Discussion:
Question about disability payments
(too old to reply)
Willard Lazybe
2012-09-18 13:25:10 UTC
Permalink
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?

What's the end-point? We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?

If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.

Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%). What's with
that?

We used to be a great country. This is sickening...

==============================

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8786049-yet-another-record-americans-collecting-disability

8,786,049: Yet Another Record for Americans Collecting Disability

(CNSNews.com) - The Social Security Administration has released new data
revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal
disability insurance payments in September. That sets yet another record
for the number of Americans on disability.

The 8,786,049 workers taking federal disability in September is a net
increase of 18,108 from the 8,767,941 workers who took federal
disability in August.

Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal
disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number
actually working.

In August 1967, 74,767,000 Americans were working (according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics) and 1,152,861 were taking federal disability
insurance (according to the Social Security Administration). That means
that at that time there were about 65 Americans working for each worker
collecting disability.

In August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were working and 8,767,941 were on
disability--meaning there were only 16.2 people working for each person
collecting disability.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a record 88,921,000
Americans were “not in the labor force” in August. These were Americans
who were at least 16 years old, who were not in the military or in an
institution such as a prison or a nursing home, and who did not have a
job and had not actively sought one in the last four weeks.

Also in August, according to the BLS, only 63.5 percent of the civilian
population (those over 16, who were not in the military or in an
institution) participated in the labor force. That was the lowest level
of labor force participation in 31 years. To participate in the labor
force a person must either have a job or at least be actively trying to
find one.
harry
2012-09-18 18:39:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point?  We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%).  What's with
that?
We used to be a great country.  This is sickening...
==============================
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8786049-yet-another-record-americans-...
8,786,049: Yet Another Record for Americans Collecting Disability
(CNSNews.com) - The Social Security Administration has released new data
revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal
disability insurance payments in September. That sets yet another record
for the number of Americans on disability.
The 8,786,049 workers taking federal disability in September is a net
increase of 18,108 from the 8,767,941 workers who took federal
disability in August.
Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal
disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number
actually working.
In August 1967, 74,767,000 Americans were working (according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics) and 1,152,861 were taking federal disability
insurance (according to the Social Security Administration). That means
that at that time there were about 65 Americans working for each worker
collecting disability.
In August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were working and 8,767,941 were on
disability--meaning there were only 16.2 people working for each person
collecting disability.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a record 88,921,000
Americans were “not in the labor force” in August. These were Americans
who were at least 16 years old, who were not in the military or in an
institution such as a prison or a nursing home, and who did not have a
job and had not actively sought one in the last four weeks.
Also in August, according to the BLS, only 63.5 percent of the civilian
population (those over 16, who were not in the military or in an
institution) participated in the labor force. That was the lowest level
of labor force participation in 31 years. To participate in the labor
force a person must either have a job or at least be actively trying to
find one.
It is to do with your system of government, greed, sense of
entitlement, ineptitude, and lack of education/moral values.
David Kaye
2012-09-18 20:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.

I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation. I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.

Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
George T
2012-09-18 20:25:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation. I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.
Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment. One
side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners that
see themselves as winners and everyone else as Leisurely welfare cheats.
Romney is building a class war of ideas and resentment with his Groups
as the Americans and everyone else as living off them.
We paid into SS and Medicare for our working lives. It is not welfare.
Disabled Veterans paid with chopped up bodies and sacrificed futures for
our Country. They are not welfare.
Romneyites formulated policies and laws shipping American jobs off shore
and butchering the dollar. They eliminated health care, pensions, and
profit sharing for Working Americans and out it in Globalists' Corporate
Raiders pockets.
Romenyites and their ilk rubbed their hands with glee when we gave them
billions in Banking and Corporate welfare. We paid for their islands,
mansions and filled their Cayman Islands sheltered and secret accounts.
How about them paying their share of taxes.
You thin you are one of his Constituents how many million did you give
for his support of your business welfare?
Atila Iskander
2012-09-19 01:11:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by George T
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation. I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.
Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment.
What a TOTAL CROCK

Class warfare is an old, old tactic of the left, NOT the right
It's actually funny to hear a pinky accuse the right of what comes naturally
to the left.
Post by George T
One side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners
Yup
Nothing has changed
The above goes back all the way to Marx



Rest of stupid pinky lies ignored
Jeff
2012-09-19 03:40:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Atila Iskander
Post by George T
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation. I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.
Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment.
What a TOTAL CROCK
Class warfare is an old, old tactic of the left, NOT the right
It's actually funny to hear a pinky accuse the right of what comes
naturally to the left.
+1
Typical tactic of the left to accuse the right of what they are doing
themselves. Not only class warfare, but also race and gender warfare.
Post by Atila Iskander
Post by George T
One side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners
Yup
Nothing has changed
The above goes back all the way to Marx
Rest of stupid pinky lies ignored
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 03:52:17 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:11:52 -0500, "Atila Iskander"
Post by Atila Iskander
Post by George T
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation. I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.
Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment.
What a TOTAL CROCK
Class warfare is an old, old tactic of the left, NOT the right
It's actually funny to hear a pinky accuse the right of what comes naturally
to the left.
That's precisely the left's tactic; accuse your enemy of doing what you're
*actually* doing. Right out of the left's bible (Alinsky's "Rules for
Radicals").
Post by Atila Iskander
Post by George T
One side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners
Yup
Nothing has changed
The above goes back all the way to Marx
...with a touch of Goebbels.
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds
2012-09-19 03:36:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by George T
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment. One
side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners that
see themselves as winners and everyone else as Leisurely welfare cheats.
Romney is building a class war of ideas and resentment with his Groups
as the Americans and everyone else as living off them.
We paid into SS and Medicare for our working lives. It is not welfare.
Disabled Veterans paid with chopped up bodies and sacrificed futures for
our Country. They are not welfare.
Does anyone know if any of the Romney sons have served their country in the
military?
Post by George T
Romneyites formulated policies and laws shipping American jobs off shore
and butchering the dollar. They eliminated health care, pensions, and
profit sharing for Working Americans and out it in Globalists' Corporate
Raiders pockets.
Romenyites and their ilk rubbed their hands with glee when we gave them
billions in Banking and Corporate welfare. We paid for their islands,
mansions and filled their Cayman Islands sheltered and secret accounts.
How about them paying their share of taxes.
You thin you are one of his Constituents how many million did you give
for his support of your business welfare?
David Kaye
2012-09-19 05:43:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by George T
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment. One
side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners that see
themselves as winners and everyone else as Leisurely welfare cheats.
Regardless of who wins the presidency, my life is not going to change much.
I'm wanting Obama to win because I don't want to see Obamacare disrupted.
But even if he loses, there is so much inertia in government that the
programs we have are not going to drastically change. I'm not particularly
worried about losing much.
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 12:56:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by George T
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment. One
side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners that see
themselves as winners and everyone else as Leisurely welfare cheats.
Regardless of who wins the presidency, my life is not going to change much.
I'm wanting Obama to win because I don't want to see Obamacare disrupted.
Another vote bought by Obama expanding govt and
pandering to those that want more entitlements.
Post by David Kaye
But even if he loses, there is so much inertia in government that the
programs we have are not going to drastically change.  I'm not particularly
worried about losing much.
I'm worried about losing the whole country, which
we are in the process of doing. You're right about
the inertia. Once you have a govt program, it's
just about impossible to get rid of it. And we're
spending and borrowing, rapidly approaching the
crisis point. Which is exactly what Obama wants,
as that will be another crisis to use as an opportunity
to push more socialism, confiscate the wealth, etc.
I can easily see him proposing a wealth tax, just like
some of the European countries have.

