Tea Bag Socialists

[gypski]

"Seventy percent of those who identify as Tea Partiers -- a platform that strongly decries government intervention in public life -- want an interventionist government to create jobs, and only about one in three believe Medicaid and Medicare are "socialist" programs, according to a new Bloomberg poll."

Gee, they can call Obama a socialists and then want a government socialistic jobs program. What a dichotomy!!! :D

Is Promote the General Welfare a socialistic idea put forth by the Founding Fathers??? :cool:

Poll: ‘Anti-socialist’ Tea Party activists want government to create jobs | Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0326/poll-antisocialist-tea-party-activists-government-create-jobs/)

[pepurr]

"Seventy percent of those who identify as Tea Partiers -- a platform that strongly decries government intervention in public life -- want an interventionist government to create jobs, and only about one in three believe Medicaid and Medicare are "socialist" programs, according to a new Bloomberg poll."

Gee, they can call Obama a socialists and then want a government socialistic jobs program. What a dichotomy!!! :D

Is Promote the General Welfare a socialistic idea put forth by the Founding Fathers??? :cool:

Poll: â??Anti-socialistâ?? Tea Party activists want government to create jobs | Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0326/poll-antisocialist-tea-party-activists-government-create-jobs/)

Yeah! What a bunch of dick-otomy heads. :)

[killerweed420]

First of all its a poll by Bloomberg so doubtful about its authenticity. I'm not a tea partier but I am a Libertarian, who hold alot of the same beliefs. Yes Medicare, medicaid, social security are socialist programs, no doubt about that and as a libertarian I'm against them because the federal government does not have legal authority to have these programs along with organizations like the FCC,ATF,TSA,DEA and lots of others. Libertarians believe in the constitution and bill of rights as they were first signed, we believe they are all equally important. Every time a bill is passed by congress that violates the constitution you just lost a little of your civil rights and I don't want to see that happen.

[gypski]

First of all its a poll by Bloomberg so doubtful about its authenticity. I'm not a tea partier but I am a Libertarian, who hold alot of the same beliefs. Yes Medicare, medicaid, social security are socialist programs, no doubt about that and as a libertarian I'm against them because the federal government does not have legal authority to have these programs along with organizations like the FCC,ATF,TSA,DEA and lots of others. Libertarians believe in the constitution and bill of rights as they were first signed, we believe they are all equally important. Every time a bill is passed by congress that violates the constitution you just lost a little of your civil rights and I don't want to see that happen.

....and the philosophy of Libertarian socialism, which argues that genuine free-markets weaken the capitalist class and empower the working class. :thumbsup:

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism)

[killerweed420]

The constitution certainly grants the government the right to tax and regulate interstate businesses and foreign businesses selling there products in the US. Which is a sign of socialism. The foreign companies are our biggest problem, they're pretty much unregulated and not easily taxed. My preference is to not tax businesses but tax income with an income based flat tax instead. No tax deductions for any businesses, the businesses can do what ever they want with there money but if its taken as personal income then its taxed. The problem is this would be unfair with foreign companies doing business in the US, they wouldn't be taxed.

[yokinazu]

My preference is to not tax businesses but tax income with an income based flat tax instead.

my problem with thet is that a buisnesses income is not called income but earnigings and yes they should be taxed.

the answer is a flat tax. no matter if a buisness or a person what ever money is made should be taxed. and all equally. a percantage sounds good to me. no loop holes no deductions, no earned income, no bullshit. if you make 100,000 grand a year say at 10% you pay 10,000 of that to the government. if you make no income you pay nothing. but lets face it i know people who have paid less than $1000 a year and got on a return 4500. and people who make 1,000,000 a year who pay less than 1000. and why is the tax system fucked. it dont take a genuis. you cant give people more thean they paid.

and as far as gettin rid of social programs well lets see where we will be with absolutly no social programs: that means no welfare, no "obama" care, no medicaid, no SOCIAL securaity, no fireman, no police, no un-employment. anyone who knows history shoulkd agree with the fact that when the fire deparment become city or state run by the governmetnt of city or state, still socialist but not on the federal scale, they became more efficint and saved more lives and property than 2 companys fighting over the territory. my point is socialist programs do have their good points.

