Could be the answer to our political dreams?
- Thread starter drclark
- Start date
- Status
Here's me:
I grew up in the PRNJ, but my ancestor's on my mom's side fought for the South. Before that they fought for the both *for* and *against* the British. My ancestors on my Dad's side, at the time of the civil war, were fighting against the muslims somewhere around Serbia (obviously our current little war has been going on for a while). My uncle fought against the Nips. My dad against the Nazis.
Win some, lose some.
I grew up in the PRNJ, but my ancestor's on my mom's side fought for the South. Before that they fought for the both *for* and *against* the British. My ancestors on my Dad's side, at the time of the civil war, were fighting against the muslims somewhere around Serbia (obviously our current little war has been going on for a while). My uncle fought against the Nips. My dad against the Nazis.
Win some, lose some.
Libertyteeth
Member
Before the War Against Southern Independence, it was commonly believed that under the Constitution, the states naturally had the right to secede, in both the North and the South. Lincoln instituted a martial law dictatorship to suppress dissent and conduct an unnecessary war. For extensive documentation, see Thomas J. DiLorenzo, The Real Lincoln.
The divide in this country is primarily an urban vs. rural divide, but there are regional differences as well. If I had my druthers, I would like to see a new nation formed consisting of rural northern and eastern California, southern and eastern Oregon, eastern Washington, Nevada, Idaho, Western Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Alberta, Alaska, maybe BC. Maybe other states like South Dakota as well. I suggest this ought to be the homeland for those seeking freedom from oppressive government, and that we would institute a government at least as limited as that originally envisioned by the founding fathers. With a great deal of decentralization, down to the county level. I hope it could be done peacefully via referendum...
Naturally, I would expect the South to want their own nation, and the Midwest and Northeast can do what they want. Change is coming. The fedgov wants to institute a dictatorship, and it will be their downfall. Then we plow the ground and start over. With several smaller nations where once there was one, maybe the rich and powerful will find it more difficult to think they can control the entire planet.
The divide in this country is primarily an urban vs. rural divide, but there are regional differences as well. If I had my druthers, I would like to see a new nation formed consisting of rural northern and eastern California, southern and eastern Oregon, eastern Washington, Nevada, Idaho, Western Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Alberta, Alaska, maybe BC. Maybe other states like South Dakota as well. I suggest this ought to be the homeland for those seeking freedom from oppressive government, and that we would institute a government at least as limited as that originally envisioned by the founding fathers. With a great deal of decentralization, down to the county level. I hope it could be done peacefully via referendum...
Naturally, I would expect the South to want their own nation, and the Midwest and Northeast can do what they want. Change is coming. The fedgov wants to institute a dictatorship, and it will be their downfall. Then we plow the ground and start over. With several smaller nations where once there was one, maybe the rich and powerful will find it more difficult to think they can control the entire planet.
Ivy Mike
Member
Good idea! Maybe Southern NV will get out from under these drought conditions. Lake Mead is getting pretty low too.
gunsmith
member
plenty of gun owners here in CA
if you look at county votes,most of CA voted for Bush and we own tons of guns.
as far as the Civil War,can we please concentrate on the common enemy?
The peoples front for the liberation of Judea?
if you look at county votes,most of CA voted for Bush and we own tons of guns.
as far as the Civil War,can we please concentrate on the common enemy?
The peoples front for the liberation of Judea?
Roland of Gilead
member
Socialists believe in the "greater good" and not the individual, therefore if the greater good is to be achieved by extreme taxing of the minority so that healthcare or education or whatever can be funded it is just if is for the betterment of the community.
And so you cannot differentiate between higher taxation for the rich and rape and pillage? LOL. You must be one of those people who thinks asking the super rich to pay their fair share is "class warfare". I get so tired of that BS. I think 10% of the population controlling 50% of the wealth is class warfare. Thanks for the lesson in socialism though, I'm sure you have devoted the time and energy to really learning about it that I have, instead of embracing the propoganda they taught us in public school.