That's why this election is no ordinary one. It's about
whether we at least try to get back to what made America
great, individual achievement, self reliance, freedom from
govt, or do we go even further down the path of countries
like Greece, into socialist hell.
David Kaye
2012-09-19 20:05:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Another vote bought by Obama expanding govt and
pandering to those that want more entitlements.
I'm wondering how you see Obama as a liberal. He's more conservative than
Richard Nixon or George Bush the first ever were. Obama is a pragmatist,
not a liberal. He has not expanded government; in fact, he's reduced it.
Education is a good thing; you should try it some time.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 21:29:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Another vote bought by Obama expanding govt and
pandering to those that want more entitlements.
I'm wondering how you see Obama as a liberal. He's more conservative than
Richard Nixon or George Bush the first ever were. Obama is a pragmatist,
not a liberal. He has not expanded government; in fact, he's reduced it.
Education is a good thing; you should try it some time.
You're a flamin' nutter!
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 22:35:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Another vote bought by Obama expanding govt and
pandering to those that want more entitlements.
I'm wondering how you see Obama as a liberal.  He's more conservative than
Richard Nixon or George Bush the first ever were.
LOL
Obama is a pragmatist,
not a liberal.
If that were true, he would have moved more towards the
center like Clinton did. Faced with a Republican Congress,
Clinton found ways to work together, even "ending welfare
as we know it" Actually it was more like a reform, but you
get the point. Obama has remained hard left. Now of course
you're going to say, "but it's those rascally Republicans that are the
problem."

To which I'd give the most recent of many examples that
show that the problem is Obama. Just last week Netanyahu
asked to meet with the president this week when he will
be in the USA. Obama said he's just too busy.....
You have Iran building a nuke, Israel nervous and wanting
a resolution before it's too late, and Obama snubs the only
true ally the US has in the region. See the problem?

And he snubbed him before, abruptly walking out of a meeting
at the White House a year or so ago, saying something to the
effect that he was going to dinner and you can leave
via the rear door. But of course he is planning on meeting
with Eqyptian President Morsi, of the Islamic Brotherhood.
You know, the guy who asked us to release all those
who blew up the WTC the first time. The guy who didn't
protect the US embassy in Cairo last week. That guy.

And of course, being the darling of the media, you hardly
heard mention of him snubbing Netanyahu. Had a
Republican president done it, why it would be the lead
story.
He has not expanded government; in fact, he's reduced it.
Education is a good thing; you should try it some time.
The simple fact is the budget today is 40% higher than
it was in 2007. And what exactly is Obamacare, if not
another major new govt program? He's even got the govt paying
for radio ads to encourage more people to sign up for
food stamps.
Percival P. Cassidy
2012-09-19 22:48:29 UTC
Permalink
.... And what exactly is Obamacare, if not
another major new govt program?
There isn't even a government *option* in the Affordable Care Act. How
can you say it's a government program/takeover?

Perce
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 23:18:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
....  And what exactly is Obamacare, if not
another major new govt program?
There isn't even a government *option* in the Affordable Care Act. How
can you say it's a government program/takeover?
Perce
I never said it was a takeover, just yet another big
govt program. The latest CBO estimates are that
the spending on new programs under Obamacare will
be $1.4tril over ten years. I hope that is sufficient to
meet your qualifications of yet another big govt program.

Congress has an approval rating of 13%. Why on
earth would anyone want them to do more? Do you
really think those buffoons have a clue about something
as complex as healthcare and insurance? What the
real problems are? How to fix it? They just glommed
together a pile of crap and passed it. The results
will only be seen years from now. When it's too late.
Atila Iskander
2012-09-20 01:46:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Another vote bought by Obama expanding govt and
pandering to those that want more entitlements.
I'm wondering how you see Obama as a liberal. He's more conservative than
Richard Nixon or George Bush the first ever were. Obama is a pragmatist,
not a liberal. He has not expanded government; in fact, he's reduced it.
Education is a good thing; you should try it some time.
And here we have clear evidence of Brave-New-World-speak.
War is peace
Hate is love
Expansion is reduction

YO ! MORON !
Just the administration increase from Obamacare outranks ANYTHING else that
MAY have been reduced in your fantasy
harry
2012-09-19 06:01:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by George T
My question is ->  how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"?  The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world.  True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
I think you way too much attention to radio and TV talkshows and not enough
to your own situation.  I'd bet that your own economic and quality of life
situation is probably fine, but you've likely been propagandized into
thinking that it's falling apart.
Am I wrong?  If so, why am I wrong?
Romenyites are engaged in building a class warfare and resentment. One
side is Americans the other side are Bankers, and Business Owners that
see themselves as winners and everyone else as Leisurely welfare cheats.
Romney is building a class war of ideas and resentment with his Groups
as the Americans and everyone else as living off them.
We paid into SS and Medicare for our working lives. It is not welfare.
Disabled Veterans paid with chopped up bodies and sacrificed futures for
our Country. They are not welfare.
Romneyites formulated policies and laws shipping American jobs off shore
and butchering the dollar. They eliminated health care, pensions, and
profit sharing for Working Americans and out it in Globalists' Corporate
Raiders  pockets.
Romenyites and their ilk rubbed their hands with glee when we gave them
billions in Banking and Corporate welfare. We paid for their islands,
mansions and filled their Cayman Islands sheltered and secret accounts.
How about them paying their share of taxes.
You thin you are one of his Constituents how many million did you give
for his support of your business welfare?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Good post. And Mr Greed himself up for president.
So he can rob Americans even more thoroughly.
Amazing the dopey bastards that will vote for him.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 17:59:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
Good post. And Mr Greed himself up for president.
So he can rob Americans even more thoroughly.
Amazing the dopey bastards that will vote for him.
harry, no one gives a rat's ass what you think about American politics. ...or
anything else, for that matter.
William Belazy
2012-09-18 21:54:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys
one of the highest standards of living in the world. True, there
are others with higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada,
etc., but they're more socialist than we are.
What - the fact that a huge portion of your heath-care system (medicare,
medicaid) is public doesn't make you some-what socialist?

