·  News ·  Travel ·  Food ·  Arts ·  Science ·  Sports ·  Advice ·  Religion ·  Life ·  Greensboro · 

How China Came to Own the United States

by Brenda Bowers | Published on March 23rd, 2007, 5:34 pm | News
china owns usa.jpg
china owns usa.jpg (26.23 KiB) Viewed 365 times
On the evening of January 11, 1944, President Roosevelt was unable to give the annual presidential State of the Union speech before Congress so he instead gave it to the entire nation by way of his famous Fireside Chats. Cass Sunstein, a prominent liberal law professor at the University of Chicago called it “the most important speech of the century”. It’s importance is due to the fact that it is the first and most far reaching speech and endorsement of an American president for the legitimizing of the welfare state. The idea of the welfare state is that government MUST GUARANTEE the social and economic security for all citizens.

The fore fathers and creators of the United States of America promised all citizens the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing more! Originally the statement read: life, liberty and happiness. With the word happiness meaning financial well being and security for each individual. It wasn’t long before the delegates realized the mistaken assurance that promise made. No free man or free government could promise happiness (financial security) to it’s citizens. Not all individuals are endowed with the same abilities and talents. Nor are they all desirous of pursuing the same goals. So it follows that in the scheme of things some individuals will be more financially secure than others, and for a wide variety of reasons. One of the founding fathers was a prime example, Samuel Adams, the Father of the American Revolution was a brilliant orator and writer who could have chosen to turn his talent into a source of income and “happiness” (security) for himself and his family. Instead he chose to spend his talent and his time deriding the English Parliament and King George’s treatment of the colonies, and involving himself in other political matters. In that time politics was the realm of the wealthy because there was little pay for holding public office. Because of Adam's choices his family lived on charity. When he was sent to Philadelphia as a delegate to the first Continental Congress the city fathers got together and purchased a suit of clothing for him to wear so his appearance would not embarrass them.

The Founding Father’s quickly added the words the “PURSUIT of happiness”. All men were guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This belief was accepted by all from July 4, 1776 to the last century when our 32nd. President after being elected in 1932 set about initiating his New Deal with Americans and that New Deal he finally legitimized with his speech on January 11, 1944.

It is important for all citizens to recall the one thing the founding fathers knew and avoided when creating a new country and new government, a welfare state is in fact Socialism. And Socialism morphs easily into communism as the state takes from those who have to give to those who have not and in so doing reduces the haves to the level where they can not maintain the investments which produce jobs and job security forcing the state to therefore take over and operate these factories and businesses. The state owns all. All people are guaranteed a job for life and healthcare from birth to death. There are in theory no classes or divides, no people getting more than any others. Well anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention to Russia and China the two largest communist (socialist) countries in the world should be cognizant of the fact that there are very definite disparities between peoples and groups. They should also be aware of the standards of living of even what is in this country considered the middle class. Doctors and scientist are happy the state allows them a three room apartment and a salary of $100 per month. The factory worker gets a two room apartment and only $70 per month. People line up for hours at the grocery stores to be able to purchase a limited supply of groceries from the state own stores and the state own factories and the plants and the state own farms. There are shortages of every type consumer goods because production levels are very low. Why are they low? Why should any one work any harder than the laziest worker if all are going to be paid the same amount for their labors?

As for health care in Russia and China since the Iron Curtain fell we have been treated to the horror stories concerning the conditions in their hospitals. If we ever get to view the conditions of health care in China I am sure we will see the same. The polluting of the rivers in China have made headlines. these same rivers provide the drinking water for millions of people.

This is the welfare state that Franklin D. Roosevelt started and legitimized with his introduction of Social Security, a promised payment of funds to all elderly upon reaching age 65 based on how much they put into the system. (The dirty little secret of Social Security that most Americans don't realize is that every cent a person has put into the system thru pay roll deductions is returned to that person after 2 to 2 1/2 years and after that it is nothing more than Welfare for the Elderly with the younger workers picking up the tab. I hear all the time” I deserve this because I paid into it". The answer is , "Yes you paid into the fund but certainly you are getting much more back."

