What does "Shared Prosperity" mean to you?

oh, yes...
and the profits of the major retail chains like WalMart, of the health insurance industries, gas and electrical companies, rental properties, heck, just about every segment of our economy, where do you think they would be if all this money wasn't flowing to the lower income brackets to help them buy what they need and a little of what they want? how much do you think landlords would have to reduce their rents to have tenants if it wasn't for hud? how many customers would the electric company lose if it wasn't for heap? how many patients would be dropping out of the healthcare industry if it wasn't for medicare and medicaid? how many employees would be demanding more money for their labor if they didn't have all these other sources? and....how much do you think this would be cutting into their profits? think maybe they'd be a little redistribution in the payscales at work to compensate....a little less bonus money for the upper management, a small reduction in the salaries of some of the better paid employees?
the democrats, with their social programs, along with the republicans with their emphasis in profits, are running hand in hand, creating a slave class, raping the middle class, and and endowing the wealthy with more wealth.

some time, take an interest in who owns a large portion of the rental properties in your area. let me know if you find alot of politicians in the group. with hud paying over $1000 bucks for a rat invested apartment in some areas, there's big money to be had on the hud bandwagon, and politicians are in the perfect position to cash in....and in the area that I was living in, they were cashing in big time!

I don't think that anyone with a thimble full of intellect, would argue that our system is perfect..

However,

The age old adage of "Being careful what you wish for, you might get it" applies here so completely..

Is there a wage disparage? Yes, but to ask the Government to step in, well....

Socialism has failed in every single attempt in history, why is it that the proponents of that dead system still continue to espouse the ideals that have themselves proved to be unworkable and unattainable?

It is also usually the ones that scream the loudest about corrupt government that want that same government to step in and control all of our lives. (Oxymoron)

Facts

1. We are arguably the single most successful and powerful country in the world...

2. People have been foretelling the doom of this country because of our system for decades...

3. Those same people are not going to go away, they just need to repaint their placards and find another place to predict doom.. LOL

4. This great nation is based on self reliance.. Not working for you? Change jobs, or go to some other country..

5. This great nation is Capitalist... Again, not for you? You have options..

Capitalism and self reliance IS what makes this country as great as it is.. People work hard all over the world, yet here is where the wealth, success and prosperity are.

Even the poor people here in the states live better than most moderate income people in the rest of the world....

So keep on wishing for your socialist state, all the while watching your new DVD player, listening to your Ipod and driving your automobile. All that belongs to you....

Keep hoping for socialism and living with JUST YOUR FAMILY in your home, only your home on your lot that would fit two or three other houses in a socialist country...


Yeah, those poor people that are posting here on ATS with those computers that in a socialist society would all be in a shared common room and we would be waiting in line to use them...

The strongest economy
The greatest health care
The most successful people

Yeah, we really stink as a country...

Semper

First off...can you name those "Socialist" countries you're describing? I saw mention of Cuba, Vietnam and North Korea. Those are communist regimes...well except for North Korea, which is off the Looney Tunes scale, way past totalitarian.

There are those in the US that regard Canada as a shade too pink for their liking...and I ain't talking gay rights. Yet the only major consumer failing we seem to have here is a dearth of Hostess 'Real Fruit' Fruit Pies. I think you can call most of Scandinavia socialist, Tony Blair was Labour, was he not? While he embraced the neocons, that's still the mainstream Socialist party in the UK. Most of Europe has strong socialist parties that regularly share government...heck, it was actions of Canada's socialist NDP that toppled the Liberals and got the neocons into a minority government here. Still no Hostess 'Real Fruit' Fruit Pies, though.

I'm gonna bet that all of those "socialist' countries have higher universal health care ratings than the US. My point? Define your terms and do a little more research. In this country, it's the socialist parties that have brought about universal health care, government pension, and I believe, also unemployment insurance...safety nets for the average citizen.