Well, the North certainly considered the South part of their community, and there were far more Northerners than there were Southerners, they were the majority. What happened to the individual Southerner is irrelevant, all that matters is what happened to the country.
Who cares what the North considered? Not anyone in the South. We are a nation of laws thanks the inspiration Ben Franklin derived from exposure to the Five Nations of Hoshosone, who's conference he attended in Albany in 1754. And the law before Lincoln was that states had a right to secede. Lincoln instituted martial law, and a martial situation is exactly what he got. Why did he do that? He knew the South was the bread and butter of the US. Kinda like how Cali is now, come to think of it.
Thanks for telling me how Southerners thought or think, since you have such powerful insight, being from NH and all. At least you are familiar with the concept of "Liberty or Death". I for one, demand nothing less. The socialist system I envision is certainly not an authoritarian one. I think its funny that some people can't differentiate between political and economic systems. They think democracy has to have capitalism to work. I think that is a sell out, and a sure way to see a democratic republic become an oligarchy just like happened to the Greek democracies, and just like happened here. Guess what happened in Greece when that got out of hand? I think you'd call it "class warfare".
And so you cannot differentiate between higher taxation for the rich and rape and pillage? LOL. You must be one of those people who thinks asking the super rich to pay their fair share is "class warfare". I get so tired of that BS. I think 10% of the population controlling 50% of the wealth is class warfare. Thanks for the lesson in socialism though, I'm sure you have devoted the time and energy to really learning about it that I have, instead of embracing the propoganda they taught us in public school.
Well, the North certainly considered the South part of their community, and there were far more Northerners than there were Southerners, they were the majority. What happened to the individual Southerner is irrelevant, all that matters is what happened to the country.
Who cares what the North considered? Not anyone in the South. We are a nation of laws thanks the inspiration Ben Franklin derived from exposure to the Five Nations of Hoshosone, who's conference he attended in Albany in 1754. And the law before Lincoln was that states had a right to secede. Lincoln instituted martial law, and a martial situation is exactly what he got. Why did he do that? He knew the South was the bread and butter of the US. Kinda like how Cali is now, come to think of it.
Thanks for telling me how Southerners thought or think, since you have such powerful insight, being from NH and all. At least you are familiar with the concept of "Liberty or Death". I for one, demand nothing less. The socialist system I envision is certainly not an authoritarian one. I think its funny that some people can't differentiate between political and economic systems. They think democracy has to have capitalism to work. I think that is a sell out, and a sure way to see a democratic republic become an oligarchy just like happened to the Greek democracies, and just like happened here. Guess what happened in Greece when that got out of hand? I think you'd call it "class warfare".
Last edited by a moderator:
longrifleman
Member
Rewrite:
The American Colonists were obviously concerned about themselves instead of the community, and their selfish actions threatened the safety of the British Empire. Just because some people in the colonies wanted to go their own way doesnt mean they have any business deciding their fate, that decision is made by the community for the express purpose of serving the greater good, and secession was only good for the few at the expense of the many.
That self-determination stuff is such a bad idea.
There is also some historical revisionism here. Before the War of Northern Agression the "community" was usually considered the state in which one lived and not first the entire country. The difference between America and The United STATES of America. None of us have lived with the difference in attitude that that represents and will probably have a hard time understanding the difference. I read a fair amount of history before I grasped the difference. Maybe I'm just kinda slow.
Your're gonna have to explain that. How are you going to deal with the folks who don't want your hand in their pockets?
Define "fair share".
Democracy can function very well, at least for a while, under a socialist system. Some would argue that we are very close to that type of system now. Voting to take other people's money is always popular with folks who don't have much and don't want to work for it. That doesn't make it just.
I think we may have an irreconcilable difference here. Your liberty is my enslavement, if you demand that I be part of your socalist system.
Glock Glockler
Member
Roland of Gilead,
And so you cannot differentiate between higher taxation for the rich and rape and pillage?
