Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Two Perspectives


So the Democrats won the White House and gained seats in both the House and Senate... And FOX(R) was wrong. Shocking. And although more Americans voted for Democratic, rather than Republican representation, GOP gerrymandering allowed them to keep control of the House.

This is what Speaker Boehner called a “status quo election”. Yeah, that’s it.

But that’s not even the most unhinged lunacy from Republicans. Not by a long shot.

The brainwashing cult indoctrination of the radical Right is an amazing thing to see. These are some real true believers.

We see Public Policy Polling has some interesting findings. And before anyone denounces them for having “liberal bias”, please note: The Murdoch Wall Street Journal ranked PPP as one of the top swing state pollsters in the country during the last Presidential election.

PublicPolicy Polling reveals the madness:


“Republicans not handling election results well”


PPP's first post election national poll finds that Republicans are taking the results pretty hard...and also declining in numbers.

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found:

 that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.

Some GOP voters are so unhappy with the outcome that they no longer care to be a part of the United States. 25% of Republicans say they would like their state to secede from the union compared to 56% who want to stay and 19% who aren't sure.


One reason that such a high percentage of Republicans are holding what could be seen as extreme views is that their numbers are declining. Our final poll before the election, which hit the final outcome almost on the head, found 39% of voters identifying themselves as Democrats and 37% as Republicans. Since the election we've seen a 5 point increase in Democratic identification to 44%, and a 5 point decrease in Republican identification to 32%.

What a country! Turns out half of the Republican voters STILL think ACORN stole the election for Obama, from the grave apparently.

I'm not sure what hope there can be for a nation that is a quarter delusional. The good news is their cult is shrinking.

But they still number in the millions and American has its work cut out if it wishes to be a free and prosperous nation.


Yes, as the pundits and corporate "journalists" say, the polarization in American politics is wider than ever. No wonder. The corporate media stenographers do very little reporting of facts, while the propaganda arm of the Republican Party has duped it’s cult into believing they are “fair and balanced’.


Let’s look at the contrast between the two perspectives of a divided America. One is that of the so-called “conservative” radical Right, aka the Republican Party. The other is the opposite alternative, not necessarily that of the junior corporate Democratic Party.


"In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." - Spencer Bachus (R) AL

And who can forget:

”There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it....And so my job is not to worry about those people—I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” Willard (R) the Loser
Now that’s the Right attitude.

In contrast we have:

On taxes:

Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”


But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? Show Me the tax money.”


So they brought Him a denarius.


And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”

And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”  (Matthew 22:17-21)

On wealth:


No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.- (Mathew 6:24)


On social justice for the poor:

 “From each according to his ability and to each according to his need.”


What? Too liberal, too compassionate, and too commie?

Well then, there’s this radical view:

 "All whose faith had drawn them together held everything in common: they would sell their property and possessions and make a general distribution as the need of each required."  (Acts 2:44-5) 

Verily I say unto thee, if Jesus were to come to America, he would be called a godless commie by the “real Americans” of the FOX(R) cult. If the Republicans were in power they'd want to toss the radical Leftist into Gitmo.


136 comments:

S.W. Anderson said...

Sad to say, if Jesus were to come to America, he'd probably get the N-word from some tea party types.

"I'm not sure what hope there can be for a nation that is a quarter delusional. The good news is their cult is shrinking."

Their cult is shrinking now, but there's a Freddy Kreuger quality to it. There was plenty of reason for voters to go with another Democrat in 2000, and based on record, ideas and ideals, Al Gore was lightyears ahead of George W. Bush. I painfully recall how that worked out.

There is hope, but Democrats had better keep their act together, their assertiveness well oiled and make sure their next presidential candidate is charismatic and compelling.

"Let’s look at the contrast between the two perspectives of a divided America. One is that of the so-called “conservative” radical Right, aka the Republican Party. The other is the opposite alternative, not necessarily that of the junior corporate Democratic Party."

I see a Democratic Party that has rediscovered some of its old spunk and can-do, must-do spirit. Democrats spent a long time in the wilderness. That does things to politicians. Democrats' old coalition came apart — and for a worthy cause they gave up the entire South — at the very time a new generation of voters and taxpayers came along who took all of Democrats' hard-won reforms and programs for granted, or saw them as hindrances. That generation of voters and taxpayers was made up of too many people who were, literally, fat, dumb and happy — and selfishly eager to turn things over to those who promised them the dubious blessings of small, weak government and trickle down. I painfully recall how that has worked out, too.

At a time when Democrats are making a better showing at sticking to their principles and facing down right-wing bullies, I think some attaboys will get us liberals farther than will giving them the back of the hand for past lack of purity and other failings.

No, Democrats aren't perfect. They never have been. I look on Roosevelt as one of the best national leaders any country ever had, but he wasn't perfect. He screwed up by cutting back spending and backing off some New Deal programs in 1936, and promptly saw economic growth and employment numbers backslide. And, he had an unfortunate way of turning a blind eye and deaf ear to calls for him to support civil rights — including the urging of his own wife. Was Roosevelt a closet conservative and a bigot? I don't think so. I think he was, like me, you and everyone else, less than perfect.

free0352 said...

Quit putting your religion on my body... And wallet. Fuck Ceaser.

free0352 said...

Oh, and as for FDR its kinda funny his worst act you forgot. He put people into concentration camps based on their race.

Dave Dubya said...

SW,
You're right about FDR. Despite his two major flaws of civil rights/internment and caving to Republicans on spending.

Free,
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of Bible thumping right wingers. You missed the point, I see.

Who’s putting religion on your body? You sound like a pregnant woman going in for her Republican mandated test, except she has the real objection and you don’t. Feeling thin-skinned today, are we?

Nobody forgot anything about FDR. He also jailed German Americans. Did you know that? I bet not, it changes your charge of simple racism, to over-caution for people with possible ties to Germany and Japan. It was wrong, and elements of racism and xenophobia were at work, but the mistakes were acknowledged. In case you forgot, we never hear the radical Right admit mistakes. They are perfect in every way and know everything, right?

Apology is a dirty word used against Obama for not apologizing.

“Fuck Caesar” says the Legionnaire forgetting who provides his pay and health care.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"What a country! Turns out half of the Republican voters STILL think ACORN stole the election for Obama, from the grave apparently."

It is difficult to find common cause with a party that attracts that kind of crazy.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Dave Dubya to Free0352: "...I was pointing out the hypocrisy of Bible thumping right wingers. You missed the point, I see.

Whoosh!

Right over his head.

(I guess he thought it was a drone...)

Dave Dubya said...

Shaw,
Finding common cause with crazy would just be more crazy. They need to be deprogrammed, outnumbered or marginalized, or the cult will drag us all down with them.

JG,
I was simply contrasting two perspectives, illustrating the great fundamentalist disconnect. I wonder why he didn't think I was putting the 47% crap on him...

free0352 said...

Yes we did right the wrong of internment camps. 3onald Reagan saw to it those who suffered FDRs grevious war crime got paid very jusifiable reparations.

As for your point, I got yours and you clearly mmissed mine. Religion has no place in politics or a logical debate... Period. Both you and those you claim to object to will use it to further your ends because like them you think ends justify the means. You are part of the same hypocrisy and ignorance and it is by those tools you both further your agenda which is really just the goal of governmental power instead of individual liberty.

T. Paine said...

"All whose faith had drawn them together held everything in common: they would sell their property and possessions and make a general distribution as the need of each required." (Acts 2:44-5)

Indeed! The premise here was that all of those Christians “CONTRIBUTED” according to their means and talents. In other words, they all worked TOGETHER. There are too many lazy parasites that don’t want to contribute today. They want the “evil rich” to take care of them. In fact they think the wealthy are morally obligated to take care of them.

While I have no problem helping out “the least of these”, I do have a problem helping out those that won’t work for their own betterment.
While the Bible calls us to help the poor, it is also clear that the poor must help themselves to the extent they are able. In 2 Thessalonians 3, St. Paul warns against idleness and says, “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” In 1 Timothy 5, Paul also declares, “Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” Even inclusion on the widows’ “list” (which entitled widows to receive aid from the church) was conditioned upon age and good conduct. Nowadays, we don’t take care of our extended families in need. That is the government’s job, so you progressives think. While many of you many have good intentions, you all foster this attitude of entitlement. You are making the problem worse, rather than better, accordingly. I would submit that it is often the entitlement-minded progressive that is obsessed with mammon – money that belongs to another.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Say, did FDR’s “grevious war crime” kill thousands of Americans like Bush’s war of choice based on false pretenses, or did FDR’s “grevious war crime” torture anybody quite like the war criminals at Abu Ghraib?

Religion has no place in politics or a logical debate. I’ll drink to that. How you presume such an odd train of fantasy that followed would be interesting.

TP,
Your interpretation omits the second part: “make a general distribution as the need of each required."

There are too many lazy parasites that don’t want to contribute today ...I do have a problem helping out those that won’t work for their own betterment.

You presume I want to support the lazy? Why don’t you understand the fact that liberals want jobs for everyone, not handouts? There are not enough jobs and not enough good jobs, so something else needs to be done. Tax cuts failed to bring jobs. The so-called “job creators” profit by off-shoring jobs. That doesn’t help either.

Your resentment for the minority who may abuse the system contributes to the decline of support for the truly needy. Republicans don’t care. The rich don’t care. This is why there are taxes for public safety nets. The Right presumes that liberals only want to take from the rich, without ever considering the fact we pay taxes too. My willingness to support public safety nets does not make me an “entitlement-minded progressive that is obsessed with mammon – money that belongs to another” in any way. It is not greed. Greed only applies to selfish inclinations, not in helping others. Your perception is twisted out of perspective there.

Your endless shilling for the wealthy to contribute less to society and resentment for public assistance can also be seen as an obsession with other people’s money. You act as if the poor are too rich and the rich are too poor.

The Right’s obsession with cutting safety nets in tough economic times, while cutting taxes for the rich during a time of war and debt is unwise, and counter-productive to our making progress in any way. Lower taxes for the rich do nothing to improve jobs, debt, or society at large, and increases the burdens on the middle class. That is simple arithmetic.

This has proven to be a failure for both our economy and public interest.

Tell me how this deserves your accusation that “you all foster this attitude of entitlement”. That is divisive FOX(R) political propaganda. It’s a sad thing to see Right Wing propaganda needing to indoctrinate Americans into false and antagonistic views of fellow Americans. I resent the fact you choose to ignore the reality that liberals want jobs over welfare. Wanting safety nets is not communism and it is not class warfare. Wanting the Bush tax cuts to expire for millionaires and billionaires is not communism and not class warfare. If you think otherwise you have no grounding in reality whatsoever.

I wish Right wingers could only seek to understand what liberals think, instead of embracing the negative depictions fed them by FOX(R) and other Right wing corporate media. You’ve made up your mind, and closed it to consideration of whatever seems counter to your beliefs.

I guess only liberals care to examine their beliefs about themselves and others.

T. Paine said...

Dubya: Your interpretation omits the second part: “make a general distribution as the need of each required."

Paine: I didn’t omit anything. That does NOTHING to change my original response. The early Christians under the leadership of the apostles each worked together and contributed what they were able to help each other. Heck, that is how the office of deacon was created so as to administer and distribute what was needed to the fellow Christians, and to receive what was given from excess from those Christians for such distribution to others. How is that the same thing as with the millions of able-bodied folks that find it better to live off of unemployment or the public safety net rather than try to find a job or improve their current lot? They aren’t looking to contribute and help others. They are looking only to their own welfare. Now, before you go off half-cocked, I am not talking about those that truly cannot provide for themselves. I have no problem helping them on a continuing basis.

Further, I don’t know if you want to support the lazy or not, but your support of progressivism ends up doing so by default. Look at all of the Occupy Wall Street rabble. Besides protesting capitalism, which ultimately makes far more people richer than any other economic system does, they also were screaming to have their student loans forgiven. I remember seeing some flipping idiot on TV whine about how expensive his student loan to Columbia was. Well WAHH!! Get a damned job and work your way through college like I and a lot of other responsible adults did. Stop complaining how unfair it is that you should actually have to abide by the contract you signed for the loan for your damned Ivy-league education. (An education that will no doubt educate this buffoon well past his intellectual capabilities.)

You claim you and other liberals want jobs for everyone. Good, so do conservatives. The difference is that you then go support hyper-regulatory practices that kill jobs. You champion tax hikes that stifle job creation and economic growth. Even your Dear Leader agreed awhile back that it was bad policy to raise taxes during a recession because it would further exacerbate the problem. Now that he has won reelection, to hell with common sense and what he once knew though.

You claim tax cuts failed to bring jobs. Not so. Remember the economic collapse after 9/11. Tax cuts helped restore the economy and bring jobs back. The problem was there was too damned much spending which ultimately brought about the current economic mess we are in now. Obama’s stimulus certainly did not create jobs, other than for a few connected crony capitalists like Solyndra. I read the other day that 70% of the jobs created in the last 6 months have all been in the government. Government jobs, while necessary in constitutionally limited cases, do NOT add to the economy. Indeed, those salaries have to be paid by the tax payer. They do nothing to produce economic growth.

T. Paine said...

Dubya: Your resentment for the minority who may abuse the system contributes to the decline of support for the truly needy.

Paine: The fact that you and the progressives seemingly don’t resent those taking advantage of the system is a huge part of the problem. Further, you all look to the government and indeed abrogate your own moral responsibilities to help the poor because you assume that is the government’s job. That only grows the government and exacerbates the situation.

If you think raising taxes on the rich will get them to invest more of their income into creating jobs, then I understand your problem. You are ignoring economics and history. I have yet to ever have been given a job by a poor man. Have you?

Dubya: Tell me how this deserves your accusation that “you all foster this attitude of entitlement”.

Paine: Dave, the fact of the matter is that it is an economic principle and certainty that whatever you subsidize, you will get more of that thing. That said, if you support candidates and legislation that builds up the entitlement culture, you will consequently only succeed in expanding the number of people dependent upon it. In summary, you end up fostering that attitude of entitlement. It wasn’t an accusation so much as an observation. The truth hurts, my friend. It hurts you, me, and those you purport to help. Perhaps you need to reexamine your beliefs once again, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,

I don’t know if you want to support the lazy or not, but your support of progressivism ends up doing so by default. The difference is that you then go support hyper-regulatory practices that kill jobs. You champion tax hikes that stifle job creation and economic growth. I have yet to ever have been given a job by a poor man.

Now there you go again. It is pure partisan diatribe you put out. You offer not one example that supports your accusations. It is your dogma speaking again. Remember our buddy HR admitted tax cuts did not stimulate job growth. You can’t accept the reality of this. Look at the Bush Administration’s job record for Pete’s sake. You act like he left us booming prosperity. Get real.

Your obsession with, and deep resentment for, what you perceive as “millions of able-bodied folks that find it better to live off of unemployment” is clear.

So where are the millions of jobs for them? China? India? You betcha. Your alleged “job creators” are nothing but exploitative profit takers, using cheap foreign labor as a wedge against American workers. If they hate Americans so much why don’t they move to China? Why do you revere these Robber Barons so much? Why do you want to give in to every one of their demands? Talk about “entitlement culture”.

whatever you subsidize, you will get more of that thing... Like off-shoring jobs, war on drugs, union busting, militarism, factory farms, Wall Street swindlers, etc?

Just where is the “entitlement culture” being built up? You have an entire Party of the Rich actively working to privatize, dismantle and defund safety nets. Clinton crowed about “welfare reform” as he and Republicans began taking safety nets apart.

I have yet to ever have been given a job by a poor man. Then to hell with them, eh? So basically, your major concern is the rich are too poor and the poor are too rich. Corporate profits are at record highs. The wealthy have never been richer or taxed less. The income equality gap is at levels higher than at the brink of the Great Depression. We all do better when we all do better. When only the rich do better, our country suffers.

I have yet to see a poor man offshore American jobs, start a war based on falsehoods, crash the economy, buy our politicians and subvert our democracy. Have you?

Money is not morality, Wealth is not virtue. Your reverence is misplaced and your resentments are out of proportion. You have chosen these beliefs, and they fit the exclusive agenda of the economic elites to a “tea”.

free0352 said...

