Thank you, Mr. O.
 

On Jan 22, 1:37*pm, Larry L wrote:
On Jan 21, 6:41 pm, David LaCourse wrote:

: *"From each according to his ability, to each

according to his need ." **That's* what most of these liberal,
progressive mutton heads believe and *want*. *But, it doesn't work,
does it? *Try telling them that.

The IDEOLOGY of communism has been PROVEN to fail and fail badly in
the real world, as a tool to better the conditions of society as a
whole and promote social stability

The IDEOLOGY of unregulated free market capitalism has been PROVEN to
fail and fail badly in the real world, as a tool to better the
conditions of society as a whole and promote social stability ( ask
even Greenspan, who flat admitted that the ideology was flawed .. try
telling YOU that :-)

In fact, neither capitalist nor communist ideology has yet suffered a
real world test worthy of consideration. Think about it. Take your
time. Please.

Capitalism and Communism are economic systems, NOT governmental ones,
although we all tend to lose sight of that often.

All? In fact, in the real world there is no such thing as an
"economic system" divorced from a "governmental" one.

Government is a needed thing in human society.

Bull****. Supportive arguments?

Good government is
ALWAYS at risk from the forces of economic systems.

Absolutely meaningless. Prove me wrong.

Unchecked and unregulated, any economic system WILL undermine the
desirable effects of government.

;ljkawredjoir....or .....qefnphrqo?

In this country, Capitalism has,
is and will cause the near downfall, at times, of *our society, by
undermining the restraints on 'free enterprise' needed to protect
against too much concentration of wealth and power.

Sweet baby jesus......read that, and then report back to us if you can
discern anything that resembles meaning in it.

One of the things that strikes me as very odd about our culture is
that, often, the very individuals that most fear "big brother"
government willingly open their arms to the very real potential of
"big brother" corporate and wealthy individual power.

No, duh!

Concentrate
all the money ( and resulting power ) in too few hands and YOU will
become a slave.

Well, maybe YOU will.....

A slave is a slave, regardless of who his owner is ....

Deep.

we are at real
risk of becoming slaves to "business" as democracy is downgraded and
undermined by capitalism.

So, slaves are at risk of becoming slaves? I don't think so.

OF course, I think capitalism has worked better, thus far, than
communism, in real world tests ....

And which tests would those be?

but, largely because it has been
regulated and restrained by democracy's goal of serving and protecting
all of the people ...anti-trust laws, environmental protection laws,
worker protections, etc etc. * For instance, without government
regulations on business, your search for trout still living in clean
water would most certainly be much more difficult, and your life
therefore much sadder.

O.k., I confess, I never realised just how funny you can be. :)

One thing I simply can't understand is why people would vote for
individuals that openly state that they want to undermine government,
as a whole.

Well, you're absolutely right about that.....that is one.

To me this is like being on the board of directors of
a large business, interviewing applicants for key management
positions, and then choosing the ones that say," I don't believe in
this business and will do all I can to wreck it."

So, you believe that the boards of directors of large businesses
interview applicants for key management positions with an eye toward
something or other? :)

There is most certainly room for serious debate on the subject of what
the roles of government should be,

And there always will be much more than enough room.

but I'm looking for applicants that
will try to make it work better at those roles, not worse.

Well, whatever "it" may be and however one might make it work better
at "those roles" whatever that may mean, I'm sure that we are all
somewhat less than unanimous in wishing you the best of luck in
bringing something or other about.....or something.....or not.....as
the case may be.

Limiting
those roles to ones achievable and needed is, obviously, part of that
process towards improvement.

Obvious? Well, I hope to shout!

Anyone that honestly believes that "no government" is the best
government, needs to research conditions in the many places where "no
government" is a near reality.

Obviously, no government cannot be the best government. On the other
hand, no government might very well be better than the best
government. Language is like that......it doesn't necessarily mean
whatever foggy **** you'd like to pretend to think it means.

Oh, one last thing ...

Good god, we hope so!

jumping to the conclusion that anyone the
doesn't think just like me is a "mutton head" *is, also, a way to
become enslaved.

True. Or not. Maybe. But custard don't multiply purple, ainna?

Consider the historic fates of nearly everyone
that has embraced an ideology at the cost of real thought and
conversation.

Or not, for that matter.

g.
o.k., everyone who got past the third grade.....and knew it at the
time.....stand proud and declare yourselves......go on,,,,,don't be
shy.

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

On Jan 22, 7:59*pm, sgr wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:04:04 -0800 (PST), Giles
wrote:

So, just for the record, do you think davie is stupider than
you.....or vice versa?

Doesn't matter.

It may or it may not. There are numerous considerations to take into
account.

g.
not that it matters.

Good point.

Well, it was when I made it.


g.

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

never mind what this clown says...watch what this clown does.......



STORY HIGHLIGHTS
At town hall meeting, Obama acknowledges "frenzy" over Senate election
He promises to keep pushing for economic stimulus, health care reform
President says his actions helped stave off economic cataclysm
He is expected to push for new recovery package in State of the Union
speech

RELATED TOPICS
Barack Obama
U.S. Senate
National Economy
Ohio
Elyria, Ohio (CNN) -- Offering his most extensive public comments
about the election debacle in Massachusetts, President Obama
acknowledged that he's taking some lumps but also trying to cast
himself as a populist who will "never stop fighting" to bring health
care reform and jobs to communities like this hard-hit manufacturing
area outside Cleveland.

"Let me tell you, so long as I have the privilege of serving as your
president, I'll never stop fighting for you," Obama said at the
beginning of a town hall meeting with voters Friday. "I'll take my
lumps, too. I'll never stop fighting to bring jobs back to Elyria.
I'll never stop fighting for an economy where hard work is rewarded,
where responsibility is honored, where accountability is upheld, where
we're creating the jobs of tomorrow."

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

"Giles" wrote in message
...
Obviously, no government cannot be the best government. On the other
hand, no government might very well be better than the best
government.

at first, I read the above as you exercising semantics, but coupled with
some of your other comments, I wonder if you, Wolfie, are suggesting a
society without government.
If so, I'd appreciate examples of how that works on a society which is
urbanized, diverse and fairly densely populated. Actually, I would take
issue with a few of your remarks aimed toward Larry's observations, which I
didn't find to be poorly thought out whatsoever. In addition, you state that
there have been no real-world tests of various permutations of
capitalism/socialism/communism, if I understand you correctly. Why would you
feel that history provides no such evidence of tests?
Tom

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

On 2010-01-22 19:57:36 -0500, "Tom Littleton" said:

He talks as if what he has earned has no bearing on governmental
programs, yet admits he was a child of a home which benefitted from public
assistance.

You are misinformed again, Littleton. If my mother was here, she's
wash your mouth out with soap. *Never* have I been on public
assistance. Both my parents worked hard all of their life and for you
to say that is very hurtful. I myself have worked hard for everything
I have.

Still, no mention of paying my family and thousands of others
back for the fact he was allowed to grow up and earn, rather than starve in
a gutter, thanks to governmental largesse.

What a crock of ****, Tom. There was NO gov largesse in my life. I
didn't "starve in the gutter" because both of my parents worked very
hard and voted Dem. They put a roof over my head and made sure that
everything in my life was good. I had a neice who was on public
assistance, but she was playing the system being lazy.


No big thank-yous for the GI
benefits he started his career upon, nor the pension he draws, thanks to our
tax money.

I didn't use the GI bill because working was more important. I had a
wife and two children to provide for. Working for a good wage was more
important. While I do not have an edumacation like you and Opie, I
seem to have done very well *by WORKING*. As far as my military
pension is concerned, I too paid taxes and still do (probably a helluva
lot more than you and I'm retired). My pension was promised to me when
I reenlisted for the first time. It was all a plan, Tom, a plan that
has made me successful.

I await your apology.

Dave

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

Tom, your last post really angered me. I have had breakfast, a second
cup of coffee, and have cooled down a little.

Your post makes it sound like I am anti-government. I am not. I am
anti-socialism. Marx himself said that socialism is a but a stepping
stone, a pit stop if I may, in the march to communism. I see our
country becoming a socialist one instead of a capitalist one.

There is obviously a need for government. Law enforcement, public
works, fire fighting, military, postal, social welfare, et cetera, all
play a part of any government. I too believe as you do that something
has to be done about our healthcare, but the present system rammed down
our throats at night and behind closed doors is NOT the answer. I am
not the minority in this argument; most Americans feel the same way.
Nancy and Harry have tried to screw us and are spending money like a
drunken sailor on shore leave. Our dept has increased beyond belief in
the past year.

Fix the system. Fix healthcare. Fix the insurance companies. Fix the
tort system so that a doctor doesn't have to pay unnecessary insurance.
Fix it so that we can bring employee healthcare from one job to
another. Fix it so that we can cross statelines to get better
insurance. But, don't throw the baby out with the wash water and make
it so expensive that it *could* break the back of our great country.
Don't buy votes like the Louisiana Purchase and the pay-off to Nebraska.

This thread started because I said thank you to Obama for getting a
Massachusetts Republican elected to the U.S. Senate. A Republican from
Massachusetts! Think about that and WHY he got elected. It is a shot
across Obama's bow, and it could be beneficial to him if he takes heed
to what the *people* are saying. If he and the Dems do not square
away, then they will suffer come November. Count on it. The American
people do not want things jammed down their throat.

Redistribution of wealth? There has, as you have stated, always been
redistribution via taxes that the working people pay. I am not against
social welfare for the needy. That is one of government's
responsibilities. Obama's plan goes beyond that and reeks of socialism.

Dave

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

On Jan 23, 7:59*am, David LaCourse wrote:
Tom, your last post really angered me. *I have had breakfast, a second
cup of coffee, and have cooled down a little.

Your post makes it sound like I am anti-government. *I am not. *I am
anti-socialism. *Marx himself said that socialism is a but a stepping
stone, a pit stop if I may, in the march to communism. *I see our
country becoming a socialist one instead of a capitalist one.

There is obviously a need for government. *Law enforcement, public
works, fire fighting, military, postal, social welfare, et cetera, all
play a part of any government. *I too believe as you do that something
has to be done about our healthcare, but the present system rammed down
our throats at night and behind closed doors is NOT the answer. *I am
not the minority in this argument; *most Americans feel the same way. *
Nancy and Harry have tried to screw us and are spending money like a
drunken sailor on shore leave. *Our dept has increased beyond belief in
the past year.

Fix the system. *Fix healthcare. *Fix the insurance companies. *Fix the
tort system so that a doctor doesn't have to pay unnecessary insurance.
*Fix it so that we can bring employee healthcare from one job to
another. *Fix it so that we can cross statelines to get better
insurance. *But, don't throw the baby out with the wash water and make
it so expensive that it *could* break the back of our great country. *
Don't buy votes like the Louisiana Purchase and the pay-off to Nebraska.

This thread started because I said thank you to Obama for getting a
Massachusetts Republican elected to the U.S. Senate. *A Republican from
Massachusetts! *Think about that and WHY he got elected. *It is a shot
across Obama's bow, and it could be beneficial to him if he takes heed
to what the *people* are saying. *If he and the Dems do not square
away, then they will suffer come November. *Count on it. *The American
people do not want things jammed down their throat.

Redistribution of wealth? *There has, as you have stated, always been
redistribution via taxes that the working people pay. *I am not against
social welfare for the needy. *That is one of government's
responsibilities. *Obama's plan goes beyond that and reeks of socialism..

Dave

Imbecile.

g.

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

"David LaCourse" wrote in message
news:2010012308022216807-dplacourse@aolcom...
You are misinformed again, Littleton. If my mother was here, she's wash
your mouth out with soap. *Never* have I been on public assistance. Both
my parents worked hard all of their life and for you to say that is very
hurtful. I myself have worked hard for everything I have.

I thought I understood you to have said in past posts that there was a brief
period where assistance was required. If I am wrong, let me be quick to
apologize for the error. It was unintentional, and not meant to demean
anyone. In fact, just the opposite. I support social safety nets of various
sorts for the simple reason that they save for productive lives, many who
wouldn't otherwise make it.

Still my point remains: income redistribution happens, and has happened, in
countless ways. As long as we have any taxes, paying for any programs,
income is being redistributed. Farm subsidies and other
agricultural/forestry programs flow to my family, businesses receive
largesse all the time. It's not so simple
as taking from them that has it, and giving to the undeserving, as you
state. Further, the poor, for the most part, receive far less in government
handouts, than the wealthy.
Tom

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

David,
A quick followup on your second post this AM(the post-coffee
one).......how, exactly, do you feel that Obama is proposing a more unfair
income redistibution than, say, giving $250,000/yr to subsidize Rep.
Michelle Bachman's family farm in Ohio? Or, paying timber owners a subsidy
to remove brush which inherently raises the value of their timber land, once
it is removed(and thus, a smart move which in no way requires additional
incentive)? Or, dropping the cap gains tax rate to one far below the income
tax rate(is investment income preferrable for a society to the detriment of
labor income?)?
you puzzle me at times,
Tom

Thank you, Mr. O.
 

oh, and David, a follow-up to my other post. A search from the past revealed
that you were discussing your brother's family, not your childhood home.
Hence, my memory was, indeed, foggy. Apologies for the mixup.

Tom