Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 11:53:27 AM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


It's going to have to take a bunch of cranky old men.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't think we'll ever "lose" our 2A......



Because someday, when they push too far.....some cranky old man will decide he's had enough. With nothing to lose.


Then again, maybe not.


It's going to have to take a bunch of cranky old men.

I'll throw my cranky old ass into the mix
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 11:54:30 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Would you eliminate home owners on Social Security from voting?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe that's why the founding fathers only gave property owners the right to vote.   Sure it started out white men mostly, because they were the only ones that owned property but many states allowed men, women and freed slaves to vote if they owned property.


While it may have made sense then, a property requirement would be retarded now.  Make it a requirement to have a net payment of taxes over the previous year (thus ridding the societal leeches who only collect welfare from voting).  I feel that would be a good modern equivalent given the differences in tax types we have now.


Would you eliminate home owners on Social Security from voting?

If someone in that category has sufficient passive income at that point in their lives they will be taxed on the passive income and the government will claw back some of their social security via taxes.

You would be right if that person was living off of Social Security and flipping the Krugerrands he or she had amassed over their lifetime.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 11:54:57 AM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
How would you calculate that. If I payed into Social security INSURANCE my whole life? I would hope the money I paid in would grow in value.  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe that's why the founding fathers only gave property owners the right to vote.   Sure it started out white men mostly, because they were the only ones that owned property but many states allowed men, women and freed slaves to vote if they owned property.


While it may have made sense then, a property requirement would be retarded now.  Make it a requirement to have a net payment of taxes over the previous year (thus ridding the societal leeches who only collect welfare from voting).  I feel that would be a good modern equivalent given the differences in tax types we have now.


Would you eliminate home owners on Social Security from voting?


If you are not footing the bill you should not get a say in how it is spent. Net payment is the requirement, not zero receiving of benefits.
How would you calculate that. If I payed into Social security INSURANCE my whole life? I would hope the money I paid in would grow in value.  


Do you even calculate inflation bro?
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:06:33 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I don't think we'll ever "lose" our 2A......



Because someday, when they push too far.....some cranky old man will decide he's had enough. With nothing to lose.


Then again, maybe not.
View Quote


You're half right, we won't lose it.  We will have a liberal court interpret the 2A to mean the states have a right to organize their own citizen militia in order to enforce local and state law.  States which chose to do so can organize armed state defense forces and arm/equip/train (i.e., regulate) them as they see fit.  

The pro-gun states can say "everyone who enlists in the state defense force will be given a state tax credit for one sidearm, one centerfire rifle and one shotgun, xx rounds of ammunition, xx equipment if the report to one of the 4 quarterly training sessions annually".  If the state says selct-fire rifles and suppressors are needed in their militia.  State government will handle federal NFA with regard to the arms purchased for service within the state defense force.

The semi-antigun states can say "we don't need a state militia, we have the NG, but you can still have hunting guns for hunting".  

The full antigun states can say "nobody needs cartridge guns except cops and the NG.  You can hunt with separate loaded black-powder".  

Everyone who wants to be in a state militia can contact the militia commanders in the states with one, and if accepted, move to that state to join.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:21:41 PM EDT
[#5]
"Democracy: A government of the masses.

"Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.

"Results in mobocracy.

"Attitude toward property is communistic — negating property rights.

"Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.

"Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy."

U.S. War Department TM 2000-25 issued 1928

Upon his election, FDR (Democrat) had this training manual pulled, collected ,and when possible destroyed.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:26:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Democracy is kind of a very broad term. Some democracy's in ancient times were also some of the most cruel to it's people. Everyone had a vote, yes. But still forced kids out of their families at young ages to train as soldiers for the State.







I don't think any other form of government can have so many different variations as Democracy.




 
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:27:08 PM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


You're half right, we won't lose it.  We will have a liberal court interpret the 2A to mean the states have a right to organize their own citizen militia in order to enforce local and state law.  States which chose to do so can organize armed state defense forces and arm/equip/train (i.e., regulate) them as they see fit.  

