»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Tea Partier's Resolution
| The Alley |
|
Tea Partier's Resolution |
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I, ________________________, do solemnly swear to uphold the principles of a socialism-free society and heretofore pledge my word that I shall strictly adhere to the following: I pledge to eliminate all government intervention in my life. I will abstain from the use of and participation in any socialist goods and services including but not limited to the following: * Social Security * Medicare/Medicaid * State Children’s Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP) * Military, Police, Fire, and Emergency Services * US Postal Service * Roads and Highways * Air Travel (regulated by the socialist FAA) * The US Railway System * Public Subways and Metro Systems * Public Bus and Lightrail Systems * Rest Areas on Highways * Sidewalks * All Government-Funded Local/State Projects (e.g., see state 2009 federal senate appropriations) * Public Water and Sewer Services (goodbye socialist toilet, shower, dishwasher, kitchen sink, outdoor hose!) * Public and State Universities and Colleges * Public Primary and Secondary Schools * Sesame Street * Publicly Funded Anti-Drug Use Education for Children * Public Museums * Libraries * Public Parks and Beaches * State and National Parks * Public Zoos * Unemployment Insurance * Municipal Garbage and Recycling Services * Treatment at Any Hospital or Clinic That Ever Received Funding From Local, State or Federal Government (pretty much all of them) * Medical Services and Medications That Were Created or Derived From Any Government Grant or Research Funding (again, pretty much all of them) * Socialist Byproducts of Government Investment Such as Duct Tape and Velcro (Nazi-NASA Inventions) * Use of the Internet, email, and networked computers, as the DoD's ARPANET was the basis for subsequent computer networking * Foodstuffs, Meats, Produce and Crops That Were Grown With, Fed With, Raised With or That Contain Inputs From Crops Grown With Government Subsidies * Clothing Made from Crops (e.g. cotton) That Were Grown With or That Contain Inputs From Government Subsidies If a veteran of the government-run socialist US military, I will forego my VA benefits and insist on paying for my own medical care I will not tour socialist government buildings like the Capitol in Washington, D.C. I pledge to never take myself, my family, or my children on a tour of the following types of socialist locations, including but not limited to: * Smithsonian Museums such as the Air and Space Museum or Museum of American History * The socialist Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson Monuments * The government-operated Statue of Liberty * The Grand Canyon * The socialist World War II and Vietnam Veterans Memorials * The government-run socialist-propaganda location known as Arlington National Cemetery * All other public-funded socialist sites, whether it be in my state or in Washington, DC I will eat only food that has not been inspected and approved by the socialist U.S. Department of Agriculture. I will take drugs and other medications that have not been subject to the approval by the socialist Food and Drug Administration. That goes for any medical devices implanted in my body. I will deposit all my money in savings institutions that are not regulated by the socialist FDIC. I will urge my Member of Congress and Senators to forego their government salary and government-provided healthcare. I will oppose and condemn the government-funded and therefore socialist military of the United States of America. I will boycott the products of socialist defense contractors such as GE, Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Humana, FedEx, General Motors, Honeywell, and hundreds of others that are paid by our socialist government to produce goods for our socialist army. I will protest socialist security departments such as the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, TSA, Department of Justice and their socialist employees. Upon reaching eligible retirement age, I will tear up my socialist Social Security checks. Upon reaching age 65, I will forego Medicare and pay for my own private health insurance until I die. I will complain about the destruction of 1st Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 1st Amendment Rights. I will complain about the destruction of my 2nd Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights by legally but brazenly brandishing unconcealed firearms in public. I will foreswear the time-honored principles of fairness, decency, and respect by screaming unintelligible platitudes regarding tyranny, Nazi-ism, and socialism at public town halls. SWORN ON A BIBLE AND SIGNED THIS DAY OF __________ IN THE YEAR ___. _____________________________ _________________________ Signed Printed Name/Town and State (permitted use) |
||
| © Copyright 2010 JenniferMaxwell - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
