Class warfare - Page 6 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

SwampYankee · #76 08-04-2011, 10:27 AM

Quote:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.

I don't really know who gets credit for the quote (Tocqueville, Tytler, Franklin, whoever) but I think we're living the first part now.

Neither party has shown any ability or desire to control spending. For a career politician it's not good for their job security. It's why I support some sort of BBA as well as term limits. The current system is akin to a expecting crack addict to ask the crack dealer to send them less crack.

sjh · #77 08-04-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

That might be true if government acted in a transparent manner. However, our government ( this is truly bipartisan) acts in any way but transparent. ....

I'm sorry my friend. IMO the electorate needs to accept MUCH more of the blame than they do. Again, IMO, the childish desires and refusal to acknowledge the consequences of the electorate is right before us.

Honus · #78 08-04-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

...IMO the electorate needs to accept MUCH more of the blame than they do...

That's right. The knuckleheads running the show in DC are a symptom of a deeper disease in the electorate. I don't know what we do to fix that. A media that does its job wouldn't hurt.

sjh · #79 08-04-2011, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

That's right. The knuckleheads running the show in DC are a symptom of a deeper disease in the electorate. I don't know what we do to fix that. A media that does its job wouldn't hurt.

Right ON!!!

Power to the people.

Oh, that's right, they already have it.

retmil46 · #80 08-04-2011, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

If you need the gov't to play the role of your parents and take care of you. Fine. Your stating you cannot fulfill your responsibilities as an adult. Voting and possibly other rights of adulthood are suspended.

I'm completely serious. I hear the constant braying of those demanding their rights. It's a two-edged sword; rights & responsibilities. Fulfill your responsibilities and assume rights.

Indeed. For quite some time after the country was founded, it was a requirement that you had to own property (ie, land, house, farm, business, etc) before you were allowed to vote. In essence, it meant you had to establish yourself in some sort of trade or occupation, and become a productive self-supporting tax-paying member of society before you had a say in how the country was governed and public funds were spent - IOW, you had to have your own "skin" in the game before you were allowed to play.

Nowadays, with EVERYONE eligible to vote, and thanks to essentially drive-by voter registration many who shouldn't be eligible in the first place (I often wonder how many illegals have voted in the past few elections thanks to election fraud by BOTH parties) - and the majority of the population now paying no federal taxes, but yet still able to vote for politicians that promise them a continuing flow of public funds and entitlements into their pockets -

I'd say it's little wonder then that we've reached this point - and proof of the quote that once the public learns it can vote itself funds from the public treasury, then a democracy is doomed.

I opined several months ago in another thread that the federal government would be set on it's ear, if the requirement to own property and/or pay federal taxes as a prerequisite for voting were reinstated. Instead of pandering to this or that special interest or ethnic group, there would be one main group that all politicians would have to answer to come election time - those that paid taxes and were eligible to vote.

I imagine the legality would be challenged under the "free speech" principle, but a similar requirement for any individual, corporation, or organization prior to being allowed to make campaign contributions to a party or candidate might shake things up significantly as well.

In actuality, there would be about a snowball's chance of either happening - those in the present status quo stand to lose too much.

sjh · #81 08-04-2011, 12:45 PM

Well the first thing that would happen if one needed to have 'skin in the game' is that the democratic party would become irrelevant.

That's disturbing because I do not find the republicans to have much wisdom either.

Local2ED · #82 08-04-2011, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

I suppose you believe CBS....you do remember they got caught red handed falsifying "evidence" on a fabricated smear story on Bush. Dan Rather got thrown under the bus on that one.....to protect the higher ups. Like the other drive by media...they never let the facts get in the way of a story.

You love your Koolaide don't you....good democrats only believe what the DNC tells them to believe. Which rarely has any basis in reality.

Talk about self delusion.

And George Soros does have his hands in a lot of stuff he shouldn't have. But then you worship the man who has the left duped big-time.

Do you think 9/11 never happened too? And the moon landing was a fabrication?

Limbo says George Soros and the lemmings head vibrate like a bobble head toy.

Botnst · #83 08-04-2011, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Local2ED

AH yes, the fox news canned reply.

When you have no clue, blame George Soros

Tit-for-tat, muh'man. I responded to the typical Koch Bros canard with the typical Georg Soros canard. We now have a wonderfully matched set of canards. Who's buying?

retmil46 · #84 08-04-2011, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

Well the first thing that would happen if one needed to have 'skin in the game' is that the democratic party would become irrelevant.

That's disturbing because I do not find the republicans to have much wisdom either.

Agreed.

Botnst · #85 08-04-2011, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

I'm sorry my friend. IMO the electorate needs to accept MUCH more of the blame than they do. Again, IMO, the childish desires and refusal to acknowledge the consequences of the electorate is right before us.

Of course it does, of course it does. And that's one of the primary reasons for a representative democracy rather than a pure democracy -- to prevent the excesses of the mass of humanity by having people of good will and conscience act in the long term best interest of the state and people.

Unfortunately, we have the downside of both at present. And have had so since FDR. Got a solution? I don't. But I'm sure looking.

retmil46 · #86 08-04-2011, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

We now have a wonderfully matched set of canards. Who's buying?

Talk to the EU. They can probably use them on one of their Eurofighters.

raymr · #87 08-04-2011, 01:22 PM

Ain't nothing worse than a needy government.

boneheaddoctor · #88 08-04-2011, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Local2ED

Limbo says George Soros and the lemmings head vibrate like a bobble head toy.

And that's being excessively nice......what I have to say about Soros I can't put on the forum.

Except I hope Georgie boy contracts a rather aggressive form of Rectal cancer that all his money won't buy his way out of since he has to stick his nose in places he has no business sticking it.

MTI · #89 08-04-2011, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

Well the first thing that would happen if one needed to have 'skin in the game' is that the democratic party would become irrelevant.

Hardly. If being a renter or homeless or being below the threshold for payment of federal income tax were the sole criteria for being part of the Democratic party, then the GOP should already have overwhelming dominance.

boneheaddoctor · #90 08-04-2011, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTI

Hardly. If being a renter or homeless or being below the threshold for payment of federal income tax were the sole criteria for being part of the Democratic party, then the GOP should already have overwhelming dominance.

Really.....I can see all those Inner city supporters in the Projects that voted for Obama clearly aren't Republican.