Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Farmer77

America's 74 Year Cycle?

50 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then
On 6/18/2019 at 5:47 AM, Alchopwn said:

Give me back the days of bipartisan agreement, science and pragmatism

That led us to 22T $ in debt and an ever-expanding government with ever-shrinking accountability.  Trump can well be called a clown on many levels but the fact that he was electable at all is an indictment of the tyranny this system has become.  The proof is the treatment he has received from prior to even winning.  We may go back to those "good old days" after his time but that won't signal success.  To the contrary, it will be the sign of the end of this nation's greatness in perpetuity.  The bureaucratic state will win and it will finish the job of crushing us or we'll have to rise against it in a way that cannot be resisted.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
RavenHawk
17 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

That's because "Socialism" is an all-purpose word for anything that people find disagreeable. 

Close but no cigar.  “Socialism” is indeed a generic catch-all term but not because it is *anything* that people find disagreeable.  It is to signify undesirable forms of government.  And undesirable forms of government are ones that robs people’s rights and coerces them into submission and dependency.  The only goal of government is more control at the cost of the individual.  The goal of freedom is less government control (limited government) for the benefit of the people.

 

The General Welfare Clause is one of the three most abused clauses in the Constitution.  When it is used to start giving special interest groups things, it has turned into a Socialist government and I would argue that this government has turned into a Socialist government and it is the Right, it is the duty of the people to take it back.  Trump is trying from the inside.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
19 hours ago, Katniss said:

I have to ask. RavenHawk, how does crony capitalism relate or equate to socialism when the two words capitalism and socialism are opposite in their meaning from one another?

The two words are pretty much opposite, but ‘crony’ modifies the term ‘capitalism’ for a different meaning that is more in line with socialism.  Crony Capitalism just means that the economic leg is in bed with the ruling elite (government leg).  Depending on the flavor, one will have more control over the other.

13 hours ago, Katniss said:

In Russia, I have several online friends and in our past political conversations they have explained to me about their current Russian government, to which they have explained to me many times, both their government and the rich business people there work together creating a Oligarch system for their benefit. They have called this crony capitalism many times before and they've explained to me this is completely different to the pre-Soviet socialist era, not the same, where as the Soviets took away the independent individual rights of the rich business people and their companies beforehand and subjugated them all under oppressive Soviet socialist rule. So for that reason, I have a hard time understanding how crony capitalism and socialism are one in the same. It makes no logical sense.

Russia has stepped back from Communism to be more Marxism/Nazism but it is still a dictatorship.  They’ve discovered that Communism doesn’t work because you need a viable ‘means of production’.  That’s what caused the collapse in the first place.  They thought that the state could run production directly, that cogs were interchangeable.  They didn’t understand human nature (that’s the main drawback with Socialism).  They have an oligarchy for the benefit of the state/party.  The people are still cogs of the proletariat with some bread and circuses (but still a gilded cage).  And you still have to support the party if you plan on becoming a wealthy businessman.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
22 hours ago, and then said:

That led us to 22T $ in debt and an ever-expanding government with ever-shrinking accountability. 

LMAO you dont actually care about that **** !!!!!! :lol:

The deficit is skyrocketing under Trump and he exemplifies "shrinking accountability".  

Holy hell do you know these facts and just lie because you hate the "other side" or is it that right wing media has become so fact free that you honestly dont know?

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
On 6/25/2019 at 9:16 PM, Katniss said:

(I wanted to wait for a while before I replied, just in case you wanted to edit again.)


Oh but I have. And it is the reason why I asked RavenHawk my question in the first place. In Russia, I have several online friends and in our past political conversations they have explained to me about their current Russian government, to which they have explained to me many times, both their government and the rich business people there work together creating a Oligarch system for their benefit. They have called this crony capitalism many times before and they've explained to me this is completely different to the pre-Soviet socialist era, not the same, where as the Soviets took away the independent individual rights of the rich business people and their companies beforehand and subjugated them all under oppressive Soviet socialist rule. So for that reason, I have a hard time understanding how crony capitalism and socialism are one in the same. It makes no logical sense.

 

of course it does not make sense to you, cuz you looking at what fits definitions, i look at end result  in real world.  and it is the same, very few ultra rich, majority dirt poor, it was true in USSR and it is still true n Russia today

Edited by aztek
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Katniss
On 6/26/2019 at 3:35 PM, RavenHawk said:

The two words are pretty much opposite, but ‘crony’ modifies the term ‘capitalism’ for a different meaning that is more in line with socialism.  Crony Capitalism just means that the economic leg is in bed with the ruling elite (government leg).  Depending on the flavor, one will have more control over the other.

 

Russia has stepped back from Communism to be more Marxism/Nazism but it is still a dictatorship.  They’ve discovered that Communism doesn’t work because you need a viable ‘means of production’.  That’s what caused the collapse in the first place.  They thought that the state could run production directly, that cogs were interchangeable.  They didn’t understand human nature (that’s the main drawback with Socialism).  They have an oligarchy for the benefit of the state/party.  The people are still cogs of the proletariat with some bread and circuses (but still a gilded cage).  And you still have to support the party if you plan on becoming a wealthy businessman.

 

So maybe you believe there are a few elements that are akin in the process, but not entirely the same or with the  same end result?

10 hours ago, aztek said:

of course it does not make sense to you, cuz you looking at what fits definitions, i look at end result  in real world.  and it is the same, very few ultra rich, majority dirt poor, it was true in USSR and it is still true n Russia today

What is your definition of dirt poor? Do you mean unable to afford the basic necessities to live on and to have no comfort zone of living? Living in the streets begging for the next meal? No decent shelter?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Katniss said:

So maybe you believe there are a few elements that are akin in the process, but not entirely the same or with the  same end result?

What is your definition of dirt poor? Do you mean unable to afford the basic necessities to live on and to have no comfort zone of living? Living in the streets begging for the next meal? No decent shelter?

 

They're not the same. Ravenhawk believes every form of governance aside from Trumpism is "socialism" and aztek is just happy to have Ravenhawk around to emulate.

