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.

 

Obama: Limited Gov't That Preserves Free Markets 'Doesn't Work. It Has Never Worked

page: 6
132
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by dadgad
 


Capitalism is not equal to free enterprise and the free market economy, but monopolism and corporatism is an abuse of Capitalism.


And you expose your leftist socialist ideology when you talk about the evils of private property. Socialism and communism are what opposed private property. You are obviously a collectivist and I do not trust you when you say that communism has problems. Perhaps you think that it just hasn't been implemented right, or by the right people? hmmm?
edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Im sorry but I don't know what you want me to read with those links, they're just websites.

In any case. I disagree with your argument. I say that monopolism and corporatism are simply what it leads to, unavoidably. The idea of free enterprise, free market economy completely separate from government intervention etc. are just non-existent things. They exist in books and dreams.
edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
The POTUS presently is a script reader. Someone else dictates how and what he says. Many of the US forefathers knew the dangers of more control and less balance. I don't know if BA made an agreement to be a part of history in return for his indirect contributions to the increase in federal government control. Selling one's soul for "hope" and "change"? In the old world, when one was placed in a position of authority, should they fail to justify their position or failure to do the task, they were removed. I'm not sure why anyone would become upset with anything he says. He does not have his own voice. You could be upset that most politicians do not have to be held accountable for their positions. Once they are in, they are IN.

-now you can be angry- =)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Yeah, maybe you did hear that, but that isn't the case. They want to end the system we have now. The confused ones think that is capitalism, but it isn't. We can excuse them though because the media and people tell them this system that is crushing the middle class is capitalism so it looks bad, but it is really corporatism. That is what they want to end. Most of the protesters know that what we have now is a perversion of capitalism.

The protestors aren't the socialists the news want everyone to believe. That is a tactic to keep the people divided. You don't really think there were ten thousand socialists on the streets of Portland that night do you? If you and the others stopped buying into the news and joined your fellow Americans they would really have something on their hands. Luckily it's really easy to keep the ignorant masses divided with the news. Sucks, but that is how it is. So the protesters just have to be twice as loud to make up for their manipulated brethren.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by dadgad
 


Capitalism is not equal to free enterprise and the free market economy, but monopolism and corporatism is an abuse of Capitalism.


And you expose your leftist socialist ideology when you talk about the evils of private property. Socialism and communism are what opposed private property. You are obviously a collectivist and I do not trust you when you say that communism has problems. Perhaps you think that it just hasn't been implemented right, or by the right people? hmmm?
edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


I mean the evils that result from private property. Is it a crime to acknowledge this?

20th century communism was a disaster, period. Not because it wasn't implemented right, but because it didn't work.

I told you, I don't have definite answers. I'm attracted to the idea of resource based economy. But I realize that seeing the current state of man, that is simply too far ahead.

I'm really not a collectivist. I actually love liberal idea's. America is great. It's just that there are a lot resulting problems, which we aren't addressing in the right way in my opinion.
edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dadgad
 


So let me ask you something. If working for a big corporation for a pittance is so awful, how would working for govt with no private property and no individual rights and no way to get more by working harder and and govt taking away most of your paycheck to give to someone who is needy going to be any better? Do you really think you would have incentive to work at all if the govt is just going to tell you what to do, where to do it, and how much of your paycheck you get to keep?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by dadgad
 


Exactly what evils arise out of having private property? By the way, what makes you think the upper crust at the Kremlin didn't get more of the spoils than the poor common proletariat with his little brown working man's cap? Did you know that the very people in the US Senate and House of Representatives who are advocating socialistic programs and health care are themselves extremely wealthy? Do you really believe Nancy Pelosi is going to give up her personal wealth and property for the common good of the proletariat?
edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Since Wilson they have all been in the pockets of their masters and owners,
we have been deluded and diluted for one hundred years, one drip at a time and the final icing on the cake will be to topple a government while its president applauds the fall.
It wont be long now, there's no way out of this back to yesterday.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Ok I'm going to be honest and say I'm not real sure what you mean by a resource based economy. All economy is based on one resource or another.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
The OP was debunked on page two, folks. But, Hell, why let the truth get in the way when you have a golden opportunity to slam the Occupy movement, liberals, progressives and "leftist radicals" (my personal fave, that one ). Somebody (I'm not going to name names) even blamed Obama for "destroying several countries to get one person".