Suppose people dont think they're "rich" and disagree with the degree to which they are being taxed and send in a lessor amount, what do you think will happen? The govt will seize and funds they have and they'll eventually come to your house with guns. The only difference is the South called the North's bluff and most overtaxed people just fold before they get to that point.
I think 10% of the population controlling 50% of the wealth is class warfare
Imagine a scenario with two people, the first drops out of high school and can only get a job sweeping floors, then he spends whatever money he has on booze, gambling, and hookers, and he runs up a lot of high interest debt in the process. How much money will he accumulate?
Then we have someone who works hard in school, decides to open a small business and eventually has a few people working for him. He spends 18 hours/day building it up for years, and then he's able to expand and hire even more people. Years later he has a nationwide customer base and employs hundreds of people (including the one above), he's wealthy at that point so that he never has to work again in his life.
How is this scenario unfair?
Who cares what the North considered? Not anyone in the South.
Who cares what the "poor" think? Certainly not the "rich".
since you have such powerful insight, being from NH and all
Just because I live here now doesnt mean I have all my life, nor does it mean that I am conpletely ignorant of the thoughts of people from a certain area, or for all we know the French might be rabidly pro-US.
At least you are familiar with the concept of "Liberty or Death"
I am not, no, but I do believe in taking people's property from them against their will for the common good.
...just like happened to the Greek democracies
Lesson #412 about why Democracy is a bad political system, when people find out that they can vote themselves someone else's money you get factions which will eventually seek to destroy the other faction.
longrifleman,
See a definition of "tongue-in-cheek" for future reference
And so you cannot differentiate between higher taxation for the rich and rape and pillage?
Suppose people dont think they're "rich" and disagree with the degree to which they are being taxed and send in a lessor amount, what do you think will happen? The govt will seize and funds they have and they'll eventually come to your house with guns. The only difference is the South called the North's bluff and most overtaxed people just fold before they get to that point.
I think 10% of the population controlling 50% of the wealth is class warfare
Imagine a scenario with two people, the first drops out of high school and can only get a job sweeping floors, then he spends whatever money he has on booze, gambling, and hookers, and he runs up a lot of high interest debt in the process. How much money will he accumulate?
Then we have someone who works hard in school, decides to open a small business and eventually has a few people working for him. He spends 18 hours/day building it up for years, and then he's able to expand and hire even more people. Years later he has a nationwide customer base and employs hundreds of people (including the one above), he's wealthy at that point so that he never has to work again in his life.
How is this scenario unfair?
Who cares what the North considered? Not anyone in the South.
Who cares what the "poor" think? Certainly not the "rich".
since you have such powerful insight, being from NH and all
Just because I live here now doesnt mean I have all my life, nor does it mean that I am conpletely ignorant of the thoughts of people from a certain area, or for all we know the French might be rabidly pro-US.
At least you are familiar with the concept of "Liberty or Death"
I am not, no, but I do believe in taking people's property from them against their will for the common good.
...just like happened to the Greek democracies
Lesson #412 about why Democracy is a bad political system, when people find out that they can vote themselves someone else's money you get factions which will eventually seek to destroy the other faction.
longrifleman,
See a definition of "tongue-in-cheek" for future reference
WilderBill
Member
Sure. Go ahead.
Just limit the Peoples Repbulic of California to the blue areas along the coast and let the other 90% of the state become the state of Jefferson.
Oh, and Texas will be happy to take up the slack of being the largest block of electoral votes, major grower of food, one of the largest oil producers, center of most telecom business, etc, etc.
Just limit the Peoples Repbulic of California to the blue areas along the coast and let the other 90% of the state become the state of Jefferson.
Oh, and Texas will be happy to take up the slack of being the largest block of electoral votes, major grower of food, one of the largest oil producers, center of most telecom business, etc, etc.
RealGun
Member
The words are [secede] and [secession]. I looked it up. I wish 'em luck.
Roland of Gilead
member
Imagine a scenario with two people, the first drops out of high school and can only get a job sweeping floors, then he spends whatever money he has on booze, gambling, and hookers, and he runs up a lot of high interest debt in the process. How much money will he accumulate?
