herrjr

Bear in mind this guy is coming from a position that is prevalent in a country that is about to go bankrupt, AGAIN.

Oh yeah, no more flags on this site.
[/quote]


Yuu mean Spain, right?

How about focusing on the countries in the European Union that all have unemployment rates lower than the US?

Like: Finland, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Netherlands, Norway, etc.

They all have social services that far exceed what pittance we throw to the poor.

Now what you should do instead of opening your piehole is do some goddamn research or have an original thought of your own. Stop regurgitating foolish catch phrases that mean nothing and have no thought behind them.
[/quote]

Of course I meant Spain.

Why don't you follow your own words and state something other than socialist crap that ALL EU countries espouse? As far as my own research, I shouldn't have to declare that I went to one of the leading universities in the world and received an honors education in the subject matter herein discussed (which also happens to be eponymous to being the spreader of socialist AND communist values in this country). I don't resort to ad hominem attacks, nor do I assume so hastily the foundations of the statements of others.

This is AMERICA. We have a history of freedom HERE. Individual freedom HERE matters more (historically speaking) than anything else. Granted, these freedoms have eroded over time, since the inception of this country. The point that I was merely bringing up was that you are harping a philosophy that is SYNONYMOUS with your ancestral homeland, and it is that FIRM adherence to that philosophy (amongst other things) that has pushed that country (in addition to Greece) to the brink. YES, I know that we spend more on defense than we do on other matters such as education (I argue for the cut of many things, entitlement programs only being ONE of them). But we also spend a similarly large portion on the entitlement program known as Social Security. If you want to talk about actual dollars spent on entitlements, then do YOUR research about how much is actually spent in THIS country, before you criticize people here for stating a position that is of clearly greater importance HERE.

herrjr

Illegals are targeted because they are criminals that add to the social burden that ALL citizens bear. It has nothing to do with their "poorness" or their race.

I read the article too and I recognize it's points. The point that I argue that is MISSING in the current discussion is that MOST of the immigrants to this country HISTORICALLY, prior to the New Deal, were POOR too. Yet, SOMEHOW, they found a way to succeed in THIS country WITHOUT the government having to give them a portion from another man's pockets.

What you FAIL to recognize is that by giving a government power to take from a citizen a portion of what they have produced, under the belief that that money will be used for a social good such as "helping the poor," that you have also given that government funds with which to pursue ITS own agenda (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.)

mrjulius

Bear in mind this guy is coming from a position that is prevalent in a country that is about to go bankrupt, AGAIN.

Oh yeah, no more flags on this site.
[/quote]


Yuu mean Spain, right?

How about focusing on the countries in the European Union that all have unemployment rates lower than the US?

Like: Finland, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Netherlands, Norway, etc.

They all have social services that far exceed what pittance we throw to the poor.

Now what you should do instead of opening your piehole is do some goddamn research or have an original thought of your own. Stop regurgitating foolish catch phrases that mean nothing and have no thought behind them.
[/quote]

Of course I meant Spain.

Why don't you follow your own words and state something other than socialist crap that ALL EU countries espouse? As far as my own research, I shouldn't have to declare that I went to one of the leading universities in the world and received an honors education in the subject matter herein discussed (which also happens to be eponymous to being the spreader of socialist AND communist values in this country). I don't resort to ad hominem attacks, nor do I assume so hastily the foundations of the statements of others.

This is AMERICA. We have a history of freedom HERE. Individual freedom HERE matters more (historically speaking) than anything else. Granted, these freedoms have eroded over time, since the inception of this country. The point that I was merely bringing up was that you are harping a philosophy that is SYNONYMOUS with your ancestral homeland, and it is that FIRM adherence to that philosophy (amongst other things) that has pushed that country (in addition to Greece) to the brink. YES, I know that we spend more on defense than we do on other matters such as education (I argue for the cut of many things, entitlement programs only being ONE of them). But we also spend a similarly large portion on the entitlement program known as Social Security. If you want to talk about actual dollars spent on entitlements, then do YOUR research about how much is actually spent in THIS country, before you criticize people here for stating a position that is of clearly greater importance HERE.
[/quote]

Funny, I always thought the reason why Greece are potentially bankrupt was because of years of unrestrained spending (huge military budget), cheap lending, and failure to implement financial reforms, not because they had a societal safety net for those less fortunate. The same goes for Spain; it is facing a severe housing market correction, an industrial slump, and a banking crisis caused by the housing correction and the recession’s overall effects — simultaneously.

If anything, their years of following the United States' lead is what did them in.

But yea, welfare, man, that shit is totally to blame. SOCIALISM!!!

herrjr

Bear in mind this guy is coming from a position that is prevalent in a country that is about to go bankrupt, AGAIN.

Oh yeah, no more flags on this site.
[/quote]


Yuu mean Spain, right?

How about focusing on the countries in the European Union that all have unemployment rates lower than the US?

Like: Finland, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Netherlands, Norway, etc.

They all have social services that far exceed what pittance we throw to the poor.

Now what you should do instead of opening your piehole is do some goddamn research or have an original thought of your own. Stop regurgitating foolish catch phrases that mean nothing and have no thought behind them.
[/quote]

Of course I meant Spain.

Why don't you follow your own words and state something other than socialist crap that ALL EU countries espouse? As far as my own research, I shouldn't have to declare that I went to one of the leading universities in the world and received an honors education in the subject matter herein discussed (which also happens to be eponymous to being the spreader of socialist AND communist values in this country). I don't resort to ad hominem attacks, nor do I assume so hastily the foundations of the statements of others.

This is AMERICA. We have a history of freedom HERE. Individual freedom HERE matters more (historically speaking) than anything else. Granted, these freedoms have eroded over time, since the inception of this country. The point that I was merely bringing up was that you are harping a philosophy that is SYNONYMOUS with your ancestral homeland, and it is that FIRM adherence to that philosophy (amongst other things) that has pushed that country (in addition to Greece) to the brink. YES, I know that we spend more on defense than we do on other matters such as education (I argue for the cut of many things, entitlement programs only being ONE of them). But we also spend a similarly large portion on the entitlement program known as Social Security. If you want to talk about actual dollars spent on entitlements, then do YOUR research about how much is actually spent in THIS country, before you criticize people here for stating a position that is of clearly greater importance HERE.
[/quote]

Funny, I always thought the reason why Greece are potentially bankrupt was because of years of unrestrained spending (huge military budget), cheap lending, and failure to implement financial reforms, not because they had a societal safety net for those less fortunate. The same goes for Spain; it is facing a severe housing market correction, an industrial slump, and a banking crisis caused by the housing correction and the recession’s overall effects — simultaneously.

If anything, their years of following the United States' lead is what did them in.

But yea, welfare, man, that shit is totally to blame. SOCIALISM!!!
[/quote]


Mockery aside, those points are factual. And yes, perhaps, following the US did lead them astray. Regardless, why do you think people decide to embark on risky endeavors (individually), if not for the belief that somehow society will step up and save them from the consequences of their actions? People, countries, AND companies, should all bear the price of their actions, particularly when they fail. That is the price of freedom. Freedom includes the possibility of suffering and death. When immigrants who had first moved to certain parts of the US that had severe winters were unprepared, they perished. Their neighbors that were better prepared did not. Life involves suffering and death, and I don't think that that is something that can be legislated away, no matter what people like Obama may claim.

mrjulius

I didn't see this until now. The role of government, in my eyes, is to provide defense of its people, plain and simple.

This applies to national defense (not national offense aka Iraq) and defending the right of people to live without concern of being killed or starved.

I think my general life viewpoint is that of lagom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagom

I am willing to empathize with people who are not as well off as myself. People on this forum have this idea that we must analyze other people from a purely theoretical, disconnected, economics-based position.

I'm sorry, I can't support that. There is more value in this world besides that of money.

If that makes me a socialist, I guess I'm a socialist.

mrjulius

Yes, over time, and through countless generations, immigrants have found a way to succeed. That is without question. I already stated that, so you are agreeing with me. It takes time, man.

Also, I realize that paying taxes funds wars. There's nothing I can do about that. There's nothing you can do about that either. The abolition of taxation is not going to happen. What we're discussing here is the redistribution of those tax funds. Focusing on the poor just doesn't make any sense to me.

herrjr

There is more value in this world besides that of money.

If that makes me a socialist, I guess I'm a socialist.
[/quote]

No, that makes you an idealist.

I stated this before, but I'll repeat it again:
What you FAIL to recognize is that by giving a government power to take from a citizen a portion of what they have produced, under the belief that that money will be used for a social good such as "helping the poor," that you have also given that government funds with which to pursue ITS own agenda (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.).

I agree that there is more value in this world than money. In fact, I would argue that nothing of value in this world involves money. However, to a government, there is NOTHING but money. And ANYTHING that strengthens a government WITH money, by using the ideals of idealists to FUND itself with money, is WRONG. You claim that the purpose of the government is to serve the people, and yet do not see how that belief has allowed for a situation wherein the people serve the government, and the government serves itself.

mrjulius

There is more value in this world besides that of money.

If that makes me a socialist, I guess I'm a socialist.
[/quote]

No, that makes you an idealist.

I stated this before, but I'll repeat it again:
What you FAIL to recognize is that by giving a government power to take from a citizen a portion of what they have produced, under the belief that that money will be used for a social good such as "helping the poor," that you have also given that government funds with which to pursue ITS own agenda (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.).

I agree that there is more value in this world than money. In fact, I would argue that nothing of value in this world involves money. However, to a government, there is NOTHING but money. And ANYTHING that strengthens a government WITH money, by using the ideals of idealists to FUND itself with money, is WRONG. You claim that the purpose of the government is to serve the people, and yet do not see how that belief has allowed for a situation wherein the people serve the government, and the government serves itself.
[/quote]

I have agreed that we need to reduce the breadth and scope of the federal government. We're not arguing about that, man.

I'm just in disagreement about what we should prioritize and what we should stop scapegoating.

I have libertarian leanings as well, my friend. I realize that government can be excessive and wasteful.

herrjr

Yes, over time, and through countless generations, immigrants have found a way to succeed. That is without question. I already stated that, so you are agreeing with me. It takes time, man.

Also, I realize that paying taxes funds wars. There's nothing I can do about that. There's nothing you can do about that either. The abolition of taxation is not going to happen. What we're discussing here is the redistribution of those tax funds. Focusing on the poor just doesn't make any sense to me.
[/quote]

I do not agree with the way that you have perceived my point. The immigrants here that arrived (pre-New Deal) came legally and succeeded in THEIR own generation. I highly recommend the biography of Andrew Carnegie; he is the epitome of what was possible here.

The fact of the matter is that illegal immigration costs money, alot of money, money that is taken away from citizens that have their families' needs to account for. In addition to other costs, which I also argue against (wars, bailouts, etc.); the point is that I'm not singling out "the poor" or "illegals."

mrjulius

Yes, over time, and through countless generations, immigrants have found a way to succeed. That is without question. I already stated that, so you are agreeing with me. It takes time, man.

Also, I realize that paying taxes funds wars. There's nothing I can do about that. There's nothing you can do about that either. The abolition of taxation is not going to happen. What we're discussing here is the redistribution of those tax funds. Focusing on the poor just doesn't make any sense to me.
[/quote]

I do not agree with the way that you have perceived my point. The immigrants here that arrived (pre-New Deal) came legally and succeeded in THEIR own generation. I highly recommend the biography of Andrew Carnegie; he is the epitome of what was possible here.

The fact of the matter is that illegal immigration costs money, alot of money, money that is taken away from citizens that have their families' needs to account for. In addition to other costs, which I also argue against (wars, bailouts, etc.); the point is that I'm not singling out "the poor" or "illegals."
[/quote]

Ah, the classic "rags to riches" story.

Where do I begin?