The Left = Trifling

doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
GreatwhiteNorth said:
If you wanted to get stoned today, asked me for a J & I turned you on you would think that pretty cool.
Tomorrow when the same scenario plays out & you get even more free pot you would undoubtedly think that was still very cool.
Fast forward two years from now as our little drama is enacted daily with you getting high when ever you wanted for free.
What exactly have you learned in the proceeding twenty four months? That all you have to do is ask & you get free weed, and as time goes by you feel as though I owe you the freebies.
You could have simply put your back into it and grown your own, but there is no sense in that - all you have to do is ask.
Hence the entitlement mentality.

I'm all for assisting those that are down on their luck through no fault of their own, but supporting career welfare families that do nothing but spit out yet more welfare recipients is illogical and fiscally irresponsible.
GWN
Click to expand...
I like your analogy: it is right on the money! I said the same thing in another thread. :lol:

Unfortunately there are those who want to take advanatage of the system. This puts an unfair burden on those who are productive in society. The more people who see how easy it is to get a free ride, the more unproductive people we will have until there are very few people actually producing anything at all and a whole country full of people suckling on the teat of our bloated, intrusive govt. I agree we need to help those who need it but it shouldn't be no strings attached and indefinite. We are entering into dangerous territory the closer we get to becoming a true socialist nation. Many of these countries don't see people as humans. We are simply peasants who must produce or be eliminated. If anyone doesn't believe it they should really read about Karl Marx or Stalin. They were really nice guys who only cared about their people (for those who haven't figured out I am being sarcastic with that last statement).:fire:
 
J

jimboob

Member
a very reasoned argument White. Alot of people arent satisfied with a little, they usually want more.

lets continue your analogy. After u smoking me out everyday, eventually i would want more i.e. my own stash. so i could smoke out my own disciples. Now instead of just smoking me out, maybe u could give me some encouragement. Like sharing ur grow knowledge and explaining how easy the whole process is. Myabe u could give me a deal on a second hand grow light and a clone.

real world application. give them more the job training and freeish higher education. i know its a tough sell to invest more into a system that doesnt seem to be working properly, but I also know that I wouldnt be here if there werent so many extended hands trying to pull me out of the many ruts I have dug for myself. educating the youth is the key
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
jimboob said:
.....I cant give up on the welfare state. People need second chances. People need help. A lot of people are too prideful to ask for help when they really need, so the hold it against people who do ask. america isn't exactly at the front of the globalization line. We need EVERYONE supporting the economy to compete globally. If we kick all the poor people to the curb, there will be an unforeseen backlash.
Click to expand...
it's all fine and well to aid those in distress, but the welfare state isn't about helping people to get back on their feet. the welfare state has been designed to redistribute wealth for the sake of garnering the political support of the masses and to ensnare the poor into the habit of expecting entitlements. temporary relief is a cornerstone of any compassionate society, but we have long since passed the point of considering that relief to be temporary.

the sins of pride and envy have become virtues through our acceptance of the welfare state. those too prideful to accept charity are told that it is their right to expect others to support them and the envious mob has been catered to by our vilification of wealth and success. the new american dream is "something for nothing" and it is being pushed by political animals whose only aim is to increase their own power and forward their own agendas. it is the profit motive and personal responsibility that are being kicked to the curb, demonized as the cause of an unfairness that is inherent in the human condition.

yes, we need everyone to support our ailing economy, but that economy is not made up of agenda driven policy and governmental bureaucracy. it is the creation of the individual, separately and in conjunction with others, and his self-determination. government, the creator of the welfare state, produces nothing. its sole purpose is to enable the individual to produce and to thrive. doing that job at the expense of other individuals is just an extension of the very unfairness that it is supposedly meant to alleviate. sacrificing the rights of some for the benefit of others should be left to personal choice, not the violence of governmental force. ivory tower idealists have no right to use that force in such a way and neither does the envious mob.

the poor will always be with us, as will those who choose to care for them. ignorance and corruption are merely the flip side of a coin that includes benevolence and enlightenment. it is the choices we make that determine what sort of individuals we are and those choices are the inviolate right of the individual. we may force the individual into an acceptable mold and we may steal from him in a vain attempt to enforce a charitable nature, but we cannot make the individual something he is not. we can only degrade ourselves and our society by our use of larceny and coercion to attain a questionable end.
 
J

jimboob

Member
FDR opened our eyes to the need for a balance between capitalism and marxism. America cant go back to the times of fiefdoms and less government. The only path forward is better government.