 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
Posted (edited)
On 6/26/2019 at 6:14 AM, aztek said:

maybe for you it is , but for anyone living in reality, it has a very clear definition.  it is also easy recognizable by anyone who actually lived in socialism, just ask ex soviets

On the other hand, the Soviet Union was Totalitarianism, whereas mostly Socialists today want something more like the system the Scandinavians have, i.e. Social Democracy.  Not many people like Totalitarianism, or authoritarianism.  To knee-jerk associate Socialism with the USSR is as foolish as to associate Fascism/Nazism with the Free Market and Corporations.  Both Facism and Communism were extremist and Totalitarian, and there are MANY more moderate positions between these pseudo-extremes that are eminently more reasonable and liveable alternatives.  The crucial thing is to realize there is little difference between Fascism and Communism, as they are both forms of extreme authoritarianism.  It is also important to realize that the opposite to Totalitarianism, i.e. Anarchy, is also stupid and unacceptable, and will lead to just as many deaths thru casual violence and disease.  What a society needs is a careful balance between freedom and law enforcement that gives us the benefits of both and as few of the negatives as possible.  This always winds up looking like an uncomfortable compromise that nobody really likes, but everyone can tolerate.  Civilization and its discontents, huh?

Edited by Alchopwn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
1 hour ago, Alchopwn said:

On the other hand, the Soviet Union was Totalitarianism, whereas mostly Socialists today want something more like the system the Scandinavians have, i.e. Social Democracy.  Not many people like Totalitarianism, or authoritarianism.  To knee-jerk associate Socialism with the USSR is as foolish as to associate Fascism/Nazism with the Free Market and Corporations.  Both Facism and Communism were extremist and Totalitarian, and there are MANY more moderate positions between these pseudo-extremes that are eminently more reasonable and liveable alternatives.  The crucial thing is to realize there is little difference between Fascism and Communism, as they are both forms of extreme authoritarianism.  It is also important to realize that the opposite to Totalitarianism, i.e. Anarchy, is also stupid and unacceptable, and will lead to just as many deaths thru casual violence and disease.  What a society needs is a careful balance between freedom and law enforcement that gives us the benefits of both and as few of the negatives as possible.  This always winds up looking like an uncomfortable compromise that nobody really likes, but everyone can tolerate.  Civilization and its discontents, huh?

the devil is in details, system like the Scandinavians have only works in Scandinavian countries, with it's tiny population, very high taxes, and different mindset of people.  

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Katniss
13 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

They're not the same. Ravenhawk believes every form of governance aside from Trumpism is "socialism" and aztek is just happy to have Ravenhawk around to emulate.

 

I know one political objective from the conservative right and it's media is to sway public opinion to stay away from any kind of socialism and to fear it, I understand that and that is the typical nature of the conservative right, but to characterize crony capitalism and socialism as the same is really intellectual dishonesty. Personally I don't like too much socialism and I completely detest crony capitalism, although we do need just a little bit of socialism in the mix of capitalism to keep the greedy criminals at bay. So as an Independent I share some sentiment with the conservative right, but I want them to be honest too and stop with the disinformation or dishonest propaganda. But to be fair, the liberal left does the same thing.


Since crony capitalism occurs here a lot in the U.S. and has occurred over again since the Industrial Revolution, up until it's last occurrence between 2007 - 2009 during the recession, if I go by what these two say, then I should be dirt poor by now. Yet I'm not dirt poor, starving to death, groveling for food on the streets or living in a cardboard box, tent shelter, whatever. It doesn't appear to be the case for the majority of us either. And yet I'm able to pay for this ISP to talk to you and others here online. Pay for groceries, pay insurance, pay for a car and live in decent housing. But I'm not running a major business or lobbying government for tax payer money, benefiting from the government, so I keep wondering why we have not meet the same supposed end result as socialism. Because if what they say is true, how in the world am I able to afford to talk to everyone here right now online? I should not be able too and I should be dirt poor.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Katniss said:

 

What is your definition of dirt poor?

look at Venezuela. that is dirt poor. cuba,  no better future whatsoever in sight,  people living under poverty level are dirt poor, we have entire towns in usa living bellow poverty line.  even thou we are as far from crony capitalism as we are to a nearest star.  ,modern closest example to crony capitalism is Russia, aka country of oligarchs, and a mob state

Edited by aztek
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Katniss
8 hours ago, aztek said:

look at Venezuela. that is dirt poor. cuba,  no better future whatsoever in sight,  people living under poverty level are dirt poor, we have entire towns in usa living bellow poverty line.  even thou we are as far from crony capitalism as we are to a nearest star.  ,modern closest example to crony capitalism is Russia, aka country of oligarchs, and a mob state

We have modern examples here in the U.S. as well, always have for over a 100 years. A great example of crony capitalism in the U.S. is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. There are more such as bailing out the banks and manufactures. The entire agricultural industry, and yet, not everyone in the U.S. is poor as dirt or living under the poverty line. There are still other class levels of wealth besides the rich. The middle class still exists. But remember, your comparison of crony capitalism to socialism is the end result of e-v-e-r-y-o-n-e being poor as dirt.  That's what you said twice on page 1. It's actually the same in Russia, not everyone there, that is not a rent seeking corporation or rich oligarch, is poor as dirt or living below their poverty line either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Skulduggery

Those damn capitalist nazi socialist communist industrialist anarchist b*******. SMDH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
19 hours ago, aztek said:

the devil is in details, system like the Scandinavians have only works in Scandinavian countries, with it's tiny population, very high taxes, and different mindset of people.  

Think over your tiny population argument. A smaller population SHOULD have lower earnings and make such a system impossible, and yet it works very well.  As to higher tax, well that sounds bad, but it is ultimately about a society seeing the government as a resource pool that they put into and then draw from.  You wind up with a co-operative system that isn't run by corporate psychopaths who want to inflict social darwinism on the poor. Scandinavian society reaps the benefits of not tearing itself apart with crime and corruption, while providing a broad array of services to its people.  Nothing is free, but the people get what they need from the public purse, because it isn't getting hijacked by vested interests.  To say it couldn't work in the USA flies in the face of the facts that this is what the USA was turning into under FDR.  Not communism, but a mixed economy and a representative democracy that was determined to give everybody a slice of the pie equal to their contribution.  A lot of the US population knows that it works, and will vote for Bernie to make it happen, and the very people who would most benefit, i.e. the rural poor, will fight tooth and nail to try to prevent it because the education system has failed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Katniss said:

We have modern examples here in the U.S. as well, always have for over a 100 years. A great example of crony capitalism in the U.S. is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. There are more such as bailing out the banks and manufactures. The entire agricultural industry, and yet, not everyone in the U.S. is poor as dirt or living under the poverty line. There are still other class levels of wealth besides the rich. The middle class still exists. But remember, your comparison of crony capitalism to socialism is the end result of e-v-e-r-y-o-n-e being poor as dirt.  That's what you said twice on page 1. It's actually the same in Russia, not everyone there, that is not a rent seeking corporation or rich oligarch, is poor as dirt or living below their poverty line either.

