Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 161
  1. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Jurupa Valley, CA
    Posts
    1,658
    I never said the constitution shouldn't be changed in any ways - I said it is being pissed on, and ignored, without properly being changed. The writers described how the change process is to go, and what would be required to make changes (2/3rd vote by both houses to propose the amendment, then 3/4 of the states must ratify it), and, because the American public doesn't care about doing it right, they let the politicians just get away with doing what they want, WITHOUT ratification. That is how the government has gotten large and powerful enough to destroy the country - american's simply don't care. If all of these infractions had gone to the public in actual votes, almost none of them would have been ratified, because MOST do not want them if asked directly - however, with it all being done illegally, then the public's apathy kicks in, and the barn doors get left open.

  2. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,749
    Quote Originally Posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
    I never said the constitution shouldn't be changed in any ways - I said it is being pissed on, and ignored, without properly being changed. The writers described how the change process is to go, and what would be required to make changes (2/3rd vote by both houses to propose the amendment, then 3/4 of the states must ratify it), and, because the American public doesn't care about doing it right, they let the politicians just get away with doing what they want, WITHOUT ratification. That is how the government has gotten large and powerful enough to destroy the country - american's simply don't care. If all of these infractions had gone to the public in actual votes, almost none of them would have been ratified, because MOST do not want them if asked directly - however, with it all being done illegally, then the public's apathy kicks in, and the barn doors get left open.
    You & I just kinda said the same thing. But in place of apathy, which is an ingredient, a new factor has entered our market place..and that is the kind of voters that not only promote but believe that all of what you describe is the best way to govern this country.

    Hence we have our problem. And in my official unoffcial research into this weird factor I have found that all, so far, that have been interviewed/talked to by me find that the supporters of the usurp of this country is being done actively by individuals that are only considered with their self interests in place of the interests of our country; and, most importantly, they have some sort or form of financial connection or support from this radical form of government based on the followings and beliefs of this present President.

    Translated, he's buying their votes while at the same time making them dependent on his every word and move.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  3. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Losantiville
    Posts
    1,720
    Let me get this straight - everything sucks because you disagree with the policy taken by the current administration. Spoken like a true partisan hack, just like the majority of the House, even if they were for it at one time "I'm against it" now.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtMV44yoXZ0

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,749
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    Let me get this straight - everything sucks because you disagree with the policy taken by the current administration. Spoken like a true partisan hack, just like the majority of the House, even it they were for it at one time "I'm against it" now.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtMV44yoXZ0
    I'm more surprised that to support whatever point you were attempting to make on this subject that you did not use cartoon characters.

    At least the video presented a gentleman who was very talented and benefited greatly by the free enterprise system in place at that time in our history.

    Now I'm waiting for a duck to drop out of the ceiling with your magic word for today.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  5. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Jurupa Valley, CA
    Posts
    1,658
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltaT View Post
    You & I just kinda said the same thing. But in place of apathy, which is an ingredient, a new factor has entered our market place..and that is the kind of voters that not only promote but believe that all of what you describe is the best way to govern this country.

    Hence we have our problem. And in my official unoffcial research into this weird factor I have found that all, so far, that have been interviewed/talked to by me find that the supporters of the usurp of this country is being done actively by individuals that are only considered with their self interests in place of the interests of our country; and, most importantly, they have some sort or form of financial connection or support from this radical form of government based on the followings and beliefs of this present President.

    Translated, he's buying their votes while at the same time making them dependent on his every word and move.
    That element has always been there - voting for what would benefit the voter directly - that has always been a strong element in any democracy - and that is fine, because the constitution puts limits on this behavior - if it is obeyed. The supreme court at one point was supposed to enforce this, but has turned into a political system itself, removing all honor from a once 'honorable' position.

  6. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,749
    Quote Originally Posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
    That element has always been there - voting for what would benefit the voter directly - that has always been a strong element in any democracy - and that is fine, because the constitution puts limits on this behavior - if it is obeyed. The supreme court at one point was supposed to enforce this, but has turned into a political system itself, removing all honor from a once 'honorable' position.
    And we agree on that also but we are into splitting hairs in definitions now, which is necessary for true understandings of points of views.

    One of the basic elements of our world is fire. Fire can be use to heat a house or burn the house down. The basic element present in our political leadership world of the US is in the burn the house down concept in place of having a warm safe house for ourselves and our families which was earned, designed and built by us in our efforts and ability to promote our self interests.

    And in doing so the US benefits as does our own neighbors, communities. This method makes all of us stronger and promotes the best of us to do the most in our own lives.

    Individual houses indicate individual freedoms and so self interest also serves the self interest of the community. Under the present administration, and this is a simplified example, they/he wants to burn down the exsiting structure(s) so all would have to live under the same roof (fairness), share the same resources ( supplied by them/him) and direct our lives as a mass and not individuals.

    Dependency would be and is the ultimate goal.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Losantiville
    Posts
    1,720
    I think there is some misplaced blame here. The rampant capitalism since the beginning of the 19th century has destroyed the family as the center of society and replaced it with a soulless structure that has not replaced the family as a security net for its members. The house has been burnt down for years now and the family dispersed to the wind depending on where the monolith companies need "labor". Mobility has increased and stability is non-existant. The government is the provider of last resort so that the bottom doesn't fall out. The Mega-corps want it that way so you had better face it, that is the way it will be, no matter who runs the show. You just need to look at S Korea to see this phenomenon on steroids, they never had a need for retirement planning, welfare,etc it was taken for granted that the family would shoulder the responsibility. Since south Koreans are abandoning their families for lucrative careers the social fabric is disappearing just like it has in the US. Unbridled capitalism really is the antithesis of what most conservatives desire, they just can't see it.