The pro-gun states can say "everyone who enlists in the state defense force will be given a state tax credit for one sidearm, one centerfire rifle and one shotgun, xx rounds of ammunition, xx equipment if the report to one of the 4 quarterly training sessions annually".  If the state says selct-fire rifles and suppressors are needed in their militia.  State government will handle federal NFA with regard to the arms purchased for service within the state defense force.

The semi-antigun states can say "we don't need a state militia, we have the NG, but you can still have hunting guns for hunting".  

The full antigun states can say "nobody needs cartridge guns except cops and the NG.  You can hunt with separate loaded black-powder".  

Everyone who wants to be in a state militia can contact the militia commanders in the states with one, and if accepted, move to that state to join.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't think we'll ever "lose" our 2A......



Because someday, when they push too far.....some cranky old man will decide he's had enough. With nothing to lose.


Then again, maybe not.


You're half right, we won't lose it.  We will have a liberal court interpret the 2A to mean the states have a right to organize their own citizen militia in order to enforce local and state law.  States which chose to do so can organize armed state defense forces and arm/equip/train (i.e., regulate) them as they see fit.  

The pro-gun states can say "everyone who enlists in the state defense force will be given a state tax credit for one sidearm, one centerfire rifle and one shotgun, xx rounds of ammunition, xx equipment if the report to one of the 4 quarterly training sessions annually".  If the state says selct-fire rifles and suppressors are needed in their militia.  State government will handle federal NFA with regard to the arms purchased for service within the state defense force.

The semi-antigun states can say "we don't need a state militia, we have the NG, but you can still have hunting guns for hunting".  

The full antigun states can say "nobody needs cartridge guns except cops and the NG.  You can hunt with separate loaded black-powder".  

Everyone who wants to be in a state militia can contact the militia commanders in the states with one, and if accepted, move to that state to join.

Sounds like Balkanization.

So healthy for a continent. works so well for Europe I can say that much. They hardly ever have wars among each other.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:31:43 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Democracy is kind of a very broad term. Some democracy's in ancient times were also some of the most cruel to it's people. Everyone had a vote, yes. But still forced kids out of their families at young ages to train as soldiers for the State.

I don't think any other form of government can have so many different variations as Democracy.
 
View Quote



That's because democracy is government by the whim of the ignorant.  Absent the constraints of a Republic and fixed constitutional law, democracy is basically undefined as anything but the "will of the people," 50% of whom have a below average IQ. Representative government based on constitutional law allows for democratically elected representatives to act as a shock absorber to the stupidity of the people.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:47:14 PM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Good thing America is a Representative Republic instead of a democracy.  It’s like somebody had a plan…

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Aristotle said democracy turns into socialism, because the poor outnumber the rich. More and more poor, non-working class with vote for leaders that will give them free stuff. The rich and working/productive class will carry the burden by having their taxes increased more and more.

voting for the Democrat nominee and not voting at all (bc you don't like the Republican nominee), will result in the same out come. I do not want to pay more taxes, nor lose more of my 2nd Amendment rights.

we failed last election to unite under Romney, and allowed NObama another 4 years in office. will we allow Hillary/Bernie to win the White House this election?

Good thing America is a Representative Republic instead of a democracy.  It’s like somebody had a plan…



Well...it was. But many of the checks against direct democratic rule have been erased. Most obviously the people electing Senetors vs them being selected by the individual state.
The plan has changed.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 12:50:21 PM EDT
[#10]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





The VAST majority of people who draw SS paid into it for many, many years. Yes you can find examples of people who abuse the system, but you can't judge something's worth the small percentage who abuse it. That sounds like the anti-gunner argument (get rid of them all since some use them for violence.)

Agree



Some of you need to go read up on how the US worked before SS. Maybe you love your nana and would take care of her. But have you never met an elderly person, maybe a neighbor, who literally had no one? Because there would be millions of elderly homeless/dead people without SS. Some of them now from the greatest generation who worked in the factories during WWII, who stayed up praying for sons, fathers, and brothers to return.