The Social Security Act was quickly followed by several others that would come to be known as “entitlements” 1)a payment to widows and orphans from this same fund called a Survivors Benefit. Having had experience with the Survivors Benefits I can tell you they are generous enough that a widow and her children can live well enough if not extravagantly. In fact it was President Reagan in 1981 who stopped paying the benefits past age 18 to surviving children who went to college.

2) a Medicaid Bill providing health care to the needy and poor. A bill I fully support and feel should be expanded for the needy children who will be the future workers and supporters of all this largess.

3) guarantee of funds to those who are disabled and unable to work. The only problem with this program is the large disparity in what is considered a disability.

I admit these are all worthy causes but they are like that second bathroom, nice to have if you can afford it. The thing is we the tax payers can not afford them. We couldn't then because we were in a depression and we surely can not now given whaty has been done to the programs and the funding for the programs. In the beginning the payment into the Social Security account from a workers pay check was only ½ of 1%. Another fact of life then was that most people did not reach age 65 so it was deemed a "safe” age for retirement and promise of payment of benefits which of course would not need to be paid. Things have changed considerably over the years. With advances in medical care and then the Medicare Bill which came along in 1965 people began to live much longer. It is not unusual for a person to receive Social Security Benefits for 10 or even 20 years after retirement. And though the payroll deductions into the Social Security Trust Fund is now up to 15% (7 1/2% from each the employee and the employer) the fact of any one person cashing out their contribution in 2+ years is still true.

World War II came along and the military requirements meant jobs were available for everyone. This prosperity continued into the 1950’s and 1960’s. Everyone was on top of the world and everyone remembered FDR. He was in fact all but a God to my parents and grandparents who had lived during the “Great Depression” and Roosevelt was credited with getting us out of the Great Depression. Well, really he did. He got us into a war and wars mean jobs and jobs mean money.

The prosperity of the 1950’s and 1960’s was also primarily due to the war. First, there were jobs during the war years and good money being made but no consumer goods being produced to spend it on so people had money in the ‘50’s for homes and appliances and cars and colleges for their kids. The government encountered a problem tho after the troops began returning home from the war that threatened another depression with more workers than jobs. The government solved this problem by offering the soldiers coming home a GI Bill for special schooling or college which ushered in a huge middle class in the United States which further added to the prosperity of the country for decades. The GI Bill was probably the only outstandingly prosperous and good legislative act of the government since the Constitution of the United States of Amrica was written. Itr made possible the United States as we known it today; a country whose citizens enjoy the highest standard of living in the world. The only shame is that our elected officials failed to make more of this wave of prosperity we at one time were riding.

Anyhow, getting back on topic, the second thing the government did which created jobs was to rebuild Europe with what was called the Marshall Plan (the greatest idea ever conceived after a war. Do read about it if you never have. The Marshall Plan did more to insure peace than any thing else ever could.) It wasn't freeas we were taking back IOU”s from the Europeans for this help. So our factories kept producing and jobs were available into the 1960’s rebuilding Europe and then continuing into the 1980's to supply the restored and gaining in prosperity of the European people with much wanted American products.

Enter President Lyndon Johnson who in 1965 made another welfare state deal with Americans with his Medicare Bill which guaranteed all elderly Americans health care for a very small monthly fee taken from the Social Security Franklin D. Roosevelt had given them. Johnson also expanded Medicaid which I grant was needed, I have always felt the poor and needy should be cared for. Then Johnson looked around and decided more “poor” kids needed to go to college and since the GI Bill wasn’t getting enough of the population in college now that there were fewer soldiers so he started the ball rolling towards the government stepping in and guaranteeing student loans. The money for students loans weren't from the government, but were government backed and the government paid the interest on these loans until the student graduated and began paying back the loans themselves. The banking industry loved this bill! It was a sweetheart deal made in Heaven as far as they were concerned and they couldn't lose because if the student defaulted then the government paid off the principle after paying the interest all those years. Billions of dollars are owed the government on defaulted student loans. (another story for another day).

The Medicare Bill did set up a separate tax for the so-called Medicare Trust Fund, but it basically operates the same as the Social Security Trust Fund and is stuffed with all but worthless T-Bills. Both extra tax systems are pay as you go schemes where those paying now are carrying the load for the present recipients. When more funds are taken in than are needed then they are to go into these trust funds. The funds are then taken out of the Trust Fund and used for current government expenses while being replaced with Treasury Notes, or promises of payment by the same government( read that: tax payers) from future taxes when the funds are needed. I suggest some of you take a good look at the predicted value of treasury notes in the future when they are “needed”. They ain’t got no value at all! And next year when the first of that huge group of so-called baby boomers (children born to the returning WWII veterans) start to retire and demand their Social Security the only place our government has to turn is to tax you the tax payer more, or to do what it has been doing for years now and that is sell more of our treasury notes and assets to China. We are selling our country to China thru buying far more from them than they are buying from us. Jobs that were once in the United States have now gone to China. Our government is spending more and more than it is taking in in taxes meaning the government must "borrow" this money from somewhere to pay the deficit. Along comes China quite willing to take our government's IOU's for its goods. Thus my title for this rant: China now OWNS the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! Sincerely, BB


**John Marini, Professor of political science at The University of Nevada spoke at Hillsdale College and his speech was later printed in Hillsdale’s Imprimis Newsletter. This particular newsletter is what got inspired this post. For you not familiar with Imprimis Newsletter it has a monthly readership of 1,250,000. Hillsdale College's motto is Educating for Liberty since 1844. Their roll call of speakers are some of the foremost experts in their fields. They have a web site if you too would like to receive their newsletter.
 
 
Oh pulease!

A few years ago it was Japan - remember 'Rising Sun' by the Paranoid Crichton? And let's not forget the Saudi's. I expect the "US will be owned" by India next as hi-tech jobs go off-shore to well educated and low paid Indians instead of highly paid, poorly educated Americans.

Socialism does not morph into communism any more than conservatism morphs into fascism. There are a very large number of socialist countries that exist quite happily in a stable middle ground. Most feel that a healthy, well educated, employed workforce is a 'good thing'.

As for how to pay for preventing the elderly and those unable to work due to injury from starving; perhaps the $200,000,000/day spent on the Iraq war might go a little way to help?

By US standards virtually all European countries are socialist. And in general very happy about it. The USA is largely by itself at one extreme, China is certainly a long way at the other. You seem to be mixing fiscal conservatism with welfare and totalitarianism. A state can have a mixed economy, social welfare and be a democracy. e.g. UK, France, Canada, Australia, Spain, Netherlands etc. Totalitarian states are not necessarily socialist.

Governments can get away with overspending for many years but it eventually catches up with them (and the unfortunate population) with inflation, currency devaluation, recessions and unemployment. Welcome to your future. Wars and government spending can take a country out of a depression - but it's usually what starts them too.

I'm simply pointing out that social spending isn't the cause of the problem and trade isolationism and protectionism isn't the answer. Bush has found plenty of ways to piss away huge quantities of money and no one would accuse him of being a socialist. It's just priorities. Personally I don't see supporting the elderly and disadvantaged as being like that second bathroom, more like a bedroom for Grandma. But the Iraq war is more like an imported Italian marble toilet with gold plated plumbing and a subscription to Big 'Uns for Dad.

The solution? Good decisions at the ballot box. Unfortunately it won't be easy or popular getting spending under control but it can be done.
March 23rd, 2007, 8:53 pm
User avatar
A Person
 
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North
A Person wrote:But the Iraq war is more like an imported Italian marble toilet with gold plated plumbing and a subscription to Big 'Uns for Dad.

