Welcome to PatsFans.com

The Wealthy Overwhelmingly Support Socialism

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatriotsReign, Sep 11, 2008.

  1. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    At least that is what all the bailouts by our federal government are telling us. All US corporations have always supported minimal government regulation. That has always been the Mantra of conservative republicans and corporate America in this nation.

    Then can anyone explain why our federal government is endlessly bailing out corporations and taking them over? That is socialism, not capitalism!

    I can understand bailing out Fanny Mae and Freddy Mack. They were started & backed by our government since their inception. But it now appears to me that any large US corporation will be bailed out. Anyone who supports that is not truly a supporter of free market capitalism and can never again criticize government regulation or intervention....NEVER!

    I have stated before that recessions are supposed to happen. That they are GOOD for our economy as they stabilize all the inequities and restore confidence so we can build upon a solid foundation. If our government continues to bail out companies like Lehman, Ford, GM, etc., what will we have to build upon? I'll tell what, a new socialist economy funded by our tax dollars.

    This recession SHOULD have been one of the biggest re-distributions of wealth in our history and hopefully, it still will be. We don't always need taxes to re-distribute wealth. When too many dollars end up in the hands of the few, the mega-wealthy, a correction will take place. One that is needed. Also, when too many dollars end up in the coffers of the few mega-corporations, a correction will take place...BUT, it won't happen if our government insists on protecting the wealthy and stopping this mass re-distribution of wealth.

    I could not believe I read that Reuters believes Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson went to Wall Street for advice on bailing out Lehman;

    "Several financial experts said Paulson, a former Goldman Sachs chairman, was likely calling friends on Wall Street asking what people know, who is exposed and how much loss they are willing to take."

    Talk about our government officials being in bed with corporate America! The time for revolution is coming.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2008
  2. STFarmy

    STFarmy In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    I doubt you'll get many here that disagree. There's been too much intervention, and now it's a precedent. Things unfortunately are going to continue this way, I don't see McCain or Obama changing that.
     
  3. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Bail our Lehman!!! But those poor people in the ghettos should get off welfare and get a job!

    Incompetence should only be rewarded if you donate the maximum campaign contribution!
     
  4. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    No argument from me PR, I like you can at least somewhat understand Freddie and Fannie, even though I still don't like it, but all these bailouts are total BS. More and more it makes me feel like a Libertarian rather than a Republican.
     
  5. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Join the swelling ranks of people who are tired of being told what to believe and how to believe in it... People are tired of being told by the 2 parties what issues to care about, while they both comprise their beliefs after they get elected to simply pad their own re-election funds...

    The Liberty minded people of this country are finally seeing the opening to break free from the 2 party system... More and more, in both parties, it really is just another corporate organization where you have to kiss ass to get ahead, and know people in order to move up... who they hell wants another boss, or set of bosses telling them how to live...
     
  6. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    True, although there are still issues I consider vital that I agree with the Republican party on, like an aggressive foreign policy (just my opinion guys, I'm not trying to say it is right). That one is big enough to me to support the R candidate over a 3rd party. Can we have some kind of "Common Sense" party? Can someone start that one or direct me to where I sign up? I agree with you though, on one side you have a party beholden to the trial lawyers, the unions, etc, and on the other beholden to large corporations, hard-line religious, etc. Not good times at all.
     
  7. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Great post, PR. The whole "bail out the big boys" makes me sick.

    Stokes, I believe Ron Paul is running as an independent, but I could be wrong.
     
  8. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    He is not, Ron Paul is not running for anything right now... he is simply championing his Campaign for Liberty which is a movement to elect and push the freedom, and liberty principles back in to our politics...


    The Ron Paul people, and all the Libertarians believe in a strong Military that can defend all threats to our country, but it does not support military bases in foreign countries, or attacking without a declartion of War... You can have a strong military without being a dick with it...

    We can have the best, strongest, and brightest Military in the world, the key is to use it to defend our country when we are at war... not policing wars, or war for protecting oil, ect...
     
  9. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Correct, he's just saying get out there and support a third party candidate.

    See I disagree with the Libertarian position for the role of the US in world affairs, and that does hold me back. I combine a libertarian take on domestic policies with a hawkish, interventionist foreign policy. Just my personal preference.
     
