• 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.

Queston for hunters...

JNugent said:
I can't say I align myself with either political party on a regular basis. I have a system of morals and values and religious beliefs my own. Neither party will ever be totally in line with me. So I go for the lesser of two evils or I participate in the swing vote. I know that doesn't really help, but at least I exercise my right to vote. Nor do I believe forcing any of my beliefs on anyone else, or saying my way is the only way, I couldn't see how anyone would think I was trying to do that from my earlier post. What I'm trying to say is, within reason and in accordance with laws, we should have the freedom to live our lives how *WE* want as individuals. Not having someone or some group up on capitol hill deciding for me. Whether it be my guns, my snakes, or who'll teach religious values to my children, whatever. I'm saying that what burns me up is the service I've given to this country, the personal sacrifices I've made, (under both parties administrations) and how they're trying to restrict more of those freedoms I've fought for. Kind of seems like they're doing me wrong. I'm not asking for much. I just want to finish my 20 years, move back to Louisiana on my property, and be left alone to enjoy my life how I see fit. I'm not a criminal, I wouldn't be hurting anyone else.. so what's the big deal?
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying. And I agree with you 100%. However...

The people that most strongly support your right to own and purchase whatever guns you would like to, are the same people that want to outlaw homosexuality, enforce religious education in schools, adopt a governmentally sanctioned religion in Christianity, forbid women from getting abortions safely and legally under ANY circumstances, and generally tell everyone else what they should believe in, how they should act, what church to go to, and whom they are allowed to fall in love with.

Now...you ask the majority of the people in this country their honest opinion, and *most* of them will tell you the same thing...hunting weapons are not the problem. People, in general, do not have a problem with hunters or hunting weapons, and I would dare say *most* don't have a problem with personal and home protection. What they DO want is legislation in place to prevent lunatics, psychotics, and people with absolutely no sense from acquiring these weapons.

MY problem is not with the responsible ownership of guns. My problem is with the irresponsible attempts to strip me of every other freedom I have, and the thinly veiled attempts to monitor and control every citizen of this country under the one thumb rule of the Federal Government.

Our last administration in office tried as hard they possibly could to pull that off. There isn't a whole lot that could make me prefer the last administration to the new one, no matter WHAT Obama has in mind for the country OR himself...
 
Nova_C said:
Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, United Kingdom, etc. There's lots of cases of Socialism working.
Click to expand...

Having free medicine and schooling doesn't make you a socialist country...

What do you mean 'Comedian'? How are those nations not socialist?
Click to expand...
For starters, I believe they are all run by a democratically elected parliament.
 
tyflier said:
Having free medicine and schooling doesn't make you a socialist country...


For starters, I believe they are all run by a democratically elected parliament.
Click to expand...

Public healthcare, public education, welfare, etc, are all socialist policies.

And what does democracy have to do with socialism? Democracy is a governmental system, socialism is an economic system.
 
If socialism is so perfect, then please tell all the wealthy foreigners that can afford it to stop coming to America for our non-socialism produced (i.e., better) health care.

Oh, and here is why I'm against socialism here in these united states.....
 

Attachments

  • 91301-004-68C32FE3.jpg
    91301-004-68C32FE3.jpg
    41.7 KB · Views: 30
If your healthcare is better, that's cool, but then again, only wealthy foreigners go to America for treatment, and they do it because they don't have to wait in line. I mean, if you're rich you obviously deserve better, right?

And that's the constitution? Where in the constitution does it say the government can't provide free services to the nation's citizens?
 
Here is the Merriam - Webster definition:

so·cial·ism Listen to the pronunciation of socialism
Pronunciation:
\ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function:
noun
Date:
1837

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

I don't think Canada or Western European countries would be socialist under any of these definitions.
 
In it's pure form, no, but Canada has many crown corporations (Corporations owned by the state). Petro-Canada was started by the government and was a crown corporation for years before being privatized after the oil crash in the 80s. Parts of Canada (Such as BC) has only government provided insurance. Under the Health Care Act, it is illegal to provide private health insurance (Althought the Supreme Court struck down the law in Quebec). Our health care system is publicly owned and provided, our education is public.

Canada is very socialist and under the Conservative government, may even become more so. Canada is certainly no more Capitalist than it is Socialist.
 
I will note: That my definition of Socialism was separate from complete government or public control and was not correct.

However, I will say this: Neither the US nor Canada nor any other nation is all that Capitalist, either. Pure Capitalism is certainly just as bad as pure Socialism because they both depend on humans being honorable with little oversight.
 
Generally speaking, the more socialist a country becomes, the less individual initiative and hard work will advance a person beyond those who are less ambitious. Because of human nature (i.e., we are very much individuals compared to certain species of truly socialistic animals such as bees and ants), most of us will be less inclined to work harder than our neighbors if we don't see good results from the extra effort.

If the State will provide a low, but decent, baseline of standard of living no matter the effort put forth, then increasingly larger numbers of people will put forth the minimum of effort required. Of course, some people will still be passionate about their work and still work hard. But they will be in the minority if compensation doesn't equate to the extra effort.

In the long run, the more the government interferes with the risks and rewards of individuals who work (or don't work) hard and who take risks in starting new and innovative business ideas, the less individuals are likely take those risks and work hard to achieve their goals. It is just the way human nature works.

If enough people decide to take the easy, government provided way, then society as a whole will suffer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top