|
On April 28 2009 03:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 02:34 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 01:46 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 01:19 only_human89 wrote:
socialism sucks it promotes laziness and gives free handouts fuck that
ahahahahahahh What if you suddenly lost your job and home and shit? Would you just go live in the street if you wouldn't get another job? Socialism is fair. Without any socialism, it would be shit <_> Have fun if you get sick in your country. go and pay your ass off. meanwhile i enjoy my free healthcare Why should I have to pay for someone's welfare because they lost they're job and home? I know it helps people less fortunate but there isn't an unlimited supply of money in the world. People should be able to keep what they earn and i always give back. And there certainly isn't a surplus of jobs right now. The Federal government is printing money out of thin air, it is basically counterfeit. The dollar is going to crash if this keeps up, or its going to screw over countries like China who are heavily in ivested in the U.S. dollar. Why should you not? Are you that selfish? Don't you care of people, only yourself and maybe your family and friends? Have you ever done any charity or even thought about it? Do you think its they are poor? And how did you expect them to get away from being poor if they aren't given money? And hwere else could government get the money if not from taxes? Also you would be paying your own healthcare, schools, school food(thats also free here :>) And everyone else would too. i mean, one for all, all for one. Except the poor-asses can't really pay much taxes because tehy are fucking poor.
ALERT: Godwin's Law [[ In a slightly amusing form ]]:
Read what the dude from finald wrote. Yeah for selflessness right? Or at least, we must tame the rabid, individualist ego for the sake of the poor and crippled! Or, as a noble man once said,
"It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparions with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole...that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual...This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture...The basic attitude from which such activity arises, we call -- to distinguish it from egoism and selfishness -- idealism. By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men."
-Adolf Hitler
"Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State."
--Benito Mussolini
We must let the europeans continue preaching their collectivism. But this time, with an important difference -- this time the United States shouldn't send millions of its own to face death to save a savage continent which, from the looks of things, will never learn.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 28 2009 03:44 MuR)Ernu wrote:
Is money really that important to you?
Are they bad people if they aren't interested in getting rich or something?
Also don't you think they have problems? They might be lazy, but there is probably a reason for it, i mean, not too many WANT to be unemployed.
Also here in finland we have so that if you don't even try, your welfare gets reduced.
What if some relative of yours gets depressed or something and drops from school and stuff.
Should they not get payed and just die away or something?
we have responsibility over each others.
There is a difference between responsibility and a welfare entitlement. The current tax system is welfare entitlement. If you want real responsibility have people post their dire situations to the public and ask for charity. People that are fortunate will step up and pay for their less fortunate neighbors.
|
On April 28 2009 03:44 MuR)Ernu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 03:29 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 03:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 02:34 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 01:46 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 01:19 only_human89 wrote:
socialism sucks it promotes laziness and gives free handouts fuck that
ahahahahahahh What if you suddenly lost your job and home and shit? Would you just go live in the street if you wouldn't get another job? Socialism is fair. Without any socialism, it would be shit <_> Have fun if you get sick in your country. go and pay your ass off. meanwhile i enjoy my free healthcare Why should I have to pay for someone's welfare because they lost they're job and home? I know it helps people less fortunate but there isn't an unlimited supply of money in the world. People should be able to keep what they earn and i always give back. And there certainly isn't a surplus of jobs right now. The Federal government is printing money out of thin air, it is basically counterfeit. The dollar is going to crash if this keeps up, or its going to screw over countries like China who are heavily in ivested in the U.S. dollar. Why should you not? Are you that selfish? Don't you care of people, only yourself and maybe your family and friends? Have you ever done any charity or even thought about it? Do you think its they are poor? And how did you expect them to get away from being poor if they aren't given money? And hwere else could government get the money if not from taxes? Also you would be paying your own healthcare, schools, school food(thats also free here :>) And everyone else would too. i mean, one for all, all for one. Except the poor-asses can't really pay much taxes because tehy are fucking poor. How am I being selfish if I earned what i make? And what says i can't give back to the community without the government telling me i have to? There are too many lazy uneducated people in America that expect a free hand out from the government just because they decided to drop out of high school and quit their job every month. And those handouts are not free they are paid by the people that actually work for a living and have their own family to support. If your so righteous the next time you think about buying that computer game you want so badly think again. Give that money away to someone who didnt earn it. Is money really that important to you? Are they bad people if they aren't interested in getting rich or something? Also don't you think they have problems? They might be lazy, but there is probably a reason for it, i mean, not too many WANT to be unemployed. Also here in finland we have so that if you don't even try, your welfare gets reduced. What if some relative of yours gets depressed or something and drops from school and stuff. Should they not get payed and just die away or something? we have responsibility over each others.