 

yea, that is exactly what i said, everyone who is not either a capitalist or gvmnt officials., what is the problem here?definition of dirt poor?  that is what you base your entire argument on?

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Think over your tiny population argument. A smaller population SHOULD have lower earnings and make such a system impossible, and yet it works very well.  As to higher tax, well that sounds bad, but it is ultimately about a society seeing the government as a resource pool that they put into and then draw from.  You wind up with a co-operative system that isn't run by corporate psychopaths who want to inflict social darwinism on the poor. Scandinavian society reaps the benefits of not tearing itself apart with crime and corruption, while providing a broad array of services to its people.  Nothing is free, but the people get what they need from the public purse, because it isn't getting hijacked by vested interests.  To say it couldn't work in the USA flies in the face of the facts that this is what the USA was turning into under FDR.  Not communism, but a mixed economy and a representative democracy that was determined to give everybody a slice of the pie equal to their contribution.  A lot of the US population knows that it works, and will vote for Bernie to make it happen, and the very people who would most benefit, i.e. the rural poor, will fight tooth and nail to try to prevent it because the education system has failed them.

shoulda woulda coulda, ...blah blah... look at real world, such systems only work in countries with low population, high taxes, different mindset.  show me examples of countries with 300 mil where such system works as good as it does in those small countries

btw it is not me but you who needs to rethink population argument here, when it takes 5  taxpayers to support 1 none working person,  population is very important, you can raise taxes (which is exactly what they did), but there is a reasonable limit, notice how their gvmnt does not consume even fraction of what gvmnt in large countries consume.  like usa .  look at amount of military spending....etc  you need to look at big pic here

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
21 hours ago, Katniss said:

I know one political objective from the conservative right and it's media is to sway public opinion to stay away from any kind of socialism and to fear it, I understand that and that is the typical nature of the conservative right,

That is a very true statement except for one thing.  It is not the fear of running away or hiding from a poison.  It is vigilance and prudence; to fight it.  To fight it out of love, not hate.  We should fear it with every fiber of our being and do everything in our power to destroy it.  The only way to do that is to embrace the Constitution as originally intended.

 

but to characterize crony capitalism and socialism as the same is really intellectual dishonesty.

Maybe not “the same” but interrelated.  Crony capitalism is corruption and Socialism manipulates corruption.  It is honesty to call the beast by its name and it has many names.

 

Personally I don't like too much socialism and I completely detest crony capitalism, although we do need just a little bit of socialism in the mix of capitalism to keep the greedy criminals at bay.

This is where some of the confusion comes in.  People consider things like a police force or fire department as Socialism.  This is what people like you consider “a little bit”.  I understand what you are trying to say.  I’ve used the phrase myself out of convenience.  This is not Socialism.  This is merely a function of government.  Socialism is the enslavement of the people by coercion to some degree.  It could be a gilded cage or bread & circuses or it could be by the force of arms.  Socialism does not remove corruption; it utilizes it as another means of control.

 

So as an Independent I share some sentiment with the conservative right, but I want them to be honest too and stop with the disinformation or dishonest propaganda.

In this case, it is not dishonesty or disinformation.

 

But to be fair, the liberal left does the same thing.

Both sides do it because both are tainted with Socialism.  Socialism first affected the liberals back in the 1920s and 30s.  But it slowly did its work on Republicans.  Never knew how far gone the Republican Establishment was until Trump ran for President.  Only a few patriots (conservatives) that are actually holding out and with Trump leading them, is taking the fight to the enemy of America.  And that is what Socialism is.  Socialism is like the Matrix.  People get caught up in it but then aren’t ready to be unplugged and become mindless bots.  That’s how Socialism spreads until it is too late.  That’s why we need to listen to those like Cuban exile Manuel Martinez (see link in the Democratic Nominee thread or just google him).

 

In the early days of this nation, there were the Federalists and anti-Federalists.  They are the basis for our political parties today.  They stood together to fight Tyranny, which is what Socialism is.  It was known just as Monarchy back then.  Socialism was not part of the feds or antis like it is now today.  Through the years since, these two have morphed and merged until now and they are known as Democrats and Republicans.  Today only Conservatives incorporate the best of both keeping it free from Socialism.  The Founding Fathers never liked a party system but perhaps this is a turning point to rid ourselves of them and Socialism as we did slavery?  Hopefully, there won’t be a need for another civil war??


Since crony capitalism occurs here a lot in the U.S. and has occurred over again since the Industrial Revolution, up until it's last occurrence between 2007 - 2009 during the recession,

It’s going on now.  Don’t get hung up on only Bush.  Frank was just as much of a cause.  It is a constant threat.  We see it mostly with the high tech industry and international interests.  But it’s not that simple.  The robber barons of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries built this nation but their power grew too great in the form of monopolies.  Today’s tech giants aren’t building this nation as much as they are enslaving it.  They are trying for monopoly before giving anything back.  If we really want to control crony capitalism, we should do what Teddy did back then, break up the monopolies and keep tight controls on them.  They are the poison in capitalism.  They are a source of power that Socialists seek.  That should be the only regulation the government has on the free market.

 

if I go by what these two say, then I should be dirt poor by now. Yet I'm not dirt poor, starving to death, groveling for food on the streets or living in a cardboard box, tent shelter, whatever. It doesn't appear to be the case for the majority of us either. And yet I'm able to pay for this ISP to talk to you and others here online. Pay for groceries, pay insurance, pay for a car and live in decent housing. But I'm not running a major business or lobbying government for tax payer money, benefiting from the government, so I keep wondering why we have not meet the same supposed end result as socialism. Because if what they say is true, how in the world am I able to afford to talk to everyone here right now online? I should not be able too and I should be dirt poor.

