Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Far better than any of the tyrannical leftist economic ideologies, but not without problems.Capitalism?You are confused.Because you are revisionist and because there is no left in America to speak of. The democrats in this country support the same hierarchical system you do.So? That means nothing.You are aware that your libertarian/anarchist association derives from leftist thought? Wasn't it Rothbard who admitted to having absconded the term libertarian from the socialists?No. I am not. I am lumping what is Socialism all together.
Of course, I being a balance and intelligent person (unlike you) recognize the many faults of Capitalism. It can't work effectively if a small elite controls the nation. It can't work if the government sleeps with big business. It can't work if government over regulates it.
It is all about LIBERTY!!! Government and liberty don't like each other much.
Libertarian thought is about the complete opposite of Leftism. You know that. Why are you arguing with me?
I do not support the hierarchical system. I want it destroyed. I would prefer no central government rather than what we have today.
Does the constitution mandate a socioeconomic system?Far better than any of the tyrannical leftist economic ideologies, but not without problems.Capitalism?You are confused.Because you are revisionist and because there is no left in America to speak of. The democrats in this country support the same hierarchical system you do.So? That means nothing.You are aware that your libertarian/anarchist association derives from leftist thought? Wasn't it Rothbard who admitted to having absconded the term libertarian from the socialists?
Libertarian thought is about the complete opposite of Leftism. You know that. Why are you arguing with me?
I do not support the hierarchical system. I want it destroyed. I would prefer no central government rather than what we have today.
Does anyone capable of thinking, think the USA would have been an economic superpower generating a huge middle class, had the Founders imposed a socialist system?
Where did I state it did?Does the constitution mandate an economic system?Far better than any of the tyrannical leftist economic ideologies, but not without problems.Capitalism?You are confused.Because you are revisionist and because there is no left in America to speak of. The democrats in this country support the same hierarchical system you do.So? That means nothing.
Libertarian thought is about the complete opposite of Leftism. You know that. Why are you arguing with me?
I do not support the hierarchical system. I want it destroyed. I would prefer no central government rather than what we have today.
Does anyone capable of thinking, think the USA would have been an economic superpower generating a huge middle class, had the Founders imposed a socialist system?
Even Marx understood the role capitalism necessarily had to fill before a socialist society could develop.
[Q
No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would starve and the weak would die. Its shite.
The USA would never have accomplished what it did, had the welfare system been enacted at the founding.[Q
No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would starve and the weak would die. Its shite.
What you greedy Libtards call a "safety net" is the pathetic excuse for having the checks for the dipshit welfare queens in this country.
49% of the people aren't even paying into the trillion a year that is collected in income taxes and they are the getting the welfare so don't tell me that the people pay in magically get something out of it because they aren't.
It is your responsibility to take care of your children, not mine. If they don't have enough to eat then it is because their parents are too sorry to provide for their well being.
Besides, you Liberals don't give a shit about children. You advocate the murder of a million American children each year on demand.
[QUOT
The USA would never have accomplished what it did, had the welfare system been enacted at the founding.
Many of our ancestors left the old world to come to America, because there was opportunity to make money and provide a nice life for themselves and their children. These people worked tough jobs, but most were able to attain a middle class life style and provide an even better life for their children. This was not likely in the old world.
So, this makes the marxist agenda preferable? It's okay if you are controlled in every aspect of your life, BECAUSE you are afraid that some day, somebody may OVERTURN gay marriage and re-instate sodomy laws?Conservatives do not want to be "left alone". They want to control every aspect of my life including who I can fuck and marry.You need to rethink this whine.
The USA would never have accomplished what it did, had the welfare system been enacted at the founding.[Q
No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would starve and the weak would die. Its shite.
What you greedy Libtards call a "safety net" is the pathetic excuse for having the checks for the dipshit welfare queens in this country.
49% of the people aren't even paying into the trillion a year that is collected in income taxes and they are the getting the welfare so don't tell me that the people pay in magically get something out of it because they aren't.
It is your responsibility to take care of your children, not mine. If they don't have enough to eat then it is because their parents are too sorry to provide for their well being.
Besides, you Liberals don't give a shit about children. You advocate the murder of a million American children each year on demand.
Many of our ancestors left the old world to come to America, because there was opportunity to make money and provide a nice life for themselves and their children. These people worked tough jobs, but most were able to attain a middle class life style and provide an even better life for their children. This was not likely in the old world.
