99 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

shaddow134, on 14 November 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

The situation will worsen as the World population spirals out of control towards the end of this Century.India and China springs to mind.

quite the contrary, China, India and Brazil will stop the population growth in the same measure as their welfare increases. exploding populations happen there where people are underprivileged.

Edited by questionmark, 14 November 2012 - 07:15 PM.

[Dredimus]

I'm going to go ahead and chime in here... I've not posted anyting since election night in order to not be trolled by either party into an arguement of who won, who didnt and all that good Jazz. I start off by congratulating President Obama on his re-election. I may not agree with his policy, but he is the president... like it or not.

Now, as for these states (I do believe there are now petitions for all 50 states) filing for secession. I do not believe its so much of an "I dont like Obama" movement as it is a "Im fed up with the politics and the debt and the lies and the issues this country has and no one is doing a damn thing to fix them and its all just getting worse" movement. There are many people like me out there who have no true party affiliation. I am not a republican nor a democrat, I consider myself to be mostly conservative but I dont agree with any particular party line. Abortion? Its your choice, just dont expect me to pay for it. Gay Marriage? Your life is your life, just dont do it in my front yard. Gun Control? How about we crack down on the criminals before we go after the hunters... just makes more sense... Immgration? Hell, I have quite a few friends that are hispanic, we get along great. They are all good people, they take care of their familes and they work hard... they do eat some weird stuff... but thats on them... they got here LEGALLY and arent sponging off the system. Welfare/medicaid/unemployment? All good programs when they are utilized correctly, though right now they are abused beyond belief... Im all for giving a hand up, just not a hand out. So, you see, those are just tip of the iceberg topics... I happen to believe that the policies of the last few administrations have left this country with little to no hope and alot of people are starting to wake up and see this. Alot of people see the writing on the wall, many countries have been where we are right now and many countries have fallen in the past. I take these petitions (which are done by citizens, not the state governments) to be a wake up call... And I agree with that wakeup call... You all know just as well as I do that these states are NOT going to leave the union, nor do I beleive they truely want to. I do believe they want the horse poop to stop. Stop pitting man against man on party lines, stop slinging the race card (both sides) stop bickering about he said she said crap... and actually get to work... earn the salary that the US Tax payer pays you. Cut Spending, bring in more business/jobs. STOP trying to take over every part of our lives... It is not the governments place to micromanage... we are not sea monkies. Furthermore... stop with the CIA/FBI soap opera and focus a little more on Benghazi... 4 americans are dead and no one seems to give a rats patoot... as an american and as a soldier... I want to know why they died and why help wasnt delivered in time...

ok, that is all... *steps off my soap box*

[RavenHawk]

questionmark, on 14 November 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

quite the contrary, China, India and Brazil will stop the population growth in the same measure as their welfare increases. exploding populations happen there where people are underprivileged.

But it will be welfare that will make them even more underprivileged.  Giving people things does not increase their wealth.  The one thing that welfare robs from the people is self dignity and self reliance.  What reduces overpopulation is education and success – upward mobility.  Education for education’s sake only creates educated morons.

[questionmark]

RavenHawk, on 14 November 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

But it will be welfare that will make them even more underprivileged.  Giving people things does not increase their wealth.  The one thing that welfare robs from the people is self dignity and self reliance.  What reduces overpopulation is education and success – upward mobility.  Education for education's sake only creates educated morons.

Ah yes, we need a population of church going underachievers that work for a sack of rice a month... sounds like something we heard in the 30s... from Benito Mussolini. Worked quite well as we know...quite well...

Edited by questionmark, 14 November 2012 - 07:55 PM.

[shaddow134]

questionmark, on 14 November 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Ah yes, we need a population of church going underachievers that work for a sack of rice a month... sounds like something we heard in the 30s... from Benito Mussolini. Worked quite well as we know...quite well...

you won't need dental plans,because their teeth will drop out through malnutrition and no need for Health care just work them to death.

[questionmark]

shaddow134, on 14 November 2012 - 08:05 PM, said:

you won't need dental plans,because their teeth will drop out through malnutrition and no need for Health care just work them to death.

Well, put on your black shirt and scream it to the world. But don't be surprised if somebody does not like it.