You are fine for now.  We have too many that are in poverty, however, even our poor are better off than most.  That is because we have an abundance of wealth.  Capitalism builds up potential.  It’s stored like a battery (accumulation of wealth).  Socialism eventually drains the battery and doesn’t recharge it.  Only the free market can do that.  The smaller European nations have great potential but Socialism is draining the battery and in a generation or two, will be completely drained.  This draining is an irritation to the system and it takes many forms from austerity, to yellow vests, to Brexit.  Some are trying to avoid the inevitable, like Ireland lowering their corporate tax rate and Sweden getting away from pure Socialism.  Socialism doesn’t work and in time you get a Venezuela.  If nothing changes, I see a major war that will erupt in Europe as it would hundreds of years ago under the Monarchies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Katniss
7 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Think over your tiny population argument. A smaller population SHOULD have lower earnings and make such a system impossible, and yet it works very well.  As to higher tax, well that sounds bad, but it is ultimately about a society seeing the government as a resource pool that they put into and then draw from.  You wind up with a co-operative system that isn't run by corporate psychopaths who want to inflict social darwinism on the poor. Scandinavian society reaps the benefits of not tearing itself apart with crime and corruption, while providing a broad array of services to its people.  Nothing is free, but the people get what they need from the public purse, because it isn't getting hijacked by vested interests.  To say it couldn't work in the USA flies in the face of the facts that this is what the USA was turning into under FDR.  Not communism, but a mixed economy and a representative democracy that was determined to give everybody a slice of the pie equal to their contribution.  A lot of the US population knows that it works, and will vote for Bernie to make it happen, and the very people who would most benefit, i.e. the rural poor, will fight tooth and nail to try to prevent it because the education system has failed them.

I have to say, that is not entirely true, really it's mostly people who are well off that want to be rich someday and some of the rich that do the fighting? Those people worked hard for their money and they don't want to see it taken away by government. And most rural poor people that I know are not shy of taking a handup from the government when they are in need. Not because they want to, it's because their situation sometimes puts them in dire straits and they have no one else to turn to but the government. So they're not the ones trying to prevent anything except being poor.

 

2 hours ago, aztek said:

yea, that is exactly what i said, everyone who is not either a capitalist or gvmnt officials., what is the problem here?definition of dirt poor?  that is what you base your entire argument on?

Now I'm confused and this discussion is getting twisted. Are you now trying to say we are all crony capitalists and that is why some of us are not dirt poor? If so, that doesn't make any sense, because everyone who lives in the U.S. is a capitalist in some way, whether they want to be or not, even the poor or dirt poor as you put it. The system we all operate under forces everybody to be a capitalist soon or later one way or the other.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 6/27/2019 at 10:08 PM, Farmer77 said:

They're not the same. Ravenhawk believes every form of governance aside from Trumpism is "socialism" and aztek is just happy to have Ravenhawk around to emulate.

 

Government by its nature is Socialist.  The Constitution puts controls on it to keep it from sliding away.  Trumpism is just another form of Populism and even that has the potential of falling into corruption.  For now, it has been a long over due and welcomed counter to “Fundamental Change”.  Sometime in Trump’s second term or after, we’ll need a more traditional form of Conservatism to keep the prosperity going.  This current system is just a transition period to return to Constitutionalism.  Hopefully those that come after will learn the lesson of Socialism and make the proper changes.  If not, then the system will kick into action as it has before.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog
Posted (edited)

This forum shows how some american people keep confusing western european social-democracies with socialism/communism, all because it has 6 starting letters "social" just like communism. Western european countries mostly fit the category of social-democracies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy) without actually trying to go to socialism, because we all know socialism doesn't work with current human production, /technological or economical capabilities, it just doesn't work.

Say what you like from the European Union, or western european countries (including scandinavian countries) but we are anything from being communists or socialists. Any one who does needs to check with a shrink, cause you're delusional. Don't think for a moment I think the EU is great, it's not, it's also not a nanny state, yet basically all european countries would be worse without it, and this is why I support it. 
Without it my country could not have been able to get cleaning residual water systems, cleaner water/air laws, etc because it would be financially affordable, and yet I think overall the euro currency and eurozone fiscal policies have been a disaster.

For my american friends all I say to you is that your country too is going down the drain, cause you are allowing corporate fascist capitalism destroy you, you can call it free enterprise all you want, but in reality it´s the law of the strongest capitalist, and everytime someone tries to put some limits on it is labeled a communist. The fact is most of the western world although admires american prosperity and entrepreneur of its economy (faq I do too) is also appalled at the lack of humanism and basic ethical principles like human dignity (one thing is the lack of economical resources, other is the lack of any political will) where people think that most folks on food stamps are leeches (sure there are plenty of leeches), that giving government social unemployment income is bad yet giving tax cuts that only enrich the top 10% (or less) is a good thing (again leeches comes to mind).
The concept of american dream was something that somewhat the world could understand where it came from, but now it´s just more of a innocent and naive illusion.
When a person like Trump is elected it only shows that the a large % of US citizens capable of voting has become either stupid, blind, morally or ethically corrupt (not saying prior US Presidents were some kind of near perfect humans), but your President is a disgrace.
When you read stuff like the electoral maps drawing, this stupid thing called "electoral college" (for fuqsake its 21st century) where one man one vote simply goes down the drain, the now extreme partisan divide, the "climate change hoax".....etc... Djisas Craist you really have a problem with drugs.

No I don't think my country is any better, every single country has its problems, but for me the USA is the only country that could go much faster than any other to a better overall society. I really want to admire the US but I cannot in good conscience do.

I am one of those outside the US who roots for "make America great again" (has it ever been?)
I do wish the US success even if it´s Trump presidency  (or any President), but I do think he's a moron or a con artist or the american people have become somewhat stupid.

Edited by godnodog
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Katniss
13 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

That is a very true statement except for one thing.  It is not the fear of running away or hiding from a poison.  It is vigilance and prudence; to fight it.  To fight it out of love, not hate.  We should fear it with every fiber of our being and do everything in our power to destroy it.  The only way to do that is to embrace the Constitution as originally intended.

Thanks for elaborating further on that and as I said, I understand and you're not the first person to tell me reason.