[Q
Even admitted in the NYTimes....
"I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery."
Roger Cohen: One France is enough
Sadly, too many Americans do not know their nation's history. Not even their family's history.The USA would never have accomplished what it did, had the welfare system been enacted at the founding.[Q
No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would starve and the weak would die. Its shite.
What you greedy Libtards call a "safety net" is the pathetic excuse for having the checks for the dipshit welfare queens in this country.
49% of the people aren't even paying into the trillion a year that is collected in income taxes and they are the getting the welfare so don't tell me that the people pay in magically get something out of it because they aren't.
It is your responsibility to take care of your children, not mine. If they don't have enough to eat then it is because their parents are too sorry to provide for their well being.
Besides, you Liberals don't give a shit about children. You advocate the murder of a million American children each year on demand.
Many of our ancestors left the old world to come to America, because there was opportunity to make money and provide a nice life for themselves and their children. These people worked tough jobs, but most were able to attain a middle class life style and provide an even better life for their children. This was not likely in the old world.
Even admitted in the NYTimes....
"I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery."
Roger Cohen: One France is enough
Sadly, too many Americans do not know their nation's history. Not even their family's history.The USA would never have accomplished what it did, had the welfare system been enacted at the founding.[Q
No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would starve and the weak would die. Its shite.
What you greedy Libtards call a "safety net" is the pathetic excuse for having the checks for the dipshit welfare queens in this country.
49% of the people aren't even paying into the trillion a year that is collected in income taxes and they are the getting the welfare so don't tell me that the people pay in magically get something out of it because they aren't.
It is your responsibility to take care of your children, not mine. If they don't have enough to eat then it is because their parents are too sorry to provide for their well being.
Besides, you Liberals don't give a shit about children. You advocate the murder of a million American children each year on demand.
Many of our ancestors left the old world to come to America, because there was opportunity to make money and provide a nice life for themselves and their children. These people worked tough jobs, but most were able to attain a middle class life style and provide an even better life for their children. This was not likely in the old world.
Even admitted in the NYTimes....
"I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery."
Roger Cohen: One France is enough
No. The principle isn't sound. It is a slow death spiral as there is no incentive to do anything. It couldn't be farther from the natural order and will eventually lead to anarchy and then totalitarianism. Most likely communism.The principle is sound, the amounts given out are generally less than is needed. Certainly that is the case in the UK.No, its the law of the jungle. The guy being taxed and the guy receiving it are the same person. Its a safety net that benefits all of us. Under your vision children would staff and the weak would die. Its shite.[QU
Individuals live as part of a community and benefit from things that the community has paid for through taxation. No man is an island. Your philosophy might have had credence a few hundred years ago when much of the world was not "settled". However in the modern age we are all interlinked and we all benefit from the efforts of our neighbours and vice versa.
Bullshit.
There are two kinds of taxation.
One is for the necessary government functions that we all would agree is necessary. Defense, courts, police, etc. Most of us do not mind paying our fair share for the building of roads because it benefits us all equally. Very few people are against that kind of minimal and necessary government services providing the money is spent wisely and we get good value for it..
Then there is that other kind of taxation that is absolutely despicable. That is when money is taken from productive people and given away to the filthy ass welfare queens. There should be no money ever spent on welfare, entitlements, bailouts or subsidies. It is morally wrong for my money to be taken away from me by the force of government and given away to somebody else, wouldn't you agree? You are not one of these greedy assholes that think you are somehow entitled to have me pay your bills simply because you are are alive, are you?
You pay your bills and I will pay mine. Isn't that fair and equable?
So what happens to them when they only get enough money to last for 3 weeks rather than enough for the full 4 weeks. Is this system fair?
Whole families go without milk or cereal for that last week and a lot more.
A Dad goes out and sells individual cigarettes and gets killed in New York. Is that a safety net?
The left doesn't care about the poor. They are perfectly happy with the poor being poor as long as the rich are less rich.
Scientific socialism is entirely rational which is why Americans are discouraged from examining it.Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.
“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”The left doesn't care about the poor. They are perfectly happy with the poor being poor as long as the rich are less rich.
Just like LBJ championing the Great Society initiatives and the 1964 Civil Rights Act just to secure a Black voting base for the Democrats fat cats to stay in power.