This was true, but irrelevant. Social security was never designed to be collected by anyone...or at least not by many nor for very long. Collect at 63yrs old, life expectancy of 65....25 people paying in for every one that collected....



The REASON why Sanders and "socialism" (which isn't really socialism. Why do we keep using that word? They are promoting social programs.) are swinging back into favor is a natural thing because they system is currently fucked and the little guy can no longer buy into the American dream that if they work hard they will make it. A lot of the reforms being called for are not hand outs, but leveling the playing field.

Disagree. He wants total socialism, Eurpoean or whatever. It's what he came from and what he knows.



There are two areas that I notice this and think some of their complaints are valid. The first being college education. I worked through school, got some scholarships, and did the rest with loans. Loans are helpful, though I am still paying on them due to some lean years putting it off. But looking at the costs of college, they way out paced the average person's ability to pay on their own. My dad worked through college and was able to pay his whole education just through his low wage job. I worked through college but was unable to pay for all of my college, but made up for it in loans. Looking now at even the cost of state school where I went, unless you have the privilege of parents helping you, or scored super high on your ACT/SATs, you are going to have to go into debt to get an education. The cost of education has out paced our ability to pay. Couple this with a weak economy, kids coming out of college, even those with non-liberal arts degrees, are having trouble getting good jobs. The job market is fierce out there still, no mater what Obama keep saying the numbers are. There are many reasons for this, but when you can no longer "work hard and make it" people are going to call for things to become more equal. And they have a point, IMHO.

Back then, colleges weren't pissing a ton of money away on internet, networking, advertising, collegiate sports, fitness centers and hiring people for bullshit degrees. An education is an investment and a risk for ones self. It is not the burden of others to bear.



Second, and probably the most important thing, is the shrinking middle class and the huge wealth gap. Every play Monopoly and just get stomped? You never have enough money to buy even the most basic of property, and the other guy has enough to buy everything you land on, plus his. And half your turns you end up owing HIM money? That is a decent metaphor with the issue here. People in America like the rich because we all hope to attain the status some day. The problem with putting them on pedestal and making them false gods. So many people in America are not rich from their hard work or smarts or even luck. They were born that way. And all of them use every loop hole and slick trick to stay that way. In other words, they are rarely playing on a level field, they are manipulating the system and screwing YOU. Trump is a great example of this. Jesus Christ, just read a basic bio on the guy. He isn't a brilliant business man. One could argue someone like Mark Cuban is a pretty smart business man, but Trump would be a used car sales man driving a 5 year old BMW if he didn't have his daddy's wealth and connections to start him off and help keep him afloat as he fucked shit up over and over.

Middle class is an economically unsustainable phenomenon that occurred 1 time in world history. Like it or not, we had the luxury of a powerful middle class only because WW2 saw the destruction of Europe and Japans manufacturing capabilities. They were busy with rebuilding infrastructure, not cars and TV's. America, being unharmed by WW2 allowed us to be the sole supplier of everything to everyone. Of course we got rich from that event. Demand was high and we had the supply. Today...we have competition...1940-1960...not so much.



But anyway, the rich aren't who make America great. The Middle Class is. One of the largest times of prosperity, which had a huge jump start from the boom post WWII, saw the rise of the middle class. You know what also helped that rise? Unions, because with out unions many of those manufacturing jobs and other post-war jobs wouldn't have paid a wage that would have allowed the rise of the middle class. But if you look at the stats now, the middle class is disappearing. The top top rich are eclipsing us that he bar graphs look like a cartoon. This isn't ok. They aren't getting richer and richer just by doing more and better business, they are working the system to get ahead. God forbid a 70 year old women feel entitled so some SS, but I don't hear the same outcry about corporate welfare, or how many tax loop holes there are for special interests.

Unions had there place and did some good. They are not what created the middle class and they sure aren't whats keeping it on life support now.

Rich always get richer. How does compounding interest work? Ever play the game Monopoly?

I have no problems with rich people, hell I want to be one.