Quote

Maybe not “the same” but interrelated.  Crony capitalism is corruption and Socialism manipulates corruption.  It is honesty to call the beast by its name and it has many names.

 Yes I can see corruption as being one of the akin elements, and eventually corruption in a socialist society can turn into communism. We've all seen it many times throughout history.

Quote

This is where some of the confusion comes in.  People consider things like a police force or fire department as Socialism.  This is what people like you consider “a little bit”.  I understand what you are trying to say.  I’ve used the phrase myself out of convenience.  This is not Socialism.  This is merely a function of government.  Socialism is the enslavement of the people by coercion to some degree.  It could be a gilded cage or bread & circuses or it could be by the force of arms.  Socialism does not remove corruption; it utilizes it as another means of control.

Actually that's not exactly the little bit I was thinking about, what I was really thinking about was some regulations to keep companies from screwing the rest of us over like price gouging, when one company is the only one in control of a product or dumping toxic waste in our own backyards and to keep the greedy criminals at bay, for example like Bernie Madoff. So just regulations that keep corporations and business considerate and honestly fair to the consumer. The level of regulations is always debatable and always will be, but that little bit of socialism is needed rather then none at all.

Quote

In this case, it is not dishonesty or disinformation.

Can you elaborate more on what you are referring to here? It's not exactly clear to me what you're indicating.

Quote

 

Both sides do it because both are tainted with Socialism.  Socialism first affected the liberals back in the 1920s and 30s.  But it slowly did its work on Republicans.  Never knew how far gone the Republican Establishment was until Trump ran for President.  Only a few patriots (conservatives) that are actually holding out and with Trump leading them, is taking the fight to the enemy of America.  And that is what Socialism is.  Socialism is like the Matrix.  People get caught up in it but then aren’t ready to be unplugged and become mindless bots.  That’s how Socialism spreads until it is too late.  That’s why we need to listen to those like Cuban exile Manuel Martinez (see link in the Democratic Nominee thread or just google him).

 In the early days of this nation, there were the Federalists and anti-Federalists.  They are the basis for our political parties today.  They stood together to fight Tyranny, which is what Socialism is.  It was known just as Monarchy back then.  Socialism was not part of the feds or antis like it is now today.  Through the years since, these two have morphed and merged until now and they are known as Democrats and Republicans.  Today only Conservatives incorporate the best of both keeping it free from Socialism.  The Founding Fathers never liked a party system but perhaps this is a turning point to rid ourselves of them and Socialism as we did slavery?  Hopefully, there won’t be a need for another civil war??

 

I understand where you are coming from when you point all these things out, but I was just being honest about both sides in my opinion because I don't favor one over the other.

Quote

It’s going on now.  Don’t get hung up on only Bush.  Frank was just as much of a cause.  It is a constant threat.  We see it mostly with the high tech industry and international interests.  But it’s not that simple.  The robber barons of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries built this nation but their power grew too great in the form of monopolies.  Today’s tech giants aren’t building this nation as much as they are enslaving it.  They are trying for monopoly before giving anything back.  If we really want to control crony capitalism, we should do what Teddy did back then, break up the monopolies and keep tight controls on them.  They are the poison in capitalism.  They are a source of power that Socialists seek.  That should be the only regulation the government has on the free market.

Oh I know, that is exactly what I was saying to Aztek and I even mentioned to Aztek the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act signed by Obama, but Aztek seems to think the only modern closest example to crony capitalism is in Russia. It's like Aztek doesn't realize it's happening in our very own backyard. And I totally agree about breaking up monopolies.

Quote

You are fine for now.  We have too many that are in poverty, however, even our poor are better off than most.  That is because we have an abundance of wealth.  Capitalism builds up potential.  It’s stored like a battery (accumulation of wealth).  Socialism eventually drains the battery and doesn’t recharge it.  Only the free market can do that.  The smaller European nations have great potential but Socialism is draining the battery and in a generation or two, will be completely drained.  This draining is an irritation to the system and it takes many forms from austerity, to yellow vests, to Brexit.  Some are trying to avoid the inevitable, like Ireland lowering their corporate tax rate and Sweden getting away from pure Socialism.  Socialism doesn’t work and in time you get a Venezuela.  If nothing changes, I see a major war that will erupt in Europe as it would hundreds of years ago under the Monarchies.

I really don't have any argument to make to this, because my previous post really pertained to crony capitalism and socialism and what the end results are. But like I said before, I understand where you are coming from on this too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
Posted (edited)
On 6/26/2019 at 5:01 PM, and then said:

That led us to 22T $ in debt and an ever-expanding government with ever-shrinking accountability.  Trump can well be called a clown on many levels but the fact that he was electable at all is an indictment of the tyranny this system has become.  The proof is the treatment he has received from prior to even winning.  We may go back to those "good old days" after his time but that won't signal success.  To the contrary, it will be the sign of the end of this nation's greatness in perpetuity.  The bureaucratic state will win and it will finish the job of crushing us or we'll have to rise against it in a way that cannot be resisted.  

Yet another person who seems to think that National debt should be treated like their house mortgage.  There is a huge qualitative difference between National Debt and personal debt.  Are you familiar with the saying:

“If you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have a problem. But if you owe a million, it has.”   John Maynard Keynes

Obviously these numbers are given for 1930s British pounds, but the principle remains the same.  The saying has been updated to say "Borrow a billion dollars and the bank owns you, borrow a trillion dollars and you own the bank.".  The rules of household economics simply do not apply to Nation States, as Nation States have access to a range of economic options that households will never possess, but undeinformed people still seem to think that the situation is equivalent, when it just ain't so.

Here's an interesting fact for you.  Most people are unaware that China is presently $50 Trillion in debt, but their economy is still powering along unhampered and unconcerned.  The USA's modest $22 Trillion.  Presently the US GDP is a bit over $19 Trillion, and that means that the debt is still very manageable.  Remember also, that most debt gets turned into bonds of whichever government produces the debt, and people tend to consider bonds to be a long term investment, and one that they often forget to redeem in their lifetime.  This has been the way of things since the Renaissance, when city states first invented bonds as a way of financing their wars.  Of course the other way of paying these bills is to introduce a measure of inflation. 

