Democracy

Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Robert Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
1,387
Reaction score
0
Location
Homosassa, FL
Read this today.



"A Democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesses from the Public Treasury. From the moment that realization takes hold, history shows that the majority of the people will always vote for the candidate promising the most goodies from the Public Treasury."



"Once Democracy goes down this road things never end well."
 
I've come across this a couple times. Can't remember who is credited with it. Always saddens me because I do believe this has happened in this country and it is not attributable exclusively to one party or the other.
 
Indeed. The Founding Fathers feared democracy and wisely sought to establish a Constitutional Republic. Our country was commonly referred to as a republic until the early 20th century during the Progressive movement and the Wilson administration. That's when the word "democracy" began to be used in reference to our form of government.



One of my favorites is:
In a democracy, two wolves and a sheep take a majority vote on what's for supper. In a constitutional republic, the wolves are forbidden on voting on what's for supper, and the sheep are well armed.
 
The middle class can only exist when people have money to pay wages to them instead of to taxes to pay for those who refuse to work.
 
A Democracy can only exist with a middle class. Bring back the middle class, and then the USA will be healthy again



Once again, a cut/pasted rhetorical, propagandist talking point. First: Our government is not a democracy, it's a constitutional republic. Go back to Civics class and educate yourself on different forms of government. Then, go back to History class and study the writings of the Founding Fathers and learn why they feared and despised democracy.



Second: Assuming for a millisecond that the rhetorical, propagandist talking implying that the middle class has "disappeared"--define "middle class". Then, offer up reasoned, thoughtful, sensible ideas on how to "bring back" the supposed vanished middle class.



The middle class can only exist when people have money to pay wages to them instead of to taxes to pay for those who refuse to work.



Only Hugh can clarify this statement, but what I get from it is that he's referring to the what now seems to be perpetual extension of unemployment insurance. What was originally a 26-week temporary program intended to provide recipients with assistance in searching for a job has now become just another welfare program. If recipients continue to receive "benefits" longer than 26 weeks, (many now longer than 99 weeks), it removes incentive to look for employment. And if employers have to continue to pay the unemployment tax, it's that much less capital that they can invest in growing their business and job creation.
 
The original quotes posted by Redfish do summarize many well many of the things that seem wrong with America today. There was a time where people were not looking to get some liberal gift from the government. Instead, what they wanted was to work for themselves, provide for themselves, and for government to make that possible (the working and the providing) in the forms of making sure there were infrastructure and national security.



Somewhere along the way many figured out that they could use government first as a safety net, and then as the primary platform for their secure footing...in other words, government could provide for them. That providing came in many forms, with most ended in nice sounding words like: care, fare, aid.



Paying for those that have not, and for those that care-not to work for what they needed (then, even worse, merely what they wanted) became pretty much assumed. Those that received started to feel entitled.



These things have hurt America, immensely.



TJR

 
Cut and paste?? Propaganda?? Both sides of the political coin have asserted, over and over recently, about the middle class suffering. It is fact. I didnt copy and paste anything Trac.



I ask again... are you saying that people who refuse to work, are the reason that the middle class has disappeared?



You can answer this too Train Trac. A simple yes or no might work.



By the way.. job creation is SOLEY the biproduct of demand. Companies (big and small) do not hire people to be kind...they hire because they want to stay in business, or grow thier businesses. (to make money) If the companies arent hiring at the moment...they must have plenty of cash to go around.



:banghead:



 
A simple yes or no might work.



This coming from Frank that refuses to answer a "yes or no" question.



If the companies arent hiring at the moment...they must have plenty of cash to go around.



So you are saying companies are not hiring because they have cash? Explain that.

 
Cut and paste?? Propaganda?? Both sides of the political coin have asserted, over and over recently, about the middle class suffering. It is fact. I didnt copy and paste anything Trac.



Yes, it is propaganda and rhetoric. I agree with your assertion that it's used by both sides of the aisle. Politicians of all stripes like to use it to whip the electorate up into a frenzy, who then call for "gov't to do something". When in reality, gov't should do less. Gov't should get out of the way and let the economy fix itself.



I ask again... are you saying that people who refuse to work, are the reason that the middle class has disappeared?



You can answer this too Train Trac. A simple yes or no might work.



Sorry, but there's not a simple answer to this question, because you're making a blanket assertion that there is no longer a "middle class" in America without defining "middle class". Define "middle class", and then illustrate with verifiable data your assertion that the middle class has "disappeared"; because frankly I don't believe it.



As for the first part of your question,
are you saying that people who refuse to work



I would say yes, there are some folks who do indeed refuse to work, so long as they continue to receive "benefits" in the form of Unemployment Insurance or other gov't assistance. A few years ago, I worked in the local state unemployment office as a claims processor. If you've ever filed a UI claim, you know that a stipulation of receiving benefits is that you have be actively searching for work during the time you're collecting UI. Claimants are also required to document this search and submit it to the UI office when they certify for benefits every two weeks. The validation requirements for this work search are very vague. Claimants often write down things like "looked at newspaper classified ads", and that counted as looking for work. So it didn't take those of us working in the UI office long to figure out that some folks simply went through the motions to keep claiming UI benefits rather than actually find employment. And with UI benefits now having been extended from 26 to up to 99 weeks for several years now, lots of folks are indeed refusing to work, for many reasons such as: they would rather not work and just sit home and collect UI, they can't find a job that brings in more than UI so there's a financial incentive to not work, etc.



By the way.. job creation is SOLEY the biproduct of demand. Companies (big and small) do not hire people to be kind...they hire because they want to stay in business, or grow thier businesses. (to make money) If the companies arent hiring at the moment...they must have plenty of cash to go around.



Partially correct. But also, gov't should foster a climate friendly to business growth, which is not the case in many parts of the country right now; due to a number of reasons like excessive regulation and high corporate tax rates. Both of which drive up the cost of doing & growing business. A case in point can be found right here in the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of Illinois. Last year, the state passed one of the largest personal (67% increase) and corporate (45% increase) tax increases ever. As a result, several large corporations like Sears, Caterpillar, and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange threatened to leave Illinois. Fearing millions in lost revenue, the politicians in Springfield just last week passed a tax break Sears, Caterpillar and CME to get them to stay in the state. :banghead:



 
A treatise on how the private sector, not gov't has done more for growth of the "middle class" throughout the history of this country:

Middle class



By Neal Boortz



Yesterday on the program I had a truly ignorant caller try to tell me that it was the government that created the middle class. This man is, unfortunately, representative of a growing number of progs, libs and ignoranuses in this country. Just like Barack Obama, he believes that Americas greatness comes from government. America would be nothing if not for our magnificent government to fuel our prosperity and build the ideal society.



This growing mentality is disconcerting, to say the least. The American middle class was built on the individual pursuit of the American dream. The federal government exists solely to ensure that your pursuit of the American dream is not infringed upon by another individual or the state. It is not the job of the federal government to provide this American dream to you.



Now lets talk about the middle class. The truth is that there is no real definition of the middle class. Income wise, middle class Americans earn anywhere from $20,000 to $91,000 a year, give or take the economic times. The average salary is somewhere in the neighborhood of $48,000. A college education is usually associated with a middle class status. I read somewhere that the middle class tends to value independence, adherence to intrinsic standards, valuing innovation and respecting non-conformity. Whoever wrote that clearly does not subscribe to our callers theory of a middle class built by the government. Innovation, individualism, independence these are not words often associated with government.



The current economic climate has had its impact, but most middle class Americans are homeowners. Homeownership, as politicians throughout the years have tried to emphasize, has become synonymous with the American Dream. The recent housing bubble shows where government managed to mangle that dream by forcing banks to make loans to Americans who couldnt actually afford to be homeowners. Most middle class Americans can be found in urban centers and in suburbs, and most have two cars or more.



Lets take the concept of the suburb filled with subdivisions. This has also become synonymous with the middle class. If we subscribe to the callers theory, it would be the government that would have planned this concept of the suburb some may call this central planning. Libs and progs like Obama are a big fan of this concept because they believe that government knows best how to build communities. But it was a private citizen by the name of William Levitt who created the first subdivision in Long Island, New York in 1947. No one from the imperial federal government came to Long Island and declared that they had a plan to build communities for middle class Americans flooding to New York. Nope. Instead Mr. Levitt turned 4,000 acres of potato farms in Long Island into the largest privately planned housing project in America. Houses were built like an assembly line and tada! the subdivision was born.



Now why were workers flooding to urban places like New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and other places? Work. In the early 20th century, that work was mainly in factories. These were not government-owned factories. These were innovators who were trying to grow their business. The promise of government handouts isnt what drove the Industrial Revolution in America, which led to an explosion of income and population growth. It was an entrepreneurial spirit for innovation and business.