I'll stop using their services when they refund half of the money i've ever earned that the Government sucked from me. Ho hum... How much tax do we really pay? Item Rate Notes Federal personal income tax 17% Top 25% rate. It ranges from a credit up to well over 40%. State & local income taxes 10.1% State taxes range from under 6% to over 12%. Local taxes run from zero to 2.75%. Sales tax 8.6% Figure is the average rate. State sales taxes range up to 7% and local taxes run from zero to over 5%. Social security & Medicaid 7.65% Total rate is actually 15.3% since half is paid by the employer, but we're ignoring that to be kind. Federal corporate income tax share 3% Based on corporate taxes being approximately 1/6 of personal taxes, and that they are paid by individuals in the final analysis. Property tax 2.5% Yearly average actual costs range from under $200 in Alaska to almost $1900 in New Jersey. Fuel/gasoline tax .5% Approximately 23% of the 2005 gasoline price is for federal & state taxes. The federal excise tax is 18.4 cents per gallon. Per the CPI, about 6% of the average budget is for transportation. Estimated. Other 5% Includes estate tax, fees, licenses, inflation losses, inheritance, deficit allowance, gift, and others too numerous to mention. Estimated. Total tax percentage paid by the above average US citizen, 2005 - 54.4% Note 1: the total tax paid is closer to 46-48%, since the figures above do not distinguish between taxes on gross and net income. Note also that the Tax Foundation's numbers are closer to 34% for the actual "average" US citizen. Note 2: Inflation effects are likely quite understated - if actual inflation is 6% and one is only earning 4%. the tax rate is not the main issue. Note 3: This page is not intended to be definitive and completely accurate on tax rates and issues - to do so would be virtually impossible considering all the factors. Its primarily intended to show a fuller picture than is normally presented. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A partial list of the various ways in which citizens of the US are taxed: •Accounts Receivable Tax •Building Permit Tax •Capital Gains Tax •CDL license Tax •Cigarette Tax •Corporate Income Tax •Court Fines (indirect taxes) •Deficit spending •Dog License Tax •Federal Income Tax •Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) •Fishing License Tax •Food License Tax •Fuel permit tax •Gasoline Tax •Hunting License Tax •Inflation •Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money) •Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax) •IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) •Liquor Tax •Local Income Tax •Luxury Taxes •Marriage License Tax •Medicare Tax •Property Tax •Real Estate Tax •Septic Permit Tax •Service Charge Taxes •Social Security Tax •Road Usage Taxes (Truckers) •Sales Taxes •Recreational Vehicle Tax •Road Toll Booth Taxes •School Tax •State Income Tax •State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) •Telephone federal excise tax •Telephone federal universal service fee tax •Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes •Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax •Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax •Telephone state and local tax •Telephone usage charge tax •Toll Bridge Taxes •Toll Tunnel Taxes •Traffic Fines (indirect taxation) •Trailer Registration Tax •Utility Taxes •Vehicle License Registration Tax •Vehicle Sales Tax •Watercraft Registration Tax •Well Permit Tax •Workers Compensation Tax |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Threadbear, Do you think the figures you posted are correct? . |
||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
Are the numbers correct? Yes....these numbers are ALL sourced here in this link. The originating website here is a nonpartisan Question and answer website that is pretty reliable. Now, of course, if you live in California, Michigan, and New York, the numbers are in the 60% range. http://www.nowandfutures.com/taxes.html |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Thanks for the link but I’d already seen the site Threadbear and I’ve also looked at the source of the statistics posted there and, personally, I don’t think the figures are correct – which is why I asked for your opinion. For example did you look at how the Tax foundation deals with capital gains accruals to reach its conclusions? Do you think that it’s correct to count the tax paid on capital gains while not adding the capital gains themselves as earnings? What sort of effect do you think that has on the percentage of total figure? . |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Socialist goods, services, programs, etc. are ok as long as you get them on offer, 50% off? Who should be paying your share for them, Jeff? |
||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
That's a decent question, Grinch: on balance, or average, No, I don't think the numbers will change much. 90% of people with IRA's don't get more than 5% return on avg. Here's why I think these numbers are accurate: when I was working in corporate America for 30 years, every couple of years I kept anal-reten. records on the taxes I paid, so I could accurately say: I pay XX%. I wanted to know exactly how much i ALLOWED the government to take. The middle-earning years were in the 46% for Indiana pay, and closer to 62% at the top end of my pay scale total. Owning a house cost me megabux on property taxes that I didn't pay when I was a renter. I also paid more county taxes, local school taxes for better schools, and more children at the end of my working in corporate America. Longwinded way of saying: this 54% is only an average- depending on what end of the earnings cycle you are, you will pay more or less than 54%. Jenn: sorry: i don't understand your question as you wrote it. Nobody pays my 50%. I pay it myself plus 9more percent% plus 10% at least in charitable donations voluntarily. Plus I paid 6% union dues on top of that. No matter how you slice it, I pay my 'fair share.' I don't need someone lecturing me 'Who's gonna pay your share?" |
