Posted on 01/12/2003 2:10:15 PM PST by Jean S
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:02:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A conservative preacher once told me he thought "a little socialism was good." I was dumbfounded. He did not realize this was tantamount to saying a little evil is good.
In the early 1900s socialism was regarded as a crazy idea invented by revolutionaries and Marxists to disrupt civilization and bring down governments. But today the majority of Americans behave as socialists
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
Then we start hearing about 'society's right' to-
A smoke free environment.
A sober populace.
Healthy citizens, because we have to pay for their overeating/smoking/etc.
Safety. (which is quite well addressed by the 2nd Amendment, IMO)
The corruption of the clear meaning of the Constitution, in particular the Commerce Clause, opened the door to an unsound Federal retirement system (SS), a failing educational system, a badly botched WOD, and other such mischief.
If you retire while I'm still working, your revenge will be taking money out of my pocket. I will call you a leech and a looter and will be correct in doing so.
No, you are wrong in calling him a leech. He entered into a contract with the gov against his will, as I was forced to do, when he started working.
A certain amount was stolen from him over the years and he was promised a certain amount would be stolen form others to reimburse him.
He and I didn't design the f*cking system, didn't elect to participate in the f*cking system, and you have no right calling those those that were stolen from earlier leeches.
Grow up or go away.
Really!? Show me the contract. Tell me how much is in your Social Security account that is owed to you. Further, show me the portion of the Constitution that granted the Federal Government or any of its agencies the authority to enter into such an agreement with you.
A certain amount was stolen from him over the years and he was promised a certain amount would be stolen from others to reimburse him.
So, a little bit (actually a lot) of stealing is OK just like a little bit of socialism is OK!?
Thieves, looters, and leeches are what they are no matter who they hire as their agents to commit the actual theft. That you would excuse such a system so long as you get what you think is owed to you - what you believe you are entitled to - just proves the point made by the author of this article. Socialism permeates America, the Republican Party, and even Free Republic.
He and I didn't design the f*cking system, didn't elect to participate in the f*cking system, and you have no right calling those those that were stolen from earlier leeches. Grow up or go away.
Leech. Looter. Thief.
Exactly. There is nothing wrong with "having all things in common" as long as it is voluntary and that one can cash out at any time.
Charity is good also. Forced charity is not, it is theft. To legally plunder my paycheck to provide handouts to someone deemed to be "needy" is still plunder.
Nope, I made that same observation 40 years ago.
Sorry, but your money was and is immediately spent by the looters and leeches.
So what? You think I had a choice? It was forced from me, as for you.
Saying that you will get out of it what you put in to it is like saying that you're going to go hold up a liquor store to make up for money a burglar stole from your house.
Bull. The gov stole from me and promised a pay back, if I lived.
The money is being stolen from working Americans. If you retire while I'm still working, your revenge will be taking money out of my pocket.
As mine was taken out of my pocket to pay for my grandfather & his peers, - who never paid in a dime. But then, your grandparents don't collect SS I assume. Correct?
Big deal in any case, as you seem to think you're the only one who's been fleeced.
I will call you a leech and a looter and will be correct in doing so.
Get a grip. - You wouldn't do it in a bar, to my face, so you shouldn't do it here. You're being irrational.
When live-ins would be charged and hauled to jail for adultery.
Keep your dumb ass false moralism to yourself.
With payment in blood.
Those that made stole the money from him and made the "promise" had no real authority to do so. Unfortunately, this leaves a very real quandary since digging up FDR and selling off his gold teeth or any jewelry with which he might be buried wouldn't make the slightest dent in Social Security's systemic debt [might still be a good idea, but . . .]
Essentially, the issue is this: the government has promised people more money than it has or can morally claim title to. Someone is going to have to pay the price for the government's malfeasance. The only equitable thing I can see to do is divvy up the "pain" among workers and retirees.
It is a direct, and correlated phenomenon.
The rise of the social spending started with giving the vote to women. It's documented.
They have proven themselves, on average, of being unfit for the responsibility of living in a Republic. (Which is why we ain't one now...)
Of course, if one had a legal structure where it was impossible for legislators to transfer money from one person to another, it wouldn't matter what woman wanted.
They don't make history books and voting records where you're from?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.