The death of the American century

[crashoverride7]

i dont belive what we are seeing is the death of the american dream. that died with the hippies. what your seeing in its death throes is the american spirit. the free thinking intelligent educated involved citizens that used to be the heart of this country are now to entrance by the new ipod touch and whos gonna win american idol that they cant be bothered by what is actually happening to their country. the government has spent the last 40 years trying to get us as fat and stupid and lazy as they can. that way we can be more easily controlled.

[ck_taft325is]

There's has to be a way for me to buy you a beer...

If he's ever in the greater Puget Sound area, I'll add yours to the tab I'm going to start for him.


And before anyone starts zero'ing in on this, "There is a loss of hope, not because things are that bad, but because no matter how hard you try, government will make it impossible to excel because it isn't fair to the other guy (who probably never tried)." from Hallen, keep in mind all it takes is ONE guy doing nothing for the gamut of "fairness" comes into play to destroy the dreams and hard work of individuals that actually do something. This should not be taken as, "I work and refuse to pay for lazy people and anyone without a job, home, $40,00 a year job, BMW, suit, 20 shoes... etc, etc... is lazy!"

Really think about "fairness" and how it's been instituted and used by certain idealogies. In the doctrine of "fairness" things have gone horrible askew.

[markseven]

If he's ever in the greater Puget Sound area, I'll add yours to the tab I'm going to start for him.


And before anyone starts zero'ing in on this, "There is a loss of hope, not because things are that bad, but because no matter how hard you try, government will make it impossible to excel because it isn't fair to the other guy (who probably never tried)." from Hallen, keep in mind all it takes is ONE guy doing nothing for the gamut of "fairness" comes into play to destroy the dreams and hard work of individuals that actually do something. This should not be taken as, "I work and refuse to pay for lazy people and anyone without a job, home, $40,00 a year job, BMW, suit, 20 shoes... etc, etc... is lazy!"

Really think about "fairness" and how it's been instituted and used by certain idealogies. In the doctrine of "fairness" things have gone horrible askew.

Look me up if you are in SoCal, amigo.

[mrsleeve]

If he's ever in the greater Puget Sound area, I'll add yours to the tab I'm going to start for him.


And before anyone starts zero'ing in on this, "There is a loss of hope, not because things are that bad, but because no matter how hard you try, government will make it impossible to excel because it isn't fair to the other guy (who probably never tried)." from Hallen, keep in mind all it takes is ONE guy doing nothing for the gamut of "fairness" comes into play to destroy the dreams and hard work of individuals that actually do something. This should not be taken as, "I work and refuse to pay for lazy people and anyone without a job, home, $40,00 a year job, BMW, suit, 20 shoes... etc, etc... is lazy!"

Really think about "fairness" and how it's been instituted and used by certain idealogies. In the doctrine of "fairness" things have gone horrible askew.

I owe him several beers as of now so put me on that list as well.

as to the rest of your post, You have just defined Social justice, and hows its fucking up the world. We are all born of equal rights and equal opportunity, but results will vary, not everyone entitled to equal results, there is a certain amount of luck that goes with life too.

[Bill 84 318i]

We don't share politics most of the time, but I do appreciate how well thought out your worldview is. This sentence bugged me, though.

There is a loss of hope not because big business is stealing America but because Government can be bought by big business.

I can't quite figure you out here. It's kind of a circular reference, no? In the end, big business comes out ahead and in control, and you seem to be implying that this is a bad thing. Unless just saying that corruption is bad (well, duh) - but that again comes back to the implication that big business shouldn't have all the power.

But you're very anti-goverrnment, as well. All of your posts are "government should be minimal", free market, etc. I think you're wise enough to know that this clearly isn't a black and white thing - it's a huge grey world - but how do you reconcile this? I think that big overarching statements like what you just made are overly simplistic and, while emotionally appealing, aren't realistic in the end.

[ck_taft325is]

Look me up if you are in SoCal, amigo.

I was born in Salinas and lived from 16 (almost 17) to 18 near Monterey. CA has been rough on me ;) Not sure why I came back to WA beyond the fact that it was easier than trying to stay in CA! Will do though.