||
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
Once again, one side is going above and beyond the realms of sanity, realism, and appropriateness when talking to and about the other side. (And, yes, both sides of the isle do it.) The 9/12 organizations DO NOT advocate the all out exclusion of the federal government from the lives of the citizens of this country. They are, very simply, making use of their CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED rights of free speech and peaceful assembly. They are also protesting the OVER-inclusion of the federal government into our lives. It started out as a protest about the multitudes of additional taxes that were being added to the rolls, and has grown to include anything that goes against the American public. These people are protesting the fact that the American People do not, the majority of them, want Obamacare (the figures for this can be found in almost any poll you wish to look at), and yet, the un-holy trinity have decided that they know better, and are going to do what they want, regardless of what anyone wants. With enough Democrats in Congress to get the 2/3 vote needed according to the Constitution, they still can't get a simple majority... so theya re going to resort to a tactic where the representatives vote on whether they want reform, and if the majority vote in the afirmative, then the health care bill passes without a vote. This is what is causing the 9/12 organizations to gather in our nation's capitol on Saturday. The part that many- but not all- of the people on the left cannot handle... THERE ARE DEMOCRATS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THEIR LOCAL 9/12 ORGANIZATION. Another thing that tends to blow the severe liberal mind... there has never been a single arrest or any violence at a 9/12 rally. Imagine, the cruel, heatless, uncaring, racist right wing organizations not resorting to violence when making their point. Let me enlighten you, since you- likely- refuse to find yourself on any 9/12 organization's website: You suggest that we sign this laughable pledge vowing to never use such items as: Social Security- never used in the 9/12 literature) Medicare/Medicade- $60 billion in waste annually is being protested. In order to fight the fraud, the President is raising taxes and cutting spending. That is being protested Military- it is the LEFT side of the isle that is protesting the military. I will bet my last dime that you will NEVER find a conservative, or any member of the 9/12 organizations that ever protested against the American Military. As for the others, most of the members of the emergency services that I know are the typical slightly right of center (but not extreme right) and resent the government intrusion into the medical field. The Postal Service- the waste and abuse (like spending in excess of $13,000 to "entertain" 81 people at a cost of $160 each, not to include the $3000 alcohol bill.) is what is being protested. Roads and highways- increased taxes for no increase in services or repairs are being protested. Air Travel- pulling a 12 year old out of line and refusing to allow him to fly because of his name, tell grandma she can't bring a nail file on board because she might attempt to take over the plane, airplane food in general... any hassles with these being protested? Railways- Amtrak lost in FY2007, $1.7 billion. For their troubles, they are set to receive $2.6 billion in subsidies. GM lost 1.19 billion, and the government walked in, fired the leadership, and restructured it (NY Times article, 11/17/2009). Yeah, that's something to be angry about. Public Subways and metro systems- $40 million loss, and still getting free cash. All Government-Funded Local/State Projects- The Dept of Energy de-funded an inefficient power plant in Illinois, and yet the Spending Bill gave it $2 billion; thte local community college runs a monthly budget surplus of (on average) $2.3 million, and yet the federal government gave them money for a new computer center (which I am sure it could have afforded itself). What's not to love about that? Public Water, etc- You mean the ones that I pay each and every quarter? If they are public, and the government is giving them money, then why the hell am I being billed so much? Seseme Street- Huh? Again, I will bet my last penny that NO member of the 9/12 oreganizations EVER protested the fact that Bert and Ernie share a room. The rest of them are going to get the same basic answer. If you wish to be taken seriously, do not post absurdity. Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Based on the revenue from Capital gains tax and the subsequent earnings on the same I’d say that simple error would make quite a difference, but whether large or small the figures would inevitably change. To your average Joe on the street Threadbear wouldn’t that suggest that the figures aren’t actually correct to start with? quote: When you said that were you guessing, lying or simply joking? . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: You speak here of the “9/12 Organizations.” My ignorance is staggering in this as in so many other areas. What I understand you to be talking about, though, is a group of organizations on the right that have taken some sort of set of positions on the right as a result of the 9/11 tragedies. These are organizations like The TEA Party, if I understand you correctly, who have taken stances on traditional Republican issues such as taxation and who have tried to tie these issues into the events of 9/11 in some fashion. In doing so, of course, you may be overlooking the fact that 9/11 has meaning, and great meaning indeed, to people other than folks from the right. By suggesting that you and your friends are the 9/12 people, you may have inadvertently overlooked that 9/11 was — at least originally — looked at as a series of events that brought the country together, and by discounting the meaning of these events for other Americans in terms of loss of individual rights, for example, you are essentially disenfranchising them. You would, should you think on it, probably be quick to say that these people are doing the same to you,; and while I would not be in complete agreement with you, I would certainly say that you would have a serious point. Not of course that you’ve said any such thing, only that you could and well might, with a certain justification. Continuing to call The Tea Party and like organizations “The 9/12 Organizations” seems to me to be perpetuating this split, a split that I believe is both real and unnecessary to any but those people who would have the American people divided and at each other’s throats rather than looking about for the causes of what actually troubles us. Should we be so fortunate as to be able to identify those causes. While the 9/12 Organizations may not advocate the all out exclusion of the Federal Government from the lives of the citizens of this country, there are many in the Republican party who tend very much in that direction. The last President was one such man. He advocated the end of Social security, for example, and wanted to replace it with private investment programs. You can imagine how well that would have worked out for many during the last economic downturn if the money that you’d been putting aside for social security had gone into some of the riskier real estate investments or odder stock market schemes, Even experienced investors went belly up with Bernie Maddoff. We could go on, but this is not the point. The point is that it’s difficult for folks on the Left to tell the players on the right without a program in much the same way that the same difficulty exists going the other direction. As for judging the inclusion of the Federal government in the lives of individual citizens, that is what we have legislators for and why citizens vote on them. Sometimes the Government is too involved, sometimes it’s not involved enough, and sometimes it mistakes the issues on which involvement is needed. While it may be clear that the majority of people do not want Obamacare — and I think I would have to agree with you that it is in fact clear that they don’t — I would also like to point out to you that the majority of the people have absolutely no idea what it is. In fact, Obamacare is a Republican fiction and tissue of lies made up of death panels, which don’t exist, government take over of health care, which isn’t in any version of the bill that I’ve seen, health care rationing, which is actually less health care rationing than goes on now under the current system of health care under the private vendors. And much much more of the same sort of falsified ordure. If I thought it were true, I’d be against it too. The problem is that the Republican account of the bill, which hasn’t even reached final form yet, has been a near year long series of horrific lies designed to scare people away from any sort of rational consideration of the plusses and minuses of what a real bill might actually be. I have no idea if you are aware of this or not. I assume not, otherwise you wouldn’t be repeating this sort of stuff. Your comments about the “Deem and Vote” rules used by the Republican congress to get through roughly 20% of its legislation for a number of congresses starting with Newt Gingrich would sit better if you’d been upset about them while the Republicans were using them so frequently and successfully to overcome Democratic opposition for nearly 10 years of Republican domination. Apparently “Deem and Vote” is only evil when Republicans think that somebody else can do it too. At any rate, your objections appear too late, since my current information is that the Democrats are, foolishly, not going to attempt this tactic. Failure for the Democrats to use it will clearly not stop the use of it in the future by the Republicans. Perhaps the Democrats don’t have enough votes. I’ll have to wait and see. I have addressed the cruel heartless uncaring racist right wing organizations not resorting to violence to make their points in another posting. I don’t have time as space to go over the details here. I would disagree with most of your characterizations of the right wing organizations under discussion. However, I would point out to you that one of the things that right wing organizations tend to be more frequently than left wing organizations is armed. Any prudent law officer would be silly to pick a fight with an armed individual in a group of armed individuals, even if the armed folks were rowdy enough that under ordinary circumstances some of them might be detained. I’d much rather arrest a nice stoned hippie with pupils the size of manhole covers any day of the week, myself. Sometimes when I’m not so tired, I’ll go into the specifics of the litany you go into of the expenses that you seem to think bizarre. Apparently you believe that everything the government does is supposed to turn a profit. I’d like to suggest to you that this isn’t the case. The government does a lot of things because it’s a public need and that nobody else is going to do it. But if you don’t keep a rail system in repair, a lot of manufacture and commerce dries up and it’s really a sort of public good to keep Wyoming going, despite the fact that there aren’t any people there and all their politicians think that use of the rack is still good police work. The same goes for keeping their foolish roads going. Even rotten people deserve a shot at the American dream. I’ll see if I can pick this up tomorrow or the next day. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
No, Bob, the 9/12 Project, was formed not on the events of 9/11, but on the spirit that existed in this country the day after when the entire country came together as one...hence the name. They also outlined the 9 Principles and 12 Values for responsibile citizenship to help get this country back on track and more in line with the Founders intent for our country. They are not Republican. Most are conservatives, but they aren't owned or controlled by the Republican Party. Their members are registered Republicans, Independents or Unafilliated, and Democrats. |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
Actually, the Tea Party and the 9/12 organizations are so incredibly linked that they might as well be the same thing. Kinda like ACORN and SCIU for the other side. As for the party affiliation, it is no secret to anyone who rememberes me that I was a very deeply tied, died in the woool Republican; however, I have re-registered as an independent due to the simple fact that they are just as screwed up as the Democrats... more, actually. They scream as loudly as they can that they are the solution, and the opposition to the Liberal Agenda... and yet, they don't- in my opinion- gop far enough. There are SOME Republicans who are advocating the total exclusion of the federal government (just as there are SOME Democrats who are advocating a total socialist agenda), yet no one on either side is willing to actually pay attention to the facts. Yes, President Bush, Jr. advocated privatizing Social Security... but WHY? Yes, Nancy Pelosi advocates the total conversion to socialism, (with her very public personal attacs and smear campaign against anyone who disagrees), but WHY? There is so very rarely not one single solitary person in any discussion- including the ones on this very page with the people involved here- who are willing to do anything except spout, blindly, the party line for whichever side of the fight they espouse. I would give examples about this; however, Mickey just screamed at me something about it being 10:00 and after... andI was supposed to leasve for work 10 minutnes ago. Perhaps I will finish this later. Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Your comments about Nancy Pelosi and socialism need more detailing. Your comments about the people on the page need actual proof. Unless you care to supply them, the gaps in the weave of the hat you appear to be talking through tend to make the actual words you're using sort of hard to understand. You get carried away with the sweep of your rhetoric at the expense of the accuracy of the details. Where's the beef, Ringo? Not more flummery or persiflage, the real Megillah. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
not one single solitary person in any discussion- including the ones on this very page with the people involved here- who are willing to do anything except spout, blindly, the party line for whichever side of the fight they espouse. You have just defined the Alley, Ringo. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Ringo, How would you say that my posting # 9 above is a party line repetition of the Democratic position? I was quite careful to distinguish my views from party-line points of view on both sides. I was quite careful to credit you in particular where I thought you had or might have had a point, and I certainly did not dismiss right wing thinking out of hand, though I do not agree with the way that much of it is expressed, and my own thinking is further to the left than that. I would also like to point out that there is a difference between socialist thinking and Democratic Party thinking. I tend to like Bernie Sanders better than most of the Democrats in the House. He is a socialist though he caucuses with the Democrats. Nancy Pelosi is not a Socialist, and her agenda is not as far to the left as Bernie Sanders' agenda is. Suggesting her agenda is Socialist is wrong. The point I made with Denise a few days ago — that people should have a right to be called pretty much as they choose — seems valid here. It would be useful for me if I had something less awkward than TEA Party Members to call those of her persuasion, or 9/12ers for those of yours, should those be your titles of choice, but that is my problem. As long as you call my Party the Democratic Party, I am happy to extend the courtesy in the other direction as well. Actually, even if you don't. It's pretty much the same about socialist and Democrat as well. The point being made is a propaganda point and not a point of politics, as I am reasonably convinced you are aware, since many of the same folks who call Democrats (and often more specifically, the President) a Socialist, will also call him a Nazi without turning a hair. It's as though the words have lost all political meaning and suddenly become synonyms for "bad." Ah well, so much for now. It's not that I'm complaining about the passion in your postings, mind you. That's one of the things I admire about them. I wish, though, that you'd wait a little bit and re-read what you've said before you post, simply to think about whether you still agree with everything that you said during the original outpouring. It's something I'm trying to do myself with, I must confess, a limited success. Limited but slowly increasing. Best to you, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
Once again... the point I was trying to make was made, and not by me. The statement I made was: quote: Bob, being the first one to respond, then takes me to task for the statements I have made, and states that I am talking through my hat. It seems that I didn't give proper documentation to my statements... again, let's head back to the tape. quote: I stated that I would be back to defend myself, but that I had to head to work (watching the clock, not being one of my strengths). Bob (again) posted: quote: Again, I made the statement that there is RARELY anyone... I NEVER said there is NEVER anyone, and yet the defenses are out. I need to point out here that I am using Mr. K's words solely becauase he is the one that spoke up. I do not do so with any intended disrespect, and apologize if any is taken. Bob, you have nearly always been respectful of the views of others, and their rights to have them, and you have my respect for that. You are simply the only one on the chopping block from your side- the thread started having posted numerous times since her last one on here; however, not deciding it was important enough to continue the discussion. Now then: If the ENTIRE post was read, it is apparent that I was not criticizing anyone for anything... I was asking a very simple question that I have still not seen an answer... WHY? When I was asking WHY about Pres. Bush II and Speaker Pelosi, you'll notice (or perhaps you didn't) that I did not say I was agreeing, or disagreeing with either statement. I very simply was asking why it was they had done those very things. Why did #43 advocate allowing people to switch their social security accounts to a privatized one that was invested in the stock market and such as that? What was the reason that he felt that was the proper thing to do for the American people? Was he thinking about the American people, or did he have other notions about it? What proof did he have that supported his viewpoint? As for the Socialist statements? I will actually widen this to include the entire Administration. See if these seem to remind you of anything from your current events lesson: The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.- Vladimir Lenin (debauch: To reduce the value, quality, or excellence of) It seems that President Obama, with an $11 trillion deficit is continuing to spend money faster than it can be printed, thereby devaluing it in the world market. Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.- Benito Mussolini uh... GM, anyone? Now... with these, and many other quotes from people of socialist, fascist, and communist beliefs hitting so close to home, the question still remains... WHY ARE THEY DOING IT???? The former president advocated privatizing Social Security because the market has ALWAYS outperformed the federal government, and even the simplest index fund has grown the money faster than taxes could put into the fund. Not something the Democrats want you to realize, or remember that he said... and not something most people would understand, anyhow. With the quotes I just gave you... it is clear that The Obama Administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress is engaging in socialist activities (not a disrespect, simply the facts), and again the question is posed... WHY ARE THEY DOING IT? I have my own thoughts of the matter; however, I am going to ask you, boys and girls, to do something that NO government wants you to do... THINK for yourself. It is the same thing that I am demanding from my children when they make a statement about one politician/government/public figure or another. It is the same thing I will be demanding of my students when I graduate with my History Education degree and begin teaching. Do not tell me that President Obama and Nancy Pelosi are the greatest Americans to have ever lived, and that passing Socialized medicine is the greatest thing this country has ever done. Don't scream at me that the country is now sliding quickly into the twilight of its very existence because of these same reasons. Don't tell me I should support one politician over another. Tell me why the people involved did the things they did, and why those opposed did the things they did, said the things they said, and believe the things they believe... and THEN tell me why you are the only one in the discussion who is right. We all know I can bloviate for hours, so I will simply leave this post at that. Thank you for playing along. Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Health-reform rally heckler says he's sorry and scared http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/03/24/dollar-bill-throw.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101 |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