[gypski]

The constitution certainly grants the government the right to tax and regulate interstate businesses and foreign businesses selling there products in the US. Which is a sign of socialism. The foreign companies are our biggest problem, they're pretty much unregulated and not easily taxed. My preference is to not tax businesses but tax income with an income based flat tax instead. No tax deductions for any businesses, the businesses can do what ever they want with there money but if its taken as personal income then its taxed. The problem is this would be unfair with foreign companies doing business in the US, they wouldn't be taxed.

I have no problem with a graduated flat tax. Face it, the more you make the more you give up. I'm not saying rob the rich, but make them ante up. Most of the corporate CEOs could afford to pay 50% flat and still live high off the hog. Thieves must pay their far share. Then start down the ladder from there. If you only get paid minimum you pay nothing. :D

And still place tariffs and taxes and duties on imports. Keep the sin taxes stable and quit fucking everybody on them too. :smokin:

[WashougalWonder]

Everyone should pay an equal percentage from rich to poor.

[delusionsofNORMALity]

....and the philosophy of Libertarian socialism, which argues that genuine free-markets weaken the capitalist class and empower the working class.quoting a wikipedia entry on libertarian socialism is disingenuous at best. there are so many ideologies concerning economic and political theory and they are labeled in such an obtuse manner that those labels become almost meaningless. the concept of a libertarian socialist is nearly an oxymoron. there are certainly deluded fools out there that believe a libertarian's minimal government is capable of controlling a massive nation's economy, as in the socialist model, but those are the sort of naive, ivory tower idiots that have gotten us into the mess we are in now. the u.s. began its life as a libertarian society, a loosely knit alliance of separate states with the federal government as the final arbiter in assuring the liberty of the individual. in about two centuries that limited federal authority has become the oppressive voice of control through its use of federally mandated programs and overreaching power grabs, centralizing control to a nearly totalitarian degree. this is the outcome of mixing the near anarchism of libertarian thought with the stringent control required by socialist dogma. the liberty assured by one is overridden by the necessary centralized power of the other.


.....as far as gettin rid of social programs well lets see where we will be with absolutely no social programs.....
my point is socialist programs do have their good points.there are very few who would demand the abolition of all social programs. a certain amount of charity within government is a sign of a healthy society. the dilemma is deciding at what point does the scope of those programs become oppressive to the nation as a whole and where should the power to control those programs reside. the expansion of liberty demands that such charitable causes be gradually taken over by the private sector and placed in the hands of regional authority. this country is on the opposite course, centralizing that authority at the expense of the individual's freedom of choice. the quest for moral solutions to the ills of society is leading to the creation of the same sort of totalitarian regime that has failed time and again in nations across the globe.


I have no problem with a graduated flat tax. Face it, the more you make the more you give up. I'm not saying rob the rich, but make them ante up. Most of the corporate CEOs could afford to pay 50% flat and still live high off the hog. Thieves must pay their far share.i'd say you haven't the faintest idea what the term "flat tax" means. what you describe is the progressive taxation that penalizes success, inhibiting growth for the sake of some illusory concept of "fairness". while you may deny it, what you are really saying is "steal from the rich to give to the poor" and your reasoning is based on the same tired rhetoric of envy that all of modern liberalism is based on. you equate the accumulation of wealth with evil and seem to see some inherent nobility in poverty.

the debt owed by the successful is one of ethics and of gratitude, not of the law, and the use of government's force to exact revenge on the mob's chosen scapegoats is no more moral than the outright theft you claim to abhor. just because the rich can afford to pay does not mean that we should be allowed to demand the payment of such usurious taxation under the threat of government's violent force. we should not allow some vague notion of social benefit to override the inviolate freedom of choice and personal ownership of self that is promised to us all by the constitution. we may praise those who engage in charity and damn those who hold the material above the welfare of their neighbor, but to demand conformity through force is nothing more than the mob's sin of envy. perhaps you would have us all believe that we are nothing more than beasts of the herd, but i certainly hope that we are capable of better.

[gypski]

i'd say you haven't the faintest idea what the term "flat tax" means.

I know exactly what a flat tax is. Its been talked about as along as I can remember. I still believe in parity. Pay what you can afford. The wealthy or super wealthy used to pay nearly 90%. Now they pay nearly nothing. always loop holes. Its a part of citizenship to pay taxes, but not for legislatures to piss away. The tax argument will never end. Maybe we should just say every man for himself, starting now with no level playing field. I'm on disability. I had a business and paid all the taxes including soc sec matches, unemployment and never bitched about it. I'm not greedy. But right now what I'm surviving on, no one should be placed in that position. Especially because they had marijuana offenses and are discriminated against. I take you you don't have any marijuana felony. And, I'm 61. I used to have a construction company. Its not just one easy solution. As a matter of fact, my family was once well to do, but several depressions and other things seemed to winnow it down. We've been in the US for nearly 300 years and are in every state. :jointsmile: No bragging, just saying. And, they associated with the Founders. Don't believe it, I don't care. :thumbsup:

Hypothetically, If I made a million bucks a years, I'd have no problem giving up 50%. but that's just me. ;)

[delusionsofNORMALity]

If I made a million bucks a years, I'd have no problem giving up 50%. but that's just me. ;)exercising the personal choice to donate your earnings to worthwhile endeavors is one thing. being forced to hand over those earnings to the political animals of government, so that they can curry favor with their constituents after taking a sizeable chunk as a "handling fee", is another matter entirely. being forced to invest in a pyramid scheme retirement plan that is regularly raided by those same political animals for their pet projects and sorry attempts at social engineering runs contrary to the concept of individual liberty. being forced by government agency to part with what you have earned because of the envy of those who have less than you, for whatever reasons, is antithetical to the notion of a free society. the confiscation of the personal property of the few in order to prop up the failings of the welfare state is theft, plain and simple.

the problem with your version of parity is that it denies individual choice and places the state in the position of deciding how much is enough. you may be willing to part with half of your earnings to aid your neighbors, someone else may decide that a quarter of their worth is donation enough, and another may feel that giving everything but what is needed for their own survival is the least they can do for their fellow man. that is the individual's prerogative and the nature of charity. what the liberal establishment proposes is the replacement of individual charity and personal responsibility with the government mandated redistribution of wealth. placing the onus of supporting society on the successful few interferes with their rights to personal property and enables government and the mob it controls to interfere with the rights of all men. perhaps you don't feel that the rights of the wealthy are worth protecting. perhaps you feel that their success makes them less worthy of liberty than those of us who scrabble for our existence. perhaps you are perfectly happy with the thought of the successful being made slaves to the mob.

[killerweed420]

"i'd say you haven't the faintest idea what the term "flat tax" means. what you describe is the progressive taxation that penalizes success, inhibiting growth for the sake of some illusory concept of "fairness". while you may deny it, what you are really saying is "steal from the rich to give to the poor" and your reasoning is based on the same tired rhetoric of envy that all of modern liberalism is based on. you equate the accumulation of wealth with evil and seem to see some inherent nobility in poverty."

The problem with that statement is you are assuming people that make millions do so ethically. Very far from the truth. No one makes that kind of money who aren't either screwing there employees, screwing there customers or doing both.
Thats why I too favor the gradiated flat tax. No one needs a million dollars a year to live comfortably. I'm against taxing businesses because that just drives up the price of products for us consumers. All of this would probably be irrelevant if we just had some sort of control over congressional spending. If we could get congress to quit pissing money away on worthless programs there would probably plenty of money to go around.

[gypski]

I also disagree with the notion that the nation's natural resources are there for the taking by any private individual. The Mining Law of 1876 is so fucking out dated with the royalty structure, and non-payment of royalties by the extractors stiffing the government. Its insane to allow private companies to buy the American people's land (public trust) for $5.00 stinking dollars an acre. Or pay a lease fee of $2.50 and acre and turn around and screw us when it comes to energy and payment of royalties. The nation has lost trillions. That is one law that has sorely been needed to change for nearly a 100 years and congress still won't act to change it. Individual states, like Alaska, pay a portion to their people. Nationally neither the people or the government get their fair share.

