OP/ED: Bushkrieg: Shock and Awe in America

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I wish all Americans could attack Canada and Canadian politicians the way soficrow attacks America and our President.

do you think 'all americans' DISAGREE with soficrow?
soficrow knows that canada and it's politicians are no better, there are just less of an issue because of the gravity of population and the issue of military mindset and power.

FYI - djohnsto77.

I am an American citizen by BIRTH.

I love this country - and IMO - I am fighting for it's integrity and survival as a democracy.


...But even if I weren't - I would still have a right to speak.

Also FYI - It is only in dictatorships and fascist regimes where people are not allowed to express dissatisfaction or dissent. Think about that.



.

Originally posted by mwm1331
The simple fact is I dont have a problem paying more what I object to is paying a higher percentage I am not attempting to pull up a rope, I just dont want that rope tied around my feet.
I am more than willing to give to charity, and I do, what i object to is being forced to do so.
What I object to is being told I will be dscriminated against and that its OK becuse I can afford it.
Since when does what people can afford have anything to do with fairness?
Most of the people in my income level could afford a 80% tax and still not go hungry, what does that have to do with equality?

If we went through the points, we'd likely be singing from the same song book for the end result.....we digress in the methods as applied.
It's top down class warfare the way it's being applied now.

Originally posted by mwm1331 That is IMHO discrimination.

Quit whining. It's the responsability you have as an American citizen, which has provided you with the opportunity to be successful. Like you, I'm one of the 3%, and at a certain point, money really stops mattering. You can only own so much. You can only buy so much STUFF, because STUFF loses its appeal.

I gladly pay my taxes, because in that way, I know that I earn my citizenship - yearly. I know that I'm beholding to my fellow citizens, liberal and conservative. I know that I'm doing my part to keep the republic afloat - roads paved, children fed, salaries paid. If it means that I have pay a little bit more so some janitor can afford a hospital visit or pay his apartment's heating bill, so be it.

That's the responsability that we have for being successful. Is it fair? Probably not. But, the winds of change occur so frequently, that you just never know where you're going to end up tomorrow. So, maybe we should be beholding to the idea that those gutters shouldn't be so deep, they shouldn't be so dirty.

We're not paying taxes to the King England, get over it.

Wrong brimstone and 'll tell you why. Any monies that I pay in taxes, which do not go to the military is wasted. Especially monies that are used for social services. Know why? Becuase the people who run those programs couldn't make that money work if thier life depended on it. The reason I (and apparently you) are in the top 3 is becuase we understand the nature of capital We know how to make it work, how to get the most effect from the smallest investment, when was the last time the government did anything effeciently?
The people who run those social services at the grond level are just as clueless as the average wage slave. The one secret which the poor dont know, what in fact keeps them poor, is how to make money work for you All poor people know how to work for money, you get rich by knowing how to make money work for you.
My point is with the same money the government is wasting, I, you, or anyone else who understands capital could get an exponentially greater effect, from a fractional level of investment. Thats my problem, not only is the government discriminating against me, it is wasting my money in doing so.
The governments number one expenditure is in social programs at yet they are nowhere near as effective as private charity.
Bout you talk about top down class warfare, I see it as bottom up warfare.
I see the poor drivng around in new corrola's, watching color TV's, eating at resturants 3-4 tmes a week, drinking thier life away, then having the gall to want the money I have sacrificed those same exact things for?!? For what? So they can keep thier parastic lifestyle?
I see every single politician railing against and demonising "corporate america" and the "elite" despite the fact that every single technological advancement, every single thing that has made America what it is today, was either built, funded, or made possible by those self same people. I see democrats pushing a death tax to keep me from passing on the fruits of my labor to my kids so they can pay for a woman with no education and 5 kids by 5 dfferent fathers to stay at home and eat government cheese, while her children run around with no structure and grow up to burglarise my home or car jack me in traffic. I see employees who want to get paid for work they don't do, want pensions that I have to pay into becuse they aren't willing to, and want healthcare they don't have to pay for. I see union employess who's benefit packages are so ridicoulsly good, they end up working half the hours they are paid for. You want to talk about class warfare? How about the fact that amercans today would rather sue someone than work for a living?
The only consolation I have is that as bad as it is in America its far far worse in europe.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Wrong brimstone

The worse you make it for the poor, the more likely they're going to come into your house and physically remove you from your wealth. I'm sorry, but if you've ever spent five minutes in Columbia, then you would understand the rational of not wanting to live under armed protection 24 hours a day.

