Whatever ever happened to the little sign ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

[JakeStarkey]

Someone wants to buy a cake, and they want government to force them to sell it to them. Of course that's "running to the government." Do you not grasp the English language?

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Injuring others is not a fundamental human right.

No one has the right to hurt one publicly except to save life or limb.

You little anarcho-commie, listen up: your private accommodation is protected.

 

[bripat9643]

So we've never had it, meaning you aren't dealing with reality, it's just what you would like.

As for my Utopia, there is no such thing but there is a better functioning version of America than the one we have currently. Until we do, I deal with what we have and try to make the best of it. You should do the same. It would make your arguments rational instead of ideological.

We've never had your socialist utopia either, so you aren't dealing with reality. Knock it off and pay your own bills.

I do, and my share of those for others. And there is no utopia, just dreams and reality.

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

 

[bripat9643]

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Injuring others is not a fundamental human right.

No one has the right to hurt one publicly except to save life or limb.

You little anarcho-commie, listen up: your private accommodation is protected.

You haven't injured anyone if you simply choose not to do business with them. On the other hand, government injures you when it compels you to undertake activities against your will.

 

[Flopper]

Someone wants to buy a cake, and they want government to force them to sell it to them. Of course that's "running to the government." Do you not grasp the English language?

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

 

[bripat9643]

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

Hmmmm . . . wrong. The law compelled the bus company to make blacks ride in the back. Government enforced Jim Crow, not private business.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

We've never had your socialist utopia either, so you aren't dealing with reality. Knock it off and pay your own bills.

I do, and my share of those for others. And there is no utopia, just dreams and reality.

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

He had dreams, I deal in reality. I'm ahead.

 

[Flopper]

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

Hmmmm . . . wrong. The law compelled the bus company to make blacks ride in the back. Government enforced Jim Crow, not private business.

An government stuck down Jim Crow laws, passed the Americans with Disabilities Act ending discrimination against the disabled in public facilities, and ended job discrimination based on sex with the Civil Rights Act of 64. And you think society would would have ended this discrimination without government?

 

[kaz]

Someone wants to buy a cake, and they want government to force them to sell it to them. Of course that's "running to the government." Do you not grasp the English language?

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

True dat. The marketplace is far more effective at ending discrimination than government is. Look at all the hatred and bigotry the left is exerting through government power in their faux quest to end hatred and bigotry.

 

[kaz]

At what point in your vision of the world does any discrimination need to be deemed illegal by the government?

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

Right where government put them. Government that legalized slavery. Government that declared blacks 3/5ths of a person. Government that said Dred Scott was property to be returned to his owners. Government that implemented Jim Crow laws and segregated schools.

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

 

[kaz]

I do, and my share of those for others. And there is no utopia, just dreams and reality.

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

He had dreams, I deal in reality. I'm ahead.

Ahead? Your socialist utopia is nowhere to be seen, there's nothing realistic about your views. All you have is government forcing people to bake cakes for gays. You're further from your paradise than I am from mine. I still have some forms of liberty. Nothing operates according to your socialist dream. You're in pure fantasy land, kiddy poo.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Kaz, hooked on soundbites. And in the ADA case, and in many others, the government was the solution.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

He had dreams, I deal in reality. I'm ahead.

Ahead? Your socialist utopia is nowhere to be seen, there's nothing realistic about your views. All you have is government forcing people to bake cakes for gays. You're further from your paradise than I am from mine. I still have some forms of liberty. Nothing operates according to your socialist dream. You're in pure fantasy land, kiddy poo.

Kitten3, I don't want a Socialist Utopia. The fact that you can't understand that is what makes you a child.

 

[kaz]

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Kaz, hooked on soundbites. And in the ADA case, and in many others, the government was the solution.

The ADA, LOL, just another tool of government to force the will of leftists authoritarians on the citizens of this country.

Government making people bake cakes for gays. Wow, you're not on the same planet as your socialist utopian wet dream. I still have all sorts of personal liberties in my life. This all shows how how badly you're losing.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Kaz, hooked on soundbites. And in the ADA case, and in many others, the government was the solution.

The ADA, LOL, just another tool of government to force the will of leftists authoritarians on the citizens of this country.

Government making people bake cakes for gays. Wow, you're not on the same planet as your socialist utopian wet dream. I still have all sorts of personal liberties in my life. This all shows how how badly you're losing.

Losing? The law agrees with me little man. Try again.

 

[Flopper]

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

Right where government put them. Government that legalized slavery. Government that declared blacks 3/5ths of a person. Government that said Dred Scott was property to be returned to his owners. Government that implemented Jim Crow laws and segregated schools.

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Well if Ronnie thinks government is the problem maybe we just do away with it and see how long it takes civilization to disappear.

The federal government passed no laws to legalize slavery because it was always legal but they did ban in 1862.

 

[bripat9643]

I do, and my share of those for others. And there is no utopia, just dreams and reality.

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

He had dreams, I deal in reality. I'm ahead.

You claimed liberals don't deal in dreams.

BTW, don't you numskulls call the children of illegals "dreamers?"

 

[bripat9643]

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Kaz, hooked on soundbites. And in the ADA case, and in many others, the government was the solution.

Yeah, it was an exorbitantly expensive solution to a problem that affected a small number of people.

When I go to the grocery store, the three best parking spaces are reserved for the handicapped. They are always empty. In fact, I can't remember the last time I noticed a car parked in a handicapped space.

That's a typical government solution: inconvenience the entire population for the benefit of very few people.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

Kaz, hooked on soundbites. And in the ADA case, and in many others, the government was the solution.

Yeah, it was an exorbitantly expensive solution to a problem that affected a small number of people.

When I go to the grocery store, the three best parking spaces are reserved for the handicapped. They are always empty. In fact, I can't remember the last time I noticed a car parked in a handicapped space.

That's a typical government solution: inconvenience the entire population for the benefit of very few people.

Life is unfair little man. Sorry...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Remember this speech?

"I have a dream"

- Martin Luther King -

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

He had dreams, I deal in reality. I'm ahead.

You claimed liberals don't deal in dreams.

BTW, don't you numskulls call the children of illegals "dreamers?"

Liberals do what they do. I deal in reality.

 

[Bfgrn]

It doesn't, shit for brains. Haven't you been reading this thread? Problems like discrimination are for society to solve, not the government. Choosing who you associate with is a fundamental human right.

Left for society to solve, blacks would still be riding on the back of the bus in the south and people in wheelchairs would still have limited access to public facilities.

Right where government put them. Government that legalized slavery. Government that declared blacks 3/5ths of a person. Government that said Dred Scott was property to be returned to his owners. Government that implemented Jim Crow laws and segregated schools.

Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution, government is the problem

That soundbite really gets to the root of the problem. It was never meant to be a mantra.

The only 'utopians' in this country are the right wing 'Marketists'.

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.

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.

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