Yes, they would, and it would be terrible. It wouldn't solve the problem of insufficient budget, because they [government] would just find more things to spend it on.
Like diamond-studded police cars.
Like diamond-studded police cars.
Yeah, because he's open with his agendaReciprocity wrote:
well, when it becomes an obama talking point, you just let me know.JohnG@lt wrote:
Not openly. It would be political suicide. Too many people still believe in the myth of Reaganomics for them to have any chance of bringing back those tax rates. But, they would if they could. Trust me.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Now you sound like ATG.JohnG@lt wrote:
Yeah, because he's open with his agenda
Believe what you want. Believe that they've been completely honest with the American people. If there wasn't a mid-term election coming up and they weren't terrified of losing, believe me, Pelosi would be running buck wild trying to reshape the whole of America in California's image.Reciprocity wrote:
Now you sound like ATG.JohnG@lt wrote:
Yeah, because he's open with his agenda
When it comes to politicians, always expect the worst. There isn't an honest man or woman among the scum that inhabit Washington.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
And when it comes to plumbers, always expect the worst.
Yes. Ass crack all out and about. What kind of crap is that?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
And when it comes to plumbers, always expect the worst.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I don't believe any of them. But I also don't doubt that both parties are restrained by political realities. both sides are always terrified of losing. That's what keeps us from becoming either a socialist state or a completely unrestrained free market christian theocracy.
Really need to separate the belief that having a free market is somehow associated with a christian theocracy. The two ideas couldn't be more at odds. It's why the Republican Party doesn't make any sense.Reciprocity wrote:
I don't believe any of them. But I also don't doubt that both parties are restrained by political realities. both sides are always terrified of losing. That's what keeps us from becoming either a socialist state or a completely unrestrained free market christian theocracy.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
This is JohnG@lt missing the point that because both sides are terrified of losing, we will have neither the socialist state the Democrats want or the completely unrestrained free market christian theocracy the Republicans want.
me? I don't. It's them.JohnG@lt wrote:
Really need to separate the belief that having a free market is somehow associated with a christian theocracy.
Marriage of convenience foisted on the country by McCarthyReciprocity wrote:
me? I don't. It's them.JohnG@lt wrote:
Really need to separate the belief that having a free market is somehow associated with a christian theocracy.
You know, the biggest mistake Marx ever made was attacking religion. Socialism lines up pretty brilliantly with the core Christian values but they'll forever be at odds because of his one stated conviction. Yay for me
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Christianity and communism don't fit together at all really. To get them to work together would mean one or the other would have to give up a lot of their beliefs and basis.JohnG@lt wrote:
You know, the biggest mistake Marx ever made was attacking religion. Socialism lines up pretty brilliantly with the core Christian values
republicans did what communists weren't willing to do.Macbeth wrote:
Christianity and communism don't fit together at all really. To get them to work together would mean one or the other would have to give up a lot of their beliefs and basis.
The core of each is personal sacrifice. Love thy neighbor also plays in heavily with both. Sacrificing your worldly ambitions for a better place in the afterlife would've been the perfect vehicle for Marxism.Macbeth wrote:
Christianity and communism don't fit together at all really. To get them to work together would mean one or the other would have to give up a lot of their beliefs and basis.JohnG@lt wrote:
You know, the biggest mistake Marx ever made was attacking religion. Socialism lines up pretty brilliantly with the core Christian values
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
But you are invading and dominating, and there have been multiple atrocities.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
We aren't committing atrocities and using sheer brutality on the Afghans.
Dilbert_X wrote:
Where exactly?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
The point is Dilbert is talking hate
Dilbert_X wrote:
Only an American could misinterpret 'Express outrage' as 'Invade'
Pointing out entrenched hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty isn't 'hate'.Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats the convenient self-serving intellectual dishonesty which lets [America] trade with despots.
Fuck Israel
Relatively speaking, it could be much worse.Dilbert_X wrote:
But you are invading and dominating, and there have been multiple atrocities.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
We aren't committing atrocities and using sheer brutality on the Afghans.
