Here comes socialism.

[Duke{CLR}]

An interesting read form Dick Morris.

TheHill.com - The Obama presidency: Here comes socialism (http://thehill.com/dick-morris/the-obama-presidency--here-comes-socialism-2009-01-20.html)

[Jeffro]

i wouldn't pass judgement so soon, lets wait and see what happens.

[BigTwinky]

The text is interesting. I didn't read the whole thing as it just ends up being one person's projection as to what will happen between now and 2012, so its all just opinions...although they are learned and more expert opinions than you normally get.

The text goes from some interesting points about taxes and the deficit to how the border will be weakened to allow more latinos in to ensure Obama gets more votes. So when it went from facts and figures to more of a conspiracy type of text, I lost interest.

[Duke{CLR}]

Giving amnesty to illegal aliens is not a conspiracy theory. It's a fact that by allowing them to vote will give a huge votes to the Democrats. It's been brought up before and is the reason McCain was trying to get their votes by supporting amnesty. The reason I linked to Dick Morris is because he has a more balanced view then others that dare be critical of BHO.

Jeffro this is not a judgment but a prediction and I hope it doesn't come true.

[BigTwinky]

Sorry, conspiracy theory was a poor choice of words on my part. I didn't mean that it actually is a conspiracy theory, but the whole "Predicting the future" based off of learned opinions is what I was referring to.

Its all very doomsday-ish.

But yeah, we have similar discussions with immigrants here and how they tend to vote all one way. BUt in the last few elections, they are voting more spreadout, and actually more and more are voting for the party that wants to seperate Quebec from Canada.

[Duke{CLR}]

Its all very doomsday-ish.


That's why I hope he is wrong.

So when will Quebec separate?

[Rand{CLR}]

Lo, let it be heard that Quebec shall goeth on its own way when Youppi is once more sighted in the city. So say we all.

-Rand

[Skud]

He certainly is partisan. "If they go by top-heavy margins for the Democrats, as they did in 2008, it will assure Democratic domination (until they move up the economic ladder and become good Republicans)." Which is followed by this in the following paragraph: "The result will be to raise the proportion of the labor force in unions up to the high teens from the current level of about 12 percent."

Big business, with no taxes, no oversight...workers with low wages and poor working conditions. The author does not try to hide this fact.

The disparity between the rich and the poor again matches the levels that existed in the Gilded Age. http://www.cainslair.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=111151 One good thing that came of this time was the creation of unions...it is the middle class that makes or breaks the economy, not the top 2 percent...we can see that now as they lose their jobs and the economy tanks.

I wonder if he called Bush's tax rebates "welfare checks" at the time they came out? It's strange that someone so against taxation would use such strong terms. And the combination of so many alarmist (I won't say fear-mongering), phrases, references and terms certainly lessen the credibility of his article, in my mind.

I don't think there is much worry about a nationalized healthcare system passing...though the folks from other countries I know who have them say how much better it is. The main reason I say it won't pass is that the pharmaceutical companies have very powerful lobbies, and are second only to the oil companies in profits. They seem to walk hand-in-hand with the rest of the healthcare system, as we now live in the most medicated society yet. Watch the six o'clock news, and see how many ads for how many meds run past. Anyway, nationalization wouldn't be too lucrative for them...so I don't see it passing.

Schools, renewable energy, infrastructre, I don't have a problem with. If we can raise the budget ceiling every three months for the past six years, why stop now? :wink:

In the end, much of this is speculation. As it is only the second day of the presidency, I am still thinking Obama might actually do some worthwhile things. I certainly don't want to argue too much about things that may or may not happen. But it is good to look at the possibilities, and voice concerns to congressmen if you see something dangerous coming. (though in the end they are part of a club that we are not allowed in...so afterwards they might just hang up the phone and laugh their way to the bank as usual).

[BigTwinky]

Lo, let it be heard that Quebec shall goeth on its own way when Youppi is once more sighted in the city. So say we all.