They may not move to repressive china, but I've been to Lictenstine and Luxumberg many times and they are quite pictyresque little tax havens, not to mention Dubai and Hong Cong and a slew of tropical islands. Oh who will you tax when they get sick of paying for all those lazy, fat, so called poor?

free0352 said...

And you can bad mouth their lack of adherrance to your moral code all you like- I'm sure that won't keep them up nights inbetween skiing scessions in their alpine tax paradise. Then we middle class will be the rich. Can you afford half your salary in taxes? Better get ready to do just that. After all, once atlas shruggs you'll be the 1pec'er

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Oh who will you tax when they get sick of paying for all those lazy, fat, so called poor?"

How 'bout those lazy, fat, so-called "defenders of our country"?

Green Eagle said...

T. Paine: "The fact that you and the progressives seemingly don’t resent those taking advantage of the system is a huge part of the problem."

Those "taking advantage of the system?" Do you mean the greedy rich pigs who bought enough Congressmen and Senators to see to it that they were allowed to plunder the country into another depression? Is that who you are talking about? Or is is some pathetic schmuck who hid a couple of hundred dollars in income in order to stay on SSI? Which one of these represents a real threat to the rest of us?

Come on, man, try dealing with reality some time.

"If you think raising taxes on the rich will get them to invest more of their income into creating jobs, then I understand your problem. You are ignoring economics and history. I have yet to ever have been given a job by a poor man. Have you?"

Yes I have. I work in the manufacturing of a product- motion pictures. When poor and middle income people buy tickets to those movies, they give me a job. My continued employment depends on their purchase of tickets, not on the alleged largesse of some rich person.

And here's an idea: if rich people will not invest their (largely ill-gotten) gains in this country, let's just take the money away from them through taxes and spend it the way the rest of us want. You recognize no responsibility on their part to the rest of us; how long will the American people go on with the insanity of worrying about the welfare of the rich, like some love-sick teenager with a cheating partner?

Green Eagle said...

T. Paine: "The fact that you and the progressives seemingly don’t resent those taking advantage of the system is a huge part of the problem."

Those "taking advantage of the system?" Do you mean the greedy rich pigs who bought enough Congressmen and Senators to see to it that they were allowed to plunder the country into another depression? Is that who you are talking about? Or is is some pathetic schmuck who hid a couple of hundred dollars in income in order to stay on SSI? Which one of these represents a real threat to the rest of us?

Come on, man, try dealing with reality some time.

"If you think raising taxes on the rich will get them to invest more of their income into creating jobs, then I understand your problem. You are ignoring economics and history. I have yet to ever have been given a job by a poor man. Have you?"

Yes I have. I work in the manufacturing of a product- motion pictures. When poor and middle income people buy tickets to those movies, they give me a job. My continued employment depends on their purchase of tickets, not on the alleged largesse of some rich person.

And here's an idea: if rich people will not invest their (largely ill-gotten) gains in this country, let's just take the money away from them through taxes and spend it the way the rest of us want. You recognize no responsibility on their part to the rest of us; how long will the American people go on with the insanity of worrying about the welfare of the rich, like some love-sick teenager with a cheating partner?

free0352 said...

Wow an authentic hollywood liberal douche the right is always talking about. See, I guess the do exist. And its no secret you want to confiscate propery and wealth... Just like the communists before you. See Dave, this is why we call you little children that. Got it now?

And I love how Jeff just side steps the question because he has no answer. Because there is no answer. The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money and there is no way arround it.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "And I love how Jeff just side steps the question because he has no answer."

I didn't sidestep any issue. Just wanted to illustrate for you how you're always blaming our political and economic problems on the the poor.

"Because there is no answer."

Of course there is, but it doesn't lie with carrying it on the backs of the people who can least afford it.


"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money and there is no way arround [sic] it."

The problem with monopolistic and crony capitalism is eventually you run out of resources and you have to fight unjustified wars in order to steal them from others.

free0352 said...

Let's get it strait Jeff, I have always blamed economic woes on government. It hurts the poor and rich alike.

As for stealing other countries stuff, what stuff would that be? China, Norway and Germany got the Iraqi oil contracts, not the US. As for Afghanistan, what is there to steal... Dirt? They have a few mineral diposites, its nothing. Where is all this oil we steal? I'm curious?

But of course you'd bring that up, because it side tracks from having to explain who will pay the taxes when all those evil, greedy rich pack up and leave you holding the bag.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Someone sure snapped your garter, didn’t they?

authentic hollywood liberal douche = Authentic Right Wing hate.

He just told you, TP, and other true believers of the Luntz “Job Creators” dogma, that the poor and middle class are his job creators, not the Koch Brothers. Same as most jobs depend on an employed public, not the rich. They don’t give people money out of compassion. They make profit by the labor and patronage of others.

Deal with it. The public is the ultimate job creator and sustainer. That’s where wealth for the elites comes from. Turns out more and more wealth trickles up while workers get the shaft. Just like you Koch-suckers want.

you want to confiscate propery and wealth... Just like the communists

This is such classic, reactionary, lunatic drivel. The Big Red Book called the Constitution provides for taxes you call “confiscation”. The Big Red Book called the Constitution provides for regulation of commerce. We thank your corporate Big Red “Atlas” for confiscation of property by “eminent domain”.

Taxes have never been lower for the rich. Is that news to the Righties? Yet the hysterical shills for the economic elites whine and howl louder than ever. What a joke. It’s just like, “To hell with you, lowly working class neighbor, the Kocks need a few more billion dollars a lot more than you need unemployment compensation, Medicare and Social Security.”

eventually you run out of other people's money ... I don’t see any rich person running out of money, In fact they’re doing better than ever. Is that also news to Righties? No, they don’t see reality at all. That’s not what Rush and FOX(R) tell them.

Yes, the elites are wealthier than ever and pay lowest tax rates ever, in some cases, like inherited wealth, none at all. Oh, the suffering and torture under “socialism”. Big Money now has more political power than ever. Poor bastards, indeed.

Unlike fascists of the last century, today’s fascists see the wealthy as the Aryan super race, while the poor and middle class are the “untermensch”.

American workers are the ones losing money, thanks to corrupt politicians and a rigged system of corporatocracy.

The entire Right Wing madness is built on the koolade that the poor are too rich and the rich are too poor. That is the indoctrination that is toxic to our workers, society, freedom and economy.

The Right fails to see the short sightedness of Big Money greed. Sooner or later the working class and poor run out of money to trickle up to them.

Speaking of “other people’s money”, the government and the middle class cannot keep bailing out the failed Vulture Capitalists, and austerity for the public cannot sustain the upward distribution of wealth.

We all do better when we all do better. Call it socialism, communism, or whatever, although that would not be correct. America was better off with higher taxes on the rich. Now only the rich are better off.

Why is that picture so hard to see? Could it be because corporate media is busy showing us FOX(R) and Rush Limbaugh promoting only the interests of Big Money?

Nah.

T. Paine said...

Dubya, I wish you and the rest of the progressives would just quit with your class warfare crap that Reid, Pelosi, and Barack Insane Obama spew. We could tax all of those “evil rich” at 95% of their wealth and not even make a measurable dent in our national debt. The bottom line is that unless we stop spending money that we do NOT HAVE, our economy will collapse. Further, since the low-information and ideologically rigid left don’t see this, it is already too late. We will go over that fiscal cliff, just like that sack of excrement Obama wanted all along. He joyously gets to slash the military by draconian amounts and raise taxes on EVERYBODY. The beauty of it is that he will blame the Republicans for causing it and the statist media will parrot that bull crap back to you good progressives.

The fact that both parties aren’t serious about cutting spending means that America will go bankrupt. You all on the left seem to want to hasten this by your actions, if not always your empty rhetoric.

“…the government and the middle class cannot keep bailing out the failed Vulture Capitalists”

Do you mean like Solyndra, Fiskars, GM, Chrysler and any number of Democratic campaign contributors? You are right though; the government should not ever have bailed out ANY damned business. It is not the government’s place to rescue businesses with tax payer dollars because they mismanaged their businesses in the first place. Where the hell is that in the constitution? Perhaps in the “good and plenty” clause you all seem to have invented. You decry corporate welfare, and understandably so, but seem to have damned little problem when the money goes to “save jobs” for the union scum hierarchy that caused GM to become unprofitable in the first place.

I don’t hate the poor. Hell I am rapidly returning to being poor. I don’t loathe the rich either. I aspire to one day be rich. If I ever achieve that goal I will use my wealth to help other people become educated and self-sufficient instead of entitlement-minded leaches on what is left of our nation.

free0352 said...

Authentic Right Wing hate.

Yup, so what's your point?

Its so funny, its a simple question that you guys just can't answer.

Who will pay the taxes after the evil rich get fed up with you and move to the Cayman Islands, Lichtenstien, or Luxembourg and run their manufacturing or service business from there? Just answer the question Claire?

Oh I get it, you don't think they'll actually leave. Thats it right. Oh, but wait, ask France how trying to guilt them into staying is working out for them. Or maybe you think we can just go overseas and take it from them by force. Thats funny, who on Earth would pay for that invasion once they are gone? Who?

I know I'm asking the question, but I already know the answer... I'm just trying to see if any of you geniuses knows.

Well, I'm waiting. I suppose you can try to change the subject back to the Iraq war - and I get a good laugh out of it - but I'm not going to stop asking till you start answering.

okjimm said...

TPain.... "unless we stop spending money that we do NOT HAVE" gees, I guess that was the Bush Admin with there unlimited spending on useless wars. Course, when the time comes to pay the bill....why gosh...must have been the Dems.

free0352 said...

I guess that was the Bush Admin with there unlimited spending on useless wars.

National Debt on September 10th 2001

5,776,301,150,520.56

National debt the first day of Obama's Presidency

10,130,778,241,224.70

National debt today

16,577,233,876,580.17

Total spending on GWOT- is at most 4 trillion dollars.

4 trillion from 16.577 leaves over 12,000,000,000,000.00 dollars we would still owe had we never defended the country from Al'Queda.

I don't think the wars are the entire problem here. In order to pay this off in any reasonable time, we would have to tax out 3 trillion a year from a GDP of 15 trillion. That in addition to the 3 trillion we spend already. To pay this off, and keep spending like we are now, we would have to tax out of the economy over 50% of all the wealth this country produces per year. To do that, we would have to seize 100% of the wealthiest 1% of Americans. And of course, you can only do this one time.

So I guess we might have more of a spending problem than a tax problem eh?

T. Paine said...

okjimm, this is not a partisan issue for me. I am just as pissed at the big-government Republicans as I am at the Democrats for this spending. Stop obfuscating the problem, sir, by trying to say Bush did it first. Both parties should be thrown out for their complicity in the matter.

All are guilty. We don't fix the problem right now by fixing the blame. Not that anyone intends to ever fix the damned problem. You all would rather bury your heads in the sand and pretend our debt doesn't matter. You all think raising the taxes on the rich from 36 to 39% will solve all of the problem. Give me a damned break.

John Myste said...

Mr. Paine,

Read my lips. Raising taxes has always been done when needed, even by the Republicans who decry the approach.

No one is claiming that a tax hike will pay for the entire debt, so arguing that it will not is useless. You are debating yourself when you do this.

Far more important to America, is the deficit, not the debt, per se. Raising taxes will help with the deficit and right now it is a sticking point. If raising taxes were accepted, we could move on, and try to find other ways to help balance the budget.

Your concern seems to be that Obama wants to pay off the debt with the Rich man's money. That is a false assumption. Phew! That was close! It is a waste of your time to consider how impossible it is. Obama is not trying to pay off the debt at this moment, and would be foolish to do so. That is not going to happen in the near future and he has a real world to worry about.

So, Obama's short-term goal should not have anything to do with paying off the debt. However, he should be concerned with the budget deficit, which is a real world problem right now. To address this, he should raise taxes, see where were are from that, and continue to make other changes to that end, and the Tea Party House should introduce a bill that supports this short-term agenda.

Do this, and the tax question is behind us, and entitlement review is on the table with the full consent of everyone. No one has a real-world burden as a result and the sticking point is removed so we can make real progress. If you consider that too little progress because you have calculated the revenue it would generate and it is not enough to pay off the debt, worry not. We are not trying to pay off the debt right now, but rather to balance the budget. Trying to pay off the debt right now would be like trying to water the lawn while the house is on fire.

Goals Summary:

1. Avert the current made up crisis.

2. Balance the Budget

3. Plan for paying off the national debt.

4. Help the poor belabored rich man's burden.

Approach 1:

Tax hike.

At this point the progress obstacle is removed and we can solve the rest.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
class warfare crap Heh, heh.

Yeah, that really resonates. When the rich get richer from tax cuts and sweetheart deals from politicians they own, while they bust unions, off-shore jobs and undermine democracy, that’s not class warfare. Nope. So what is? Why suggesting their tax cuts expire, of course.

Restoring tax rates of 2000 is now communism. Sheesh!

You’re hysterical.

Stop pending money we do not have? That could plunge us into depression and complete dysfunction. If you cannot understand the fact that it is impossible, and unwise in many cases, to “stop spending”, then no reality based discussion can occur.

While I admit the debt has been blown up for political reasons by both parties, debt is still a provision under the Constitution. We will survive as long as we continue to pay for the debt. Too bad the rich don’t want to help pay what they did before the debt went crazy. And too bad that accountability is also held hostage by the Right come debt ceiling time. Ultimatums and political grandstanding accomplish nothing useful.

Government is about compromise. If you cannot understand that fact, then no reality based discussion can occur.

And this is why our government is dysfunctional. No negotiating and no compromise is the path to tyranny and failure.

You’re also hysterical in saying first: because they mismanaged their businesses then dump all the blame on “union scum hierarchy” workers. Man, that is some kind of hate you got there, Mein Herr. Unions are despised by dictators, communist tyrants, fascists....and perhaps most, by you guys.

At least Herr Frei admits to his Right Wing hatred.

”tax all of those “evil rich” at 95% of their wealth and not even make a measurable dent in our national debt.” And: ”You all think raising the taxes on the rich from 36 to 39% will solve all of the problem fall under the false “you think” category. You guys seriously have trouble comprehending us. Perhaps because you’re so convinced in your own certainly and beliefs you think you can ignore what we say. You’ve decided, as per FOX(R) and Limbaugh, what we think, and apparently refuse to consider further information or views.

Notice the “Right” framing of this issue. This argument suggests if one measure alone doesn’t fix a problem, it should be discarded. That is rigid nonsense. One measure will not fix everything, but combining it with others can. This obsessive defense of every Billionaire’s nickel is so narrow of version and outright foolish. Think for a second how many rich people have profited by our debt, by our legal system, by our economy, by our infrastructure, by our freedoms, by our people....

Why should they get tax cuts to expand our debt further? Huh? Why? Come on. Really, why?

I know you don’t hate the poor. You just want policies that treat them as if they are too rich, and the rich are too poor.

I aspire to one day be rich. Yes, of course you do. All of you Righties do. Mammon beckons. It’s essential for you to believe in your fantasy future fortunes in order to support the agenda of the rich today.

And if, not when, you get rich, what would you do? Why “educate” the poor workers into believing you need more tax cuts, of course. And some would be gullible enough to believe your tax cuts would help them, just like you and fellow true believers do today. History has a disappointing lesson for that believer.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Ha, a simple question, like who’s gonna hold our economic policy hostage to the interests of the elites?

I have the same respect for rich tax dodgers as you would for draft dodgers. Every rich traitor raiding his countries economy, only to abandon the people that helped build his wealth, should be tried for crimes and corruption. They employed their corrupt leverage into public policies in their favor. To flee taxes afterwards should be a crime. That is economic terrorism designed to hurt our nation. They should be treated as such.

Why should we trust those who love wealth more than America run our country?

And who’s so gullible to think war is not a permanent drain on the country? That share of the debt will only go up as long as the MIC and banks own congress.

Debt would best be paid by taxes for those who can most afford it and getting Americans back working in jobs that pay enough for them to pay taxes. Spending cuts and revenue growth are impossible if one uncompromising party, you know who, refuses to discuss how to do it, while insisting on coddling the rich.

Now there you go again, with the “You all think” nonsense. You have never been accurate whenever you have said “you think” to us liberals. We’ve discussed this phenomenon.

John,
Trying to pay off the debt right now would be like trying to water the lawn while the house is on fire.

I love that.

I’m not sure metaphors can be comprehended by those stuck at the “You didn’t build your business” linguistic level.

free0352 said...

Wow, just can't answer that question huh?

I have the same respect for rich tax dodgers as you would for draft dodgers

Well thats nice. It also doesn't matter. I don't imagine they care much how you feel about them.

Every rich traitor raiding his countries economy, only to abandon the people that helped build his wealth, should be tried for crimes and corruption. To flee taxes afterwards should be a crime.

Sometimes it is. So they'll pay them, and then leave to avoid ever paying them again.

I understand how you feel this way. The Soviet Block felt this way also and built this wall years back to stop people from leaving like that. Anyway, in this country it isn't illegal to move away to another one. You can do it at will, nothing there to stop you. The United States isn't a jail. You can come and go at will, and take your money and stuff with you.

So answer my question already. Who pays the taxes once they get sick of funding your Progressive policy and leave? Who will pay then?

And if you think they aren't already starting to leave, They are.

1780 people renounced their citizenship last year. Most of them were worth over a million dollars. Wave goodbye to your tax base Dave, say bye-bye. Just like the rich left Michigan and took their factories with them down south or to China or Mexico... they can easily do the same again.

After they do, who pays?




free0352 said...

Oh and for the record, I absolutely abhor the idea of military conscription and I'd be out there protesting with the hippies if it were to ever come back. Which it might, after the rich tax base leaves and we can no longer fund an all volunteer military.

But anyway, I don't have a problem with dodging the draft. I only would want to serve with a volunteer, a country who can't raise a volunteer Army doesn't deserve to win a war, and lastly I'm not a big fan of ripping children off the streets, giving them poor training and equipment and then feeding them into a meat grinder like we did in Vietnam.

So don't assume shit okay.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "So answer my question already. Who pays the taxes once they get sick of funding your Progressive policy and leave? Who will pay then?"

and...

"And if you think they aren't already starting to leave, They are."


So less than 1800 "entrepreneurs" renounce their U.S. citizenship, and you're screaming that the sky is falling? Which, incidentally, is based upon your linked article, that focused on a select few who already renounced their citizenship from their originating country. I certainly don't sense any loyalty on their part to anywhere -- except their bottom-line, that is.

Anyway, thanks for providing the linked article (from your article), which articulates exactly what I've been saying all along: Strip the defense budget to bare bones. It's the albatross around our neck.

free0352 said...

So less than 1800 "entrepreneurs" renounce their U.S. citizenship, and you're screaming that the sky is falling?

Haven't you said yourself taxes as of now were very low? Wait till they go up, especially if they go up as much as you folks want them to.

They damn sure left places like Michigan. Haven't you ever wondered why there aren't steel mills in Pittsburgh or as many car factories in Detroit or why all that stuff you buy says "Made in China"?

Strip the defense budget to bare bones.

Okay, lets cut it say... 90%. This year the defense budget was 680 billion dollars. Applying 90% of that to the budget deficit gives us 612 billion dollars to play with. Oh, and a world war. But hey whose counting. Our budget deficit this year 1.327 trillion dollars.

1,327 - 612 leaves us with a 715 billion dollar budget deficit. And thats after we cut the military to a point we can't really afford the National Guard anymore.

When the rich leave, who will pay to balance that as well as for the paid for spending? I'm just curious. I mean, we warned you folks they might take off during the 80s and 90s when George HW Bush and Bill Clinton were raising taxes and you said we were crazy.

Well, made in China homey.

Now we're warning you again. And not too surprisingly you aren't heeding it this time either. See, in 1950 you couldn't even have a factory in China let alone communicate with it instantly over the internet so Democrats could get away with huge tax rates.

But the times changed. Seems you are still living in the dark ages.

So anyway, when they leave, who pays?

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Anti-draft? Good for you. See, hippies were right about more than one thing. They were also right about the environment, corporate malfeasance, the MIC “establishment”, and right wing politicians suppressing our freedom.

We need more peace and love and less war and hate. Yeah, yeah, we know. War and hate is what you and Atlas thrive on.

Your question is loaded and hypothetical. Patriotic Americans will still pay taxes. Your arrogant Atlas master race elites can leave.

The absurdity of it all is THE RICH ARE PAYING LOWEST TAX RATES EVER. They won’t be happy until they bring back slavery and have dictatorial power over us.

Let the greedy traitors go and see who patronizes their business. Too bad Republicans have made it easy for secret foreign money to influence our elections. You want a dictatorship by the economic royalists. If the can’t have everything they want then to hell with America. Your heroes are assholes. Facebook Boy can leave, He’s produced nothing. Some “Atlas”.

There’s your answer.

Your turn.

Who’s holding our economic, environment, safety nets, and tax policy hostage to the interests of the elites?

Why should we trust those assholes who love wealth more than America run our country?

The answer to the first question is in the second question. Answer the second one, please.

JG,

Free the “Neocon libertarian” won’t like what is said at the link you provided.
And Washington no longer can afford to play at empire, subsidizing rich allies and remaking failed states. Military spending must be cut. Substantially.
Real, inflation-adjusted outlays on “defense” nearly doubled over the last decade. President Barack Obama has continued to increase military expenditures. Even if Congress adopts Defense Secretary William Gates’ proposed five-year “cut” of $78 billion, military spending will increase. Secretary Gates only wants to slow the rise.
Rather, the most effective tools are improved intelligence, Special Forces, international cooperation, and restrained intervention.

free0352 said...

Your arrogant Atlas master race elites can leave.

Okay, so when they do who pays?

The absurdity of it all is THE RICH ARE PAYING LOWEST TAX RATES EVER

Yes, and they pay half. They don't want to pay more than that. They left Greece, are leaving France, and they'll do it here too on a national level same way they did it on a state level. Then what will you do?

Let the greedy traitors go and see who patronizes their business

China and India are the worlds two largest emerging markets with a combined population many magnitudes more than this country. Thats billions of potential customers. So my guess would be them. Further, I highly doubt the citizens of our fine nation will lose their taste for inexpensive goods. So good luck with that.

If you want to see what the end state of your little idea is, go check out Detroit. No tax base. It left. City on the verge of bankruptcy.

Who’s holding our economic, environment, safety nets, and tax policy hostage to the interests of the elites?

They think you Democrats are.

Why should we trust those assholes who love wealth more than America run our country?

Well, if they leave they won't be running America. They'll be enjoying their profits in Luxembourg, Hong Kong, or the Cayman Islands. Maybe that's your plan, I don't know. We'll be free of the rich elites, yay! America will be one big Detroit!

I mean hay, Detroit doesn't have even one Wallmart in it. I know that has to make you happy.

So anyway, after they leave, who pays?








Dave Dubya said...

Free,

Wow. Stuck on that one are you? You won’t take an answer? And you don’t give them very well, either, I’m afraid. You gave non-answers to my question, you know. Instead you tried to wrap it into your fantasy question.

And I was nice enough to provide an honest answer to your fantasy question. One more time.

Who pays? Listen. Some millionaires love America and will pay. So will the rest of us who love America. That’s who.

Atlas can go.

Although many will not.. They got it soft here, and own the media and government.

You think the rich are superior to the rest of us?

You believe they should have their way with, and own, everything?

You think we poor untermensch cannot survive without our masters?

Nonsense.

We would all be better off without these jerks. We would all be better off without their antagonism toward our country, toward our middle class and poor, toward our prosperity, and our very democracy. Your Ayn Rand-roid Master Race philosophy is showing.

What if your assholes, who don’t give a damn about America, really left? Guess what? They would be replaced, Your Supermen, or Atlas, or whatever saints in the cult of Big Money you revere are replaceable. Believe it or not, some of us regular folk are smart enough to cover whatever vital skills, or criminal racketeering expertise, they take with them.

By the way, Detroit was done in by anti-union Republicans and Dixiecrat corpo-dems who brought in foreign-owned car companies. Remember?

Now the poor Nissan workers are seeing their retirement benefits evaporate. No more pensions for them. They have the same problem as US makers. Health care costs for employees and retirees are taking a toll on all of them. Imagine, if instead of billions of health care dollars being siphoned into companies and people who provide zero health care, we could have a real cure for that problem. Can’t do that now, can we? Praise Atlas!

Let’s leave your silly Randroid fantasy for a minute. The people I refer to in the question are real. And they are here now, Hellooo, are you?

Why should we trust those assholes who love wealth more than America run our country?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "They left Greece, are leaving France, and they'll do it here too on a national level same way they did it on a state level. Then what will you do?"

and...

"Well, if they leave they won't be running America. They'll be enjoying their profits in Luxembourg, Hong Kong, or the Cayman Islands."

I would think, you being the free-wheeling libertarian that you claim to be, you wouldn't have needed to even ask the question.

Haven't you always contended that the "invisible hand of competition" would take care of everything? So, wouldn't the vacuum left by the expatriates only, by your own definition, open opportunities for everyone remaining?


"We'll be free of the rich elites, yay!"

Yes, and we'll hopefully have free and legitimate elections, with corporate money no longer muddying the water.


"So anyway, after they leave, who pays?"

Your question continues to be a moot point. Why? Because they're not paying now.

You really are a tool of the elite, aren't you? You are on more levels than I ever imagined.

free0352 said...

So, wouldn't the vacuum left by the expatriates only, by your own definition, open opportunities for everyone remaining?

What vacuum? They'd still be in business. Their factories are in China, India and in Mexico, and they themselves would move to tax havens.

All that would be removed would be their potential tax revenue. When manufacturing left Michigan, they didn't stop selling cars.

They just stopped paying Michigan taxes in Michigan.

Yes, and we'll hopefully have free and legitimate elections, with corporate money no longer muddying the water.

Maybe, and one of the first things they'll have to decide is who is going to pay the taxes once the rich have fled. Also of note, in places where this has already happened, Detroit being a glaring example - elections and politicians are far more corrupt than they were before.

Why? Because they're not paying now.

They certainly are. In fact, the richest 1% of Americans 36.7% of federal taxes.

United States tax revenue is currently at record highs. Government is taking more money in now than at any other time in American history, and the rich bear most of that. Lets look just at income tax, one of many taxes paid by those evil rich. In 2011 the government took in a total of 2.2 trillion in taxation, 42% of which was from the income tax, 40% was from payroll tax, 9% was from corporate tax, and the rest was other forms of taxation.

So in other words, if the evil rich 1% left this country would lose nearly 325 billion. But some will stay you say. Well, true. Some would. Lets say only half leave. Thats still a 160 billion a year loss.

And that is just income tax. What that would do across the tax spectrum is harder to figure out, and more damaging.

So my question is, who makes up that difference?







Dave Dubya said...

Free:
We've indulged your Randroid fantasy. Now let’s go back to reality, if only for a moment.

Why should we trust those assholes, who love wealth more than America, run our country? What good are they for our economy, future, jobs, public interest, and environment?

Almost everything they do, every political position they take, and their entire Republican Party agenda, also basically true for libertarians, has wealth preservation and expansion for the elites as its priority. To hell with the working class and poor.

Tell us how this neo-feudalism is the best path for our nation.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "So my question is, who makes up that difference?"

It's been said many times and in many ways, marginal tax rates on the wealthy were at all-time highs in the '50s and into the '60s. Nobody was scampering for cover back then.

As far as who makes up the difference? There are a variety of ways and methods that the corporate media never mentions, but the possibilities are not too hard to understand.

I've already mentioned slashing defense. Another boondoggle that needs to be taken out of the equation is the massively bloated "security apparatus" that's emerged since 2001. Dismantle and embalm it. That's a quick start.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Dave Dubya to Free0352: "Tell us how this neo-feudalism is the best path for our nation."

Dave, he'll never be truthful to you, or even himself, because he's one of those who have been indoctrinated by the elitist message of fear and loathing for everything and anything different than the status quo of preserving the wealth of a select minority. He's still a believer in the mythical idea of trickle-down.

In a word, he's a tool; a puppet fastened to the strings of obedience and compliance, no matter how intolerable or antithetical to his own sense of fairness and reasonableness.

Dave Dubya said...

JG,
Indeed. He’s defending the elites and MIC more than our freedom and way of life, for sure.

And that brings me back to his claim of supporting draft dodgers. He wasn’t; there of course, but if his John Bircher self were alive back in the day, he would most certainly have condemned the “commie sympathizer traitors” for not going to Vietnam. Of that I have no doubt.

When my brother came home from Vietnam, he told me he soon figured out he wasn’t defending our freedom and way of life. He saw the “contractors” and war profiteering first hand. He saw the cold indifference to the suffering peasants along with the prospering corrupt thugs of the puppet government.

At least Free’s no chickenhawk like so many of the elites he supports. But he sure as hell would have been a supporter of the war, if for no other reason than to just to see those North Vietnamese peasant soldiers and VC slaughtered. He would be all about the “Only good commie is a dead commie” mentality

free0352 said...

Why should we trust those assholes, who love wealth more than America, run our country? What good are they for our economy, future, jobs, public interest, and environment?

Well if you are asking me what I think, I think no one is good to run our country, everyone who is rich, poor, in the middle, black, white, man, woman will be bad because I think government is bad for most things, and at best a necessary evil. Poor people running government is bad, rich people running government is bad.

I want a government that is so small, even though it will be run by bad people it won't be able to do much damage. That's pretty much the fundamental crux of libertarianism. Government will always be bad, no matter who runs it.

As for getting richer, who cares? When the rich get richer it isn't because they have taken from the poor. I would ask you why the poor running the government, enviously redistributing wealth is any better than the rich using government for crony capitalism. Both are equally bad. Hence my desire to neuter them both.

But I still must ask, who pays when the rich leave. I don't think you even think that can happen. I think you are using denial as a strategy. That seldom works out well.

free0352 said...

he would most certainly have condemned the “commie sympathizer traitors” for not going to Vietnam

I doubt that, since I could care less if people went to Afghanistan or Iraq now. I don't see why I would have seen it any different then.

Though I admit, I was very offended by people like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, who voted to send us into those places and then denied us funding and tried to end our mission once we got there for political purposes.

But I never begrudge anyone for not serving in the military. I was in the service for 12 years, 9 months and 0 days. Zero of those days did I want to serve with someone who did not want to be there. Being a professional Soldier is not for everyone.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,

Thank you for letting us know what you think. Government is bad. And everyone, rich or poor, will be bad. Bad, bad, all bad.

why the poor running the government, enviously redistributing wealth is any better than the rich using government for crony capitalism.

Good question. Do we all do better when the rich do better? Or, do we all do better when we all do better?


who pays when the rich leave Now, what did I say about your Randroid Fayntasy?

When the rich leave...Hmm...I wonder when that will be,... before or after the Rapture?

Either way, we’ll have to take our chances.

free0352 said...

Do we all do better when the rich do better? Or, do we all do better when we all do better?

If you redistribute from the rich, then the rich aren't doing better. They lost money, so they are doing worse.

I don't like systems where someone takes from someone and gives to someone else. That doesn't create wealth or better social services.

I wonder when that will be

Hmmm, they pay between 40% and 50% all taxes together now, so I imagine somewhere around 75% they are going to walk.

Thats what drove them out of France.

free0352 said...

As for government, I don't like it when people are forced to do things. I don't like it when people are forced to serve in the military, I don't like it when people are forced to join unions, I don't like it when people are forced to pay into social security, I don't like it when people are forced to buy insurance. I don't like it when government decides this or that food is bad for you. I don't like it when government decides a drug is bad for you. I don't like it when government takes money from people without their consent. I don't like it when it tells the states how to spend their money. I don't like it when they tell the people how to spend their money. I don't want them to have anything to do with what anyone does with their own property or money.

So what should government be doing?

Thats simple. First it should be protecting the rights outlined in the Constitution. That means courts, from the SCOTUS on down to your local magistrate. People need a peaceful way to settle disputes and adjudicate things. Further, they need courts to enforce contracts. Those courts need teeth, that means the US Marshals office on down to your country Sheriff's Department.