Wouldn't you rather be more socialist, vs being more facist (as you are
clearly becoming) ???

==================

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/us-totalitarian-state-wins-after-all-obama-reinstates-ndaa-military-detention-provision

Just over a week ago, we wrote of the challenge to Obama's NDAA
totalitarian bill. Hope remained that Chris Hedges' view of the
indefinite detention as "unforgivable, unconstitutional, and exceedingly
dangerous" would bolster judgment.

However, as Russia Today reports, a lone appeals judge bowed down to the
Obama administration late Monday and reauthorized the White House's
ability to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or due
process. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an emergency
stay on the previous Chris Hedges'-driven order, and hours later US
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to
intervene and place a hold on the injunction. The stay will remain in
effect until at least September 28, when a three-judge appeals court
panel is expected to begin addressing the issue. It would appear the
total fascist takeover of Amerika is drawing nearer by the day.

A lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late Monday
and reauthorized the White House’s ability to indefinitely detain
American citizens without charge or due process.

Last week, a federal judge ruled that an temporary injunction on section
1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 must
be made permanent, essentially barring the White House from ever
enforcing a clause in the NDAA that can let them put any US citizen
behind bars indefinitely over mere allegations of terrorist
associations. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an
emergency stay on that order, and hours later US Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a
hold on the injunction.

The stay will remain in effect until at least September 28, when a
three-judge appeals court panel is expected to begin addressing the
issue

On December 31, 2011, US President Barack Obama signed the NDAA into
law, even though he insisted on accompanying that authorization with a
statement explaining his hesitance to essentially eliminate habeas
corpus for the American people.

Fear is the psychological weapon of choice for totalitarian systems of
power. Make the people afraid. Get them to surrender their rights in the
name of national security. And then finish off the few who aren’t afraid
enough. If this law is not revoked we will be no different from any
sordid military dictatorship. Its implementation will be a huge leap
forward for the corporate oligarchs who plan to continue to plunder the
nation and use state and military security to cow the population into
submission.

Loading Image...
William Belazy
2012-09-18 22:07:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Belazy
Wouldn't you rather be more socialist, vs being more facist (as you
are clearly becoming) ???
Things are quickly becoming very clear.
Post by William Belazy
a lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late
Monday and reauthorized the White House's ability to indefinitely
detain American citizens without charge or due process.
A lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late
Monday and reauthorized the White House’s ability to indefinitely
detain American citizens without charge or due process.
On December 31, 2011, US President Barack Obama signed the NDAA into
law, even though he insisted on accompanying that authorization with a
statement explaining his hesitance to essentially eliminate habeas
corpus for the American people.
The US military has been training in various US cities, becoming
familiar with how to conduct "urban pacification" and other law
enforcement actions on US soil.

New federal laws (as stated above) allow this.

US naval assests are being positioned in the gulf of arabia (3 aircraft
carriers, amphibious landing craft, etc) as never before.

Western countries are closing their diplomatic missions in some arab
countries.

Israel is getting ready to attack Iran. US will have no choice but to
join the fight when it starts.

And when it starts, there will be arab / moozlem uprisings in US
cities. The US military is being prepared to deal with them when it
happens.

It's all coming together now.

October surprise - here we come.
harry
2012-09-19 06:03:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Belazy
Post by William Belazy
Wouldn't you rather be more socialist, vs being more facist (as you
are clearly becoming) ???
Things are quickly becoming very clear.
Post by William Belazy
a lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late
Monday and reauthorized the White House's ability to indefinitely
detain American citizens without charge or due process.
A lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late
Monday and reauthorized the White House’s ability to indefinitely
detain American citizens without charge or due process.
On December 31, 2011, US President Barack Obama signed the NDAA into
law, even though he insisted on accompanying that authorization with a
statement explaining his hesitance to essentially eliminate habeas
corpus for the American people.
The US military has been training in various US cities, becoming
familiar with how to conduct "urban pacification" and other law
enforcement actions on US soil.
New federal laws (as stated above) allow this.
US naval assests are being positioned in the gulf of arabia (3 aircraft
carriers, amphibious landing craft, etc) as never before.
Western countries are closing their diplomatic missions in some arab
countries.
Israel is getting ready to attack Iran.  US will have no choice but to
join the fight when it starts.
And when it starts, there will be arab / moozlem uprisings in US
cities.  The US military is being prepared to deal with them when it
happens.
It's all coming together now.
October surprise - here we come.
Sounds a possible scenario.
Stormin Mormon
2012-09-19 11:44:20 UTC
Permalink
Probably under Obama orders to detain anyone who interferes with the Muslims
and their right of free speech, rioting, and destruction.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"William Belazy" <***@be.lazy.org> wrote in message news:***@be.lazy.org...

The US military has been training in various US cities, becoming
familiar with how to conduct "urban pacification" and other law
enforcement actions on US soil.

Israel is getting ready to attack Iran. US will have no choice but to
join the fight when it starts.

And when it starts, there will be arab / moozlem uprisings in US
cities. The US military is being prepared to deal with them when it
happens.

It's all coming together now.

October surprise - here we come.
David Kaye
2012-09-19 05:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Belazy
What - the fact that a huge portion of your heath-care system (medicare,
medicaid) is public doesn't make you some-what socialist?
I have no problem with socialism since some of the most desirable places to
live are socialist in part. Socialism is the mark of a civilization;
unbridled capitalism is the mark of a lack of civilization.

Socialist structures benefit us all: public streetlights, public streets,
public parks, public schools, public mail service, public water services,
public power, public transit, public interstate freeways. Our world would
be worse off without these expenditures of public money for the common good.
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 13:00:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by William Belazy
What - the fact that a huge portion of your heath-care system (medicare,
medicaid) is public doesn't make you some-what socialist?
I have no problem with socialism since some of the most desirable places to
live are socialist in part.  Socialism is the mark of a civilization;
unbridled capitalism is the mark of a lack of civilization.
Then why is it that relatively unbridled capitalism, as
compared to those socialist countries, lifted more
people out of poverty, resulted in less unemployment,
and made the USA the most powerful country in the
world?
Post by David Kaye
Socialist structures benefit us all: public streetlights, public streets,
public parks, public schools, public mail service, public water services,
public power, public transit, public interstate freeways.  Our world would
be worse off without these expenditures of public money for the common good.
I have no problem with roads. I do have a problem with
an administration running ads to promote getting more
people to apply for food stamps. See the difference?
David Kaye
2012-09-19 20:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Then why is it that relatively unbridled capitalism, as
compared to those socialist countries, lifted more
people out of poverty, resulted in less unemployment,
and made the USA the most powerful country in the
world?
When you think of socialist countries you think of dictatorships such as the
USSR, China, and Cuba.

When I think of socialist countries I think of democratic socialist
societies such as Italy, France, Germany, the UK, Norway, Finland, Sweden,
and many other countries. So, the argument isn't against socialism, it's
against dictatorships.