The worse we make it for the poor, the more likely they will become Communists, and really decide to restribute your wealth. At 3%, we're kind of out numbered by the other 97%. The greater the number of poor people, the more chances crime will actually end up on your door step.

Demoralizing poor people might seem proper and parent-like, but you're really just shooting yourself in the foot. To remove all social programs, to remove all social spending, would result in nothing short of a new American Revolution and the birth of a new wave of a Communism, a war between the haves and the have nots, with you and me under the guillotine, pal.

I say, spend a little so we can retain a lot.

Brimstone I have no earthly idea how you possibly missed my point that badly. I never edorsed, demoralising the poor. I endorsed taking the support of the poor out of the hands of the government and putting it in the hands of those who know how to make money work. The exact same funds which the government takes from your for SS, welfare, etc. if given instead to private charities could easily help everyone who is poor or homeless with enough left over to buy france.
Do you honestly believe the federal government has the abiilty to do anything effecently?

Have they ever?
even once?

End welfare, end SS, etc. give the rich a 1 for 1 tax deducton on all money donated to approved charities, and you will never see nother man begging for change again, or sleeping in a cardboard box.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Brimstone I have no earthly idea how you possibly missed my point that badly. I never edorsed, demoralising the poor. I endorsed taking the support of the poor out of the hands of the government and putting it in the hands of those who know how to make money work. The exact same funds which the government takes from your for SS, welfare, etc. if given instead to private charities could easily help everyone who is poor or homeless with enough left over to buy france.
Do you honestly believe the federal government has the abiilty to do anything effecently?

Have they ever?
even once?

End welfare, end SS, etc. give the rich a 1 for 1 tax deducton on all money donated to approved charities, and you will never see nother man begging for change again, or sleeping in a cardboard box.

ya we will.......
unless of course, you are talking about the government forcing the citizens to give in way of taxes, and then handing it over to charities for distribution.....
let me guess, these would be the "faith based charities" right?


point me at any point in history, anywhere in this world, where there wasn't people begging for change, or sleeping in alleyways......
heck, we might even get to see slavery, if someone's misses the needs of too many, and they sell a kid or two!!
debtor's prisons......poor houses.....oh, ya, they're there in history.

meanwhile, to suggest that these poor be paid a wage that would make the need for the government or your charity obsolete, well, that's off the wall, crazy talk.....
why don't some of you rich people get together, and start your own charity, where you help business help their employees get off government assistance by paying decent wages, help train people for the jobs, ect. that would be useful to some extent at least.


[edit on 8-3-2005 by dawnstar]

So basically dawnstar what yu are saying is that the government has to take money in the form of taxes to help the poor becuase the people are too greedy to do so?
yeah thats a typical liberal attitude.
The people are too ___________ so the government has to do it.

And they say republicans are elitst.

Originally posted by mwm1331
So basically dawnstar what yu are saying is that the government has to take money in the form of taxes to help the poor becuase the people are too greedy to do so?
yeah thats a typical liberal attitude.
The people are too ___________ so the government has to do it.

And they say republicans are elitst.

show me a point in history where there wasn't hungry children, homeless people, and beggers in the streets, regardless of what we do.

But, are you saying that you would rather just keep giving them fish everyday, and never give them the nets and teach them to fish for themselves?

you would think that if the safety nets were to be pulled, the employers would find it in their best interest to make sure that thier employees were making a livable wage....just for their best interest.
if you actually believe that the safety nets should be dropped, shouldn't you be trying to prepare society in this way?

