It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why do most liberals hate Capitalism and love Government?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
*cough* Okay, let's dismantle this tripe in one response.


Originally posted by Matrix Rising
Government steals more capital and wealth from the people then anyone yet liberals and progressives think the Government is almighty.


No, we believe that the government should be a voice and the will of the people against the hegemony of international corporations that rape and take from you many times more than the government ever will.


The liberals and progressives want the government to control every aspect of our lives because to them government knows best.

Isn't government knowing best an anti American sentiment?


If I voted and thus elected a representative to office, I sure as heck expect them to work for my best interests.

We don't want government to control everything, we just want to make sure that the government allows the individual citizen the freedom to succeed without an oppressive corporate/class system that stifles upward movement and consolidates power into the few.


Obama said in a 2001 interview that the Constitution was fundamentally flawed because it restrains government and it doesn't talk about the redistribution of wealth.


Not true. That's quote mined. Reading a conversation in full, in context, is a great way to educate yourself. I doubt that this thread is an ends to that means.


The Founders restrained and tied the hands of government because they didn't want one man or a government dictating to people how to live their lives.


What's your point? If you think Obama is a dictator or our current government is dictating how we live, then we are communicating through some space time portal where your reality is vastly different from this one.

I have as much freedom now as I did 20 years ago. Except now I have less money because unrestrained capitalism almost destroyed our economy.


There will always be a split between those who trust themselves to manage their lives and those who want and trust a big government to manage their lives.


Liberals trust themselves and manage themselves as well as, or better than, conservatives. Obviously you are completely unaware of the fact that red states receive the most welfare per capita and white conservatives receive more welfare than any other demographic.


Where do all our tax dollars go? According to a new study by the Tax Foundation, many of them flow from richer states to poorer ones, and from the Northeast and the West Coast to the interior. As a result, Republican-leaning states overwhelmingly gain revenue from high taxes, whereas Democratic-leaning states tend to lose money. A raft of what might be called "Republican welfare states"—twenty-four in all—receive more per capita from Washington than their citizens render in taxes, yet nevertheless voted for the tax-slashing George W. Bush in 2000.


Source



They steal the taxes they get for Medicare and S.S. and replace it with I.O.U.'s and this is why both programs are in trouble. They are pyramid schemes.


Oh snap. Apparently REPUBLICAN states are the ones stealing the money, as is clearly outlined in national statistics if you cared to do even some cursory, non-biased research.


They have us in over 14 trillion dollars in debt, 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities and they borrow, waste and spend constantly.

I hear these liberals complaining about Capitalism yet many of them are rich because of capitalism. They want the slaves to live in a socialist country while they still bask in the freedom of Capitalism.


TARP was a Bush program. /facepalm

Afghanistan and Iraq where Republican commitments that further drained our treasury. /facepalm

Bush and Congressional Republicans slashed taxes for the elite and continued to accelerate government spending, vaporizing the budget surplus a DEMOCRAT had left them. /facepalm

I am a small business owner that does well for myself and absolutely ZERO of my liberal/progressive ideas would do anything but make it easier for people like myself to become rich.

And about the debt, noticing anything on this graph look odd? Tell me, who primarily raises debt levels?


None of the things they pass in Congress will apply to them. They will always make sure they have loopholes that exclude them.

When you live in freedom and liberty there will always be an imbalance because some people will work hard and build a business while others will party their life away. This is freedom.


Right, I forgot that Conservatives didn't party. Bush Jr. was all work and no play in college! And let's not forget all those successful businesses he ran!

Reagan was what again? An actor? In Hollywood, right? Bush Sr. was the head of the CIA, right? Wow you guys have an awesome roster of hard working, honest, Presidents, don't you?


What the liberals and progressives want is to try to stop this imbalance through redistribution of wealth and an almighty government. What they don't see is this way of thinking is truly anti -liberty and anti-freedom.


Nope. I'm getting tired of responding to this stuff that's obviously not true.


In a free society your going to have people who don't take care of themselves and people who don't make it. If you try to regulate society to fix this imbalance that comes with a free society you will eventually have a slave nation instead of a free nation.


You're right.

Fortunately for you, there are Liberals and Progressives in this nation here to take care of the statistically less-educated, poorer, welfare needing conservatives of this country that greedily take all of the liberals' hard-earned money and siphon it to support their lazy habits in the southern states, where apparently they sit around all day and rant on the internet about the big bad government instead of making their state less dependent on Liberals' and Democrats' hard earned dollars.

Glad my tax money could help.





posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Solasis
 


Unfortunately you are all too correct with your presumption my friend, there are those out there who would not only say " Nice, another swing for me," but would actually kick Timmy off of it to get it! These are most often individuals who associate themselves with a group or order. Some even for secret orders, like the secret PTB who run the show. Then you have those who, frankly, are just naturally greedy, selfish @$$holes that are about as altruistic as a 9mm.

However this is life, we have givers and we have takers. Unregulated, free-market capitalism does a great job of balancing these two groups of people in our society, socialism would simply make us all takers relying on big government to give. Let us not become lethargic and fat with the BS they feed us
.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Solasis
 


Unfortunately you are all too correct with your presumption my friend, there are those out there who would not only say " Nice, another swing for me," but would actually kick Timmy off of it to get it! These are most often individuals who associate themselves with a group or order. Some even for secret orders, like the secret PTB who run the show. Then you have those who, frankly, are just naturally greedy, selfish @$$holes that are about as altruistic as a 9mm.

However this is life, we have givers and we have takers. Unregulated, free-market capitalism does a great job of balancing these two groups of people in our society, socialism would simply make us all takers relying on big government to give. Let us not become lethargic and fat with the BS they feed us
.

[edit on 25-3-2010 by Mikemp44]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Sorry, double posted for some reason



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mikemp44
reply to post by Solasis
 

However this is life, we have givers and we have takers. Unregulated, free-market capitalism does a great job of balancing these two groups of people in our society


Up until a few months ago, I would've thought you were crazy for saying this; but then I took a class, a well-taught class, about the philosophy of economics. It was taught by a deadpan anarcho-capitalist who plays Baldur's Gate and seriously knows his economic stuff. Yes; properly unregulated free-market capitalism balances just about everything, except occasionally for underhanded competition tactics (like, Mafia style things, I mean.) But I don't think the chances of proper unregulated free-market is likely to happen. At all. And...


socialism would simply make us all takers relying on big government to give. Let us not become lethargic and fat with the BS they feed us
.


This is a misunderstanding of ideal socialism on par with my previous misunderstanding of ideal capitalism! I know it's a communist slogan, but it's close enough; think of the first part of that old adage, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Note that neither of these are "Wants" -- they both disregard what we want and only acknowledge what we're capable of. In an ideal socialism, everyone works; everyone does their fair share of the work. Everyone gives what they can, and takes what they need; they don't just take take take.

I'm fine if you don't like this way of living, but y'oughta understand it



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I always ask the same question.If you think we truley live in a free capitalistic society, open a dime store next to Wal-mart and tell me how you do.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Well, that's just bad business strategy! I mean, even Dollar Stores don't have much for a dollar anymore; a dime store would be able to sell gumballs, at best!

Your point is a good one... But it needs to be made better to convince people



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Avenginggecko
 


OMG! Avenginggecko you are my new hero! I thought I did a fine job countering this idiots broken record of brainless diarrhea, but you are the winner. Together we might help a few of the lost ones, unfortunately most are too far gone to exorcise their conservative demons.

Stick around because I am fixing to light up Matrix Rising again. Ever notice their talking points always seem to be in an incoherent stream of babble. From one talking point to another with no real flow? That's how I picture a zombie would speak.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Responding to Matrix Rising's brainless diarrhea




What you and others are doing is called class envy.


Here is an interesting bit on class envy:www.knowledgerush.com...
This debate over wealth is often a political one with left wing groups denigrating the wealthy and right wing groups accusing them of class envy. The term class envy is used by many conservative institutions such as the Wall Street Journal and the British Tory Party. The term is not generally directed at the poor themselves, but rather at groups that are viewed as trying to encourage or take advantage of class envy such as liberal media outlets or leftist political parties.

I would like to settle this issue. I DO NOT feel like money should be taken from anyone and given to anyone else. As I said earlier, I don't think a brick layer working 60 hours a week should live at the poverty level, while some people who shine a chair with their ass get 10 million a year! That is NOT socialism, NOT class envy, and NOT wanting a big government welfare! It's wanting hard work to be properly rewarded, and wanting gravy jobs to not suck up the majority of a company's financial resources.




You worry about what a C.E.O. gets paid but this is do to a lack of understanding of economics.


It's "due to" not, do to. That is a lack of understanding how to spell a three letter word. And I understand economics just fine, which has NOTHING to do with CEO"S getting 319 times higher pay than others in the same company. That seems it would be bad for a company's profit margin.




We have a strong middle class so if everyone doesn't make it, they can still live a good life.


Are you even living in the same universe as the rest of us? America's middle class is drying up thanks to Reaganomics, and trickle down economics. Why won't people like you just read stuff for god sakes?
www.time.com...
www.census.gov...
www.livescience.com...
www.wealthdaily.com...
www.factcheck.org...
thedailypage.typepad.com...




You mentioned Germany and Japan. Germany's GDP is 3.65 trillion Japan's GDP is 4.91 trillion America GDP is 14.2 trillion


There are 8 apples in my fridge, 1000 sheets of toilet paper on a roll of Scott's tissue, and 7 dwarfs in the story Snow White. Yea, so what? And? Your point is? You don't have one. Is it that America has a higher GDP so CEO pay should be 319 times that of others? Bull F*cking Sh*t! It's taking advantage of others below you, and that is wrong. PERIOD.




What people don't realize when you have an Apple, Microsoft or Google making billions of dollars this makes the economy better. This is why our GDP is 14 trillion.


"What people don't realize.." Wow, look how much smarter you are than everyone else. Your little economic summary reads like a 5 year old explaining where babies come from. The more you type, the more you reveal your IQ level. And as usual, no facts, EVER, to back up any claim.




So yes people who start a business make billions of dollars but you have a strong middle class.


"Dee stork goes to a punkin patch and wooks unda a punkin, and finds a little brubber, and dwopps him down dee chimney to dee baby cwib."




Everyone is not going to make it in a free society. People will try to be actors or start a business and fail but our economy can handle this because we have a strong middle class.


Only if you are living in 1953. Which BTW, tax rates for the top earners was 91%! en.wikipedia.org...
Under Clinton they were 39%, Bush lowered them to 33%, and Obama moved them back up to 35% AND IS CALLED A SOCIALIST! PLEASE!




I'm so sick of Americans wanting America to be Europe or some other socialist country when we have it so well here.


Europe is neither socialist, nor a country! Let me guess, big almighty government ed-jew-ma-kay-shun? Every line you type sounds like you are on some political acid trip.




We have a 14 trillion dollar GDP but now we have a 14 trillion dollar debt with over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. We also have close to 10% unemployment.


And this is even scarier...derivatives market is 50 times the ENTIRE planet's GDP! 600 trillion. Yay, unregulated free markets that solve everything!




Massive Government and massive debt is destroying this country. All of these social programs are due to crooked politicians and a liberal ideology that's anti American.


Wrong again! It's capitalist GREED that is destroying this country. Left unchecked by government we would end up with one man holding all 14 trillion dollars and 350 million broke Americans. That is anti-American. You sure are big on calling a different view anti-American. As I said before, it is a bullying tactic that attempts to draw into question a person's patriotism to sway their personal views. It's an immature, accusatory, and cheap trick that doesn't work on me, and makes you look uneducated.




America is built on the God given liberty of the individual not a nanny state that buries our children in debt.


What would America look like if we took away those "nanny state" programs? Well, let's see. First grandma would never make it to have her plug pulled. She would be broke the second she retired. She would have to work to make a living until she dropped dead. There would be an unfathomable amount of uninsured children, elderly, and veterans dying from treatable illnesses. There would be so many poor and homeless that their cardboard box homes would replace houses. Millions would die. What a wonderful world! I am sure God intended the liberty he gave to his children to look like this.




Liberals don't get the concept of freedom and like you said their are both democrats and republicans who are liberals.


(there, not their) Liberals don't get the concept of freedom? You can't possibly believe that. In that case, Conservatives don't get the concept of reality, logic, and compassion for fellow humans. That makes them anti-American, Communist people haters.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Just from the first few paragraphs of your OP I can tell you are hopelessly buried under the partisan poison pumped out constantly by the MSM. They want it to seem like Republican Versus Democrat when really it should Americans helping other Americans. Instead the powers that be, the rich controlling interests, divide and conquer using the two party system. They have this country on puppet strings and have allies bought and paid for in both parties.

To me there isn't a big difference between big business and big government, any ideology when carried to an absurd extreme becomes dangerous and that includes Capitalism.

We should be uniting under our common beliefs as a nation not bickering amongst ourselves over propaganda we were spoon-fed through the boob-tube.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   


Liberals don't realize a nanny state is anti freedom.


"A nanny state is anti freedom, liberals are anti-freedom, red lights are anti-freedom, cat lovers are anti-puppy lovers. I mean, this is getting ridiculous. Will somebody who can debate properly PLEASE come on to help defend Matrix from me?




They say a person needs to pay them so they can redistribute the wealth. I have heard liberals say,"He makes x amount of dollars so why shouldn't he want to pay a little more in taxes."


Had you read the FACTS I posted earlier, you would see the truth of the tax rates and how the redistribution of wealth has been disproportionately skewed to benefit the rich. In order to be "in the know"' you must read and be aware of actual data. Oh but to read facts would undermine your beliefs, and we can't have that.




Again, a liberal doesn't understand freedom.


Conservatives don't understand FACTS and how they reflect true reality.




If a billionaire wants to be Scrooge McDuck then in a free society he has every right to be and you can't force him to give you money.


Obviously you can't force him to pay a fair share like everyone else either.\
motherjones.com...
www.guardian.co.uk...
theweek.com...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.globalpolicy.org...





Liberals want to tell you what to eat, what car to drive and how you should use energy.


Conservatives want to tell you who to worship, what to do with your own body, and how to keep quiet while the rich siphon off your retirement savings.




They think if you just think and act like them then you would be better off. They think they know what's best for you.


Conservatives think if you just think and act like them then you would be better off. They think they know what's best for you.




In a free society people can live their lives in ways that you wouldn't and you can't force them through big government to live like you.


In this universe I am from, we DO live in a free society. Which is why in the universe I am in we have rich, poor, black, white, and Lady Gaga. Tell us more about your universe, it sounds so different to ours.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Avenginggecko
 


It's clear you don't have a clue as to what your talking about so let me educate you on your misguided liberalism. You said:


No, we believe that the government should be a voice and the will of the people against the hegemony of international corporations that rape and take from you many times more than the government ever will.


Clearly you don't understand how government works.

They rape and steal from you and your response is they only rape me a little bit compared to big corporations LOL.

Do you realize that S.S. and Medicare are pyramid schemes? The government steals the money people pay into these programs and replaces it with I.O.U.'s. This is why both of these programs are going bankrupt. They depend on workers at the bottom of the pyramid paying our benefits to those at the top of the pyramid. The reason why the pyramid is crumbling because people are living longer and the top of the pyramid is beginning to widen. When this happens government will began to pay out more than it takes in and the pyramid will crumble.

The problem occurs because governments have useful idiots who think they are getting something free when the government is stealing from them, there kids and unborn kids and grand kids who will have to pay back 14 trillion dollars in debt and over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

Here's some facts that get in the way of your liberalism.


Social Security to pay more in benefits this year than it takes in

The Social Security system this year will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, The New York Times reports, quoting the Congressional Budget Office.

The switch comes six years earlier than expected, The Times says.

The newspaper quotes Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, as saying payments have risen more than expected during the recession because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned.

At the same time, he says, there are fewer paychecks to tax.


I read a post on this story that made a very good point.


Now that coverage of health care reform is fading from the news, it is being replaced with increased coverage of Social Security. That is appropriate, but most of the articles, currently being published totally ignore the most urgent problem facing Social Security. That problem is the fact that, every dollar of the $2.5 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue, generated by the 1983 payroll tax hike has already been spent by the government. The trust fund contains no real assets. It is empty!


content.usatoday.com...

This is also occuring with Medicare. This is why many of the Obamacare benefits don't kick in until 2014 because the government will collect all of these new taxes and then spend it.

What you are supporting is theft from this generation and future generations because you love big government.

Liberalism is a cancer that's destroying this country. There are liberal republicans and democrats. We are now in a global economy with cheap labor and the last thing we need is big government and massive debt.

You said:


We don't want government to control everything, we just want to make sure that the government allows the individual citizen the freedom to succeed without an oppressive corporate/class system that stifles upward movement and consolidates power into the few.


Again, you don't understand what your talking about.

Capitalism is fine. It allows individuals to follow their dreams and if they make a bunch of money then good for them.

Sadly, liberalism is also about class envy. I remember reading about Simon Cowell getting 100 million dollars on the Huffingtonpost and liberals had a fit. They said:

"Nobody should make that kind of money."

"He doesn't deserve that, there's more important things that can be done with that money."

What I had to explain to the liberals is that we live in a free country and if FOX wants to pay Simon 100 million then they must be making billions. A liberal thinks they know the best ways to spend your money. They want you to live and think like they do. They are truly anti freedom.

Also, Capitalism would work even better if it wasn't for the greedy government that you love allowing themselves to be paid off.

It's sad when you hear liberals because they don't understand how are country works. We have a 14 trillion dollar economy because of capitalism. We have a 14 trillion dollar debt and 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities because of government.

I started a company and then sold it and now I'm working on producing an independent film.

I'm not rich but I don't envy others who are rich and I don't want to take from them just because my business didn't make a billion dollars.

You said:


Not true. That's quote mined. Reading a conversation in full, in context, is a great way to educate yourself. I doubt that this thread is an ends to that means.


Again, you should have read what Obama said. Liberals will always say,"Well he didn't really say that."

This is what Obama said in 2001:


Seven years before Barack Obama's "spread the wealth" comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.


www.wnd.com...

Obama is clearly a radical like Wright, Ayers and others.

Obama wants redistribution of wealth and "economic justice."

The term economic justice makes no sense in a free society. In a free society there will always be an imbalance. This is because some people will be successful and others will not.

It's not the job of the Government to take from those who are successful and redistribute the money according to there ideology. This is why the Founders restrained government. They didn't one man or government dictating to people how they live their lives.

Obama said, the Warren Court wasn't "radical enough" because it didn't "break free" of the essential constraints put in place by the Founding Fathers.

WHOAA!!!!!!!!!!!

This is an incredible statement that's truly anti American.

Obama knows that these are essential constraints but he doesn't care. He still wants the government to break free of these constraints because they don't allow him to put in place his radical/progressive/liberal/socialist/marxist agenda.

He said the Constitution was "negative liberties" that say what the government can't do to you but not what it "must" do.

The most radical interview I have heard from someone who is now President. He wants to change and transform the country into something it's not.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Sorry Avenginggecko, I want you to reply to this, but I couldn't help butting in.

Matrix, is citing S.S. and medicare's shortfalls meant to imply these programs that help our elderly and children are bad ideas? Does the fact that there was some mishandling of funds or bad math mean we should have never had programs that help children get medical care or keep old people from dying of starvation?

You cited Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, as saying payments have risen more than expected during the recession because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned.

Jobs did disappear, but why and how? Could it be that greedy corporations, in an attempt to save a buck for themselves, said "Screw Americans, let's ship these jobs overseas to get cheaper slave labor and avoid US taxes!" Could it be the failed conservative idea of trickle down economics? The ridiculous idea that the more money rich people have the more they create jobs. Unfortunately we tried that and it resulted in 70% of the nations wealth ending up in the hands of the top 2% while private sector job creation has been shedding jobs ever since. Trickle down economics turned out to be a ploy to enrich the top at the expense of the middle class.
www.nytimes.com...





What you are supporting is theft from this generation and future generations because you love big government.


No, it's supporting programs that keep children and old people ALIVE. If the private business sector would create programs like these the government wouldn't have to. Regardless children and old people need someone to take care of them. Conservatives regard these people as "lazy bums looking for a handout."




Liberalism is a cancer that's destroying this country.


Matrix, why don't you take your anti-American hate speech, roll it into a tube and cram it straight up your keister. Perhaps you should move to another country before us liberals destroy this one? Don't trip over your stupidity on the way out!




It's sad when you hear liberals because they don't understand how are country works.


It's is also sad to see conservatives that don't understand how OUR English words are spelled.




Obama wants redistribution of wealth and "economic justice."


Let's hear from our Founding Fathers on this subject:

Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Thomas Jefferson

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes.
Andrew Jackson



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


I'm not going to address all of your points because 12GaugePermissionSlip is doing a brilliant job deconstructing them (kudos to you, 12Gauge!), but I just wanted to look at one thing:


Obama is clearly a radical like Wright, Ayers and others.


I'm skeptical you even know why Wright and Ayers are considered radicals. Wright is an African-American religious pastor whose influence on any of Obama's policies I see none of. Can you name any?

Ayers was a member of the Maoist urban guerrilla warfare group known as the Weather Underground. This group was extremely anti-war, anti-capitalism and anti-government. If Obama was president in the Sixties, handing out bail-outs to every financial entity that slithered past as he is doing today, you better believe people just like Ayers would be conducting bombings and the like.

Learn some history, put it in perspective and think rationally.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 


What???

Your post shows a lack of understanding of how economics work and how are government works.

You said:


Matrix, is citing S.S. and medicare's shortfalls meant to imply these programs that help our elderly and children are bad ideas? Does the fact that there was some mishandling of funds or bad math mean we should have never had programs that help children get medical care or keep old people from dying of starvation?

You cited Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, as saying payments have risen more than expected during the recession because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned.

Jobs did disappear, but why and how? Could it be that greedy corporations, in an attempt to save a buck for themselves, said "Screw Americans, let's ship these jobs overseas to get cheaper slave labor and avoid US taxes!" Could it be the failed conservative idea of trickle down economics? The ridiculous idea that the more money rich people have the more they create jobs. Unfortunately we tried that and it resulted in 70% of the nations wealth ending up in the hands of the top 2% while private sector job creation has been shedding jobs ever since. Trickle down economics turned out to be a ploy to enrich the top at the expense of the middle class.


The first mistake you make is that you try to appeal to emotion.

This is what liberals do because their policies are so bad. Government greed has nothing to do with helping the poor or the elderly.

Social Security and Medicare are bankrupting this country because they are pyramid schemes.

These programs may work without bankrupting the country if it wasn't for government greed. Do you understand that government spends the money it collects in taxes for S.S. and Medicare and then they spend it. They replace the money with I.O.U.'s and then they have to raise taxes or borrow money to pay the benefits which sinks us deeper into debt.

This is how a pyramid scheme works. You depend on investors at the bottom of the pyramid to show a return to investors at the top of the pyramid. This is why you need to constantly add new investors and if you don't the pyramid will crash because you are paying out more than your taking in.

S.S. and Medicare are pyramid schemes. They depend on workers at the bottom of the pyramid to pay out benefits to those at the top of the pyramid.

Our government depends on a certain percentage of people dying before they reach the top of the pyramid.

The baby boomers have thrown a monkey wrench into this pyramid scheme. They are living longer and this means the top of the pyramid starts to widen.

So you can try to add new workers to the system. Bush tried with immigration reform. Or you can ration out healthcare and kill a bunch of people to try and close the top of the pyramid ad this is what Obamacare will try to do.

What needs to occur is the age of eligibility needs to be raised for people under 40 like myself and these programs need to be phased out unless the money is put into secure bonds or in a place where government can't touch it.

What you don't understand is these programs will bankrupt the country because of greedy politicians spending the money that's collected for these programs and replacing the money with I.O.U.'s.

It's like if I had 10,000 new investors and I had 1,000 initial investors. I could use the money from the 10,000 investors to pay the 1,000 investors. But now I need 50,000 new investors to pay the 10,000 investors. Eventually you don't have enough new investors and the pyramid crashes.

This is S.S., Medicare and this new Obamacare. They will collect new taxes for 4 years to pay for Obamacare but the government will spend the money. When it comes time for the majority of Obamacare benefits to go into effect in 2014, the government will borrow the money, tax and depend on new people mandated into the system to pay the benefits.

The sad thing is, many people fall for these lies from government because they cover their lies by appealing to emotion.

Hitler said:

It's a fortunate thing for Governments that the people don't think."

He also said:

"People are generally stupid, if you repeat the same slogans again and again they will eventually believe it."

Sadly, this is true.

You also talk about jobs being shipped overseas. You do know Clinton and the Democrats are some of the strongest supporters of free trade?

It makes no sense to cry about corporations sending jobs overseas because it's good business. Corporations are in the business of making money and if they can make more money by moving a plant to India then they will.

It's obvious that you will lose jobs to cheap labor but you can gain with service jobs and entrepreneurs. What's hurting the economy now is massive government and massive debt.

You can't have big government and massive debt in a global economy with cheap labor.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
This is what I love about politics, you can nit-pick ANYTHING that is presented, but it won't get you anywhere other than frustrated. Both sides believe very much in the same end result, but each has a very different view of how to get there. I think now we as Americans have reached a crossing point in which we choose to continue being 'progressive' and abandon the constitution, or curb our social projects and move more towards state control, as outlined in the constitution. I vote for state controlled government as it is more connected to the locals and provides a safety system for our country financially. If our federal government goes broke, the states go broke and our entire country is brought to it's kness. But if a state government goes broke it can be assisted by other states, and the impact will largely be contained to that state. I believe the constitution put this fail-safe in place to protect us from what is happenning right now. If only we would listen to our own constitution... sigh.


I know it is elementary, but those that "govern least, govern best."