Really?

Wow.... Just.... WOW.

The sooner you short-sighted partisan-types get it through your THICK FREAKING SKULLS that the "R's" AND the "D's" have sold the rest of us out for the sake of their political careers (and, probably, a bunch of cash) the sooner "We the People" can figure our way out of this mess.

*whew*

Okay. Just wanted to get that off my chest. Carry on.
edit on 7-12-2011 by OneHundredLittleCurses because: Dam emoticons



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Obama is simply trying to awaken the populace to new concepts and possibilities.
Why react by demonizing the guy? What are you afraid of? Sheesh!



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by dadgad
 


So let me ask you something. If working for a big corporation for a pittance is so awful, how would working for govt with no private property and no individual rights and no way to get more by working harder and and govt taking away most of your paycheck to give to someone who is needy going to be any better? Do you really think you would have incentive to work at all if the govt is just going to tell you what to do, where to do it, and how much of your paycheck you get to keep?


I am enjoying this conversation.

My answer to all your questions would be a definite no. No it would not be any better. You create a certain scenario, assuming that it is one I advocate, which I really don't.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by dadgad
 


Exactly what evils arise out of having private property? By the way, what makes you think the upper crust at the Kremlin didn't get more of the spoils than the poor common proletariat with his little brown working man's cap? Did you know that the very people in the US Senate and House of Representatives who are advocating socialistic programs and health care are themselves extremely wealthy? Do you really believe Nancy Pelosi is going to give up her personal wealth and property for the common good of the proletariat?
edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Again. 20th century communism was a catastrophe, I hate it.

The evils that result from private property are all around us. Someone is exceedingly rich, possesses great masses of land, which in turn deprives other people from necessities of survival. We do in the end live in a world of limited resources. An off-shore corporation like Shell buys a piece of land somewhere to drill oil, the native inhabitants are forced out of their homes, the land gets polluted, they cannot continue their lives and they cannot do anything. Now please don't tell me that is not what capitalism is meant to be. I say this kind of immoral behavior is simply was capitalism leads to, the more brutal you are, the more ruthless the more profit you are going to make. And profit is the only goal.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Ok I'm going to be honest and say I'm not real sure what you mean by a resource based economy. All economy is based on one resource or another.


It is this Utopian system in which man recognizes it's evolutionary progress in terms of technical capabilities and realizes that the institution of money has become an obstacle for progress. It eliminates money entirely and focuses on managing earth resources in the most responsible and advanced ways possible. Problems are approached scientifically. Technology will become the major player in substituting human labor, anything that can be automatized will be automatized. A society in which humans will only have to do what is absolutely necessary. Humans are encouraged to do or become that what they have the most incentive for. It is recognized that everybody is unique and born different. Therefor stimulating each persons uniqueness will always contribute to the greater good.

I realize that it sounds frightening and perhaps even dystopian. And that is one of the reasons I don't see anything like this happen in any near future.

Capitalism does provide a small minority of the world with significant freedom compared to earlier times and compared to other societies around the world, and we are naturally deeply attached to it. Especially after centuries of oppression, this little freedom that we enjoy means the world to us.

At the same time, are we really free? I mean is being a wage slave being free? Are we really free living in full knowledge that devastating catastrophes are just around the corner? All this division, injustice, exploitation, ignorance, is this really "freedom''?
edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I know this is going to be lost in the lagoon of quotes and thoughts.

But I have to add;

The beginning of his presidency a conspiracy started. The theory he was the reincarnation of Akhenaten the infamous Egyptian pharoah who took down the countries polytheistic religion to become a monotheistic religion. For reasons that Aten was the only god, the son god and all others are lesser and should not be worshipped. He took the freedom of choice to who the people should pray to. Their religion was everything.

Obama is taking our freedom away, everything that we believe in, and replacing it with the belief that government should tell us what to do.

