[jeffkrol]

Do you pay Social Security? Do you use the public Library? Do your kids go to public school? Do you believe in the FDA to make sure your food is clean and healty? Do you believe in disability if you injure yourself while working and can no longer make an income?

My eye if you say you don't do anything of these things (except for your children because maybe you haven't found someone to have kids with you). YOU are the one who is a hanger-on

:
Wait a minute, you're from Canada, why the Hell are you even sticking your nose in this?

Actually he's British living somewhere in Michigan I believe.. He chooses not to be a citizen.. read his past posts.
The "north of Canada" I believe refers to the areas north of the part of Canada that borders Michigan......
He can correct any of this if I'm in error... heaven forbid he's in Alaska..

---------- Post added 07-10-10 at 10:37 PM ----------

Nice try but these sort of things are provided for under Article I Section 8.

For example:



Teddy Roosevelt said that Big Labor can be as dangerous as Big Business (i.e. Corporations). I think we have a 4 way mega problem.

1. Mega Corporations
2. Big Labor
3. Big Government
4. Political Parties whose agenda supersedes anything else. I'm referring to the actual DNC & RNC and not necessarily the average person that claims to be a Dem or Rep.

General welfare SHOULD include health care..... just another "aspect" of what you quoted.. don't you agree..... "general welfare" is pretty broad.

[szurinaga]

It's official: Few Know What 'Socialist' means.

we can thank Glen Beck for that

[FlashCube]

A
---------- Post added 07-10-10 at 10:37 PM ----------


General welfare SHOULD include health care..... just another "aspect" of what you quoted.. don't you agree..... "general welfare" is pretty broad.

I don't know why you trimmed my post in your quote. I never said welfare wasn't broad. However, there's this little detail that often gets over-looked and you removed it from my quote:

but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I am certain that Madison, Hamilton, Hancock et al didn't intend for the Federal Government to take over every thing under the auspices of the commerce clause. In fact that was one of the biggest reasons many states were initially reluctant to ratify the Constitution, the fear the Central Government would become huge and powerful. That also resulted in the Bill of Rights because the People had been left out in a major way from the original documents. On an separate note, the establishment of the Post Office was one of the 1st things the Continental Congress did even before the War was over or the Constitution was even drafted. Washington also warned about political parties. They have gotten too powerful they are entangled with Corporations and Big Labor.

[philippe]

It's official: Few Know What 'Socialist' means.

Wee do!
In Europe it is almost a honor to be called so, don't worry, they don't eat little children...
BTW, Tony Blair, your very right wing conservative president G.W. Bush's friend, was one...

[Nesster]

Nice try but these sort of things are provided for under Article I Section 8.

For example:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
. . .

To establish post offices and post roads;To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"


Teddy Roosevelt said that Big Labor can be as dangerous as Big Business (i.e. Corporations). I think we have a 4 way mega problem.

1. Mega Corporations
2. Big Labor
3. Big Government
4. Political Parties whose agenda supersedes anything else. I'm referring to the actual DNC & RNC and not necessarily the average person that claims to be a Dem or Rep.

nice try, all you've proven is that the United States is based on a Socialist Constitution.

I'm glad you bring up Teddy, he's one of my favorite Presidents, though he does have a very large bad side to him, especially from today's perspective. I really like the guy and have done a lot of reading about him.

There's nothing wrong about being critical of the hidebound and simplistic politics of Big Labor. However, our right wing tends to return to the topic of labor unions being the root of 1/3 of the evil (government being 1/2 and topic of the day being the remainder) with great vehemence and anger, and rarely if ever is there right wing complaint about Big Business acting in ways contrary to the interests of the common man.

As I've seen, this may be directly traceable to the Fox/US Chamber of Commerce alliance, which in turn gets a lot of its impetus from the old Republican Southern Strategy.

You do know Teddy was also one of the greatest tree huggers - especially for his time - and a trust buster? His greater vitriol was towards big business, not labor, in fact, here's something the man said:

"It is essential that there should be organization of labor. This is an era of organization. Capital organizes and therefore labor must organize."
Theodore Roosevelt

I think political parties from the start have had their own agendas, otherwise why have a party at all? Parties talk about 'big tent' which means the party agenda is diluted and inclusive and negotiable - in order to attract a greater number of people into the 'big tent'. In that sense, when a 'small tent' dominates a party, as is the case currently with the Republicans, the party agenda tends to become radicalized and to supersede anything else. It happens with the Dems too, only right now, despite the view from the radicalized right, the Dems have a big tent going.

What's different right now - Fox TV hit upon a great commercial formula, that of taking the grand tradition of partisan newspapers and rebuilding that to prime time TV infotainment. The newspapers back in the day also incited and polarized, only reading a newspaper isn't quite as visceral as watching TV. Fox is also aligned much more to the radicalized right, and shares the money generating ideas of the US Chamber of Commerce (polarize, catastrophize, alarm, avoid resolution, avoid the middle) - in the case of Fox this hooks in viewers who become outrage junkies, thus delivering an audience to Fox's true clients, the advertisers.