I have many friends from other countries. They prefer to live in those
countries and only visit the USA on occasion. My friend, Neil, has
excellent health care in Canada. Werner has no worries in Germany about his
health care, his employment, his home, anything. It goes on like that...
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 22:40:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Then why is it that relatively unbridled capitalism, as
compared to those socialist countries, lifted more
people out of poverty, resulted in less unemployment,
and made the USA the most powerful country in the
world?
When you think of socialist countries you think of dictatorships such as the
USSR, China, and Cuba.
How would you know what I was thinking? For the record, I
would not limit the list to the above.
Post by David Kaye
When I think of socialist countries I think of democratic socialist
societies such as Italy, France, Germany, the UK, Norway, Finland, Sweden,
and many other countries.  So, the argument isn't against socialism, it's
against dictatorships.
No, the argument is very much against socialism. I don't want the
USA to become like those socialist countries.
Post by David Kaye
I have many friends from other countries.  They prefer to live in those
countries and only visit the USA on occasion.  My friend, Neil, has
excellent health care in Canada.  Werner has no worries in Germany about his
health care, his employment, his home, anything.  It goes on like that...
Good. Let them stay there and we will all be happy.
If all those countries are so smart and successful with their
socialism, why is it that the USA is the only super power and
has to do all the heavy lifting each and every time the world
has a crisis. Those piss ants could not even handle Libya
without the USA.
Zapp Brannigan
2012-09-20 01:43:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Post by David Kaye
I have many friends from other countries. They prefer to live
in those countries and only visit the USA on occasion.
Good. Let them stay there and we will all be happy.
Don't worry. Most people don't like to live in a country becoming a
toilet like the USA is.
Post by t***@optonline.net
If all those countries are so smart and successful with their
socialism, why is it that the USA is the only super power and
has to do all the heavy lifting each and every time the world
has a crisis.
You did a real nice job with Iraq you idiot.

And you're getting your ass handed to you in Afghanistan.
Post by t***@optonline.net
Those piss ants could not even handle Libya without the USA.
Yes, because Libya was threatening the world with catastrophe and
destruction, and only the USA could bring down Gaddafi and by so doing
insure that Libya would descend into the same islamic chaos that you
visited upon Iraq.

The USA is the 300 lb retarded kid on the playground of planet earth.
All muscles and no brains.
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-20 16:47:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
I have many friends from other countries.  They prefer to live
in those countries and only visit the USA on occasion.
Good.  Let them stay there and we will all be happy.
Don't worry.  Most people don't like to live in a country becoming a
toilet like the USA is.
If all those countries are so smart and successful with their
socialism, why is it that the USA is the only super power and
has to do all the heavy lifting each and every time the world
has a crisis.
You did a real nice job with Iraq you idiot.
Thank you. A dictator responsible for the deaths of
hundreds of thousands, including the use of chemical
weapons against his own civilians is dead. Iraq has
a functioning democratic govt, that despite all the hopes
of guys like you, has not failed.
And you're getting your ass handed to you in Afghanistan.
Perhaps. So what? If you look at our overall track record,
the hundreds of millions we've freed around the world in
the last century, the overall record is an exceptional one
and unequalled in the world. But of course, America haters
like you like to focus on the gnats ass instead of the big
overall success.
Those piss ants could not even handle Libya without the USA.
Yes, because Libya was threatening the world with catastrophe and
destruction, and only the USA could bring down Gaddafi and by so doing
insure that Libya would descend into the same islamic chaos that you
visited upon Iraq.
Doesn't matter. The simple fact is that it was the Europeans
with the big hard-on for action in Libya. But they needed the
USA to do the heavy lifting. As usual. Now if those European
socialist countries are so all damn smart, successful, etc,
why is it they always need the good old USA?
The USA is the 300 lb retarded kid on the playground of planet earth.
All muscles and no brains.
And the rest of the world, for the most part, is the little pussy
weakling that when they get into a fight, they go running to the
300lb kid to save their ass.
David Kaye
2012-09-20 20:57:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Thank you. A dictator responsible for the deaths of
hundreds of thousands, including the use of chemical
weapons against his own civilians is dead. Iraq has
a functioning democratic govt, that despite all the hopes
of guys like you, has not failed.
The democratically-elected Iraqi government is far worse than Saddam Hussein
ever was. Hussein ran a non-religious government. Now, religious
extremists have taken over and they kill women who get raped (because they
are a disgrace to Islam), and they rape, torture, and kill gay men, which
didn't happen under Hussein's regime. The USA destroyed the entire
government chain of command so that when the war was over there was chaos in
the streets. This allowed Muslim extremists to come in and mow down people.
There are MORE killings now under Islam in Iraq than there were under Saddam
Hussein.

Sure, Hussein was a murderous dictator, but he was BETTER than what there is
now. Tens of thousands of people are applying the the USA for political
asylum now...
Percival P. Cassidy
2012-09-20 21:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Thank you. A dictator responsible for the deaths of
hundreds of thousands, including the use of chemical
weapons against his own civilians is dead. Iraq has
a functioning democratic govt, that despite all the hopes
of guys like you, has not failed.
The democratically-elected Iraqi government is far worse than Saddam Hussein
ever was. Hussein ran a non-religious government. Now, religious
extremists have taken over and they kill women who get raped (because they
are a disgrace to Islam), and they rape, torture, and kill gay men, which
didn't happen under Hussein's regime. The USA destroyed the entire
government chain of command so that when the war was over there was chaos in
the streets. This allowed Muslim extremists to come in and mow down people.
There are MORE killings now under Islam in Iraq than there were under Saddam
Hussein.
Sure, Hussein was a murderous dictator, but he was BETTER than what there is
now. Tens of thousands of people are applying the the USA for political
asylum now...
And Iraq's Christian population is a small fraction of what it was:
Christians were protected under Saddam Hussein; wasn't even his Prime
Minister a Christian?

