Should America Bid Farewell to Exceptional Freedom?

[rightwinger]

Playing the Race Card is a concession that you don't have a valid point to make.

Just sayin'.

It is just putting into historical perspective the yearning for "the good ole days" when we had so much more freedom.

We have never had as much freedom as we do right now

Really? How about before we had a national income tax?
How about before there was Socialist Security tax?

Freedom INCLUDES freedom to fail

That is why the failures prefer socialism to freedom. Because then everyone fails and they don't stand out as losers.

Do you really yearn for the "freedom" of pre-1930 America?

Ask the blacks in this country how "free" they were
Ask workers how free they were to unionize and get a 40 hr work week and a safe working environment
Try being a gay American in the pre-1930s
How free were you if the air you breathed or the water you drank was poisoned by some factory trying to make a buck?

So, you don't like Social Security or income tax and feel they enslave you. Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.
What do you propose we substitute for the income tax? the Tax Fairy?

 

[Skull Pilot]

It is just putting into historical perspective the yearning for "the good ole days" when we had so much more freedom.

We have never had as much freedom as we do right now

Really? How about before we had a national income tax?
How about before there was Socialist Security tax?

Freedom INCLUDES freedom to fail

That is why the failures prefer socialism to freedom. Because then everyone fails and they don't stand out as losers.

Do you really yearn for the "freedom" of pre-1930 America?

Ask the blacks in this country how "free" they were
Ask workers how free they were to unionize and get a 40 hr work week and a safe working environment
Try being a gay American in the pre-1930s
How free were you if the air you breathed or the water you drank was poisoned by some factory trying to make a buck?

So, you don't like Social Security or income tax and feel they enslave you. Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.
What do you propose we substitute for the income tax? the Tax Fairy?

For one, the Social Security Ponzi scheme has been debunked here multiple times. That you still cling to it as some sort of panacea is ludicrous.

And equating wanting less government intrusion in our lives to being racist or homophobic is a red herring.

It is a simple fact that government is eating up more of our personal resources every day.

And tell me did the government tax me to allow blacks equal rights?

Did the government tax me to allow women to vote?

Did the government tax me to allow workers to form unions?

Does the government force people to join unions?

All those things you mention came not from government but from the people themselves.

No one here who truly believes in liberty would stand for anyone not having equal standing.

But denying that government is exercising more and more control over us and is costing us a bigger and bigger portion of our money is you being blind by choice.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Skull Pilot, the twin engines of industry have been the acquisition/use of energy and centralization of government (whether public or private). I understand your pain. In this modern age of ever new technologies that intrude in our lives, the more the corporate-fascist state will limit our choices. To think differently is to ignore the facts. Challenge, then, becomes how to maximize personal freedom within a contracting paradigm that emphasizes group over individual.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Skull Pilot, the twin engines of industry have been the acquisition/use of energy and centralization of government (whether public or private). I understand your pain. In this modern age of ever new technologies that intrude in our lives, the more the corporate-fascist state will limit our choices. To think differently is to ignore the facts. Challenge, then, becomes how to maximize personal freedom within a contracting paradigm that emphasizes group over individual.

and you call yourself a Republican? Then post this communist tripe?

Wow.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Skull Pilot, the twin engines of industry have been the acquisition/use of energy and centralization of government (whether public or private). I understand your pain. In this modern age of ever new technologies that intrude in our lives, the more the corporate-fascist state will limit our choices. To think differently is to ignore the facts. Challenge, then, becomes how to maximize personal freedom within a contracting paradigm that emphasizes group over individual.

The solution is not to subscribe to the paradigm of collectivism and to fight it every chance we get.

And new technologies only intrude on our lives if we let them. I could very easily forgo my cell phone. Shit I don't even answer it more than half the time it rings and gee I'm still alive and running a pretty successful business by all standards.

 

[boedicca]

JS (and RW for that matter) don't grok that the Big Corporations they disdain are enabled by the Bigger and Bigger Government they support.

 

[Skull Pilot]

JS (and RW for that matter) don't grok that the Big Corporations they disdain are enabled by the Bigger and Bigger Government they support.

Exactly.

They take the intellectually lazy position that if you like free enterprise that you automatically agree with corporate welfare because it's "good" for business.

The kicker is that it's not good for business that the government picks the winners and losers and it certainly isn't good for us as we get stuck with corporations that provide poor products and services for the simple reason they can since the government now insulates them from market forces.

 

[JakeStarkey]

boedicca, go back and read what I wrote and then think about it. Then you may grok it.

 

[beowolfe]

Congressman Paul Ryan delivered this speech to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs in Oklahoma City on March 31, 2010. It's pretty long but an excellent read.

RealClearPolitics - Should America Bid Farewell to Exceptional Freedom?

The sky is falling, the sky is falling.........it hit me on the head!!!

