Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/12/2006 8:17:25 PM EDT
When did it start going downhill ? Some could say it was the Civil War. Others will say it happened with suffarage in the early 1900's. Some even with the civil rights movement in the 1960's. Minorities and women are typically more liberal in their view of the modern political landscape.

With affirmative action and equal rights many political or government positions have been filled with people that traditionally may have a more liberal view on issues. This has been our downfall.

I think this country was founded on ideas that are not present today and will never be recognized again. It is lost and we are on a sinking ship.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:18:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:19:40 PM EDT by www-glock19-com]
1987


seriously I would say LBJ was the tipping point to no return
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:18:39 PM EDT
1887.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:18:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:19:13 PM EDT by DK-Prof]
Ideologically:
1776-1800

Globally:
around 1980

Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:19:47 PM EDT
The US was at its peak just after WW2.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:20:29 PM EDT
The decline comes with socialism and globalization.
Basically the filthy hippies and the 1960s.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:22:25 PM EDT

A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.

Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:24:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.

Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:25:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.





Yeah, because every male poster on arfcom is a pillar of rock-solid logic and impeccable reason.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:25:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:26:17 PM EDT by Stealth]
lol... tag
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:26:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.






Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:26:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:26:39 PM EDT by bastiat]

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.




Will you sign our petition to end the suffrage of women?
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:27:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SPECTRE:
The decline comes with socialism and globalization.
Basically the filthy hippies and the 1960s.



We had socialism in the 1930s that would make your head spin. Little done in the 60s comes close.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:28:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.




Will you sign our petition to end the suffrage of women?



That was a great show.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:28:56 PM EDT
1945
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:29:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
Ideologically:
1776-1800

Globally:
around 1980




amen
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:29:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:30:25 PM EDT by bastiat]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.





Yeah, because every male poster on arfcom is a pillar of rock-solid logic and impeccable reason.



John Lott of 'more guns, less crime' wrote a paper called "How Dramatically Did Women's Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?" that addressed the expansion of the growth of the nanny state after women gained the right to vote.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=160530

We can't go back to men only voting, but maybe we could add a logic and reason test in order to vote.



Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:29:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.




Will you sign our petition to end the suffrage of women?



Wasn't that on one of the first Man Show's?
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:30:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vedubin01:
The US was at its peak just after WW2.



+1 Most people actually cared about the success of their country back then.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:30:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NorthernBornRebel:

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.




Will you sign our petition to end the suffrage of women?



Wasn't that on one of the first Man Show's?



Si, senor.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:31:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:33:04 PM EDT by Black_Talon]
July 20, 1969


What have we done since then?
Porn on every electronic device, and cell phones, whoop dee doo.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:32:06 PM EDT
BTW...


When did the USA hit it's peak ?


When people stopped caring about grammar.

"Its" is not possessive.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:34:21 PM EDT
I don't think that the answer to this question is a simple one. America's decline as a nation of liberty began the day that FDR took office, but America's power grew tremendously since then as well. The height of America's power was during the late 80's/early 90's under Reagan and Bush I. America's power has been on the decline since Clinton. Although Bush has restored some of this power in some ways I think it is still in decline.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:35:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:
BTW...


When did the USA hit it's peak ?


When people stopped caring about grammar.

"Its" is not possessive.



I gradutated from public school, sorry.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:37:55 PM EDT
Now.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:38:19 PM EDT
Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said that tyrrany progresses and liberty regresses as the natural order of a state I think that that has shown itself to be true. It took what, 8 years after the adoption of the Constitution before liberty (think Alien and Sedition Acts) began to be slowly chipped away. It isn't possible to pin one cause on the decline of a nation.

And you can't call yourself a land of the free if the majority of people (all females and minorities) is controlled by a voting minority of male, landowning whites (only legitimate government is one with the consent of the governed...John Locke...ring any bells?)
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:39:19 PM EDT
Right before we went eyebrow deep in debt.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:41:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:43:33 PM EDT by LANCEMAN]

Originally Posted By natedog375:
Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said that tyrrany progresses and liberty regresses as the natural order of a state I think that that has shown itself to be true. It took what, 8 years after the adoption of the Constitution before liberty (think Alien and Sedition Acts) began to be slowly chipped away. It isn't possible to pin one cause on the decline of a nation.

And you can't call yourself a land of the free if the majority of people (all females and minorities) is controlled by a voting minority of male. landowning whites (only legitimate government is one with the consent of the governed...John Locke...ring any bells?)