Perce
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-20 21:13:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Thank you.  A dictator responsible for the deaths of
hundreds of thousands, including the use of chemical
weapons against his own civilians is dead.  Iraq has
a functioning democratic govt, that despite all the hopes
of guys like you, has not failed.
The democratically-elected Iraqi government is far worse than Saddam Hussein
ever was.
What total BS. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in a war
the left more than half a million dead. He invaded Kuwait in a war
that left tens of thousands dead. He committed genocide
using chemical weapons on his own civilian population.
So all you've done is show what at total lying revisionist
dictatror loving skunk you are.
Post by David Kaye
Hussein ran a non-religious government.
Yeah, so did Stalin. I bet he's one of your heroes too.
Post by David Kaye
 Now, religious
extremists have taken over and they kill women who get raped (because they
are a disgrace to Islam), and they rape, torture, and kill gay men, which
didn't happen under Hussein's regime.  The USA destroyed the entire
government chain of command so that when the war was over there was chaos in
the streets.  This allowed Muslim extremists to come in and mow down people.
There are MORE killings now under Islam in Iraq than there were under Saddam
Hussein.
The human rights abuses you outline above are not unique to
Iraq. They are widespread in the mideast even extending to
India, where if you don't like your wife, you just burn her up.
If you total up all the
deaths since the start of the Iraq war, it's nothing compared to
the half million plus that Saddam killed and would have CONTINUED
to kill. Saddam may have abused gays less, but instead he
focused on other groups. How about all the Kurds he killed?
Post by David Kaye
Sure, Hussein was a murderous dictator, but he was BETTER than what there is
now.  Tens of thousands of people are applying the the USA for political
asylum now...
Tens of thousands apply to the USA all the time from various
countries for political asylum. BFD.
David Kaye
2012-09-20 21:56:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
What total BS.
The truth hurts, doesn't it...
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-21 00:12:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
What total BS.
The truth hurts, doesn't it...
Evidently it hurts too much to quote.
HeyBub
2012-09-21 00:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zapp Brannigan
You did a real nice job with Iraq you idiot.
Yep. Consider Sadaam: We invaded his country, evicted him from his homes,
exiled his family, jailed his friends, confiscated his fortune, and killed
his children. Eventually we got his skanky ass hanged. This HAS to have an
effect on others similarily inclined.
Post by Zapp Brannigan
And you're getting your ass handed to you in Afghanistan.
You may be looking at Afghanistan through the wrong lens. Our goal in
Afghanistan is not to win, our goal is not to lose.
Atila Iskander
2012-09-20 01:52:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Then why is it that relatively unbridled capitalism, as
compared to those socialist countries, lifted more
people out of poverty, resulted in less unemployment,
and made the USA the most powerful country in the
world?
When you think of socialist countries you think of dictatorships such as
the USSR, China, and Cuba.
Considering that socialism is a creeping cancer of increased government
involvement and control of every day life
The natural progression is toward dictatorship
Post by David Kaye
When I think of socialist countries I think of democratic socialist
societies such as Italy, France, Germany, the UK, Norway, Finland, Sweden,
and many other countries. So, the argument isn't against socialism, it's
against dictatorships.
And compared to the US, they are in far WORSE shape thanks to all that
creeping socialism that has left them flat broke and I debt to their necks.
So no it's NOT about dictatorships
It's about socialism driving countries into the ground because less and
less people produce to pay for all those who don't
A very apt saying from Communist Russia was
"They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work"
Think about why that was so true.
Post by David Kaye
I have many friends from other countries. They prefer to live in those
countries and only visit the USA on occasion. My friend, Neil, has
excellent health care in Canada. Werner has no worries in Germany about
his health care, his employment, his home, anything. It goes on like
that...
How nice
And yet the US is still the TOP destination for immigrants (legal or not)
who want to improve their lot
Why do you think those MILLIONS trump your few alleged friends ?
Atila Iskander
2012-09-19 20:18:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by William Belazy
What - the fact that a huge portion of your heath-care system (medicare,
medicaid) is public doesn't make you some-what socialist?
I have no problem with socialism since some of the most desirable places
to live are socialist in part. Socialism is the mark of a civilization;
unbridled capitalism is the mark of a lack of civilization.
Funny how idiots like to come out with phrases like "unbridled capitalism"
Too bad it's a TOTAL CROCK, and an OUTRIGHT LIE to even try to imply it.
Post by David Kaye
Socialist structures benefit us all: public streetlights, public streets,
public parks, public schools, public mail service, public water services,
public power, public transit, public interstate freeways. Our world would
be worse off without these expenditures of public money for the common good.
Socialist structures are very different from rampant socialism
It's one of the way that socialists try to camouflage what they are doing
The bottom line is where does one STOP using public money for the ALLEGED
"public good"

And I won't even mention how MANY of the alleged "social structures" are
done much better when they are NOT done with "public money" under DIRECT
government control
Look at USPS vs UPS, Fedex et all
Look at private railroads vs government-run railroads
Look at Government run communications vs privately operated
communications

The government does much better when it limits itself to regulation
environments instead of getting in to run them
Stormin Mormon
2012-09-19 20:41:23 UTC
Permalink
I'd word that, "the population".... when government limits itself... "

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Atila Iskander" <***@live.com> wrote in message news:k3d9cd$5ie$***@dont-email.me...

The government does much better when it limits itself to regulation
environments instead of getting in to run them
Stormin Mormon
2012-09-19 21:02:28 UTC
Permalink
Socialists blame capitalism when things go wrong, and credit government when
a little this or that goes right. I wonder what's with socialists, who think
government is better than free market?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
Post by David Kaye
I have no problem with socialism since some of the most desirable places
to live are socialist in part. Socialism is the mark of a civilization;
unbridled capitalism is the mark of a lack of civilization.
Funny how idiots like to come out with phrases like "unbridled capitalism"
Too bad it's a TOTAL CROCK, and an OUTRIGHT LIE to even try to imply it.
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 22:44:27 UTC
Permalink
On Sep 19, 5:03 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
Socialists blame capitalism when things go wrong, and credit government when
a little this or that goes right. I wonder what's with socialists, who think
government is better than free market?
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
 www.lds.org
.
The other thing that gets me is that whenever they find something
that isn't right in the world, the immediate answer is that some new
law, some new regulation, some new govt program is the solution.
Meanwhile govt screws up half of what they try to do, has huge
waste and inefficiency. Congress has an approval rating of 13%
and these fools turn to them to pass something like Obamacare.
As if the clowns in Congress could even begin to understand
such a complex problem and formulate a correct solution.
harry
2012-09-19 06:02:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Belazy
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"?  The United States enjoys
one of the highest standards of living in the world.  True, there
are others with higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada,
etc., but they're more socialist than we are.
What - the fact that a huge portion of your heath-care system (medicare,
medicaid) is public doesn't make you some-what socialist?
Wouldn't you rather be more socialist, vs being more facist (as you are
clearly becoming) ???
==================
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/us-totalitarian-state-wins-after-all-ob...
Just over a week ago, we wrote of the challenge to Obama's NDAA
totalitarian bill. Hope remained that Chris Hedges' view of the
indefinite detention as "unforgivable, unconstitutional, and exceedingly
dangerous" would bolster judgment.
However, as Russia Today reports, a lone appeals judge bowed down to the
Obama administration late Monday and reauthorized the White House's
ability to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or due
process. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an emergency
stay on the previous Chris Hedges'-driven order, and hours later US
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to
intervene and place a hold on the injunction. The stay will remain in
effect until at least September 28, when a three-judge appeals court
panel is expected to begin addressing the issue. It would appear the
total fascist takeover of Amerika is drawing nearer by the day.
A lone appeals judge bowed down to the Obama administration late Monday
and reauthorized the White House’s ability to indefinitely detain
American citizens without charge or due process.
Last week, a federal judge ruled that an temporary injunction on section
1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 must
be made permanent, essentially barring the White House from ever
enforcing a clause in the NDAA that can let them put any US citizen
behind bars indefinitely over mere allegations of terrorist
associations. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an
emergency stay on that order, and hours later US Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a
hold on the injunction.
The stay will remain in effect until at least September 28, when a
three-judge appeals court panel is expected to begin addressing the
issue
On December 31, 2011, US President Barack Obama signed the NDAA into
law, even though he insisted on accompanying that authorization with a
statement explaining his hesitance to essentially eliminate habeas
corpus for the American people.
Fear is the psychological weapon of choice for totalitarian systems of
power. Make the people afraid. Get them to surrender their rights in the
name of national security. And then finish off the few who aren’t afraid
enough. If this law is not revoked we will be no different from any
sordid military dictatorship. Its implementation will be a huge leap
forward for the corporate oligarchs who plan to continue to plunder the
nation and use state and military security to cow the population into
submission.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroo...
Another good post!
George
2012-09-18 23:02:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Am I wrong? If so, why am I wrong?
You are trying to have a sensible discussion with schizophrenic new name
every hour "home guy"
Percival P. Cassidy
2012-09-19 01:44:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has
enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of
outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been
even when it had its most right-wing governments.