And I agree will KillerWeed on the notion that robber CEOs and corporations rape the people. Not one of them are worth what they get paid to destroy the infrastructure. Its not only obscene, its totally unAmerican. :twocents: more to the kitty.

[gypski]

And example of one of the robber barons and his philosophy. In one sense it makes sense if I actually applied. In a service economy it boils down to chicken feed. But then Morgan made his fortune screwing many along the way. :twocents:

John Pierpont Morgan (1837-1913), who founded an industrial empire and worked as a financier at the bank which today has become part of JPMorgan Chase, believed the desirable top-to-bottom salary gap in any company should be twenty-to-one.

Since JPMorgan's CEO and chairman, Jamie Dimon, stands to pocket more than 17 million dollars in 2009, that would mean the lowest salary at his bank should be fixed at 850,000 dollars, according to the bank's founding father.

[delusionsofNORMALity]

The problem with that statement is you are assuming people that make millions do so ethically. Very far from the truth. No one makes that kind of money who aren't either screwing there employees, screwing there customers or doing both.


I agree will KillerWeed on the notion that robber CEOs and corporations rape the people. Not one of them are worth what they get paid to destroy the infrastructure.you two are both so typical of what is wrong with modern liberal thought that it's almost scary. equating success with evil is the product of a culture of entitlement and the envy of the have nots of those who may very well have earned every bit of their wealth. taking isolated anecdotal evidence as proof of an endemic criminal tendency has fed the mob's undirected rage and turned it against the very entities that provide them with a means to survive and flourish. the foolish notion that business is bad and that only government can save us from such evil denies that business is made up of the people and that it is government that has set itself up as judge and jury, deciding what our labors are worth instead of leaving that up to the marketplace.

this strange idea that wealth is evil and its creation a sign of ill intent dooms us to an inevitable mediocrity. as citizens of one of the world's wealthiest nations, we should be particularly aware that it is only the concentration on the material at the expense of all else that is evil. it is wealth that enables charity and the very innovation that has created products and services that have saved countless lives and alleviated the suffering of millions. it certainly isn't our altruistic nature that has led the u.s. to become the single most charitable nation on the planet. it is the freedom that such wealth engenders and the leisure it affords that has bred any greatness this country may have attained. belittling that wealth by demonizing its creators and demanding that the state rein in the entrepreneur leads us down the path toward the abolition of the individual.

you seem to forget that it is government that hires armed thugs to force the common man to submit to its will, that enforces conformity under penalty of violence and demands obedience to its every whim. where private industry may offer up any commodity at any cost, a free marketplace also allows for competition and the destruction of unfavorable business practices by an aware consumer base. while it is only with the collusion of authorities that any business may force consumers to use an unwanted product, government has no such safeguards. there is no recourse to the will of the state. the lie of the ballot box may have deluded the masses into believing that they have some control over their representatives, but the evidence to the contrary is undeniable. by demanding that government restrict businesses where we should be using the marketplace as a tool of control, we cede our liberties to the whims of a political elite that we ourselves have created and continue to enable.

[cannabis=freedom]

Long live socialism in the untainted splendour of its lofty ideal, as yet unrealized...that's all I can say at the moment. Politics have seemed to me lately even more of a twisted mess of garbage that I'd be better off ignoring for poetry and sunsets. I will say, though, that I'm very pleased the U.S. has finally reformed its awful system and people hopefully won't be bankrupted by long illnesses anymore.

Delusions, I have a strong feeling in my soul that business and government are alike evil, and that as to American charity, I cite that passage in Wuthering Heights about 'don't raze my palace, erect a hovel and praise your own charity.' Charity usually has other motives, too (at least on the state level), whether for leverage, a good face, or what have you. If asked whether I'd rather be under business or government, I would answer a resounding 'neither.' I can't believe that any huge institution donates out of the goodness of their collective hearts.