MSNBC tries to follow the Fox business model with its prime time line up.

~~~

Teddy Roosevelt had a gift for speech:

"Let the watchwords of all our people be the old familiar watchwords of honesty, decency, fair-dealing, and commonsense."... "We must treat each man on his worth and merits as a man. We must see that each is given a square deal, because he is entitled to no more and should receive no less.""The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us."
New York State Fair, Syracuse, September 7, 1903

"A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards. More than that no man is entitled, and less than that no man shall have."
Speech to veterans, Springfield, IL, July 4, 1903

"We demand that big business give the people a square deal; in return we must insist that when anyone engaged in big business honestly endeavors to do right he shall himself be given a square deal."
Letter to Sir Edward Gray, November 15, 1913

And what was this Square Deal?

The Square Deal was President Theodore Roosevelt's domestic program formed upon three basic ideas: conservation of natural resources, control of corporations, and consumer protection.[1] Thus, it aimed at helping middle class citizens and involved attacking the plutocracy and bad trusts while at the same time protecting business from the extreme demands of organized labor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_Deal


So, taking historical era into account, Obama's socialism is squarely in the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt.

"The reactionary is always willing to take a progressive attitude on any issue that is dead."
Theodore Roosevelt

[GingeM]

nice try, all you've proven is that the United States is based on a Socialist Constitution.

My, my... That's an astonishing leap... The entire constitution was set forth to limit government and it's power by enumerating the powers government has and denying them all others. The entire point of Socialism is to expand government and it's power. The fact that you can then make the leap you did shows that, for all your reading and quoting, you've lost the plot somewhere along the line.

[jeffkrol]

Consider the fact that a "socialist constitution" fits right in w/ the current one (ie over 80% compatible) I'd say we are closer than you think.
OUR SOCIALIST CONSTITUTION. - Article Preview - The New York Times

www.qualiteitems.com/images/socialism.pdf
NOTE:My servers down so pdf is unavailable directly for above......
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9E02E4D91E3EE233A25755C1A96E9C946096D6CF
To fuel the never ending fire...... a Brit.

There are many forms of socialism. The version practiced in the US is the most deceitful one I know. An honest, courageous socialist government would say: this is a worthwhile social purpose (financing home ownership, helping my friends on Wall Street); therefore I am going to subsidize it; and here are the additional taxes (or cuts in other public spending) to finance it.

Instead the dishonest, spineless socialist policy makers in successive Democratic and Republican administrations have systematically tried to hide both the subsidies and size and distribution of the incremental fiscal burden associated with the provision of these subsidies, behind an endless array of opaque arrangements and institutions. Off-balance-sheet vehicles and off-budget financing were the bread and butter of the US federal government long before they became popular in Wall Street and the City of London.

http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2008/07/time-for-comrade-paulson-the-pull-the-...eddie-charade/
So.. historically we have leaned "socialist" for generations....... shocking...
This is interesting.........
http://www.webspawner.com/users/directdemocracycons1/

PREFACE: This model socialist constitution is just that, a modest proposal, a *model*. Obviously, no one has any intention of challenging the current constitution or government. Rather, it is hoped that some of the most worthy aspects of this Model will be incorporated into whatever democracy-socialism constitution is eventually democratically, peacefully ratified by the American People as capitalism becomes incompetent and unworkable.

Them's some fighting words....
And as a counterpoint to our constitution:
http://www.vietnamembassy-usa.org/learn_about_vietnam/politics/constitution/chapter_five/

---

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-11-2010 at 09:44 AM.

[GingeM]

So.. historically we have leaned "socialist" for generations....... shocking...

... And ever since I have been "politically aware" I have said it's wrong and I still do. Just because it happens doesn't make it right.

[jeffkrol]

... And ever since I have been "politically aware" I have said it's wrong and I still do. Just because it happens doesn't make it right.

Good luck with that...... Maybe you should move to Hong Kong or Singapore???
Index of Economic Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stefan Karlsson of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, challenged the usefulness of the index due to the fuzziness of many of the categories used to determine freedom.[16] John Miller, writing in Dollars & Sense, criticizes the Index for inappropriately weighted indicators for economic freedom and not taking into account the actions of governments to nurture business. According to him this leads to wealthy and/or conservative countries with barriers to trade placing high on the list, while poor and/or socialist countries with fewer restrictions on trade place low.[17]. According to Left Business Observer, the Index has only a 10% statistical correlation with a standard measure of economic growth, GDP per capita.

And to point-counter-point of your belief.......
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2005/0305miller.html

Moving further down the list of "free" countries, the rankings are no better correlated with any ordinary definition of "freedom," as economic journalist Robert Kuttner pointed out when the index was first published in 1997. For instance, Bahrain (#20), where the king holds an effective veto over parliament and freedom of expression is limited, ranks higher than Norway (#29), whose comprehensive social insurance and strong environmental regulation drag down its score. Likewise, Kuwait, an emirship no one would term free or democratic, is tied (at #54) with Costa Rica, long the most vigorous democracy in Latin America.

These results are not surprising, however, given the index's premise: the less a government intervenes in the economy, the higher its freedom ranking.