[RavenHawk]

Dredimus, on 14 November 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

Immgration? Hell, I have quite a few friends that are hispanic, we get along great. They are all good people, they take care of their familes and they work hard... they do eat some weird stuff... but thats on them... they got here LEGALLY and arent sponging off the system.

Hispanics aren’t the only immigrants and if they are here LEGALLY, then they can’t be illegal immigrants – right?  That is the issue, not immigration.

Quote

and actually get to work...

That’s the problem.  It’s a matter of ideology.  Two opposing views are vying for control of this country.  Until that control is won and the foundation set, we are just going to spiral in.  This nation cannot long endure being half slave and half free.  This nation can only be a Socialistic Democracy or a Constitutional Republic.

[Mike D boy]

I find it ridiculous and possibly illegal, secession drives are prone to failure: it's interesting the states with the most willingness are mostly conservative and/or home to grass-roots small government movements (i.e. the Second Republic of Vermont). Much of the southern/southeast, midwest, northern and northwest states are poised to secede from the union, therefore the future USA will be reduced in size focused solely in the Mid-Atlantic region around Washington DC.

Texas attempts to secede from the union every year, they did it once in 1860 to join the ill-fated confederacy had to rejoin the union during reconstruction. They once were a nation apart after declaration of indepedence from Mexico in 1836 and felt was necessary to forfeit nationhood in order to be an US state.

I knew Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and other US territories are interested in nationhood status (well...a small minority of voters) claims the feds focused more on the contiguous 48 or mainland states, and in the case of Hawaii and Puerto Rico, they were forcibly annexed by acts of war and invasion in the 1890s.

Also to point out threats of secession by Arizona over the illegal immigration and border security debates, as well "Aztlan" in parts of the southwest US with heavily Hispanic/Mexican-American populations, and Oklahoma with the eastern half home to Native Americans belonging to the large five "civilized" tribes such as the Cherokee, felt they were deprived autonomy since statehood in 1907 (tomorrow is the date when OK was made into the 46th US state).

[RavenHawk]

questionmark, on 14 November 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Ah yes, we need a population of church going underachievers that work for a sack of rice a month... sounds like something we heard in the 30s... from Benito Mussolini. Worked quite well as we know...quite well...

Well, I don’t think you’ll see much of a church going population under Socialism.  But you will see a lot of underachievers working for exactly what they are worth – a sack of rice.  It’s exactly what we heard in the 30’s from Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler, etc.

[questionmark]

RavenHawk, on 14 November 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Well, I don't think you'll see much of a church going population under Socialism.  But you will see a lot of underachievers working for exactly what they are worth – a sack of rice.  It's exactly what we heard in the 30's from Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler, etc.

Only they were not socialists, capitalism really thrived under them, ask GM whose plants were still producing tanks for the Germans in Germany until they finally agreed a price to let them be bombed by the Air Force. Or IG Farben, who produced weapons in both Germany and the US to "aid the war effort".

[Mike D boy]

RavenHawk, on 14 November 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Well, I don't think you'll see much of a church going population under Socialism.  But you will see a lot of underachievers working for exactly what they are worth – a sack of rice.  It's exactly what we heard in the 30's from Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler, etc.

or Josef Stalin in his land collectivization programs of the 1930s/40s Soviet Union, forced people to work for a common cause with tens of millions lost their lives in the name of his warped vision of socialism. Same applies to Mao-Tse-Sung's cultural revolution of the 1960s and other communist leaders performed acts of forced collectivization. Both communism and fascism are authoritarian regimes' ideologies meant to force everyone to follow their law and rules...or else.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

questionmark, on 14 November 2012 - 08:25 PM, said:

Only they were not socialists, capitalism really thrived under them, ask GM whose plants were still producing tanks for the Germans in Germany until they finally agreed a price to let them be bombed by the Air Force. Or IG Farben, who produced weapons in both Germany and the US to "aid the war effort".

That's the problem in a nutshell. Oppressive government does not necessarily = Socialism. Oppressive governments can be Socialist, but there are many governments that would undoubtedly be Socialist in American eyes in Europe that could not remotely be described as Oppressive. And while there is undoubtedly a creeping authoritarianism in the government of the United States, that's by no means all because of Obama, since those organisations (CIA, FBi, Homeland Security, TSA) were all in existence when Obama came to power. Indeed, some of them were created by the previous Republican administration. Obama hasn't done much to curb any of them, of course, but that's just another symptom of the increasing irrelevance of the party system.