Then we have someone who works hard in school, decides to open a small business and eventually has a few people working for him. He spends 18 hours/day building it up for years, and then he's able to expand and hire even more people. Years later he has a nationwide customer base and employs hundreds of people (including the one above), he's wealthy at that point so that he never has to work again in his life.
How is this scenario unfair?
Oh right, the old "only lazy, stupid people are poor" argument. I have a hard time believing that you are so stupid, and limited in life experiance that you really think that. But maybe I am wrong. How about this, I am a HS graduate with 2 years college (on academic scholarship), self employed, and employing three other people. I work about 70 hours a week in the spring, summer, and fall, sometimes more, about 40 hours a week in the winter. Come work with me for a week and 9 people out of 10 would fall over dead from heat stroke and exhaustion if they didn't die in an equipment accident first. And yet I earn less than $25,000 most years, and then the government wants 25% of it. Mostly for Social Security I'll never see. I guess if I wasn't so goddamn lazy, I might have more. If I had kids, I could keep $1000 more a year thanks to G.W.! Of course I would also have motivation to cut throats when they were hungry and didn't ahve shes that fit.
Or I could have been a trust fund baby, like so many I have met in Nashville at Vanderbilt, in B'ham at BSU. They are 18, have never worked, will never work, and drive a ????ing Porsche. You tell me that because their Granddad was a steel baron in B'ham in the 1940's that they don't have to work ever, and shouldn't have to pay taxes on their money cause they "earned" it.
This is fair?
When people have nothing, they have nothing to work for. Its easy for well off people to be judgemental, and that's fine. Fight the unfair taxes all you like, just don't bitch when a crowd of poor people with shotguns and machetes comes to a gated neighborhood near you and relieves some of those people of thier "hard earned" money. That IS class warfare.
The bottom line is that CEOs often earn 200x or more what average workers for their company earn. I am sure that is fair in your mind. It is also a fairly recent event, as the figure in the 1970's was more like 35-50x their employee's average pay. This is the socialization of America you were talking about? Get a clue, then come lecture. Or, if you want to keep puching the same BS, my advice is don't come lecture, spend that time at the range, you'll need it when the SHTF.
Then we have someone who works hard in school, decides to open a small business and eventually has a few people working for him. He spends 18 hours/day building it up for years, and then he's able to expand and hire even more people. Years later he has a nationwide customer base and employs hundreds of people (including the one above), he's wealthy at that point so that he never has to work again in his life.
How is this scenario unfair?
Oh right, the old "only lazy, stupid people are poor" argument. I have a hard time believing that you are so stupid, and limited in life experiance that you really think that. But maybe I am wrong. How about this, I am a HS graduate with 2 years college (on academic scholarship), self employed, and employing three other people. I work about 70 hours a week in the spring, summer, and fall, sometimes more, about 40 hours a week in the winter. Come work with me for a week and 9 people out of 10 would fall over dead from heat stroke and exhaustion if they didn't die in an equipment accident first. And yet I earn less than $25,000 most years, and then the government wants 25% of it. Mostly for Social Security I'll never see. I guess if I wasn't so goddamn lazy, I might have more. If I had kids, I could keep $1000 more a year thanks to G.W.! Of course I would also have motivation to cut throats when they were hungry and didn't ahve shes that fit.
Or I could have been a trust fund baby, like so many I have met in Nashville at Vanderbilt, in B'ham at BSU. They are 18, have never worked, will never work, and drive a ????ing Porsche. You tell me that because their Granddad was a steel baron in B'ham in the 1940's that they don't have to work ever, and shouldn't have to pay taxes on their money cause they "earned" it.
This is fair?
When people have nothing, they have nothing to work for. Its easy for well off people to be judgemental, and that's fine. Fight the unfair taxes all you like, just don't bitch when a crowd of poor people with shotguns and machetes comes to a gated neighborhood near you and relieves some of those people of thier "hard earned" money. That IS class warfare.