[LBJefferies]

You know who we have to blame for the end of American exceptionalism? It's greedy Wall Street execs who were only concerned with the bottom line so they sent all our jobs overseas. Yup, big business is to blame again. Why doesn't that surprise me?

Tax Chinese imports, that will bring jobs and money back to America and keep "The American Dream" alive. Hell, ban Chinese imports all together for all I care. Does China produce anything that we actually need? I'm pretty sure it's all just endless amounts of useless plastic shit like lead tainted toys.

[Hallen]

We don't share politics most of the time, but I do appreciate how well thought out your worldview is. This sentence bugged me, though.

I can't quite figure you out here. It's kind of a circular reference, no? In the end, big business comes out ahead and in control, and you seem to be implying that this is a bad thing. Unless just saying that corruption is bad (well, duh) - but that again comes back to the implication that big business shouldn't have all the power.

But you're very anti-goverrnment, as well. All of your posts are "government should be minimal", free market, etc. I think you're wise enough to know that this clearly isn't a black and white thing - it's a huge grey world - but how do you reconcile this? I think that big overarching statements like what you just made are overly simplistic and, while emotionally appealing, aren't realistic in the end.

Yes, everything is shades of gray and black and white is almost never found. My point is that because government meddles with the economy, the market per se, it makes itself vulnerable to influence by business. Business is opportunistic, it's one of its best traits and one of its most dangerous. It's like fire: very necessary for cooking food and making it safe, yet very dangerous if not constrained. Those of us who believe in the power of the free market believe that business is best constrained by success and failure. If a business acts inapporpriately, if it is unfair to its workers and customers, the idea is the consumer and workers will shun that company and it will fail. If a business takes on too much risk and things go slightly wrong, then it will fail.

Government has ultimate control because power lies with them, ultimately. Because government thinks it has a large roll in the economy and has the power to manipulate the economy in ways that a business never can, it has the power to completely distort the natural flow of commerce. Business recognizes that and therefore insinuates itself in the government process insuring that one particular business, or a particular sector, has unfair advantages or favoritism.

If government had no roll in the markets at all, there would be no way for business to influence the markets by bribing the government. It just couldn't happen. Business is not looking to control government, not really. They don't want to lead the world. They want to make money. That's the only reason that a business entity has any real interest in government.

Before you go jumping off the cliff on me, I am not naive enough to think that government can be 100% extricated from the markets. There are still very real criminal elements out there and it is the government's roll to protect property rights. Therefore, there will still have to be laws on theft and fraud that will have to be enforced. But that should be the extent of it.

Look at it this way, almost all of the "monopoly" companies out there in the US were created because of government regulations, not in spite of them.

You know who we have to blame for the end of American exceptionalism? It's greedy Wall Street execs who were only concerned with the bottom line so they sent all our jobs overseas. Yup, big business is to blame again. Why doesn't that surprise me?

Tax Chinese imports, that will bring jobs and money back to America and keep "The American Dream" alive. Hell, ban Chinese imports all together for all I care. Does China produce anything that we actually need? I'm pretty sure it's all just endless amounts of useless plastic shit like lead tainted toys.

Your understanding of economics is pitiful. The worst thing possible to do is tariffs. However, since China is unfairly manipulating their own currency value, and putting the US economy at risk by doing so, there should be something done about it. The first thing to do is to stop government from printing and spending so much fucking money. That would hinder the Chinese government's buying of our debt and burying it which forces their currency to stay low compared to ours which enables this trade inequity. Yep, that's right, it's government intervention in the markets again that is CREATING the problem. More intervention will not solve it.

Greedy Wall-Street CEO's is simply the left's vilification of success. Yes, there are greedy, unethical CEO's out there. Greed isn't always bad, but when it is backed by stupid government intervention that gives them the power to do what they do, well, that's a problem. Remember, these greedy Wall Street guys are only reacting to what government does.