-Rand

Actually, when the Expos left the city, Youppi migrated over to the Montreal Canadiens and became their mascot. You can see him at all their home games and random hockey events in the city. :D

So when will Quebec separate?

I day before I leave the province.

The last few provincial elections have had the Partie Quebecois going down in favor. From being the top party, they were 3rd a few elections ago. People were finally thinking that their main focus on seperatism is starting to be something that people are tired of hearing.

But they have a new leader now and she has brought the idea of seperatism back to light and strangely enough, the party is back as the official opposition party.

Although they are trying not to make it a hot topic, but it always is.

Funny though... I still haven't met a seperatist who can give me decent, sound arguments as to why Quebec should seperate and how it can be viable after it does.

Sorry, hijack done :)

[Duke{CLR}]

I wonder if he called Bush's tax rebates "welfare checks" at the time they came out? It's strange that someone so against taxation would use such strong terms. And the combination of so many alarmist (I won't say fear-mongering), phrases, references and terms certainly lessen the credibility of his article, in my mind.



Well a "Rebate" that goes to someone who didn't pay taxes is welfare and I have no idea what he has said about them The content of the article is what interesting to me.

[Skud]

Well a "Rebate" that goes to someone who didn't pay taxes is welfare and I have no idea what he has said about them The content of the article is what interesting to me.

I don't know what he said either. I wouldn't agree with bonuses for those who don't pay in to begin with, or even SS for someone who hasn't held a job and is not disabled.

Well, the content is worthwhile. I read it through, and as I said, it is good to hear both sides...and extremes in any direction are dangerous, I believe. I give my feedback, not saying or believing that is the end-all, but hoping to provide a counterpoint, which might lead us to some near-truth in the middle. Anyway, knowledge is power. We certainly have to keep an eye on all of our politicians--it is a difficult task (almost seems impossible) to keep them honest. So keep the articles coming. I know that we can find and have found some common ground. :2thumbs:

[Duke{CLR}]

Key things about this are when less then 1/2 of the people of the people pay taxes. You then set up for a long future with people having to rely on people in Washington for more and more aspects of their lives.

[Skud]

Key things about this are when less then 1/2 of the people of the people pay taxes. You then set up for a long future with people having to rely on people in Washington for more and more aspects of their lives.

Those who do not work and thereby support the necessary functions (waste pickup, police protection, passable roads, running water, etc.) should live in a special little city, built by their own hands, where they can live off of their own unique abilities. :)

[Rand{CLR}]

Key things about this are when less then 1/2 of the people of the people pay taxes. You then set up for a long future with people having to rely on people in Washington for more and more aspects of their lives.

The problem with this statement is that nobody knows where it's coming from. I read the article as almost pure speculation, and the comment that 1/3 to 1/2 of American workers don't pay taxes doesn't seem right, and it's certainly not backed by information in the commentary (a simple "according to..." would have worked).

I also don't know where the $1,000 rebate he mentions comes from. To my knowledge, that's never even been broached by Obama. The last time money came back for "free" was last year when Bush gave up $600 per person, and though I don't see everything that comes from Obama, I don't recall him ever saying "hey, that's a GREAT idea, but it doesn't go far enough." I would hope they know that giving back money to the people to stimulate spending doesn't work. Though I could really use an extra $1,000 right now--it would buy the carpet for my basement.

Actually, when the Expos left the city, Youppi migrated over to the Montreal Canadiens and became their mascot. You can see him at all their home games and random hockey events in the city. :D

Mercenary Mascots? That is awesome.

-Rand

[Duke{CLR}]

The problem with this statement is that nobody knows where it's coming from. I read the article as almost pure speculation, and the comment that 1/3 to 1/2 of American workers don't pay taxes doesn't seem right, and it's certainly not backed by information in the commentary (a simple "according to..." would have worked).

-Rand

I will look for the numbers but I think they are about %33 of workers are below the income level for the taxes and these numbers are from tax data then you need to figure in the people who aren't working. Now it is speculation what would happen if it got to %50 but it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that selling a conservative message would be tough.