For a lecture about how capitalism has been replaced by globalism, I'll need to get caffeinated up. But the fact is, a few years ago you could land a pair of Nikes in Vancouver for $9...then they sell for $110. That ain't capitalism if those who make them can never dream of buying them. That's somebody laughing all the way to the bank over the global disparity in wages. And for all that cheap stuff y'all (and me) can buy at Walmart...we need it cheap cuz our jobs making that stuff went off-shore, so now we have to buy Chinese. There's my 2-bits Canadian, one coffee in.

What does "Shared Prosperity" mean to you?

Her unroyal lowness, her hideous heinous--Queen Shrillery Antoinette de Fosterizer de Machiavelli de Marx de Stalin . . . de Sade . . . Has spoken.

All slaves and serfs kowtow IMMEDIATELY.

FOREHEADS TO THE FLOOR SCUM! NOW!

= = = =

She has brazenly proclaimed publicly earlier that "We will take things away from you and give them to others for the common good."

She is keenly interested in forcing very extensive citizen monitoring hiding in a Machiavellian health care system.

She's very keenly interested in forcing parents to surrender children to The State for educating and rearing.

She's very interested in trashing Christian and patriotic values.

She's super keenly interested in becoming QUEEN OF NORTH AM/NAU. She'd love to be married to the Anti-Christ but likely realizes that's not an option so she'll take all the power she can beg, borrow and especially steal.

She's super keen about taxing every available penny possible so she can spend it on more power mongering, greed and tyranny.

Evidently her daddy was horrid at bonding at critical stages of her development.

The gals and profs at her univ taught her the glories of Marxism. Her thesis was a glowing praise of Marxism. Her part time work was in behalf of the Chicago 7 under the most influential Communist Party Attorney in the nation.

So . . . I guess, in short . . . her slogan means just what she says--in her euphamistic paraphrase of the hollow Communist ideal:

to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities.

She's eager to force everyone into the lowest common denominator as taxed-to-death-serfs--to her greed and power mongering on the way to her rushing the USA into the NAU and the global government at the speed of light.

This is the wonderful creature that walked down White House hallways cursing the very men on duty to guard her filthy worthless life.

This is the sweet BWitch who demanded that a Marine guard refill her coffee cup. When the marine repeated for the 2nd or 3rd time that he was not allowed to leave his post of standing guard for her, she threw the remains of her coffee in his face.

= = = =

This is the creature from the dark lagoon who gets a transfusion of black widow blood every other hour . . . welll . . . maybe not . . . but I wouldn't be shocked if there were something about that hideous going on that hadn't surfaced yet.

The stories of lesbian orgies at Camp David . . . and the Christmas tree she was responsible for decorating in the Whitehouse of hand crafted ornaments from donors from around the country . . . of sex organs . . . are entirely plausible with this creature.

What does "Shared Prosperity" mean to you?

To me it sounds like new buzzwords for increasing the tax burden on the middle class.

johnny,

You have not addressed anything near to what was exemplified as a "pure" socialist government.

If you are a student of government then you understand that NO true communist country has ever survived the first rebellion, nor has any true socialist government survived the first socialist famine.

As far as health care systems go, you are correct in that the US is not number one, but according to the WHO we consistently rank higher than any quasi socialist regime. See it's those pesky one, two and three year waiting periods you all have to get anything done. Actually other than your cheap prescriptions, the flood of Canadians entering the US for surgeries is astounding. But be glad, if you improved your health care, the Mexicans would be coming there.

But they are not, they come here because those same "Neocons" you espouse, have created the greatest nation this world has ever seen. They come here because they know they can make a living here, not in Canada or any other socialist state.