The bottom line is that CEOs often earn 200x or more what average workers for their company earn. I am sure that is fair in your mind. It is also a fairly recent event, as the figure in the 1970's was more like 35-50x their employee's average pay. This is the socialization of America you were talking about? Get a clue, then come lecture. Or, if you want to keep puching the same BS, my advice is don't come lecture, spend that time at the range, you'll need it when the SHTF.
308win
Member
There you have it! The rich and powerful have always known and practiced the proposition that it is easy and cheap to get one half of the lower classes to kill the other half. The middle class is the backbone of this country and the rich and powerful have discovered divisiveness such as prolife/prochoice, church/government, etc., etc. as the most effective weapon(s) to assure that the sheep comprising the middle class don't vote their economic, political and class interests to the detriment of the rapacious policies of the privileged, elitest few who actually call the shots in this country.
Merry Christmas!!gunsmith
member
I have a friend who built his own biz
A HS grad,no college.
he worked 80 plus hours most weeks on call 24/7 and after 10 years owns a house in the bay area 2 cars 5 motorcycles and 20 assorted guns.
he employs 20 or so people yet still puts in 60 plus hours a week.
I on the other hand own a pick up truck,and 2 guns.
I spent those years chasing skirts and drinking & smoking.
I don't begrudge him nothing he earned it all,he is an asset to freedom,liberty and America & if the SHTF I know I could count on him & vice a versa.
A HS grad,no college.
he worked 80 plus hours most weeks on call 24/7 and after 10 years owns a house in the bay area 2 cars 5 motorcycles and 20 assorted guns.
he employs 20 or so people yet still puts in 60 plus hours a week.
I on the other hand own a pick up truck,and 2 guns.
I spent those years chasing skirts and drinking & smoking.
I don't begrudge him nothing he earned it all,he is an asset to freedom,liberty and America & if the SHTF I know I could count on him & vice a versa.
Shooter 2.5
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 476
Roland of Gilead
If I recall, you're the guy who votes for the Democrats. I suppose this included the "rich yankee from taxachusetts".
Thanks for the laugh.
If I recall, you're the guy who votes for the Democrats. I suppose this included the "rich yankee from taxachusetts".
Thanks for the laugh.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Dunno why Roland thinks socialism would prevent a small percentage of people from owning a large percentage of the wealth of a nation.
After all, Norman Thomas bowed out of the 1964 race for president of the US after 32 years of candidacy. He didn't need to be further involved in politics. The planks of the 1932 platform of the Socialist Workers Party of the US had all been enacted into law. (Reader's Digest synopsis of the interview, Norman Thomas press conference, 1964.)
The main difference between socialsim and what we had before the 1930s is that we've evolved from a condition wherein the quantity of one's wealth determines one's power and influence to a condition wherein one's political position or governmental job determines that power and influence.
I've seen few altruists in government. Wealthy individuals endow universities and libraries and hospitals. Government, generally, does not, except as with monies it takes from the producers.
Government in and of itself has no money. It can only take from those who create or help in creating wealth. And that leads to discussion about the "why" of the creation of fiat money and an income tax and gun-control laws, and I ain't goin' there.
Art
After all, Norman Thomas bowed out of the 1964 race for president of the US after 32 years of candidacy. He didn't need to be further involved in politics. The planks of the 1932 platform of the Socialist Workers Party of the US had all been enacted into law. (Reader's Digest synopsis of the interview, Norman Thomas press conference, 1964.)
The main difference between socialsim and what we had before the 1930s is that we've evolved from a condition wherein the quantity of one's wealth determines one's power and influence to a condition wherein one's political position or governmental job determines that power and influence.
I've seen few altruists in government. Wealthy individuals endow universities and libraries and hospitals. Government, generally, does not, except as with monies it takes from the producers.
Government in and of itself has no money. It can only take from those who create or help in creating wealth. And that leads to discussion about the "why" of the creation of fiat money and an income tax and gun-control laws, and I ain't goin' there.
Art
wally
Member
About the same is it will be today in Houston, TEXAS. Think I'll take my AK out to the range to celebrate
--wally.
Otherguy Overby
member
Socialism
If socialism is good, how come so many self serving politicians like it so much?
If socialism is good, how come so many self serving politicians like it so much?
Roland of Gilead
member
"rich yankee from taxachusetts".
35 states have higher tax burden than Massachsetts. In case you have trouble with math, that puts it in the lower 50 %. "Taxachucetts" is more just that much more BS from the GOP.
You are right I did vote for him. It was one rich yankee or another, I picked the war hero, you picked the cheerleader. Congratulations on a job well done, BTW.
I am not too insulted, it'll be your great grandchildren and their progeney who will finally have to shake off the yoke of the system you are building. I think that its sad that in this two party system I have to support either a party who is trying to starve me or a party that is trying to disarm me so I am easier to starve. This is the reality I struggle with every November.
35 states have higher tax burden than Massachsetts. In case you have trouble with math, that puts it in the lower 50 %. "Taxachucetts" is more just that much more BS from the GOP.
You are right I did vote for him. It was one rich yankee or another, I picked the war hero, you picked the cheerleader. Congratulations on a job well done, BTW.
I am not too insulted, it'll be your great grandchildren and their progeney who will finally have to shake off the yoke of the system you are building. I think that its sad that in this two party system I have to support either a party who is trying to starve me or a party that is trying to disarm me so I am easier to starve. This is the reality I struggle with every November.
longrifleman
Member
I did wonder about that. It didn't sound like your usual self. I thought maybe the socialist pod people got to you.
I've heard the case made that the richest man (in practical terms) ever was Ole Uncle Joe Stalin(you know, the socialist). He directly controlled the entire wealth of the whole Soviet Union. He wasn't living on cabbage soup and black bread.
We all struggle with that same problem. I have to respectfully disagree that turning the country over to the National Socialist American Workers Party is the answer. History says socialism won't work very long, or very well. Our current corporatist/fascist system certainly has the problems Roland has mentioned. And, probably a few more he hasn't got around to yet. I know; lets try real freedom! I know it ain't gonna happen, but one can dream.
Roland of Gilead
member
I thank you for your respectful disagreement. That is something I can truly appreciate.
I've heard the case made that the richest man (in practical terms) ever was Ole Uncle Joe Stalin(you know, the socialist). He directly controlled the entire wealth of the whole Soviet Union. He wasn't living on cabbage soup and black bread.
The USSR was a terrible example of a socialist state, and a worse example of a republic. Marx said that for communism to be successful it would be preceded by capitalism. We have not seen this happen anywhere on this Earth yet.
I think a socialist/capitalist democratic republic hybrid is as close to utopia as we will get. Purify any of these systems and their faults run rampant. The real secret is keeping the balance while the pedulum swings.
I agree that a system that lets those who work hardest reap the most rewards is preferential. I do not believe for a second that the system we currently live under does anything remotely like that.
What many of you don't realize is that for all practical purposes, I, in my $25,000-$35,000 tax bracket am in the same boat as the rest of you with a net worth of less than $10 million. We are all getting screwed. The $250,000 "Upper Class Mark" that John Kerry set in the 2004 campaign really is ridiculous in my opinion. Those people are still worried about sending their kids to college and paying off their mortgage and cars. Many of you prolly don't realize what the top 0.5% of this country is worth, or what their lives look like compared to yours. And that is exactly how they want it.
I've heard the case made that the richest man (in practical terms) ever was Ole Uncle Joe Stalin(you know, the socialist). He directly controlled the entire wealth of the whole Soviet Union. He wasn't living on cabbage soup and black bread.
The USSR was a terrible example of a socialist state, and a worse example of a republic. Marx said that for communism to be successful it would be preceded by capitalism. We have not seen this happen anywhere on this Earth yet.
I think a socialist/capitalist democratic republic hybrid is as close to utopia as we will get. Purify any of these systems and their faults run rampant. The real secret is keeping the balance while the pedulum swings.