Having individual rights is nice, but individuals too often make poor choices. Adversely affecting the group. The Wall Street collapse is a prime example

Pure capitalism and pure socialism are both sound theories but neither work by themselves in the real world.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
jimboob said:
FDR opened our eyes to the need for a balance between capitalism and marxism. America cant go back to the times of fiefdoms and less government. The only path forward is better government.
Click to expand...
it is exactly attitudes like that which have been causing this country to veer from the path. the marxist doctrine preaches the destruction of the individual and its adherents have always fed off of the excesses created by capitalistic nations. its appeal is to those who embrace victimhood and envy the lucky and productive for their success. the fiefdoms that are spawned by such societies exist through the intervention of governmental violence and are impossible to eradicate except through an equal violence. there can never be a balance between such opposing ideologies, the one espousing mob rule and the other demanding the supremacy of the individual.

the only thing fdr opened our eyes to was the possibility of an oppressive federal government in the u.s. overreaching the constitutional bounds of its authority, washington set itself up to be the grand arbiter of all things for all people. instead of being chastened by the abuses such power had caused in the past, he embraced the role of god emperor of the independent states of america. instead of bowing to the sovereignty of those states, he stole a bit more of their power, investing it in a centralized government, and set us on a course toward a nightmare of orwellian proportions. the use of violent force to create the welfare state is his legacy and the ends justifying the means have been the watchwords of our ever growing bureaucracy ever since.

the necessity for this big government is the creation of a culture of entitlement. for each gift given to the people by our masters, another petty bureaucracy is formed. each new program to fulfill another imagined need or desire of the mob is reason enough for the expansion of government and its intrusions into the lives of the citizenry. the idea of better government has been subverted by the inherent waste of a bureaucracy that pays only lip service to the concept of transparency and concerns itself mostly with its own survival above the duties invested in it by the constitution or even the will of the people. it's true that the individual may make poor choices, but there is no advantage in compounding those errors by handing our freedom of choice over to the political elite or the tender mercies of the mob.
 
Man o' the green

Man o' the green

Active Member
jimboob said:
FDR opened our eyes to the need for a balance between capitalism and marxism. America cant go back to the times of fiefdoms and less government. The only path forward is better government.

Having individual rights is nice, but individuals too often make poor choices. Adversely affecting the group. The Wall Street collapse is a prime example

Pure capitalism and pure socialism are both sound theories but neither work by themselves in the real world.
Click to expand...
FDR indeed permanently damaged the country by making the welfare state acceptable.

America does not need better government as much as it needs less federal government..

Individual rights are the cornerstone of the republic. People often make choices that impact others, some are legal and some are not. We can't make all mistakes into criminal behaviour.

I do not support absolute capitalism, but there is a fixed limit in going the other direction : the constitution. I have no personal issue with a socialist state - like California, but not the federal government. It has limits. As has been said before, these issues should be fought on the battlefield of ideas amongst the states. Who could be so arrogant as to know what is best for all in such complex issues, wiping out the power of the states to find the best solution.

Stop the abuse of the commerce clause and follow the 10th amendment and I will be much closer to supporting the government.

If people don't like limited government, then change the constitution. Until then I will live here and fight for freedom.

And UTI ^^^^ good response.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Man o' the green said:
I have no personal issue with a socialist state - like California.....
Click to expand...
the people here are learning the hard lesson of the failure of socialistic governance and mob mentality, just as some others are learning the lessons of unrestrained capitalistic zeal. the balance, if there is one, is in proper regulation to avoid the abuse of the individual, not the dogma of the dictatorship of the proletariat. the promises of individual liberty guaranteed to all citizens of this nation leave no place for the totalitarianism of complete government control, no matter at what level. the ideals of the constitution must override the petty dreams of authoritarian legislators and the demands of the puling mob if it is to have any meaning at all.
 
jeffchr

jeffchr

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
Some of you libs on here must be bi-polar. On the one hand you are saying that we can't trust the govt. They lied to us about the Iraq war, sent 4,000 young men and women to their deaths and were only interested in profit. On the other hand you are saying that we can trust the govt. with our healthcare, our most personal information. They don't want to ration care or use death panels to see if it's "worth it" to treat some illnesses. Seriously man! Which is it? You can't have it both ways. Either they lied about every aspect, as you libs like to claim, of the war or they are a nice warm and fuzzy govt. that only has our best interest at heart. I think I get it though. Bush was the anti-christ, blah, blah, blah, blah........... :-?