Funny...I never had a rich person steal from me or ask for money in a checkout line. Poor people have though (and I don't mean welfare taxes either).



Regan's "trickle down" economics didn't work. It was a bullshit idea to begin with. Now I am sure right now half of you are labeling me a commie pinko liberal. And I am not. But I am a realist. I love capitalism, but capitalism ONLY works long term with LIMITS in place. Because with out LIMITS you will find people use it as a tool to screw the little guy over. Don't believe me? Read a fucking book. Why do we have an FDA? Because people were selling snake oil and cocaine laced cough medicine. Why do we have the FDIC? Because the banking crises in the 20s destroyed our faith in banks. And capitalism can't function with out banks. Why do we have the SEC? To police fraud in the financial market. Even with these checks and balances in place we still have shit like the retarded 2008 bubble that burst, which was completely avoidable, it was greedy companies taking advantage of people's dreams to own a home, preying on weakness and their optimism that they would be able to afford payments in the future - because if we work hard in America, we all will make it - right? I still can't believe payday loans is a thing.  It is legalized loan sharking, and efforts to crack down on them have the snakes just slithering to new corners with new tricks.

Keep raising the minimum wage (poverty level) eventually it catches
up to the middle class...except you create artificial inflation which
makes middle class and poor the same class. Has nothing to do with
trickle down. So taxing businesses more is the answer? You realize that businesses pass that cost onto the consumer or shuts its doors and puts its employees on the unemployment line right? So you want shit to cost more or less revenue paid to the locality in real estat taxes, plus the loss of any other economic benefits...




Anyway - I feel some of you think that America's poor comprise of mainly some black fat chick with 2 kids on welfare, doesn't work, smoking weed all day. That isn't reality, so you need to get that cartoonish iimage out of you're head. There are about as many whites on welfare as blacks. Less than half as many are those lazy hispanics. Over half of the people on welfare HAVE JOBS. The problem is the cost of living has outpaced our ability to pay for it.

Most costs that outpaced the ability to live comfortably are luxury and self inflicted. Internet, computers, anti-virus programs, cell phones, video games, cable/satellite, added electric to power all this crap...all shit I see poor welfare people have that are not 100% necessary. Your grand parents and most of your parents didn't have this stuff (it didn't exist).



They system is broken. We need to fix it or the calls for government intervention is going to be louder. And you can't look too far down on people who are calling for this. That 40 hour work week, with over time if you work more? That's thanks to movements like this. Our current relatively cushy labor laws we all enjoy as "normal" now - the ones we still bitch about sucking -  was seen as communist propaganda 80+ years ago. You really don't want a return to the good ol' days.
View Quote


I cant sit and dissect everything you wrote.

It looks like most liberal college age crap spewed by a Sanders supporter with a cherry picked view of history.



For a realist...you haven't looked at the entire picture of the last 120 years or your conclusions would be vastly different.

Not trying to change your mind/views, just showing the angles to your points.





 
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 1:11:48 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Social Security is a ponzi scheme.  You paid into nothing as your money was sent out to the people drawing from it.  If your entire retirement income consists of government welfare (thats what Social Security is, deal with it) then no... you get what those paying the taxes to support you say you get.
View Quote


Welfare = means tested or based on hardship/need.  Just saying.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 1:12:44 PM EDT
[#12]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
That's because democracy is government by the whim of the ignorant.  Absent the constraints of a Republic and fixed constitutional law, democracy is basically undefined as anything but the "will of the people," 50% of whom have a below average IQ. Representative government based on constitutional law allows for democratically elected representatives to act as a shock absorber to the stupidity of the people.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:

Democracy is kind of a very broad term. Some democracy's in ancient times were also some of the most cruel to it's people. Everyone had a vote, yes. But still forced kids out of their families at young ages to train as soldiers for the State.



I don't think any other form of government can have so many different variations as Democracy.

 






That's because democracy is government by the whim of the ignorant.  Absent the constraints of a Republic and fixed constitutional law, democracy is basically undefined as anything but the "will of the people," 50% of whom have a below average IQ. Representative government based on constitutional law allows for democratically elected representatives to act as a shock absorber to the stupidity of the people.