[edit on 8-3-2005 by dawnstar]

Dawnstar you dont get it do you? Society doesnt need to be prepared. If we pull the safety nets as I propose those using them wont see much difference. Instead of going to the Fed for job training etc. They will go to thier local church, mosque, synagogue, community center etc.
Im am not talking anout ending social assistance, I am talkng about transferring the responsibility from the government through taxes directly to the people themselves, at an individual level.

and you don't get it....

==================================================

"So basically dawnstar what yu are saying is that the government has to take money in the form of taxes to help the poor becuase the people are too greedy to do so?
yeah thats a typical liberal attitude.
The people are too ___________ so the government has to do it. "
===================================================
yep, just like the department stores waste tons of money and cause the prices to go sky high because they think the people are all theives and hire security guards to spy on us!!!


there's hungry, homeless, and sick people out there, why aren't they being helped?

Because people like you think the government should do it.
So rather than enacting a plan which would co-opt peoples natural tendancies to ensure they get help, the government enacts a wasteful program which allows liberals to feel like thier "doing thier part" by supporting it, despite the fact that .50-.75 out of every dollar never gets to those in need.
I am not saying that it would end poverty. Nothng will, there will always be poor people no matter what we do. The questions are is the help available for those who are willing to work for it, is the sytem as effecient as possible, and are the right people running it?
Under the current tax system there is a maximum write off for charitble deductons, remove that cap, and it would solve half the problem right there, get social programs away from government control and we wll have fixed the other half.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Because people like you think the government should do it.
So rather than enacting a plan which would co-opt peoples natural tendancies to ensure they get help, the government enacts a wasteful program which allows liberals to feel like thier "doing thier part" by supporting it, despite the fact that .50-.75 out of every dollar never gets to those in need.
I am not saying that it would end poverty. Nothng will, there will always be poor people no matter what we do. The questions are is the help available for those who are willing to work for it, is the sytem as effecient as possible, and are the right people running it?
Under the current tax system there is a maximum write off for charitble deductons, remove that cap, and it would solve half the problem right there, get social programs away from government control and we wll have fixed the other half.

=======================
No, I think their employers should be doing it!!!!

if they can't do it for their own employees with a sense of honor and dignity, well, I don't believe the rest of it....

So then tell me dawnstar do you believe that employers have the right to decide how much the work employees do is worth to them?
How much should you get paid for sweeping the floor? Or diggng a ditch?
See the problem with borderline communists like yourself s you think people should get paid based on what the need, not based on what they do.

Originally posted by mwm1331

Do you honestly believe the federal government has the abiilty to do anything effecently?

Have they ever?
even once?

The Department of Defense funnels money to corporate interests very effectively, and leaves ordinary soldiers hanging. Their lives are a bit better when they're on active duty, but not much. Veterans are right out in the cold.

End welfare, end SS, etc. give the rich a 1 for 1 tax deducton on all money donated to approved charities, and you will never see nother man begging for change again, or sleeping in a cardboard box.

If you read history, you will learn that these programs evolved precisely because charity and the capitalist system did NOT work to protect the vulnerable. It used them, chewed them up and spit them out to die.

I agree that the current system is flawed, but the alternatives are worse.



.

Soficrow - Some will give becase it is right.
Many will give becuase it makes them feel good.
For the rest a true incentve wll get them to give.
When in the past was there ever a financial incentve for the rich to care for the poor?

============================================
So then tell me dawnstar do you believe that employers have the right to decide how much the work employees do is worth to them?
How much should you get paid for sweeping the floor? Or diggng a ditch?
See the problem with borderline communists like yourself s you think people should get paid based on what the need, not based on what they do.
=============================================

if the job is worth you hiring someone to do for 40 or more hours a week, well, then you should pay enough to keep a living breething person there doing the job!!!!

which puts it at probably around $9.00/hr????

Uhhuh, so in other words you dont feel an employer has the right to decide how much that work is worth to them, OK got it.
So what you are saying is that you advocate facism, ie government control of Industry. Good to know.

Originally posted by mwm1331

When in the past was there ever a financial incentve for the rich to care for the poor?

1775 - The American Revolution

1789 - The French Revolution

1917 - The Russian Revolution


There's more, but you get my drift.


.

Sooner or later you're going to find out that compassion is the most important thing there is in life.