Whatever the biases in the index do to cement a tight relationship between economic freedom and income, they can't produce a tight correlation between economic freedom and growth. The fastest-growing countries are mostly unfree. Take China, India, and Vietnam, three of the fastest-growing countries in the world. They are way down in the rankings, at #112, #118, and #137 respectively. While all three countries have adopted market reforms in recent years that have improved their standing in the index, their trade policies and regulations remain "repressive." And there are plenty of relatively slow growers among the countries high up in the index, including Estonia (#4), the Journal's poster child for economic freedom. How free or unfree a country is according to the index seems to have little to do with how quickly it grows.An "Economic Freedom Index" that tells us little about economic growth or political freedom is a slipshod measure that would seem to have no other purpose other than to sell the neoliberal policies that stand in the way of most people gaining control over their economic lives and obtaining genuine economic freedom in today's global economy

On a side bar:
Adam Smith.....
Adam Smith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

yet he was prepared to accept or propose qualifications to that policy in the specific cases where he judged that their net effect would be beneficial and would not undermine the basically free character of the system. He did not wear the Adam Smith necktie." In Stein's reading, The Wealth of Nations could justify the Food and Drug Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, mandatory employer health benefits, environmentalism, and "discriminatory taxation to deter improper or luxurious behavior".[91]

[GingeM]

Good luck with that......

Just because it's difficult doesn't mean one should give up.

[jeffkrol]

Just because it's difficult doesn't mean one should give up.

Maybe after re-living another failed "capitalistic experiment" you'll change your tune.. or conveniently retire to England.....

[GingeM]

Naaahhh.... I'll stick around... After November this will be a really nice country again...

[Ratmagiclady]

Naaahhh.... I'll stick around... After November this will be a really nice country again...

Well, *someone* was making out like a bandit for the Bush years, after all. Seems clear it's not us. Vote Palin if you want to throw Ginge some more money!

[gokenin]

Them's some fighting words....
And as a counterpoint to our constitution:
VN Embassy : Learn about Vietnam : Politics : Constitution : Chapter Five

Article 10
The trade union, being the socio-political organisation of the working class and the toiling people, joins State organs, economic and social bodies in looking after and safeguarding the rights and interests of cadres, workers, employees and other labouring people; it participates in State administration and social management, in the control and supervision of the activity of State organs and economic bodies; educates cadres, workers, employees and other labouring people to work well for national construction and defence.

Article 17
The land, forests, rivers and lakes, water supplies, wealth lying underground or coming from the sea, the continental shelf and the air, the funds and property invested by the State in enterprises and works in all branches and fields - the economy, culture, society, science, technology, external relations, national defence, security - and all other property determined by law as belonging to the State, come under ownership by the entire people.

Article 23
The lawful property of individuals and organisations shall not be nationalised.

In cases made absolutely necessary by reason of national defence, security and the national interest, the State can make a forcible purchase of or can requisition pieces of property of individuals or organisations against compensation, taking into account current market prices.

The formalities of the forcible purchase or requisition shall be determined by law.


Article 26
The State manages the national economy by means of laws, plans and policies; it makes a division of responsibilities and devolves authority to various departments and levels of the administration; the interests of individuals and collectives are brought into harmony with those of the State.

Article 33
The State shall promote information work, the press, radio, television, cinema, publishing, libraries and other means of mass communication. Shall be strictly banned all activities in the fields of culture and information that are detrimental to national interests, and destructive of the personality, morals, and fine lifeway of the Vietnamese.

Article 36
The State undertakes the overall management of the national system of education with regard to the objectives, contents, plans, the standards required of teachers, the regulations governing examinations and competitions and the system of diplomas and certificates.

The State shall ensure the harmonious development of the educational system: pre-school education, general education, vocational training, college and post-graduate education; it shall enforce the generalisation of primary education, eliminate illiteracy; it shall develop various educational institutions: State-run schools, people-run schools, and others.

The State gives priority investment to education and encouragement to other investors.

Priority investment is reserved for educational work in the high- lands, in regions inhabited by national minorities and in regions encountering special difficulties.

Mass organisations, first of all the Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, social organisations, economic bodies, the family and the school all bear responsibility for the education of the youth, teenagers and children.

Article 39
The State makes investment in, ensures the development of, and exercises unified management over the protection of the people's health; it mobilises and organises all social forces in the building and development of Vietnamese medicine following a far-sighted orientation; prevention shall be combined with treatment, traditional medicine and pharmacology with modern medicine and pharmacology, State health services with people's health services; the State shall see to the organisation of health insurance and create the necessary conditions for all citizens to enjoy health care.

Priority is given to the programme of health care for highlanders and national minorities.

It is strictly forbidden to private organisations and individuals to dispense medical treatment, to produce and trade in medicaments illegally, thereby damaging the people's health.

Article 40
It is the responsibility of the State, society, the family and the citizen to ensure care and protection for mothers and children; to carry into effect the population programme and family planning.well there goes Roe v Wade


Yes the constitution of Vietnam sounds nice but these are just a few things that make you pause for a second.

[GingeM]

Vote Palin if you want to throw Ginge some more money!

Wait!!! Why give her a cut... Send the cash directly to me... Oh, wait... You like taxes...