You speak as if providing social welfare comes at no cost. If you've ever taken a basic economics class, you would know that there is no such thing as a free lunch. For every free check up you get, somebody else is paying through taxes. You argue that this is "fair" and that you want to take care of other people in society, but you are doing it at the cost of your future children. The government is ALWAYS more inefficient than the free market and if the government is running the show, redistribution of resources is going to be inefficient. Each dollar that the government takes for its programs is a dollar taken away out of the hands of an individual who would invest that into the market in some way or another, but the difference is that each dollar the government spends is inefficient. The reason for this is that democratic governments aren't governed by the basic tenet of greed. It is governed by getting votes. Greed creates inefficiency, lobbying for votes doesn't. Plus you toss in all the beuracratic costs of the government and you compound the inefficiency. Granted, there are immaterial externalities in government programs but I am not talking the complete lack of government--I am talking about the balance of private markets and government spending within a reasonable range. The case of many of the scandinavian countries is almost to the extreme when it comes to taxation. The only reason why these extremely socialist countries are even surviving is because they are small countries and they can function on markets dominated mostly by one or two sectors--scandinavian countries have relatively little diversity in their markets compared to the US. US would never be able to survive under such conditions because we are an influential economic power.
|
Poor people are the ones who actually can get us out of this mess. Microfinance in India, China, etc. is seen as a way to get economy back up and stable again in some years to come. Believed to be the next big thing.
Although yes, I hate the people who get benefits for doing absolutely nothing. They should clean streets, beaches, plant trees or be beneficial in some other way. No work means no food and no benefits is pretty fair. Also its better to get them back into society with that case of making them work for benefits. They don't become bums who can't work anymore.
|
On April 28 2009 03:44 MuR)Ernu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 03:29 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 03:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 02:34 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 01:46 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 01:19 only_human89 wrote:
socialism sucks it promotes laziness and gives free handouts fuck that
ahahahahahahh What if you suddenly lost your job and home and shit? Would you just go live in the street if you wouldn't get another job? Socialism is fair. Without any socialism, it would be shit <_> Have fun if you get sick in your country. go and pay your ass off. meanwhile i enjoy my free healthcare Why should I have to pay for someone's welfare because they lost they're job and home? I know it helps people less fortunate but there isn't an unlimited supply of money in the world. People should be able to keep what they earn and i always give back. And there certainly isn't a surplus of jobs right now. The Federal government is printing money out of thin air, it is basically counterfeit. The dollar is going to crash if this keeps up, or its going to screw over countries like China who are heavily in ivested in the U.S. dollar. Why should you not? Are you that selfish? Don't you care of people, only yourself and maybe your family and friends? Have you ever done any charity or even thought about it? Do you think its they are poor? And how did you expect them to get away from being poor if they aren't given money? And hwere else could government get the money if not from taxes? Also you would be paying your own healthcare, schools, school food(thats also free here :>) And everyone else would too. i mean, one for all, all for one. Except the poor-asses can't really pay much taxes because tehy are fucking poor. How am I being selfish if I earned what i make? And what says i can't give back to the community without the government telling me i have to? There are too many lazy uneducated people in America that expect a free hand out from the government just because they decided to drop out of high school and quit their job every month. And those handouts are not free they are paid by the people that actually work for a living and have their own family to support. If your so righteous the next time you think about buying that computer game you want so badly think again. Give that money away to someone who didnt earn it. Is money really that important to you? Are they bad people if they aren't interested in getting rich or something? Also don't you think they have problems? They might be lazy, but there is probably a reason for it, i mean, not too many WANT to be unemployed. Also here in finland we have so that if you don't even try, your welfare gets reduced. What if some relative of yours gets depressed or something and drops from school and stuff. Should they not get payed and just die away or something? we have responsibility over each others.