[RavenHawk]

questionmark, on 14 November 2012 - 08:25 PM, said:

Only they were not socialists, capitalism really thrived under them, ask GM whose plants were still producing tanks for the Germans in Germany until they finally agreed a price to let them be bombed by the Air Force. Or IG Farben, who produced weapons in both Germany and the US to "aid the war effort".

It’s not really capitalism as it was just industrialization.  It was the means of production that was controlled by the state.  The wealthy were part of the Party or the ruling elite.  Capitalism is more in line with a freer market system.  In a free market system, the economy is driven by a well educated consumer, not by the state directing it.

[questionmark]

RavenHawk, on 15 November 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

It's not really capitalism as it was just industrialization.  It was the means of production that was controlled by the state.  The wealthy were part of the Party or the ruling elite.  Capitalism is more in line with a freer market system.  In a free market system, the economy is driven by a well educated consumer, not by the state directing it.

cap·i·tal·ism
   [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

Industrialism is not a political but a economic definition.

[RavenHawk]

747400, on 14 November 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

That's the problem in a nutshell. Oppressive government does not necessarily = Socialism. Oppressive governments can be Socialist, but there are many governments that would undoubtedly be Socialist in American eyes in Europe that could not remotely be described as Oppressive.

Now I admit that I use Socialist/Socialism very liberally (pardon the pun).  A more accurate term would be Oligarchy but I consider Socialism more appropriate for today.  It is always oppressive.  It doesn’t always have to be totalitarian.  I consider Europe very oppressive, closely followed by the United States of the last 100 years.

I’m hardly a world traveler but I had made visits to England, Germany, and Italy.  I saw the oppression there.  It was albeit subtle but it was there.  You don’t have to be in England to know it.  Things like their gun controls and NHS.  But Italy was something else.  You could see the oppression just dripping off the people.  Now, the people were all normal and they were very hospitable.  I would definitely go back.  They’re a very beautiful people.  It’s something that I can’t really put into words but it was something that you could actually feel.  It was like an acceptance of their fate and their fate was subjugation.  They say if you want to learn the psyche or mindset of a country, watch its films.  I enjoy watching Italian film.  From watching them, what I couldn’t express in words, I now know in feeling (because I’ve been there), but the words still escape me.  The film just confirms for me what I witnessed in person is actually there.  But this is the fruits of a Socialistic Democracy.  This was the same mindset that our Founding Fathers tried to free themselves from under the Monarchy of King George.

Quote

And while there is undoubtedly a creeping authoritarianism in the government of the United States, that's by no means all because of Obama, since those organisations (CIA, FBi, Homeland Security, TSA) were all in existence when Obama came to power. Indeed, some of them were created by the previous Republican administration. Obama hasn't done much to curb any of them, of course, but that's just another symptom of the increasing irrelevance of the party system.

Some can argue that it started creeping into our system as early as the 1870s.  That’s when Hindenburg had set it up in Germany and created the first modern welfare state.  It took bigger strides in 1913 with the passing of the 16th Amendment that established the income tax and the Federal Reserve.  That was passed in a very similar manner as Obamacare was.  Then in the 1930s, the New Deal was revealed.  Most of it had been shot down by Congress but it left Social Security which was only meant as a temporary relief of the Depression.  By this time, Socialism had become entrenched in our society as it marked the creation of the fifth party system in this country.  None of us alive today can really remember a time when we didn’t have to deal with Socialism.  Then in the 1960s, we were presented with the Great Society on the heels of and in opposition to “ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country”.  For a time in the 1980s it looked like Socialism had gone away but it had just become dormant and we entered a great time of prosperity but in 2007 with the seating of the Democratic majority 110th Congress, Socialism returned with a vengeance which lead to the collapse of the economy and Obamacare being crammed down our throats.  Socialism just won’t quit even in light of how Europe is on the verge of collapse.  No, it’s not all Obama, he is just the latest Nicolae Carpathia.

I still don’t worry about these organizations.  I do not consider the Patriot Act as an abuse of power.  Most of the abuses we hear about are Hollywood.  It was Napolitano that has made that reality a possibility.  In the footsteps of Janet Reno.  Just hints of the overreach of the government.