Politics in a Nutshell
-
Correction: Democrats want to help the poor by screwing the rich. Republicans want to help the rich by screwing the poor. Libertarians want to stand aside and break down the government because Democrats don't realize that having a government so big in the first place is why corruption occurs and that the legislation only helps the rich. Taxes imposed on the rich get passed down to the middle class through higher prices. People have forgotten that there's a problem with this "screwing" idea... it's called theft, and is the very essence of why nobody trusts anyone. The bigger the government, the more of a problem we have. #justsayin
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects.Can someone please explain two things 1, what a joke is to Josh 2, why does small govenment mean the middle class and poor dont get the shaft? because history clearly shows that when the US did have a small govenment the middle class and especially the poor were well screwed
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
-
Correction: Democrats want to help the poor by screwing the rich. Republicans want to help the rich by screwing the poor. Libertarians want to stand aside and break down the government because Democrats don't realize that having a government so big in the first place is why corruption occurs and that the legislation only helps the rich. Taxes imposed on the rich get passed down to the middle class through higher prices. People have forgotten that there's a problem with this "screwing" idea... it's called theft, and is the very essence of why nobody trusts anyone. The bigger the government, the more of a problem we have. #justsayin
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects.Here in the Netherlands, it's the Libertarians who are screwing the poor, and the Socialists would be doing something about it but they didn't get enough votes. But whatever it is they used to do, it used to work - even though you make it sound like that's impossible :) I'm surprised it's so different.. By the way, why do many (most?) Americans think socialism is a Bad Thing?
-
Here in the Netherlands, it's the Libertarians who are screwing the poor, and the Socialists would be doing something about it but they didn't get enough votes. But whatever it is they used to do, it used to work - even though you make it sound like that's impossible :) I'm surprised it's so different.. By the way, why do many (most?) Americans think socialism is a Bad Thing?
harold aptroot wrote:
By the way, why do many (most?) Americans think socialism is a Bad Thing?
Cold war relic. It used to be Capitalism vs. Communism, and most people don't understand that the "Communism" practiced by the USSR was really just an authoritarian regime disguised as a communist state. So the general public thinks that "socialism" = "Communism" = USSR = Evil, when in reality, a certain amount of socialism nicely complements a capitalist economy. The real question should be how much socialism is needed (More than we have now, less than we have now, etc).
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Correction: Democrats want to help the poor by screwing the rich. Republicans want to help the rich by screwing the poor. Libertarians want to stand aside and break down the government because Democrats don't realize that having a government so big in the first place is why corruption occurs and that the legislation only helps the rich. Taxes imposed on the rich get passed down to the middle class through higher prices. People have forgotten that there's a problem with this "screwing" idea... it's called theft, and is the very essence of why nobody trusts anyone. The bigger the government, the more of a problem we have. #justsayin
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects.Saw this one coming a mile away... Ignoring for a moment that my original post was meant as a humorous jab at all of the various parties... Big government = Government screws some people, helps others. Small government = Rich people screw poor people, help themselves. Without the government keeping a grip on things, what's to stop the rich from screwing the poor?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
harold aptroot wrote:
By the way, why do many (most?) Americans think socialism is a Bad Thing?
Cold war relic. It used to be Capitalism vs. Communism, and most people don't understand that the "Communism" practiced by the USSR was really just an authoritarian regime disguised as a communist state. So the general public thinks that "socialism" = "Communism" = USSR = Evil, when in reality, a certain amount of socialism nicely complements a capitalist economy. The real question should be how much socialism is needed (More than we have now, less than we have now, etc).
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)I think it goes even further back in history. The original political party that was elected in Germany with Adolf as it's leader was known as the National Socialist Party. It probably goes even further back than that, though. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
-
I think it goes even further back in history. The original political party that was elected in Germany with Adolf as it's leader was known as the National Socialist Party. It probably goes even further back than that, though. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
Really? That's ironic, considering that a dictatorship is the polar opposite of socialism... Then again, North Korea is actually the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" (DPRK)...
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Saw this one coming a mile away... Ignoring for a moment that my original post was meant as a humorous jab at all of the various parties... Big government = Government screws some people, helps others. Small government = Rich people screw poor people, help themselves. Without the government keeping a grip on things, what's to stop the rich from screwing the poor?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
Without the government keeping a grip on things, what's to stop the rich from screwing the poor?