Last edited by Reciprocity (2010-08-01 21:41:21)
Relatively speaking the bubonic plague could have been a lot worse, so what?Reciprocity wrote:
Relatively speaking, it could be much worse.Dilbert_X wrote:
But you are invading and dominating, and there have been multiple atrocities.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Fuck Israel
Lol, are you really this mad that my argument didn't line up exactly with what you read in the criticism section of his wikipedia page so you don't know how to counter? Get over yourself. You're not nearly as smart as you think you are. You've got the wisdom and life experience of a fruit fly.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is JohnG@lt missing the point that because both sides are terrified of losing, we will have neither the socialist state the Democrats want or the completely unrestrained free market christian theocracy the Republicans want.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
it could always be worse. right now we restrain ourselves to our own detriment, but that's just the cost of waging modern war against insurgents. and I'm not the biggest fan of this war or any war.Dilbert_X wrote:
so what?
Despite the fact I have work in the morning, I'll write you a very short list of reasons why Christianity wouldn't work with communism.JohnG@lt wrote:
The core of each is personal sacrifice. Love thy neighbor also plays in heavily with both. Sacrificing your worldly ambitions for a better place in the afterlife would've been the perfect vehicle for Marxism.Macbeth wrote:
Christianity and communism don't fit together at all really. To get them to work together would mean one or the other would have to give up a lot of their beliefs and basis.JohnG@lt wrote:
You know, the biggest mistake Marx ever made was attacking religion. Socialism lines up pretty brilliantly with the core Christian values
Christianity and a belief in the afterlife does more to make people care less about this life. The idea that 'I'll get a better deal in the next life' makes people care less about this life and do only what they have to in order to make it into the next life with a good deal. Marxism would require people to care about improving their life in this world because 'this is the only one I'll get'.Sacrificing your worldly ambitions for a better place in the afterlife would've been the perfect vehicle for Marxism.
Unless your neighbor is a homosexual, a nonbeliever, a adulterer, etc. Christianity does more to set people apart for arbitrary reasons then bring them together. Furthermore, the idea of a 'chosen people' would not fit with the Marxist goal of 'economic equality'. Following Christian logic, if a person or group of people were Gods favorite then power and money they have over others is okay since 'God wills it'. This logic was the same as as the logic the Euro Kings used who claimed Divine Rights since 'if it's happening God must be cool with it.'Love thy neighbor also plays in heavily with both.
I could keep going but I have to get some medically induced sleep. So if you want me to post more tomorrow, it's up to you.
To boil Macbeth's post down, you can't sacrifice yourself twice. You can only sacrifice yourself to the state if there is no God in need of your full attention.
religion is a very pliable utility of control.
And yet we are not even close to bringing the full force of our military might into the engagement, at the cost of (amongst other things) American lives. Making the whole area a glass parking lot is the easy example, but there are a lot more reasonable middle grounds in conventional warfare that we are not at either.Dilbert_X wrote:
But you are invading and dominating, and there have been multiple atrocities.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
We aren't committing atrocities and using sheer brutality on the Afghans.
It's small-minded stereotyping across an entire nation. Not hate my ass.Dilbert_X wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Where exactly?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
The point is Dilbert is talking hateDilbert_X wrote:
Only an American could misinterpret 'Express outrage' as 'Invade'Pointing out entrenched hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty isn't 'hate'.Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats the convenient self-serving intellectual dishonesty which lets [America] trade with despots.
you can always sacrifice yourself to the state in the name of god.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
To boil Macbeth's post down, you can't sacrifice yourself twice. You can only sacrifice yourself to the state if there is no God in need of your full attention.
Your "argument" could have been a copy/paste job out of any piece of material telling early twenty somethings to avoid taking out a loan to buy their first car. It demonstrated no understanding of the time value of money.JohnG@lt wrote:
Lol, are you really this mad that my argument didn't line up exactly with what you read in the criticism section of his wikipedia page so you don't know how to counter? Get over yourself. You're not nearly as smart as you think you are. You've got the wisdom and life experience of a fruit fly.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is JohnG@lt missing the point that because both sides are terrified of losing, we will have neither the socialist state the Democrats want or the completely unrestrained free market christian theocracy the Republicans want.
You have never read/understood the fiscal policy section of Wikipedia, much less an economics textbook.