Must read: The "[b] Historic[/b] " vote - Page 4 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 03:42 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
daisound's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2008
Vehicle: W210.265/2001, W220/S500/2000, Porsche 997 C2S/2006, GMC K1500/1992
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
JCD1234 & Jak
You guys should consider yourselves as Troll or idot.
It is just so easily to bad mouth others same as you, meaningless shit.

500SEC 1984 retired at 192K
Porsche 928S GT 1984 (euro) retired at 243K
daisound is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 07:14 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,529
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
I understand fully that there are monies going to people from the government. I understand that they are going to be, in some cases "gifts" as the folks will not have paid taxes [or enough taxes] to make a balance.

But that said, the point that I have been trying to look at since this whole thing came up is that it simply is NOT Socialism and I really don't think it is "a step toward" Socialism as that requires a endgame that just does not exist nor is it conceivable in a Capitalistic Economy.

Using a annoying analogy, if you have a daughter who, at 15 and 5'6" weighs 120 pounds, when she gains a couple of pounds for whatever reason you say "You're getting fat". "You are on the road to FAT". Nevermind that, at 15 muscle mass changes, hormones change, and it may just be that she is meeting a boy at the Sonic having a milkshake once or twice a week. But because you see ONE indicator, you assume she is getting FAT.

That is what I see with these calls of Socialism. Other than the intent to induce Fear, Uncertainty, Confusion and Dread, folks make the leap that, because X is happening in a Capitalism Economy and X also happens in a Socialism Economy, THEREFORE we must be making the leap to Socialism.

It is very possible for X to occur in BOTH types of economies without osmosis occuring. But the LEAP assumes that it must.
It is another step towards socialism. You think we can stop partway and only have the goodness that socialism brings? Whether we continue to make steps and complete the journey becomes up to us. I'm not sure how the 15 year old female analogy fits into this, but if it's what you had on your mind, so be it.

You really like your little catch phrase, there, like to use it to dismiss things that don't stick, and things that do. I put it right up there with "the rich man is holding me down," "you must not care about sick, poor, starving children if you don't want the federal government to do charity," and other deflection techniques that are used to vindicate an ever increasing span of governmental control. And, it is control, just like the folks on the alleged right want to control the wombs and email inboxes for their moral causes of saving the unborn and protecting us from the boogey man terrorists, the left wants to control just as many people for their moral causes and use government to do it. There is NO difference and both are dead wrong in this country.

In this particular instance, the author in the OP said, essentially, that we will be taking an unprecedented step towards a socialistic system in using the IRS to redistribute wealth, in giving people who owe no income taxes a refund. That is true. Add to it the politics of promising a majority of the people free stuff and money and saying out loud that the money is coming from the minority. In this case, the promises are 95% get money from 5%. That's quite an election year formula, eh? Good lesson for the young electorate, as well. That 5% is those nefarious rich people who took money, right? This is well justified, right? After all, they all got rich on the backs of the working man . . .

I have a good friend who just made VP in my company. He started out as a student operator some 30 or so years ago, at one of our fossil plants, worked his way up through the ranks of operations, went over and ran their engineering group (without a degree) and set up the best reliability plan the company had in that organization, became plant manager, set record after record, and is now a VP. He's a real people person, the folks at the plant he is leaving would follow him anywhere. Worked his ass off, made the company better, and now has his reward. What should his penalty be? What is his fair share? Most importantly, what has he done to deserve the categorization of the boogey man in our latest class warfare? While I understand there are many who came about their wealth in less honorable, perhaps even illegal methods, I would expect that the majority who have it earned it.

Now, with regards to the step, here's a simple question for you: If a majority of people were seduced into believing that a socialistic economic system was best, that the government should take and distribute all wealth, could that be done without an amendment to the COTUS? Yes or No, then with explanation, no deflection nor catch phrases, pls.


Last edited by edfreeman; 11-02-2008 at 07:33 PM. Reason: legal, illegal . . .
edfreeman is offline  
post #33 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 07:40 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdc1244 View Post
Troll or idiot - it's hard to tell.
McBare, our resident liberal intellectual, begs us to use our rational thinking skills. You could heed his good advice, instead of name-calling like most liberals. Don't limit yourself unless you just are limited.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
post #34 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 07:42 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottomline1 View Post
McBare, our resident liberal intellectual, begs us to use our rational thinking skills. You could heed his good advice, instead of name-calling like most liberals. Don't limit yourself unless you just are limited.
Dude, you're back.

I thought since your state seemed to be turning blue that you might have been trying to get the smurf die off of you.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #35 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 08:00 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfreeman View Post
It is another step towards socialism. You think we can stop partway and only have the goodness that socialism brings? Whether we continue to make steps and complete the journey becomes up to us. I'm not sure how the 15 year old female analogy fits into this, but if it's what you had on your mind, so be it.

You really like your little catch phrase, there, like to use it to dismiss things that don't stick, and things that do. I put it right up there with "the rich man is holding me down," "you must not care about sick, poor, starving children if you don't want the federal government to do charity," and other deflection techniques that are used to vindicate an ever increasing span of governmental control. And, it is control, just like the folks on the alleged right want to control the wombs and email inboxes for their moral causes of saving the unborn and protecting us from the boogey man terrorists, the left wants to control just as many people for their moral causes and use government to do it. There is NO difference and both are dead wrong in this country.

In this particular instance, the author in the OP said, essentially, that we will be taking an unprecedented step towards a socialistic system in using the IRS to redistribute wealth, in giving people who owe no income taxes a refund. That is true. Add to it the politics of promising a majority of the people free stuff and money and saying out loud that the money is coming from the minority. In this case, the promises are 95% get money from 5%. That's quite an election year formula, eh? Good lesson for the young electorate, as well. That 5% is those nefarious rich people who took money, right? This is well justified, right? After all, they all got rich on the backs of the working man . . .

I have a good friend who just made VP in my company. He started out as a student operator some 30 or so years ago, at one of our fossil plants, worked his way up through the ranks of operations, went over and ran their engineering group (without a degree) and set up the best reliability plan the company had in that organization, became plant manager, set record after record, and is now a VP. He's a real people person, the folks at the plant he is leaving would follow him anywhere. Worked his ass off, made the company better, and now has his reward. What should his penalty be? What is his fair share? Most importantly, what has he done to deserve the categorization of the boogey man in our latest class warfare? While I understand there are many who came about their wealth in less honorable, perhaps even illegal methods, I would expect that the majority who have it earned it.

Now, with regards to the step, here's a simple question for you: If a majority of people were seduced into believing that a socialistic economic system was best, that the government should take and distribute all wealth, could that be done without an amendment to the COTUS? Yes or No, then with explanation, no deflection nor catch phrases, pls.
First a question, what catch phrase?

Now, to your question, could the government move to a socialistic economic system with out an amendment to the COTUS.

Hard to answer that question with a simple yes or no. Since we have a Capitalistic System, it would not simply be the government that would have input into the decisions. There is just too much commerce and enterprise that would be involved that remove the simple answer.

Second to that however, if, hypothetically the system were not encumbered with decisions and pressures from commerce and enterprises, I would think that yes, a government could do just that in that we do not have specific directives in the COTUS that defines the type of economic system that the United States should have. Since the Congress has the rights to levy taxes and the rights to make laws which could, in your theory reset the distribution of funds through various programs, I don't see what would stop a Congress from doing it or a President from signing it other than the wrath of the people that did not agree.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #36 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 08:18 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfreeman View Post
I have a good friend who just made VP in my company. He started out as a student operator some 30 or so years ago, at one of our fossil plants, worked his way up through the ranks of operations, went over and ran their engineering group (without a degree) and set up the best reliability plan the company had in that organization, became plant manager, set record after record, and is now a VP. He's a real people person, the folks at the plant he is leaving would follow him anywhere. Worked his ass off, made the company better, and now has his reward. What should his penalty be? What is his fair share? Most importantly, what has he done to deserve the categorization of the boogey man in our latest class warfare? While I understand there are many who came about their wealth in less honorable, perhaps even illegal methods, I would expect that the majority who have it earned it.
I really don't see a mass of folks demonizing that small group of people in the top 5%. I don't see folks categorizing them as the boogey man. Only folks who are making a "class warfare" out of this are the Republicans who don't want to see that group's tax cuts expire, or that they might get an additional couple percent on their taxes. We had this conversation the other night. The room had fourteen people in it. Different economic strata. The conversation was put in perspective when one of the guys who makes north of $500K said that the Obama taxes would cost him about $35K extra a year and it wasn't fair. One of the other people, a woman about 5'2" started laughing. She said that as a Masters Degreed teacher teaching HIS special education kid, that was what she made a year. And she had to buy school supplies for his kid out of that check because the school could not afford it.

The point was not that HE had done anything wrong. He had not. He made his money, he earned it fairly. But the concern is that there is a group of people who make very good money and if that group just kicks in a bit more, it can help everyone. Is that socialism, no. It really is not. It's simply reality. That VP you brought up. He made his rise through many ways. His brains, his skills but I would be willing to bet that some of either his projects or the business that he was in had some government funding or prodding that helped that industry move forward. Odds are he also had a bit of luck.

Nobody is saying the top tier is doing anything wrong and being "punished". That is simply absurd. It is that, when you take a couple of extra percent off that net, there is still a bunch of net left. When it comes off that teacher making $35K, there is not so much net left.

And since our economy has made there be a choice, I would rather see the 95% of Americans who work hard and have had to scrimp to get by get a break than the 5% who, if they have to pay a bit more really don't see [or feel]the difference in their bottom line. It would be better if NOBODY ever had pain from taxes but that just isn't going to happen, ever.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #37 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 08:49 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,529
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
I really don't see a mass of folks demonizing that small group of people in the top 5%. I don't see folks categorizing them as the boogey man. Only folks who are making a "class warfare" out of this are the Republicans who don't want to see that group's tax cuts expire, or that they might get an additional couple percent on their taxes. We had this conversation the other night. The room had fourteen people in it. Different economic strata. The conversation was put in perspective when one of the guys who makes north of $500K said that the Obama taxes would cost him about $35K extra a year and it wasn't fair. One of the other people, a woman about 5'2" started laughing. She said that as a Masters Degreed teacher teaching HIS special education kid, that was what she made a year. And she had to buy school supplies for his kid out of that check because the school could not afford it.

The point was not that HE had done anything wrong. He had not. He made his money, he earned it fairly. But the concern is that there is a group of people who make very good money and if that group just kicks in a bit more, it can help everyone. Is that socialism, no. It really is not. It's simply reality. That VP you brought up. He made his rise through many ways. His brains, his skills but I would be willing to bet that some of either his projects or the business that he was in had some government funding or prodding that helped that industry move forward. Odds are he also had a bit of luck.

Nobody is saying the top tier is doing anything wrong and being "punished". That is simply absurd. It is that, when you take a couple of extra percent off that net, there is still a bunch of net left. When it comes off that teacher making $35K, there is not so much net left.

And since our economy has made there be a choice, I would rather see the 95% of Americans who work hard and have had to scrimp to get by get a break than the 5% who, if they have to pay a bit more really don't see [or feel]the difference in their bottom line. It would be better if NOBODY ever had pain from taxes but that just isn't going to happen, ever.
That rhetoric (evil rich) is as common as the diversions the GOP uses for Obama. It started with "soak the rich," what a wonderful way to lead the people. It is not as direct as my paraphrase, but I tend to cut to the chase.

You're rationalizing "taking" again. Nobody is asking the evil rich friend you have there to kick in a bit more. It is being taken so that the rest of your friends can receive a reduction, and possibly get a gift, as you called it. That is socialism.

A tax increase will be necessary to address our deficit, I'm not proposing your friend escape that particular reality. As most tax increases do, this one will follow our progressive tax system and be done from the top down, little doubt in my mind that it will and should. But to propose to cut anyone's taxes, give gifts, and increase spending on programs is the kind of stuff you'd be all over GW for had he done it.

And, FWIW, teachers are our most undervalued resource.

edfreeman is offline  
post #38 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 08:55 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,529
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
First a question, what catch phrase?

Now, to your question, could the government move to a socialistic economic system with out an amendment to the COTUS.

Hard to answer that question with a simple yes or no. Since we have a Capitalistic System, it would not simply be the government that would have input into the decisions. There is just too much commerce and enterprise that would be involved that remove the simple answer.

Second to that however, if, hypothetically the system were not encumbered with decisions and pressures from commerce and enterprises, I would think that yes, a government could do just that in that we do not have specific directives in the COTUS that defines the type of economic system that the United States should have. Since the Congress has the rights to levy taxes and the rights to make laws which could, in your theory reset the distribution of funds through various programs, I don't see what would stop a Congress from doing it or a President from signing it other than the wrath of the people that did not agree.
Catch phrase: Fear, Despair, and agony on me . . . or something like that.

Second, our thinking on the COTUS has already been proven to be quite different, and this hypothetical illustrates it perfectly. Your application has been that congress has the power to make laws to do whatever they would want, allegedly supported by the people, with the list of powers that is in the COTUS being a partial listing or a listing of things to start off with and the 10th amendment being moot. I would say that the enumerated list, which would confine the powers of congress, would prevent our becoming a socialistic country/economy without some revision. I would expect that the framers would agree with me and would see socialism as quite the opposite of freedom and liberty.

edfreeman is offline  
post #39 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 09:02 PM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
I'm just ecstatic that everyone is finally talking about socialism again. This is great!









If only they actually knew what they were talking about...[shrugs]
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #40 of 50 (permalink) Old 11-02-2008, 09:34 PM
Surely A Large Human
 
Qubes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Posts: 34,259
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeitgeist View Post
I'm just ecstatic that everyone is finally talking about socialism again. This is great!









If only they actually knew what they were talking about...[shrugs]
Well, the candidate for President of the United States from the Socialist Party vehemently disagrees that anything Obama is proposing resembles socialism.

I agree it would be helpful if people knew what they were talking about when they threw the term "socialism" around lately.
Qubes is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Vote for "The Magic Negro" or be damned to liberal Hell Botnst Off-Topic 32 03-20-2007 10:02 AM
    Go take a hike, Senate, Bush rips anti-surge vote, declares "I am the DECIDER" Jakarta Expat Off-Topic 3 01-28-2007 04:22 PM
    Official Vote - Change Andy to "Elite" UncAl Off-Topic 33 01-14-2004 07:03 PM
    Those with M102 & M103 "free power upgrade" must read! Greg in Oz W124 E,CE,D,TD Class 2 06-18-2003 02:59 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome