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.
You've been duped by a self-absorbed poser who looks down her nose in disdain at those she disagrees with. I've seen this type on many forums. You are enamored with her? Good for you. I'll not participate in your genuflection. And yes. At this point in time is it us v them. I've lived long enough and have observed enough life to form my opinions based on experience. And she's educated? And? Meaning what? Or are you one of those people who get a 'tingle up your leg' when you;re in the presence of someone with many letters after their name. I look for more from people. Thank you for your opinion.
I feel one of the biggest mistakes people make is to try and replace knowledge with experience. Not saying you aren't intelligent, I don't know one way or the other, but I do know I'm not going to take someone's word for it because they have "experience." Living long does not earn anyone bonus respect points in my book. People who actually do have experience and wisdom I respect, but not all old people are created equally.
And no, I'm not enamored with anyone here. I don't know if that other person is educated, but I do know you denounced education and diverging away from party lines. That was bad enough for me to chime in.
You can spin yourself into the ground if you wish Green. But the history is clear. And I have offered quotes as recent as three years ago as to how libs speak about minorities. You wish to ignore reality as it makes you uncomfortable to face what you endorse and alibi for. Delusion and abject, willful ignorance are the calling cards of liberals when they have their own words shown to them. You like people to stay ignorant of any form of history that shows the truth about your party. You're part of the problem.
Why do any of us care how liberal politicians speak about minorities. I couldn't give half a ****. Me being liberal doesn't automatically link me with any politician, period. I don't know what you think you're proving by saying "THA LIBRULS ARE RACIST TOO!"
When the final history of this country is written I think LBJ will go down as this country's worst president
Before you say that, please remember this. I understand you are Black, of African heritage. It was under LBJ that the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were both passed. Both were very important in combating discrimination and voter disenfranchisement of Blacks.
Ok this is going to take some explanation. First, where did I state that I was referring to politicians? I will remind you that I was speaking Conservatives "I KNOW". Here we go. (Deep breath)
I said:
Can you provide examples to back up this claim. The "modern Conservatives" I know:
-Want to secure the border so that illegal aliens are unable to violate our borders and steal from the American taxpayer in the form of jobs, welfare, and/or the cost of incarceration.
You said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1
Ask the conservative small business people who hire the Mexicans.
Counter:
I can't speak for small business people who hire Mexicans. I can however postulate on the factors that might motivate them to do so. 1) Taxes: Property, income, etc. 2) Energy costs. If the cost of doing business continually increases then you have three options. First is to raise the cost of your product. Second is to hire cheaper labor. And the third is to give up. Clearly the danger of raising the cost of your product is that sales will fall off in favor of less expensive goods.
I said:
-Want to end or reduce foreign aid. We collect tax dollars, and sometimes borrow money, just to send it abroad without hope of repayment.
You said:
Quote:
Ask them about aid to Israel.
Counter:
Israel is an ally both politically and militarily. Some foreign aid is justifiable, but the top 10 foreign aid recipients are all in Africa and the Middle East. What is the rationale behind giving hundreds of millions of dollars to these countries, aside from showing that we aren't racist? Is it bribe money to allow us a military presence? The way I and many others see foreign aid, is money that could be given back to the taxpayers, or used to build up our own country.
I said:
-Want to bring our military back from the 100+ bases scattered the world over.
You said:
Quote:
What is a Neocon and who started these wars?
Counter:
Look it up yourself. Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Having read the description I can conclude that I do not resemble such people. I believe in building up America. As for who started these wars, it isn't important to me who threw the first punch. What is important is that we have military bases in 130 countries and the cost associated with keeping them supplied and operational. Our military is spread so thin that it would be difficult to defend a coordinated mainland attack.
I said:
-Reduce dependency on the federal government.
Counter:
I already said I wasn't referring to politicians.
I said:
-Explore for oil/natural gas/other types of energy on our own soil (as we have more natural gas and oil than all of the middle east combined).
You said:
Quote:
Mineral rights are granted by the government.
Counter:
Elaborate on that. Are you stating that mineral rights are granted solely by the government, or that mineral rights HAVE been granted, etc?
I said:
-Refine the tax code so that it is simpler, as well as reducing the corporate tax rates that drove businesses overseas in the first place.
You said:
Quote:
Their banker buddies like the high corporate taxes because it encourages debt financing which is tax deductible. That way bankers get the loot. Why not the Adam Smith tax? Why don't they do what Milton Friedman said? Least bad tax.
Counter:
I have read Adam Smith as well as Hamilton's remarks regarding taxation in "The Federalist Papers" and am in near complete agreement. Too much of what is collected in taxes is wasted entirely or on projects that suit a passing fancy. Politicians understand the problem with the tax code but are unwilling to fix it because of the money wrapped up in campaign contributors that may be adversely affected by a reformation or outright rebuilding of the tax system.
I said:
-Encourage family values and morality rather than teaching ten year-olds how to put on condoms so that they can become whores.
You said:
Quote:
By creating real estate bubbles and pretending the government does not give them their own welfare license?
Counter:
What the hell are you talking about. What do real estate bubbles have to with teaching and instilling family values and morality? Nice deflection. Children are losing their childhood to political correctness and everyone trying to shield them from the world so they don't get their feelings hurt or a bump on the knee. Abstinence is no longer taught in schools, save for perhaps a few, but rather that it's okay to have sex when you're 11, 12, 13, and so on as long as you wear a condom. Teaching abstinence is seen as forcing beliefs on the students. Parents need to take a more active role in their children's education.
Currently in America appx 40% of all children born are out of wedlock. For women in their 20's it's as high as 60%. What we are finding, culturally, are boys born with no one to teach them how to be men. A mother alone is not good enough, nor is a single father. Boys and girls sleep around seemingly without regard for potential consequences.
I said:
-Enforce the laws already on the books rather than ignoring them and then calling for even more strict legislation.
You said:
Quote:
One place I actually agree.
Counter:
None
I said:
-Encourage personal accountability and responsibility.
You said:
Quote:
What they say, not what they do.
Counter:
Again, I believe you are referring to politicians. My statement is more broad both in scope and application. I maintain that if we can encourage personal accountability and responsibility among our citizenry, the personal pride in knowing that you can be independent will necessarily follow. More than just getting on welfare and staying there, accountability and responsibility in the home, in the classroom, and at work.
I said:
Please explain how any of these contribute to the development of a nanny-state.
You said:
Quote:
All I wish to make clear is that even without any increase in population, the progress of invention constantly tends to give a greater proportion of the production to landowners. Therefore, a smaller and smaller share goes to labor and capital. Since we can assign no limits to the progress of invention, neither can we offer any limits to the increase of rent — short of the entire output. If wealth could be obtained without labor, there would be no use for either labor or capital. Nor would there be any possible way either could demand any share of the wealth produced. If anybody but landowners continued to exist, it would be at their whim or mercy — perhaps maintained for their amusement, or as paupers by their charity.
Henry George This statement is not applicable to the question posed as it does not foster a "nanny-state" which is the total dependence of the population on the federal government for subsistence.
it suffices here to have made it clear that the pretended utility of a privileged order for the public service is nothing more than a chimera; that with it all that which is burdensome in this service is performed by the Third Estate; that without it the superior places would be infinitely better filled; that they naturally ought to be the lot and the recompense of ability and recognized services, and that if privileged persons have come to usurp all the lucrative and honorable posts, it is a hateful injustice to the rank and file of citizens and at the same a treason to the public.
Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes It does pose a problem when not but the supposed elites of society attain positions of power and authority within government as they are likely to fulfill their rolls with their own interests in mind and not that of the People. This statement I will acknowledge brings greater detriment to the country and is more likely to bring a "nanny-state" to fruition, but it does not directly tie in to any of the points I posed.
Land monopoly is not the only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies -- it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly. Unearned increments in land are not the only form of unearned or undeserved profit, but they are the principal form of unearned increment, and they are derived from processes which are not merely not beneficial, but positively detrimental to the general public.
Winston Churchill From this it can be deduced that Churchill is opposed to inheritance, and sees inheritance as something "undeserved". Churchill's remarks are yet another example of a lack of relevance. Just because someone is left land and money in a will doesn't drive others to the government tit. Should we do away with all inheritance and have the federal government seize all assets upon death?
Counter:
I can't speak for small business people who hire Mexicans. I can however postulate on the factors that might motivate them to do so. 1) Taxes: Property, income, etc. 2) Energy costs. If the cost of doing business continually increases then you have three options. First is to raise the cost of your product. Second is to hire cheaper labor. And the third is to give up. Clearly the danger of raising the cost of your product is that sales will fall off in favor of less expensive goods.
You cannot have a principle to remain dry while standing in the rain. This is again the problem that I can agree with many conservative principles, but that is where it ends. You cannot leave the economic incentives as they are. Just this issue is very complex and would take many posts to go through. If you are interested in how "supply side" has created a massive incentive for labor arbitrage, I would be happy to present it to you.
Quote:
Counter:
Israel is an ally both politically and militarily. Some foreign aid is justifiable, but the top 10 foreign aid recipients are all in Africa and the Middle East. What is the rationale behind giving hundreds of millions of dollars to these countries, aside from showing that we aren't racist? Is it bribe money to allow us a military presence? The way I and many others see foreign aid, is money that could be given back to the taxpayers, or used to build up our own country.
And these are the same arguments used to send money to Egypt , Pakistan et al. To give money to those who are so called loyal to us. To be honest its not a major financial issue however.
Quote:
Counter:
Look it up yourself. Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Having read the description I can conclude that I do not resemble such people. I believe in building up America. As for who started these wars, it isn't important to me who threw the first punch. What is important is that we have military bases in 130 countries and the cost associated with keeping them supplied and operational. Our military is spread so thin that it would be difficult to defend a coordinated mainland attack.
I would submit it is the neocon philosophy that has done this the most. Since I am more of a paleoconservative by comparison on many issues I despise the neocon reinterpretation.
Counter:
Elaborate on that. Are you stating that mineral rights are granted solely by the government, or that mineral rights HAVE been granted, etc?
The idea of just distribution is entirely broken and falls under the same Ricardian arguments redefined by JS Mill. Technology driven energy should be tax free while easy oil is partially treated as a rent. Government over site is baked in the cake. Its a natural resource.
Suppose that the demand for food requires the cultivation of three qualities of land, yielding, on an equal surface, and at an equal expense, 100, 80, and 60 bushels of wheat. The price of wheat will, on the average, be just sufficient to enable the third quality to be cultivated with the ordinary profit. The first quality therefore will yield forty and the second twenty bushels of extra profit, constituting the rent of the landlord. And first, let an improvement be made, which, without enabling more corn to be grown, enables the same corn to be grown with one-fourth less labour.
The above more than hundred year old economic proof is mysteriously ignored. 60 bushels is a normalized profit and in the same vein we have easy access oil. One requires little capital while the other lots of it. Tax policy need to reflect this.
Quote:
Counter:
I have read Adam Smith as well as Hamilton's remarks regarding taxation in "The Federalist Papers" and am in near complete agreement. Too much of what is collected in taxes is wasted entirely or on projects that suit a passing fancy. Politicians understand the problem with the tax code but are unwilling to fix it because of the money wrapped up in campaign contributors that may be adversely affected by a reformation or outright rebuilding of the tax system.
Then you must know capitalists were the ones he viewed as being most disintrested to the public general interest . Worse is that class of rentier, the country gentlemen and land owner now sees most of that asset now being absorbed by finance, also not in the general public intrest, meaning labor is now completely alone.
And the neocons? A total disaster.
Now a FIRE sector as finacialization and debtor ownership of land rents is mobile in world capitalist markets meaning rule by merchants, the worst form of rule accoding to Smith.
Quote:
What the hell are you talking about. What do real estate bubbles have to with teaching and instilling family values and morality? Nice deflection. Children are losing their childhood to political correctness and everyone trying to shield them from the world so they don't get their feelings hurt or a bump on the knee. Abstinence is no longer taught in schools, save for perhaps a few, but rather that it's okay to have sex when you're 11, 12, 13, and so on as long as you wear a condom. Teaching abstinence is seen as forcing beliefs on the students. Parents need to take a more active role in their children's education.
A deflection? You don't get my meaning. It is the basic economic engine that has impoverished people who cannot afford private schools, who need two incomes(away from parenting), who need more money from real estates directed to schools and away from dependency on federal grants. Since the banks absorb the prosperity of real estate , federal grants run the school system. The root of the problem.
Policy of being dry while standing in the rain. Why not tell slaves to have better schools?
Quote:
Currently in America appx 40% of all children born are out of wedlock. For women in their 20's it's as high as 60%. What we are finding, culturally, are boys born with no one to teach them how to be men. A mother alone is not good enough, nor is a single father. Boys and girls sleep around seemingly without regard for potential consequences.
No one is at home because people are at work to pay the FIRE sector .
Quote:
I said:
Please explain how any of these contribute to the development of a nanny-state.
You said:
Because people are losing their financial independence while they see obvious ostentatious luxury . They don't know the details like I do so they turn to the only measure they know which does not get to the root of the problem. They trun to the welfare state , knowing nothing else and as the numbers mount it will be the worst form of rule according to Plato's Republic, rule of slaves.
And old conservative would know this. neocons are clueless.
However again all these issues are complex so a thread on a laundry list of liberal sins is exactly the wrong headed and useless flag waving which ignores why they even came to be.
At least you have an argument. However I would say it was poorly done by both of us since we did not drill into the essence of them largely due to the huge laundry list of issues.
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.
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.
Rebutted