Next the government should protect people from the worlds predatory humans. That means your local cop, the FBI for things across state lines, and a military. You can throw fireman into that if you want, though that is not nor should it be a Federal function.

It should be leaving states alone. If you want a progressive government in California thats up to Californians. If I want a libertarian government in my state, thats up to my state. The federal government should always be libertarian in nature, and allow citizens to craft the states the way they want to live in them, bound only by the Bill Of Rights which the federal government has a duty to enforce.

In short, a nation of laws, beyond that... I'm not interested in anything else.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "I want a government that is so small, even though it will be run by bad people it won't be able to do much damage."

I agree, but concurrently I would demand a government that's not beholden to corporate influence. Consequently, I want corporations that are small, not corporations that are deemed "too big to fail". I want corporations that have a limited existence and their corporate charters are revoked. I don't live into perpetuity; neither should corporations. I don't want corporations that have limited liability. I don't, and neither should they.


"As for getting richer, who cares? When the rich get richer it isn't because they have taken from the poor."

I disagree. Let's use, as only one example, how Shell Oil has exploited and taken from the Nigerian people.

Obviously, this is a point we fundamentally disagree upon. Whenever I see someone becoming extravagantly rich, it's more times than not because they've taken from someone else.


"I would ask you why the poor running the government..."

Huh? When, and where, do "the poor" run any government?


"But I still must ask, who pays when the rich leave. I don't think you even think that can happen."

You keep asking, and I keep giving you answers. Here, let me add to my list. Let's tax capital gains at a rate equal to income tax (the traditional tax on "labor"). Shouldn't capital be treated as fairly (or unfairly) as labor? Here's another: let's tax each securities transaction.

No, I don't think they'll leave. Some may, but most will not. If there is a large exodus, it won't be because of higher tax rates. More likely they're "gettin' outta Dodge" before the economy collapses. They know whose necks will be hanging from the gallows first.


"I was in the service for 12 years, 9 months and 0 days."

"Was"? You're no longer in the military? Who are you working for now? Homeland Security? Are you a professional troll?


"I don't like systems where someone takes from someone and gives to someone else."

Do you mean like Shell Oil takes from the poor Nigerian people?


"Hmmm, they pay between 40% and 50% all taxes together now..."

And their small percentage makes between 50% and 60% of the nation's income. They should be taxed proportionally.


"As for government, I don't like it when people are forced to do things."

Is that why, more times than not, you sit in the conservative's camp? How ironic.


"So what should government be doing? Thats simple. First it should be protecting the rights outlined in the Constitution."

Like the rights of human beings, and not the rights of fictitious persons such as corporations?


"Next the government should protect people from the worlds predatory humans."

Do you mean those who lead the most predatory private institutions in the world...like Goldman Sachs, CitiGroup, Shell Oil, ExxonMobile, etc., etc., etc.

Do you mean those predators?


"In short, a nation of laws, beyond that... I'm not interested in anything else."

Isn't that exactly what out leaders say we are...a nation based upon "the rule of law"? Unfortunately, the laws only apply to the poor and those without means, while the rich and powerful always get a pass.

That's the essence of crony capitalism. Ironically, it's the same with communism. I don't want to have anything to do with either.

Dave Dubya said...


A sentiment that I think we all share:

The major problem, one of the major problems, for there are several, with governing people is that of who you get to do it. Or, rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize: it is a well known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made president should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem. - Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hickers Guide to the Galaxy

free0352 said...

I agree, but concurrently I would demand a government that's not beholden to corporate influence. Consequently, I want corporations that are small, not corporations that are deemed "too big to fail"

I for one, don't like it either. I don't like bail outs, and I certainly don't think any company is too big to fail. In fact, companies failing is a good thing, because that means competition is working.

Obviously, this is a point we fundamentally disagree upon.

Thats correct. Its idiotic to think the United States became the richest country in the world by stealing from farmers in Angola.

Do you mean those predators?

No. I mean people using violence.

To summarize: it is a well known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.

That is an absolutely true statement. Hence, why I don't like a powerful government, why I don't want the government to provide much of anything, and why I don't like most laws in general.


Jefferson's Guardian said...

Freeo352: "Its idiotic to think the United States became the richest country in the world by stealing from farmers in Angola."

Oh really? (How 'bout Nigeria?) Anyway, it's obvious you're avoiding the topic, as you always do when it comes to the "external costs" of business that get neatly swept under the rug and forgotten about -- especially by conservations, and in particular by libertarians.

I suppose nobody in America got rich by stealing property, and resources, from the native and indigenous people occupying this continent, either, huh?

free0352 said...

I suppose nobody in America got rich by stealing property, and resources, from the native and indigenous people occupying this continent, either, huh?

Absolutely they did, and if this were 1787 I'd be siding with George Washington that we needed to try and assimilate the native population. In fact, historically Abraham Lincoln - first Republican President - strenuously objected to Andrew Jackson's - Democrat - policy of Indian removal.

We haven't stolen a damn thing in over a century. Its ancient history, and if I were you I wouldn't bring it up because it makes your party look pretty bad.

free0352 said...

But hey, if it makes you feel better Jeff, you can always go find an Indian and given him all your stuff to clear your conscience.

Oh, didn't think so.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "We haven't stolen a damn thing in over a century. Its ancient history..."

Yeah, we've substituted more appealing and less offensive euphemisms, like "occupation", but we still steal their valuable resources for pennies on the dollar -- like in Nigeria.


"...and if I were you I wouldn't bring it up because it makes your party look pretty bad."

You really have a terrible memory. I've told you countless times that I'm not a Democrat, but for some reason it never sinks in. I can only surmise that it's caused by shell-shock. You really ought to have it checked out.

free0352 said...

You're trying to use your Nigerian link as an example but if fails. Firstly, your link is about a pollution case, no theft was even mentioned. Second, the case is before a court of law. Firstly, Shell could not be liable, and if they are secondly they will have to pay damages. Your own link doesn't support your contention. In fact, the US government isn't occupying Nigeria, nor is anyone else.

You really have a terrible memory. I've told you countless times that I'm not a Democrat

Oh I know what you've said. Its what you do that counts.

Who did you vote for last month? If the answer is Barack Obama, you're a Democrat.



free0352 said...

Oh, and I'm still gonna ask. In light of France's newest round of tax hikes (which are similar to the ones you've suggested we enact here many, many times) the evil rich are leaving France in droves.

Who do you think in France will be paying the taxes once the rich finish leaving France?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "...your link is about a pollution case, no theft was even mentioned."

Once a person's way of life is taken away -- no matter the method -- it's "stealing". Shell Oil has created devastation in Nigeria for decades. It's what this country would turn into if regulations were done away with and your ridiculous notion of laissez-faire, "do anything you want style capitalism", were allowed to exist.


"...Shell could not be liable, and if they are secondly they will have to pay damages."

Shell (like other Big Oil giants, in other countries, worldwide) has been polluting and destroying the Nigerian farmlands for decades. This isn't a one-time or isolated incident. This just happens to be the first time Nigerian farmers have been able to take it to court.


"Who did you vote for last month?"

It wasn't Barack Obama. But, at least, I voted.

Who did you vote for?

free0352 said...

It's what this country would turn into if regulations were done away with and your ridiculous notion of laissez-faire

In a laissez-faire system, all regulatory means are accomplished via tort law. And it works. Which do you think deters someone more, a relatively small fine (for often pointless infractions of stupid rules) or a class action settlement costing potentially billions of dollars?

And if the best you can do to prove America amassed the largest collection of wealth ever in human history was to pollute a few Nigerian farms, well... thats pretty laughable. Thats chump change to an oil company.

It wasn't Barack Obama. But, at least, I voted.

Well good for you. I would have loved to vote for Gary Johnson, but that wasn't an option for me since Republicans cried and whined about him being a former primary candidate for them and got him thrown off the Michigan Ballot. Instead of the pathetic response writing him in would be, I decided along with many others to boycott the election, to show the GOP what happens when they play these kinds of games. They ended up getting fewer registered Republican votes than they did in 2008. And those folks didn't run out and vote for Obama, they stayed home. Maybe that will wake the RNC up, perhaps it won't. But I won't reward that party for dirty tricks like that no matter how much I can't stand big-eared Barry in office.

So anyway, which Frenchmen do you think will be paying for all that European welfare state stuff now that the rich are jumping the French ship?




Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Which do you think deters someone more, a relatively small fine (for often pointless infractions of stupid rules) or a class action settlement costing potentially billions of dollars?"

I'll concede that the current regulatory system is weak and ineffective, but that's because the regulations are written by those with ties to the industry (lobbyists). The system's corrupt as the the day is long.

As far as class action suits, they're also ineffective within the current structure. A cadre of top-notch corporate lawyers always make sure of that.

As previously mentioned, the only answer is to revert back to late eighteenth/early nineteenth century law which limited corporate existence. Back then, once a corporate charter was established it had a limited life of usually 20 to 30 years before it was revoked. Corporations were not permitted to exist into perpetuity. After the corporation's stated goals were accomplished, or even if they weren't, the charter was revoked and the organization was dismantled.


"And if the best you can do to prove America amassed the largest collection of wealth ever in human history was to pollute a few Nigerian farms, well... thats pretty laughable."

Shell and Nigeria is just one example of many, and you know this. Big Oil, as just one industry, has been polluting wherever they explore, produce or refine. That's a fact. Because of regulations in this country, the pollution isn't anything compared to what goes on in third-world nations. You know this also, being the renown world traveler that you are.

Again, what position does libertarianism take on this? Just let them pollute? That seems to be the case.


"...which Frenchmen do you think will be paying for all that European welfare state stuff now that the rich are jumping the French ship?"

I'm inclined to believe the Frenchmen "jumping ship" aren't concerned so much with losing their Francs as they are with losing their heads. When the collapse occurs, as I already mentioned, the rich know who's going to be the first on everybody's chopping block.

free0352 said...

Back then, once a corporate charter was established it had a limited life of usually 20 to 30 years

Really, so you wouldn't mind the end of Ford, General Motors, General Electric, Apple, IBM, Intel, CNN, the NY Times... oh where do I go on? I'm sure that will do wonders for the US economy.

Because of regulations in this country, the pollution isn't anything compared to what goes on in third-world nations

The pollution you see in the 3rd world has nothing to do with industry, but a lack of sanitation. Its open sewers and no trash disposal and people living on top of each other who don't know how to take a bath and think their left hand is toilet paper. The third world is dirty because the people there chose to be dirty because they are largely ignorant, simple people who don't understand the effects of dumping your sewage upstream from where you get your drinking water, or that using your front yard as a garbage dump for 40 years creates problems. And yes, when they do open of factories there (and trust me most are locally owned who sell to larger companies over seas) they could care less about what they put in the water or in the soil. As well, there are a lot of wars in the 3rd world, and they create more disease, starvation and death. Africa has the most fertile soil on Earth, there is famine there because the people living their burn their own crops in petty wars over slights that happened before their grandparents were born. America did not make these people the poor, simple savages they are. They chose it.

Just let them pollute?

Course not. We happen to think that Tort law is a far better system than big government. And it is. Regulations should not exist for their own sake as they do now, to give a government regulator a job. They should exist to keep people from hurting one another. Tort law does this without punishing people who haven't hurt anyone. This prevents incidents like when the movie theater gets shut down because the hand rail on the steps is an inch too high.

as I already mentioned, the rich know who's going to be the first on everybody's chopping block.

Maybe. But they are gone. Who pays the taxes after they leave?







Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "...oh where do I go on? I'm sure that will do wonders for the US economy."

It doesn't really matter, does it? Pick your poison. (By the way, with world economic collapse a distinct possibility in the not-too-distant future, these organizations will dry up and wither away by default.)


"The pollution you see in the 3rd world has nothing to do with industry..."

Nothing? Yeah, sure...

Do you say the same about traditionally known "second-world" nations, such as China?


"America did not make these people the poor, simple savages they are. They chose it."

Not only are you the supreme tool, you're also exceedingly naive. Suggestion: Read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins. A review:

"Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly-paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization."

You're obviously in need of understanding of how the world really works. Pick up a copy through Amazon and enlighten yourself.


"Regulations should not exist for their own sake as they do now, to give a government regulator a job. They should exist to keep people from hurting one another."

As already mentioned, regulations have no bite because they're written by lobbyists on behalf of industry. Severing the umbilical cord between government and industry is what's needed -- not more tort law, which will easily favor those with deeper pockets (i.e., corporations and/or the wealthy).

Tort law requires that three positions must be established in every tort action. First, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant was under a legal duty to act in a particular fashion. Second, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant breached this duty by failing to conform his or her behavior accordingly. Last, the plaintiff must prove that he suffered injury or loss as a direct result of the defendant's breach.

Without regulatory agencies designed to establish these minimum requirements from the onset, litigation by individuals (or even class-action) would, by default, be futile.


"Who pays the taxes after [the rich French] leave?"

Your assumption, that they're going to leave in significant numbers, is baseless. Therefore, it serves no purpose to respond. From what I've read, the small number who've considered emigration, are heading to London. The German austerity measures are what's driving them away. As already mentioned, they're more interested in keeping their heads; not losing their Euros. They also covet the investment property that's available in England. It has as good a ROI as gold. Their greed is what's beckoning them. As Dave has already explicitly detailed, let 'em go.

free0352 said...

It doesn't really matter, does it? Pick your poison

Alright. I pick the Western Civilization, modern market economy poison over the poverty ridden, starvation alternative.

with world economic collapse a distinct possibility in the not-too-distant future, these organizations will dry up and wither away by default

Have you been listening to Glen Beck? No, I don't want to buy gold. Next you'll tell me how the builderburg group and the NWO are going to enslave us all. Lord, I know some Michigan Militia dudes you should go bowling with - since you sound just alike.

regulations have no bite because they're written by lobbyists on behalf of industry

Okay, lets have a weaker government then, that won't help lobbyists. I know you think you can craft some kind of utopia - but you can't. Certain people will always find power. I like those people not to have armies and guns.

. Severing the umbilical cord between government and industry is what's needed

Can't be done. Well I guess it can, by having NO MORE regulations.

which will easily favor those with deeper pockets

Yeah, ask John Edwards about that. He made millions off it... and his clients got pretty nice settlement checks to boot.

First, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant was under a legal duty to act in a particular fashion. Second, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant breached this duty by failing to conform his or her behavior accordingly. Last, the plaintiff must prove that he suffered injury or loss as a direct result of the defendant's breach.

That is not hard to do. People do it every day, and there are an army of lawyers looking to get their 33 and a third more than happy to represent them.

Therefore, it serves no purpose to respond.

They are leaving. ITs tanked the Paris housing market already.

Their greed is what's beckoning them

Maybe, but it did do some beckoning didn't it? We live in a globalized world, and in that world you live. They can run factories from china just as easily from the Caymans as from here. All you have to give them is the incentive. You want proof? Proof. We're a nation of people who left their home countries to get away from economic oppression.













Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "I pick the Western Civilization, modern market economy poison..."

Of course you do. Tools always do.

Personally, I choose democracy over the corporate-state.


"No, I don't want to buy gold."

It's your choice. Hey, why don't to buy some long-term treasury bonds? They'll be as worthless as the U.S. Dollar soon enough.


"...lets have a weaker government..."

I agree. Dismantle DoD.


"I know you think you can craft some kind of utopia - but you can't."

You do? How can you know anything about me other than what I've written here or on my own blog? Is it "faith" which allows this?


"Certain people will always find power. I like those people not to have armies and guns."

I know what you mean. Let's disassemble the military-corporate-complex.


"Yeah, ask John Edwards about that. He made millions off it..."

While the corporate lawyers shanghaied billions, and have literally gotten away with murder. Just ask the families of the victims of Bhopal.


"That is not hard to do. People do it every day..."

Sure, even under a paltry as-it-is regulatory system. Without any standards, whosoever (which is what you propose), the advantage would always go to the polluters and cancer-creators. Why wouldn't it? There wouldn't be any benchmarks of acceptability (or non-acceptability).


You want proof? Proof. We're a nation of people who left their home countries to get away from economic oppression.

It's the people's democracy that's oppressed in this country -- not corporate economic opportunities. Corporations are enjoying a heyday.

As Dave mentioned, and as I agree, let the bastards go.

free0352 said...

Okay you let them go. After that who pays the taxes?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "After [they go] who pays the taxes?"

Since you tend to have a proclivity to continuously repeat yourself, I'll play the game too.

Your assumption, that they're going to leave in significant numbers, is baseless.

free0352 said...

Your assumption, that they're going to leave in significant numbers, is baseless.

No it isn't. They certainly moved the factories over seas, why not themselves?


Its funny how you run these people through the mud, then you expect the most altruistic behavior from them. It doesn't seem a very consistent line of thinking. You folks are constantly bleating how terrible, selfish, and destructive these people are. You vote to take more of their money away. You have to think eventually they'll get sick of it. And its not as if they don't have countries like Lichtenstien, Luxembourg, the Caymans, Dubai and Hong Cong that will welcome them with open arms. And if you think their tax breaks are large here, go there. They pay almost NO taxes. It seems a disconnect to accuse these people of limitless greed and then assume they will not act on it.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0252: "Its funny how you run these people through the mud..."

That's because we're not their tools, like you are. You hold them high on a pedestal, and bow and genuflect to their every action.

That's what tools do.


"...then you expect the most altruistic behavior from them."

Altruistic? Hardly. Just know they're not going anywhere. They know what side of the bread their bread is buttered.


"You have to think eventually they'll get sick of it."

Eventually? Yeah, that's possible. But we're already sick of the greedy narcissistic sociopaths, and we're coming to get 'em. The tide is turning. They've seen their best days.

"And its not as if they don't have countries like Lichtenstien [sic], Luxembourg, the Caymans, Dubai and Hong Cong [sic] that will welcome them with open arms. And if you think their tax breaks are large here, go there. They pay almost NO taxes."

If the deal is that sweet, than it sounds like they should already be there.

But of course they're not. They're not going anywhere. (Unless, as I've already pointed out, they're "gettin' out while the gettin' is good". They don't want to lose their heads. You know what I mean?)

taospeaks said...

Dave,

Now we have Tagg Romney (where in the world do they get these names?) stating that his father "had no desire" to run for President!

He has been running for how long?

How much of his own money did he pour into it?

...all of which he did because to make his wife and son happy!

"Tagg Romney told The Globe that he and his mother, Ann, had to talk Mitt into running. “He wanted to be President less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire to … run,” Tagg Romney said."

I am not real sure how many people Tagg has met in his life who want to be President but I think Tagg should be happy to know that his Daddy fooled most of the country!

Dave Dubya said...

Tao,
Yes, the rich man's burden. Mitt didn't want so much to run for, rather than he wanted to buy, the White House. The elites do seem to have a sense of entitlement to our government.

Also, I don't believe a word from their aristocratic silver-spooned mouths. I think that's just "loser talk".

free0352 said...

it sounds like they should already be there.

They are. Manufacturing moved to China, now I'm just waiting for them to leave too. Your strategy seems to be denial. That you can soak them and soak them and they'll just take it and come back for more. I doubt that.

Dave Dubya said...

“Soak them”?? “Them” who?

“Them” who pay the lowest taxes in memory, suck up sweetheart tax credits, corporate welfare, and crony giveaways, while making record profits? Them who dump our workers after they built their company, for cheap foreign labor? Them who buy our politicians and write trade agreements and public policy to suit their bottom line?

Them?....Soaked? The poor, poor bastards. No wonder they need guys like you to stick up for them...while the soak America.

Look around this country and see who’s really getting soaked.

And it aint prosperity that “Them” are letting “trickle down” on us, that’s for sure.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Your strategy seems to be denial. That you can soak them and soak them and they'll just take it and come back for more."

I can't help but repeat exactly what Dave Dubya said: "Soak Them"? You've got to be kidding. Right?

I always considered you their tool -- due to utter foolishness and ignorance. Now I see you're actually their water boy.

free0352 said...

They pay 50% now, and we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Just because you aren't soaking them as bad today as say, back when FDR was purposing 99% tax rates makes no difference.

Back then they couldn't leave and keep their businesses. Today they can. You do realize that its not about what you think is enough taxes that provides incentive, its what they think.

Now I'm perfectly aware you could care a lick what the top whatever percent of income earners feels about how much they pay the government. So my question is, if your policy drives them out -and I think it will because it is in their interest to go- who will make up the difference? Who will pay?

Dave Dubya said...

Note the wording: we have the highest corporate tax rate

Yes, but who actually pays that amount? Very few. Some of “them” pay nothing at all. And who really pays 50%? Not “Them”.

So who pays after the rapture?

free0352 said...

Who really pays half? People making over 250,000 dollars. When you add up local, state and federal taxes. Who pays that high corporate tax rate? Mostly small business, who don't have an army of tax lawyers to shelter their money.

You can think they don't pay enough all you wish. They think they pay too much, and when you raise their rates it provides incentives to leave. Who pays after that? The rapture isn't going to happen, higher tax rates are.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Who pays that high corporate tax rate? Mostly small business."

Nobody's sticking a gun to their heads and making them incorporate.

And who, besides you, claims it's "high"?


"You can think they don't pay enough all you wish. They think they pay too much, and when you raise their rates it provides incentives to leave."

Yeah, I'm sure there's going to be a groundswell of small business owners scampering to ports around the country vying to secure safe passage to China, Vietnam, India, and parts of the Middle East. I'm sure they can't wait to get there.

As it's been said, many times and many ways...let 'em go.

free0352 said...

Nobody's sticking a gun to their heads and making them incorporate.

Really? What do you do for a living exactly? Are you business retarded?

And who, besides you, claims it's "high"?

Well, it is the highest rate on Earth. Couldn't we be like, number 50 instead of the highest?

Yeah, I'm sure there's going to be a groundswell of small business owners scampering to ports around the country vying to secure safe passage to China, Vietnam, India, and parts of the Middle East

Yes, I'd say so. After all, if your small business does most of its manufacturing in say- China or India or Mexico (as many do now, in fact most do now) or if you own a franchise business its a simple matter to move and keep 40% or more of your money over night. And of course no one would live in China or India or Mexico. They manufacture there now and don't live there. No, they'd live in tax havens like Luxembourg, or Lichtenstien or the Camens or Dubai. I've been to all of those places save the Camens which I hear are quite nice. They are beautiful places. And places where someone worth five million dollars can enjoy their profits and not have to share them very much. That starts looking pretty attractive once you start paying more than half of what you make and get nearly nothing back for it.

So I think, like what is happening in France, that a lot of top earners are going to take advantage of a life of alpine skiing or kicking back on the beaches of the Caymens or Dubai and keep more of their money.

You call them greedy and in the same breath say they'd never do such a thing. Really? You think?

Oh and my favorite is when you exclaim "Fine! Let them go."

Okay, thats cool. But who pays after they leave?





free0352 said...

I get these odd flashbacks from the politics of yore.

Conservatives: "If you enact all these crazy healthcare requirements on employers they will outsource all the jobs."

Liberals: "Nah, never happen. And if they do, screw em' anyway!"

Well, it happened. And the results suck.

Now in 2012 conservatives warned you

Conservatives: "If you raise top rates too high, the top earners will leave the country for foreign tax havens."

Liberals: "Nah, never happen. And if they do leave, screw 'em anyway!"

You know what they say about those who refuse to learn from history right?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Really?

Yes, really.

Again, I'll ask. Who's forcing them to incorporate?


"Well, it is the highest rate on Earth."

Well, almost, but not quite. The United Arab Emirates comes in at a hefty 55%, while Japan follows with a 40.69% tax rate. The United States, at 40%, takes the bronze.

Interestingly, during the "aughts", countries world-wide dropped their corporate rates precipitously -- while the United States raised its. Why is that? I'd say it's all part of the plan described in Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine. We're on the "hit list". It's part of the premeditated and deliberate dismantling of the middle- and working-classes in this country.

You know this. That's why you sit on this blog and attempt to propagate. You're a paid troll of the worst kind. As I said, you're hired to carry their water.


"You call them greedy and in the same breath say they'd never do such a thing. Really? You think?"

Yes, greedy -- and have no balls. Like I said, let 'em leave. (But they won't, except if they feel it'll save their necks -- which it won't.)


"Oh and my favorite is when you exclaim 'Fine! Let them go.' Okay, thats cool. But who pays after they leave?"

Like it's been all along, we do -- but less the corporate giveaways, subsidies, and catering to the Military-Corporate-Complex. Once the real leeches are out of the way, we can establish an equitable and fair system.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Conservatives: 'If you enact all these crazy healthcare requirements on employers they will outsource all the jobs.'"

Yeah, like outsourcing just started in 2008. You're funny. (Well, not really. Pathetic is a more descriptive term.)

If I recall, liberals (not Democrats) claimed all along that the new healthcare law was a big payday for the insurance industry. Guess you missed all of those remarks.


"Conservatives: 'If you raise top rates too high, the top earners will leave the country for foreign tax havens.'"

Capital moves at the speed of light, and doesn't care whether it's in New York or The Caymans. Moving families is another thing.

I don't see any mass exodus. Unless, as previously mentioned (at least a dozen times), socially, economically, and politically things spiral out of control. Then they'll be scampering like the roaches that they are. By then, though, where are they going to go? Where will it be safe, after the United States (and Israel) have made everywhere on this planet unsafe?

Let 'em fucking go.


"You know what they say about those who refuse to learn from history right?

Projecting, again. Dave's devoted numerous posts to this very topic. You guys are the masters of the technique.

Spoken like the true fascist that you are.

free0352 said...

Yeah, like outsourcing just started in 2008

You thought I was talking about ObamaCare. Oh how cute. I was talking about The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, and The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

These two acts more than any, resulted in the outsourcing trend. However, ObamaCare will increase that trend.

claimed all along that the new healthcare law was a big payday for the insurance industry

True. Nothing like a law that mandates you buy a service. You are aware however, that there are other business in the country outside the health insurance industry and those businesses will suffer under ObamaCare, and that as a result they will only employ part time employees to avoid the 30 hour threshold, outsource more jobs, and scale back growth as a result right?

Capital moves at the speed of light, and doesn't care whether it's in New York or The Caymans. Moving families is another thing.

Would you make your children learn German for a million dollars or more a year? Yeah, you know the answer.

Let 'em fucking go.

Okay. Who pays after they're gone.

after the United States (and Israel) have made everywhere on this planet unsafe?

Oh yes its THE JOOOOOOOS and their evil banking conspiracy. That's it. Been doing some reading have we Jeff.







free0352 said...

You're a paid troll of the worst kind

Really? When do my checks come? I'd love to get paid for this shit.

and have no balls

Funny thing about millions of dollars for the individual and billions for a class... it makes you grow balls... quick.

Funny how your entire scheme depends on rich people not having the balls to save money.

Once the real leeches are out of the way, we can establish an equitable and fair system.

Yes, one where everyone is equally and equitably poor. Yay!



free0352 said...

Oh, and the UAE only taxes its own oil company. There are zero taxes on income in the UAE Dave, but you're right, the US has only the second highest corporate income tax on the planet. My bad. Oh, ever heard of the Japanese lost decade?

Guess not.

Doooooomed to repeat it Jeff. Dooomed.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "These two acts [ERISA & HIPAA] more than any, resulted in the outsourcing trend."

Okay, I'm biting. How? (I can't wait for this...)


"...there are other business in the country outside the health insurance industry and those businesses will suffer under ObamaCare, and that as a result they will only employ part time employees to avoid the 30 hour threshold..."

So, the 30-hour work-week just recently came into vogue? Gimme a break.

Pray tell, what "other businesses in the country" will "suffer"?


"Would you make your children learn German for a million dollars or more a year?"

I suppose even treason and espionage, if the price is right, deserve no blame. So much for patriotism in your eyes, huh troll?

"Okay. Who pays after they're gone."

I believe I answered this adequately and truthfully. Just in case you missed it:

"Like it's been all along, we do -- but less the corporate giveaways, subsidies, and catering to the Military-Corporate-Complex. Once the real leeches are out of the way, we can establish an equitable and fair system."

If you believe the libertarian gibberish you spout, the "invisible hand" will take care of everything once the parasites flee.


"Really? When do my checks come? I'd love to get paid for this shit."

You recently claimed to be a desk-jockey in the military, pushing papers. That's when you got paid. You were doing this on government time, weren't you? I accused you of this previously and you never denied it.

But even more recently you made reference that you got out (of the military,) and that's when I accused you of being with Homeland Security (which you also never denied).


"Funny how your entire scheme depends on rich people not having the balls to save money."

Scheme?

Never claimed they didn't save money; claimed they didn't have the balls to banish themselves and their families to unknown and foreign lands just to save a few bucks -- only their necks.


"Yes, one where everyone is equally and equitably poor."

Instead of one where most are unequally and inequitably poor -- like we've seen happening for at least the last thirty years?


"...the UAE only taxes its own oil company."

Yeah, where 85% of it's GDP comes from oil exports.

Maybe we ought to tax our own. (See, I'm nibbling away at our "debt crisis" little by little.)


"There are zero taxes on income in the UAE Dave..."

Dave never made any claim about taxes in the U.A.E., one way or the other. Shell-shock affecting your memory again, dough-boy?

By the way, the U.A.E. has their own debt worries. Don't think I'd want to go there. Who do you think the population will point to first when the whole thing goes into the crapper? Can you spell American expatriates? Do you think the cavalry's going to come to their rescue? If you do, you've lost your mind (but not before the expats will have lost their heads).

Jefferson's Guardian said...

By the way, you (Free0352) harped about the lack of "white papers" during a previous thread (on a previous post).

This one white enough for you?

Ya' know, the official storyline is crumbling around them. A majority of the world sees through it, and the tide is slowly turning in this country. This may prove to be the straw that ultimately breaks the empire's back.

free0352 said...

Dave never made any claim about taxes in the U.A.E.

My bad, I meant you.

The United Arab Emirates comes in at a hefty 55%,

All their funding comes from a state oil company. We don't have as much oil, but we do have coal. Lets start mining it like crazy and use coal gas to power our automobiles. I'm down.

Okay, I'm biting. How?

They make it prohibitively expensive to hire American workers for many jobs. Compliance with the regulations in these bills add billion in overhead. Its cheaper to hire Chinese slave laborers and absorb the considerable shipping costs.

So, the 30-hour work-week just recently came into vogue? Gimme a break.

Its going to get a lot more in vogue. Less income for American workers, yay ObamaCare! Well, at least with their reduced income they will be forced to buy expensive insurance they don't need. This was a great idea!

Pray tell, what "other businesses in the country" will "suffer"?

All of them, however businesses who aren't drug companies or health insurance companies won't offset the loss with greater sales.

"Like it's been all along, we do -- but less the corporate giveaways, subsidies, and catering to the Military-Corporate-Complex. Once the real leeches are out of the way, we can establish an equitable and fair system."

Yes, one where everyone is fairly and equitably poor. I remember.

Instead of one where most are unequally and inequitably poor -- like we've seen happening for at least the last thirty years?

Americans are the richest people on the planet. But... they're losing ground every year. Gee, I'm sure sending their bosses over seas along with the jobs will help them out so much. That way they can not only lose jobs but get to make up the lost tax revenue (about half of it) in their spare time. This is looking more and more like a really awesome idea of your's Jeff.

free0352 said...

If you believe the libertarian gibberish you spout, the "invisible hand" will take care of everything once the parasites flee

Yes it will. It will take care for China, India, and tax haven countries. They will compete better and we will lose. They will see untold wealth. We will grow more impoverished. But like Detroit we won't have many Wallmarts. So I guess that will make you liberals happy.

claimed they didn't have the balls to banish themselves and their families to unknown and foreign lands just to save a few bucks -- only their necks.

Your scheme is your ideas on tax policy. And as for moving over seas, there is nothing like millions of more dollars a year in your bank account to provide incentive. Ever been to the alps? I used to live there. Its really nice. Its one of the most beautiful places in the world. Dubai isn't bad if you like desert, and while I've never been to the Caymans, I have been to the Caribbean a time or two. Yeah, lets just say its easy on the eyes, and your wallet.

As for people moving to untold lands for economic opportunity, um... our entire country are the children of people who did just that. I think they'd do it again for the right price. And I don't think calling them unpatriotic, leeching, parasites when they pay 53% of this countries taxes will make them too sorry about hitting the road.

By the way, the U.A.E. has their own debt worries. Don't think I'd want to go there. Who do you think the population will point to first when the whole thing goes into the crapper?

Who will they turn to? Well, if I had to guess, I'd say Eric Prince. You know, my old boss of yesteryear (Well, more like my boss's, boss's boss) and founder of Black Water? He lives in the UAE and has built for the rich over yonder quite a force capable of killing.... well whatever. The royal family of the UAE aren't stupid, and they weren't about to get Arab Springed and let their radicals take over. They hired the worlds best military contractor and built an army of foreign mercs who are paid very well and will slaughter anyone over there who even tries to overthrow the government and monarchy.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Freeo352: "Lets start mining it like crazy and use coal gas to power our automobiles. I'm down."

Sure. Let's add more methane and carbon monoxide to the already over-heated atmosphere. Real smart.

You would be down...


"They make it prohibitively expensive to hire American workers for many jobs."

There's no substantiated proof of this. (Simply because you're making it up.) It's not prohibitively expensive to hire American workers. That's just the excuse they use for their own greed.


"Its cheaper to hire Chinese slave laborers..."

You're right about this. Slavery is always cheaper in the short run.


"[The 30-hour workweek is] going to get a lot more in vogue."

Agreed. More dismantling of the middle-class -- courtesy of the corporate-state.


"Americans are the richest people on the planet. But... they're losing ground every year."

Agreed, courtesy of the corporate-state -- and the tools, like you, who are complicit in the shakedown.


"Your scheme is your ideas on tax policy."

They (the elitist 2%) are paying the lowest highest marginal rate in several generations, and you want them to pay less.

I've already told you how to balance the budget, but let's extrapolate on my thought about eliminating the Military-Corporate Complex for a moment. If we could stop being the world's military force, and the world's largest supplier of weaponry, all these places you've mentioned (The U.A.E., Hong Kong, The Caymans, etc., etc.) all of a sudden wouldn't hold the appeal to the rich any longer. Right now, we're subsidizing other countries' security, at the expense of our own people -- for the benefit of a few.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?


"I don't think calling them unpatriotic, leeching, parasites when they pay 53% of this countries taxes will make them too sorry about hitting the road.

They take more than they give, like around 80% of the wealth that's created. They steal our democratic processes, and they subvert and deny justice. As I've said, let 'em go. They're not wanted here.


"They hired the worlds best military contractor and built an army of foreign mercs who are paid very well and will slaughter anyone over there who even tries to overthrow the government and monarchy."

You're envious and wish you could join them, don't you? What's keeping you here? The pay is "very" good, so why aren't you packing up the family and heading out? Surely you'd force your kids to learn Arabic for such grand remuneration. Wouldn't you?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Hey Free0352, what did you think of the white paper I left for you? C'mon, no sarcastic and impotent comment? You're slippin'. (Or, more likely, you know the information is spot-on.)

Also, you haven't confirmed (or denied) your association with Homeland Security. What do they pay you to troll lefty blog sites? Is it full-time with benefits?

And once you answer that, why did Homeland Security just buy well over 750 million rounds of high-power ammunition -- much of it hollow-point? (Which, by the way, was banned by the Hague Convention of 1899 for use in international warfare.)

Expecting the Mexicans to raid the border...or worse, the drunken Canadians?

Just askin'...

Dave Dubya said...

"If you believe the libertarian gibberish you spout, the "invisible hand" will take care of everything once the parasites flee"

Yes it will. It will take care for China, India, and tax haven countries. They will compete better and we will lose. They will see untold wealth. We will grow more impoverished.

Ah, the workers paradise... If we were only more like China and India.

free0352 said...

Sure. Let's add more methane and carbon monoxide to the already over-heated atmosphere. Real smart.

Petrol supply can't last forever. In the really real world cars won't run on unicorns and fairy dust. Coal gassification can power the future just as well as petrol can.

There's no substantiated proof of this. (Simply because you're making it up.) It's not prohibitively expensive to hire American workers. That's just the excuse they use for their own greed

I would call all those MADE IN CHINA stamps on all the stuffy you buy that once upon a time was made here pretty substantial proof. Its simple: Americans became expensive to employ, namely because of healthcare insurance costs mandated by US law. So instead of paying Americans, business decided to pay Chinese people, who are basically slaves and work cheap. For the average Chinese, the standard of healthcare is REEDUCATION CAMP and getting worked to death.

Slavery is always cheaper in the short run

No, no - its cheaper in the long run too. Immoral and wrong, but cheap.

Agreed. More dismantling of the middle-class -- courtesy of the corporate-state.

Nope. Courtesy of ObamaCare.

- and the tools, like you, who are complicit in the shakedown.

More like accepting of the reality that people are always going to do what is in their own best interest. Nobody really lives their lives for the benefit of other people beyond their family. If its cheap to have jobs here, business will have jobs here. If its easy to save money living in the Caymans, they'll do that too. If it means they can drive a car, people will laugh while the polar bears drown.

They (the elitist 2%) are paying the lowest highest marginal rate in several generations, and you want them to pay less

In yesteryear business didn't have the option of outsourcing to China and running their business via internet from a tax haven. Today they do. This isn't 1915. This is 2013. Deal with it.

If we could stop being the world's military force, and the world's largest supplier of weaponry, all these places you've mentioned (The U.A.E., Hong Kong, The Caymans, etc., etc.) all of a sudden wouldn't hold the appeal to the rich any longer.

First of all lets set aside for a moment that getting rid of the military and the industry that supplies it, is like firing all the police and security guards who protect the biggest bank on the planet. The results are predictable.

Frankly, I don't think you know what percentage defense contractors are of GDP. Or that most of what they produce is made right here in the good old USA thanks to the Berry Amendment which mandates this and hence will never be outsourced. Most of what is made in China and India and the rest of Asia has nothing to do with defense contractors. Mostly its cars, flat screens, motorcycles, blenders, light bulbs, microwave ovens, picture frames, couches, chairs, beds, blankets, clothing, the computer you're reading this on, the cable that connects it to the wall socket, the wall socket, the wiring that socket plugs into, the insulation in the wire, pencils, pens, paper, fake christmas trees, candles, DVDs, your toaster, and on, and on, and on. Look around, almost everything you see was made in China. Most of what you see on an Army base was made in America in accordance with Federal Law.

free0352 said...

Ah but one could say we wouldn't need so many taxes if we didn't hav a military. Well, I suppose being dead is rather tax free. My guess is, were we to disband our military it wouldn't be simply the rich trying to get out of America. The poor would be abandoning ship as well before the missiles hit.

Right now, we're subsidizing other countries' security, at the expense of our own

Very true. Being the world police isn't cheap. But we took on that role after WWII and we're stuck with it. The only other country capable of doing the job is China. You know, the one with all the slaves.

Not a good idea.

They take more than they give, like around 80% of the wealth that's created.

If they created the wealth I'd say they deserve 100%. They did it. Yup, alone.

They're not wanted here

Well, I think they are getting the picture. Who pays after they are gone? Oh right, no one does. We'll just disband the military and then more unicorns and fairies will bring us mana from heaven. I forgot.

You're envious and wish you could join them, don't you?

I could couldn't I? Nah, don't wana. Oppressing people ain't my gig.

The pay is "very" good, so why aren't you packing up the family and heading out?

Morally object to the job.

Surely you'd force your kids to learn Arabic for such grand remuneration. Wouldn't you?

Firstly, my kid is learning Arabic in high school already along with the 40% of her fellow students who are of Middle Eastern decent and speak it fluently. I have no problem with this, as knowing that language is an insta-job when her goal of being a concert musician ends up where it will likely end up. I hope she makes it into an orchestra don't get me wrong, but lets be real- that line of work requires a backup plan.

As for me, I like this place. I fought for it, five times. But hey, I'm not stupid. If I figure out tomorrow how to make five million dollars I don't want to share one penny with you Jeff because I don't know you and I don't care about you - and that goes for anyone else I'm not blood related to. Pay total strangers half my earnings? Fuck that! I'm taking my ass to Lichtenstein and chilling on the interest in between runs on the slopes.

I love America sure. Too bad if I'm successful it would try to drive me away by taking half my profits. And the minute they quit doing that, I'd move right back, because this is a great country - but our government and our greedy welfare class suck balls.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "Petrol supply can't last forever."

Agreed. Neither can coal.


"In the really real world cars won't run on unicorns and fairy dust."

Agreed. They'll run on hydrogen -- if we're still around.


"Its simple: Americans became expensive to employ, namely because of healthcare insurance costs mandated by US law."

No, it's because of greed. Pure and simple.

(Plus, it's because slave-labor has relatively no cost. You've said this yourself.)


"Nope. [The dismantling of the middle-class is] [c]ourtesy of ObamaCare."

The dismantling began decades ago. You know this. "ObamaCare" came into effect, when...?


"Nobody really lives their lives for the benefit of other people beyond their family."

And that will be what ultimately brings about the demise of our species.

But that's not a reason to not try.

(It's called greed. It's one of the seven deadly sins. Even early man recognized its detriment to humanity -- unlike Adam Smith, and your heroine, Ayn Rand.)


"Deal with it."

I do -- but you don't. You continue to suck the teat of the government with one hand, while discrediting and vilifying it with the other. You're hypocritical in not only thought, but also your actions. If you were a real man, you'd be slogging it out in the private sector. But, you're not.


"The results are predictable."

Never made a claim for disbandment; just reduce the size and scope to about a fifteenth of what it is.

More savings!


"I don't think you know what percentage defense contractors are of GDP."

I have a good idea, but I'm sure you're getting ready to tell me.


"Or that most of what they produce is made right here in the good old USA thanks to the Berry Amendment which mandates this and hence will never be outsourced. Most of what is made in China and India and the rest of Asia has nothing to do with defense contractors."

I know that too. I also know that they're basically the only products we manufacture in this country anymore -- products designed for mass destruction; harming, maiming, and killing. We make nothing for the betterment of humankind.

Of course, I know, you're okay with this. I expect this from you.


"Look around, almost everything you see was made in China."

You're preachin' to the choir.


"Being the world police isn't cheap. But we took on that role after WWII and we're stuck with it."

No, the elite and those in power covet the role. It's what allows expansionism and the ability to manipulate world commerce and its resources.

But, that role is coming to an end. All empires do.


"If they created the wealth I'd say they deserve 100%. They did it. Yup, alone."

Alone, huh? (See answer above.)


"Oppressing people ain't my gig."

As a tool for the elite, that's exactly your thing!


"Morally object to the job."

Gee, that's not the impression you've left me. Always thought you got a woody killing and maiming others. Found religion over the holidays?


"I hope she makes it into an orchestra..."

I wish the best for your daughter. I hope she reaches her dreams.

(I thought you didn't believe in "hope". You really did find religion, didn't you? ;-)


"As for me, I like this place."

I don't like what it has become. We're in for tumultuous and chaotic times ahead -- possibly the worst we've ever experienced as a nation. The crisis has begun.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Oh, missed this one...

Free0352: "...but our government and our greedy welfare class suck balls."

Surely you speak of the corporatists, the monopolists, and the oligarchs -- such as Wall Street.

Who else could you be referencing?

By the way, what did you think of the white paper? Have you read it?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352, there was a $16 trillion bailout during the Bush years, and continuing during the current administration, by the Federal Reserve which comes at an expense the taxpayers must pay -- that's you and me -- but was never authorized by Congress (or shown "on the books")

According to the GAO audit, $16.1 trillion in secret loans were made by the Federal Reserve between December 1, 2007 and July 21, 2010. The following list of firms and the amount of money that they received was taken directly from this GAO audit report:

Citigroup -- $2.513 trillion
Morgan Stanley -- $2.041 trillion
Merrill Lynch -- $1.949 trillion
Bank of America -- $1.344 trillion
Barclays PLC -- $868 billion
Bear Sterns -- $853 billion
Goldman Sachs -- $814 billion
Royal Bank of Scotland -- $541 billion
JP Morgan Chase -- $391 billion
Deutsche Bank -- $354 billion
UBS -- $287 billion
Credit Suisse -- $262 billion
Lehman Brothers -- $183 billion
Bank of Scotland -- $181 billion
BNP Paribas -- $175 billion
Wells Fargo -- $159 billion
Dexia -- $159 billion
Wachovia -- $142 billion
Dresdner Bank -- $135 billion
Societe Generale -- $124 billion
"All Other Borrowers" -- $2.639 trillion

This report was made available to all the members of Congress, but the vast majority of them have been totally silent about it.

Surely, this is the "greedy welfare class" of which you speak.

free0352 said...

Agreed. Neither can coal

Yes, but coal gives us another 100 years to invent that efficient hydrogen engine.

No, it's because of greed. Pure and simple.

Its cost efficiency. If that's your definition of greed, so be it. I bet you try to save money in your life too, but I'm sure you don't think of yourself as greedy.

it's because slave-labor has relatively no cost

True, but shipping costs are very expensive. China has shit natural resources, so raw materials have to be shipped there, transported to various factories, and then the products have to be shipped to a port, transported over the largest Ocean on the planet, and then trucked all over the continent to your local store. This is very, very expensive. However, its still cheaper than paying for government mandated health insurance on full time employees. Government was trying to help the working man by forcing employers to pay part of their insurance. They helped that working man right out of a job.

And that will be what ultimately brings about the demise of our species

Personal interest BUILT civilization. Not collectivist altruism.

I trust a man operating on his interest. Its the altruist I fear.

(It's called greed. It's one of the seven deadly sins

What you call greed, I call a virtue. What is truly greedy, is taking the product of one man for the benefit of another against the producer's will. Its legalized theft. I'm pretty sure there was a commandment against coveting your neighbor's shit too. And taking it without permission.

We make nothing for the betterment of humankind.

Uh-huh. Riiiight. I guess when my wife hand builds neural probes used in brain surgery under a microscope she's killing children in Angola.

More savings!

World war isn't cheap. And its the result of your child like idea of national defense. We're the world police. Somebody has to do it.

But, that role is coming to an end. All empires do.

Maybe. You'll surely hasten that by crippling the American economy with progressive's cockamamie, hair brained ideas on economics. Bad econ policy has brought more empires to their knees than all other factors combined.

If you were a real man, you'd be slogging it out in the private sector

Oh I am. I retired December 13th. Now I break strikes for a living and disrupt union organization attempts on my customer's property. I just got done throwing some Teamsters off a job site. Its awesome to put in their place union thugs who are used to beating others into submission. I love this fucking job, the looks on their faces when instead of some nerdy business guy they instead are dealing with me is priceless. They run, like women, when just before they were so tough. Cowards. I guess that makes me a real "tool of the elite" now huh? Fuck yes, and its fun. Oh, and the money is great. Having grown up raised by a Teamster's business agent I know all their little tricks and I stop them cold and that creates VALUE which I now sell. I haven't had this much fun in years. Be that as it may, I don't regret my time in the military. It was a fun 15 years. And it wasn't hypocrisy. Defense is a legitimate function of government. Being a union shill is not. God I love it that Michigan is a right to work state now.

I'm going to make some real money.


































free0352 said...

, what did you think of the white paper? Have you read it?

Nope, have not. Probably won't. Ain't got the time lately. As for Bush's secret loans I'm not tracking it, but as he was indeed a remorseless shill for government give-away's to crony capitalist scum bags like Goldman Sachs I wouldn't doubt it for a minute. TARP certainly wasn't a secret.

In 2008 I quit the Republican Party over it. I hate welfare. Especially when it goes to millionaires.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "...but coal gives us another 100 years to invent that efficient hydrogen engine."

It's already here
. A hydrogen-based economy can be a reality...now, unfortunately the monolithic and monopolistic practices of Big Oil suppress it.

That's where your complicity as a tool was a major factor. If the Empire wasn't in position to provide cover for Big Oil's stealing and extraction of others' oil resources, we'd be in a hydrogen-based economy right now. No, we would have been years ago.


"If that's your definition of greed, so be it."

Yes, it is.


"I bet you try to save money in your life too, but I'm sure you don't think of yourself as greedy."

I don't make enough to be greedy. I survive and hang-on by a thread -- just as millions of Americans are doing today.


"...its still cheaper than paying for government mandated health insurance on full time employees. Government was trying to help the working man by forcing employers to pay part of their insurance."

It's considered the cost of living in society. What would be your proposed solution to providing healthcare?


"Personal interest BUILT civilization. Not collectivist altruism"

That's a fine philosophical topic that's surely open to debate. The only comment I'll make at this time is when your "personal interest" invades the rights of my "personal interest", it ceases to build anything except discord and dissension. In the majority of cases, nothing is "built"; it's taken. Examples are overwhelmingly abundant throughout history.


"Uh-huh. Riiiight. I guess when my wife hand builds neural probes used in brain surgery under a microscope she's killing children in Angola."

I'm speaking in terms of trends and generalities; you speak in terms of specifics. Absolutely, there are exceptions -- but they're insignificant in the scheme of things. I could play the same game with you when you deride, for example, the function and nobility of taxes. Yours is not a valid argument. But, then, I've come to expect this from you.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: "We're the world police. Somebody has to do it."

Not when the cost is greater than the gain -- and the cost has driven us to the brink.


"Bad econ policy has brought more empires to their knees than all other factors combined."

Yes, agreed, the economic policies of military expansionism to the detriment of domestic tranquility.


"Now I break strikes for a living and disrupt union organization attempts on my customer's property. I just got done throwing some Teamsters off a job site."

So you're now a Pinkerton head-knocker. I can tell you're proud of yourself. Guess you've had a change of heart since your last comment that you "morally object to the job."


"I guess that makes me a real 'tool of the elite' now huh? Fuck yes, and its fun."

Well, not any more or any less -- just in a different capacity. Once a tool, always a tool, I guess.


"I don't regret my time in the military. It was a fun 15 years. And it wasn't hypocrisy. Defense is a legitimate function of government."

Sure, it's a "legitimate function of government" when the government is providing defense. But this government has made policy of creating war for the illegitimate gain of its corporate puppeteers. It has been this way for decades. Your life in today's military has been squandered to benefit a select few. You've prostituted yourself for your corporate pimps of the Fortune 500.

Congratulations!

(I guess there are some prostitutes who enjoy their work.)


"Nope, have not [read the white paper]. Probably won't. Ain't got the time lately."

Of course you don't have time. The crime of the century was committed and the perpetrators were never prosecuted. Of course you don't have time to learn the facts. The reality setting in would only affirm the truth that your military life has been a waste.

Congratulations again!

free0352 said...

I survive and hang-on by a thread

And your soul strategy to improve your situation is to use government power to take from others and give to you. And they're greedy... How bout this, instead of expecting others to take care of you, you should do what I did. Get a better fucking job and quit crying about your life. I was unemployed a sum total of 36 hours and I got one. My wife even less. What the hell is your excuse?

What would be your proposed solution to providing healthcare?

We had a situation that wasn't broken, then government broke it. Now it wants to break it even more to fix what it has broken. Hmmmm, how about get government out of healthcare for starters.

The only comment I'll make at this time is when your "personal interest" invades the rights of my "personal interest

It sounds to me that your only interest in life is hobbling those who were more successful in life than you were out of envy and spite. I'm happy to stand in your way if I can.

and the cost has driven us to the brink.

I've been in countries that have hit the actual brink. This isn't a brink, this is a hiccup.

So you're now a Pinkerton head-knocker

Not exactly, Pinkerton doesn't do that kind of work anymore and they don't employ me. But I do knock heads if the situation calls for it. Of course I haven't knocked a single one yet, as every time those union thugs get a look at me they run away like vermin when only minutes before they were screaming their usual "Scab, whore, motherfucker!" line. When a bully sees a real man, he runs.

Guess you've had a change of heart since your last comment that you "morally object to the job."

I don't believe US Servicemen should EVER work for a foreign government. If they chose to work for ours in the private sector as a contractor that is fine. But not a foreign government. That is what I object to. As for my job today, I don't use many of my Soldier skills. Most of what I do I learned growing up in NYC and Detroit.

I guess there are some prostitutes who enjoy their work.

So long as they are doing the fucking as opposed to getting fucked.

We all know you don't think protecting America's economic interests are a reasonable cause for military action. I disagree. However that point is irrelevant to the war on terrorism. Frankly, they don't have much worth stealing, and we haven't taken anything.

The crime of the century was committed

I know they passed ObamaCare, but trust me, I had nothing to do with it ;)











Dave Dubya said...


So "bullies" are guys who defend their livelihood, standard of living, and right to bargain for pay and work conditions.

Wealth and power are the poor victims again.

free0352 said...

So "bullies" are guys who-

Intimidate people into joining the union, sabotage company equipment, threaten management, intimidate replacement workers, assault non-union contractors, threaten security staff.

Yup. Bullies. And they run, like women, when confronted. I haven't even had to raise a hand to one yet. They're all tough when its little old women in their way, but just one man and they RUN.

Dave Dubya said...

Oh, now I see...

Management, replacement workers, non-union contractors, and security staff are all poor, helpless, intimidated little old women.

I guess they are bullies... Or you're just full of the same old crap.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352 (aka "Pinkerton"): "And your soul strategy to improve your situation is to use government power to take from others and give to you."

Well, my strategy does include "soul" -- through enrichment and enlightenment.

As far as using government -- no, that's not my style. That's yours. I work for a living, just like you, although unlike you, I don't make my living at the expense of the American taxpayer.

Tool.


"...quit crying about your life."

You've never heard me crying about my life. As a matter of fact, I mentioned to you a couple of posts ago that I'm very happy and satisfied with my personal well-being.

Can you make the same claim?



"We had a [healthcare] situation that wasn't broken..."

We did?! It was actually hemorrhaging with escalating costs and taking a larger percentage of our GDP on almost an annual basis.

That's not broken?

You haven't answered my question. What would be your proposed solution to providing healthcare?


"This isn't a brink, this is a hiccup."

Hiccups that won't go away? As I said, we're on the brink.


"...every time those union thugs get a look at me they run away like vermin..."

I run from ugliness and evil too. It's bad for the soul. (Or is it "sole"? ;-)


"Most of what I do I learned growing up in NYC and Detroit."

So you steal cars and mug people?

Tell me, did you leave "Fly over country" and return to Michigan and mama?


"We all know you don't think protecting America's economic interests are a reasonable cause for military action. I disagree. However that point is irrelevant to the war on terrorism."

Oh, you mean the economic interest (policy) that asks, "What's our oil doing under your country?"

"Terrorism" is a sham. You know it and I know it. Something had to fill the void created by the collapse of the Soviet Union. With no boogeyman to justify spending billions on the Military-Corporate-Complex, one had to be created.

9/11 did that.

Speaking of, when are you going to read the white paper?

free0352 said...

What would be your proposed solution to providing healthcare?

Its tot complex a question for any one man, nor a cabal of corrupt Washington DC bureaucrats to ever figure out. People will find their own way - would government stop constraining them with its arbitrary programs and laws. The government provides nothing, it simply serves as a corrupt middle man driving up costs and limiting supply. More of the poison will not cure the patient. Only cold turkey will heal a system perverted by those with the hubris to think a handful of people who know nothing of medicine can somehow anticipate and cure every social problem. As with most things, they do far more harm than good.

Hiccups that won't go away?

Everything goes away in time. You only think you've seen poverty, when really there is no such thing in this country. Our homeless, drug addicted bums live better than the vast majority of people on this planet. You reveal your utter lack of contrast. I on the other hand, have lived very real and authentic poverty and have had the chance to see what real collapse looks like.

This doesn't look at all like that. Thats why most people on Earth would kill to trade places with our poorest citizen.

So you steal cars and mug people?

Hardly. No, I grew up raised by a Teamster's business agent. I know all the labor tricks because I grew up learning them.

As for where I live, I just bought a very nice house to reflect my new very nice income that it took me a few hours to procure. So I'm quite happy in life. Good paying job, wife has a good paying job, new house, and soon I'll be accomplishing the life-long dream of owning horses. Pretty good for 45 days of work I'd say.

"What's our oil doing under your country?"

More like - "We won't let you threaten our friends who sell us oil under their country."

"Terrorism" is a sham. You know it and I know it.

You've proven over and over Jeff you know nothing about "terrorism." Terrorism is a tactic. Our threat comes from radical Islam, which must be destroyed, exterminated, wiped out. Not only for our own sake, but for the sake of moderate Muslims who are radical Islam's chief victims.

You forget you're talking to a man who stood in the Al'Queda camps in December of 2001. I saw the diagrams of the American elementary schools in Wisconsin, the videos of how to make home-made poison gas to flood them with and the vesa applications left behind by those who were to do the gassing. Left behind because I and some fellow Marines arrived and chased them off, hunted them down, and killed them all.









Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352: (aka "Pinkerton") "People will find their own way [to find a healthcare solution] - would government stop constraining them with its arbitrary programs and laws."

Just as I thought -- you don't have an answer, other than "the free market will solve everything".

Yeah, sure.


"You only think you've seen poverty, when really there is no such thing in this country."

and...

"I on the other hand, have lived very real and authentic poverty and have had the chance to see what real collapse looks like."

I'm curious. Why have you lived "very real and authentic poverty", yet in the same paragraph you claim "there is no such thing in this country".

I guess it's a paradox, so please do me the honor and explain.


"Pretty good for 45 days of work I'd say."

Sounds suspiciously illegal to me.


"More like - 'We won't let you threaten our friends who sell us oil under their country.'"

Is that why we invaded Iraq and continue to occupy that country?


"Terrorism is a tactic. Our threat comes from radical Islam."

I agree, terrorism is a tactic. So why did Bush declare a war on terrorism, and not Islam?


"You forget you're talking to a man who stood in the Al'Queda camps in December of 2001."

No, I haven't forgotten how heroic you claim you are. I also haven't forgotten that you're a legal expert, an expert in demolition, unparallelled in the use of every type of weapon known to mankind, a linguistic specialist, and now are capable of "procuring" a high-paying job in just 45 days. (I'm sorry, I've forgotten your other areas of immeasurable achievement, but I know I've missed some.)

I also know a bullshitter when I see one. That's my expertise.

free0352 said...

the free market will solve everything

It certainly couldn't do a worse job...

Why have you lived "very real and authentic poverty", yet in the same paragraph you claim "there is no such thing in this country".

Kosovo, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Iraq. I've lived in all of them. Take your pick. Not to mention I've visited Thailand, Mexico, South America and numerous African countries.

Sounds suspiciously illegal to me.

Nah, being a security consultant is simply a skill in demand. Especially in Michigan now days which is recently a right to work state. Every union has its thugs out to intimidate workers into joining up.

I simply prevent them from entering the property and keep tabs on whose trying to so that workers can make a decision safe from intimidation. Most of the people I protect are not rich, but simple employees who don't want to be pressured into union membership.

Is that why we invaded Iraq and continue to occupy that country?

No, we invaded because Saddam Hussien was too much trouble to "contain" and we stayed for a number of years to ensure the power vacuum wasn't filled by Iran or Al'Queda. As for our most recent return you'll have to ask Barack Obama why Syria presents such a threat that we need to have troops on Iraq's western boarder with Syria because of it. Frankly, Syria's Baath party supported Al'Queda in Iraq for years and now that AQ and Assad's men are killing each other I'm delighted and content to see that go on for 100 years. Serve's Assad right for helping AQI now doesn't it. Its downright ironic.

So why did Bush declare a war on terrorism, and not Islam?

Political correctness. Bush was afraid Americans were too stupid to tell the difference between the radical brand of Islam and moderate Islam and would attack Muslims who are indeed loyal to America in this country. He chose to focus on "the terrorists" and not who those terrorists were and what motivated them. I think this was a grave error.

free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

I haven't forgotten how heroic you claim you are

Just do'n my job.

I also haven't forgotten that you're a legal expert

I'd say judges are legal experts. Knowledge is a relative thing. In a room full of judges or even most attorneys I don't amount to much. When compared to you however, I'm fucking Hamurabi the fucking law giver. Its all relative.

an expert in demolition

Well I am an USMC Assaultman (MOS 0351)
with an Urban Mobility/Breecher rating and have served as a chief battalion Demolitions instructor for all Battalion Assault sections as well as being specifically trained in robotics in a counter IED role. I am also a graduate of the Army's Sapper Leader's Course./
I have conducted demolition shots consisting of many thousands of NEW at a time in both the disposal of enemy ordinance, clearance of obstacles, and yes - the demolition of structures. Again, this means on this topic I am far more knowledgeable than you are. Only military EOD team members and a handful of senior combat engineers who specialize in explosives have a greater level of knowledge on the subject of combat demolition, as EOD techs are the foremost experts on military ordinance and its employment on this planet. I can't disarm a nuke, and they can. Probably blindfolded. I wouldn't know. I'm not EOD.

But I'd say I know what I'm talking about a tad more than- well- whatever it is you are. As I recall I actually did the math for you once. But numbers I quickly learned confuse you and get in the way of your conspiracy theories.

unparallelled in the use of every type of weapon known to mankind

Paul Howe is unparalleled, I'm just damn good.

I was a Marine Corps Rifle/Pistol instructor, member of the 2nd Marine Regimental Rifle/Pistol during the 2000 and 2001 2nd Marine Division Matches, and designated marksman, as well as an Army Small Arms Master Gunner and graduate of the USMC Advanced Machine Gun Leader's Course and Advanced TOW Leader's Course. Hey, I also do windows.

a linguistic specialist

Why, because I speak English, bad English, and a smattering of German, Arabic and Spanish?

Who knew that made me so awesome? Oh, its because very likely you only speak English and have never lived outside this country. That's right. You only have your narrow view of the world since you've never seen the world. Only most likely the po-dunk backwater that spat you out into the world. Your -laughable- expert knowledge seems to consist of tin-foil-hat conspiracy and a resentment of people who make more money than you do. Perhaps this lack of any significant life accomplishment is why you are so bitter and jealous and tend to see conspiracy everywhere against you. Being the victim of such vast forces makes you feel a tad special and smarter than everyone else - at least in your mind. Really, you're just a very little fellow in a very wide world.

Pathetic. Get out of your mom's basement already.

Dave Dubya said...

The government provides nothing, it simply serves as a corrupt middle man driving up costs and limiting supply. More of the poison will not cure the patient. Only cold turkey will heal a system perverted by those with the hubris to think a handful of people who know nothing of medicine can somehow anticipate and cure every social problem.

Yes, only put "insurance companies" in place of "government" and tell us how wonderful that worked out.

free0352 said...

Fair enough. But one can choose an insurance company. One cannot ignore a law. We'd all be better off if we ignored these insurance companies and the government monopoly that works to replace them.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352 (aka "Pinkerton): "[The free market] certainly couldn't do a worse job..."

Well, you're wrong -- it has.


"Kosovo, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Iraq. I've lived in all of them. Take your pick. Not to mention I've visited Thailand, Mexico, South America and numerous African countries."

So, let me get this straight. You've lived as a civilian in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Djibouti, and Iraq, and while living in all of them you lived in poverty?

Are you writing a book?

By the way, "visiting" Thailand, Mexico, South America, etc., hardly qualifies as "living in poverty".


"Especially in Michigan now days which is recently a right to work state."

For someone who consistently has dissed Michigan, and in particular Detroit, it must not be too bad. You went back.

So you did run home to mama.


"I think [declaring a war on 'terrorism'] was a grave error."

But that's where we disagree. You think it was an error; I say it was deliberate and by design. Declaring a war on a tactic opened the door, even wider, to unending and perpetual war -- even against our own citizens, if that's what they want to do.


"...and yes - the demolition of structures. Again, this means on this topic I am far more knowledgeable than you are."

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know you're super-dough boy.

However, you're not more knowledgeable about the reasons the World Trade Towers came down...obviously. Seismic data from recordings that day have concluded all three NYC towers experienced detonations just prior to tumbling to the ground. That's pretty significant evidence, wouldn't you say?