The solution? Good decisions at the ballot box. Unfortunately it won't be easy or popular getting spending under control but it can be done.

So true! The reason we are under such huge debt to China is Bush's wild and profligate spending while at the same time, protecting his family and rich buddies (about 1% of the population or less) from taxes. He knows that the middle class won't finance his war (at least not while he is on office), and he isn't about to let his rich buddies pay one dime of his insane war spending spree, so of course he had to borrow all the money from China.

And his buddy Karl Rove is a master as sleight of hand. This is why all the silly squawking about gays and lesbians takes front and center near any election. It is the only group against which a lot of people feel it is still acceptable to discriminate. So of course, the conservative churches will rant and inflame their membership over that at election time so the stupid conservative church members won't notice that it is their pockets that are being picked and their children's future being mortgaged to fund Mr. Bush's lucrative war machine. (Lucrative for Mr. Bush and his family, that is. Remember, his family owns a big chunk of that military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about so urgently.) He is the worst president this country has ever seen, from the perspective of preserving America and its way of life.

And idiot conservatives continue to vote for him and his ilk, while he destroys the constituiton, the very foundation of this country, as fast as he can. He has openly stated he is a major follower of the one-world government movement you know. I used to think the people warning about that agenda were crazies. Now I realize they were prophets who had a rather poor presentation style.
March 24th, 2007, 6:16 am
Questioner
 
Location: Colorado
A Person, Happy to hear from you. In answer to your statements: There are many countries in the world with some type of socialistic political parties who are sometimes in power. There are a few more that claim to be Democratic Socialistic countries. As defined “Democratic socialism is a broad political movement propagating the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. This means that the means of production are controlled by the entire population through democratically elected representatives.” This is in contrast to our capitalistic democracy where the means of production is own by and controlled by individual citizens while the running of the country is by a democratically elected body. The governments role is supposed to be limited to defense of the citizenry and providing such necessities as can be used by all for the convenience of all (ex. Highways, dams, postal service and limited welfare aid to the needy.)

I have tried to define both forms of government as simply as possible for this discussion . Of the countries claiming to be Socialist Democracies most in fact are dictatorships. When the means of production is owned and controlled by the “government” an enormous amount of trust must be given to the elected officials to do what is right for ALL the people. I know of no county on earth where this is the case. When any given power group owns and controls all means of production which is the life of the economy and people it is very easy to move to one man or a small group in total control. Russia under Putin is moving back to Communism as he takes back the industries that were set up and privately own after the fall of the first attempt at Communism went bankrupt and fell under Gorbachev (1985-1991). Perhaps you know of a well run and happy citizenry under Socialism and can enlighten me. Most are semi-socialist democracies where the basic necessities like electricity and a major industry or two are owned in theory by the people and controlled by elected officials. The vast majority of the “means of production” (JOBS) are privately owned and operated. France is an example.


The difference being when Japan was buying into the United States heavily the debt burden was around $2,000 per person now the debt burdened of the United States was far, far more. The debt burden now is up to $440,000 per house hold, or approximately $75,000 per person. That is the amount of money the government would need from each of us right now today to pay off all our obligations as of today. And the debt is growing exponentially.

I believe you can see from the above figures that the $200 billion a day you claim the war is costing wouldn’t make much difference to our debt burden. A drop in a huge bucket.

SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:That's the key, isn't it? We have yet to learn the lesson the Britain took 200 years to learn before us -- the cost of maintaining a world-spanning empire is prohibitive. But once that empire is taken off our hands, we'll be able to afford a few "creature comforts" like minimal universal health care and a decent education system.

And if we can get the national debt paid down -- watch out! We might not have to pay 40% of our income to keep the nation running!



