Democrats bring prosperity. Republicans bring recession. (Afghanistan, Brown, downturn, companies)

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by njquestions

Sure, but keep in mind that liberals already don't believe in a right to work (union monopoly) or property rights.

Fortunately, their beliefs are not law.
Read law, available at any county courthouse law library.
Do something that even CONgress won't do - read the law.

. . . .
As the Declaration of Independence reminds us, governments are instituted to secure rights. They were never delegated power to infringe, tax or diminish those rights it was created to secure.

"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but, the individual's rights to live and own property are NATURAL RIGHTS for the enjoyment of which an excise [tax] cannot be imposed."
Redfield vs Fisher, 292 P. 813, at 819.

" The right to labor and to its protection from unlawful interference is a constitutional as well as a common-law right. Every man has a natural right to the fruits of his own industry."
48 Am Jur 2d, Section 2, p. 80

‘The right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right…’ And ‘It has been well said that ‘the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his owns hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.’’ U.S. Supreme Court, Butcher’s Union Co. v Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1883)

‘Included in the right of personal liberty and the right of private property- partaking of the nature of each- is the right to make contracts for the acquisition of property. Chief among such contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property.’ Coppage v Kansas, 236 U.S. 1 (1915)

" Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severe constitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the POWER TO TAX A RIGHT, this would enable the state to DESTROY RIGHTS guaranteed by the constitutions through the use of oppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the right of travel by the ordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legitimate object of state taxation. The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of the taxing power of the states has been repeatedly considered by the High Court. The right of the states to impede or embarrass the constitutional operations of the the U.S. Government or the Rights which the citizens hold under it, has been uniformly denied."
McCulloch v. Maryland 4 Wheat 316.

"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution."
Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105, at 113 (1943).

- - - -
If you're wondering WHAT HAPPENED to change America into a benevolent socialist totalitarian police state . . .

From the Communist manifesto:
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."

Connect the dots.
Yes, we were [expletive deleted] and royally [censored].

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by Pine to Vine

Why is it that the policies of Democratic administrations over the past 30 years have delivered a robust economy (low unemployment, increasing wages, bull markets, healthy dollar) only to have Republican administrations take over and drag us into recession? Time to hunker down.

We've gotten so used to the recession of the last eight years that any little blip upward is called "robust?"

You are apparently very young and don't remember, or were not even born, during the Reagan era. It's also obvious you know nothing about economics.

During the Obama administration, home ownership has fallen to post WWII levels. Family incomes are down pretty dramatically. We have 50% of the workforce unemployed (but most of them are left out of the 'official' unemployment figures). Full time work, which used to be 40 hrs/week is not only 30 hrs/week, which further reduces incomes. Job growth has been paltry. Real average annual economic growth has dropped to just over 1%.

In the decade from 1981 to 1990, average annual growth in real GDP was 3.36%. During just the years that President Barack Obama has been in office (2009 through 2012), average annual growth in real GDP has been only 1.075 percent.

The past 30 years includes 8 years of President G.W. Bush, 4 years of G. H. W. Bush and 3 years of Ronald Reagan. Not 30 years of Democrat administrations.

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by Red as Gold

Well, do you think the US would be as prosperous with no military or a private military?

Without a military, we would have no country. Don't be ridiculous. Freedom must always be defended, and the only way to do that is with a strong military. We are in a dangerous state of military readiness right now, and we need to rebuild. Democrats only talk of reducing it even more. Clinton always talked about the "peace dividend," which is ridiculous, because peace comes through strength. As soon as we reduce our military, we are vulnerable.

[gmagoo]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

We've gotten so used to the recession of the last eight years that any little blip upward is called "robust?"

You are apparently very young and don't remember, or were not even born, during the Reagan era. It's also obvious you know nothing about economics.

During the Obama administration, home ownership has fallen to post WWII levels. Family incomes are down pretty dramatically. We have 50% of the workforce unemployed (but most of them are left out of the 'official' unemployment figures). Full time work, which used to be 40 hrs/week is not only 30 hrs/week, which further reduces incomes. Job growth has been paltry. Real average annual economic growth has dropped to just over 1%.

In the decade from 1981 to 1990, average annual growth in real GDP was 3.36%. During just the years that President Barack Obama has been in office (2009 through 2012), average annual growth in real GDP has been only 1.075 percent.

The past 30 years includes 8 years of President G.W. Bush, 4 years of G. H. W. Bush and 3 years of Ronald Reagan. Not 30 years of Democrat administrations.

The recession ended in 2009.
Business Cycle Dating Committee, National Bureau of Economic Research

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

Without a military, we would have no country. Don't be ridiculous. Freedom must always be defended, and the only way to do that is with a strong military.

All male citizens are the militia. . . Assuming that the eligible males are 25% of the population, that's an army of 80 million, roughly.