You may want to research the use of the word Neocon, according to a research group of the Nation Broadcasters Union, the term is to be avoided on the air as it is indicative of poor verbiage and a general lack of knowledge...
I do my research too..

socialist
1827, from Fr. socialiste, in reference to the teachings of Comte de Saint-Simon, founder of Fr. socialism. Socialism is attested from 1837, apparently first in reference to Robert Owen's communes. "Pierre Leroux (1797-1871), idealistic social reformer and Saint-Simonian publicist, expressly claims to be the originator of the word socialisme" [Klein]. The word begins to be used in Fr. in the modern sense c.1835. Socialista, with a different sense, was applied 18c. to followers and pupils of Du. jurist Grotius (1583-1645).

~~~~~~

3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles

# Communism

1. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
2. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.


dictionary.reference.com...

Oh Yeah, You got it going on....

That is why the Socialist countries are leading he world in...... OOOPPS

Nothing

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
johnny, You have not addressed anything near to what was exemplified as a "pure" socialist government.

Neither is the US a pure capitalist economy...especially now under globalism.

If you are a student of government then you understand that NO true communist country has ever survived the first rebellion, nor has any true socialist government survived the first socialist famine.

Doing just fine up here, thanks. Barring that Hostess "Real Fruit' fruit pie thing.

As far as health care systems go, you are correct in that the US is not number one, but according to the WHO we consistently rank higher than any quasi socialist regime. See it's those pesky one, two and three year waiting periods you all have to get anything done.

Wife just spent 8 hours in the hospital for an allergic reaction. No waiting, observation, ultrasound, IV, oxygen, drugs...they called it the "Million Dollar Treatment". Cost? Zippidy-dooh-dah.

... they come here because those same "Neocons" you espouse, have created the greatest nation this world has ever seen. They come here because they know they can make a living here, not in Canada or any other socialist state.

The neocons don't create, they exploit.

You may want to research the use of the word Neocon, according to a research group of the Nation Broadcasters Union, the term is to be avoided on the air as it is indicative of poor verbiage and a general lack of knowledge...

My MP calls them that...I like him cuz he walks the walk. I'll accept the term.

Oh Yeah, You got it going on....
That is why the Socialist countries are leading he world in...... OOOPPS
Nothing

Oh yah? 60% of the players in the Stanley Cup playoffs are Canadian...and we invented basketball!!

Dude, I don't agree with everything you say, but I respect the way you think.
Cheers, Johhnny Canuck

Dude, I don't agree with everything you say, but I respect the way you think.
Cheers, Johnny Canuck

Agreed!!!

Same here...

And just so you know....

I think the greatest place God created is the Yukon....

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
I think the greatest place God created is the Yukon....

Ahem.

Have you ever been to New Mexico?

Shared prosperity is just a newspeak for income redistribution and maybe a dozen more terms for taking more of what people earn.

The basis of this concept is class conflict, which is the hallmark of Marxism.

[edit on 2007/6/4 by GradyPhilpott]

the problem is...the poor live better than some of the moderate income people here in some areas. they can move into that $1000 rat invested apartment I spoke of earlier, how many of you could? They can air their houses out every winter day, and still have a warm house, how many of yous could? they can have three kids, take a job that pays $6.00 an hour, and have a baby sitter that get's nine dollars an hour! Let's see the housewife and mother of three in a moderate income family swing that one! They can run their child to the doctors everytime they have a sniffle, can you?

one thing is darned sure...this isn't shared prosperity, it isn't capitalism, and it isn't socialism....it's some kind of interbreeded mongrel that just isn't working. I spent half the time that my kids were growing up knowing darned well that them and me would be better off financially kicking the income earner out of the house!! the actually value of the benefits we would get actually exceeded his income.



Why is it that we have a system that actually rewards people (actually, it just about makes it necessary) to decrease their earning potential, to opt for the low paying job instead of something that pays $10 an hour? It's like they really want people willing to take those jobs...it's like they are bribing them to take them.

True Socialism would be better.

True Capitalism would be better...and freedom would be preserved. Since, I am sorry, but the more who can lay claim of paying your way, the more who will have a say as to what you do, how you act, what you eat or drink.

what we have is insanity...