Having spoken to some central bankers, the consensus is that your national debt shouldn't exceed 1 year's GDP (at least not without a really pressing reason), and inflation shouldn't go over 10%.  The reason for this that it is generally possible to get a 1 year's GDP debt under control with a bit of a policy shift if necessary, and 10% inflation is manageable, and can be brought under control again without many problems.

Ultimately, the way to generate money is to get an economy moving, and that means promoting exchange of currency.  Austerity measures simply strip currency out of a market, and hence trust, too goes out of a market.  What you want is a rapid exchange of resources, or "velocity of exchange".  It is thus far more sensible to add money into a stagnating economy than to strip it out.  

As to Trump's alleged economic success, he is merely riding on Obama's shirt-tails, and soon his trade war shennanigans will crash the global economy, so get ready for that.  I know I have idiot proofed my investments (and made a packet in the process thanks to 2008), and I advise others to do likewise.

Edited by Alchopwn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
19 hours ago, aztek said:

shoulda woulda coulda, ...blah blah... look at real world, such systems only work in countries with low population, high taxes, different mindset.  show me examples of countries with 300 mil where such system works as good as it does in those small countries

Well that's pretty funny, as the only countries, worldwide, with more population than the USA atm are China and India.  Of those 2, China is running a mixed Communist/Capitalist economy and is rapidly overtaking the US economy on every measure. I think a fine indicator of how well these economies are doing can be viewed thru the various approaches to the provision of healthcare.

Interestingly 95% of China's population has access to state health, but there are also out of pocket expenses they need to meet based on income.  China's health system is not presently up to US standards, but the gap is closing rapidly on all fronts.  By comparison, India has always been a messy chaotic laissez faire situation that is all but ungovernable, regardless of who is in charge.  Presently India can  maintain adequate levels of adequate nutrition for its population, and is putting in a billion public toilets in its major cities.  India has a lot of catching up to do, and it will be interesting to see if they are able to meet the challenges or whether they will just bumble along as usual.  On the other hand, most European countries manage to handle national health systems far better than the "devil-take-the-hindmost" approach of the USA's health insurance paradigm.

In short, who are these 300 million pop nations you are talking about?  Europe on the whole handles health WAY better than the USA, and even China is better able to help its poorest than the USA seems prepared to do.  National Health Services have been the work of Social Democratic parties, and have made sure that all people have had access to affordable health care.  The main opponents of these initiatives have not been the poor, but the very rich, who don't like paying taxes to keep their serfs alive, to the point where US corporations take out insurance on their workers, that the families of the workers will never see a penny of, and that is called Dead Peasant Insurance LINK.  This sort of contempt for working Americans is one of many reasons that the present system is untennable.

So in answer to your question, I say there are only 2 countries who have 300 million+ pop, and one is actually providinng a National Healthcare program, and is STILL overtaking the US economy i.e. China.  India is following a more strict Capitalist model, and is nowhere near China.

19 hours ago, aztek said:

btw it is not me but you who needs to rethink population argument here, when it takes 5  taxpayers to support 1 none working person,  population is very important, you can raise taxes (which is exactly what they did), but there is a reasonable limit, notice how their gvmnt does not consume even fraction of what gvmnt in large countries consume.  like usa .  look at amount of military spending....etc  you need to look at big pic here

Considering that the top 1% don't pay tax, yet own more resources than the bottom 75% of the population, perhaps that TOTAL SYSTEM EXPLOIT needs to be fixed first?  I think that if we freed up that stolen money, suddenly your concerns might be proven incorrect.  The fact is that your 5 tax payers stat is wrong, depending on who the taxpayer is.  It might be that having 1 of the 1% actually paying their fair tax burden may cover ALL the unemployment briden of the whole USA.  In the USA we presently only spend 145 billion on Social Security, and that is about 15% of a Trilionaire's income, which a reasonable portion to pay as their proper tax burden.  Oh, and if the figures don't measure up for 1 trillionaire, perhaps we could  properly tax 2 of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 6/29/2019 at 1:58 PM, godnodog said:

This forum shows how some american people keep confusing western european social-democracies with socialism/communism,

This forum shows how many Europeans keep confusing their social-democracy as something vastly different than socialism/communism.  Social-democracy is the embryonic form.

 

all because it has 6 starting letters "social" just like communism. Western european countries mostly fit the category of social-democracies (

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy) without actually trying to go to socialism,

Maybe because the government is Socialist, that’s why the first 6 letters are the same.  Couldn’t be a coincidence could it?  If it wasn’t Socialist, don’t you think someone would come up with a different name?  You do realize that democracy is Socialism too?  One-man, one-vote is so easy to abuse and manipulate.

 

because we all know socialism doesn't work with current human production, /technological or economical capabilities, it just doesn't work.

Then why is it that they keep trying it?  They’ll get it right next time.  I really do think that the history books are out of *next time*.

Say what you like from the European Union, or western european countries (including scandinavian countries) but we are anything from being communists or socialists. Any one who does needs to check with a shrink, cause you're delusional.

When it comes to Rights, do you think that Europe can compete with the US?  Especially when it comes to our 1st and 2nd Amendments?  The 1st is basically at the core of Brexit.  How difficult is it to even comment on Muslim violence in Europe?  How many cities in Europe can you walk around armed?  In Iceland, parents can only give traditional names for their babies.  I don’t know what the latest status is on this is?  They could have reversed it since I last saw anything on it.  We could probably fill a thread alone on the Rights that Europeans don’t have that Americans take for granted.

 

Don't think for a moment I think the EU is great, it's not, it's also not a nanny state, yet basically all european countries would be worse without it, and this is why I support it. 

You don’t consider NHS as part of a nanny state?  That is the dictionary definition.  Cradle to grave care with rationing (death panels).  NHS sounds more like something from “Logan’s Run”.  I don’t know about being worse, just exchanged one demon for another.  Germany and France get much of the benefit at the expense of the other nations.  Are not Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Austria, etc. all at some level of collapse or austerity?  Which ones are confiscating private investments?


Without it my country could not have been able to get cleaning residual water systems, cleaner water/air laws, etc because it would be financially affordable, and yet I think overall the euro currency and eurozone fiscal policies have been a disaster.

And because of the fact of poor fiscal policy, your water systems and the like will not age well.  Because some things are generational, no one notices how bad things really get over time.