I am not a believer in this conspiracy, but their appearance and behavior are similar.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

But they are correct about a free market ... and THAT is what Obama was saying they were wrong about. Obama worships the Euro-socialist way of doing things ... even as it falls apart and needs our $$$ to be bailed out with. It's completely irrational on his part. Unless he wants the Euro-socialist way of doing things because he knows it will destroy what's left of our economy .... and if that's the case then he's an evil destroy-america genius to be where he is now and doing what he's doing.



You obviously don't know what you're trying to speak about, dear dude. Europe is currently under the fire of greedy, stupid speculators who aren't even aware that they're destroying their next playground just after having destroyed the US economy. But you'll see soon a new form of European Left Parties taking back true socialism for what it is and you ignore. Stay tuned, dear dude. Meanwhile, stick to your free-market religion that have just ruined your country.



Originally posted by Misoir
(...)
Sorry to inform President Obama, they were right and you are wrong.
(...)

edit on 12/7/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



Sorry to inform you that your President Obama there is right, they were right* and you are wrong.

*Given the circumstances of their epoch, that is, - and obviously very partly given what America has become.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pr0sp3r0

Originally posted by FlyersFan

But they are correct about a free market ... and THAT is what Obama was saying they were wrong about. Obama worships the Euro-socialist way of doing things ... even as it falls apart and needs our $$$ to be bailed out with. It's completely irrational on his part. Unless he wants the Euro-socialist way of doing things because he knows it will destroy what's left of our economy .... and if that's the case then he's an evil destroy-america genius to be where he is now and doing what he's doing.



You obviously don't know what you're trying to speak about, dear dude. Europe is currently under the fire of greedy, stupid speculators who aren't even aware that they're destroying their next playground just after having destroyed the US economy. But you'll see soon a new form of European Left Parties taking back true socialism for what it is and you ignore. Stay tuned, dear dude. Meanwhile, stick to your free-market religion that have just ruined your country.



Originally posted by Misoir
(...)
Sorry to inform President Obama, they were right and you are wrong.
(...)

edit on 12/7/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



Sorry to inform you that your President Obama there is right, they were right* and you are wrong.

*Given the circumstances of their epoch, that is, - and obviously very partly given what America has become.




Interesting. What makes you think left-parties will get back in "power" in Europe. Because I see a very conservative trend going on, moving away from every leftist idea so to speak. They are cutting everywhere. Not a pleasant sight.
edit on 7-12-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by dadgad
 


There is plenty of land around. I'm not sure how someone having lots of land deprives me of having land. Govt buys up land and then tells the citizens they cannot use the land, even for public use. The govt takes land from citizens by emminent domain. So John McCain having so many houses he doesn't know how many he has still doesn't deprive me of land, but govt can stop me from using land or take my property away.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
So much for the theory, tax more inject it in a way in the system, that will end up in the hands of the middle class.

HOWEVER currently, as it is, a lot of tax dollars are controlled by lobbyists, at the behest of interest cartels, banks, pharma etc. . Before this problem is rectified, there is no telling how much out of every dollar is mainpulated into the hands of those who bribed congressmen and how much is spent in the best interest of the nation and its people.

Raising wages would stimulate the economy, make more tax dollars avaiable and solve a pletora of problems, but that would cut into company profits, oh noes o.O. So more taxes hit those who cant escape them, while large companies evade them. No problem, just participate in their success, by acquiring stock, but, oh no, you need disposable income for that, which you will have less off, because you might get hit with new taxes, so sell your stock, guess who will be buying it.
edit on 7-12-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 

I just contacted the founders, and they said obama was 100% right .



The Negro president is right in theses times of our ideology and rhetoric that spewed out our mouths some 50 million years ago, it does not fit in the equation of whats going on today.

We never thought of wall street and we never could of imagined that in every corporate company in the existence on this planet that at least 2 to 20 people are stealing and diverting our American funds over seas.

We thought that my people would look after the 100% instead of just the 1%…never would we have thought that the repulblicans would act like this...'so inhuman'> 'So not Founder based'



edit on 7-12-2011 by LogiosHermes27 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join