Southern Fried Infidel, You are so right we MUST stop being all to the rest of the world. The difference between the United States and Great Britain is that Great Britain TOOK FROM the countries in their world empire. The United States GIVES TO absolutely every country on earth. WE have become during one short century the world’s police force and the world’s food bank. The only way we can stop being the World’s Sucker is to completely fall as did the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics when their economic mismanagement bankrupted the government. But, the rest of the world really doesn’t dare let this happen because they are riding free in our boat and will sink with us. And of course when governments fall chaos results. The fuse to that chaos is now being lite in the Middle East and unless the world does something to stop it in time the bomb will go off. (Witness: Russia has been helping and encouraging Iran in it’s drive towards obtaining nuclear weapons. Russia knows this CAN NOT ever happen but has played along just to annoy the US. Russia is now pulling back. I hope they didn’t wait too long.)

Thank you for stopping by Mr. Southern Fried Infidel.

A Person, Our problems did NOT start 8 years ago. The problems started years ago, in fact even before 1932 which was my starting point in this post because it was at this point that the country began it's flirtation with socialism.

A Person, the countries you name have Universal Healthcare with extremely high taxes instead of very low wages as do most socialistic countries, but no other socialistic attributes. The means of production are privately owned in these countries, but there again very heavily taxed. Are the people happy? Having lived and traveled among them I can tell you they most certainly are not. Canadians surge across the American borders just to buy such mundane things a as toilet paper and paper towels for God’s sake!

I did not say that Totalitarian states were Socialistic. I do maintain that if the means of production (all business, farms, factories and utilities are supposedly owned by the people and controlled by the elected officials) it is extremely easy for a dictator to take control; example: Putin in Russia. And, human nature being what it is this is what ultimately happens. This is the reason the countries you named have resisted putting their livelihoods in the hands of the elected officials, but kept them in private hands. The elected can and do tax these industries as well as the people. It is cheaper for my friends to come to the United States once a year to make their purchases than to buy the same things at home. And even when the things they purchase over here are manufactured in their own countries and exported to the Untied States! Watch the news, read a news paper, the months of November and December our larger cities are swamped with Europeans. There has to be a reason for this and it is taxes to pay for their poor quality Universal Health care system.

You are no fool. Do your homework. Read something besides the Daily Kos. Open your mind to as many diverse ideas as possible and then THINK for yourself.

And get off of blaming the past 8 years on EVERYTHING that is wrong with this country. Were you just born 8 years ago? Do you not remember these same problems you are talking about now being talked about before? In two more years we will elect another man as president and I will bet you now that be he Republican or Democrat you will still be talking about the same old problems.

Thank you for your visit. I wont be answering any more comments on this topic as I am composing Part 2 now. BB
March 24th, 2007, 1:25 pm
BrendaBee
 
You touch on a few things which I'll try to answer. Americans love to boast of their low taxes, Canadians and Britons bemoan their high ones. What is the reality?
Code: Select all
Country Business Personal Sales
Canada  36.10%   15-29%   6% - 14% Dep on province
UK      30%      0-40%    0% / 5% / 17.50%
USA     35%      0-35%    0-9.75%-16.75% dep on state
Not really that different is it?

Exchange rates have the biggest effect on cross border shopping, rather than the relative tax rates - and visitors can often claim back sales taxes. Americans cross the border northwards in droves to buy medications. If Europeans and Canadians can have the disposable income to afford the airfare for a winter holiday in the American south, it's hardly suggests they're taxed to death. It doesn't mean that they are unhappy where they are.

Of course the US financial woes are not entirely Bush's fault, he is just the latest in a long line of leaders who chose to spend more of the country's money than it receives in taxes. As I said reality will eventually catch up and then the route back to solvency will be painful. But it can't be laid at the feet of a 'flirtation with socialism'. The US could afford a generous social program if it chose to, other countries have and managed to maintain fiscal responsibility.

You also can't blame the US generosity in foreign aid. Although the US is only beaten in absolute amounts by Japan, in terms of aid as a percentage of GDP the US ranks #22 (US-0.1%, Sweden-0.7%, Norway 1.1%) - unless you count smart bombs as aid
March 24th, 2007, 10:32 pm
User avatar
A Person
 
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North
A Person wrote:You touch on a few things which I'll try to answer. Americans love to boast of their low taxes, Canadians and Britons bemoan their high ones. What is the reality?
Code: Select all
Country Business Personal Sales
Canada  36.10%   15-29%   6% - 14% Dep on province
UK      30%      0-40%    0% / 5% / 17.50%
USA     35%      0-35%    0-9.75%-16.75% dep on state
Not really that different is it?
...You also can't blame the US generosity in foreign aid. Although the US is only beaten in absolute amounts by Japan, in terms of aid as a percentage of GDP the US ranks #22 (US-0.1%, Sweden-0.7%, Norway 1.1%) - unless you count smart bombs as aid

Excellent data, A Person! Wasted on the initiator of this topic of course, but there are religious fanatics and capitalism fanatics.

Religious fanatics blame all our country's problems on "declining morals", which interestingly seem to afflict their ministers as much or more than the rest of the population. Capitalism fanatics blame all our country's problems on social programs. They are too ignorant to understand that without the social programs for which they themselves (or their family members) are beneficiaries (i.e. Medicare, Medicaid), they would suffer terribly.

The reality is that pure socialism doesn't work very well over the long run because in that system tends to destroy iniative. And of course with socialism (as with all economic systems) there gets to be a power class that reaps all the benefits, while the benefits tend to decline as motivation and iniative decline. In pure capitalism, there ends up being a system not unlike old feudal systems, where the wealthy and powerful control virtually all means of production. Ultimately, the rich class gets greedier and greedier and pay the workers less and less. Without social programs, a huge number of people are just abandoned to die from curable diseases, to starve amidst plenty, and the middle class declines to the point where it no longer exists as an effective political or economic force.

This happens because the rich acquire more and more power, and pass laws that allow them to deprive a person of his/her job (which is every person's only means of survival) for any reason or no reason. This is already the case in many Midwest and Western states in the U.S. Thus, the rich are permitted to control the behavior of their employees--even when the employee is on personal time. We are seeing this in Florida right now--that city manager with an excellent record is being fired because of his transgenderism. His contract gave him no right to his job, just like the "At Will" laws in so many western states.

"At will" laws allow the employer to fire an employee for no reason at all--and while the terminated employee has a right to unemployment if the employer cannot prove the employee was fired for cause, the employee has no right to get his/her job back. At least so long as the employer doesn't give the employee a reason such as race, age, or another federally protected class.

We are seeing this process in the U.S. right now. Unions are the only barrier against brutal exploitation of workers. So of course, the rich power class in the U.S. has destroyed the power of unions and made unions out to be evil and destructive to the economy. As a result, Americans work hours that only people in third world countries work. Salaried people are openly told they are expected to work 60 to 70 hours a week if they want to keep their job. We had to have a national accreditation scandal to stop hospitals from working Medical Residents 60 hours straight.

What actually stopped that was the public disclosure of horrible mistakes made on patients by exhausted Residents who shouldn't be allowed to make a decision about whether to take an aspirin for a headache, much less to make life and death patient care decisions. In one case in our Operating Room, a Resident fell asleep on his feet! He actually fell face first into the patient's open abdomen. That kind of exploitation of workers is ridiculous by anyone's standards. Yet Americans are rejecting unions at their own personal expense. (But now it seems hospitals are quietly raising Residents' work hours again, and I haven't seen any hospital lose its Residency program accreditation as a result).

Americans are allowing themselves to be worked to death at the expense of their families, especially children. Corporations are allowed to move people around great distances. Therefore, people have to make a choice between on the one hand living near their fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, kids and grandkids, and on the other hand having a good job. So extended families that might serve as a resource for young parents--and give them a break raising the kids--are too far away to help out. Child abuse rises. Kids are warehoused in child care facilities, being raised by people with who knows what values, who don't have a personal investment in any of the kids, and a tiny few of which are child molesters.

