"You didn't get there on your own"

[del]

Idiot liberals believe Govt existed before people moved to an area and set up their farms and businesses. In ther fucked up minds, the taxman was there waiting for people before they even created a town with their businesses out of nothing.

thank you for sharing one of the most ignorant and uniformed opinions to grace these boards in quite some time. I was just discussing with a friend, the sad state of education in America today. Your post is a classic text book case of what I wanted to posit as proof of America's education system as a broken down relic, akin to America's sad health care system pre Obamacare.

One thing you may want to know: there is a class action lawsuit pending of Americans like you who have a case against the education establishment. You should easily be able to prove their liability in your case, and collect most all the monies either you and/or your family have paid into your supposed education.

peace out

dD

And out of the OTHER side of your mouth comes the pronouncement that without 'government education, America's businesses wouldn't have such worthwhile employees...

i bet you thought you had a point.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I've noticed that Cecilie1200 hasn't answered my post that is backed up with facts as to how the government actually built the roads and fostered the settling of the West.

Oh yeah...........that Lewis and Clark thing to find out about the Louisiana Purchase? Government funded as well.

dummie,, how did the govermnet do that? that's right,, because 50% of we the people support the government with our TAX dollars. the precious government couldn't make jack shit unless 50% of we the people sent them our hard earned money.

I feel certain that Thomas Jefferson did not welcome Lewis & Clark back with, "You couldn't have done it without us."

And let's be serious. What did "commissioned by the government" mean back then, as opposed to what it means today? At most, the government bought them some horses (and they likely owned a couple of their own to start with), some guns and ammo (ditto), some non-perishable foodstuffs (nothing like everything they'd need all the way to wherever, because they wouldn't have been able to carry that much), and probably a small sack of money with which to buy things from fur traders and the like as they went along. Everything else, they'd have been expected to manage for themselves as they traveled.

Not exactly the same as these days, when exploring anything would cost millions of dollars and include state-of-the-art all-terrain vehicles, communications devices, GPS tracking, portable computers, full meals provided every step of the way, etc. . . . oh, and cushy salaries for all members of the expedition, complete with medical benefits.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They've argued it, but their arguments all suck ass.

In all fairness, there HAVE been some decent arguments for the validity of the existence of government.

Unfortunately for the leftists, they've all come from people who want to seriously shrink government.

The fatal flaw in all their arguments is the fact that once government exists it will continue to grow like a cancer until it consumes all of society. Our society is doomed. I hold out no hope for it. This election is capitalism's last stand. Even if Romney wins, it's only a matter of time until the parasites drag us down the sewer hole with them.

Alarmist imbecility at it's most extreme

 

[Cecilie1200]

^
"Pay attention to me! Validate me! I'm IMPORTANT, damn it!" ::yawn::

Oh, look...the pit talking to itself...

If anybody every had a narcisstic bone in its body "it's all about me, me, me" it would be the Cesspit.

Have pharmacies run out of lithium in Arizona, or does it need a stronger dose?

did he say chickentits?

Just because they substitute insults for rebuttal doesn't mean they're GOOD at it.

 

[GuyPinestra]

The hell with what?

Liberals started this government. Got everything essentially up and running.

I'd like to see a country started by businesses.

It'd be kind of fun..it's never been done.

We can see how well "proprietary" material works when you are trying to establish a workable government.

"Liberals started this government" . . . if you subscribe to the theory that anything people like must, by definition, have been liberal.

Meanwhile, as to "countries started by businesses", who do you think paid to send the early settlers here, and supported them once they were here? Who do you think paid for the building of the first roads and towns and infrastructure here?

Who paid? I seem to remember something about the government offering homesteads and land grants to people that could make it there.

The Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889 was the first land run into the Unassigned Lands and included all or part of the 2005 modern day Canadian, Cleveland, Kingfisher, Logan, Oklahoma, and Payne counties of the U.S. state of Oklahoma.[1] The land run started at high noon on April 22, 1889, with an estimated 50,000 people lined up for their piece of the available two million acres (8,000 km²).[2]

The Unassigned Lands were considered some of the best unoccupied public land in the United States. The Indian Appropriations Bill of 1889 was passed and signed into law with an amendment by Illinois Representative William McKendree Springer, that authorized President Benjamin Harrison to open the two million acres (8,000 km²) for settlement. Due to the Homestead Act of 1862, signed by President Abraham Lincoln, legal settlers could claim lots up to 160 acres (0.65 km2) in size. Provided a settler lived on the land and improved it, the settler could then receive the title to the land.[2]

Land Run of 1889 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just one example of how the government helped to foster the settling of the West.