Stock answers: 'Their fellow man.' 'The free market.' 'I don't care.' 'If they don't have money, they really aren't people now are they?' I will note, I've caught all of these(with the forth being a paraphrasing of a lot of philosophical/economic theory masturbation someone tossed at me once) from small government supporters.
-
I think it goes even further back in history. The original political party that was elected in Germany with Adolf as it's leader was known as the National Socialist Party. It probably goes even further back than that, though. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
It does to some extent, back in the late teens/early 20s anarchists where that evil boogyman attempting to destroy America. And I'm fairly sure there was something before them, and oddly enough they all have the same vague anti-American sentiment ascribed to them by people who most likely can't define the words they use to describe them. If you go over the history of stupid hysterics of the US the modern conception of 'Those evil socialists' starts to make sense, particularly the "Those pussy hippies are going to kill us all, take our Jesusism and give other people my health care" angle, which seems to be more or less the same rhetoric as they used at least back to the early 1900s only with the new claims piled on top.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Without the government keeping a grip on things, what's to stop the rich from screwing the poor?
Stock answers: 'Their fellow man.' 'The free market.' 'I don't care.' 'If they don't have money, they really aren't people now are they?' I will note, I've caught all of these(with the forth being a paraphrasing of a lot of philosophical/economic theory masturbation someone tossed at me once) from small government supporters.
Hold on, I'm really interested in hearing what Josh has to say on this topic. I may not agree with many of his viewpoints, but he's not a troll like CSS and FB.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Hold on, I'm really interested in hearing what Josh has to say on this topic. I may not agree with many of his viewpoints, but he's not a troll like CSS and FB.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Oh he's surprised me before, but I figured I'd toss out the common responses I've received to see just what his would be as I've run into some remarkably obnoxious(and almost always over privileged) examples in the past. The only real thread I've come across between the lot of them is the complete inability to take a joke about their political views without formulating a political response.
-
Saw this one coming a mile away... Ignoring for a moment that my original post was meant as a humorous jab at all of the various parties... Big government = Government screws some people, helps others. Small government = Rich people screw poor people, help themselves. Without the government keeping a grip on things, what's to stop the rich from screwing the poor?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)OK OK I know it's a joke... yeah I know lol BUT! I had to say it. (I mean, you did see it coming...) SO! You say to me that without government, the rich would screw the poor. Well, why are people more poor now under "big government" (I know, it's a cliche, but indeed the truth) than under small government, two hundred years ago in the United States? Why were people more poor in the USSR under big government? Why are people wanting to leave China and Cuba, but they can't (aren't allowed?) In Cuba, just recently, BARBER SHOPS WERE FINALLY SET FREE IN THE MARKET. Freaking BARBER SHOPS!!! Are you serious?! People, I just want to remind you all that there is only one reason why revolutions occur in history. It is because governments just get too big and think that they know everything; tiny freaking elites trying to destroy people's rights, whether economic or social. In the beginning of the republic, liberty reigned, not government. People think that there's a difference between economic and social liberty. There isn't... only property rights. Either you own yourself, or the government does. ANYWAY! Back to the subject. One must honestly read history to figure this one out. Big government always helps only one class, and that is the rich. Social security, as one may be able to see if they take their blinders off, is broke. Why? Two reasons: It's an inherent Ponzi scheme, where only the first to receive money benefit while eventually the scheme collapses (for example, my grandmother benefited more than my mother will), and people steal from that pool anyway to pay other programs. (Oh, by the way, we are not minding the fact that this program is unconstitutional.) The money being contributed into this program is actually NOT PAID BY THE RICH AT ALL, because they don't need it! It's a big monetary waste to the middle class, destroying the workers and making them poorer. (I can feel us becoming the USSR... and nonexistent.) Plus, I have to talk about the minimum wage. This destroys jobs, or will push higher prices onto the products that companies produce. If you think about it, if a company needs to produce a certain amount to stay afloat (and we're talking about small companies), then either they need to produce more (and hire more people, thus becoming eventually a corporation, which liberals and libertarians will usually both despise) or they need to pay workers less, or raise prices. If they hire people, they stay afloat, but get more removed from their employees. If they
-
Really? That's ironic, considering that a dictatorship is the polar opposite of socialism... Then again, North Korea is actually the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" (DPRK)...
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Sorry, but that's not true. Government is government. Do you know what Nazi stands for? Hitler was a dictator, though "democratically elected". I know what I will hear... "Oh my lord! You said Nazi! You said Hitler!" Yes. Read history.
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects. -
harold aptroot wrote:
By the way, why do many (most?) Americans think socialism is a Bad Thing?
Cold war relic. It used to be Capitalism vs. Communism, and most people don't understand that the "Communism" practiced by the USSR was really just an authoritarian regime disguised as a communist state. So the general public thinks that "socialism" = "Communism" = USSR = Evil, when in reality, a certain amount of socialism nicely complements a capitalist economy. The real question should be how much socialism is needed (More than we have now, less than we have now, etc).
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Still disagreed. What we have now is not socialism or communism... it's fascism. This is where the corruption lies... it's in the hands of the government and corporations. I suppose your question should really be, how much pandering to politicians should we have? How many bailouts? How much QE should we have? How immoral do we get, and how much looting of the population do we do? The real questions should be, "Why is gold and silver mentioned in the Constitution? Why is gold and silver on the rise? Why did the founders actually want a limited government? What morals did the founders see, and why were we once a rich country for it?" Socialism hatred is not a cold war relic. It was one coming from the founding of our country. How invasive was Britain to our rights and property?
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects. -
OK OK I know it's a joke... yeah I know lol BUT! I had to say it. (I mean, you did see it coming...) SO! You say to me that without government, the rich would screw the poor. Well, why are people more poor now under "big government" (I know, it's a cliche, but indeed the truth) than under small government, two hundred years ago in the United States? Why were people more poor in the USSR under big government? Why are people wanting to leave China and Cuba, but they can't (aren't allowed?) In Cuba, just recently, BARBER SHOPS WERE FINALLY SET FREE IN THE MARKET. Freaking BARBER SHOPS!!! Are you serious?! People, I just want to remind you all that there is only one reason why revolutions occur in history. It is because governments just get too big and think that they know everything; tiny freaking elites trying to destroy people's rights, whether economic or social. In the beginning of the republic, liberty reigned, not government. People think that there's a difference between economic and social liberty. There isn't... only property rights. Either you own yourself, or the government does. ANYWAY! Back to the subject. One must honestly read history to figure this one out. Big government always helps only one class, and that is the rich. Social security, as one may be able to see if they take their blinders off, is broke. Why? Two reasons: It's an inherent Ponzi scheme, where only the first to receive money benefit while eventually the scheme collapses (for example, my grandmother benefited more than my mother will), and people steal from that pool anyway to pay other programs. (Oh, by the way, we are not minding the fact that this program is unconstitutional.) The money being contributed into this program is actually NOT PAID BY THE RICH AT ALL, because they don't need it! It's a big monetary waste to the middle class, destroying the workers and making them poorer. (I can feel us becoming the USSR... and nonexistent.) Plus, I have to talk about the minimum wage. This destroys jobs, or will push higher prices onto the products that companies produce. If you think about it, if a company needs to produce a certain amount to stay afloat (and we're talking about small companies), then either they need to produce more (and hire more people, thus becoming eventually a corporation, which liberals and libertarians will usually both despise) or they need to pay workers less, or raise prices. If they hire people, they stay afloat, but get more removed from their employees. If they
-
OK OK I know it's a joke... yeah I know lol BUT! I had to say it. (I mean, you did see it coming...) SO! You say to me that without government, the rich would screw the poor. Well, why are people more poor now under "big government" (I know, it's a cliche, but indeed the truth) than under small government, two hundred years ago in the United States? Why were people more poor in the USSR under big government? Why are people wanting to leave China and Cuba, but they can't (aren't allowed?) In Cuba, just recently, BARBER SHOPS WERE FINALLY SET FREE IN THE MARKET. Freaking BARBER SHOPS!!! Are you serious?! People, I just want to remind you all that there is only one reason why revolutions occur in history. It is because governments just get too big and think that they know everything; tiny freaking elites trying to destroy people's rights, whether economic or social. In the beginning of the republic, liberty reigned, not government. People think that there's a difference between economic