There are too many problems out there in the economy to shake a stick at. More stupid regulations are not going to solve those problems, they will make them worse. Well conceived, carefully planned, and minimally invasive regulations and laws are what is needed which means the repeal of a whole lot of corrupt and abusive laws out there right now like the "community reinvestment act". That one act is more to blame for our current economic woes than any other thing.

Contrary to what some of you think, I am not anti-government. I am pro-small government more in line with the constitution. I am pro-free market, let consumers make the decisions, not government: it's the ultimate form of democracy. I am not 100% opposed to government safety nets like unemployment insurance, but it needs to be tough love, not entitlement. I am opposed to trade restrictions, but I am for interventions when other world governments manipulate markets for political and ideological gains. I am opposed to most all government run quasi-businesses. I believe that entrepreneurship is the best way for innovation to occur and for all people to prosper.

Anyway, no beer required, although I'd be happy to sit down and have one with you all, even Holmes. :D

[ck_taft325is]

Yes, everything is shades of gray and black and white is almost never found. My point is that because government meddles with the economy, the market per se, it makes itself vulnerable to influence by business. Business is opportunistic, it's one of its best traits and one of its most dangerous. It's like fire: very necessary for cooking food and making it safe, yet very dangerous if not constrained. Those of us who believe in the power of the free market believe that business is best constrained by success and failure. If a business acts inapporpriately, if it is unfair to its workers and customers, the idea is the consumer and workers will shun that company and it will fail. If a business takes on too much risk and things go slightly wrong, then it will fail.

Government has ultimate control because power lies with them, ultimately. Because government thinks it has a large roll in the economy and has the power to manipulate the economy in ways that a business never can, it has the power to completely distort the natural flow of commerce. Business recognizes that and therefore insinuates itself in the government process insuring that one particular business, or a particular sector, has unfair advantages or favoritism.

If government had no roll in the markets at all, there would be no way for business to influence the markets by bribing the government. It just couldn't happen. Business is not looking to control government, not really. They don't want to lead the world. They want to make money. That's the only reason that a business entity has any real interest in government.

Before you go jumping off the cliff on me, I am not naive enough to think that government can be 100% extricated from the markets. There are still very real criminal elements out there and it is the government's roll to protect property rights. Therefore, there will still have to be laws on theft and fraud that will have to be enforced. But that should be the extent of it.

Look at it this way, almost all of the "monopoly" companies out there in the US were created because of government regulations, not in spite of them.



Your understanding of economics is pitiful. The worst thing possible to do is tariffs. However, since China is unfairly manipulating their own currency value, and putting the US economy at risk by doing so, there should be something done about it. The first thing to do is to stop government from printing and spending so much fucking money. That would hinder the Chinese government's buying of our debt and burying it which forces their currency to stay low compared to ours which enables this trade inequity. Yep, that's right, it's government intervention in the markets again that is CREATING the problem. More intervention will not solve it.

Greedy Wall-Street CEO's is simply the left's vilification of success. Yes, there are greedy, unethical CEO's out there. Greed isn't always bad, but when it is backed by stupid government intervention that gives them the power to do what they do, well, that's a problem. Remember, these greedy Wall Street guys are only reacting to what government does.

There are too many problems out there in the economy to shake a stick at. More stupid regulations are not going to solve those problems, they will make them worse. Well conceived, carefully planned, and minimally invasive regulations and laws are what is needed which means the repeal of a whole lot of corrupt and abusive laws out there right now like the "community reinvestment act". That one act is more to blame for our current economic woes than any other thing.

Contrary to what some of you think, I am not anti-government. I am pro-small government more in line with the constitution. I am pro-free market, let consumers make the decisions, not government: it's the ultimate form of democracy. I am not 100% opposed to government safety nets like unemployment insurance, but it needs to be tough love, not entitlement. I am opposed to trade restrictions, but I am for interventions when other world governments manipulate markets for political and ideological gains. I am opposed to most all government run quasi-businesses. I believe that entrepreneurship is the best way for innovation to occur and for all people to prosper.

Anyway, no beer required, although I'd be happy to sit down and have one with you all, even Holmes. :D

Deal, but sorry bud, I'm buying you at least one!