He says he's not politically active but he's a member of AFP? Sure, whatever. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: Ah, Ringo, thanks for setting me straight about the timing. It's unfair to hurry a guy, especially a busy guy with kids, and I am sorry. Thanks for characterizing me as trying be be decent. You're probably giving me more than I deserve, but thanks again. Yes, I did read your entire post, and with some interest. I know that you asked some questions. The nub of these two questions you expressed this way: quote: Why did President George Walker Bush advocate privatizing social security? That, I don't know. I'm willing to share my speculations on the matter, but that's all they are — speculations and not facts. My speculations are not pretty. The former President is a fan of the economist Leo Strauss. Strauss began his career as a Liberal, but became the most conservative of conservatives, the model for such folks as William Crystal. He was completely against the idea of the government supplying any sort of safety net for people. You should look him up and research him yourself, because anything that I tell you about the man will be very biased against him, and you deserve a chance to make up your own mind. Strauss was against the safety net set up by FDR and the Democrats during the Great Depression, and believed that active measures should be taken to tear it down. One of the things he suggested was running up large deficits to tie up funding so that money could not be used for things like social security and welfare. This is a tactic that has been used by the morse conservative Republican administrations since the time of Ronald Reagan. David Stockman, Reagan's Secretary of The Treasury, was shocked and upset by the strategy, and wrote about it in his account of his time in that office. Bush Senior did the same thing, but to a lesser degree, and in fact considered some of this Strauss stuff to be Voodoo Economics; but his son was a devotee. This is why the deficit that was handed to the current president was so enormous, and why the initial borrowing package was so large. The current President went with a more standard Keynesian solution, and tried a spending package as a stimulus. All of us are currently sweating that one out. If Keynes was right, it should work. It even appears to be working, but who knows? It's called "Starving The Beast," this Leo Strauss strategy. Every time the Right gets into office, they spend on high deficit items in the hope of destroying the money reserves for the safety net. When the left comes in, they have to figure out a way to pay it back, and make the safety net work. I believe our positions differ. I think the safety net is important. I believe it helps the country get through extremely tough times without dissolving into social chaos. I think you believe that the social network is something that discourages initiative. The reality is that it does both, of course, but my thinking is that it's probably better not to turn into Belize or Colombia every twenty years while social unrest tears the country apart and people shoot each other in the streets over social issues we're capable of solving. We don't make money as quickly, but we still make a lot of it, and we can figure out how to make more. To continue, if social security is privatized, then the people who benefit are the people that George W. Bush's family is friends with. The top 2% of the population, who run the banks and financial institutions and larger businesses that people will invest in. The game is usually rigged, one way or another. You're right about how some stocks and some mutual funds do very well over time. What you don't say is that most people don't have the discipline or knowledge to invest in these things as their backup last chance option. That's what social security is. It's the last chance bare bones option. It's not anybody's idea of a comfortable retirement. It's there to keep body and soul together, and very little more than that. This is not the money that you gamble with. This was never intended to be the money that you gamble with. This was supposed to be your back-to-the wall money, your "Supplemental Security Insurance." It was never supposed to be your mad money. Maybe you could do better with it on the market, but if you think that, you're exactly the wrong person to do it. Areal investor understands that there is a portion of his/her investments that goes into and stays in absolutely stable rock solid conservative investments and doesn't get fooled around with. If some of his other investments make money, then he shifts some of that money into a fund with the same sort of rock solid conservative value, about a third of it, and he doesn't touch it unless it's to put it into another rock solid investment. The kind of investment that The former President was encouraging people to make might politely be called gambling with the food money. It's like taking the kid's college fund to Vegas. It's basically stupid. Yes, you can do better. But you do better with money that you can afford to lose at least a portion of, and you put that into well considered mutual funds, and you learn how to do research, and you learn how to invest a little bit first. You buy a copy of The Wealthy Barber and you follow The Motley Fools, and you don't act like you know more than you do. President Bush was acting like anybody could do it. A lot of people lost 60% of their savings and investments and more over the past few years from following the kind of tips that The President would have freed you to make. Make those choices by all means, if you wish, but not with your social security money. That's your back to the wall money. Save an extra ten or twenty bucks a week and after a year or two, while you read the Wealth Barber, develop some sort of a plan about what to do with the money you save for investment. Do it right. I suggest. Don't give your social security money to some wall street shark who'll gobble your savings, burp, and never even bother to say excuse me. Good for the Bushes, Good for the friends of the Bushes, not so good for the Kavens and the Ringos. Now then: If the ENTIRE post was read, it is apparent that I was not criticizing anyone for anything... I was asking a very simple question that I have still not seen an answer... WHY? When I was asking WHY about Pres. Bush II and Speaker Pelosi, you'll notice (or perhaps you didn't) that I did not say I was agreeing, or disagreeing with either statement. I very simply was asking why it was they had done those very things. Why did #43 advocate allowing people to switch their social security accounts to a privatized one that was invested in the stock market and such as that? What was the reason that he felt that was the proper thing to do for the American people? Was he thinking about the American people, or did he have other notions about it? What proof did he have that supported his viewpoint? Now, your second question: quote: The reason I didn't answer that one is not for lack of time — the reason for not answering the last question — but because it was a bad question. When I say a "bad" question, I mean it is logically ill formed in the specific way that is called "Begging the Question." To attempt an answer would suggest that I agree that your question has any reality to it, and I really don't. I think Bernie Sanders is a Socialist who caucuses with the Democrats but is not a Democrat himself. He's further to the left, and more in line with my own thinking. Nancy Pelosi, sadly, is a fairly doctrinaire middle of the road centrist Democrat who tries to do a decent job and by and large succeeds. She's better at it that I would ever be; but, Ringo, she's no Bernie Sanders. And with Bernie Sanders, I'm not even clear that he's terribly Marxist. Are you sure that Lenin said "debauch" the currency rather than "debase" the currency, by the way? That's usually the verb that's used for the situation you're talking about, and the use of the word "debauch" makes no sense at all. My understanding is that the currency hasn't been debased since we started floating it under the Nixon Administration in the 70's. Until that point, money, at least some of it, was in the form of Silver Certificates — rare — and treasury notes. Silver certificates, theoretically, could be turned in for one dollar's worth of silver at the set exchange rate, so at least a portion of the currency was based in precious metal. The Treasury notes were backed with "The Full Faith and Confidence of The American People." That, as you might expect, varied from day to day. So the debasement took place almost 40 years ago. Under a Republican administration. The dollar is now worth about a tenth of what it was then. A nickel candy bar is 89 cents, a pack of cigarettes, which was 40-45 cents now goes for $5.00, and so on and so forth. But I'm glad they've got you worried about something that happened 40 years ago. It may be that the real worry is a deflationary spiral, but why add panic to an already worrisome situation. Nobody wants to buy anything because they're sure it'll be cheaper tomorrow. Indeed, Fascism could indeed could be called "corporationism". Let me offer you a suggestion. "Corporationism" would be a situation where the corporations are covertly running the country and the economy to their advantage. You see, that would be like having people from the oil companies run the EPA and setting the pollution standards, and tell us how the oil should be distributed, the number of refineries that we should build, and how much tax we should place on petroleum products. That would be like having the logging industry control access to the national forests and park-lands and allowing those companies to set logging policy on public lands that have been protected from logging for a hundred years. That would be like having mining companies set the rules for mine safety. And all of these would be behind the smiling face of the government, who would be saying to the people, this is what's good for you. That's "corporationism". That's, as Mussolini suggested, fascism; and that's a pretty good description of the bush administration, isn't it? The means of production, under socialism, are more heavily influenced by the government. In some cases, it out-right owns some industries, especially industries necessary for the well-being of the country but which doen't generate enough of a profit for private investors to want to chip in their dough. Railroads are often done that way. With G.M., I'm afraid the government's got itself a white elephant. What they need to do is get it back into the black and sell the silly thing, take a decent profit and plough it into the social security fund and the VA. It'll be tough to do that, of course, until there's decent health care, because it's so much of the cost of American Cars that a lot of foreign cars, whose governments pay the health care costs for the employees, can sell their cars more cheaply here. Maybe the passage of the health care bill will help out here. Now I'm getting tired, and I need to go to sleep. My best to all, Mrs. Ringo and the Ringlets. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