 

[Skull Pilot]

Congressman Paul Ryan delivered this speech to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs in Oklahoma City on March 31, 2010. It's pretty long but an excellent read.

RealClearPolitics - Should America Bid Farewell to Exceptional Freedom?

The sky is falling, the sky is falling.........it hit me on the head!!!

That wasn't the sky, it was your new bigger insurance premium.

 

[boedicca]

boedicca, go back and read what I wrote and then think about it. Then you may grok it.

I did read it. You do not grasp what real private industry is - and how much it has contributed to the high standard of living we enjoy in the U.S.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.

You mean like the decrepit elderly "greeters" a Sam's Clubs around the country? The ones who, despite the Socialist Security scam, are still unable to have a comfortable retirement?
And the per capita productivity, caused by technological innovation, is so much higher you would think such impossible.
WOW, I guess Socialist Security does not work after all does it.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.

You mean like the decrepit elderly "greeters" a Sam's Clubs around the country? The ones who, despite the Socialist Security scam, are still unable to have a comfortable retirement?
And the per capita productivity, caused by technological innovation, is so much higher you would think such impossible.
WOW, I guess Socialist Security does not work after all does it.

Precisely....it all comes back down to personal responsibility and the breakdown of the family unit perpetuated by liberal/socialist policies that expand the government and increase taxes.

If a person actually saved money for their own retirement there would be no need to have the government step in. Some people cannot do this based on disabilities...they should be helped...but some able bodied person too fucking lazy to want to improve their lot in life just baffles me. Why would someone want to be a minimum wage ditch digger all their lives?

 

[rightwinger]

Really? How about before we had a national income tax?
How about before there was Socialist Security tax?

Freedom INCLUDES freedom to fail

That is why the failures prefer socialism to freedom. Because then everyone fails and they don't stand out as losers.

Do you really yearn for the "freedom" of pre-1930 America?

Ask the blacks in this country how "free" they were
Ask workers how free they were to unionize and get a 40 hr work week and a safe working environment
Try being a gay American in the pre-1930s
How free were you if the air you breathed or the water you drank was poisoned by some factory trying to make a buck?

So, you don't like Social Security or income tax and feel they enslave you. Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.
What do you propose we substitute for the income tax? the Tax Fairy?

For one, the Social Security Ponzi scheme has been debunked here multiple times. That you still cling to it as some sort of panacea is ludicrous.

And equating wanting less government intrusion in our lives to being racist or homophobic is a red herring.

It is a simple fact that government is eating up more of our personal resources every day.

And tell me did the government tax me to allow blacks equal rights?

Did the government tax me to allow women to vote?

Did the government tax me to allow workers to form unions?

Does the government force people to join unions?

All those things you mention came not from government but from the people themselves.

No one here who truly believes in liberty would stand for anyone not having equal standing.

But denying that government is exercising more and more control over us and is costing us a bigger and bigger portion of our money is you being blind by choice.

You obviously have a very limited concept of freedom and a very outdated view of the role of government in a modern society.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Do you really yearn for the "freedom" of pre-1930 America?

Ask the blacks in this country how "free" they were
Ask workers how free they were to unionize and get a 40 hr work week and a safe working environment
Try being a gay American in the pre-1930s
How free were you if the air you breathed or the water you drank was poisoned by some factory trying to make a buck?

So, you don't like Social Security or income tax and feel they enslave you. Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.
What do you propose we substitute for the income tax? the Tax Fairy?

For one, the Social Security Ponzi scheme has been debunked here multiple times. That you still cling to it as some sort of panacea is ludicrous.

And equating wanting less government intrusion in our lives to being racist or homophobic is a red herring.

It is a simple fact that government is eating up more of our personal resources every day.

And tell me did the government tax me to allow blacks equal rights?

Did the government tax me to allow women to vote?

Did the government tax me to allow workers to form unions?

Does the government force people to join unions?

All those things you mention came not from government but from the people themselves.

No one here who truly believes in liberty would stand for anyone not having equal standing.

But denying that government is exercising more and more control over us and is costing us a bigger and bigger portion of our money is you being blind by choice.

You obviously have a very limited concept of freedom and a very outdated view of the role of government in a modern society.

And you obviously have a low opinion of people and an inflated one of the "good" of excessive government.

 

[Gunny]

Do you really yearn for the "freedom" of pre-1930 America?

Ask the blacks in this country how "free" they were
Ask workers how free they were to unionize and get a 40 hr work week and a safe working environment
Try being a gay American in the pre-1930s
How free were you if the air you breathed or the water you drank was poisoned by some factory trying to make a buck?

So, you don't like Social Security or income tax and feel they enslave you. Before FDR, Social Security was either whatever meager savings you could accumulate or living off your kids. Millions of old people lived in misery and poverty once they could no longer work.
What do you propose we substitute for the income tax? the Tax Fairy?

For one, the Social Security Ponzi scheme has been debunked here multiple times. That you still cling to it as some sort of panacea is ludicrous.