In my opinion, we have WAY too much capitalism in this country. And the middle class has suffered horribly under this Bush administration, as it did under the Regan and first Bush administrations. During those years we saw the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy the world has ever seen--at least until the second Bush administration. W's war on the middle class has been ever so much more effective than even Regan's and W's father's war on the Middle Class.

Under the Clinton administration, the middle class gained back some of what it had lost, but certainly not all. The sad truth is that our ineffective laws relating to political campaign financing have allowed this country to be sold out to the highest bidder. And even with millions of donations from the middle class, there just isn't enough money in the middle class to compete with the super rich and their support of their preferred candidates. American politics is for sale to the highest bidder.

And Americans are too stupid, and too misled by their conservative religious leaders, who have obviously been bought by the wealthy, who have no limitations on donations to religious groups. And the justice dept has now been so politicized that it won't even go after the most flagrant violators of the laws against non-profits (that includes religious groups) invading politics. The most evil thing I've seen is that the IRS is going after the one tiny church that supported democrats and has ignored the entire religious right that has put its full weight openly and flagrantly, behind the republicans, who are now destroying the economic power of the middle class, and trying to destroy the few social programs that give the middle class a little security in their old age or when a disaster strikes them.

But the initiator of this topic goes blindly on her way, making up silly and unsupported cases for pure capitalism and the destruction of social security and medicare. Interestingly she would herself be uninsurable if deprived of Medicare. And she likes Medicaid because it supported her daughter when her daughter fell on hard times, but somehow she also wants to make sure it is denied to anyone she thinks is less than her fine middle class self, but would like to keep it for her own family should they ever need it again. Crazy!
March 25th, 2007, 8:08 am
Questioner
 
Location: Colorado
Thank you Questioner for saying what I feel and saying it better than I ever could. Too many people have read Ayn Rand and then rationalised away their conscience. I read her and saw evil.


But the initiator of this topic goes blindly on her way, making up silly and unsupported cases for pure capitalism and the destruction of social security and medicare. Interestingly she would herself be uninsurable if deprived of Medicare. And she likes Medicaid because it supported her daughter when her daughter fell on hard times, but somehow she also wants to make sure it is denied to anyone she thinks is less than her fine middle class self, but would like to keep it for her own family should they ever need it again. Crazy!


That's a great point. A friend of mine is a right wing republican fundamentalist christian, yet receives a lot of government support to help with a developmentaly challenged child. She is even paid as a child care worker to keep her own child. Yet she votes Republican every election, knowing these people would take all her benifits if the left would let them.

It always amazes me how Republicans can get so many of the poor to vote against their own best interests.
March 25th, 2007, 8:51 am
User avatar
Nfidel
 
Nfidel wrote:Thank you Questioner for saying what I feel and saying it better than I ever could. Too many people have read Ayn Rand and then rationalised away their conscience. I read her and saw evil.

Some people may think I'm being too hard on BrendaBee. They may think, "She is just a silly and harmless old woman, so let her spew her nonsense without challenge."

BrendaBee's posts are just about as "silly and harmless" as Hitler's ideas about the Jews were "silly and harmless". She is advocating nothing less than the total economic enslavement of the middle class, and abandonment of the elderly, poor and sick people in our country. That smacks of something between eugenics and genocide. She would kill off the underclass (many of whom are people of color), and the old and very young who don't have rich and powerful relatives to protect them.