[killerweed420]

you two are both so typical of what is wrong with modern liberal thought that it's almost scary. equating success with evil is the product of a culture of entitlement and the envy of the have nots of those who may very well have earned every bit of their wealth. taking isolated anecdotal evidence as proof of an endemic criminal tendency has fed the mob's undirected rage and turned it against the very entities that provide them with a means to survive and flourish. the foolish notion that business is bad and that only government can save us from such evil denies that business is made up of the people and that it is government that has set itself up as judge and jury, deciding what our labors are worth instead of leaving that up to the marketplace.


this strange idea that wealth is evil and its creation a sign of ill intent dooms us to an inevitable mediocrity. as citizens of one of the world's wealthiest nations, we should be particularly aware that it is only the concentration on the material at the expense of all else that is evil. it is wealth that enables charity and the very innovation that has created products and services that have saved countless lives and alleviated the suffering of millions. it certainly isn't our altruistic nature that has led the u.s. to become the single most charitable nation on the planet. it is the freedom that such wealth engenders and the leisure it affords that has bred any greatness this country may have attained. belittling that wealth by demonizing its creators and demanding that the state rein in the entrepreneur leads us down the path toward the abolition of the individual.

you seem to forget that it is government that hires armed thugs to force the common man to submit to its will, that enforces conformity under penalty of violence and demands obedience to its every whim. where private industry may offer up any commodity at any cost, a free marketplace also allows for competition and the destruction of unfavorable business practices by an aware consumer base. while it is only with the collusion of authorities that any business may force consumers to use an unwanted product, government has no such safeguards. there is no recourse to the will of the state. the lie of the ballot box may have deluded the masses into believing that they have some control over their representatives, but the evidence to the contrary is undeniable. by demanding that government restrict businesses where we should be using the marketplace as a tool of control, we cede our liberties to the whims of a political elite that we ourselves have created and continue to enable.
Too begin with I'm not a liberal but am what used to be called a compassionate conservative. Where that now means you have 2 gods, Yahweh and manna, I believe in neither. So I don't use that term any more. I'm just a libertarian that believes in the constitution and bill of rights as they were originally entended. I see no reason why conservatives can't help there fellow man as liberals should. I just have a different version of how that should be done. It should never be done with government mandates as that is hollow. It should be done by people from there hearts with no intention of ever receiving anything in return.

[Islandborn]

awww, so sorry....the libs are scared of the tea parties now....whats next? Jahova's Witness? I would hate to live my life in fear.

Thankfully, the majority actually think the teaparties are better equipped to handle the issues than congress can. Polls are fun.

Most Say Tea Party Has Better Understanding of Issues than Congress - Rasmussen Reportsâ?¢ (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2010/most_say_tea_party_has_better_understanding_of_iss ues_than_congress)

And Obama's fiscal idiot ass dropped another 2 points today....man....what a opposition "waterloo" that Obamacare was LMAO.....Dems are done.
Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval (http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx)

That supposedly idiot filled group of "teabaggers" is kicking the crap outta the left and any UNION FUNDED protests they can scrub together.

[gypski]

awww, so sorry....the libs are scared of the tea parties now....whats next? Jahova's Witness? I would hate to live my life in fear.

Thankfully, the majority actually think the teaparties are better equipped to handle the issues than congress can. Polls are fun.

Most Say Tea Party Has Better Understanding of Issues than Congress - Rasmussen Reportsâ?¢ (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2010/most_say_tea_party_has_better_understanding_of_iss ues_than_congress)

And Obama's fiscal idiot ass dropped another 2 points today....man....what a opposition "waterloo" that Obamacare was LMAO.....Dems are done.
Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval (http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx)

That supposedly idiot filled group of "teabaggers" is kicking the crap outta the left and any UNION FUNDED protests they can scrub together.

:S2: Is all I can say. Afraid of the Tea Party!!!! :S2:

[boaz]

....whats next? Jahova's Witness? ...
...

they came out to our farm once when I was a kid and I remember my dad sat down with them out on the front porch and told them all about his interpretation of the bible and proceeded to blow the f'n minds. :jointsmile: they never came back to the farm again. :D

[delusionsofNORMALity]

Long live socialism in the untainted splendour of its lofty ideal, as yet unrealized...at once saying that the socialist ideal is untainted and that government is evil seems a bit twisted in itself. perhaps you've missed the concept that this evil government is the all controlling force behind that lofty mechanism of change. everyone has grand ideals, the trick is to find a workable and ethical means to attain those goals. socialism is found lacking on both of those points. after witnessing the utter failure of the soviet model and the evolution of china's decades long experiment into the early stages of capitalism, europe's tired empires have attempted a hybrid model and are finding that even this is a path to bankruptcy and mediocrity. face it, the marxist model works only among a people so beaten down into peonage that mere starvation seems a treat and the simple loosening of their chain is enough to cause euphoria. humanity is deserving of so much better, the individual is capable of so much more than the herd.

[eastbaygordo]

I find it funny the tea baggers are clamoring for their unemployment benefits too.

[cannabis=freedom]

at once saying that the socialist ideal is untainted and that government is evil seems a bit twisted in itself. perhaps you've missed the concept that this evil government is the all controlling force behind that lofty mechanism of change. everyone has grand ideals, the trick is to find a workable and ethical means to attain those goals. socialism is found lacking on both of those points. after witnessing the utter failure of the soviet model and the evolution of china's decades long experiment into the early stages of capitalism, europe's tired empires have attempted a hybrid model and are finding that even this is a path to bankruptcy and mediocrity. face it, the marxist model works only among a people so beaten down into peonage that mere starvation seems a treat and the simple loosening of their chain is enough to cause euphoria. humanity is deserving of so much better, the individual is capable of so much more than the herd.

Exactly. 'Untainted' didn't refer in any way to any actual system of belief, only the individualist one I have in my head. All forms of government are failures--as Oscar Wilde says, democracy is simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people, and has been found out. I like how you mentioned earlier the 'lie of the ballot box.' Some entirely new form of government is needed, and unlike what most typically assume, no I'm not advocating more government control. What sane and informed person could want that?

[delusionsofNORMALity]

All forms of government are failures.....
Some entirely new form of government is needed.....admittedly, there is an element of failure in every system. perfection is nowhere to be found, it would signal the end should it ever be attained. the aim is to approach ever closer and to gain, with each step, some glimmer of enlightenment. the puling mob descends back into chaos, the tyranny of the oppressive state enabling their pointless rage. all mobs are pointless and all governments tyrannical.

that glint in the distance is the self-governance of the individual and each step we take should be toward that light. these wasted backward paces, burying us in slavery and peonage to the state, cannot lead us there and are an affront to the journey.

[Islandborn]

of course your scared of the tea party.....thats why you attack them and talk about them constantly. And the fact that they are destroying Obama and his media lapdogs with their weak ass attempts to whitewash the news. Info flows way to fast nowadays and even the mainstream media can't keep up with it.

Meanwhile, after all the crying we heard from the lefty pussies who apparently cant throw a punch or take one for that matter, an actual arrest has been made regarding threats.

Virginia Politics Blog - Updated: Norman Leboon charged with threatening to kill Cantor and his family (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/03/post_662.html)

and the DNC has to give his donations to charity lol

DNC will give Cantor threat suspect's donations to charity - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/89667-dnc-will-give-cantor-threat-suspects-donations-to-charity)

[RedLocks]

By the way, Leboon was apparently some religious nut that was trashing both parties.

[gypski]

of course your scared of the tea party.....thats why you attack them and talk about them constantly. And the fact that they are destroying Obama and his media lapdogs with their weak ass attempts to whitewash the news. Info flows way to fast nowadays and even the mainstream media can't keep up with it.

Meanwhile, after all the crying we heard from the lefty pussies who apparently cant throw a punch or take one for that matter, an actual arrest has been made regarding threats.

Virginia Politics Blog - Updated: Norman Leboon charged with threatening to kill Cantor and his family (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/03/post_662.html)

and the DNC has to give his donations to charity lol

DNC will give Cantor threat suspect's donations to charity - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/89667-dnc-will-give-cantor-threat-suspects-donations-to-charity)

The Tea Party is as phony as Sarah Palin. Like that quitter would know the first thing about running a real government. And the rest of the Party hacks are just another bunch of users. This party will go absolutely nowhere. Its like a fart in a tempest. :D