 
100% correct, good sir.
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 1:18:31 PM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Unforunately, the number of years that you have to work in order to collect SS are pitifully few.   If you want to game the system, only work under SS for the last few years (I don't remember how pitifully few) prior to your age of retirement and collect the same as someone who has "contributed" their whole working life.

I agree - trash social security.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I guess that participaing in social security is a choice that you have made.


Income taxes aren't a choice either.  Unless you work under the table (gasp, which lets you avoid SS taxes too)... oh wait, you don't then get credit for that income later when drawing SS now then do you.


Unforunately, the number of years that you have to work in order to collect SS are pitifully few.   If you want to game the system, only work under SS for the last few years (I don't remember how pitifully few) prior to your age of retirement and collect the same as someone who has "contributed" their whole working life.

I agree - trash social security.


How many years is pitifully few?  Especially to get the same benefit as the lifelong worker?
Link Posted: 3/6/2016 2:25:44 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I cant sit and dissect everything you wrote.
It looks like most liberal college age crap spewed by a Sanders supporter with a cherry picked view of history.

For a realist...you haven't looked at the entire picture of the last 120 years or your conclusions would be vastly different.
Not trying to change your mind/views, just showing the angles to your points.
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I cant sit and dissect everything you wrote.
It looks like most liberal college age crap spewed by a Sanders supporter with a cherry picked view of history.

For a realist...you haven't looked at the entire picture of the last 120 years or your conclusions would be vastly different.
Not trying to change your mind/views, just showing the angles to your points.
 


I think I have looked at past history pretty well to come to my conclusions. I think your assessment people are all having trouble making ends meet because they waste it on entertainment or luxuries isn't an accurate one at all, especially when the basic cost of living can be documented.
Quoted:
You realize that businesses pass that cost onto the consumer or shuts its doors and puts its employees on the unemployment line right?  


Not necessarily. Taxes usually are placed on profits. So no, there is no added costs to consumers. Of course it depends on the tax and type of business. But the cost of goods is what the market will bear. Because one company has high profits and higher taxes, doesn't mean they will raise prices of their goods, because a smaller company with less profit and less taxes would keep it at the regular price.

One can even see corporate tax levels have fallen int he last 60 years, near historic lows, yet shit costs more. We have this myth where "If we give all the businesses free reign, they will reinvest it and make more money and more jobs!" Only that isn't what has happened. Certainly you can tax businesses to the point it becomes a burden. But considering how low tax burden is right now, if this lie we have been fed was true, we shouldn't be seeing the economical problems we are seeng.


Quoted:
I have no problems with rich people, hell I want to be one.
Funny...I never had a rich person steal from me or ask for money in a checkout line.  


I don't have a problem with rich people either, in general or as a concept. But if you look at the giant increase in the last 20 years, something isn't lining up right. I think it is a clear indicator of people gaming the system or there is some sort of flaw allowing for such a huge, unprecedented increase and the power and influence that comes with it. Remember the Founding Fathers wanted a democracy, not a defacto aristocracy.

And the idea anyone can make it is the American Dream. But in the past nearly all of us don't make it, but we at least end up doing alright. The problem is that is happening less and less. If you can't sell Americans on the American dream anymore, things are going to change. If you want to curb socialism, you need to fix the areas where there is a lack of checks and balances.  I find it hilarious people are ready to burn neckbeards at the stake for hording .22 ammo, but a billionaire corporations shuffling company structure to avoid paying taxes is just seen as business as usual.

And if you don't think rich people haven't taken from you, you are naive. They just don't do it via direct means. This includes everything from bullshit fees that crop up in the goods and services you use, to the financial bail out recently, to fancy accounting to avoid paying taxes, to out right fraud, to buying politicians and crafting laws and policy. Case in point - zinc industry keeping the penny alive, which costs tax payers $132 MILLION dollars a year for $50 million worth of pennies - pennies that are of so little value people literally throw them away.
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top