Whatever happened to FDR's second bill of rights?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Food and shelter doesnt rain down on Earth like Manna from heaven. Somebody has to labor to provide those things. So don't you think it is a bit unfair for some healthy person to work twice as hard to provide for not only his family, but for some other family as well.




posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 


How is it a heartless and mornic thing to say... Its the Truth we have been saddled with 70 Trillion dollars in unfunded liablity... what will you liberals fools do when this whole house of cards collapses? huh when there is no Money left to #ing help any one... Damn Fool.s



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 




Wow your comments really do not make sense in this economy.
What FDR proposed was everyone have the right to support themselves to live a decent life. It has nothing to do with selfishness or being lazy. How is it selfish to want too feed, cloth and house your family?


LOL, it is people with ideas like you and FDR that f'ed the economy up in the first place. We wouldnt be laden with debt and future liabilities if we didn't have people begging for the government to wipe away every tear from their eye.

You can trace back this entire economic catastrophe to FDR. He is the one who let the entitlement jeanie out of the bottle.

SS and Medicare MUST be phased out in order for this country to survive economically, unless you have a great idea to pull a 100 trillion dollar rabbit out of your behind.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by ZuluChaka]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
It died because it was unrealistic.

It all sounds great to the naive. Yeah, why shouldn't everybody have X, Y, and Z? Wouldn't that be great?

But then start looking to what you have to do to provide X, Y, and Z. Take the jobs example. Everyone has a right to a job, it says. But there are no private sector jobs because the Fed expanded credit like mad creating a massive business cycle and screwed everybody.

So what do you do? You create government jobs, which stand outside of the usual market incentive structure and thus the only incentives are political. They are usually unprofitable and require money to have been extracted from other, more productive people, to pay out.

The other option would have been to say "Okay, we made a mistake with the Fed", abolish the Fed, and have the more creative of those out of work find a way to be productive, and the less creative be employed by them. This is how business cycles eventually balance themselves out when you don't have a central bank aggravating them constantly.

Sigh, an ideal world that would be.

The private sector is what creates wealth, and pulls people out of poverty. The productive sector ("private sector") is the reason America is rich, in spite of all the persecution it faces from the predatory sector.

Spend some time at mises.org. If you've got an hour to kill, please watch this video: mises.org...

Unfortunately, scarcity is a reality, but fortunately, under conditions of freedom, enough is produced for everybody and then some.


[edit on 7-7-2010 by NewlyAwakened]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
If we can't provide for all then we should provide for none. I don't believe in advocating a system that makes one class of people suffer for another.
You should watch captilism a love story by Micheal Moore this explains everything beautifully.
I am really confused so basically what some are saying on here is that people do not have the right to have a job nor do they have a right live?
I am confused? Is living now a privelage?
People will work if they must in order to keep living. I believe we should all put back into society in some way. If people are down on their luck why should the be out on the streets?
Has the recession taught you nothing?
What about all those people who lost their homes? What about our 10% unemployment rate.
So someone has to always scrafice? Our system was built upon others misfortunes how is that a good thing?
I am really confused by the responses and never expected so much close mindedness in my life.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
The Second Bill of Rights is a fascinating document, and one that could most certainly have been applied in the post-war years. Many elements of the SBoRs have been utilized in various places around the world, including in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Check out the UN's declaration:

Human rights set out in the Declaration

Why anybody would disagree with these is beyond me, and why anyone would disagree with the Second Bill of Rights is just as ludicrous. How can one claim to be patriotic, yet not care that their fellow countrymen a suffering? What we have today being touted as a "Constitutionalist movement" is nothing more than people wanted to use the words of the founding fathers to shut themselves off from everyone, to be selfish and self-centered, and follow a crumbling theory of economics that only became the proverbial "American Way" after corporate interests pumped millions into the parade of think-tanks that designed the Reagan Administration.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by Someone336]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


If SSI and Medicare is phased out sad to say people will die. Primarily the elderly and disabled. It really hurts me that you would rather wish to see me and my grandfather dead then to help us.
My grandfather worked all his life and now he is 81 years old. He should be allowed to retire with medical insurance.
I have 2 part time jobs and go to college without my SS and SSI payments I would be homeless or dead.
My medical insurance is Medicare. What is wrong with everyone having equal medical treatment?
Are you an elitist?



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 




If we can't provide for all then we should provide for none.


Then you better choose we provide for none, because we sure as hell cannot afford to provide for all. The Chinese won't loan us that much.

The only people society should provide for are people who are physically unable to provide for themselves, Orphans, old folks without family to provide for them. No able bodied person should have anything handed to them.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


I could not agree more. Thank you for providing that link. It amazes me to that people will want their rights protected but when it comes to others they could care less.
It is that "me" mentality that has hurt our nation in the regan years of materialism and propaganda.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


LOL! Do you not understand the concept of "Phase out"?

Try this on. We gradually raise retirement age to 75.
We start decreasing benefits to new comers to the system, while giving them a real idea of the cuts they face so they can plan accordingly.

Nobody wants to starve your 85 year old grandpa. That is just some emotional bullcrap that liberals like to use to stir up everyones feelings. If people were left to use logic vs emotion the liberal ideas would get kicked to the curb.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


then we would be back to the old west days with shoot outs etc.
I think the wealthy needs to give up a little in order to make sure everyone LIVES.
Once agian I want to remind you I am talking about people having what it takes to live, food and shelter. I am also talking about everyone working in some way to put back into soceity. I am not just saying that this is a free for all.
Once a person is 60 or become disabled they should not have to work. If a person who is elderly or disabled if they want to work it is up to them.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
[more

It is more important to be humane. Why should we raise the retirement age that is ridculous!
If is the rich that is hurting the poor not me or the average citzen who wants to help.
If we don't come at this from a human stand point than we are forever lost.
Funny I never cliamed to be liberal in this post. This not about being liberal or conservative but being a HUMAN!



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Its a nice thing to think the rich should have their wealth stolen from them by the government and handed to the poor. In reality, it doesnt work that way. Raise taxes and or regulation on the rich and they will find other places to move their money and their capital resources.

It is easier to do this today than it has ever been in history. I can build a call center in say costa rica and cut my human labor costs by more than half. I have the internet to connect back to the usa and make it look as though I am operating from there.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by ZuluChaka
[more

It is more important to be humane. Why should we raise the retirement age that is ridculous!
If is the rich that is hurting the poor not me or the average citzen who wants to help.
If we don't come at this from a human stand point than we are forever lost.
Funny I never cliamed to be liberal in this post. This not about being liberal or conservative but being a HUMAN!


You dont have to mention being a liberal, it oozes out of every word you right. 75 is not a ridiculous retirement age. People live considerably longer and healthier than they did when SS was created.

I guess now you think humans should have a right to 35 years of retirement.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
The second bill of rights was a nice thought, and I do think that we as Americans should have a right to those things and nothing more. Some of the ideals of communism aren't exactly all bad...like the abolishment of classes. If we as a people could let go of all of the labels and stop trying to fit in the narrow categories we created centuries ago, perhaps some sort of progress might happen.

We all sit here and hang on with white knuckles while those on the top take our rights away. Gosh, even people on this board are sounding more whacked right along with the rest of the idiots out there polluting oceans and silently killing us with our own food and medicine. *grasps the side of the handbasket*



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


meanwhile American citzens who are willing to work are being robbed of jobs.
If there are no jobs crimes rates rise, homeless is more prevlant and people die. Who can anyone jusify this on any level.
How can the rich have millions and millions of dollars. Who really needs a million dollars to live?
Will they die if they make $100,000 instead?
The older you get the more you will see how corrupt our system really is. If you are not poor just remember in our make or break society you can lose it all and be poor very quickly.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


I would say retirement age should be 60. Working hard for over 40 years should be enough for anyone.
Hmm am I really oozing liberalism or humanterism?
I will tell you this I do not agree with either conservative or liberals.
I have my own beliefs.
I disagree with abortion, agree with equality, disagree with war, I agree with morals,ethics and values.
Since you are want to label so quickly what would you call me now?



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
I am really confused by the responses and never expected so much close mindedness in my life.

The closed-mindedness is not on our part.

The problem with your and all utopian schemes is that, when you think them through, they ask the impossible.

I wrote this post on my blog a while back, that discusses the question of why such "utopian" schemes as this so-called "bill of rights", when actually implemented, have tended to result in tyrannical regimes with massive casualty lists.

I would copy it here but it's too long and I don't feel like breaking up a reply to an existing thread. I will provide a link instead: Musings on government and social interconnectedness

I suggest you are the closed-minded one here. Please study economics, and you will realize you ask the impossible.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Why are you collecting SSI and medicare and being able to work two part time jobsa and attend school? Do you not see the Irony behind that?

Your grandfather worked his whole life, and should not be aloud to just die. But it is not my responsabilty to care for you or your grandfather, when I have my own Kids and Grandparents to look after...



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Nobody is robbing anyone of jobs by anyone except maybe the government and its history of irresponsible financial choices.

Who in their right mind would build any kind of manufacturing in this country when you can build a factory in China where the government is more open to capitalists then in the USA?

There used to be an advantage to be in the US, because we had the biggest market, best minds, hardest workers. Now you can ship an entire container of products from anywhere in the world for a few hundred dollars. You can use VOIP and the internet to create a network of distribution centers around the world.

Our government is tying the hands of business with too much interference, too much regulation, and too much uncertainty. Just wait until the tax hikes next year and cap and trade, etc.. you will see a mass exodus of wealth from this country.




[edit on 7-7-2010 by ZuluChaka]





top topics
 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join