's 'the end of America' in which she too warns us to wake up but I doubt it fits the 'cycle' either. LOL

I actually wrote an 'end of' too 4-5 years ago. Slightly updated here.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=50779

 

[Paulie]

Interesting question. I disagree with his 'cycle' as you name it, and I probably lean more towards a concern with jobs, education, infrastructure, manufacturing base, and the widening separation between the rich and all others.

On another note, I am starting Naomi Wolf's 'the end of America' in which she too warns us to wake up but I doubt it fits the 'cycle' either. LOL

I actually wrote an 'end of' too 4-5 years ago. Slightly updated here.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=50779

Midcan, that cycle doesn't necessarily have to apply to the US. It's how many nations have historically evolved throughout history.

When you become dependent on your government to provide your daily way of life for you, you become a slave to however that government ultimately progresses. People in Russia probably wouldn't fair well in a free-market capitalistic society because they're so dependent on the socialist structure there, that they will accept the dictatorial nature of government to keep what they're used to.

 

[Paulie]

It's certainly not a scientific model of anything either. It's admittedly not even my own idea. I saw it somewhere and thought it made sense.

I think the fact that I've gotten PM's asking me about it, and now it's own thread being dedicated to it, speaks volumes for how it makes people at least THINK.

Take it how you will.

 

[Gunny]

It's certainly not a scientific model of anything either. It's admittedly not even my own idea. I saw it somewhere and thought it made sense.

I think the fact that I've gotten PM's asking me about it, and now it's own thread being dedicated to it, speaks volumes for how it makes people at least THINK.

Take it how you will.

It makes sense. It's a cycle of progression based on common sense. Somebody just wants to nitpick.

 

[Paulie]

It makes sense. It's a cycle of progression based on common sense. Somebody just wants to nitpick.

The funny thing is the liberals nitpick the Dependency part, because they refuse to admit their dependency.

The Tyranny part is where the most argument comes from though. God forbid I propose that I think my country is moving closer to tyranny.

I don't take too kindly to my government selling out our sovereignty, for one.

 

[trobinett]

It makes sense. It's a cycle of progression based on common sense. Somebody just wants to nitpick.

Somebody?

Your being to gracious Gunny.

 

[Gunny]

The funny thing is the liberals nitpick the Dependency part, because they refuse to admit their dependency.

The Tyranny part is where the most argument comes from though. God forbid I propose that I think my country is moving closer to tyranny.

I don't take too kindly to my government selling out our sovereignty, for one.

The dependency exists, as does the tyranny.

The dependency exists ANYTIME you have people willing to rely on its government to mollycoddle them from cradle to grave. That would be almost half our population.

The tyranny exists in the form of the wealthy who pay lobbyists who get our politicians to sell out for $. They aren't Republicans nor Democrats; rather, both, and they could care less about this Nation's soverignty if it gets in the way of making a buck.

 

[trobinett]

The dependency exists, as does the tyranny.

The dependency exists ANYTIME you have people willing to rely on its government to mollycoddle them from cradle to grave. That would be almost half our population.

The tyranny exists in the form of the wealthy who pay lobbyists who get our politicians to sell out for $. They aren't Republicans nor Democrats; rather, both, and they could care less about this Nation's soverignty if it gets in the way of making a buck.

That should put THIS thread to rest.

 

[pegwinn]

The whole "dependency" thing is a made up construct.

The "tyrannical" things about our government have more to do with warped priorities like people concerning themselves with someone telling them they have to have health coverage, but blindly allowing the government to violate the 4th amendment with warrantless searches.

Multigenerational welfare isn't a symptom of rugged individualistic self sufficiency m'dear. As to health care, pooh pooh. Most folks who oppose it would not do so if it were not mandatory. Think social security.

What warrantless searches. Got Link? I'm interested because I hear the term a lot, but have never seen a documented case that survived judicial review.

That should put THIS thread to rest.

Nap times over kids