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 





What would America look like if we took away those "nanny state" programs? Well, let's see. First grandma would never make it to have her plug pulled. She would be broke the second she retired. She would have to work to make a living until she dropped dead. There would be an unfathomable amount of uninsured children, elderly, and veterans dying from treatable illnesses. There would be so many poor and homeless that their cardboard box homes would replace houses. Millions would die. What a wonderful world! I am sure God intended the liberty he gave to his children to look like this.


Huh? Responsible people plan ahead for retirement, they dont plan to live on SS.

Grandama wouldnt be broke the moment she stopped working.

The problem with people like you is that you are under the false assumption its governments job to take care of you. It isnt.

Grow up, be responsible. Learn to take care of yourself and stop being a parasite.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Well, I can tell by your copy/paste talking points that you've used up everything you think you know. I am about done with you, you're boring me.




The first mistake you make is that you try to appeal to emotion.


Yea, you're right. What was I thinking? A conservative republican with emotions? I was reaching a bit with that line of thought.




This is what liberals do because their policies are so bad. Government greed has nothing to do with helping the poor or the elderly.


Conservatives play on emotions as well. Emotions like fear. Their policies are so bad they got to scare into them. Government greed? How about corporate greed? Corporations seem to be the ones that put profits over people. If you say the government is going broke paying out more in S.S. and Medicare benefits than it collects, that would suggest they're putting people first. I don't know of any for profit corporation that offers any financial assistance to the elderly, medical care for children, or lifetime benefits to our veterans.




Social Security and Medicare are bankrupting this country because they are pyramid schemes.


I will concede that the SS and Medicare are in real trouble. I will state your assertion that it's a pyramid scheme is twisting details. Pyramid schemes don't operate on issuing IOUs.




S.S. and Medicare are pyramid schemes. They depend on workers at the bottom of the pyramid to pay out benefits to those at the top of the pyramid.


Case in point; you would describe SS in this fashion, yet according to money.howstuffworks.com...
In the Social Security system, the money you pay into the system gets immediately paid back out to the people who are currently getting Social Security checks. This arrangement came into being because of the way the system started. In 1935, when Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law, there were a lot of people who needed benefits (because of the Great Depression), but there was no money to pay those benefits with.

Had this program had a few years head start (like health care bill), it might be just fine. However Roosevelt had a national emergency to deal with. One that was created by....say it with me now.........GREED. And it was not government greed.




Our government depends on a certain percentage of people dying before they reach the top of the pyramid.


You know who REALLY depends on a certain percentage of people dying before they reach the top of the pyramid? Insurance companies. Are they a pyramid scheme too? Yes or no?


The baby boomers have thrown a monkey wrench into this pyramid scheme. They are living longer and this means the top of the pyramid starts to widen. So you can try to add new workers to the system. Bush tried with immigration reform. Or you can ration out healthcare and kill a bunch of people to try and close the top of the pyramid ad this is what Obamacare will try to do.


Now you claim that our democratically elected officials...ALL OF THEM....are in on a vast plot to reduce the population to shore up SS! Guess again, Backward Boy. The insurance companies were the ones who rationed health care by dropping people for pre-existing conditions, denying coverage, and capping benefits, FOR MONEY!! FOR MORE PROFIT!! All the while they were raising rates every year.
Health Insurance Premiums Up 131% in Last Ten Years
Read more: money.blogs.time.com...

The health care bill corrects that injustice and now you claim rationing? Absurd! The bill STOPS the rationing, that has killed 45,000 Americans every year.
New study finds 45,000 deaths annually linked to lack of health coverage
www.harvardscience.harvard.edu...




What needs to occur is the age of eligibility needs to be raised for people under 40 like myself and these programs need to be phased out unless the money is put into secure bonds or in a place where government can't touch it.


Phased out? So you would like to see SS program ended? Let's be clear, your answer to fixing SS is to shut it down? Ending retirement benefits to 96 million elderly, ending health care for 45 million, and ending disability benefits for those who CAN'T work through no fault of their own? Who you look to then, the government or private companies, to dispose of all the corpses?




What you don't understand is these programs will bankrupt the country because of greedy politicians spending the money that's collected for these programs and replacing the money with I.O.U.'s.


Yea, those greedy politicians, like Bush who gave the top 2% $1.8 trillion in tax cuts. Half of that would have paid for ALL of the health care bill, but that socialist Bush redistributed the wealth.
www.politifact.com...
Wealth, mind you, that ALL Americans paid into and was given to the top 2 %. REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH! How about those greedy politicians (Bush) that wanted two wars but didn't want them on the budget. That has cost $1 trillion. costofwar.com...
And when you figure in veterans benefits, disability, etc. the bill is likely to top $3 trillion.
www.washingtonpost.com...
Man, America sure could use that kinda cash now, wouldn't you agree?