You are right, Nfidel, the word "evil" is not inappropriate or too strong for people like BrendaBee.
March 25th, 2007, 8:58 am
Questioner
 
Location: Colorado
Gentlemen, This sort of name calling is just exactly what I have come to expect from the likes of you. I have spent a lifetime working for and with the needy, the underdog and civil rights for all. I am just trying to understand where the funds are going to come from to do all that you want done. The well off do not NEED, they are TAKING. That is why I want to expand Medicaid for the NEEDY and get the WELL OFF off of both Social Security and Medicare. I want to scream when I see young adults and teens with bad teeth which keeps them from getting a decent job while old geezers on Medicare are getting Viagra! But there is only so much money and people can only be taxed so much; we as a country can not be all and do all for everyone! It is unfortunately the bitter truth that while other countries were taking care of their own we were also taking care of them! We are the only country in the world with a standing Army able to defend ourselves and the rest of the world. This has been, and is, a large part of our spending. But after WWII we were the only country not devastated and able to take on the job of defense against the Soviet Union. If we had not kept our Army we would all be speaking Russian right now! I am at least trying to find a viable solution to the problems we face as a nation. It really won't affect me one way or the other since I am at the end of my life; it will be our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren who will be called upon to pay the debts we are making right NOW! Talk about GREED! when it doesn't bother you to shove your debt off on someone else! It bothers me and I want to try to do something about getting back some pride in Americans and in being self reliant and paying our own way.

This post is a brief history lesson on how we got to where we are now. Nothing more and nothing less. Just an attempt to give those who had social studies instead of history in school a bit of background that I am sure you at least were not aware of.

I feel so sorry for people who for lack of anything better to say must criticize and denigrate others. And I forgive you. Sincerely, Brenda Bowers
March 25th, 2007, 11:57 am
BrendaBee
 
We can all agree that a country needs to run a balanced budget (on average). The US hasn't for many years and while the Republicans talk about fiscal conservatism they don't walk the talk.

So -where to cut? It's not going to be easy and it will hurt.

The question is simply one of priorities.

You can take the kids out of school, quit visiting the dentist and make Grandma find her own apartment and look after herself, or maybe you could trade in the Hummer, ATV and Ski boat for a Ford Focus and a kayak.
March 25th, 2007, 12:25 pm
User avatar
A Person
 
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North
I see nothing wrong with Brendabees posts at all. I think she is making some very valid points. We should live within our own means and not the means of our grandchildren. As A Person noted... it is a question of priorities and not right or wrong when we choose what programs to support.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second,it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
March 25th, 2007, 12:59 pm
User avatar
BecauseHeLives
 
I do have to say that while I disagree with Brenda's assessment of the causes and cures for the problem and while I usually agree with Questioner; there is no justification to call her 'evil' and liken her to Hitler. That's neither productive nor reasonable and means that further reasoned discussion is likely difficult or impossible.

I'm going to appeal to Godwin's Law and withdraw from this thread. Sorry.
March 25th, 2007, 3:42 pm
User avatar
A Person
 
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North
Well BrendaBee, the first place the funds might come from to take care of our own people is the billions and billions and billions being shoved into this insane war. And to cronies in companies like Haliburton to skim billions off the top--in effect, robbing the American people. Does anybody really wonder why they just relocated to Dubai? That totally insulates their company officials from American justice. And when a reckoning comes as to how much that company has stolen, and American justice wants to investigate just what they did with the billions they stole (i.e. who got some huge kickbacks???), no way will we be able to get any information out of that company. Not from Dubai.

Then the second place we can get that money is to take back all the corporate welfare being paid to Oil companies. You know, those companies that just posted the biggest profits of any company EVER! Just why do they need corporate tax breaks and gifts from the government??? (Other of course, than the fact that Mr. Bush's family on his Dad's side is heavily invested in oil).

The third place to go for money is to revoke all the tax breaks given to the richest 1% of Americans. By far, they have benefitted the most of anyone from the opportunities in America, and they should help pay for the cost of this country.

Instead, of course, we see the richest, Bill Gates, now advocating for more and more illegal aliens to further drive down wage costs in America. His greed and arrogance know no bounds.

Those are places where we can get the money. And that won't hurt our grandchildren one bit. At least, not unless anyone reading this blog is in that 1% of the richest people.
March 25th, 2007, 10:26 pm
Questioner
 
Location: Colorado

Return to News