“AGE.... In the United States, at twenty-five, a man [citizen] may be elected a representative in congress;
at thirty, a senator; and
at thirty-five, he may be chosen president.
He is liable to serve in the militia from eighteen to forty-five inclusive, unless exempted for some particular reason.”
- - - From Bouvier’s Law dictionary, 1856 ed.

Articles of Confederation, VI. (1777)
...every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined MILITIA, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON (1789)
Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the MILITIA to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

Title 10 USC Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The MILITIA of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, CITIZENS of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Title 50 USC Sec. 453. Registration (Selective Service)
(a)...it shall be the duty of every male CITIZEN of the United States, and every other male person RESIDING in the United States, who, on the day or days fixed for the first or any subsequent registration, is between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six, to present himself for and submit to registration at such time or times and place or places, and in such manner, as shall be determined by proclamation of the President and by rules and regulations prescribed hereunder.

The states also impose militia duty - - -

PENNSYLVANIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY
TITLE 51, PART II, CHAPTER 3
THE MILITIA
Sec. 301. Formation.
Enactment. Chapter 3 was added August 1, 1975, P.L.233, No.92, effective January 1, 1976.
§ 301. Formation.
(a) Pennsylvania militia.--The militia of this Commonwealth shall consist of:
(1) all able-bodied citizens of the United States and all other able-bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this Commonwealth, who are at least 17 years six months of age and, except as hereinafter provided, not more than 55 years of age

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, MILITIA, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

Since 1777, the MILITIA were defined as all able bodied male citizens, between 17 and 45. They were obligated to train, fight, and die, on command. That is the reason why conscription (“the draft”) is 100% constitutional.

[nononsenseguy]

The Leftists love to brag about all the jobs Obama has created, when the exact opposite is true:

Josh Earnest Claims Obama Created 805k Manufacturing Jobs When He LOST 303k – TruthFeed

[FKD19124]

please tell me you are trying to be funny???!!!

Originally Posted by Pine to Vine

Why is it that the policies of Democratic administrations over the past 30 years have delivered a robust economy (low unemployment, increasing wages, bull markets, healthy dollar) only to have Republican administrations take over and drag us into recession? Time to hunker down.

[FKD19124]

who pushed the banks to offer housing loans to people who could not afford them?

Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~

Bull****, but nice way to try to twist the truth around. And the Bush Jr economy was pretty average. I think you also forget the point that Clinton campaigned on welfare cuts. He was under no obligation to go along with the GOP. They didn't have enough to overturn his vetos. It was a Democratic Congress he had issues getting to go along with. Not that it really spurred the economy along or anything.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

We've gotten so used to the recession of the last eight years that any little blip upward is called "robust?"

You are apparently very young and don't remember, or were not even born, during the Reagan era. It's also obvious you know nothing about economics.

During the Obama administration, home ownership has fallen to post WWII levels. Family incomes are down pretty dramatically. We have 50% of the workforce unemployed (but most of them are left out of the 'official' unemployment figures). Full time work, which used to be 40 hrs/week is not only 30 hrs/week, which further reduces incomes. Job growth has been paltry. Real average annual economic growth has dropped to just over 1%.

In the decade from 1981 to 1990, average annual growth in real GDP was 3.36%. During just the years that President Barack Obama has been in office (2009 through 2012), average annual growth in real GDP has been only 1.075 percent.

The past 30 years includes 8 years of President G.W. Bush, 4 years of G. H. W. Bush and 3 years of Ronald Reagan. Not 30 years of Democrat administrations.

1. the recession ended almost 7 years ago

2. robust is an opinion, and many on this site base it on their person growth, not the nation as a whole

3. GDP is not the end all of the discussion when it comes to economic growth as a nation, if it was, you would be conceding this discussion

4. Homeownership is at 62.9%, which means it is at 1965 levels, not WWII. Regardless, the number started to drop in 2004, Before President Bush even started his second term.

5. the LFP rate peaked in 2000 at 67.3% And has been going down since, even as the economy was growing in the mid 2000's before the recession

6. 50% of the work force is not unemployed, you can not call someone unemployed if they can not work even if they wanted to, you cant call them unemployed if they are in school and not looking for work, you cant call them unemployed if they are 65 or 70+ and retired. You cant just call everyone with out a ob unemployed.

I get that you want to do it so that you can attack Democrats, but it doesnt make sense.

7. the federal government defined 40 hours a week so that companies would be forced to give those people benefits. Many companies, long before Obama, dropped that number to 36, and took away people's health insurance and benefits, so the administration dropped the number to 30 to be a "catch all".

What companies were doing was an accounting method to same money.

[Fox Terrier]

Everybody, just chill!

Tramp is going to declare the country bankrupt and wipe out the debt!

(he's got a lot of experience with bankruptcy)

Then he'll take credit for wiping out the national debt!

(screw whatever ramifications would ensue afterward)

All hail the Great Oz! (I mean Tramp)