And..............as far as who provided the infrastructure? Well, up until Eisenhower, the roads kinda sucked and there were towns that didn't connect up with the rest of the country. His highway system changed that.

The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (commonly known as the Interstate Highway System, Interstate Freeway System or the Interstate) is a network of limited-access roads, including freeways, highways, and expressways, forming part of the National Highway System of the United States. The system is named for President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who championed its formation. Construction was authorized by the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956, and the original portion was completed 35 years later. The network has since been extended, and as of 2010, it had a total length of 47,182 miles (75,932 km).[2] As of 2010, about one-quarter of all vehicle miles driven in the country use the Interstate system.[3] The cost of construction has been estimated at $425 billion (in 2006 dollars),[4] making it the "largest public works program since the Pyramids."[5]

The Interstate Highway System had been lobbied for by major U.S. automobile manufacturers and championed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was influenced by his experiences as a young Army officer crossing the country in the 1919 Army Convoy on the Lincoln Highway, the first road across America.

Initial federal planning for a nationwide highway system began in 1921 when the Bureau of Public Roads asked the Army to provide a list of roads it considered necessary for national defense. This resulted in the Pershing Map.[6] Later that decade, highways such as the New York parkway system were built as part of local or state highway systems.

As automobile traffic increased, planners saw a need for such an interconnected national system to supplement the existing, largely non-freeway, United States Numbered Highways system. By the late 1930s, planning had expanded to a system of new superhighways.

In 1938, President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave Thomas MacDonald, chief at the Bureau of Public Roads, a hand-drawn map of the U.S. marked with eight superhighway corridors for study.[6] In 1939, Bureau of Public Roads Division of Information chief Herbert S. Fairbank wrote a report entitled Toll Roads and Free Roads, "the first formal description of what became the interstate highway system," and in 1944 the similarly themed Interregional Highways.[7][8]

Eisenhower gained an appreciation of the German Autobahn network as a necessary component of a national defense system while he was serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II.[9] He recognized that the proposed system would also provide key ground transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments in case of an emergency or foreign invasion.

I-55 under construction in Mississippi, photo from May, 1972
The publication in 1955 of the General Location of National System of Interstate Highways, informally known as the Yellow Book, mapped out what became the Interstate System.[10] Assisting in the planning was Charles Erwin Wilson, who was still head of General Motors when President Eisenhower selected him as Secretary of Defense in January 1953.

Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yep..............that's right..................the government built the roads too (at the request of the auto manufacturers btw........)

Let's look at just one small paragraph of your Wiki C&P, shall we? You'll see it highlighted above, assuming you know how to scroll. Nevermind, let me help you out.

As automobile traffic increased, planners saw a need for such an interconnected national system to supplement the existing, largely non-freeway, United States Numbered Highways system. By the late 1930s, planning had expanded to a system of new superhighways.

Notice how the traffic increased BEFORE the 'planners saw a need'? How does that jibe with the meme that government was first, BEFORE the need?

I just don't see it, can you clear it up for me?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Idiot liberals believe Govt existed before people moved to an area and set up their farms and businesses. In ther fucked up minds, the taxman was there waiting for people before they even created a town with their businesses out of nothing.

thank you for sharing one of the most ignorant and uniformed opinions to grace these boards in quite some time. I was just discussing with a friend, the sad state of education in America today. Your post is a classic text book case of what I wanted to posit as proof of America's education system as a broken down relic, akin to America's sad health care system pre Obamacare.

One thing you may want to know: there is a class action lawsuit pending of Americans like you who have a case against the education establishment. You should easily be able to prove their liability in your case, and collect most all the monies either you and/or your family have paid into your supposed education.

peace out

dD

And out of the OTHER side of your mouth comes the pronouncement that without 'government education, America's businesses wouldn't have such worthwhile employees...

you can start here: Famous and Noteworthy Texas Public Schools Alumni

then you can do your own search, but beware...your world view will come crashing down around your shit stained undies.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

That's exactly why forward-thinking liberals should start their own damn company and profit-share with their own damn employees of their own damn free will!

They do. You really need to get out more. Does your Scooter have new batteries? If not after 5 years I hear your privately funded Medicare will pay for a set.

They do? Really? Then why of all of you parasite liberals here crying your little eyes out about the evil rich who won't give you money???

You're parasites - you're too fucking lazy to work, much less start your own business...

says the internet troll who lives on the internet(s)

 

[regent]

Asking US leaders to define communism is similar to asking posters to define communism. Better and more accurate definitions might be found by asking political scientists, perhaps those that teach subjects like comparative economic systems, and even better than that, to read what Marx had to say about the political and economic facets of his system.

Seriously, you're making about as much sense as a stoned donkey right now. You have no idea what you're talking about, but it appears you're working very hard to convince people you do - and it's just coming out as nonsense.

First of all, Communism was just the term they used - nobody asked them to "define it" and claiming a "political scientist" (hilarious term by the way) can better define a term coined by leadership 50 years ago is absurd. It's like saying naming Microsoft Windows was the wrong name to use for Bill Gates product and he should have waited 30 years until he could ask YOU what to call it.

Did Marx believe that a dictators would force capitalistic nations into communism?

Almost certainly. Because only an asshole would voluntarily enter into the philosophy of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"



Same way it always does. Same way it has through 10,000+ years. Through force.



Probably dictatorship as we already established.

I'll ask you another question one that I have asked numerous times, can you name a nation that has or is now practicing Marxian communism?

Also as we already established, Marxism is a part of the blanket term Communism, so this is like saying a Democratic Democracy. However, many nations are currently employing Communism and all are failing miserably. One must only look off the coast of the US at Cuba to see it.

And still another question, if our founders were liberals and used liberal ideas in the Constitution does that make the founders communists? They certainly advocated a political system that was pretty radical for its time and based on liberal ideas.

Well, if you sucked cock, would you swallow every time? Why ask a hypothetical question about people who have been dead for 200+ years? The reality is, our founders lived oppression first hand (not like the priviliged, spoiled, lazy, greedy liberal of today) and thus created a small government of limited powers to protect against the tyranny they knew all too well.

However, if they hypotheticlally HAD implemented the Communist policies of the left, then yes, they would have been Communists. But they didn't, so asking that question makes zero sense and seems like a desperate attempt to start framing a debate at some point that our founders did do somethign that stupid. Typical of the left.

No nation has ever practiced Marxian communism, the USSR started on the path and dumped it early as unworkable. It doesn't work and has never worked.
Calling something communism doesn't make it communism, or as Lincoln said calling a horse's tail a leg doesn't mean the horse has five legs. All these terms have meaning and using them correctly is for a reason.
Our framers took a government with no powers and minimal size and changed it to a govenment of considerable size with considerable powers. And worse made the change using liberal ideas of government from the Age of Reason. As for asking questions about those in the past, well that's just history.

 

[GuyPinestra]

I've noticed that Cecilie1200 hasn't answered my post that is backed up with facts as to how the government actually built the roads and fostered the settling of the West.

Oh yeah...........that Lewis and Clark thing to find out about the Louisiana Purchase? Government funded as well.

dummie,, how did the govermnet do that? that's right,, because 50% of we the people support the government with our TAX dollars. the precious government couldn't make jack shit unless 50% of we the people sent them our hard earned money.

The federal government runs on more than federal income taxes. Poor people pay taxes to the federal government. Some wealthy people and corporations take so many exemptions they pay a fraction of what they publicly claim to pay. It is I suspect one of Romeny's main objections to releasing his tax records.

What does Romney really pay?

What did BoiKing's Jobs Czar pay? What did Immelt's company pay? How many GE jobs went to China?

 

[GuyPinestra]

thank you for sharing one of the most ignorant and uniformed opinions to grace these boards in quite some time. I was just discussing with a friend, the sad state of education in America today. Your post is a classic text book case of what I wanted to posit as proof of America's education system as a broken down relic, akin to America's sad health care system pre Obamacare.

One thing you may want to know: there is a class action lawsuit pending of Americans like you who have a case against the education establishment. You should easily be able to prove their liability in your case, and collect most all the monies either you and/or your family have paid into your supposed education.

peace out

dD

And out of the OTHER side of your mouth comes the pronouncement that without 'government education, America's businesses wouldn't have such worthwhile employees...

i bet you thought you had a point.

I bet you thought you had a brain.

 

[del]

And out of the OTHER side of your mouth comes the pronouncement that without 'government education, America's businesses wouldn't have such worthwhile employees...

i bet you thought you had a point.