For my american friends all I say to you is that your country too is going down the drain, cause you are allowing corporate fascist capitalism destroy you,

You are very right and I call it Crony Capitalism.  At least there are enough here still trying to fight it.  We haven’t been completed whipped into submission.

 

you can call it free enterprise all you want, but in reality it´s the law of the strongest capitalist,

 “Law of the strongest” (survival of the fittest) *IS* Capitalism.  There is nothing wrong with that.  People just need to get better at playing by the rules.  We get this concept from Darwin, where he said “It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”  This is the crux of Capitalism (not dog-eat-dog or maybe in your case dognoeatdog :)).  Most people do not consider the whole quote and that the coined phrase is just a shorthand.  The coined phrase by itself implies a slightly different meaning.  Now indeed in business, it is dog-eat-dog but you don’t want anything that isn’t the fittest to survive.  Humans are not stuck in any one kind of endeavor to sustain life.  It might take a person several tries to find his niche.

 

and everytime someone tries to put some limits on it is labeled a communist.

It depends on how it is done.  But as I’ve stated, the only regulation that government should put on business is tight regulation on monopolies.  You can have *too good* of anything and everything.  Large corporate monopolies is that poison in capitalism.  When you have these large monopolies, they become too big to fail and that leads to corporate welfare.  The government should be encouraging capitalism by allowing business to fail.  Knowing that there is no government bailouts, corporations will think twice about being mega corporations.  The free market is based on the “Invisible Hand”.  A concept developed by a Scott.  It has a personal connotation and not for a faceless corporation.  The “Invisible Hand” brings benefit to the individual.  It was at this level that the free market was meant and that is how it builds a nation’s wealth.  As long as a corporation keeps to that intent, then fine.

 

The fact is most of the western world although admires american prosperity and entrepreneur of its economy (faq I do too) is also appalled at the lack of humanism and basic ethical principles like human dignity (one thing is the lack of economical resources, other is the lack of any political will) where people think that most folks on food stamps are leeches (sure there are plenty of leeches),

Human dignity is the ability to do something for yourself, not dependent on government for sustenance.  The “Invisible Hand” *IS* humanity.  That is what keeps people off food stamps.  Some people don’t make the “Invisible Hand” personal.  Sure there are leeches, some because of poor character but there are those that are actually in need.  But this is what happens, those that are borderline wonder why should they struggle when someone of lesser character gets a free ride?  In time that wears down the individual and then they give in.  Then it is just a cascade effect on up the line.  This is what Socialism counts on.  Then it can enslave the people without a fight.  How it that ethical?

 

that giving government social unemployment income is bad yet giving tax cuts that only enrich the top 10% (or less) is a good thing (again leeches comes to mind).

There’s a difference there.  Taxes belong to the individual or corporation, not the government.  When you *give* a tax cut, that just means that the individual or corporation keeps more of their money.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that but Socialism will make it sound bad.  The corporation will keep more because it makes more.  In this country, the top 10% pay 70% of the tax burden as it is.  That doesn’t sound very fair to me.  Social unemployment (handout as opposed to a helping hand) creates a special interest group.  Socialism gets into identity politics where it can play one special interest group off another.  This nation was established not to have special interest groups but that is what we have.  I think it was unintentional but that is one aspect that allows Socialism to stay entrenched.  Our own Amendments do us in.  I have proposed is to repeal the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments (note: all post-Constitutional Convention Bill of Rights) and replace them with one (1) “Citizenship Amendment”.  This removes the special interest and preserves equal rights equally.


The concept of american dream was something that somewhat the world could understand where it came from, but now it´s just more of a innocent and naive illusion.

That sounds like a Socialist to me.  That is how it would attack what we have by calling it an innocent and naïve illusion.  In a way, I suppose it is.  To think it foolish that we can do better than the Socialism that exists?  But there were men and women that stood fast to an idea and made it a reality.  That’s all it takes, sacrifice your freedoms to keep them.  And many have given that last full measure of devotion.


When a person like Trump is elected it only shows that the a large % of US citizens capable of voting has become either stupid, blind, morally or ethically corrupt (not saying prior US Presidents were some kind of near perfect humans), but your President is a disgrace.

Our current President is exactly what the Founding Fathers envisioned.  A large % of US citizens have realized that the old way of voting has been out of stupidity, blindness, immorality, and ethically corrupt.  You’ve been suckered in by the MSM.


When you read stuff like the electoral maps drawing, this stupid thing called "electoral college" (for fuqsake its 21st century) where one man one vote simply goes down the drain, the now extreme partisan divide, the "climate change hoax".....etc... 

Djisas Craist you really have a problem with drugs.

You simply do not understand what the Electoral College does for us.  It prevents mob rule.  It keeps the one-man, one-vote disaster of democracy from dragging this nation down the drain.  The purpose of the Electoral College is to assure that the broadest possible appeal is what elects the President.  Without that, candidates need only campaign in a few states like California or New York.  Does California or New York represent *ALL* Americans?  Absolutely not!  What we call fly-over space are not represented by these two and neither are they concerned with the needs of the other.

No I don't think my country is any better, every single country has its problems, but for me the USA is the only country that could go much faster than any other to a better overall society. I really want to admire the US but I cannot in good conscience do.

I agree.  If we could get rid of Socialism, this nation would take off like nobody’s business.  Trump has done much in the short time he has been in office.  He’s turned around the disaster of what came before.

I am one of those outside the US who roots for "make America great again" (has it ever been?)

It was great from the beginning because that it was the Great Experiment fueled by the Age of Enlightenment.  As long as America is great, Socialism can’t take it over.  That’s why you’ve seen those that have disparaged her greatness.  When Trump started “Make America Great Again”, which he wasn’t the only one to use that phrase, but he was the one that believes it, was his way to encourage the rest of us not to lose hope.  It wasn’t that we needed to reclaim something that we lost but to continue what we have so we don’t lose it.  There is room for improvement and our best days are in front of us.


I do wish the US success even if it´s Trump presidency  (or any President), but I do think he's a moron or a con artist or the american people have become somewhat stupid.

Again, it sounds like you are being influenced by the media.  If you were aware of how Obama tried to destroy this country, I don’t think you’d think Trump is so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
godnodog
On 7/1/2019 at 7:43 PM, RavenHawk said:

This forum shows how many Europeans keep confusing their social-democracy as something vastly different than socialism/communism.  Social-democracy is the embryonic form.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe because the government is Socialist, that’s why the first 6 letters are the same.  Couldn’t be a coincidence could it?  If it wasn’t Socialist, don’t you think someone would come up with a different name?  You do realize that democracy is Socialism too?  One-man, one-vote is so easy to abuse and manipulate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then why is it that they keep trying it?  They’ll get it right next time.  I really do think that the history books are out of *next time*.

 

 

When it comes to Rights, do you think that Europe can compete with the US?  Especially when it comes to our 1st and 2nd Amendments?  The 1st is basically at the core of Brexit.  How difficult is it to even comment on Muslim violence in Europe?  How many cities in Europe can you walk around armed?  In Iceland, parents can only give traditional names for their babies.  I don’t know what the latest status is on this is?  They could have reversed it since I last saw anything on it.  We could probably fill a thread alone on the Rights that Europeans don’t have that Americans take for granted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You don’t consider NHS as part of a nanny state?  That is the dictionary definition.  Cradle to grave care with rationing (death panels).  NHS sounds more like something from “Logan’s Run”.  I don’t know about being worse, just exchanged one demon for another.  Germany and France get much of the benefit at the expense of the other nations.  Are not Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Austria, etc. all at some level of collapse or austerity?  Which ones are confiscating private investments?

 

 

 

 

And because of the fact of poor fiscal policy, your water systems and the like will not age well.  Because some things are generational, no one notices how bad things really get over time.
 

 

 

You are very right and I call it Crony Capitalism.  At least there are enough here still trying to fight it.  We haven’t been completed whipped into submission.

 

 

 

 

 

 “Law of the strongest” (survival of the fittest) *IS* Capitalism.  There is nothing wrong with that.  People just need to get better at playing by the rules.  We get this concept from Darwin, where he said “It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”  This is the crux of Capitalism (not dog-eat-dog or maybe in your case dognoeatdog :)).  Most people do not consider the whole quote and that the coined phrase is just a shorthand.  The coined phrase by itself implies a slightly different meaning.  Now indeed in business, it is dog-eat-dog but you don’t want anything that isn’t the fittest to survive.  Humans are not stuck in any one kind of endeavor to sustain life.  It might take a person several tries to find his niche.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It depends on how it is done.  But as I’ve stated, the only regulation that government should put on business is tight regulation on monopolies.  You can have *too good* of anything and everything.  Large corporate monopolies is that poison in capitalism.  When you have these large monopolies, they become too big to fail and that leads to corporate welfare.  The government should be encouraging capitalism by allowing business to fail.  Knowing that there is no government bailouts, corporations will think twice about being mega corporations.  The free market is based on the “Invisible Hand”.  A concept developed by a Scott.  It has a personal connotation and not for a faceless corporation.  The “Invisible Hand” brings benefit to the individual.  It was at this level that the free market was meant and that is how it builds a nation’s wealth.  As long as a corporation keeps to that intent, then fine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Human dignity is the ability to do something for yourself, not dependent on government for sustenance.  The “Invisible Hand” *IS* humanity.  That is what keeps people off food stamps.  Some people don’t make the “Invisible Hand” personal.  Sure there are leeches, some because of poor character but there are those that are actually in need.  But this is what happens, those that are borderline wonder why should they struggle when someone of lesser character gets a free ride?  In time that wears down the individual and then they give in.  Then it is just a cascade effect on up the line.  This is what Socialism counts on.  Then it can enslave the people without a fight.  How it that ethical?

 

 

 

 

 

 

There’s a difference there.  Taxes belong to the individual or corporation, not the government.  When you *give* a tax cut, that just means that the individual or corporation keeps more of their money.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that but Socialism will make it sound bad.  The corporation will keep more because it makes more.  In this country, the top 10% pay 70% of the tax burden as it is.  That doesn’t sound very fair to me.  Social unemployment (handout as opposed to a helping hand) creates a special interest group.  Socialism gets into identity politics where it can play one special interest group off another.  This nation was established not to have special interest groups but that is what we have.  I think it was unintentional but that is one aspect that allows Socialism to stay entrenched.  Our own Amendments do us in.  I have proposed is to repeal the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments (note: all post-Constitutional Convention Bill of Rights) and replace them with one (1) “Citizenship Amendment”.  This removes the special interest and preserves equal rights equally.

 

 

 

 

That sounds like a Socialist to me.  That is how it would attack what we have by calling it an innocent and naïve illusion.  In a way, I suppose it is.  To think it foolish that we can do better than the Socialism that exists?  But there were men and women that stood fast to an idea and made it a reality.  That’s all it takes, sacrifice your freedoms to keep them.  And many have given that last full measure of devotion.

 

 

 

 

Our current President is exactly what the Founding Fathers envisioned.  A large % of US citizens have realized that the old way of voting has been out of stupidity, blindness, immorality, and ethically corrupt.  You’ve been suckered in by the MSM.

 

 

 

 

You simply do not understand what the Electoral College does for us.  It prevents mob rule.  It keeps the one-man, one-vote disaster of democracy from dragging this nation down the drain.  The purpose of the Electoral College is to assure that the broadest possible appeal is what elects the President.  Without that, candidates need only campaign in a few states like California or New York.  Does California or New York represent *ALL* Americans?  Absolutely not!  What we call fly-over space are not represented by these two and neither are they concerned with the needs of the other.
 

 

 

I agree.  If we could get rid of Socialism, this nation would take off like nobody’s business.  Trump has done much in the short time he has been in office.  He’s turned around the disaster of what came before.
 

 

 

It was great from the beginning because that it was the Great Experiment fueled by the Age of Enlightenment.  As long as America is great, Socialism can’t take it over.  That’s why you’ve seen those that have disparaged her greatness.  When Trump started “Make America Great Again”, which he wasn’t the only one to use that phrase, but he was the one that believes it, was his way to encourage the rest of us not to lose hope.  It wasn’t that we needed to reclaim something that we lost but to continue what we have so we don’t lose it.  There is room for improvement and our best days are in front of us.

 

 

 

Again, it sounds like you are being influenced by the media.  If you were aware of how Obama tried to destroy this country, I don’t think you’d think Trump is so bad.

 

Good reading, yet I´m sticking with my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.