• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Example of What's Wrong with America

I dunno, some people here make a big deal about government encroachment on their freedom, but I guess if you receive a government paycheque, the notion of individual freedom goes right out the window.

Funny how that happens.
 
Nova_C said:
At what point does it stop being your money? Are all the employees of the banks that received government bailout money beholden to you?
Click to expand...

Yes, they SHOULD be. They can pay themselves huge bonuses with that money and you don't have any issues with that? They are business entities that made poor choices in how to run their business. And I am expected to pay for that?

Nova_C said:
Employees of government contractors? The contractors themselves?
Click to expand...

Nope. They WORKED for and EARNED the money they got. It was not GIVEN to them for no like value in return. They were PAID for a job that was done. Theoretically, anyway. But the point is they were not GIVEN the money, they EARNED it, just like I originally earned the money that was paid to them.

Obviously you can't see the difference, can you?

Nova_C said:
How many times does the money change hands before you no longer hold sway over the people that have received it?
Click to expand...

As long as it is forcibly taken from the citizens of this country, and given to others with no return that directly benefits the EARNERS of that money.

Nova_C said:
This is very educational. I guess freedom really is all about money, isn't it?
Click to expand...

That sort of statement seems to be said quite often by people who have no skin in the game. People are quite willing to spend money freely and easily as long as it isn't THEIR money being spent. You fail to see the difference between "money" and the product of one's own hard labors to produce and earn that "money". The "freedom" part comes into play by the application of who has discretion over what is being done with MY money. If it is not me, then no, I do not have the "freedom" of that discretion. Someone else does. Where is my "freedom" in that equation? You equate "freedom" with someone taking money from someone who earned it and giving it to someone else who did not earn it? How is that "freedom"?
 
Nova_C said:
I dunno, some people here make a big deal about government encroachment on their freedom, but I guess if you receive a government paycheque, the notion of individual freedom goes right out the window.

Funny how that happens.
Click to expand...

Please define "paycheque" in the context you are using it.

You don't see the difference between a check paid for services or materials rendered, and a check paid as unearned income for welfare, food stamps, and other various and sundry categories where the money is basically a gift?
 
Rich Z said:
That sort of statement seems to be said quite often by people who have no skin in the game. People are quite willing to spend money freely and easily as long as it isn't THEIR money being spent. You fail to see the difference between "money" and the product of one's own hard labors to produce and earn that "money". The "freedom" part comes into play by the application of who has discretion over what is being done with MY money. If it is not me, then no, I do not have the "freedom" of that discretion. Someone else does. Where is my "freedom" in that equation? You equate "freedom" with someone taking money from someone who earned it and giving it to someone else who did not earn it? How is that "freedom"?
Click to expand...

What does the bolded even mean?

And you describe taxes as being forcibly taken from you. Am I correct in concluding, then, that you consider taxation to be theft? If I remember correctly, you are a big proponent of Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground. Why not defend yourself the next time the taxman comes to steal your property?
 
Nova_C said:
What does the bolded even mean?
Click to expand...

I presume you are smart enough to figure it out.

Nova_C said:
And you describe taxes as being forcibly taken from you. Am I correct in concluding, then, that you consider taxation to be theft? If I remember correctly, you are a big proponent of Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground. Why not defend yourself the next time the taxman comes to steal your property?
Click to expand...

Could happen. Americans have been known to do that in the past.
 
Nova_C said:
... Am I correct in concluding, then, that you consider taxation to be theft? ....
Click to expand...
If it is for anything other than what is authorized by the US Constitution, YES!!!
 
I know what 'skin in the game' means, I just don't know what you're trying to say by referring to it.

Anyway, regardless of the lawfulness of taxation, freedom is not something that is bought. Receiving government funds does not suspend one's freedoms. The US constitution does not make any reference to rescinding rights and privileges based on economic situation.

I can understand being upset at the welfare state, or social assistance, since your ideology aligns you against such programs, but I am surprised at how quickly so many of you would strip freedoms from fellow citizens.
 
No freedom or rights have been rescinded. They are perfectly free to go earn money and spend however they wish.
 
Oh, you're describing socialism. Wait, that one is just "You do what we say."
 
I think there should be some distinction between those who receive 'handouts' and those who receive 'assistance'. Not everyone who receives assistance is trying to get a 'free ride', and not everyone with a job is 'earning' a living, or improving the economic structure of our country, IMO.

I believe it mostly comes down to one's ambition to reach a form of independence for themselves, which sometimes has little to do with what job they may (or may not) have, although I would certainly concede that those without jobs make up a majority of the burden, financially, in this country. But I know plenty of people with 'jobs' that suck the life out of their fellow employees by doing little as possible, having miserable attitudes, and yet, for one reason or another, are able to find plenty of handouts that aren't technically issued by the governments benefits programs. Those folks would sadly make it easier on their tax paying counter-parts if they were on the couch with a bag of chips and a six pack.

I know this will probably get flamed with an "at least they have a job!", and I understand that point. They technically pay taxes. However, I would argue that one who has a little assistance on their way to independence is significantly more beneficial to the overall well-being of this country, than those who get off their shift of doing nothing and act as though their role as an American is done. Some people are born with conditions, or live in conditions, that make it very difficult to simply tighten the boot-straps and achieve financial independence. Yet they live their lives with a sort of ambition and determination that is most 'American'. So not everyone should be so easily grouped or labeled.

All I'm saying.. it's easy to judge. Some judgements are very correct, and the older I get, the more I can understand and appreciate the conservative's/libertarian's perspective. This country is full of people who would rather sit on their aces in front of a TV and drool, than create their own reality of success. But I believe it goes (somewhat) both ways. And for all of the assumptions made about those receiving assistance, there is very little (if anything) discussed about those who epitomize 'handout', just because they have an employer. And for me, the "American Dream" is equally tarnished by those people. They contribute equally to our current state of fat-and-happy, which reflects poorly on all of us as Americans, and slowly it brings us all down, no matter how you slice it. We won't flourish as a nation until all of us are held accountible equally for our lack of creativity and innovation.
 
Chip said:
Oh, you're describing socialism. Wait, that one is just "You do what we say."
Click to expand...
With a 400% trade surplus with the US and nationally defended by the US and UK the whole country of Canada is basically on "assistance". Tough to wean that level of dependency so defending it and a socialist/Marxist world view become second nature. :shrugs:
 
Michael823 said:
I think there should be some distinction between those who receive 'handouts' and those who receive 'assistance'. Not everyone who receives assistance is trying to get a 'free ride', and not everyone with a job is 'earning' a living, or improving the economic structure of our country, IMO.

I believe it mostly comes down to one's ambition to reach a form of independence for themselves, which sometimes has little to do with what job they may (or may not) have, although I would certainly concede that those without jobs make up a majority of the burden, financially, in this country. But I know plenty of people with 'jobs' that suck the life out of their fellow employees by doing little as possible, having miserable attitudes, and yet, for one reason or another, are able to find plenty of handouts that aren't technically issued by the governments benefits programs. Those folks would sadly make it easier on their tax paying counter-parts if they were on the couch with a bag of chips and a six pack.

I know this will probably get flamed with an "at least they have a job!", and I understand that point. They technically pay taxes. However, I would argue that one who has a little assistance on their way to independence is significantly more beneficial to the overall well-being of this country, than those who get off their shift of doing nothing and act as though their role as an American is done. Some people are born with conditions, or live in conditions, that make it very difficult to simply tighten the boot-straps and achieve financial independence. Yet they live their lives with a sort of ambition and determination that is most 'American'. So not everyone should be so easily grouped or labeled.

All I'm saying.. it's easy to judge. Some judgements are very correct, and the older I get, the more I can understand and appreciate the conservative's/libertarian's perspective. This country is full of people who would rather sit on their aces in front of a TV and drool, than create their own reality of success. But I believe it goes (somewhat) both ways. And for all of the assumptions made about those receiving assistance, there is very little (if anything) discussed about those who epitomize 'handout', just because they have an employer. And for me, the "American Dream" is equally tarnished by those people. They contribute equally to our current state of fat-and-happy, which reflects poorly on all of us as Americans, and slowly it brings us all down, no matter how you slice it. We won't flourish as a nation until all of us are held accountible equally for our lack of creativity and innovation.
Click to expand...
Some good points Michael.
 
Also, Justin Bieber's charges got dropped. If it were anyone less charismatic, then they would have been punished to a great extent. Money is power, folks. That's one reason America is so lackluster compared to previous eras. Sure, our technology is great but our freedoms are dwindling every day. There's a bill in our legislative circulation in WV that bans sale and trade of all exotic animals, and the wording can make it include even the most common of tropical fish. I am facepalming, but hey, I can always move to Switzerland when I graduate!
 
Sorry for the double post, I meant to add this with the last post. In a lot of cases, it's easier for someone/some family to live off of taxpayer money than to have a job and try to support themselves. The guidelines for financial assistance need updated imo. My parents make enough to make ends meet, and that's about it. However, when it's time to fill out a FAFSA to get (hopefully) some money for school, we get none because the government thinks that if we can make ends meet, then we're stinkin' rich! I feel like the current system perpetuates stuff like this, based on this observation.
 
BTW, I am very sorry, Nova, if you end up getting stuck with the Biebs. I would be fine with SEAL team 6 just handling that job.. do all of North America a favor. (kidding, kidding.. kinda kidding).
 
tsst said:
With a 400% trade surplus with the US and nationally defended by the US and UK the whole country of Canada is basically on "assistance". Tough to wean that level of dependency so defending it and a socialist/Marxist world view become second nature. :shrugs:
Click to expand...

Really, when is the last time your military pulled us out of anything? We were in a Combat role in Afghanistan, our Navy is still in the Persian Gulf and we are still supplying troops to Peacekeeping missions. Who is this threat you are saving us from? Give me a break!! For that matter, I did not know the UK was defending our borders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top