What rightism does to people

[LilOlLady]

There is no such thing as general welfare except county assistance is the nearest we can get and it is very temporary. If there were a such thing we would not have 1.5 million homeless children,etc. I guess none of you have ever tried to apply for welfare or food stamps. It is just not handed out to all that apply. They turn you inside out and then up side down and still you may not get them. And then you leave pissed that you have wasted an entire day.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There is no such thing as general welfare except county assistance is the nearest we can get and it is very temporary. If there were a such thing we would not have 1.5 million homeless children,etc. I guess none of you have ever tried to apply for welfare or food stamps. It is just not handed out to all that apply. They turn you inside out and then up side down and still you may not get them. And then you leave pissed that you have wasted an entire day.

Oh well....

 

[LilOlLady]

If everyone worked for their own economic gain then the community would prosper.

Do you prefer that some people pursue their own economic gain at the expense of others and how does that serve the community?

What are you drinking, smokng and sniffing? Get real.
You must be a fat cat or think you are.

 

[DiamondDave]

Maybe, just maybe, because a society and government that is supposed to be based on personal freedoms knows better than the wannabe socialists in places such as Canada or Prance

or maybe, just maybe, because certain people like ignoring the general welfare clause.

people who cared about *freedom* would stop trying to impose laws based on their religious beliefs.

The 'general welfare clause' does not grant legislative powers to the federal government to provide any 'general welfare'.

General welfare clause does not make government your nanny, nor does it allow for the federal government to force participation and purchase

 

[LilOlLady]

Every billionaire and millionaire got there on the backs of some poor souls and step over and on countless others blood sweat and tears.
Every one does thing at the expense of other. That's the democartic and christian way. I am getting dressed to go out an exist at the expense of someone?
Our very existence as a nation depends on "general welfare" Each for his own is not a reality and never has been since the beginning of time.

 

[Bfgrn]

If those on the left think they are following in the footsteps of the Athenian Democrats, perhaps it might be wise to them to learn what happened to the Athenian Democracy. And why those policies lead to the destructions of that democracy.

I might also suggest they make a study of the many Republics of the world and see how they have had better success and where they have had failures.

yes, you should study other countries. the US is the only civilized country where we don't have mandated health care.

thanks for playing. it would be so nice if you actually knew as much as you think you do.

Great point jillian. It was gratifying to read a book (excerpt in OP) that reinforced what I have seen happening in my country. The health care debate really exposed how blind and dogmatic the 'Marketists' are.

I believe strongly in free market capitalism for many areas in our economy, just not ALL. When you understand the dynamics of the market, it is critical that all parties involved in a transaction have leverage...i.e., when you buy a car and it turns out to be a slug, you have the leverage of your next purchase as your stake in the market.

Health care does not fit that model. It never will. If you're diagnosed with cancer, and your insurance finds a way to deny coverage, what is your leverage...go with a different provider IN YOUR NEXT LIFE?

 

[Full-Auto]

so to cali general welfare doesnt mean general welfare?

LOL The stumper question of the day.

Explain in detail the differences between promote and provide?

 

[DiamondDave]

so to cali general welfare doesnt mean general welfare?

LOL The stumper question of the day.

Explain in detail the differences between promote and provide?

Not to mention the difference between the General Welfare of the United States.... (you know... the UNION of States).... and the specific provided welfare to individuals

 

[Bfgrn]

Every billionaire and millionaire got there on the backs of some poor souls and step over and on countless others blood sweat and tears.
Every one does thing at the expense of other. That's the democartic and christian way. I am getting dressed to go out an exist at the expense of someone?
Our very existence as a nation depends on "general welfare" Each for his own is not a reality and never has been since the beginning of time.

Great post. My favorite liberal and President said it very well in a speech he gave a month before his murder. I love the phrase he took from Robert Frost, the man he was honoring. It best describes what I believe conservatives offer: they invite the fate of Robert Frost's hired man, the fate of having "nothing to look backward to with pride, and nothing to look forward to with hope."

Remarks at Amherst College, October 26, 1963
President John F. Kennedy
Amherst, Massachusetts
October 26, 1963

"Privilege is here, and with privilege goes responsibility. There is inherited wealth in this country and also inherited poverty. And unless the graduates of this college and other colleges like it who are given a running start in life--unless they are willing to put back into our society, those talents, the broad sympathy, the understanding, the compassion--unless they are willing to put those qualities back into the service of the Great Republic, then obviously the presuppositions upon which our democracy are based are bound to be fallible."