We would be in much better shape if only land owners were allowed to vote.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:45:52 PM EDT
Why? What does owning land have to do with having a fair say in selecting your public servants?
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:49:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 8:49:57 PM EDT by bastiat]

Originally Posted By natedog375:
Why? What does owning land have to do with having a fair say in selecting your public servants?



Because as a landowner, you are generally a taxpayer that directly feels the impact of decisions made in your local and state elections.

A 19 year old kid going to college and voting for the latest welfare program or school referendum doesn't feel the financial repurcussions of his vote. He can be generous with the other guy's money.

The ones that pick up the tab should be able to decide what is for dinner.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:52:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By natedog375:
Why? What does owning land have to do with having a fair say in selecting your public servants?



Because as a landowner, you are generally a taxpayer that directly feels the impact of decisions made in your local and state elections.

A 19 year old kid going to college and voting for the latest welfare program or school referendum doesn't feel the financial repurcussions of his vote. He can be generous with the other guy's money.

The ones that pick up the tab should be able to decide what is for dinner.



Well then, I will be selling 1 square inch of land for $1 each for all those who wish to vote.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:55:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By natedog375:
Why? What does owning land have to do with having a fair say in selecting your public servants?



The early rationale was that only those with a stake in society and the community have the opportunity to change it.

It started with affluent male property owners because that who controlled the wealth. Later, depending on the state it was changed to all white males, or all male taxpayers to all males, so on and etc.. The list of eligible voters kept growing until 1920 with universal suffrage and then in the early '70's(??) when the voting age was dropped to 18.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:56:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Red-Bucket-98:

Originally Posted By lippo:
A guy at work said, "When women got the right to vote", to this question.




That is EXACTLY what I was going to say.

Women decide with emotion and feeling instead of logic and reason.





Yeah, because every male poster on arfcom is a pillar of rock-solid logic and impeccable reason.



John Lott of 'more guns, less crime' wrote a paper called "How Dramatically Did Women's Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?" that addressed the expansion of the growth of the nanny state after women gained the right to vote.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=160530

We can't go back to men only voting, but maybe we could add a logic and reason test in order to vote.







If they did that, most of America wouldn't be able to vote.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:57:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By yekimak:
Well then, I will be selling 1 square inch of land for $1 each for all those who wish to vote.



If I remember what I've read earlier correctly (and there's a good chance I don't), there was a size requirement for the property owned.

Depending on the state.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 8:58:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 9:01:26 PM EDT by natedog375]
As a taxpayer and a citizen you'd feel all the impact of decisions made in elections. Also, as a taxpayer you have a right (and some would say an obligation) to voice your say in how your tax dollars are being spent. "No taxation without represnetation!" was a rallying cry for a certain group of fellows a long time ago.

Reducing voting rights to priviledges held by a wealthy, landowning elite lowers the nation to something near an Old-World European aristocracy.


Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:02:52 PM EDT

A 19 year old kid going to college and voting for the latest welfare program or school referendum doesn't feel the financial repurcussions of his vote. He can be generous with the other guy's money.


And what about the 18 year old draftee? He's old enough to fight and die for his country, but can't vote because he can't afford land?
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:05:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 9:05:42 PM EDT by Chairborne]
We haven't hit our peak yet. People always want to believe things were better in the past, but they most definitely weren't. Our standard of living is better than ever, our position in the world is more dominant than it has ever been. Our military is more effective and with a tiny fraction of the losses that it would have taken in the past. We lead the world in technology, entertainment, medicine, and many other areas. We are still working towards our peak.


The funny thing is I am usually the most pessimistic person in the room, but not around here! We always say things like "oh damn, how are these screwed up gen _ kids ever going to take over all the great things our generation has created?" Woe is us, we are doomed. What do you think your parent's generation said about you? Your grandparents about them? See my point?
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:12:48 PM EDT
There's a whole lot of Doom and Gloom on this forum.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:20:12 PM EDT
when did the USA peak? just now...today...with the advent of this thread. it's all downhill from here fellas.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:24:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Stealth:

Originally Posted By yekimak:
Well then, I will be selling 1 square inch of land for $1 each for all those who wish to vote.



If I remember what I've read earlier correctly (and there's a good chance I don't), there was a size requirement for the property owned.

Depending on the state.



An acre of land goes for $100,000 in some parts of this state, $800 in others, and less than $100 in parts of Oregon and some of the plains states.

Land ownership as a requirement for voting also promotes nepotism. I am not above having some sort of requirements other than being 18 and having a pulse as a prerequisite to voting, but I do not think land ownership is one of them that would work.