and social liberty. There isn't... only property rights. Either you own yourself, or the government does. ANYWAY! Back to the subject. One must honestly read history to figure this one out. Big government always helps only one class, and that is the rich. Social security, as one may be able to see if they take their blinders off, is broke. Why? Two reasons: It's an inherent Ponzi scheme, where only the first to receive money benefit while eventually the scheme collapses (for example, my grandmother benefited more than my mother will), and people steal from that pool anyway to pay other programs. (Oh, by the way, we are not minding the fact that this program is unconstitutional.) The money being contributed into this program is actually NOT PAID BY THE RICH AT ALL, because they don't need it! It's a big monetary waste to the middle class, destroying the workers and making them poorer. (I can feel us becoming the USSR... and nonexistent.) Plus, I have to talk about the minimum wage. This destroys jobs, or will push higher prices onto the products that companies produce. If you think about it, if a company needs to produce a certain amount to stay afloat (and we're talking about small companies), then either they need to produce more (and hire more people, thus becoming eventually a corporation, which liberals and libertarians will usually both despise) or they need to pay workers less, or raise prices. If they hire people, they stay afloat, but get more removed from their employees. If they
josda1000 wrote:
SO! You say to me that without government, the rich would screw the poor. Well, why are people more poor now under "big government" (I know, it's a cliche, but indeed the truth) than under small government, two hundred years ago in the United States?
Two hundred years ago, our "poor" consisted of slaves and indentured servants who were owned by businessmen and rich landowners, and were bought and sold as commodities. In other words, the poor were being screwed by the rich.
josda1000 wrote:
Why were people more poor in the USSR under big government? Why are people wanting to leave China and Cuba, but they can't (aren't allowed?) In Cuba, just recently, BARBER SHOPS WERE FINALLY SET FREE IN THE MARKET. Freaking BARBER SHOPS!!! Are you serious?! People, I just want to remind you all that there is only one reason why revolutions occur in history. It is because governments just get too big and think that they know everything; tiny freaking elites trying to destroy people's rights, whether economic or social. In the beginning of the republic, liberty reigned, not government. People think that there's a difference between economic and social liberty. There isn't... only property rights. Either you own yourself, or the government does.
Off-topic. The question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. I'm not advocating an authoritarian regime.
josda1000 wrote:
ANYWAY! Back to the subject. One must honestly read history to figure this one out. Big government always helps only one class, and that is the rich. Social security, as one may...
Again, the question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. You're just arguing about which class is getting screwed NOW.
josda1000 wrote:
Plus, I have to talk about the minimum wage. This destroys...
Again you're talking about what government is doing now. See previous statement.
josda1000 wrote:
I hope that this clears up a few things, because liberals truly do not understand how the market really works. Liberals, out of fear, go along with the politicians, whom they forget are RICH. Republicans are rich... SO ARE DEMOCRATS. Politicians pander to money... corporations win because of this.
-
No Problem. http://www.brusselsjournal.com/files/Prosperity.gif[^] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/files/TaxBurden.gif[^] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/files/PublicSpending.gif[^] But I know that you'll shun this info. Basically, as you raise taxes, you take money away from the businesses that can reinvest the capital, or pay workers better, or hire more workers. This is the very problem you have with taxation. Ireland does well because they tax less and spend less. (Holy crap... spending less making sense?!)
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects. -
Still disagreed. What we have now is not socialism or communism... it's fascism. This is where the corruption lies... it's in the hands of the government and corporations. I suppose your question should really be, how much pandering to politicians should we have? How many bailouts? How much QE should we have? How immoral do we get, and how much looting of the population do we do? The real questions should be, "Why is gold and silver mentioned in the Constitution? Why is gold and silver on the rise? Why did the founders actually want a limited government? What morals did the founders see, and why were we once a rich country for it?" Socialism hatred is not a cold war relic. It was one coming from the founding of our country. How invasive was Britain to our rights and property?
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects.josda1000 wrote:
Socialism hatred is not a cold war relic. It was one coming from the founding of our country. How invasive was Britain to our rights and property?
That wasn't socialism. That was a capitalistic monarchy.
josda1000 wrote:
The real questions should be, "Why is gold and silver mentioned in the Constitution? Why is gold and silver on the rise? Why did the founders actually want a limited government? What morals did the founders see, and why were we once a rich country for it?"
Dodging the issue.
josda1000 wrote:
I suppose your question should really be, how much pandering to politicians should we have? How many bailouts? How much QE should we have? How immoral do we get, and how much looting of the population do we do?
Dodging the issue.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Sorry, but that's not true. Government is government. Do you know what Nazi stands for? Hitler was a dictator, though "democratically elected". I know what I will hear... "Oh my lord! You said Nazi! You said Hitler!" Yes. Read history.
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects.What does that have to do with anything? Dictatorship = All power is in the hands of a dictator Socialism = The people collectively share the power Now, in real life, attempts at socialist societies inevitably BECOME dictatorships (See USSR) because of human greed, but in their purest forms, they are opposites.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
josda1000 wrote:
SO! You say to me that without government, the rich would screw the poor. Well, why are people more poor now under "big government" (I know, it's a cliche, but indeed the truth) than under small government, two hundred years ago in the United States?
Two hundred years ago, our "poor" consisted of slaves and indentured servants who were owned by businessmen and rich landowners, and were bought and sold as commodities. In other words, the poor were being screwed by the rich.
josda1000 wrote:
Why were people more poor in the USSR under big government? Why are people wanting to leave China and Cuba, but they can't (aren't allowed?) In Cuba, just recently, BARBER SHOPS WERE FINALLY SET FREE IN THE MARKET. Freaking BARBER SHOPS!!! Are you serious?! People, I just want to remind you all that there is only one reason why revolutions occur in history. It is because governments just get too big and think that they know everything; tiny freaking elites trying to destroy people's rights, whether economic or social. In the beginning of the republic, liberty reigned, not government. People think that there's a difference between economic and social liberty. There isn't... only property rights. Either you own yourself, or the government does.
Off-topic. The question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. I'm not advocating an authoritarian regime.
josda1000 wrote:
ANYWAY! Back to the subject. One must honestly read history to figure this one out. Big government always helps only one class, and that is the rich. Social security, as one may...
Again, the question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. You're just arguing about which class is getting screwed NOW.
josda1000 wrote:
Plus, I have to talk about the minimum wage. This destroys...
Again you're talking about what government is doing now. See previous statement.
josda1000 wrote:
I hope that this clears up a few things, because liberals truly do not understand how the market really works. Liberals, out of fear, go along with the politicians, whom they forget are RICH. Republicans are rich... SO ARE DEMOCRATS. Politicians pander to money... corporations win because of this.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Two hundred years ago, our "poor" consisted of slaves and indentured servants who were owned by businessmen and rich landowners, and were bought and sold as commodities. In other words, the poor were being screwed by the rich.
You're right. But that doesn't mean that we'd do that now, in our more enlightened society.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Off-topic. The question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. I'm not advocating an authoritarian regime.
Ah, but you are. How does taxation happen in the first place? If you don't pay your taxes for a substantial amount of time, your assets are taken from your home. Sounds brutal to me.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Again, the question was what would stop the rich from screwing the poor without government controls. You're just arguing about which class is getting screwed NOW.
Your original statement was that the rich screw the poor, and that the poor should be screwing the rich with government controls. But the RICH made it LOOK LIKE that the government is screwing the RICH while indeed they are SCREWING THE POOR. And yes, it is indeed based in reality, which is NOW. So what I'm saying is that NO form of government can screw the RICH, if the governmental/political class IS RICH.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Again you're talking about what government is doing now. See previous statement.
What I'm trying to do is show you that you live in world that can never exist, and never has in history, for the fact that those in government are rich.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Sorry, Josh, but you haven't answered the question at all. You've just sidestepped it by discussing what we have today. You're trying to argue that the Libertarian philosophy is good because the Democrats and Republicans are bad, but one doesn't imply the other.
No, I'm saying that those Democrats/Republicans in power are bad, and don't understand economics. I'm also trying to enlighten those whom are innocent (the Democrats/Republicans by name in the population). It's really quite simple. I'm not sidestepping anything.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
But once again, how does trusting people protect the poor from being screwed
