Random thoughts:

1. The writers of the Constitution were all members of the Elite class. When they said "all men are created equal", they were not referring to Blacks, Native Americans, or Women.

2. They built into the document the frameworks for change, as they were evidently savvy enough to understand that the basis for our government would need to be modified as times change.

3. I have to smile a little bit when people on Medicaire and Social Security rail about "socialism."

A few more thoughts.

1. Not even sure how address that one, I don't get your point. I guess that gives Obama license to do whatever he wants?

2. What exactly is the frame work for change built into the Constitution?

3. I don't get your logic with this one. If I read my pay check correctly there are dollars confiscated twice a month against my will for certain benefits to which I did not opt-into. Did I have a choice?

How about this, Obama refunds all my SS money since I was 18 and he can keep my SS benefits when I retire.

Originally Posted by Laker14

Random thoughts:

1. The writers of the Constitution were all members of the Elite class. When they said "all men are created equal", they were not referring to Blacks, Native Americans, or Women.

2. They built into the document the frameworks for change, as they were evidently savvy enough to understand that the basis for our government would need to be modified as times change.

3. I have to smile a little bit when people on Medicaire and Social Security rail about "socialism."

As to #3, you must be self-employed (and choose not to pay in) or not/never employed at all, if you think SS and Medicare are "free". I paid SS from the time I was 16 until I retired and then worked part-time and still paid on those wages. As for the Medicare, "premiums" are deducted every month just like any other insurance and between the two of us, that's a good chunk of what you consider "socialism". Check it out, put a pencil to it and then tell us we're getting something that you alone are paying for.

Originally Posted by dillywho

As to #3, you must be self-employed (and choose not to pay in) or not/never employed at all, if you think SS and Medicare are "free". I paid SS from the time I was 16 until I retired and then worked part-time and still paid on those wages. As for the Medicare, "premiums" are deducted every month just like any other insurance and between the two of us, that's a good chunk of what you consider "socialism". Check it out, put a pencil to it and then tell us we're getting something that you alone are paying for.

I never said they are "free", nor did I mean to imply that "you", whoever "you" are, are receiving something you didn't earn, or don't deserve. They are examples of social programming, designed to ensure that a certain segment of the population that was once very vulnerable to finding itself without money, without healthcare, and without the means to support oneself.

As for me, I have been employed since I got out of school, 32 years now. I have "contributed" the max every year. The likelihood that I'll get out of the system what I've been forced, by law, to put into the system is very small.

Nevertheless, I still think this country is a better place for having done something to make sure that people too old, or too sick to work anymore, aren't left with nothing.

When FDR was pushing the program, he was labelled a socialist. And it was an accurate statement.

Pure unfettered Capitalism has, as it's endpoint, the same result as a game of Monopoly. One player winds up with everything. Along the way, before the game concludes, the more assets the player amasses, the more the odds are stacked in that player's favor. The difference of course being that when you lose at Monopoly you feel relieved because you get to go to bed, but in real life you and the kids wind up on the street.

for explaining exactly what you meant, Laker14. I appreciate your reply. You apparently understand where I was coming from. I just get tired of hearing how we are somehow out to get something for nothing and that someone else is having to foot the bill. There are plenty who see it that way. You're right, none of us will ever get out what we put into it. There are also many who paid in a lifetime with that lifetime ending up being too short to ever receive anything in return. Not really a fair system, is it? I don't have a solution but I wish I did. Had those funds not been raided for years by the politicians for their own agendas, perhaps then it wouldn't be a problem needing a fix now.

real socialism. A more appropriate smack would be the "free" money being made available to those who are not paying their mortgages (for what ever reason).

It is very easy to identify socialism based countries just take a look at the average tax rates...the ones at the top of the percentage table are socialist entities.

BTK

gotta lot to say..but I gotta go to work.

Have a good weekend. Keep those cards and letters coming, folks.

The tax rate in the UK is 60%. Guess what, the government is broke.

Originally Posted by dklassen

The tax rate in the UK is 60%. Guess what, the government is broke.

Actually, so is ours..think National Debt.

Originally Posted by dklassen

The tax rate in the UK is 60%. Guess what, the government is broke.

Fact checking:

Maximum tax rate in UK is 40 %; blended tax rate would be somewhat lower.

Originally Posted by dklassen

A few more thoughts.

1. Not even sure how address that one, I don't get your point. I guess that gives Obama license to do whatever he wants?

2. What exactly is the frame work for change built into the Constitution?

3. I don't get your logic with this one. If I read my pay check correctly there are dollars confiscated twice a month against my will for certain benefits to which I did not opt-into. Did I have a choice?

How about this, Obama refunds all my SS money since I was 18 and he can keep my SS benefits when I retire.

1. My point is that if we want to use the Constitution as our guide, and the words of the architects of that document, we are well served to try to remember the lens through which they saw the world. "All MEN created equal" did not mean Women, Blacks, Native Americans". The original document protected slavery. Times changed. That kind of thinking is no longer accepted. Not by most of us, anyway. I'm going to go out on a limb here and include you in the group of people who think those groups should be treated as equals, allowed to vote, and who think slavery is a bad thing and should not be protected by our Constitution.
It does not give Obama license to do whatever he pleases.
It does give him license to use the legal powers of the Presidency to try to enact legislation that he feels would improve things for the majority who voted him in. That's the way it works.

2/ The framework for change in the Constitution, is the mechanism for drawing and ratifying Amendments.

3. regarding this one, see my post in response to dillywho. Short version, we have social programs, and often those who rail against "socialism" receive benefits from them.
As far as a refund on your SS, unfortunately it doesn't work that way, or I'd get my money back that is going to fund a war I don't agree with.

Originally Posted by pfiliat

Fact checking:

Maximum tax rate in UK is 40 %; blended tax rate would be somewhat lower.

Your "facts" although I am sure you think are accurate as stated. Either by accidental or deceptive omission, you are wrong concerning the complete tax picture for a British citizen living in England. Before I go posting an answer to a error, would you please define your source of information? As long as it is not Wikipedia.

Respectfully

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

The facts that I included in my post were from the UK government web site. For some reason, when I tried to include the link within my post, it was being flagged for SPAM. If I deleted it, it worked.

I had assumed you meant income tax rates, which at 60 %, I had found excessive, prompting me to check. Upon re-reading your post, you did not specify income tax rates. Would you then be kind enough to specify what taxation rate you were referring to, and what is the source of that figure ?

Originally Posted by Laker14

1. My point is that if we want to use the Constitution as our guide, and the words of the architects of that document, we are well served to try to remember the lens through which they saw the world. "All MEN created equal" did not mean Women, Blacks, Native Americans". The original document protected slavery. Times changed. That kind of thinking is no longer accepted. Not by most of us, anyway. I'm going to go out on a limb here and include you in the group of people who think those groups should be treated as equals, allowed to vote, and who think slavery is a bad thing and should not be protected by our Constitution.
It does not give Obama license to do whatever he pleases.
It does give him license to use the legal powers of the Presidency to try to enact legislation that he feels would improve things for the majority who voted him in. That's the way it works.

2/ The framework for change in the Constitution, is the mechanism for drawing and ratifying Amendments.

3. regarding this one, see my post in response to dillywho. Short version, we have social programs, and often those who rail against "socialism" receive benefits from them.
As far as a refund on your SS, unfortunately it doesn't work that way, or I'd get my money back that is going to fund a war I don't agree with.

I am not going to comment on your first two points, as I am not sure what point you are trying to make with them !!

On your third point.......first, if you get a refund on Iraq (I assume from your previous posts that is what you were referring to) then I want one for a few wars I didnt agree with either...wouldnt that be some world, where our ELECTED REPS in congress vote for a war....we dont like it....especially in HINDSIGHT after we know what happens...and thus we get a refund !!!!

Socialism, I think, is defined as a poltical system where the federal government is owning most, if not all, of the corporations and where the citizens rely mostly on the federal government for thier needs.

Based on that definition, can we assume that you are an advocate of that type of government ?

It seems to me, with all due respect, that our current President has had ALL of his training in or with socialist leaning people and groups. It also seems to me that the federal government now owns more corporations than ever before, and it seems to me that there are more folks looking to the federal government for their needs than ever before.

I have never lived in a socialist society and thus cannot give a first hand account of how it might be to actually live in that atmosphere, and can onlly surmise from all the failures of socialist societies and the poverty...albeit EVERYBODY is poor....that I would not like it.

Your point about SS and medicaire does not wash with me, as those who are talking about socialism, in my opinion, are speaking to the current direction of this country and the taking over of corporations and banks.

I am almost finished with "House of Cards" by William Cohan, a bestseller about the specific collapse of Bear Stearns, but it spend much much detail on how this collapse took place. It appears to me that President Clinton, and then followed by President Bush, and the congress were the beginnings of this disaster, and I can find NO evidence that it was done for anything else than political expediency !

Point is there is NO change in how we, the people, want this country to go....we are not advocating socialism of any kind...WE had no input in any of this mess. If you read about the background of this current administration, about the "strings" attached to everything, this is all political...pure and simple.

With all the bad news from the Bush administration.....61 MILLION folks did NOT vote for this President. The only change that is occuring is being done for political purpose..pure and simple.

To para phrase one of the posters on here....we better wake up in 2010...I dont care what party anyone votes for....but we need to unload many, if not all, of the incumbents and get this country back to the middle...extremism on both sides is crushing us.

If I got off point, I apologize, but I am passionate about the country and fear what is happening.

I write this with much trepidation, as the thread on the main area says that us with opinions may be driving others away from there and I dont want to be a party to that so accept this as my opinion and I will respect your right to disagree with me !

Originally Posted by Bucco

I write this with much trepidation, as the thread on the main area says that us with opinions may be driving others away from there and I dont want to be a party to that so accept this as my opinion and I will respect your right to disagree with me !

I may be wrong, but I don't think that honest debate and differing opinions is the problem. It is the ones that feel the need for name-calling and disrespectful attitudes toward those that don't agree with them that drives posters away. I have my opinions, you have yours, and others have theirs and I respect all of them whether I agree or not. That is what this great country is about...freedom and respect for one another. Please don't go away.