Have you read the white paper yet?


"As I recall I actually did the math for you once. But numbers I quickly learned confuse you and get in the way of your conspiracy theories."

Well, I do recall you pulling a bunch of nonsense out of your ass. Is that what you mean?

It's not "theory" if there's evidence to the contrary -- and there is.


"You only have your narrow view of the world since you've never seen the world. Only most likely the po-dunk backwater that spat you out into the world."

That's funny...

Actually, I've noticed that your "accomplishments" only are accomplishments because the government gave them to you. Every one that you listed. Have you accomplished anything in the private sector? Anything at all?

I didn't think so.


"Perhaps this lack of any significant life accomplishment is why you are so bitter and jealous and tend to see conspiracy everywhere against you."

So is this. Funny, that is.


"Really, you're just a very little fellow in a very wide world."

Really, we all are.


"Get out of your mom's basement already."

We've had this discussion already. If you recall, which I'm sure you don't, I'm almost twice your age. And sure, I admit that I have a basement, but it sits below a beautiful home in Northern Virginia that I own. If you know anything about this area, you'll know that home values here are some of the highest in the nation.


"We'd all be better off if we ignored these insurance companies and the government monopoly that works to replace them."

Is this your solution to healthcare? How does this work, exactly? What do you mean? Please, expound upon this.

free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

Well, you're wrong -- it has.

Wow, what a great arguement that last statement was... said no one ever. Really? Its the most regulated industry bar none. So when was it not you may ask? Well, what about this- You know whats not regulated too much. Vet care for my dogs. Sounds bad, but I gotta ask why to get my dogs an x-ray, an examination and some meds its 120.00 and to do the same at a hospital its several thousand. And that's without the insurance company at all. That's paying cash. God knows what they charge those bastards for the exact same procedure my dog just had for the cost of dinner and a night at the bar. Same x-ray machine. The medicine can't be that much different. So what gives? Government does. Government drives the price up.

You've lived as a civilian in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Djibouti, and Iraq, and while living in all of them you lived in poverty?

Not as a civilian. But living in a bombed out school with no running water and carrying a gun vs not carrying a gun isn't much difference when it comes to observing true poverty.

"visiting" Thailand, Mexico, South America, etc., hardly qualifies as "living in poverty".

No it doesn't, but it does qualify as "seeing it." But let me ask, how many third world countries have you been to, or second world for that matter? Yeah. Driving through Juarez doesn't really count.

For someone who consistently has dissed Michigan, and in particular Detroit, it must not be too bad. You went back.

I did it for them money. Fuck this state. I'll surely not retire here in this wretched, cold hell hole. But hey, if your business is counter-union security its the place to be these days. Maybe if I make a few million I'll retire in a tax haven to avoid funding your old age.

I've noticed that your "accomplishments" only are accomplishments because the government gave them to you

Well if its so easy why don't you bop on down and cash in hero? Bok, Bok, Bok. I mean, hey, if anyone can just do it right? Why not you?

Have you accomplished anything in the private sector? Anything at all?

More and more every day. This shit is way easier than the military.

Really, we all are. [a little fellow]

Well, some are smaller than others.

If you know anything about this area, you'll know that home values here are some of the highest in the nation.

Really? Oh and what do you do in the suburbs of our nations capital? I'm DYING to know. Do you work for a union? I'm willing to pay for information you know ;)

Oh and it dawns on me you used to be a hippie. Well, on behalf of Generation X I'd like to thank you for trillions in generational debt my generation on down to my grandchildren's generation we'll be paying off the rest of our lives long after you're dead, AIDS, rampant drug addiction, high divorce rates and a fundamental decline of universal moral values that resulted from the "If it feels good, do it" generation.

The Beatles sucked and Woodstock was a bunch of fucking bullshit. I wouldn't be bragging about my age if I were from the most pathetic generation EVER produced by this country. Your Greatest Generation parents should have beat the lot of you more. This country wouldn't nearly be as fucked up and my generation wouldn't have to clean up your mess. You want to help someone, pay your fucking national debt you folks ran up off instead of trying new and exciting ways to leech off your children.

Dave Dubya said...

The Beatles sucked and Woodstock was a bunch of fucking bullshit.

Yes, pop music today is sooo much better. After all, who needs melodies and harmony in music? Electronic drums and strutting macho vocals are the real art of music.

free0352 said...

Compared to the nasal whining of Bod Dylan or John Lennon? Give me Slayer. Or hell, even Justin Beiber.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352 (aka "Pinkerton"): "Same x-ray machine. The medicine can't be that much different. So what gives? Government does. Government drives the price up."

So why don't you take your dog's meds, and go to a veterinarian yourself? I'm sure the expertise of your veterinarian can't be too radically different from your medical doctor's. ;-)


"Not as a civilian. But living in a bombed out school with no running water and carrying a gun vs not carrying a gun isn't much difference when it comes to observing true poverty."

Oh, so you are full of crap. You were in the military, on a mission, and you were trying to pass it off as "living in poverty". I hardly think so.

(Dave, would you please penalize Pinkerton 100 points for lying. That's a major infraction.)


"No it doesn't, but it does qualify as 'seeing it.' But let me ask, how many third world countries have you been to, or second world for that matter?"

"Seeing it" isn't "living it".

(Dave, please deduct 50 more points for continuation of the lie. Thank you.)

By the way, I've been in several third world nations -- predominately in central and south America -- and I wasn't serving as a tool in the military. I guess, by your definition, I "lived in poverty" also. ;-)


"Maybe if I make a few million I'll retire in a tax haven to avoid funding your old age."

Good luck, but the odds are against you. Head-knockers usually don't reach that status.


"[I've accomplished] More and more every day. This shit is way easier than the military."

You're suffering "new kid on the block syndrome". Tell me if you feel the same way one year from now.

To be continued...

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Free0352 (aka "Pinkerton"): "...some are smaller than others."

No, we're all equal in our smallness. Some just think they're not because their egos won't allow them to see this.


"Do you work for a union? I'm willing to pay for information you know."

How much? I'm listening.


"Oh and it dawns on me you used to be a hippie.

No, never was "a hippie" (whatever that means), but always have sought truth and enlightenment. Does that count?


"Well, on behalf of Generation X I'd like to thank you for trillions in generational debt...blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."

You've made this same exact claim on a previous post, so I'll let you go back and view my response (concerning the blah, blah, blah part). If I recall, you never responded. I knew it was because you realized how lame and childish your accusations were.

As for the "trillions in generational debt", I'd venture a guess that your generation has this dubious distinction.


"The Beatles sucked and Woodstock was a bunch of fucking bullshit."

From Wikipedia: "The best-selling band in history, EMI Records estimate that the Beatles have sold over one billion units worldwide. They have had more number one albums on the British charts, 15, and sold more singles in the UK, 21.9 million, than any other act. They ranked number one in Billboard magazine's list of the all-time most successful Hot 100 artists, released in 2008 to celebrate the US singles chart's fiftieth anniversary. As of 2012, they hold the record for most number one hits on the Hot 100 chart with 20. The Recording Industry Association of America certifies that the Beatles have sold 177 million units in the US, more than any other artist. They were collectively included in Time magazine's compilation of the 20th century's 100 most influential people."

Yeah, they really sucked.

In reality, your slacker generation has a profound jealousy of the artistry that was produced in the '60s and '70s (by my generation). Your generation has never reached such heights -- in anything, really.

Dave Dubya said...

JG,
I don't know, Free's generation have the better skills at video games and the impersonal acts of drone killing they train for.

free0352 said...

How much? I'm listening

What do ya got?

I knew it was because you realized how lame and childish your accusations were.

Its childish to resent being put into debt before even being born? Is your sense of entitlement really that huge? Talk about ego. I'm pretty sure the kids who aren't even born yet, and yet will have to shoulder the burden of your generation's decrepitude with absolutely nothing in return qualifies as taxation without representation. After all they aren't born yet, so its not as if they got a vote.

As for the sales record of the Beatles, people like all kinds of stupid, mindless shit. The Beatles were Jersey Shore with worse teeth.

As for MY generation, well, that depends on what part of it you're talking about.

As for war by remote control... I hope so. I'd welcome a day when we don't have to put men into harms way like I was.







free0352 said...

As for the 60s and 70s, it was the darkest era this country ever had to include the civil war. It produced NOTHING except brain dead, bell-bottom sporting, shallow assholes. It took the 1980s to rehabilitate a good amount of you. The only boomers I have any respect for fought in Vietnam. The rest of you pale in the shadow of your parents generation who were too busy saving the world to drop LSD and fuck anything with a heartbeat while listening to lame ass sitar music.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Yes we're aware that you are as much an expert on history as you are on music. I bet those angry metal heads, along with you, sure could teach those dumb old Beatles a thing or two about music.

I couldn't miss the irony of your video. Angry metal heads shouting "Fuck you" at everybody but the ones who really did get fucked. A lot of Marines paid with their lives for Bush's politically motivated war of choice in Iraq. Fucked completely, as first in their obedient and proud little brains, then by their early deaths for Bush's re-election as "war president".

So you respect Vietnam vets? You mean only the willing tools, not the ones who woke up to the Great Lie that sent them there. I remember you saying you wouldn't have condemned draft evaders.

I guess that's changed.

free0352 said...

A lot of Marines paid with their lives for Bush's politically motivated war of choice in Iraq

Let us contrast the number of Marines you know personally who died in war with the number of Marines I know. (Answer is 63 Marines, and 16 Soldiers for me.)

Okay, now that we established that, I can tell you this. Every single one of them volunteered and wanted to go. They didn't get drafted, they chose it. They made a conscious decision. They didn't trip and fall into the Marine Corps.

You mean only the willing tools, not the ones who woke up to the Great Lie that sent them there. I remember you saying you wouldn't have condemned draft evaders.

I wouldn't put people who evaded the draft in prison. Conscription is wrong. I don't believe we should force people to do much of anything. However, for those that didn't answer your countries call, I simply have less respect for you than those who did answer it... even if they didn't want to but answered it anyway. If you were over 18 and didn't go way-back-when, then you are less of a man than the man who did, at least in my eyes, for what that is worth.

The only "great lie" was that free love and dope didn't have very serious consequences. Your parents warned you... but you didn't listen. It felt good, so you did it. You didn't think, you just acted. You wrecked this country.

Oh and that wasn't Metal, it was Punk. Shows what you know about modern music. The goal of all art is to create an emotional response. Small wonder that since each individual born after 1979 will owe 180,000 dollars worth of debt RAN UP BY YOU FUCKERS the feeling my generation's art most often reflects is anger.

After all, why wouldn't we resent the parents who sold us and spent the American dream on total crap? We shouldn't pay. Damn it we shouldn't pay a dime of it and see the boomers reap what they sewed.

Dave Dubya said...


The only "great lie" was that free love and dope didn't have very serious consequences.

Showing off your superior grasp of history again.

Ohh...yes. Angry Punk. Yes, that’s it. Except Punk is older than you...

So is anger. Just imagine being told to sign up for the draft, go to fight a MIC war of choice, defend a corrupt dictatorship, watch people you know go off to be killed for the lies, and see if there’s no reason for anger.

Now imagine your Chickenhawks in Chief Bush and Cheney back then. They had “other priorities” didn’t they? Your fearless and wise leaders in war.

They knew being cannon fodder was for other chumps. And that “deficits don’t matter”. These are the guys of that generation that left consequences. September 11, wars of choice, dead soldiers, record debt, a national surveillance state, etc... But they took good care of their Halliburton/KBR and other oily cronies. It’s almost as if they wanted it to be that way all along...Hmm.

Yes there can be legitimate war for self-defense. And there can be illegitimate war for politics and profits.

When Big Money Chickenhawk assholes start those wars it makes sane Americans angry. And we don’t need punks to express our anger, unlike the poor angry puppets of Big Money.

free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

Well, the drug epidemics, AIDS, trillions in debt and 30% of children growing up in broken homes during the 70s and 80s are historical facts Dave.

Thanks boomers.

My generation will hop-to funding your lavish lives until you die while we get zero return on investment. Yes m'assa I's oh so happy to pay's for all ya'lls shit. I work's real good m'assa.

You boomers go prattling on about how you are owed Medicare, Social Security and all of these other benefits because you "paid" into those programs and "deserved" them. The truth is your generation already voted to spend the money that you have paid in on other things, and it is gone. And no, as if that spending orgy isn't enough, you want to force your children at gunpoint to keep funding that big 'ol party you started back during the summer of love. And then you call us greedy when we resent it. You want to talk about a war for profit? Well okay, lets talk about how your generation perpetrates economic warfare on mine and on my generations children and our grandchildren. When you can own up to that, you can point the finger.

You know the thing about boomers? They were against Vietnam because they might have to go, and they were for all those social programs because they might have to be responsible with their money. Pure and simple. Thats why you want to tax those "evil rich." Because the thought of being responsible for your own old age terrifies all of you. You're waking up to the fact the Greatest Generation who carried you for all these years are nearly all dead, and you've partied away your lives on cheap money and bad decisions.

And your answer is to rape your own children. What paragons of virtue you flower children are.

Dave Dubya said...

Yes a "Pure and simple" assessment, indeed.

Dave Dubya said...

And imagine the world after Free's generation, as he and the legions of fellow corporatist puppets and mercenaries stomp the life out of workers' rights to collective bargaining and fair compensation.

Imagine what's left of our remnants of democracy after they limit access to the polls for anyone thinking of voting against the primary corporatist candidate.

Free has now aligned his services with the Republican Party's war on the American worker. The future will be a bleak Orwellian police state, and the servants of the corporatocracy will be taught to blame liberals or the previous generation, as they continue to ignore the plight of humanity and play their shoot'em-up video games in hopes they can kill people and spy on Americans with drones.

For there will no blame for the powerful elites for anything, none before, and none after, the decline of our civilization.

It shall be all the liberals fault. We are on course to being the, scapegoats, the Jews of the radical Right Amerikan Reich.

Your kids will have so much to thank you for...that is if they get tight with the lords over the serfs in the glorious Great Republican Feudal States of America.

Soon enough we'll see the Brave New World of Galt's iron-fisted rule by the elites.

And Free can stand up proudly and declare he was a loyal foot soldier and mercenary for the forces against democracy and worker rights.

For Free is now in eager service to the Republican New Order.

I'm sure they appreciate his service, and will probably have his vote by loyalty oath soon enough.

free0352 said...

All this paranoia from the guy whose favorite president operated concentration camps the prisoners of whom were there because they happened to be asian.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Dave Dubya: "Yes a 'Pure and simple' assessment, indeed."

Not so pure, but certainly simple. Actually, more like simplistic.

Yes, Free0352's certainly the scholar of modern era history, isn't he? ;-)

free0352 said...

I happen to think its pretty funny when you guys talk about paying a "fair share" when the reality is you boomers are driving your great grandkids into crushing debt. Truth is you had your fair share, a long time ago. But some how YOU aren't greedy. Freaking grey ponytail generation is the most hypocritical ever.

Dave Dubya said...

Right you are, Free. No more fair share for most Americans. No more unions, no more pensions, no more middle class, no more hope for good jobs without a college degree. You will do your best to see that happens.

Corporate welfare continues, though. Time has come for only the rich to have their fair share.

free0352 said...

I think its time for the government to stop subsidizing things and people. Both rich and poor. And its damn sure time to stop expecting your unborn great grand children to pay for it.

If ever there was taxation without representation, being taxed before you are born should qualify.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Freedom0352 (aka, "Pinkerton"): "...the reality is you boomers are driving your great grandkids into crushing debt."

How am "I" doing that?


"Truth is you had your fair share, a long time ago."

What is my fair share, and how long ago did I have it? I think I may have missed it.


"Freaking grey ponytail generation is the most hypocritical ever."

And you're not?


"I think its time for the government to stop subsidizing things and people."

Wait a minute...am I hearing you classify corporations as "things"?!

By the way, with fifteen years of military service, are you eligible to draw a pension? More importantly, do you?


"If ever there was taxation without representation, being taxed before you are born should qualify."

I guess you think there wasn't public debt before my generation?

By the way, have you read the white paper yet?