This is S.S., Medicare and this new Obamacare. They will collect new taxes for 4 years to pay for Obamacare but the government will spend the money. When it comes time for the majority of Obamacare benefits to go into effect in 2014, the government will borrow the money, tax and depend on new people mandated into the system to pay the benefits.


That is in direct contradiction to the CBO report, which states there will be a deficit REDUCTION by $130 billion the first ten years and $1.2 trillion REDUCTION the second decade. So you are just plainly wrong. There is no way to come to that mathematical conclusion and claim they will need to borrow anything. FAIL.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   


The sad thing is, many people fall for these lies from government because they cover their lies by appealing to emotion.


OMG! Look at what the emotion is on your side. Fear, anger, contempt, hatred. So you are lied to, to make you angry, we are lied to, to make us compassionate. Whatever!



Hitler said: It's a fortunate thing for Governments that the people don't think."


Oh...Okay. now I see...you're a Nazi. Why else would someone quote Hitler if not for the fact they are a Nazi. If you will claim some quote by Obama makes him a socialist then you have to own being a Nazi.




He also said: "People are generally stupid, if you repeat the same slogans again and again they will eventually believe it."


Actually, Nazi, he didn't say that.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it...." is regularly attributed to Joseph Goebbels. However, I have found no evidence that he said it. Everyone quotes everyone else, but no one ever gives a source.

"A lie told often enough becomes truth" Vladimir Lenin.

William James (1842-1910) The father of modern Psychology "There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it."

wiki.answers.com...




Sadly, this is true.


Yes, it is. Fox noise and republican leadership employs this tactic all day, everyday! Do you claim to be immune. You know, the first step to recovery is acknowledging you have a problem. Own it.




You also talk about jobs being shipped overseas. You do know Clinton and the Democrats are some of the strongest supporters of free trade?


So are republicans: www.ontheissues.org...

* International trade has become the world’s most powerful economic force. We must secure America’s competitive advantage by preventing other countries from erecting barriers to innovation. We propose to:Revitalize the World Trade Organization negotiations on agriculture and services.
* Give the next president fast-track negotiating authority.
* Negotiate reductions in tariffs on U.S. industrial goods and the elimination of other trade barriers so that our autos, heavy machinery, textiles, and other products will no longer be shut out of foreign markets.
* Take action against any trading partner that uses pseudo-science to block importation of U.S. bioengineered crops.
* Advance a Free Trade Area of the Americas to take advantage of burgeoning new markets at our doorstep.
* Revise export controls to tighten control over military technology and ease restrictions on technology already available commercially. Source: Republican Platform adopted at GOP National Convention Aug 12, 2000





It makes no sense to cry about corporations sending jobs overseas because it's good business. Corporations are in the business of making money and if they can make more money by moving a plant to India then they will.


Oh so, good for them. Screw American jobs if they can make a buck, but then look at government because of 10% unemployment.
New poll out today;
"More than 90 percent of Tea Party backers interviewed in a new Bloomberg National Poll say the U.S. is verging more toward socialism than capitalism, the federal government is trying to control too many aspects of private life and more decisions should be made at the state level," it adds. "At the same time, 70 percent of those who sympathize with the Tea Party, which organized protests this week against President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, want a federal government that fosters job creation."
rawstory.com...

Trying to have it both ways. FAIL

I am so sorry Matrix. I am sorry for exposing your hypocrisy. I am sorry for cheating you out of your beliefs. I am sorry for turning your so called arguments into Swiss cheese. I am sorry for the fact that I didn't get through to you despite all the indisputable facts, math, history, etc. I know your type, and bet you never looked at one link I provided. You just can't risk hearing any facts because it would tear down your predisposed assertions. Now, this is where I end on this thread. I will, however, be looking for future threads you post. I will be there to stop you from barfing up your brainwashed BS unchallenged to others. Good day, sir.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
"US Political Madness » Why do most liberals hate Capitalism and love Government?"

There is a simple answer to this question - liberals are greedy people who are jealous of what other have got. They want what you have got and would preferably pay nothing for it.

Greed, jealousy - and government promises to give them something for nothing at the expense of those who work hard for it.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by Mrmerak]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join