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,749
    Interesting points of view. That help me to understand better where you are coming from. Very few supporters of this present day condition ever really explain their beliefs.

    The rampant capitalism you speak of -- isn't part of that due to the change over of our country from an agricultrial society to an industrial society? And wouldn't that be a natural evolution no matter what free country in the world we would speak of?

    And hasn't captialism improved, notice I did not use the word rampant, our lives including health?

    So if I'm reading you correctly we should have always had a predominant governing body looking over us citizens to pull the reigns in or let them out based on what this central body would deem good for the masses. Is this your view?

    If the family has been destroyed then why since the 1800's - just as a date in history -- that the family has pretty much been the center of our importance up until late? Even our tax code is written to favor the family.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Losantiville
    Posts
    1,720
    The destruction of the family safety net was inevitable with industrialization, this could be viewed as good or bad but the result is the same, when societies move from a family centered system (agricultural or otherwise) to a more centralized system the emphasis is shifted to the entity providing the "bread". Business had the opportunity to provide this safety net for their employees and the better ones did for many years but since most businesses are in business to make money (nothing wrong with that) they are not easily convinced to provide these services to employees. Hence we have a void, large companies realize this and depend on the government to provide this safety net, because social unrest is not good for business. The problem comes in when this safety net is not funded according to the benefits derived from its existence.

  10. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Jurupa Valley, CA
    Posts
    1,658
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    The destruction of the family safety net was inevitable with industrialization, this could be viewed as good or bad but the result is the same, when societies move from a family centered system (agricultural or otherwise) to a more centralized system the emphasis is shifted to the entity providing the "bread". Business had the opportunity to provide this safety net for their employees and the better ones did for many years but since most businesses are in business to make money (nothing wrong with that) they are not easily convinced to provide these services to employees. Hence we have a void, large companies realize this and depend on the government to provide this safety net, because social unrest is not good for business. The problem comes in when this safety net is not funded according to the benefits derived from its existence.
    I think you are slightly blurring the lines between the industrialization of the society, and the generation of the welfare state. They are not necessarily linked, though they did occur at about the same time in our case. I think a lot of this comes back to the new deal era, where yes, because of the 'rampant capitalism' as you call it, many were in a bad place. The problem came about when the US government decided it needed to 'fix' it by manipulating the natural order of things in a way that we are still feeling today. Were it not for this misstep, the problems of that era would have naturally fixed themselves. People would have probably starved, etc. - but those with a strong self worth and family preservation would have prospered, and we would be in a much better state today. You cannot coddle a person into success, and you cannot coddle a people into success. Harsh reality, but it has proven true over and over throughout history. The biggest problem is that those deviations from a constitutional republic in the early 20th century set a precedence for such behavior, and was the beginning of the downward spiral. I suppose the only comforting point now is that there are some who finally see the bottom of the pit, and are readying for the quick stop at the end, ready to start jumping back up - I don't pity those who feel the need to give in and land head first, because they didn't have a choice on the ballots.

  11. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Losantiville
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
    I think you are slightly blurring the lines between the industrialization of the society, and the generation of the welfare state. They are not necessarily linked, though they did occur at about the same time in our case. I think a lot of this comes back to the new deal era, where yes, because of the 'rampant capitalism' as you call it, many were in a bad place. The problem came about when the US government decided it needed to 'fix' it by manipulating the natural order of things in a way that we are still feeling today. Were it not for this misstep, the problems of that era would have naturally fixed themselves. People would have probably starved, etc. - but those with a strong self worth and family preservation would have prospered, and we would be in a much better state today. You cannot coddle a person into success, and you cannot coddle a people into success. Harsh reality, but it has proven true over and over throughout history. The biggest problem is that those deviations from a constitutional republic in the early 20th century set a precedence for such behavior, and was the beginning of the downward spiral. I suppose the only comforting point now is that there are some who finally see the bottom of the pit, and are readying for the quick stop at the end, ready to start jumping back up - I don't pity those who feel the need to give in and land head first, because they didn't have a choice on the ballots.
    Interesting, so you are essentially arguing the Darwinian theory of economics where the weak are purged from the ranks. Grandma and Grampa might disagree.

  12. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    3,824
    Coddle a person into success.......elaborate.

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Well what an interesting thread, with netsalt, CraziFuzzy, DeltaT giving good food for thought. Oh so much better than the bickering we are used to. So maybe I should throw a little different spice into the soup. I think the problem is credit. It changed society and how we look at what we have and what we deserve. My 26 year old nephew asked my mother 'Grandma, are you still making payments on your house?' He has no clue what it is like buying things for cash, actually saving up the money before you buy something. The whole concept of I want it now and deserve it started a generation before him and now it is so entrenched our economy would not run without it.

    People now do not wish for things, they expect it. And this attitude extends to government now. We want and it should provide. If it does not we will pick someone who will promises us they will give it to us. If people had to learn restraint and save for what they wanted or for their future I bet government would be a lot simpler.
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event