Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-27-2008, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,115,379 times
Reputation: 348

Advertisements

We don't have a democracy, it's a Republic system of government. It was designed to stop the "mob" mentality. However, this system is *supposed* to have your elected officials represent you, hence the term "representative". Instead, they (democrats and republicans) represent special interests and not the common constituant.

Whenever the government grows too large and interferes too much it causes problems for the country, and corporations are quick to take advantage of this (who can blame them). The solution is smaller government and less regulation. Instead of capitalism, we have some sort of corporatist/crony capitalist/socialist system.

The socialists are quick to blame capitalism and corporations for economic problems, but the true culprit is the government. The federal government was designed to be a collective power of the states, not to dictate requirements to the states and blackmail them with federal handouts.

From Wikipedia:

Crony capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Capitalists generally oppose crony capitalism as well, but consider it an aberration brought on by governmental favors incompatible with true capitalism. In this view, crony capitalism is the result of an excess of socialist-style interference in the market, which requires active corporate lobbying to reduce red tape. They point to the relatively higher levels of interaction between corporations and governments that are considered more socialist, taken to its maximum in the form of nationalization of industries.

Economists of the Austrian School are severe in attacking crony capitalism, although in more formal contexts the term "state corporatism" is usually used.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2008, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,067,914 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
What part of the Constitution permits fiat currency and the taking of property?

I missed that amendment.
Uh the 1st Amendment.

Fiat money requires no amendment. We've had it since the revolution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 09:59 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,972,786 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Uh the 1st Amendment.

Fiat money requires no amendment. We've had it since the revolution.
We've only had fiat money since 1913. Money was redeemable on demand for gold at any time before then. Even after that until 1971 there was impled gold backing of the currency. The constitution specifically dictates that only gold and silver may be used for currency.

1st amendment permits taking of property? Wow!

"The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. On its face, it prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (the Establishment Clause) or that prohibit free exercise of religion (the Free Exercise Clause), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Please show me where I missed this taking of property part?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,067,914 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
We've only had fiat money since 1913. Money was redeemable on demand for gold at any time before then. Even after that until 1971 there was impled gold backing of the currency. The constitution specifically dictates that only gold and silver may be used for currency.

1st amendment permits taking of property? Wow!

"The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. On its face, it prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (the Establishment Clause) or that prohibit free exercise of religion (the Free Exercise Clause), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Please show me where I missed this taking of property part?
Sorry typo 14th Ammendment:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 10:50 AM
 
2,265 posts, read 3,733,329 times
Reputation: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post
The most conclusive evidence can be found by looking at our own congress.


YouTube - Democrat Maxine Waters Wants To Nationalize Big Oil
Like I've said a thousand times Democrats = socialist.
Communism is the next natural step after socialism.

We wouldn't be in this oil mess if the liberals and environmental wackos had a lick of common sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 11:00 AM
 
711 posts, read 933,257 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by paullySC View Post
Like I've said a thousand times Democrats = socialist.
Communism is the next natural step after socialism.

We wouldn't be in this oil mess if the liberals and environmental wackos had a lick of common sense.
You have also been incorrect a thousand times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 11:04 AM
 
2,265 posts, read 3,733,329 times
Reputation: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluskyz View Post
You have also been incorrect a thousand times.
Liberalism = socialism, you don't have to agree with it. But that's what it is.

And socialism is right there next to communism. Again, you don't have to agree with it. But that's what it is.

And yes, we wouldn't be in the oil mess if it wasn't for the liberals and environmental wackos.

I apologize for being brutally honest, it's one of my flaws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,791,864 times
Reputation: 24863
If Democracy leads to a socialism free of corporate domination I am all for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 11:13 AM
 
711 posts, read 933,257 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by paullySC View Post
Liberalism = socialism, you don't have to agree with it. But that's what it is.

And socialism is right there next to communism. Again, you don't have to agree with it. But that's what it is.

And yes, we wouldn't be in the oil mess if it wasn't for the liberals and environmental wackos.

I apologize for being brutally honest, it's one of my flaws.
Make that incorrect one thousand and one times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2008, 11:33 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,867,563 times
Reputation: 18304
Socailism leads drirectly to a permanent under class and a powerful elite class. Look at the soviet union and ploland. In the end if you look at socailist leaning countries like in europe the uner 30 have a high unemploymeny rate. The only socialist or communist countries that have expended in modern times have gone to more market type economies to make these gains. But they still keep the workers at very low wages even considering the countries GDP. That's the way they atract businesses because of their low wages.Look at coutnries like north korea and south korea for a examle of wehst stae ownership brings to teh commnon man.Communism ad socailism are a con to atrqct those that have failed to compete in a democracy because of their own failures or lack of trying.In the end liberal leaders in congress would know what to do with teh oil companies because they can even run their own business efficently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:13 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top