Besides, aren't the Democrats the wealthier bunch in general? At least the ones in office are IIRC.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:33:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:
BTW...


When did the USA hit it's peak ?


When people stopped caring about grammar.

"Its" is not possessive.



it is = it's

Possessive= its

Example
It's a fact that it lost its way home.


Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:55:55 PM EDT
1964-1965.

The West in general has been on the wrong track since the French Revolution.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:56:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By natedog375:

A 19 year old kid going to college and voting for the latest welfare program or school referendum doesn't feel the financial repurcussions of his vote. He can be generous with the other guy's money.


And what about the 18 year old draftee? He's old enough to fight and die for his country, but can't vote because he can't afford land?



Does he pay taxes or even live in the district he'd be voting in?

A local school board seeking money they didn't need held a referrendum in a low-turnout eleciton. They sent out absentee vote cards to college students living out away from home, hoping to get them to vote 'for the children', knowing they'd feel no pains from their generosity.

My preferred system would be a little more complex than just property ownership.

If you don't own a certain size property (say at least a lot capable of having a house in it one day), then you don't get to vote on anything that would impact property taxes.

If you are a net taker fromt he government (you get more in welfare / assistance,etc) that you pay in taxes, then you don't get to vote in any election. And no, this doesn't leave out people in the military, since they aren't on the dole but are actually working for their money.

Of course, we could keep on letting people vote on how to spend other people's money. It's worked out just grand so far.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:04:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vedubin01:
The US was at its peak just after WW2.



+1
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:06:03 PM EDT

Of course, we could keep on letting people vote on how to spend other people's money.


Which is exactly what would happen if a landowning elite were the only elibible voters: they'd vote on how to spend everyone else's tax dollars.

I apologize for sidetracking this thread so much.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:07:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Black_Talon:
July 20, 1969
www.orlandosentinel.com/media/photo/2005-07/18733386.jpg

What have we done since then?
Porn on every electronic device, and cell phones, whoop dee doo.




+1

My only real question is, Can we have more than one peak, or is it all downhill from there?


Steve
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:08:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dukota:

Originally Posted By vedubin01:
The US was at its peak just after WW2.



+1



Riight, when the average "starter home" was 800 square feet, not 2500, the average car was a total pile of crap that broke down almost weekly, phone calls were so expensive that long distance was unaffordable (good old monopolies, I love them!) air travel was reserved for the very rich, nobody else could afford it. I could go on and on, but we ALL live better today than people in the 50s did, rose colored glasses notwithstanding.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:11:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By natedog375:

Of course, we could keep on letting people vote on how to spend other people's money.


Which is exactly what would happen if a landowning elite were the only elibible voters: they'd vote on how to spend everyone else's tax dollars.




That why I'd prefer a two tier system, with separate elections for different groups of 'stakeholders'.

Have a school referendum on a new addition? Then only the propety owners in that district get to vote - once vote per piece of property. The other people can sit on the sidelines and hope for the best.

Then there's general elections, where your name would be checked against of list of 'net takers' - if you get more on the dole than you paid in taxes last year, you're on the list until that changes. Don't like it? Don't take more money via handouts from the government than you put it.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:18:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By SPECTRE:
The decline comes with socialism and globalization.
Basically the filthy hippies and the 1960s.



We had socialism in the 1930s that would make your head spin. Little done in the 60s comes close.



yep all the shit to get us out of the depression.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:21:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 10:22:04 PM EDT by blacklisted]

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Originally Posted By Dukota:

Originally Posted By vedubin01:
The US was at its peak just after WW2.



+1



Riight, when the average "starter home" was 800 square feet, not 2500, the average car was a total pile of crap that broke down almost weekly, phone calls were so expensive that long distance was unaffordable (good old monopolies, I love them!) air travel was reserved for the very rich, nobody else could afford it. I could go on and on, but we ALL live better today than people in the 50s did, rose colored glasses notwithstanding.



We may live better today, but at a cost. It's all going to fall down around us eventually.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:26:21 PM EDT
Here is an idea:

When the IRS receives your annual income taxes, they send you a voter registration, good for one year. Allows you to vote in a federal election for the next twelve months.

The same thing happens when you pay your state and local taxes. Then you are resistered to participate in those elections.

No income taxes, no vote.
If you are not supporting the government, or if the government is supporting you, tough shit. Get a job.

The Man Show was the shit. I remember that 'End Suffrage' thing they did. Hilarious. I dont think they ever recovered from the loss of The Fox.

I really do think this country has been circling the drain ever since women were allowed to vote.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top