I agree that a system that lets those who work hardest reap the most rewards is preferential. I do not believe for a second that the system we currently live under does anything remotely like that.
What many of you don't realize is that for all practical purposes, I, in my $25,000-$35,000 tax bracket am in the same boat as the rest of you with a net worth of less than $10 million. We are all getting screwed. The $250,000 "Upper Class Mark" that John Kerry set in the 2004 campaign really is ridiculous in my opinion. Those people are still worried about sending their kids to college and paying off their mortgage and cars. Many of you prolly don't realize what the top 0.5% of this country is worth, or what their lives look like compared to yours. And that is exactly how they want it.
Last edited:
308win
Member
Exactly! I continue to believe that there is a small wealthy, privileged, elite who are calling the shots in this country and the only thing that will save this nation is if - and that is a big if - the middle class wakes up and takes the country back at the ballot box. And that is when the SHTF that the barstool commandos write about on these bulletin boards will come to pass. Those people aren't about to give up everything they have amassed over the last 200+ years without some bloodshed - preferably not theirs but the other class' as has always been their method of operation.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Y'know, I guess I must be et up with the terminal stoopids to make it through seven decades and never yet recognize that some major political party is trying to starve me.
I guess I'll just have to keep on eatin' my food...
, Art
I guess I'll just have to keep on eatin' my food...
, Artcarebear
Member
A patent falsehood. One thing the Civil War is notable for is the distinct lack of rapine by victorious armies. It didn't occur to any extant greater than the gen-pop by Sherman's or any other General's (Union or Confederate) armies and was punished severely when it did occur. This does not include actions by para-military bands but, in general, if troops were uniformed and regulated they did not rape.
It's one reason we as Americans are better than almost all the rest of the world both then and now.
Roland,
If you are working that hard and yet are "just getting by" I have to recommend the only realistic way to get financially successful.
You have to invest. Any human can only work 24 hours in a day and there is a natural limit on how much any one person's labor is worth per hour. (pro athlete's and singer's aside) You have to put your money to work FOR you. Invest in real estate, or rental properties, or the market. Anything but the sucker's route of saving a 2% a year.
The reason I have problems with socialism in general and "taxing the rich" in particular is because I own property. I wasn't satisfied to just build it for other people. I have a $410K tri-plex that earns $3800/mo. and I pay property taxes on it. I'm looking at building another duplex right now. My net worth is closing on a million on paper. Yet I work hard every day. Being rich is an indicator of working hard AND smart, not some ivory tower avoidance of it. I don't hate the rich, I want to BE them. That's the beauty of our country, that a blue collar/middle class guy like me CAN!
My kids will be the ones to really benefit someday. But every additional dollar of jealousy tax on me now is money out of their inheritance. Every socialistic death or "estate" tax calls me a fool for being so stupid as to think I was wise to plan for their future. They will inherit over a million, hopefully more, if my finances remain in order. THEY deserve the fruits of my labor, not some schmo whose efforts I can't ensure.
It is up to us as individuals to take care of ourselves and our families. I'm doing my part without bitching about folks with more, whose parents maybe got smart sooner and were thus able to teach them the right way. I don't blame them for my comparative lack of success. I don't think THEYowe ME a damn thing. I still have the ability to become THEY and that's good enough for me.
Libertyteeth
Member
If money has been gained honestly, I respect and honor the hard work and astuteness generally required. If money has been gained through subsidies, regulatory privleges, corruption, or other government-granted favors, I am less impressed.
The only thing I want from the rich is to leave me the hell alone. Some rich people give wealth a bad name. Especially the members of the super-wealthy ruling elite, who are using their wealth and accumulated power to subvert the Constitution and the American way of life.
The only thing I want from the rich is to leave me the hell alone. Some rich people give wealth a bad name. Especially the members of the super-wealthy ruling elite, who are using their wealth and accumulated power to subvert the Constitution and the American way of life.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked