Wright - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

MS Fowler · #1 05-01-2008, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Communism was bound to burn itself out. And it did in what, 100 years?

Get over it.

I WISH that were true!
Communism has simply relocated; it is not dead. After backrupting the Soviet Union, it now seeks to do the same to the USA. Listening to the way the libs* want to take from the oil companies reminds me of an old quote,
" From each according to his ability to each according according to his needs"

It sounds so seductive, so alluring, in the abstract, but in the real world, it simply doesn't work. People who have the ability to be more productive than average, will not extend themselves if they get no benefit.

The question is, Will the US learn the lesson, or will we continue to listen to pandering politicians who promise us the Garden of Eden while "someone else" pays for it? You heard it here first--There is no free lunch!

* for the purposes of this post, "libs" is defined as any politician of any party who panders to any special interest group by promising benefits paid for by others not of the special interest group."

Jim B. · #2 05-01-2008, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I WISH that were true!
Communism has simply relocated; it is not dead. After backrupting the Soviet Union, it now seeks to do the same to the USA. Listening to the way the libs* want to take from the oil companies reminds me of an old quote,
"From each according to his ability to each according according to his needs"

"

^^^^ I ALWAYS say that every time I am siphoning the gasoline out of Cadillacs!!!!! hahahahahaha!!! < snorts >

cmac2012 · #3 05-01-2008, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I WISH that were true!
Communism has simply relocated; it is not dead. After backrupting the Soviet Union, it now seeks to do the same to the USA. Listening to the way the libs* want to take from the oil companies reminds me of an old quote,
" From each according to his ability to each according according to his needs"

It sounds so seductive, so alluring, in the abstract, but in the real world, it simply doesn't work. People who have the ability to be more productive than average, will not extend themselves if they get no benefit.

The question is, Will the US learn the lesson, or will we continue to listen to pandering politicians who promise us the Garden of Eden while "someone else" pays for it? You heard it here first--There is no free lunch!

* for the purposes of this post, "libs" is defined as any politician of any party who panders to any special interest group by promising benefits paid for by others not of the special interest group."

It's a tough one. Full on, unrestrained capitalism is likely to lead to the sort of feudal landlord societies of present day El Salvador or medieval Europe, where the upper 1% have 95% of the wealth. Not a lot of growth in such a society. I'd much rather have a strong middle class with good educations so that they can provide the sort of goods and services that make live worth living.

LaRondo · #4 05-05-2008, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I WISH that were true!
Communism has simply relocated; it is not dead. After backrupting the Soviet Union, it now seeks to do the same to the USA. Listening to the way the libs* want to take from the oil companies reminds me of an old quote,
" From each according to his ability to each according according to his needs"

It sounds so seductive, so alluring, in the abstract, but in the real world, it simply doesn't work. People who have the ability to be more productive than average, will not extend themselves if they get no benefit.

The question is, Will the US learn the lesson, or will we continue to listen to pandering politicians who promise us the Garden of Eden while "someone else" pays for it? You heard it here first--There is no free lunch!

* for the purposes of this post, "libs" is defined as any politician of any party who panders to any special interest group by promising benefits paid for by others not of the special interest group."

This is actually a really good post. It's got soul. Yet it also needs a few adjustments.
You are very well right, with the evolving situation on this soil and the spread of communist behaviour and centralized patterns of doing big business. That's exactly what is happening.

Big government, big business and millions of likewise dependents. The only significant difference:

Over there they called it 'Communism', over here they call it 'Capitalism'. Same thing different name for it.

So, you still worry about, what one 'leftwing liberal' wants to take from another 'rightwing liberal'?

No need to worry, it's all going to wash out in the end.

The US learning a lesson? I doubt it. Once again, same difference. Somewhere else they call it 'Garden of Eden', here they call it 'American Dream'.

Your description of "libs" is very acurate as well, which means those big-business-libs, thriving on everybody's mandatory contribution, are perfectly included in club.

t walgamuth · #5 05-05-2008, 02:54 AM

please give an example of a big bus. lib.

tom w

Knightrider966 · #6 05-05-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

This is actually a really good post. It's got soul. Yet it also needs a few adjustments.
You are very well right, with the evolving situation on this soil and the spread of communist behaviour and centralized patterns of doing big business. That's exactly what is happening.

Big government, big business and millions of likewise dependents. The only significant difference:

Over there they called it 'Communism', over here they call it 'Capitalism'. Same thing different name for it.

So, you still worry about, what one 'leftwing liberal' wants to take from another 'rightwing liberal'?

No need to worry, it's all going to wash out in the end.

The US learning a lesson? I doubt it. Once again, same difference. Somewhere else they call it 'Garden of Eden', here they call it 'American Dream'.

Your description of "libs" is very acurate as well, which means those big-business-libs, thriving on everybody's mandatory contribution, are perfectly included in club.

Well, not quite! You see when you pay people to stay poor by creating a welfare state and giving them unlimted access to the teat, you create a second class generation of welfare recipients who put back nothing, unlike business owners like me who will in turn hire more people and create a work force producing products everyone needs and creating more income which in turn puts more money BACK in to the treasury!

A couple of major differences between communism and capitolism. Communism takes what you have and gives it away with no return on investment required, therefore no economic growth is involved or expected.
Capitolism expects and DEMANDS you to generate more of what you created and SHARES that with those willing to WORK for it.

Do you know why a welfare recipient cannot find a paycheck? Because it's under their workboots!

The American Dream is working for your own wealth, not by being robbed by your government who gives your money away to those who contribute and put back nothing, especially jobs and earnings potential.

The American Dream is learning to stand on your own two feet and shout out that you can achieve as long as the liberal parasites get off your back and quit sucking your blood like leeches and giving your money to those who pop out more kids for a bigger welfare check!

t walgamuth · #7 05-05-2008, 06:20 PM

I don't think what we have qualifies remotely as a welfare state.

Its really hard to get and stay on welfare these days.

We might have a pretty good welfare state for big corporations though!

Tom W

Botnst · #8 05-05-2008, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

I don't think what we have qualifies remotely as a welfare state.

Its really hard to get and stay on welfare these days.

We might have a pretty good welfare state for big corporations though!

Tom W

I have never been quite sure what the phrase, "corporate welfare" means. I know what it means on a personal level -- taking money from the taxpayer and giving to a non-productive individual. How does that work with corporations -- you mean like farm subsidies? I'm all for letting the free market rule in farming as it should in everything else.

t walgamuth · #9 05-05-2008, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

I have never been quite sure what the phrase, "corporate welfare" means. I know what it means on a personal level -- taking money from the taxpayer and giving to a non-productive individual. How does that work with corporations -- you mean like farm subsidies? I'm all for letting the free market rule in farming as it should in everything else.

Tobacco subsidies, oil subsidies (I am not sure what there is here but I suspect there are some.)

Tom W

Botnst · #10 05-05-2008, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Tobacco subsidies, oil subsidies (I am not sure what there is here but I suspect there are some.)

Tom W

Tobacco subsidies come under agriculture, to which I have already made reference to a preferred elimination.

I have never had an oil subsidy and would be interested in receiving one.

B

tankdriver · #11 05-08-2008, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

I have never been quite sure what the phrase, "corporate welfare" means. I know what it means on a personal level -- taking money from the taxpayer and giving to a non-productive individual. How does that work with corporations -- you mean like farm subsidies? I'm all for letting the free market rule in farming as it should in everything else.

Not just subsidies, though they are a part. There are also tax credits and protectionist policies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Yes, Hussein has a cultural meaning. Are you suggesting that the cultural meaning of his name is unimportant? I think it is every bit as important as his first & last names and at least as worthy of attention.

Bot An Ist

What cultural meaning does his middle name have? I don't have to suggest it, but if it does have some cultural meaning I call it unimportant. I fail to see how, as a member of our society, you have chosen this individual's middle name as equal in importance - beyond means of identification - as his first and last. First and last is typically all anyone is asked in America.
BTW, what significance does Soleil Moon Frye's middle name have?