BTW your post looks like a talking point from the Ed Show. :shock:
Click to expand...
Ed's just OK. He has an agenda and he is passionate about it. But, his show is not informative - can't really be called news. Typical of cable news.

If we have the right people in office, under our representative democracy, we can have an effective government. I am not anti-government.

I am against the influence corporate America has on government. I know corporate America drives a good segment of our economy. But frankly, the country should be about the people, not the corporations. Corporations are just a means to an end, not the ultimate beneficiary of governance.

So, you see, I can have it both ways. I do have it both ways. Who are you, the bothways police?
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
jeffchr said:
I am against the influence corporate America has on government. I know corporate America drives a good segment of our economy. But frankly, the country should be about the people, not the corporations. Corporations are just a means to an end, not the ultimate beneficiary of governance.
Click to expand...
what are these corporations and where did they come from? are they aliens, sent here to enslave our race and devour our vital bodily fluids? are they demons, created by the prince of darkness to capture our immortal souls? perhaps they are the personification of mankind's darkest desires, destined to roam the earth and wreak destruction wherever they may? no, they are the creation of individuals and groups of individuals, bent on protecting the welfare and investment of their authors. they may have been endowed with a legal status as further protection for their creators, but they are merely the face of businesses developed to create products and offer services to a public that may or may not wish to purchase them. the individuals behind that face are the employers of government, not just its beneficiaries, as are we all. you may claim that the economic advantage of great wealth gives many corporations undue influence over our representatives, but the wealth of labor unions and various other organizations certainly aren't overshadowed by that strength and i see no such outcry over their influence as is leveled against the business community. any group may gather together its funds and attempt to influence the workings of government, all it takes is the will to operate collectively. the sin lies in the greed of our representatives for the power afforded by the wealth of great allies. their thirst for control outstrips the meager avarice for gold and their power enables the wealthy to obstruct the constitution. that business may ask for favor is natural, that our representatives betray the public trust for the sake of their own power is crime.
 
ChChoda

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
the people here are learning the hard lesson of the failure of socialistic governance and mob mentality, just as some others are learning the lessons of unrestrained capitalistic zeal. the balance, if there is one, is in proper regulation to avoid the abuse of the individual, not the dogma of the dictatorship of the proletariat. the promises of individual liberty guaranteed to all citizens of this nation leave no place for the totalitarianism of complete government control, no matter at what level. the ideals of the constitution must override the petty dreams of authoritarian legislators and the demands of the puling mob if it is to have any meaning at all.
Click to expand...
Uncle Milt Friedman...


“I'm in favor of legalizing drugs. According to my values system, if people want to kill themselves, they have every right to do so. Most of the harm that comes from drugs is because they are illegal.”


“What kind of society isn't structured on greed? The problem of social organization is how to set up an arrangement under which greed will do the least harm; capitalism is that kind of a system."
 
ChChoda

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
what are these corporations and where did they come from? are they aliens, sent here to enslave our race and devour our vital bodily fluids? are they demons, created by the prince of darkness to capture our immortal souls? perhaps they are the personification of mankind's darkest desires, destined to roam the earth and wreak destruction wherever they may? no, they are the creation of individuals and groups of individuals, bent on protecting the welfare and investment of their authors. they may have been endowed with a legal status as further protection for their creators, but they are merely the face of businesses developed to create products and offer services to a public that may or may not wish to purchase them. the individuals behind that face are the employers of government, not just its beneficiaries, as are we all. you may claim that the economic advantage of great wealth gives many corporations undue influence over our representatives, but the wealth of labor unions and various other organizations certainly aren't overshadowed by that strength and i see no such outcry over their influence as is leveled against the business community. any group may gather together its funds and attempt to influence the workings of government, all it takes is the will to operate collectively. the sin lies in the greed of our representatives for the power afforded by the wealth of great allies. their thirst for control outstrips the meager avarice for gold and their power enables the wealthy to obstruct the constitution. that business may ask for favor is natural, that our representatives betray the public trust for the sake of their own power is crime.
Click to expand...
Lovely...:clap:
 
