[JohnInIndy]

Im not sure what you mean by a class war. So please explain. I certainly am not envious or hateful of people more successful than me, and there are plenty. I grew up in the ghettos of Brooklyn and now make a very comfortable living after 9 years of post college education. I can't think of another country (maybe Canada....maybe) where I could have went from poverty to owning a house in one of the wealthiest cities. Also, my family didnt even speak english and we're not of the "evil" (sarcasm btw) caucasian desent! So if we could achieve the American Dream through hardwork, why couldnt anyone else?

Because most are too use to "entitlements". Why work for something when it will be given to you. Heck generations of "families" are product if our "welfare" system. It's a total way of life. You are, I guess, first generation here. You strived to be better. You haven't had a chance yet for the "entitlement" mentality to sink in.

[stevewig]

I'm not sure I follow this political thought, I'm thinking there's some mistaking of the mainstream Liberal (who is a capitalist) with a bogey man utopian socialist? .....

You make a very good point here Nesster that I never thought about before!

There is a strong probability that Republican supporting people who are not very active in the political world may well be believing right wing nut propaganda that any Democrat or Liberal thinking individual is an extreme left wing SOCIALIST whose only goals are to destroy Capitalism.

[shooz]

Nazi is perhaps not the correct term.
Fashist would be more correct. Merging corporations and state is what Mussolini was all about.
It's what most of the teabaggers are all about too.
Here, it's just not profitable enough to keep the trains and planes running on time.

As far as the witch thing? The video was around when she was chosen as possible VP.
RML understood it better that me.
She went to see some kind of hybrid Christian/Witch doctor, to be somehow de-witched.
It was appalling to watch.
It's probably still on youtube, if you care to look.

I still stand by the statement. prove me wrong and I will adjust.

[GatorPentax]

You felt offended by this? A joke I made without connection to anything you said. I jokingly answered Nesster's question concerning the available presidential 'material'.
What can I say? I'm sorry you can't see Palin, Trump, and Bush (especially the first two) as comical characters. It shows you have some respect for Palin and Trump as political persons, even if you don't like them.

But then the whole thread was asinine from the beginning. It started with an asinine comment on Palin. Why did you even bother to post here?



I'm one of the two. First step to a normal conversation.

You make a very good point here Nesster that I never thought about before!

There is a strong probability that Republican supporting people who are not very active in the political world may well be believing right wing nut propaganda that any Democrat or Liberal thinking individual is an extreme left wing SOCIALIST whose only goals are to destroy Capitalism.

Not destroy capitalism but to definitely hinder individualism Liberals generally vote for higher taxes (personal and business), liberals want entitlements for healthcare, retirement, housing, food, etc and want the wealthier to pay for the poor (thats called socialism), liberals still believe in affirmative action to "equalize" education and pay gaps, why? I'm a minority and I dont want affirmative action, it's an insult to minorities. Are any of those made up by the right? Im pretty sure we could look up voting patterns of liberals and conservatives and prove my statements to be truthful.

[GatorPentax]

Because most are too use to "entitlements". Why work for something when it will be given to you. Heck generations of "families" are product if our "welfare" system. It's a total way of life. You are, I guess, first generation here. You strived to be better. You haven't had a chance yet for the "entitlement" mentality to sink in.

2nd generation, but you're right, I have experienced how hard work still pays off in America. It's a shame that so many in America waste their time crying for inequality when they could simply channel that energy into hardwork and balance out the so called "inequalities" on their own.

[GatorPentax]

Nazi is perhaps not the correct term.
Fashist would be more correct. Merging corporations and state is what Mussolini was all about.
It's what most of the teabaggers are all about too.
Here, it's just not profitable enough to keep the trains and planes running on time.

As far as the witch thing? The video was around when she was chosen as possible VP.
RML understood it better that me.
She went to see some kind of hybrid Christian/Witch doctor, to be somehow de-witched.
It was appalling to watch.
It's probably still on youtube, if you care to look.

I still stand by the statement. prove me wrong and I will adjust.

I did see that video, kinda freaky. I do agree she's a bit looney but i dont worr y because she isn't going to be in any political role that can affect us.

[JohnInIndy]

2nd generation, but you're right, I have experienced how hard work still pays off in America. It's a shame that so many in America waste their time crying for inequality when they could simply channel that energy into hardwork and balance out the so called "inequalities" on their own.

Product of our "liberal" welfare system and the ACLU.

[shooz]

Because most are too use to "entitlements". Why work for something when it will be given to you. Heck generations of "families" are product if our "welfare" system. It's a total way of life. You are, I guess, first generation here. You strived to be better. You haven't had a chance yet for the "entitlement" mentality to sink in.

Still have that vision of the "welfare queen", dancing in your head John?
You do realize these are different times, don't you?

[causey]

and want the wealthier to pay for the poor (thats called socialism)

No, that's not Socialism. If that were the definition of Socialism, then any state would be Socialist, since there can be no State without taxation.

socialism - definition of socialism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm)
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

[JohnInIndy]

You do realize these are different times, don't you?

Yes I do. These are times when too many people are too lazy to get off their duffs and actually try to make a living. Too many want everything handed to them.

Who is John Galt?

[jolepp]

...
most of the European countries, and Australia had intelligence stating Hussein had WMDs
...

Substantiation for "most European countries" as used above would be most interesting.

[shooz]

Product of our "liberal" welfare system and the ACLU.

Sure, John, but it's OK for corporations to gouge the government for our tax dollars?
See both sides for a change.

[shooz]

John Galt is a fictional character that,were he real, would never do what was done in the novel.

[Nesster]

There is a strong probability that Republican supporting people who are not very active in the political world may well be believing right wing nut propaganda that any Democrat or Liberal thinking individual is an extreme left wing SOCIALIST whose only goals are to destroy Capitalism.

This is why a Democratic president (Clinton and Obama) feel somewhat disappointing to the left of the party, and why the Republicans muster such outrage and hatred. The guys don't behave like the Republicans think they will (based on their own preconceptions).

And since they tend to govern better (or at least try to) than the usual Republican prez'es, there's that resentment as well. And plain pissedness that the Just Cause didn't win, I suppose.

The policies of both Clinton and Obama are pro-business, but in the context of being pro-business with social progress in mind. This is conservative anathema.

Because most are too use to "entitlements". Why work for something when it will be given to you. Heck generations of "families" are product if our "welfare" system. It's a total way of life. You are, I guess, first generation here. You strived to be better. You haven't had a chance yet for the "entitlement" mentality to sink in.

This analysis goes off the track somewhere... let's see, think of, say, the 5 points area in NYC back in the day. Certainly there was no welfare system, and no entitlements. Yet the economy was booming, vast fortunes were made. Did the poor raise themselves by their bootstraps, eliminate squalor and unwanted pregnancy and drink and so on? No. The human suffering was very much greater however.

And among the poor, these conditions will tend to persist. One can argue that the current programs are only marginally effective. One can also argue that if one takes the reduction of suffering as a valid political aim, these programs may be somewhat effective.

However, as I said before, the aim here isn't to magically puff out poverty and associated ills (despite what the extremes of the left assume and dream of), but to make it slightly more likely that people can escape their conditions through individual initiative. Theory goes something like: you have 100 people in disadvantaged circumstance. Let's say in a perfect world 50 of them will make it out, while the other 50 for various reasons won't (and will be joined by 50 others on their way down). That's the maximum realistic goal.

Support local business growth so it adds 100 jobs... how many of those 100 will be able to get and hold these jobs in a lasseiz faire set up? Not very many. Let's say 10 to be generous. The liberal looks at the problem and figures that a) improve education b) provide some support c) encourage - and if need be require - business to hire more in this group, maybe 20 will make it. That is a real gain. Politically, however, a +10 gain may be difficult to sell.

Historically, research has shown that the one common denominator that raises a group's overall economic standing is the arrival of new immigrants (who take the lower rung and push up the prior occupants). History also shows that almost invariably, there's a hostile reaction to the new immigrant group, who is seen as a threat. Yet this mechanism is shown to work.

[shooz]

I did see that video, kinda freaky. I do agree she's a bit looney but i dont worr y because she isn't going to be in any political role that can affect us.

I knew we could agree on something...........

I do tire of the endless threads on the subject.