[87e30]

Yes, everything is shades of gray and black and white is almost never found. My point is that because government meddles with the economy, the market per se, it makes itself vulnerable to influence by business. Business is opportunistic, it's one of its best traits and one of its most dangerous. It's like fire: very necessary for cooking food and making it safe, yet very dangerous if not constrained. Those of us who believe in the power of the free market believe that business is best constrained by success and failure. If a business acts inapporpriately, if it is unfair to its workers and customers, the idea is the consumer and workers will shun that company and it will fail. If a business takes on too much risk and things go slightly wrong, then it will fail.

Government has ultimate control because power lies with them, ultimately. Because government thinks it has a large roll in the economy and has the power to manipulate the economy in ways that a business never can, it has the power to completely distort the natural flow of commerce. Business recognizes that and therefore insinuates itself in the government process insuring that one particular business, or a particular sector, has unfair advantages or favoritism.

If government had no roll in the markets at all, there would be no way for business to influence the markets by bribing the government. It just couldn't happen. Business is not looking to control government, not really. They don't want to lead the world. They want to make money. That's the only reason that a business entity has any real interest in government.

Before you go jumping off the cliff on me, I am not naive enough to think that government can be 100% extricated from the markets. There are still very real criminal elements out there and it is the government's roll to protect property rights. Therefore, there will still have to be laws on theft and fraud that will have to be enforced. But that should be the extent of it.

Look at it this way, almost all of the "monopoly" companies out there in the US were created because of government regulations, not in spite of them.



Your understanding of economics is pitiful. The worst thing possible to do is tariffs. However, since China is unfairly manipulating their own currency value, and putting the US economy at risk by doing so, there should be something done about it. The first thing to do is to stop government from printing and spending so much fucking money. That would hinder the Chinese government's buying of our debt and burying it which forces their currency to stay low compared to ours which enables this trade inequity. Yep, that's right, it's government intervention in the markets again that is CREATING the problem. More intervention will not solve it.

Greedy Wall-Street CEO's is simply the left's vilification of success. Yes, there are greedy, unethical CEO's out there. Greed isn't always bad, but when it is backed by stupid government intervention that gives them the power to do what they do, well, that's a problem. Remember, these greedy Wall Street guys are only reacting to what government does.

There are too many problems out there in the economy to shake a stick at. More stupid regulations are not going to solve those problems, they will make them worse. Well conceived, carefully planned, and minimally invasive regulations and laws are what is needed which means the repeal of a whole lot of corrupt and abusive laws out there right now like the "community reinvestment act". That one act is more to blame for our current economic woes than any other thing.

Contrary to what some of you think, I am not anti-government. I am pro-small government more in line with the constitution. I am pro-free market, let consumers make the decisions, not government: it's the ultimate form of democracy. I am not 100% opposed to government safety nets like unemployment insurance, but it needs to be tough love, not entitlement. I am opposed to trade restrictions, but I am for interventions when other world governments manipulate markets for political and ideological gains. I am opposed to most all government run quasi-businesses. I believe that entrepreneurship is the best way for innovation to occur and for all people to prosper.

Anyway, no beer required, although I'd be happy to sit down and have one with you all, even Holmes. :D

Good fucking shit.

A bit simple though, no? What about military, and business providing to the government via militar? There is a lot of tech out there that will intertwine the two?

I'm just curious why it seems inevitable to increase the government hand more and more, perhaps this plays some role.

[Georges Clemenceau]

America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilization.

[Ryan Stewart]

On a personal note: Lee, seriously, why all the fascination over us?

What the fuck else would they talk about? Canada?

[Massive Lee]

What the fuck else would they talk about? Canada?

I strongly suggest you ask the site owner to not accept any IP from outside the US if you don't accept other POVs than yours. Such cocky comment only demonstrates your own insecurity.

You may very well have a different opinion than mine, at least articulate it. Which was exactly the goal of that thread. Seems like you failed.

[markseven]

America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilization.

On eBay:

WWII French Rifle. Never fired, dropped once :p ;) :D

[ck_taft325is]

On eBay:

WWII French Rifle. Never fired, dropped once :p ;) :D