It makes no sense for Americans to brag about how low their taxes are in
comparison to those of many other countries (all the while bitching
about how high their taxes are) when they have to pay out large sums of
their net income to profit-making entities (or to empire-building
"non-profit" entities) for services that are provided at no (or little)
extra cost in those other countries.

Perce
Bill
2012-09-19 03:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has
enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of
outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been
even when it had its most right-wing governments.
It makes no sense for Americans to brag about how low their taxes are in
comparison to those of many other countries (all the while bitching
about how high their taxes are) when they have to pay out large sums of
their net income to profit-making entities (or to empire-building
"non-profit" entities) for services that are provided at no (or little)
extra cost in those other countries.
We live in the "Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile" mentality.
Little is sacred, especially ethics. We are reaping what we, as a
society, have sowed. Perhaps too many lawyers and MBAs compared to folks
in engineering and the hard sciences starting back in the 80's.
Incentive matter--people chased the buck. Here in the midwest, kids play
football and basketball like it will provide them with a future. I know
of 3 kids in junior high that currently have broken arms from playing
football. The "dream" is still true--work hard (at the right things) and
there will most likely be a decent job ready. Sacrifice is not as
popular as it might be. Of course, employers are not being as
"benevolent" as they might be either--many are taking advantage of the
circumstances. The above is all just my opinion as of this moment. I'm
not looking for an argument! ; )

Bill
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
Perce
David Kaye
2012-09-19 05:37:13 UTC
Permalink
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has enough
to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of outrageous
medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been even when it had
its most right-wing governments.
Indeed, Australia is socialist. The pure definition of socialism: "From
each according to ability; to each according to need." It is not an
oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to preserve a socialist state
would be conservative. It's conservative because they want to preserve the
status quo, even if that status quo is socialist.
Bob Barker
2012-09-19 12:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker
has enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy
because of outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist"
and has been even when it had its most right-wing governments.
"From each according to ability; to each according to need."
It is not an oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to
preserve a socialist state would be conservative.
If your tax dollars go to fund the military, the police departments,
fire departments, ambulance and emergency services, grade-school and
high-school teachers - then why can't the services provided by doctors
and hospitals be seen as extensions of those services?

What makes it socialism if you have some level of gov't negotiate the
fee schedules for doctors and pay them for services they provide to the
public just like you do for teachers, police, military, firemen, etc?
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 18:01:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Barker
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker
has enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy
because of outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist"
and has been even when it had its most right-wing governments.
"From each according to ability; to each according to need."
It is not an oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to
preserve a socialist state would be conservative.
If your tax dollars go to fund the military, the police departments,
fire departments, ambulance and emergency services, grade-school and
high-school teachers - then why can't the services provided by doctors
and hospitals be seen as extensions of those services?
Federal dollars *SHOULDN'T* go for anything in that list except the military.
Post by Bob Barker
What makes it socialism if you have some level of gov't negotiate the
fee schedules for doctors and pay them for services they provide to the
public just like you do for teachers, police, military, firemen, etc?
It's a forced, direct, transfer of money from one citizen to another. It
should come under the fourteenth, if not a dozen other places in the
Constitution.
Atila Iskander
2012-09-19 20:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Barker
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker
has enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy
because of outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist"
and has been even when it had its most right-wing governments.
"From each according to ability; to each according to need."
It is not an oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to
preserve a socialist state would be conservative.
If your tax dollars go to fund the military, the police departments,
fire departments, ambulance and emergency services, grade-school and
high-school teachers - then why can't the services provided by doctors
and hospitals be seen as extensions of those services?
Turn that around
Why should they be ?
And where do you actually stop extending those services ?
Post by Bob Barker
What makes it socialism if you have some level of gov't negotiate the
fee schedules for doctors and pay them for services they provide to the
public just like you do for teachers, police, military, firemen, etc?
Nope
What makes it socialist is that the government has defined that EVERYONE has
a right to it, no matter what they cost, and everyone else, at least the
taxpayers MUST pay for it.

Personally, I don't see why I should pay for medical services provided to
anyone else, PARTICULARLY when there is no built-in penalty against those
who choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle
You want to get fat, not exercise, eat junk food, smoke, drink, do drugs,
pump out babies to collect more welfare
YOU pay for the consequences.
David Kaye
2012-09-19 20:09:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Barker
What makes it socialism if you have some level of gov't negotiate the
fee schedules for doctors and pay them for services they provide to the
public just like you do for teachers, police, military, firemen, etc?
Again, "From each according to ability; to each according to need."
Teachers, police, military, and fire fighters are all provided under a
socialist model.

Remember that there are communities where the government does NOT provide
fire righters. Instead people organize volunteer fire departments or pay a
subscription fee to have fire protection for themselves. The volunteer fire
departments have pretty much gone away because people no longer want to
volunteer to help out their community. So, most of these have been taken
over by the counties in which they were located.

And as for private fire protection, we all know how THAT comes out, "The
fire fighters watched the house burn down because the home owner hadn't paid
for service."
Atila Iskander
2012-09-20 02:14:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by Bob Barker
What makes it socialism if you have some level of gov't negotiate the
fee schedules for doctors and pay them for services they provide to the
public just like you do for teachers, police, military, firemen, etc?
Again, "From each according to ability; to each according to need."
Too bad you keep leaving out the 2nd part of that saying
Post by David Kaye
Teachers, police, military, and fire fighters are all provided under a
socialist model.
NOPE
You're playing word games
By that oh so broad definition ANYTIME ANY 2 people get together
cooperatively - it's "socialism"
TOTAL BULLSHIT
Post by David Kaye
Remember that there are communities where the government does NOT provide
fire righters. Instead people organize volunteer fire departments or pay
a subscription fee to have fire protection for themselves. The volunteer
fire departments have pretty much gone away because people no longer want
to volunteer to help out their community. So, most of these have been
taken over by the counties in which they were located.
Or MORE CORRECTLY< they were actually regulated out of service by
governments which imposed more stringent and expensive requirements on such
volunteer services to the point where it was more trouble than it was worth
doing.
Post by David Kaye
And as for private fire protection, we all know how THAT comes out, "The
fire fighters watched the house burn down because the home owner hadn't
paid for service."
And ?
I think that's a far model for ALL people
Why should anyone pay for the services of those too lazy to provide for
themselves ?
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 13:04:14 UTC
Permalink
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has enough
to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of outrageous
medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been even when it had
its most right-wing governments.
Indeed, Australia is socialist.  The pure definition of socialism: "From
each according to ability; to each according to need."  It is not an
oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to preserve a socialist state
would be conservative.  It's conservative because they want to preserve the
status quo, even if that status quo is socialist.
Obviously you have no understanding of what
conservative means today in the USA. Hint: It's not
about preserving the status quo.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 18:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has enough
to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of outrageous
medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been even when it had
its most right-wing governments.
Indeed, Australia is socialist.  The pure definition of socialism: "From
each according to ability; to each according to need."  It is not an
oxymoron to say that a government that wanted to preserve a socialist state
would be conservative.  It's conservative because they want to preserve the
status quo, even if that status quo is socialist.
Obviously you have no understanding of what
conservative means today in the USA. Hint: It's not
about preserving the status quo.
Today's conservative is yesterday's (classical) liberal.
David Kaye
2012-09-19 19:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Obviously you have no understanding of what
conservative means today in the USA. Hint: It's not
about preserving the status quo.
Obviously you have no understanding of how to read because I wasn't talking
about what conservative means in the USA at all. I was talking about how a
socialistic country such as Australia could have a conservatrive government
that is trying to keep the status quo, that is, socialist policies. I
wasn't addressing the USA at all.
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 13:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Percival P. Cassidy
My question is ->  how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"?  The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world.  True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has
enough to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of
outrageous medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been
even when it had its most right-wing governments.
It makes no sense for Americans to brag about how low their taxes are in
comparison to those of many other countries (all the while bitching
about how high their taxes are) when they have to pay out large sums of
their net income to profit-making entities (or to empire-building
"non-profit" entities) for services that are provided at no (or little)
extra cost in those other countries.
Perce
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for
those services privately, where I have a choice as to
whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide
them. How about we have govt provide dinner for
you every night and you eat what they give you. Sound
good?
Stormin Mormon
2012-09-19 13:13:14 UTC
Permalink
Who leaked the Michelle Obama second term plan?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

<***@optonline.net> wrote in message news:e55eba30-d361-4cc0-8188-***@b8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...

Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for
those services privately, where I have a choice as to
whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide
them. How about we have govt provide dinner for
you every night and you eat what they give you. Sound
good?
t***@optonline.net
2012-09-19 13:57:59 UTC
Permalink
On Sep 19, 9:13 am, "Stormin Mormon"
Post by Stormin Mormon
Who leaked the Michelle Obama second term plan?
LOL. That's a good one. Actually we're already heading
in that direction. Bloomberg in NYC has banned transfats
in restaurants, banned sodas over 16 ounces in restaurants,
delis, pushcarts, etc. And he's pressured restaurants to
remove salt shakers from tables and reduce the amount
of salt they put in food. Allowed to go unchecked, you can
see where this process will take us.

And they conveniently forget that often their thinking of the
day was completely wrong. The best example of that is
transfats. In the 70s and 80s we were told to replace butter, which
was supposed to be bad, with margarine, which was made
from transfats and was supposed
to be healthy. Now they find out that it's actually the transfat
that is bad and in turn ban that. Go figure.
Post by Stormin Mormon
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
 www.lds.org
.
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for
those services privately, where I have a choice as to
whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide
them.   How about we have govt provide dinner for
you every night and you eat what they give you.  Sound
good?
David Kaye
2012-09-19 19:58:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@optonline.net
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for
those services privately, where I have a choice as to
whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide
them.
Good luck with that. What happens when the high-wattage streetlamp outside
your home costs about $300 a year to power and maintain? Are you going to
pay for it ALL out of your own pocket, or are you going to join with your
neighborhood in providing streetlamps for the entire neighborhood?

So many rightwingers have no idea how much it costs to provide the services
they take for granted and that there's no way they'd ever pay for them out
of their own pockets.

Oh, it's happened many times where governments have gone broke, such as the
town of Hollister here in California. Sure, people mowed the lawn in front
of the library FOR A WHILE, then got tired of it and stopped. So, for some
time the grass was growing tall and brown, creating a fire hazard. I
believe they finally passed a tax increase to allow the town to provide at
least some fundamental services.
Atila Iskander
2012-09-20 02:01:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Post by t***@optonline.net
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for
those services privately, where I have a choice as to
whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide
them.
Good luck with that. What happens when the high-wattage streetlamp
outside your home costs about $300 a year to power and maintain? Are you
going to pay for it ALL out of your own pocket, or are you going to join
with your neighborhood in providing streetlamps for the entire
neighborhood?
<YAWN>
Another stupid factoid example.
YO ! DUMMY !
What do you think a municipal government is about and for ??
Street lamps in the appropriate places is one of them
This has NOTHING to do with socialism
Post by David Kaye
So many rightwingers have no idea how much it costs to provide the
services they take for granted and that there's no way they'd ever pay for
them out of their own pockets.
So many right-wingers are so much smarter than pompous pinky nincompoops
likes you, who need stupid presumptions to justify your belief that you are
so much smarter than most anyone else.
I'll point out that in the US, it's the so-called conservatives who pay most
of the taxes that pay for a lo of those services you are babbling about.
How do we know that ?
Because a great many voters who vote Democrat/liberal/progressive just
happen to be on the left side of the earnings bell curve.
That's also why the Democrat/liberal/progressive just happen to pander
to them for their votes
Post by David Kaye
Oh, it's happened many times where governments have gone broke, such as
the town of Hollister here in California. Sure, people mowed the lawn in
front of the library FOR A WHILE, then got tired of it and stopped. So,
for some time the grass was growing tall and brown, creating a fire
hazard. I believe they finally passed a tax increase to allow the town to
provide at least some fundamental services.
And do tell us what drove Hollister into bankruptcy ?
Atila Iskander
2012-09-19 19:57:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has enough
to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of outrageous
medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been even when it had
its most right-wing governments.
1) The basic presumption that government somehow owes people a minimum
wage is nutty
That really is not and should never be the role of a government
2) People have faced "outrageous medical bills before this century"
The notion that I should pay for some stranger's medical care, in
part or in whole, because such as you declare that (magically) they have a
right to any an all medical care that they need no matter the cost is
outrageous.
If you feel some duty in that regard, go for it
But don't force others to live up to it too
It makes no sense for Americans to brag about how low their taxes are in
comparison to those of many other countries (all the while bitching about
how high their taxes are) when they have to pay out large sums of their
net income to profit-making entities (or to empire-building "non-profit"
entities) for services that are provided at no (or little) extra cost in
those other countries.
<YAWN>
When you're done spewing ignorant propaganda, do come back
You might have something worth reading
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 21:34:14 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:57:42 -0500, "Atila Iskander"
Post by Atila Iskander
Post by David Kaye
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What do you mean, "a toilet like this"? The United States enjoys one of the
highest standards of living in the world. True, there are others with
higher standards, such as Germany, Australia, Canada, etc., but they're more
socialist than we are.
If it's socialist to make sure that even the lowest-paid worker has enough
to live on and that nobody has to declare bankruptcy because of outrageous
medical bills, then Australia is "socialist" and has been even when it had
its most right-wing governments.
1) The basic presumption that government somehow owes people a minimum
wage is nutty
Worse - He believes that government demands that *you* owe someone a living
wage.
Post by Atila Iskander
That really is not and should never be the role of a government
Damned straight.
Post by Atila Iskander
2) People have faced "outrageous medical bills before this century"
The notion that I should pay for some stranger's medical care, in
part or in whole, because such as you declare that (magically) they have a
right to any an all medical care that they need no matter the cost is
outrageous.
If you feel some duty in that regard, go for it
But don't force others to live up to it too
You'll never see medical care more expensive than when it's free.
Zero price => infinite demand.
Post by Atila Iskander
It makes no sense for Americans to brag about how low their taxes are in
comparison to those of many other countries (all the while bitching about
how high their taxes are) when they have to pay out large sums of their
net income to profit-making entities (or to empire-building "non-profit"
entities) for services that are provided at no (or little) extra cost in
those other countries.
<YAWN>
When you're done spewing ignorant propaganda, do come back
You might have something worth reading
Not going to happen.
Bill
2012-09-18 22:41:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point? We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%). What's with
that?
Our opportunities were sold to to a lower bidder? What happened to
minimum wage?
Post by Willard Lazybe
We used to be a great country. This is sickening...
harry
2012-09-19 06:04:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point?  We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%).  What's with
that?
    Our opportunities were sold to to a lower bidder?  What happened to
minimum wage?
Post by Willard Lazybe
We used to be a great country.  This is sickening...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
American slaves will work for (next to) nothing.
k***@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
2012-09-19 18:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by harry
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point?  We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%).  What's with
that?
    Our opportunities were sold to to a lower bidder?  What happened to
minimum wage?
Post by Willard Lazybe
We used to be a great country.  This is sickening...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
American slaves will work for (next to) nothing.
You work for the Queen (much less than nothing).
HeyBub
2012-09-19 02:36:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
The last eleven presidents, Truman thru Bush the younger, had a combined
total of 38 months in which unemployment exceeded 8%. The current
administration has had 43. Consecutive.

If people can't get work, they'll do whatever is necessary to put a few
beans on the table.
Ashton Crusher
2012-09-25 01:38:32 UTC
Permalink
As George Carlin said, "There's no one in the third world passing up
bread because they have a gluten intolerance." The US is becoming
soft and lazy and indolent and just plain stupid compared to any other
developed country. Much of the blame for the stupidity can go to
religion but as for the rest, much of the blame there goes to the gvt.

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:25:10 -0400, Willard Lazybe
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point? We're all going to be collecting social security
disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%). What's with
that?
We used to be a great country. This is sickening...
==============================
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8786049-yet-another-record-americans-collecting-disability
8,786,049: Yet Another Record for Americans Collecting Disability
(CNSNews.com) - The Social Security Administration has released new data
revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal
disability insurance payments in September. That sets yet another record
for the number of Americans on disability.
The 8,786,049 workers taking federal disability in September is a net
increase of 18,108 from the 8,767,941 workers who took federal
disability in August.
Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal
disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number
actually working.
In August 1967, 74,767,000 Americans were working (according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics) and 1,152,861 were taking federal disability
insurance (according to the Social Security Administration). That means
that at that time there were about 65 Americans working for each worker
collecting disability.
In August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were working and 8,767,941 were on
disability--meaning there were only 16.2 people working for each person
collecting disability.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a record 88,921,000
Americans were “not in the labor force” in August. These were Americans
who were at least 16 years old, who were not in the military or in an
institution such as a prison or a nursing home, and who did not have a
job and had not actively sought one in the last four weeks.
Also in August, according to the BLS, only 63.5 percent of the civilian
population (those over 16, who were not in the military or in an
institution) participated in the labor force. That was the lowest level
of labor force participation in 31 years. To participate in the labor
force a person must either have a job or at least be actively trying to
find one.
frag
2012-09-25 04:30:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ashton Crusher
As George Carlin said, "There's no one in the third world passing up
bread because they have a gluten intolerance." The US is becoming
soft and lazy and indolent and just plain stupid compared to any other
developed country. Much of the blame for the stupidity can go to
religion but as for the rest, much of the blame there goes to the gvt.
It's the fault of top posters.
Post by Ashton Crusher
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:25:10 -0400, Willard Lazybe
Post by Willard Lazybe
My question is -> how can a great country like ours slide into the
toilet like this?
What's the end-point? We're all going to be collecting social
security disability payments once our unemployment payments run out?
If this keeps up, if we keep becoming disabled, then we'll be easy
pickings for Russia or China if they want to invade and take us over.
Our labor participation rate is at an all-time low (63.5%). What's
with that?
We used to be a great country. This is sickening...
==============================
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8786049-yet-another-record-americans-co
llecting-disability
8,786,049: Yet Another Record for Americans Collecting Disability
(CNSNews.com) - The Social Security Administration has released new
data revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal
disability insurance payments in September. That sets yet another
record for the number of Americans on disability.
The 8,786,049 workers taking federal disability in September is a net
increase of 18,108 from the 8,767,941 workers who took federal
disability in August.
Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal
disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number
actually working.
In August 1967, 74,767,000 Americans were working (according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics) and 1,152,861 were taking federal
disability insurance (according to the Social Security
Administration). That means that at that time there were about 65
Americans working for each worker collecting disability.
In August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were working and 8,767,941 were
on disability--meaning there were only 16.2 people working for each
person collecting disability.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a record 88,921,000
Americans were “not in the labor force” in August. These were
Americans who were at least 16 years old, who were not in the military
or in an institution such as a prison or a nursing home, and who did
not have a job and had not actively sought one in the last four weeks.
Also in August, according to the BLS, only 63.5 percent of the
civilian population (those over 16, who were not in the military or in
an institution) participated in the labor force. That was the lowest
level of labor force participation in 31 years. To participate in the
labor force a person must either have a job or at least be actively
trying to find one.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...