RIOTS
“The limitation of riots, moral questions aside, is that they cannot win and their participants know it. Hence, rioting is not revolutionary but reactionary because it invites defeat. It involves an emotional catharsis, but it must be followed by a sense of futility. ” ― Martin Luther King, Jr.
Rheman, In my opinion, the rioters in both Ferguson and Baltimore should have been harshly admonished by every one in positions of power and influence, from Barack Obama on down. The rioters should have been told, in no uncertain terms, that they are a disgrace to the black race, that they are setting back progress, and that they are behaving like savages.
Personally, I believe that Obama is to blame for what happened in Ferguson and Baltimore -- and the reason why I feel that way is, as soon as the riots broke out in Ferguson, Obama should have posted a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division on the outskirts of the city, with the unit ready to go in on a moment's notice.And what would happen in the black community if he did?
I wonder???
I think they would cry.
They would mutter amongst themselves, "Dad is mad."
Obama can't be the hated Dad.
I agree with MLK here. I also agree when he said: "Urban riots must now be recognized as durable social phenomena. They may be deplored, but they are there and should be understood.
Urban riots are a special form of violence. They are not insurrections. The rioters are not seeking to seize territory or to attain control of institutions. They are mainly intended to shock the white community. They are a distorted form of social protest.
The looting which is their principal feature serves many functions. It enables the most enraged and deprived Negro to take hold of consumer goods with the ease the white man does by using his purse. Often the Negro does not even want what he takes; he wants the experience of taking. But most of all, alienated from society and knowing that this society cherishes property above people, he is shocking it by abusing property rights.
There are thus elements of emotional catharsis in the violent act. . . . It is also noteworthy that the amount of physical harm done to white people other than police is infinitesimal and in Detroit whites and Negroes looted in unity."
(Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.)Yes. We need to give these misguided youth "space to destroy".
Every upstanding citizen needs a space to destroy now and again.More deprivation and oppression:
Baltimore second in per-pupil spending
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-0 … -districts
Disenfranchise people, leave them with no voice and no alternative method of objecting to anything. How do you expect people to express their displeasure with the system?
Get off their asses and vote . For one. It is an epidemic of apathy to begin with that has brought us all to the brink of revolution in the streets . One out of four or five would be my guess as to what percentage of people actually do . Yet we riot at the end game of that which we create ourselves ?
The problem is you have no party that represents the disadvantaged so even when you do use your vote, you inevitably vote for more oppression.
Yes, they are oppressed with free food (EBT), free education including higher education, free housing, Affirmative Action for employment and college, voting rights. I'm sure you could come up with dozens of more "oppressive" perks they get, on the backs of the white oppressive taxpayer who has to pay of third of thier earnings every month to pay for the perks.
And you think that is compensation for being treated as a second class citizen!.
I've never seen anyone being treated as a second class citizen. Please show me where anyone's being treated that way.
How many of your first class citizens have to rely on free food etc?
You don't have to rely on free food if you get off your butt and get a job. And not have six kids by six different fathers.Just like the Mother of the Year they are celebrating, who pummeled her rioting child. (Great parenting skills, by the way.Why is no one calling CSD on that wonderful mother?)
You are so detached from reality that I can't even begin to tell you.
No, I can see reality for exactly what it is. I see more of it every day.
Funny how you ignored my points. Are they too much "reality" for you?No, your points were so detached from reality as not be worth comment.
I can post a video of your upstanding Mother of the Years beating her son if you like. That's REALITY.
So she's typical of every mother in the USA, nay, the world!
She's typical of the 50-70 % no-father "families" of the welfare class.
I've had a look at google and can find nothing to confirm your figures. Perhaps you could supply me with your source.
"It should not surprise us that 71% of poor families with children are not headed by a married couple.”
http://www.msnbc.com/politicsnation/gop … me-povertyNo, I wanted a link to back up your claim that she's typical.
I've done both and can't say I've seen anybody who is typical of anything.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42364656/ns/h … VE0HvlViko
One in five American women have kids with different dads.Don't you think that single mothers are one of the main root causes of poverty?
No, I'd say that poverty is the root cause of single mothers.
That's easy. Just set up a system where the only way that many women have of alleviating poverty is to become baby factories.
Wow. So it's a conspiracy theory that the welfare state was created on purpose to create baby-makers out of wedlock. That's believable.
No, but the welfare state was created to keep the unemployed (necessary to keep wages down) from rioting.
Having done that those who are made dependent on welfare find which ever method that they can to increase their meagre income.
It is sad to see so many people slandering the poor with false accusations.
They often resort to lies and exaggerations because they can not justify their opinions with true and factual statements. "Six kids by six different fathers" is a typical distortion spread by the seriously misinformed. It is, in fact, a far cry from the real world in which the average number of persons in a one-parent family receiving means-tested government assistance is 3.1 persons, i.e. a parent and about 2.1 children {1}
Furthermore, US families receiving assistance are the same average size as families that do not receive assistance. As for getting a job, in four out of five one-parent families receiving assistance, there is one wage earner.
"Six kids by six different fathers" is blatantly false and a fabricated generalization that is completely inconsistent with what actually exists in our society.
{1} http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/sp … stance.htm Table 1.Vermont ,where I live , has rather a very lenient welfare system . it's pretty obvious which neighbors ARE on the system. no one works , entirely overweight , under-motivated parent's and children , often no vehicle in the apartment house yards , single moms , live in boy toys , It's so obvious it's amazing .
I don't know how you can deny the image above of career welfare recipients It's so flagrantly obvious . Perhaps you live in a rather affluent area . We are doing our society no favors what-so-ever by extending and expanding welfare roles in America . As much as it displeases me to subsidize crop - beef - food growers , I'd rather do that than increase the numbers of welfare fed children.
I have actually witnessed welfare mothers dropping off their kids at state sponsored day -care and returning home for the day !+1,000,000,000,000.000.000.000.000.000.000-you're right as usual. What you've stated is reality.
I'm intrigued by this ability to look at somebody and immediately know how they get their income and what the intend to do with their time, all with a quick look!
So you have zeroed in on approximately 6 to 8% of the population receiving welfare. How many of those are as you describe? There are too many issues that contribute to the downfall of those that are less fortunate than taking a couple of cases you have witnessed and applying it them all. Yeah there are those that abuse the charity and there always will be. It has happened since the beginning of time. Getting the government to handle the abuse is like using a sledge hammer to swat a fly. They regulate and miss more than they catch. The ones they catch are soon back on it with some other ailment or condition. I would worry more about the other 92 to 94% of the population like the congressmen and lobbyists that are buying and stealing billions in their crooked shenanigans.
Well , I've been around quite awhile [61 yrs. ] and virtually everyone I've ever known on welfare bennies is fully capable of working AND abuses those "gimmies " , I have known at lease a dozen or more families , almost always .........single moms with live in boy friends , . Most of those I have met on SSI are as well on disability and receiving Bennie's .
The figure of those associated with receiving federal dollars , SSI , welfare , military payrolls , government employee's , subsidized business owners , Farmers , crop growers , , the "military industrial complex ", , the figure that you quote .....6----8 % is more like 45 % !
Do you like fruit , my friend ?
'How do like you like them apples 'Actually, I don't think that's too far off. Certainly it isn't for some grand cause.
Lets see the only thing we have in common is our age. Other than that could you break down those figures for me with links as I can't seem to find anything that backs up your claim.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 … rking-poor
Some folks credit the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan with this wisdom: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.”
Please share with us how you knew which mothers were collecting welfare and which were not. Also, tell us how you managed to follow all of them after they left their children at the day-care center. Include, if you can, how you knew they all went home. I am interested in hearing how you waited around to make sure they all remained at home all day and none later went off to work. No doubt, you interviewed all of the mothers to determine how many worked nights and slept while their kids were in day-care.
Homespun tales and local anecdotes are not acceptable substitutes for facts. Drawing conclusions based on a small sample size is a logical fallacy known as “Hasty Generalization.” The total reality is distorted by focusing on a tiny, tiny segment that does represent the characteristics found in the much, much larger world. Analyzing the national data reveals details that are much more in line with the typical or average situation. {1}
My post was part of a discussion about "six kids by six different fathers." Apparently, you have no data to support this claim, so you would rather substitute additional calumny in place of rational thinking.
In your words, "I don't know how you can deny the image above of career welfare recipients. It's so flagrantly obvious."
I reject the image because it is neither obvious nor objective. It is a false image conjured from emotions and opinions that ignore and deny the truth.
I can accept that this is the way you view the world. However, if you want rational, critical thinking adults to agree with your world view, you must make an effort to present hard facts and not a handful of personal observations.
Show us, for example, the number of welfare recipients interviewed who had “six kids with six different fathers” before you declare that is the norm and not the exception.
Show us research that supports this illogical statement: "It's pretty obvious which neighbors ARE on the system," according to you, "no one works." Americans who make an effort to keep themselves informed about welfare issues have learned there is one wage earner living in four out of five one-parent families receiving assistance. {2}
Some folks claim they can tell which neighbors are collecting benefits because they are “entirely overweight.” I weigh over 200 pounds so I guess I must be receiving benefits too. Right?
Oh, and let’s not forget one other very important give away. (Pardon my sarcasm.) Anyone who does not own a car is surely a benefit recipient! However, it takes a very gifted individual who is privy to everyone’s sex life to know who is single, who is separated or divorced, and who have “boy toys.” I am very sorry, but a world view constructed on fantasy and prejudice is not a model I admire.
From your post, we learned, "As much as it displeases me to subsidize crop - beef - food growers , I'd rather do that than increase the numbers of welfare fed children."
This generous and compassionate testimony is preaching tough love to underprivileged children while condoning corporate welfare for wealthy, land-rich, profit-driven agriculturist.
“A commonplace of political rhetoric has it that the quality of a civilization may be measured by how it cares for its elderly. Just as surely, the future of a society may be forecast by how it cares for its young.” {3}
{1} http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/inde … ralization
{2} http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/sp … stance.htm Table 1.
{3} Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Daniel Patrick. Family and Nation, (1986), Ch. 3Quilligrapher , I grant you this , You and I are allowed to pick an chose "facts" , "Statistics" , "truths" , by reaching out into the virtual universe , this great universal vacuum of social media certainly allows that . just a touch of the keyboard put's us right into the center of the encyclopedic marvel of the cartoon world called Wiki-Pedia , or for that matter just "google it " Baam ! ,you 're the king of all the " facts "in the world .
However , there is one thing missing in this virtual encyclopedic wealth of info that we all chose . That my friend is the definition of common sense ! I live in a small town ! For the most part I have spent only five of my sixty- one years living in a city , HENCE , I know almost everyone in a twenty + mile radius of the few small towns that I've lived in , that's just the way it is in small towns , unlike in the population centers where one doesn't know the people across the hall , across the subdivision street or at the other table in the country club near them .
Here, it is impossible to not know of almost all your neighbors and their lifestyles , try as we might ! So given that , I feel it's pretty safe to say that , in spite of you're implication of my being a stalker , at least locally , I know' who's who', so to speak . Within a few homes near me there are several "section eight " apartment houses , subsidized apartments . For the most part they are filled to the brim with single mom's , kids and their boyfriend's or husbands . On two sides of my home their are people living on SSI disability payments , personally , I would love to be as "disabled " as they are , but I just have to work for my living .
Quill, some of us don't live to simply "google up" our facts , we can use the one's right there before our very own eye's ! In fact , I wouldn't want to have to only rely on " keyboard facts" , I couldn't live without the common sense that allows me to know something when I see it .So you live in a small town where it is not possible not to know most of your neighbours. This allows you to extrapolate what you see to cover the whole country!
Hi there, Ahorseback. I appreciate you having made the time to reply.
The lecture on common sense was humorous particularly the part, "there is one thing missing in this virtual encyclopedic wealth of info that we all chose . That my friend is the definition of common sense !"
Every person who defends outlandish conclusions by claiming to have “common sense” is actually admitting he doesn’t use it very well. You see, using common sense, by definition, is to reason and to reach conclusions based on intellectual abilities that are shared (“common”) by nearly all people without debate. As soon as a preposterous statement meets large scale opposition and contradicts a large body of data, it is, by the same definition, NOT an opinion based upon shared (“common”) sense. The term “Common Sense” is typically misused, as in this case, to pretend one person has more than another and then to assert the “additional” common sense is a form of authority.
“The conviction is rather to be held as testifying that the power of judging aright and of distinguishing Truth from Error, which is properly what is called Good Sense or Reason, is by nature equal in all men;” ~ Rene Descartes {1}
What I do not see in your eloquent post it a single fact that proves you know anything about Americans nationwide who are receiving benefits. You admit all of your knowledge is limited to experiences in a rural Vermont region that is so underpopulated that you boast, “I know almost everyone in a twenty+mile radius of the few small towns that I've lived in.” To estimate how many people you know, simply research “Dunbar’s Number.” From this provincial setting, you would have us believe you know everything there is to know about this country’s welfare system. How odd.
I do not see anything in your post about the original claim you tried to defend. Give us more facts about the preponderance of welfare recipients who had “six kids with six different fathers.” Have you forgotten that this claim drew you into this strand of the thread?
Show us exactly how relying on common sense proves this illogical statement: "It's pretty obvious which neighbors ARE on the system...no one works." I do not believe “common sense” is more reliable than national research that determined there is one wage earner living in four out of five one-parent families receiving assistance. A “common sense” explanation is intellectually bankrupt. So, what may be true in Backwater, VT, is not true throughout the country. {2}
You ridicule self-education; you berate online research; and, you over rate limited personal experience. Let’s explore what limited knowledge reveals about welfare in this country. Shall we?
"Within a few homes near me there are several "section eight " apartment houses , subsidized apartments . For the most part they are filled to the brim with single mom's , kids and their boyfriend's or husbands . On two sides of my home their are people living on SSI disability payments , personally , I would love to be as "disabled " as they are , but I just have to work for my living ."
Now, please tell us exactly what this knowledge tells you about the families living and receiving benefits in my hometown. Also, share what it tells you about single mothers struggling elsewhere in America. If you know so much about over-weight, unemployed, lazy, welfare queens, then why post meaningless anecdotes but no facts that apply from coast to coast.
How easy it is to belittle the importance of facts when you don’t have any. How convenient to rely on limited experiences when that is all you have. In a skirmish between facts and emotions, I will take the side of the facts every time.
"Quill, some of us don't live to simply "google up" our facts , we can use the one's right there before our very own eye's !"
Really? Right there before our very own eyes? Only a fool would look through a pinhole and believe he was seeing the entire world.
I am sorry if this comes across as unnecessarily harsh. It is meant to apply to statements and not people.
But, this thread is about riots and racial stereotyping. So I am grateful to you for demonstrating just how distorted many opinions about race and welfare in the US have become.
{1}Descartes, Rene. Discourse on Method, Part 1.
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/d/descar … part1.html
{2} http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/sp … stance.htm Table 1.Talk about an eloquent response , how colorful , I do know one 'fact ' about opinions in the public forum , and That is , We can immediately tell which end of the political spectrum one calls from . All Americans are either for more government sponsored ' "sharing of the wealth " , or they are for less .
We come from two parties , or none at all , right ? Obviously , the liberals in America are for more feeding at the public welfare troth , all forms of national spending be damned , The , " I want mine too " mentality obviously permeates and dominates all forms of discussion .
You can quote all of the charts , statistics , or scientific studies you want . The bottom line always remains the same in these forum discussions. and that is , that you are defending that old adage , ' 'I have my hands in your pocket book and that's okay ' ?
As to "common sense " ; once there was such a thing my friend , and they were widely held as a common truths , Today however , we are divided by the those are for more elements of socialism in our government systems and those who are for less . Quite simply put , You argue very well for more !"Today however , we are divided by the those are for more elements of socialism in our government systems and those who are for less ."
Peculiar by the way it is worded but what I guess from the statement you have said there more of those in favor of socialism than those who are opposed to it. This says something in of itself. What is the reason that there are more in favor of socialism than not? Could it have something to do with a non responsive political system to those who are in favor of more inclusion and equality? Or could it be that the 1% is ruling in favor of their needs more so through their wealth's ability to influence favorable outcomes through political means than being concerned about their consumers that support them? Why is it that capitalism is not the preferred system with these socialistic minded people? Are they all just lazy or is there a reason why it has fallen short in their eyes? If the numbers are slanted one way more than the other could there be a change in our future by a vote?
You see capitalism has no conscience as it promotes profit over ethical and moral ideologies. If the profits are made at the expense of others including the competition, the government or the people it extracts their profits from it makes no difference in the short haul. The short haul is the standard business model. Devastating an economy or countries solvency has no meaning when profit is the most important thing. Socialism on the other hand has a moral and ethical principle capitalism does not in that it takes the welfare and prosperity of the individual into consideration. Unless capitalism starts to learn that the Golden Goose can be stuck once to many times before it dies, capitalism may loose its foothold."You see capitalism has no conscience as it promotes profit over ethical and moral ideologies. If the profits are made at the expense of others including the competition, the government or the people it extracts their profits from it makes no difference in the short haul. The short haul is the standard business model. Devastating an economy or countries solvency has no meaning when profit is the most important thing. Socialism on the other hand has a moral and ethical principle capitalism does not in that it takes the welfare and prosperity of the individual into consideration. Unless capitalism starts to learn that the Golden Goose can be stuck once to many times before it dies, capitalism may loose its foothold."
On the other hand, you see, socialism has no conscience as it promotes control of the people over ethical and moral ideologies. If that control is done at the expense of others (playing Robin Hood, whether legally or not) it makes no difference in the short haul. The short haul is the standard model of socialism; it cannot withstand the long term effects of it's policies, as devastating an economy or countries solvency has no meaning when controlling the masses is the most important thing. While socialism pretends to care about the welfare and prosperity of the individual, it is only those individuals that do not support themselves or their culture that matter. All others, from middle class to the top, are fair game for the greed of the socialist. Unless socialism starts to learn that the Golden Goose can be struck once too many times before it dies (witness much of Europe), socialism will inevitably fade and die - probably back to feudalism.Nice try from a true capitalist. What have we learned from your post? You just reverse the position without any documentation to bolster your OPINION? You see capitalism in America is an experiment that is mixed with many socialistic caveats added to it to make it palatable for the masses. Capitalism left to its own devices creates a super class and and substandard class. Capitalism has found its way into ruling us from an elitist position and deep pockets to make it work for them. Eventually the people will tire of the greed that ruins our so called democracy and vote some more safe guards to prevent the elitists from owning everything including our future. Your unmitigated support for the system to the exclusion of any safeguards is very dangerous. But knowing that the government is corrupted by the very money that is donated and underhandedly provided them by this elitist group may prove more and more difficult to hide for very much longer.
"Capitalism has found its way into ruling us from an elitist position."
Capitalism is neutral. A system does not have intentions.
The people who use that system can use it for good.
When used for good, it benefits all.
It really boils down to the intent of those who are involved. It really gets down to individuals who either use or misuse a perfectly practical and functional system.
T W I S II know…! is capitalism some sort of hairy, purple pimply monster that hates the poor?
Really???Yes, this hairy, purple pimply monster OWES the poor.
Why again?
Capitalism is neutral? Capitalism is a theory that when put to use in its truest form rewards those who direct their efforts towards profits. Profits or failure are its rewards or downfall. Risk is the determining factor. How little or how much is on the capitalist. When it has no other direction other than providing profits at the expense of individuals, country or ethics it no longer is neutral. Unfortunately we have many corporations who buy legislation for their own profits at the expense of the country. This is when with no other element it takes on a detrimental role in the Virtuous Cycle. The intent of many of these corporate capitalists is only to become rich at the expense of whoever gets in the way. It is the truest American phenomena to run a shortest run at financial providence and could care less about who it hurts. Eventually the jobs will be gone and the money will be in their hands. Just look at the trend today of the top 1% gain at the expense of the middle class.
Tsk tsk. You seem to have missed the underlying point entirely.
Your precious socialism has the same problems, and in spades. Greed, in other words, wrecking the system from within.
Yes, capitalism must be controlled to some degree - just as socialism must. Any workable system must be a mix of the two, as I intended to indicate with a post nearly identical to yours but "proving" the exact opposite. Neither pure capitalism nor pure socialism can possibly work - capitalism because a few control the many and socialism because the non-producers control the producers. Neither works if not subject to some control and mixing. I'd even to so far as to say (in a gross simplification) that failure of capitalism creates a small sub-culture of poverty stricken people while a failed socialism creates an entire nation of poverty stricken people.
But that's something you never seem to understand; that turning capitalism into a degenerate socialism is not the answer. That simply taking (stealing legally) from one group to hand it out to others is NOT the answer to a viable and vibrant economy. Charity does not produce a working economy; it produces a non-productive populace dependent on politicians for their very survival.Tsk tsk on you as well. I never said we should convert to socialism. Marx was dedicated to it and I never would want to squash this country with such a legacy. But capitalism is running amok with its seemingly intent on buying out the will of the people and their welfare for profits. You are the one who professes a worship of capitalism and I think it has gone unchecked with recent Supreme Court rulings and then corporations backing trade agreements that will cripple many more American families through job loss.
Yet you said:
"Socialism on the other hand has a moral and ethical principle capitalism does not in that it takes the welfare and prosperity of the individual into consideration."
- looks like you do advocate it, even though you never said we should convert to it…
What ARE you saying?A couple of posts ago I said it is a mix of Socialism and Capitalism that is what is needed. The problem with many is that they want the shift to more of Capitalism in the face of it's destroying our country. The move towards globalization is in direct alliance with the Capitalist approach.
You would rather hide your head in the sand, pretending we do not live in a global economy even as we carry out global commerce as a necessary factor in maintaining our country? All while crying that the capitalism necessary to support that global trade is ruining our country, but the massive charity programs we cannot afford and sell off our future to pay for is not?
Liberals never seen to understand that we all live in the real world, not a fantasy they'd like to see. And, although it can take many years, when their failed policies slowly grind the country, culture and country into dust, they can't understand what happened. What happened is that they want more than they can pay for and have destroyed everything around them by insisting they have it anyway.I don't pretend a thing. You claim there is some sort of mutual advancement for all who participate in this wonderful phenomena. How is that so when all we seem to export in volume is debt and money for the import of goods. Where is the balance in that? How can we maintain that for very much longer? Your claim is that I have a liberal take on this while all it I can think of is common sense. When you give more than you receive (trade and commerce) you are losing ground. No liberal slant to that. I maintain capitalism is the freest system we can have to conduct our economy but the explosion came when the trade agreement let loose the greed and fleecing of jobs in this country. Not everyone is a HVAC mechanic, plumber, computer tech, etc. but we are all consumers and you break the back of the economy when you remove their ability to earn enough money to support capitalism. You claim that the problem comes from people insisting they have something they can't afford. That is very true but does that include school, groceries or a retirement?
John , Apathy keeps way too many from the polls , that and the two party plague . There should be another , perhaps independent , party entered into the works ! However , a grass root's voter connection from both parties COULD change the gridlock and political games congress plays .
I think a grass roots connection is the only answer.
In the UK we had five major parties vying for power in the recent election which resulted in the party winning power having 63% of the electorate voting against them.
How do we get corporate influence out of our daily lives?We in America , have to begin a major voter revolution where only a very well organized major public outcry will work . Somewhere between that and beginning to hang congressman from light posts ! I personally would vote for the second action . Really , I don't know John !
Pretty much the same here ahorseback, even though we had several parties all vying for power most of them offered pretty much the same austerity. Austerity in the UK is a method of making the many pay for the financial incompetence of the few.
How has the vote worked so far? Is there any change in the candidates, the rhetoric or for that matter the country due to it? It continues to head south as the greed at the top overtakes our freedom of choosing anybody that is not the party preference or patsy. Getting off your @## has done little to help the system choose a candidate of the people.
Yes, always blame someone else.
People are incapable of voting for their true interests. Therefore, idiots will keep voting in idiots who will continue to destroy the country. We get exactly what we deserve.If we cannot rely on the vote, and the greed at the top cannot be controlled... then what?
Are we done?
Are the Globalists bringing about WWIII and theres no stopping it?
Probably.
But "they're just kids!".
Yes, we should encourage our children to riot, burn, loot and destroy, instead of instilling values in them and punishing them for their misdeeds.
We need to give them their "space to destroy"!- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
0Capitalism , by today's modern definition , is the most successful driving economic force in the world , by default ! Hence , it becomes the source for so many to look for the place to settle into an atmosphere of ---------- " What can I get out of this system!",
Why does it not surprise me then that the crier's all things 'socialism' call for America to finance everything from welfare driven ,socio- economic welfare slavery , to the free educational grant's totally fueled by leftist taught ideals , leading to the over- throwing of individual control of THIS very system .
Kathryn Hill said it best and someone should quote this ! "Capitalism is neutral ,a system does not have intentions "
Yet there are many , many other-wise very bright minds here who would make you believe that our very system somehow owes you ! For the life of me , I cannot figure how anyone decides too rely on the system to provide instead of finding a way to live by earning from this system . Monopolies are the problem. Not capitalism. And there are laws to deal with potential crooks and evil individuals or corporations of individuals who would "make profits at the expense of others, including the competition, the government or the people…" who "extract profits in the short haul... and believe "the short haul is the standard business model." The law is to prevent Individuals who unite and end up "devastating an economy or other countries' solvency, since profit is the most important thing to them."
Or has the law changed and ALLOWS crony capitalism where the GOV'T picks winners and losers?"Monopolies are the problem. Not capitalism."
How do you think monopolies are formed? The government is bought to ignore the problem while they ship the manufacturing overseas where a few factories will produce their products. They are in total control of the process from beginning to end. Who else could or would compete with that.
"Or has the law changed and ALLOWS crony capitalism where the GOV'T picks winners and losers?"
Wake up and smell the coffee. This has been going on for years. Buy a politician and he remains faithful to your cause. Once bought they will not "out" themselves and they keep getting paid for their loyalty.
BTW: Yes.
So don't blame the system of capitalism, blame the breakdown of the rule of law.
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorial … m-bank.htmI personally don't consider King as a model. I have no respect for someone that will leave his people to be kicked, beat by the local police without reacting. An eye for an eye is my motto. I hardly believe that the numeral superiority leads to defeat.
Rioting is revolutionary. What did Russia, France do if not rioting? It led to the establishment of republics, or its idea, at least. Countries that didn't oppose their repressive government are the ones that are still suffering.
King is for idealists. Realists know that freedom comes with a price.MLK, was a true leader IN HIS TIME and in today's , to not respect him for his non-violent approach is speaking un-thought out opinions that are beneath any conscious dignity .
One , I think one truly had to have lived in a sixties household to understand the direction violent popular uprisings were leading this American society .
Two , violence , that typical of rioting , get's no one -nowhere .
Three, . If it wasn't for MLK , race relations in America , as skewed as they are at present , would not be anywhere near as meaningful , or at the level of general acceptance in our culture today .
All seem to be missing a very important point.
Welfare is a product of (liberal) capitalism, not socialism.Now John ! How is it I agree with this statement ?
Probably because you misunderstand the purpose of welfare! The elderly and infirm aside, it's an act of oppression, not liberation.
...and socialism has nothing to do with some sort of welfare contribution through redistribution of hard earned individual $$$$$$…? from capable contributing individuals to somehow-less-contributing others?
Define hard earned money compared to no opportunity to earn money. Hard earned money at what expense. Owning a store and selling product that was manufactured overseas in some sweat shop? Then turning around and selling it to somebody who barely ekes out a living at minimum wage because no other jobs are available. Maybe it is the doctor who spends incredible money for an education and has a lawyer come along and sue him for all he is worth because something went wrong. How did that lawyer work so hard to gain from others misfortunes?
When you take away a persons means of making a living you enslave them to survive at whatever level they can. The very wealthy who shortcut the system to literally rob there customers buy taking their jobs and charging them to sell cheap goods is so American business that it makes you want to throw up.Only very extraordinary individuals get out and normally that is through some help with welfare, scholarships both educational and athletic. So the answer is threaten even this opportunity by cutting them off and in support of corporate fat cats getting even more quickly wealthier at the expense of those they hurt?How is it that only those selling the products that people demand get the blame for poverty in your world? What about those buying and supporting those products?
When did I use a term only? Only exists in your world of absolutes. The basis by which this system works is one that rewards those that provide the best product for its price. When you have entities (corporations) buying influence (NAFTA and the soon to be TPP) they create a way of circumventing those who would be manufacturing the products in their own economy that would buy the products. In doing so they eliminate the competition here and provide what we then have available. That is how we have to support them. It is not hard work, just a manipulation.
It just seems so odd that I never see anyone posting on the root of the evils of NAFTA, TPP or any other form of importing goods.
That the root is people saving money instead of buying American is never, ever addressed. Just those making a profit by providing what they want. There is no "manipulation" and no "circumventing". Just a demand for low cost products without any care of what the actual cost is. Unless you are trying to say that John Q Public is "manipulating" corporations into finding lower cost methods of production?I like this reasoning , My idea all along is that American's ARE far, far more responsible for their own future , finances ,politics , lifestyles and the same for their children's !
We the people , have created this mess of a society that we live in by simply and dumbly existing within it , without the shared responsibilities that we began with . A far more involved and conscientious effort to control our own future . American's have willfully given away all the individual economic and political control that we once held above all else .
Anyone remember ,"Buy American "?
Anyone remember what it was like to involve yourself in local ,state and national voting ?
How do you like driving that foreign car ?
Buying that shirt made in Pakistan?
How do you like being owned by foreign elite ?
No matter who you ' blame it all on ', the faults lie entirely within our own apathetic lack of involvement in maintaining our own quality of life .But it is no longer popular to accept responsibility for our actions. In this matter, then, demand lower pricing than American labor can provide and then vilify companies that provide that pricing in the only manner possible - by lowering labor costs with overseas production.
The best of both worlds that way - low prices without blaming ourselves for wanting them! At least until the bill comes due - when we no longer have jobs making the cheap stuff we demand - whereupon we'll just demand that imports be limited without paying the inevitable higher prices.Right on Man! But better than trying to buy American because the competition has run these business's out of America, shouldn't we be asking how this was able to happen where our choices where sold out from under us? As a taxpayer and voter it is my and every other Americans responsibility to be a caretaker of the process and the Constitutional rights we have been given, fought for and died for? Ask just about anybody who may agree with your concern on something in Congress that you want them to contact their representative and you will get a blank look with a question who that may be. America shows through abject ignorance that they don't give a hoot about the running of the country and that they leave it up to their representatives to do it for them. Just look at the abysmal voter turn outs. When taxes go up and it affects their pocket book they take notice with a bunch of complaining and then vote the scumbag back in. You are right my friend the problem is us and nothing will change until we take our responsibility seriously and mind the store.
Katherine unwittingly alluded to the problem earlier in that through the use of overseas labor and elimination of manufacturing jobs in America in search of cheaper products the corporations have essentially created monopolies in that their goods are exclusively on the shelves. Only one domestic sneaker company continues to stand amidst the competition pouring in from China and South East Asia. Globalization has aced and continues to oust the American worker. Just because I am seemingly the only one to you bringing this up does not make it any less relevant. I am simply amazed at the apathy people have and the absolute ignorance they have of their governments workings. I as you do not trust the government to make the necessary decisions to turn our country around. But in the same breath I do not trust the corporations as they pervert the access they have towards trade and legal wrangling through campaign donations. What is even more dangerous is that the rug has been pulled out from under us and further threats to our sovereignty is in line for us unless we act. The politicians know how to divert our attention and are trying to tug at us to do more about abortion, gay marriage and alien welfare issues while they sneak through legislation like the TPP. The whole argument can be settled through the vote but low and behold Congress decides what and how they vote on any particular issue or law. Why is that would be the better question rather than arguing about why no one knows of the TPP and the negative effects of NAFTA.
They are not allowed to "short-cut the system." What happened to the safeguards. Thats where the problem lies and the solution begins. Not by eradicating capitalism/ FREE market system…
! * *...within boundaries.* * !
HINT:
Read The Constitution!
The Sherman Antitrust Act was one of the first Federal statutes to place limitations upon monopolies. Its main purpose was to prevent companies from garnering power as monopolies. It is employed to protect the consumers as opposed to the companies, as such practices involving monopolies are deemed "failures of the market". This Act required that the Government be responsible for policing the activity of trusts, companies, and organizations of the like if they are deemed in violation of the statute.
http://constitution.laws.com/the-suprem … monopolies
No more, and probably less so, than capitalism.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
And the greatest curse OF capitalism , at least this one , is Apathy . As I talk of our system in the 'day to day ' , I am amazed at how detached they all are . We have become a nation of driveling criers and yet . "We the people ", created this mess ourselves and are the only ones who can change it .
I would go so far as to predict that if we were to poll all rioters about voter participation ; I'd bet that more than half don't even vote ! "Buy a politician and he remains faithful to your cause. Once bought they will not "out" themselves and they keep getting paid for their loyalty." Rhamson
Morals and values are other safeguards.
You can't have a democratic republic without them.
If we can't trust those we elect, well…
its over.Basically we need to vote for someone who has no connection to The Globalists. So do NOT vote for either BUSH or CLINTON in the primaries! (...we've had enough of these regimes already, anyway.)
That's what I have to say.- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
I think there are two ends of the spectrum when it comes to understanding the theories behind economic success and "sharing the wealth ." in America .
One - there are those of old school realizations that , we earn whatever we acquire in life AND that it's well understood that we may only get so far out of that which we DO earn . Hence , one man becomes a rich man because of his exceptional abilities and another man 'get's by' okay with merely the limitations of his education and his standing within his culture , limited only by his own abilities in earning a living.
Two - there are those who would have us all believe that we ALL deserve our fair and absolutely equalized share of the same pie. In other words , their idea of minimum wages is that whatever it takes to acquire everything they want in life . They want a college education , a mac- mansion , a three car garage and the houseboat on the lake .
The sad part is , is that number two really believes that whatever it takes out of everyone else's pocket book to get what he needs is simply okay and should be okay with you too !The gist of this conversation has been moved to:
"Is the Call for Raising the Minimum Wage a Detriment?
Just thought you should know in case you want to continue there without hijacking all these threads with the same topic. I will have an answer to your post there.Hi ahorseback.
Warning: rambling thoughts on the matter:
I agree with what you have said.
However, as the jobs slip away, people want the gov't to compensate.
Well, I say…
...when there is more compassion in the world from bosses on down, working and thriving will be easier.
We all know greedy, rude, mean, bossy, controlling, tyrannical, nit-picky bosses, administrators, assistants, managers, etc.
In my opinion, we are just not there as far as a conducive society which has the goal of helping oneself and helping others as well.
Why?
...because of perceived employee incompetence.
When I graduated from high school at seventeen I was fit for not much.
BUT, thanks to the influence of my mother, I was able to proceed into a career choice and fund my own way through college…( My college degree helped me about as much as my high school degree).
What will it take to raise quality individuals who have, discipline, humility, true intelligence, ambition, creativity, guts, and enthusiasm??
Hint it must start early in life. All my life-skills and talents came from following my mother around from the age of four until…
...this very day, actually!!!!
(Not following her around, of course… that stopped around fifteen, but what I learned during that early period was indelible and vital to my survival and competence in the world.
BTW Happy Late Mother's day!)
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Hi Kathryn ! I wish for you a perfect summer !..... As you say , "following mom" around helped you to learn , just as we all do or at least should do . We learn from our elders , that's for sure. More than likely as you learned that you willingly picked up on a life lesson of the good old puritan work ethics that she had too . Fortunately for you and I that has worked out pretty well .
I should say that AND your education , professionally useful or not , is the stronghold of making our way in this capitalist society . I have recently read some of Henry Ford's writings from 1926 !, In this book he neatly describes the advantages of , one , a good individual work ethic , two a company that recognizes and rewards this within the individual . And three , how good men [women ] workers , a successful company , and a government with little regulation or taxation over either one , all three combined make this country the success story that it is . I haven't finished this reading but I cannot help and compare the irony of a 1926 book of ideas and todays reality !
He also , in so many ways , describes why financiers and bankers would [ and have they ever ] ruin this economy, much like they have many European companies and actual governments . He sights the pure evil and selfishness of economists , the travesty and irony of organized labor parties , AND he also goes on to sight just how a - forty hour work week- ,rather than fifty or sixty or seventy hours , elevates a man , his household and his family to a level of comfort , that serves to actually make him a better worker !
I do however, believe that the almost systematic DE- regulation of corporate America , has and continues to erode the once decent relationship between employer and employee in America . I have witnessed , since the eighties, a new mentality spread across the corporate world , a new attitude of 'make the employee fight for every benefit he has ' , It's almost as if where once there was an attitude of ' rewarding good employees ' now has become ....."there's another man in line looking for a job ' so to hell with providing benefits . Have you noticed how many MORE part time jobs there are now comparable to yesterday ? Yeaa Obama-care.
Jeeesh - talk about rambling thoughts , listen to me .Love em ! Thanks ahorseback!
PS I just watched the coolest movie called 50 to 1 about a horse called Mine That Bird.
He won the Kentucky Derby but it had been a fifty to one shot. A true story. What surrounded the event was a lot of positive vibes and intentions. I recommend it for anyone.
PS I think it is not enough to say, go to college and get a career. I think it is vital for every parent, black, white and every race and ethnic background, to realize that what the parents are, will be passed on to their children and will influence them… more profoundly than schools and teachers.
I believe whatever the parent is, is the most important influence in a child's life, especially in the early years.
Children are not dolls to be spoiled and coddled. They must be seen as the potentially strong, clever and powerful people they will become. They must learn the skills which will enable them to survive.
If the parent is on welfare and working the system, and that is good enough for the parent, that is what the child will absorb into his very soul. What is good for mom/dad is good for me.
Every parent needs to ask him/herself:
What do I want for my kids.
What is good enough for my kids?
and be that.
...and let them tag along, if possible.
Talk to them about your job, your work, no matter what that work is. Discuss the the trials and tribulations of your work days. Teach them the skills you have. Tutor them and mentor them however you can. Encourage their hobbies and endeavors/ especially the ones they have an innate interest in.
Then, when their friends are rioting and running amok, they will have better things to do and think about.
MUCH better,
I would say.- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
I just read a hub about raising children as "free range children ", , I almost commented at length about the deliberate un-hinging of some kind of instilling some discipline in the scheduling , in behaviors both public and private . ALL people's social or private behaviors today , young or older , are absolutely effective to everyone else around them.
Most rioting is simply "wilding out ", And every time I talk to some younger person in college I am amazed at the sophomoric maturity level , the most repeated thing I have realized ; " I don't really know what I want to do later in life "........... Now , I do know what's going on in college dorms , In silence I often simply shake my head at the predictability of the response.
These "Free range" attitudes in our culture , the instant rewarding's of social media's , lack of any personal life discipline's , the creation of 'pick your own demons ' of intellectual idealist's , where does it end , My message to our society ; want to know the cause of America's social ill's today ? We have to look in the mirror ! It's all about that old adage, " How you gonna act "? worth repeating:
"I have recently read some of Henry Ford's writings from 1926 !, In this book he neatly describes the advantages of , one , a good individual work ethic , two a company that recognizes and rewards this within the individual . And three , how good men [women ] workers , a successful company , and a government with little regulation or taxation over either one , all three combined make this country the success story that it is . I haven't finished this reading but I cannot help and compare the irony of a 1926 book of ideas and todays reality !
He also , in so many ways , describes why financiers and bankers would [ and have they ever ] ruin this economy, much like they have many European companies and actual governments . He sights the pure evil and selfishness of economists , the travesty and irony of organized labor parties , AND he also goes on to sight just how a - forty hour work week- ,rather than fifty or sixty or seventy hours , elevates a man , his household and his family to a level of comfort , that serves to actually make him a better worker !
I do however, believe that the almost systematic DE- regulation of corporate America , has and continues to erode the once decent relationship between employer and employee in America . I have witnessed , since the eighties, a new mentality spread across the corporate world , a new attitude of 'make the employee fight for every benefit he has ' , It's almost as if where once there was an attitude of ' rewarding good employees ' now has become ....."there's another man in line looking for a job ' so to hell with providing benefits ." ahorsebackInstead of hijacking this thread I have opened a new one to address these conversations at :
Is the Call for Raising the Minimum Wage a Detriment?
If you want to share with us over there we can leave this thread to the discussion on RIOTS.
Thanks,
Rhamson.Maybe if your intention is to direct the flow of the conversations on forums , you might make your part of the conversation a hub . That way rhamson , you can control completely the direction and flow of it's intended meaning!
I apologize for thinking you wanted to be included in the change this thread had taken by redirecting you to the other new thread. It was done out of respect for Rhema Word the originator of this thread. If you wish to continue here in this thread I will leave you to it. My intent was to be inclusive and not controlling. Sorry.
Related Discussions
- 510
April 27, 2015: Riots break out in Baltimore, MD
by feenix 9 years ago
A black Baltimore man recently died while in police custody, and it is widely suspected that his death resulted from police misconduct and brutality. Well, I say, regardless of all that, thousands of blacks should NOT be out in the streets rioting. In my opinion, their rioting is nothing but a case...
- 60
Is America More Racist Now Than It Was 6+ Years Ago?
by ga anderson 8 years ago
In a conversation about racism in America today, a young relative, made this statement'"It is worse than it was six years ago!"It took me a moment to catch his drift. He is a young, (many times naive), anti-Obama conservative and I took his comment to mean it is worse since Pres....
- 134
McCain's VP Choice
by hubby7 15 years ago
What does everybody think about John McCain choice of Sarah Pahlin as his Vice Presidential pick?My feeling is that she might be a bit too parochial with too little experience. That my feeling. However, I admit I don't know much about her right now. Does anyone? Perhaps upon learning more about...
- 112
Police Officers: Should they wear cameras or not
by Jennifer Kessner 8 years ago
If you haven't kept up to date on the issues in Ferguson, here is a drastically simplified version of events:1. On August 9th, a St. Louis County police officer shot an unarmed 18-year-old young black man. 2. The officer shot him SIX TIMES. With a pause in between. The office shot twice,...
- 91
Is Ferguson Just a Ferguson Problem?
by Don W 9 years ago
The recent DOJ report said there was a 'pattern and practice of constitutional violations (that primarily target African Americans) in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force.'The report is a scathing indictment of the...
- 25
POLL TIME
by Grace Marguerite Williams 10 years ago
Which American President do YOU consider to be the worse of the two evils in terms of socioeconomic policies and reformations in addition to the current general state of the country, George W. Bush or Barack Obama? Why? Why not?