I bet you thought you had a brain.

i bet you thought that was a stunning comeback

 

[freedombecki]

Actually, the "Self-Made" myth was used by American families who climbed up the ladder using the full benefits of public investments but who - once they reached the top - no longer wanted to pay into the system that benefited them.

Ronald Reagan is a perfect example. He grew up in a poor family that was on the way to being crushed by the Great Depression. Reagan's father was saved by an FDR work program - a BIG Government work program literally saved Ronald Reagan. FDR's theory was that the American people had greatness inside them. And that all you needed to do was give them a leg-up during hdd times, than then they would survive and thrive. FDR called it an investment in human capital. Do you think this nation's public or government investment in the Reagan family paid off? But it wasn't just the Reagans. Countless returning veterans from WWII were put to work by Republican presidents like Eisenhower building this nation's interstate's and energy grids and water plants. Big Government put jobless people to work building modern industrial America - and all of today's profit makers are dependent on ll the advantages of a modern industrial state. Indeed, there was a massive public investment in turning America into the most technologically advanced nation earth. This had a huge multiplier effect enjoyed by business. Today, however, we don't invest in infrastructure; nope - we just sell it to China because of the free market logic of selling to the highest bidder. [You fucking morons. The market isn't patriotic. It will sell everything you own until you lose your country to outsiders]

Private profits in the Southwest would not exist but for the Hoover Dam. The technology that fueled the 80s consumer electronics boom came out of the Cold War Pentagon/NASA. All the people who profit wildly because of these public investments use the self-made myth to avoid paying anything back. Therefore,, we have to cut education and let new infrastructureprojects go unfinished so that we can keep letting the wealthy walk away with everything. The country is dying because we have been taken over by an Ayn Rand narrative which 100% ignores how dependent business and the wealthy are on the Public. *

When America was at it's economic apex in the 50s and 60s, there was a proud and successful partnership between business and government. Indeed, business craves this partnership. This is why they build massive lobbying bases in Washington, so they can suckle at the public teet in the back of the room; and then they slither out of that dark room pockets stuffed with public money, and they use the "self-made" myth so they don't have to pay taxes on all the benefits they're sucking from the system.

The anti-tax revolution has always been about maximizing what you take from government and the public, but paying as little back as possible. This includes moving all your profits offshore, like Romney. The point is to suck this country dry. To use all it's free resources, and then not pay anything back to future. This has been going on for 30 years, It was the point of the Reagan Revolution: to increase what the private sector takes from the pubic (in terms of subsidies, bail-outs, and regulatory favors) while radically decreasing what they pay back.

And it was kind of funny to watch it happen. As the wealthy began to gain control over more and more wealth, they also gained control of the Republican Party, who now 100% works for this small collection of ultra wealthy corporate interests. They began shipping jobs to freedom-hating labor markets (mostly in communist China) in order to realize a higher return on investment. Companies like Bain were essential to this transfer of jobs to China on behalf of a small collection of American investors. All the while they'd say "give us tax cuts, and we'll give you more jobs." So we gave them more and more tax cuts and they'd ship more and more jobs to China. It was hoax, and only naive people who listened to talk radio and FOX News bought it.

This is not a complicated story. The wealthy took over this country. They bought Washington and mass media. They locked down our laws and then they used media to promote the "self-made" myth to keep from having to pay back all the resources and subsidies they sucked from the system. (You people have no idea how much they rely on publicly funded infrastructure and public subsidies and public FDIC laws and public regulations which provect their monopolies.) The only way they get away with this shit is because Republican voters don't know how to question their information sources. We are still living under the essential logic of the Reagan Revolution. Tax cuts and deregulation. The result has been to concentrate all the wealth and resources into the hands of avery smaller group. And then these fucking billionaires who own the political system and mass media claim to be John Gault so that we give them even more money and resources.

We call them job creators. This is such a fucking joke. They've been job shippers since Reagan.

Londoner, * The Hoover Dam project did not leave America with a $16 trillion dollar deficit.As a matter of fact, the power plant that was placed at Hoover Dam created revenue that paid for the project time and time again.

 

[GuyPinestra]

i bet you thought you had a point.

I bet you thought you had a brain.

i bet you thought that was a stunning comeback

Don't care if it was stunning, I KNOW it was 'on point'.

