Page 2 of 5 [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

03 Jul 2012, 9:37 pm

Lord_Gareth wrote:
Joker wrote:
Oodain wrote:
by striking hard and fast?

or deporting the citizens that show sings of unrest?


You should be deporting the illgeal ones.


Won't do anything to the angry LEGAL residents.


If their angry its because of the bad economy. And because of economic crisis.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

03 Jul 2012, 9:37 pm

still wont fix internal issues,

also what vigilans said actually does have a ring of truth, the us is one of the countries where the largest percentage of people sits in prison or have been there before.

not that i think it is implicitly because of the buisness side but it sure doesnt help.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

03 Jul 2012, 9:39 pm

Oodain wrote:
still wont fix internal issues,

also what vigilans said actually does have a ring of truth, the us is one of the countries where the largest percentage of people sits in prison or have been there before.

not that i think it is implicitly because of the buisness side but it sure doesnt help.


Most people in prison of Asian Black and Mexian our country stereotypes them. They get a tougher sentence then whites. Also they are the majyority in prison. It's also extremely hard to get a job when your a ex-con.

But you already knew that.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 89,974
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Jul 2012, 12:27 pm

it should be big enough to keep corporations small enough to drown in the bathtub if need be.



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Age: 177
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,415
Location: My own version of reality

04 Jul 2012, 12:32 pm

It should be big enough that if I look out my window I see something that makes me think "Government". But small enough that nothing makes me think "Government" in my room.


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


04 Jul 2012, 1:27 pm

Joker wrote:
http://www.askheritage.org/how-big-do-liberals-want-government-to-be/ well how big do they want it?



Big enough to intervene legally to ensure that women are entitled to high salaries and enact legislation to satisfy outraged feminists who whine about the "wage gap". :P



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

05 Jul 2012, 9:28 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

Keeping the peace requires a strong state of well-being for the overall populace; social welfare.


the U.S. existed and even prospered until the Great Depression without being a Welfare State.

The main victims were black folks who suffered under slavery until the end of the Civil War and continued to suffer from racial discrimination even after we became a Welfare State.

If anything, the liberal Welfare State has exacerbated the racism displayed toward black folk. Who is the evil presence in the famous Welfare Queen canard?

Americans conquered a continent without a welfare state.

ruveyn



Oldout
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,539
Location: Reading, PA

05 Jul 2012, 10:23 am

ruveyn -- was the moving of Indians from the southeast to Oklahoma not a "welfare state" type action.? I'm sure there are other such actions in our past that show government intervention was present long before the Great Depression.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

05 Jul 2012, 11:27 am

Oldout wrote:
ruveyn -- was the moving of Indians from the southeast to Oklahoma not a "welfare state" type action.? I'm sure there are other such actions in our past that show government intervention was present long before the Great Depression.


True. But it was not a pinko stinko Left Wing Commie Loving Welfare State.

ruveyn



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Jul 2012, 1:40 pm

The state that does not guarantee its citizens access to a living income is the state that is going to have to have a significantly larger police and court system to deal with the crime that will result.

The link between poverty and crime is well established. And every barrier to access that a state puts in place is another driver for increased crime.

It's not a case of having big government, or small government. It's a case of having a government that has the means to accomplish the goals that it is required to do. That means periodically reviewing programs and asking the questions: Is this a program that needs to be done? Is this a program that is unique to government? Is this a program that could be delivered in a better way?

Saying military, police and courts and nothing else is as ludicrous as it is elegant. There are clearly a whole host of other things that benefit all of us, but that it is in no-one's direct commercial interest to provide: universal access to education; universal access to medically necessary care; transportation infrastructure. And though we might believe that the only beneficiaries of income assistance are those who collect, the reality is that we all benefit when people do not need to steal in order to feed their families.


_________________
--James


JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

05 Jul 2012, 1:55 pm

visagrunt wrote:
The state that does not guarantee its citizens access to a living income is the state that is going to have to have a significantly larger police and court system to deal with the crime that will result.

The link between poverty and crime is well established. And every barrier to access that a state puts in place is another driver for increased crime.

It's not a case of having big government, or small government. It's a case of having a government that has the means to accomplish the goals that it is required to do. That means periodically reviewing programs and asking the questions: Is this a program that needs to be done? Is this a program that is unique to government? Is this a program that could be delivered in a better way?

Saying military, police and courts and nothing else is as ludicrous as it is elegant. There are clearly a whole host of other things that benefit all of us, but that it is in no-one's direct commercial interest to provide: universal access to education; universal access to medically necessary care; transportation infrastructure. And though we might believe that the only beneficiaries of income assistance are those who collect, the reality is that we all benefit when people do not need to steal in order to feed their families.


It doesn't matter to whether the theft is carried out by gov't agency or by the common street thug; it is still theft. At least I can shoot back at the criminal who doesn't hide behind legislation.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Jul 2012, 2:35 pm

JWC wrote:
It doesn't matter to whether the theft is carried out by gov't agency or by the common street thug; it is still theft. At least I can shoot back at the criminal who doesn't hide behind legislation.


Calling it theft does not make it so.

"Theft" is a legal term that has a very clear definition. If you must resort to mangling language in order to create your rhetoric, it simply demonstrates how bare your policy cupboard is.

You don't like paying taxes--fair enough. None of us do--but most of us do so willingly, because we believe ourselves to be better off, as a society, for the things that government does. But calling taxes theft is dishonest, is disingenuous--and perhaps most important--is bereft of any substantive merit.


_________________
--James


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,774
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

05 Jul 2012, 2:40 pm

If taxation is theft, then is imprisonment kidnapping?



JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

05 Jul 2012, 2:44 pm

visagrunt wrote:
JWC wrote:
It doesn't matter to whether the theft is carried out by gov't agency or by the common street thug; it is still theft. At least I can shoot back at the criminal who doesn't hide behind legislation.


Calling it theft does not make it so.

"Theft" is a legal term that has a very clear definition. If you must resort to mangling language in order to create your rhetoric, it simply demonstrates how bare your policy cupboard is.

You don't like paying taxes--fair enough. None of us do--but most of us do so willingly, because we believe ourselves to be better off, as a society, for the things that government does. But calling taxes theft is dishonest, is disingenuous--and perhaps most important--is bereft of any substantive merit.


From wiki:

Quote:
In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.


Legal definition:

Quote:
theft n. the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use (including potential sale).


Am I really the one 'mangling' the language here, or are you just in denial of the fact that it meets the definition?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

05 Jul 2012, 3:12 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
If taxation is theft, then is imprisonment kidnapping?


If it is done by a private party without the sanction of law.

ruveyn