jeffchr

jeffchr

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
what are these corporations and where did they come from? are they aliens, sent here to enslave our race and devour our vital bodily fluids? are they demons, created by the prince of darkness to capture our immortal souls? perhaps they are the personification of mankind's darkest desires, destined to roam the earth and wreak destruction wherever they may? no, they are the creation of individuals and groups of individuals, bent on protecting the welfare and investment of their authors. they may have been endowed with a legal status as further protection for their creators, but they are merely the face of businesses developed to create products and offer services to a public that may or may not wish to purchase them. the individuals behind that face are the employers of government, not just its beneficiaries, as are we all. you may claim that the economic advantage of great wealth gives many corporations undue influence over our representatives, but the wealth of labor unions and various other organizations certainly aren't overshadowed by that strength and i see no such outcry over their influence as is leveled against the business community. any group may gather together its funds and attempt to influence the workings of government, all it takes is the will to operate collectively. the sin lies in the greed of our representatives for the power afforded by the wealth of great allies. their thirst for control outstrips the meager avarice for gold and their power enables the wealthy to obstruct the constitution. that business may ask for favor is natural, that our representatives betray the public trust for the sake of their own power is crime.
Click to expand...
OK, so the corporations are "people" and the politicians are greed and evil.

we should elect politicians who aren't evil.

and the corporations are NOT people. these companies have huge resources and they are willing to invest them in evil politicians who are willing to protect their interest. and their interest is maximizing profits for their investors who represent a limited segment of society.

labor unions do the same thing. they purchase their influence, as with corps. i agree.

so get rid of the lobbyists. make them illegal.
 
ChChoda

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
jeffchr said:
OK, so the corporations are "people" and the politicians are greed and evil.

we should elect politicians who aren't evil.

and the corporations are NOT people. these companies have huge resources and they are willing to invest them in evil politicians who are willing to protect their interest. and their interest is maximizing profits for their investors who represent a limited segment of society.

labor unions do the same thing. they purchase their influence, as with corps. i agree.

so get rid of the lobbyists. make them illegal.
Click to expand...
Lobbyists are individuals representing groups of individuals lobbying an individual who represents a group of individuals. What system do you have in mind to take it's place...

 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
jeffchr said:
so get rid of the lobbyists. make them illegal.
Click to expand...
why is it you seem willing to do most anything but limit the power of the politicians themselves? curtailing access to government is no answer, it is there to serve all the people and eliminating a means of speaking directly to our representatives would serve only to further exacerbate the lack of transparency that has led to so much corruption. the lie of the ballot box, when coupled with the lies of the politicians themselves, is certainly no proof against the abuse of power.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
jeffchr said:
Ed's just OK. He has an agenda and he is passionate about it. But, his show is not informative - can't really be called news. Typical of cable news.

If we have the right people in office, under our representative democracy, we can have an effective government. I am not anti-government.

I am against the influence corporate America has on government. I know corporate America drives a good segment of our economy. But frankly, the country should be about the people, not the corporations. Corporations are just a means to an end, not the ultimate beneficiary of governance.

So, you see, I can have it both ways. I do have it both ways. Who are you, the bothways police?
Click to expand...
Bothways police. That's a good one. Power corrupts..................:fire:
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
At this point, I don't think there is anything that can be said that will not be replied to with the same old Liberal talking points stated over and over again.

Funny thing - the global failure of Socialism and the global success of Capitalism is a simple matter of historical fact. That is why the whole world is switching to Capitalism. Evidently, a lot of you didn't get the memo.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
At this point, I don't think there is anything that can be said that will not be replied to with the same old Liberal talking points stated over and over again.

Funny thing - the global failure of Socialism and the global success of Capitalism is a simple matter of historical fact. That is why the whole world is switching to Capitalism. Evidently, a lot of you didn't get the memo.
Click to expand...
Dude, capitalism is the very mechanism responsible for so many of societies ills that you bitch about daily.

Am I saying it's bad? No. I'm a capitalist, capitalism allows me to live the way I do, but for someone to walk around with the blinders on about the negative aspects of any system, capitalism included, is ignorant.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Dude, capitalism is the very mechanism responsible for so many of societies ills that you bitch about daily.
Click to expand...
dude, it isn't the system that is responsible, but the use it is put to. even socialism, a system prone to abuse by its investment of economic power in the same element which controls military and legislative power, is not responsible for the atrocities that have been performed under its influence. such a fatally flawed system might be workable if its authority could be expected to behave in an ethical and enlightened manner. capitalism has the capacity to be the most egalitarian of economic systems, giving the people themselves the control over their economic destinies. even true communalism will result in the creation of ad hoc authorities, to organize and administer the community's resources, that cannot help but inhibit the liberty of the individual. placing the means of production directly into the hands of the individual frees him of the controls of both an authoritarian state and the envious mob, leaving him to fail or succeed through the demands of the market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top