And equating wanting less government intrusion in our lives to being racist or homophobic is a red herring.

It is a simple fact that government is eating up more of our personal resources every day.

And tell me did the government tax me to allow blacks equal rights?

Did the government tax me to allow women to vote?

Did the government tax me to allow workers to form unions?

Does the government force people to join unions?

All those things you mention came not from government but from the people themselves.

No one here who truly believes in liberty would stand for anyone not having equal standing.

But denying that government is exercising more and more control over us and is costing us a bigger and bigger portion of our money is you being blind by choice.

You obviously have a very limited concept of freedom and a very outdated view of the role of government in a modern society.

Outdated by a bunch of nanny state conformist sheep makes him no less right than it was at inception. The role of government in CURRENT society violates the very tenets upon which it was formed. It has nothing to do with modernization.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Playing the Race Card is a concession that you don't have a valid point to make.

Just sayin'.

It is just putting into historical perspective the yearning for "the good ole days" when we had so much more freedom.

We have never had as much freedom as we do right now

Yeah,I'm thinking what they mean is white christians don't have the freedom to discriminate and infringe on other's freedoms like most of American history was full of up until the latter part of the 20th century.

 

[MaggieMae]

Try again, dimwit. We had WAY more freedom in the 70s until Carter introduced gas lines to us.

Carter caused an oil embargo? Hmmm, news to me. Here I thought it was because OPEC was pissed off at the US support of Israel (which was hardly something new).

is this why Carter undermined Israel at every turn? [And Continues to even to this day]?

If that were the case, at the time, then OPEC wouldn't have stopped oil shipments to the US. Hello?

 

[boedicca]

You obviously have a very limited concept of freedom and a very outdated view of the role of government in a modern society.

What you advocate looks a lot like this:

The purpose of a commonwealth is given at the start of Part II: THE final cause, end, or design of men (who naturally love liberty, and dominion over others) in the introduction of that restraint upon themselves, in which we see them live in Commonwealths, is the foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby; that is to say, of getting themselves out from that miserable condition of war which is necessarily consequent, as hath been shown, to the natural passions of men when there is no visible power to keep them in awe, and tie them by fear of punishment to the performance of their covenants….

The commonwealth is instituted when all agree in the following manner: I authorise and give up my right of governing myself to this man, or to this assembly of men, on this condition; that thou give up, thy right to him, and authorise all his actions in like manner.

The sovereign has twelve principal rights:

1. because a successive covenant cannot override a prior one, the subjects cannot (lawfully) change the form of government.
2. because the covenant forming the commonwealth results from subjects giving to the sovereign the right to act for them, the sovereign cannot possibly breach the covenant; and therefore the subjects can never argue to be freed from the covenant because of the actions of the sovereign.
3. the sovereign exists because the majority has consented to his rule; the minority have agreed to abide by this arrangement and must then assent to the sovereign's actions.
4. every subject is author of the acts of the sovereign: hence the sovereign cannot injure any of his subjects, and cannot be accused of injustice.
5. following this, the sovereign cannot justly be put to death by the subjects.
6. because the purpose of the commonwealth is peace, and the sovereign has the right to do whatever he thinks necessary for the preserving of peace and security and prevention of discord, therefore the sovereign may judge what opinions and doctrines are averse; who shall be allowed to speak to multitudes; and who shall examine the doctrines of all books before they are published.
7. to prescribe the rules of civil law and property.
8. to be judge in all cases.
9. to make war and peace as he sees fit; and to command the army.
10. to choose counsellors, ministers, magistrates and officers.
11. to reward with riches and honour; or to punish with corporal or pecuniary punishment or ignominy.
12. to establish laws about honour and a scale of worth.

Hobbes explicitly rejects the idea of Separation of Powers, in particular the form that would later become the separation of powers under the United States Constitution. Part 6 is a perhaps under-emphasised feature of Hobbes's argument: his is explicitly in favour of censorship of the press and restrictions on the rights of free speech, should they be considered desirable by the sovereign in order to promote order.

Leviathan (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MaggieMae]

Carter caused an oil embargo? Hmmm, news to me. Here I thought it was because OPEC was pissed off at the US support of Israel (which was hardly something new).

is this why Carter undermined Israel at every turn? [And Continues to even to this day]?

Jimmy Carter was directly responsible for the rise to prominence of Islamic Jihad headed by Aiman Al Zawahiri...after he got Sadat and Begin to shake hands and embrace the entire terrorist movement took on a whole differrent strategy. Islamic Jihad assassinated Sadat, bombed the Marine Barracks in Lebenon then went to Afghanistan to fight the Russians at which point Al Qaeda was born.

Jimmy Carter was the worst president in the entire history of the country....BAR NONE!!!!!

Oh wow. When does your book come out? I'm sure the CIA will be most interested in your analysis.