 

[BOBO]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_uC0wy_O90]Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia - A Poster Comparison - YouTube[/ame]

It all sounded so wonderful until I realized that you could not provide proof regarding your claims. Such is the life of those who entertain CLASS ENVY!!!

The first democrats, the classical Athenians, had a word for the ideal free marketer, the homo economicus, working for his own economic gain but unconcerned with the community. It was not particularly complimentary, the ancestor of our word “idiot.” Pericles expressed the sentiment underlying this: “We regard the citizen who takes no part in these [public] duties not as unambitious but as useless…”

The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'

Blind Faith

For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address our problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).

The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.

The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.

It may seem odd, given the parabolic arc of our financial markets and the swelling chorus of paeans to free market economics, but despite the important role of the market, purer free market economies have consistently underperformed well-focused mixed economies. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the mixed economies of Meiji Japan and Bismarck’s Germany clearly outperformed the free market economies of Britain and France. Our own economy grew faster when we abandoned the laissez faire of the 1920s and early 1930s for the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has become increasingly sluggish as we have moved back to a purer free market. Data of the past few decades show that our GNP and productivity growth have lagged those of our trading partners, who have mixed economies characterized by moderate government intervention.

The persistently mediocre track record of laissez faire casts doubt on the claim that an economy free from government interference invariably maximizes the wealth of society. In fact, there are sound reasons the pure free market must underperform well-focused mixed economies.

But despite laissez faire’s mediocre track record and despite powerful arguments that it cannot possibly provide what it promises, the notion of the unqualified benefit of the free market has become deeply embedded in our mythology. Apologists have exulted in claims that glorify free market mythology at the expense of reality, and also at the expense of society. Free market principles, even though they have failed in economics, have been eagerly applied to sectors ranging from politics to education, where they have contributed to societal dysfunction.

One politically popular myth, that free market economics and government non-intervention provide the basis for true democracy, flies in the face of history.

Kenneth Friedman - Myths Of The Free Market

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
President John F. Kennedy

 

[Dot Com]

The Randite force is strong in this thread. Laissez Fail capitalism.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If everyone worked for their own economic gain then the community would prosper.

Do you prefer that some people pursue their own economic gain at the expense of others and how does that serve the community?

What are you drinking, smokng and sniffing? Get real.
You must be a fat cat or think you are.

I'm just a guy who has worked his ass off for everything I have. If I don't have something that i want, it's no one's fault but my own.

And until someone has worked as hard as i have and saved and sacrificed as much as I have then he/she gets no sympathy from me.

 

[freedombecki]

What the right did for America:

(1) Fought, died, and freed black slaves who'd been indentured into that way of life since their arrival in America in 1619 to 1865.

(2) Integrated school systems (President Eisenhower):

credits

(3) Continuing to fight for the civil rights of all men and women through today.
​

​

 

[Truthmatters]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/193157-forced-sterilization-who-promoted-it.html

Forced sterilizations were on the rights agenda too

 

[freedombecki]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/193153-forced-sterilization-who-promoted-it.html

Forced sterilizations were on the rights agenda too

That's bogus, dear. You have to tell the truth here.

 

[Skull Pilot]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/193157-forced-sterilization-who-promoted-it.html

Forced sterilizations were on the rights agenda too

Funny that you think something that happened 40 years ago is relevant.

How about this

State Supreme Court halts surgery to allow appeal in hysterectomy ruling

One day after a Missoula County District Court judge ordered a hysterectomy for a woman with cancer, the Montana Supreme Court stepped in and halted the surgery to allow an appeal.

Read more: State Supreme Court halts surgery to allow appeal in hysterectomy ruling

You get that a liberal judge actually ORDERED a woman to have a hysterectomy not a right wing judge.

 

[Bfgrn]

It all sounded so wonderful until I realized that you could not provide proof regarding your claims. Such is the life of those who entertain CLASS ENVY!!!

As we moved toward an ideology driven 'free market' ONLY belief economically, and away from a mixed economy, the results have been disastrous.

Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.

Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)

Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.

Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

 

[Rinata]

Do lefties ever have an original thought of their own? LMAO Too funny!!!

Is this post your idea of original???