 

[del]

I bet you thought you had a brain.

i bet you thought that was a stunning comeback

Don't care if it was stunning, I KNOW it was 'on point'.

here's a list of all the things you know that are correct:

 

[Dr Grump]

i bet you thought that was a stunning comeback

Don't care if it was stunning, I KNOW it was 'on point'.

here's a list of all the things you know that are correct:

Your list is too long....

 

[GuyPinestra]

i bet you thought that was a stunning comeback

Don't care if it was stunning, I KNOW it was 'on point'.

here's a list of all the things you know that are correct:

Here, let me help you....

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Liberals started this government" . . . if you subscribe to the theory that anything people like must, by definition, have been liberal.

Meanwhile, as to "countries started by businesses", who do you think paid to send the early settlers here, and supported them once they were here? Who do you think paid for the building of the first roads and towns and infrastructure here?

Who paid? I seem to remember something about the government offering homesteads and land grants to people that could make it there.



Land Run of 1889 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just one example of how the government helped to foster the settling of the West.

And..............as far as who provided the infrastructure? Well, up until Eisenhower, the roads kinda sucked and there were towns that didn't connect up with the rest of the country. His highway system changed that.



Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yep..............that's right..................the government built the roads too (at the request of the auto manufacturers btw........)

Let's look at just one small paragraph of your Wiki C&P, shall we? You'll see it highlighted above, assuming you know how to scroll. Nevermind, let me help you out.

As automobile traffic increased, planners saw a need for such an interconnected national system to supplement the existing, largely non-freeway, United States Numbered Highways system. By the late 1930s, planning had expanded to a system of new superhighways.

Notice how the traffic increased BEFORE the 'planners saw a need'? How does that jibe with the meme that government was first, BEFORE the need?

I just don't see it, can you clear it up for me?

I was rather caught by the notion that the government paid someone for the land grants that it issued people. Aren't these the same liberals who are always bemoaning the way the United States "stole" all the land from the Indians? NOW, though, we're being told that they, in fact, had to pay for it in order to issue land grants.

Not that it matters, because the idea of the federal government during that time going to the homesteaders, out there breaking their backs and risking their lives just to scratch out a decent living, and telling them, "You couldn't have done it without us" just makes me laugh.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

And out of the OTHER side of your mouth comes the pronouncement that without 'government education, America's businesses wouldn't have such worthwhile employees...

i bet you thought you had a point.

I bet you thought you had a brain.

you obviously have del confused with somebody else.

 

[Moonglow]

They do. You really need to get out more. Does your Scooter have new batteries? If not after 5 years I hear your privately funded Medicare will pay for a set.

They do? Really? Then why of all of you parasite liberals here crying your little eyes out about the evil rich who won't give you money???

You're parasites - you're too fucking lazy to work, much less start your own business...

says the internet troll who lives on the internet(s)

oh no! he was a contract negotiator in finance, that's one of his many talents.
I'd take his ass to work with me, and laugh when he walks home cause the job is too physically demanding, and it's my own business, been running it 30 years.

 

[Moonglow]

Who paid? I seem to remember something about the government offering homesteads and land grants to people that could make it there.



Land Run of 1889 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just one example of how the government helped to foster the settling of the West.

And..............as far as who provided the infrastructure? Well, up until Eisenhower, the roads kinda sucked and there were towns that didn't connect up with the rest of the country. His highway system changed that.



Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yep..............that's right..................the government built the roads too (at the request of the auto manufacturers btw........)

Let's look at just one small paragraph of your Wiki C&P, shall we? You'll see it highlighted above, assuming you know how to scroll. Nevermind, let me help you out.

As automobile traffic increased, planners saw a need for such an interconnected national system to supplement the existing, largely non-freeway, United States Numbered Highways system. By the late 1930s, planning had expanded to a system of new superhighways.

Notice how the traffic increased BEFORE the 'planners saw a need'? How does that jibe with the meme that government was first, BEFORE the need?

I just don't see it, can you clear it up for me?

I was rather caught by the notion that the government paid someone for the land grants that it issued people. Aren't these the same liberals who are always bemoaning the way the United States "stole" all the land from the Indians? NOW, though, we're being told that they, in fact, had to pay for it in order to issue land grants.

Not that it matters, because the idea of the federal government during that time going to the homesteaders, out there breaking their backs and risking their lives just to scratch out a decent living, and telling them, "You couldn't have done it without us" just makes me laugh.

what was the name of the private enterprise that bought the Louisiana Purchase? heck back then we(US govt.) had to keep rich people from raising armies to invade smaller nations.