Take Henry Ford. He was a farm boy who became an engineer. As a young engineer working for Edison Illuminating Company he eventually worked his way up to Chief Engineer in 1893. This job afforded him the time and money to do personal experiments on the side on internal combustion engines. While he was not the first to conceptualize the automobile, he was the first to identify a market for it: the middle class. He saw the need for an affordable mode of transportation. He failed, not once but twice in his initial attempts to create a company to make automobiles. But he continued to pursue his goals. His real innovation came with the perfection of the assembly line and the concept of vertical integration. These were his ideas for ways to make his business better, to do things faster, to grow his business and his wealth and as a result he created thousands of jobs. It wasnt just his plants where jobs were needed. People were needed to create the parts and materials. People who lived and worked around the plants needed to be fed. They places to live. Construction workers were needed. They needed churches and schools and hospitals. Gas stations were necessary to fuel their new modes of transportation.



Do you see how this happens? There was no federal mandate. There was no central plan sent from Washington. There were no government incentives. Government did not build the middle class. The middle class was built by people like Henry Ford. He is just one example of the many Americans who were fueled by their individual pursuits to make a better life for themselves and their children. THATS what the American dream is all about.
 
Heres a copy and paste...from the U.S. Government no less. Enjoy Trac



Courtesy of George W. Bush and his "Ownership Society"



The middle-class in America is shriveling at an unthinkable rate, as a new study pulling from US Census data reveals that more families are finding themselves among the very poor.



A study this week out of Stanford University shows that only around 44 percent of families in America live in what the country considers middle-income neighborhoods, down from the 1970 statistic of 65 percent. At the same time, while only 15 percent of the country was grouped into either the lower- or upper-class four decades ago, that proportion has more than doubles with a third of America now in either end of the spectrum.



Such segregation is creating what the studys authors are calling the birth of a two-tiered society in the United States, as the proportion of those that are neither the haves nor have-nots shrinks and Americans are being bundled into either one or the other with little middle ground.



"We already kind of knew that segregation by income had been going up from 1970 to 2000, though I was struck by the magnitude of that increase," Professor Sean Reardon writes in his report. What his study reveals, however, is that the intensity of that increase was far greater than what experts had thought. "One of the striking findings in the report is that in 90 percent of metropolitan areas, income segregation went up in the 2000s."



While the upper-class obviously benefit from their economic standing, a growing lower-class group means a larger portion of Americans than before are often unable to make-ends meet. The study also notes that upper-class Americans are increasingly migrating into new areas either moving into the suburbs or gentrifying old areas creating clusters of land that the growing lower-class cannot afford to live in.





I have to also add that I think almost all of what Trac has posted is complete &*%%$&^T





 
I have family in positions to hire people. One of them requires low skill and well paying jobs ($25k+). By low skill, I mean no skill other than showing up. The other requirements are no felonies, pass a drug test and distribute food to the elderly and sweep hallways in an assisted living community (neither hospice nor nursing home). She spends hours every week making calls and conducting interviews. Would you like to guess the reason these jobs are perpetually unfilled?



"I just had to show that I am looking for a job." That, I swear to you on the Bible, is the most common answer she gets on the phone.



Sometimes an interview occurs. Sometimes a job is created. Then, they quit within weeks or days. Most just quit showing up and never answer phone calls. Others:



"I don't have time to work." (part time and full time positions available)

"This isn't much more than what I was MAKING but now I have to PAY for groceries."

"Can you say I left on good terms?"

"I don't need this ****."



These aren't anecdotal happenstances; this is weekly and perpetual for years.



You're asking me to defend the statement that there is something that has made the middle class disappear. The middle class is over their heads in debt; that is a social problem, not something created by any fictitious evil rich-people conspiracy. That also doesn't mean the middle class doesn't exist. Irresponsible, maybe, non-existent, no.
 
44 percent of families in America live in what the country considers middle-income neighborhoods



Statistics based on feelings is ridiculous. What is "considered"... That's funny.



But then, you quote "statistics" that claim 44% live in middle-income neighborhoods. Would you assert that these people only live in these neighborhoods, but are actually not middle class...you know, since it doesn't exist.



Also, Train Trac schooled you. Call it what you want, but you do not even know what kind of government we have. Start with Civics 101. Get a middle school text book. Define democracy. Define republic. These words should be in bold lettering. Come back when you've done your homework.
 
Heres a copy and paste...from the U.S. Government no less.



Frank, do you see the absurdity in your statement, and where's the link?



The middle-class in America is shriveling at an unthinkable rate, as a new study pulling from US Census data reveals that more families are finding themselves among the very poor.



Less than 15% of this country lives in poverty.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Top