  10. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    And that's cool... to each their own, I will only comment that the Constitution does not give anyone the power to intervene in foreign wars, or affairs...

    I feel our military should work under the premise of "Speak softly and carry a big stick"
     
  11. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    Well said mcgraw! More and more, I look at my flag and see The United States of America, Inc.....and it makes me sick to my stomach. Life & liberty do not depend upon a booming economy. As a matter of fact, a good recession may put put our priorities in order!

    "If I was half the man I was 5 years ago, I'd take a FLAMETHROWER to this place!" Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman
     
  12. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    No matter which party or candidate one supports, we ALL must demand that our government act within the constitution as it exists today. If it says we don't intervene in foreign wars, then we don't...there is no choice, period.

    As for defending oil, that is unacceptable to anyone in this country save for maybe those who work for Exxon or Mobile. If we ever decided to fight a war for oil, then we would no longer be the United States of America. I'm sure even Stokesy agrees with that.
     
  13. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    I don't agree with you here. Even an idiot knows our government, which is really "us", can't buy out any major failing corporation. Some would call me saddistic, but I like the way this recession is continuing despite anything our government has done. It has been powerful and resiliant and I hope it finds it's own bottom so we can get on with the business of being a free market economy.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2008
  14. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,843
    Likes Received:
    591
    Ratings:
    +1,446 / 34 / -28

    #87 Jersey

    Socialism ... which party favors socialism?

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll519.xml#Y

    America's most unpopular Congress working for America :bricks:
     
  15. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    FBN...can you slow down for 2 minutes and answer a question for me?

    Why is it that you "think" everything is about partisan politics? Economic trends have nothing to do with which party is in the white house or who is controlling congress.

    While I agree that is a pitiful vote on the bailout bill, George W still had to sign it into law. It just seems that you have upped your intensity on the partisan stuff for the past month or so. Ease up, you aren't going to change any votes here.
     
  16. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Well, it is of course more complicated than that depending on how you interpret providing for the common defense. If our national interests are threatened in any way then we are (I think) justified in getting involved in foreign wars. I also don't have a problem with having foreign bases, as our standing as a world power and our commitment to various treaties and agreements necessitates them.

    No, I don't like the idea of fighting a war solely for oil, I'm with you there, although I will say it behooves us (did I really just use "behooves?") to try and influence events in our favor in places where we have a strategic interest.

    Anyway, sorry for the thread hijack, I'm finished.
     
  17. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    No hijack Stokes...just a related subject. Well, one thing is for certain, this aint the world our parents and grandparents grew up in. We have to remember, our armed forces are only to protect our citizens and allow them continue to live under the freedoms afforded by our Constitution and nothing else. There will never be a time where it will be Constitutionally legal or right for us to fight any war for economic reasons...even if it threatens our capitalistic way of life.

    That is why we must become 100% self-reliant.
     
  18. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I totally agree with that, I heard a great quote the other day from I think it was Jefferson pointing out the folly in depending on other countries for anything. He basically said "yep, you're screwing yourself if you depend on someone else to help you solve your problems." Of course I'm pretty sure he was more eloquent, and probably the term "screwing yourself" didn't appear in the actual quote.

    One thing though, even though I would agree it is wrong to fight a war for economic security, wouldn't it still be an acceptable war constitutionally if it was approved by the Congress since they were given the power to make war? Just a question.
     
  19. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,952
    Likes Received:
    160
    Ratings:
    +454 / 5 / -23

    #18 Jersey

    Good question Stokes. I'm not an expert on constitutional law, so I don't have the answer. But all we need to ask ourselves is, do we actually believe in EVERYTHING that is written in our Bill of Rights and constitution? We better say "Yes" if we are still the United States of America. Having said that, how could we ever justify taking what is not ours from another country? It would violate the very freedoms millions of Americans have given their lives to defend.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2008
  20. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,843
    Likes Received:
    591
    Ratings:
    +1,446 / 34 / -28

    #87 Jersey


    PR ... when are you going to understand what I and a few others have written many times. GWB signs anything that helps make Congressmen and Senators look good in their home districts so that he can get his Iraq stuff signed also.

    GWB is the most liberal republican President ever in terms of giving away our $$$.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>