Money? no. Keeping what i earn? yes, and the freedom to spend it how i want. But here's a thought. Since your so keen on the welfare system i may as well just quit my job and let someone else pay for me. because hey, if i dont have to work for a living why bother. Which also means i will have less and less money to do the things i enjoy. This intrestingly enough makes people less likely to want to help each other.
|
United States22883 Posts
|
On April 28 2009 04:11 only_human89 wrote:
jibbajibbajibbadurdurrdurrrrjibjibjib
The basis of a modern, western civilization is social democracy. Yes, social. The same beginning as in socialism. Socialism is there to account for the fact that every person has equal possibilities in life disregarding what happened before they were born, or were able to affect their situation themselves.
Its aim is to get the Government to provide basic infrastructure for everyone. The main points of emphasis of this infrastructure are:
-Healthcare for everyone. (hospitals, hygienic, nutrition, water, residence, etc for everyone)
-Logistics (roads, railways, electricity, communication networks, etc)
-Education (free education for everyone, disregarding socioeconomic status)
None of the aformenetioned points should be unavailable for anyone in a civilized country.
The aim for taxes is to maintain this for everyone in the future as well. The aim of progressive taxing is to make this fair and to reduce the gaps between socioeconomic classes. The aim of high inheritance tax (usually prevalent in systems which apply socialdemocracy) is that you don't want to stockpile fortune to one family, but rather spread it for future generations. IIRC Warren Buffet once said that removing inheritance tax is equivalent of letting the children of ex Olympic Winners compete against eachother after their parents have died, instead of choosing those who are best in their trade to compete against eachother.
So in short, the social aspects provide the basic infrastructure on top of which free, service based trade is built upon. It makes the country better as a whole.
Then on top of that you have Democracy. The people have the way to effect the decisions of the Government, and to decide where the tax money is going. This is not possible with totalitarist two party systems, but requires the participation of several parties in order to represent the public's multitude of views properly.
Puuh, I don't have time to finish this essay, but in short Human89 -- open your eyes, read more, rip apart the paper bag and see the real world. I might some day finish this essay regarding the dreaded 'socialism' you're so afraid of.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 28 2009 04:32 Kusimuumi wrote:
The basis of a modern, western civilization is social democracy. Yes, social. The same beginning as in socialism. Socialism is there to account for the fact that every person has equal possibilities in life disregarding what happened before they were born, or were able to affect their situation themselves.
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government.
The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
|
On April 28 2009 02:45 only_human89 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 02:21 Railz wrote:On April 28 2009 02:17 only_human89 wrote:
US isn't capitalist man we have a mixed economy. we just happen to be less socialist than most other countries. The government is what goes and screws everything up for everyone. I am not an anarchist, but it shouldn't shouldnt be too much too ask for proper representation of the people. The federal Government does'nt even have to tell us what they spend our tax money on. But they do tell us http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/There is proper representation of the people - problem for you is, the the majority doesn't represent what you like. That is the err of democracy I suppose. yeah but i would rather be free and live with the consequences than as a slave to society and world opinion. Also Congress wrote Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson a blank check for $700 billion, which amounts to a quarter of the entire federal budget last year. It is unconstitutional for Congress to delegte its power to the excutive branch. The guy has the power to directly intervene in our nation's economy.
Well for one, The executive branch was never constitutional assigned with the safeguard of the economy, congress was given that task - Congress made created the faux check for Mr. Paulson who in turn did exactly what the his job entitle is - enacting congresses 'advice'. He couldn't have acted had our elected reps not given him the green light. Just how a president can't formally declare war, the Treasury Secretary can't order a new budget - Congress assigns a budget.
|
On April 28 2009 04:40 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 04:32 Kusimuumi wrote:
The basis of a modern, western civilization is social democracy. Yes, social. The same beginning as in socialism. Socialism is there to account for the fact that every person has equal possibilities in life disregarding what happened before they were born, or were able to affect their situation themselves.
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government. The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
Liberalism is a constantly changing term. Conservatives now are under the belief that the old liberal ways are the conservative ways. Liberalism is usually designated with unknown territory of governing and social order.
And the 20th century is not a direct democracy like Athens might've been. Athens had only the land owning white men in power - and only those who cared about politics. Athens was in a constant state of oligarchy, as was every Greek polis.
Americans at least want to head back to state and city government, which runs on social democracy but on a much more managable scale then what a social democracy would have on the federal level.
|
On April 28 2009 03:53 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 03:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 02:34 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 01:46 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 01:19 only_human89 wrote:
socialism sucks it promotes laziness and gives free handouts fuck that
ahahahahahahh What if you suddenly lost your job and home and shit? Would you just go live in the street if you wouldn't get another job? Socialism is fair. Without any socialism, it would be shit <_> Have fun if you get sick in your country. go and pay your ass off. meanwhile i enjoy my free healthcare Why should I have to pay for someone's welfare because they lost they're job and home? I know it helps people less fortunate but there isn't an unlimited supply of money in the world. People should be able to keep what they earn and i always give back. And there certainly isn't a surplus of jobs right now. The Federal government is printing money out of thin air, it is basically counterfeit. The dollar is going to crash if this keeps up, or its going to screw over countries like China who are heavily in ivested in the U.S. dollar. Why should you not? Are you that selfish? Don't you care of people, only yourself and maybe your family and friends? Have you ever done any charity or even thought about it? Do you think its they are poor? And how did you expect them to get away from being poor if they aren't given money? And hwere else could government get the money if not from taxes? Also you would be paying your own healthcare, schools, school food(thats also free here :>) And everyone else would too. i mean, one for all, all for one. Except the poor-asses can't really pay much taxes because tehy are fucking poor. ALERT: Godwin's Law [[ In a slightly amusing form ]]: Read what the dude from finald wrote. Yeah for selflessness right? Or at least, we must tame the rabid, individualist ego for the sake of the poor and crippled! Or, as a noble man once said, "It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparions with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole...that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual...This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture...The basic attitude from which such activity arises, we call -- to distinguish it from egoism and selfishness -- idealism. By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men." -Adolf Hitler "Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State." --Benito Mussolini We must let the europeans continue preaching their collectivism. But this time, with an important difference -- this time the United States shouldn't send millions of its own to face death to save a savage continent which, from the looks of things, will never learn.
To be completely fair and honest - Hitler managed to bring a near third world nation back to being a super power in a sort time frame - what he did after was his own doing. You could say that it was because of government spending on the military, but that would be reinforcing what the United States has already been doing. The difference between the United States and 1940 Germany is our nationalistic pride rests on the Constitution, not the state.
|
On April 28 2009 01:51 Luhh wrote:What do you call a US "democrat" in "insert random scandinavian socialist country"? + Show Spoiler +- A rightwing extremist.[
fixed
|
transferring 1 dollar to the poor actually takes 2 dollars from the hands of the rich
|
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government.
The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
Your understanding of history is lacking, and your vauge threat of looming disaster makes me feel like im watching fox.
Please elaborate on your post, esp the liberalism part.
Just seems that there are some idiotsin thread who believe the poor want to be/choose to be/deserve to be poor.
Some of these people honestly belief that the individual is so powerfull it can overcome any obstacle such as illness, low SES or lack of education , which is laughable but typically american.
|
On April 28 2009 05:01 Railz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 03:53 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On April 28 2009 03:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 02:34 only_human89 wrote:On April 28 2009 01:46 MuR)Ernu wrote:On April 28 2009 01:19 only_human89 wrote:
socialism sucks it promotes laziness and gives free handouts fuck that
ahahahahahahh What if you suddenly lost your job and home and shit? Would you just go live in the street if you wouldn't get another job? Socialism is fair. Without any socialism, it would be shit <_> Have fun if you get sick in your country. go and pay your ass off. meanwhile i enjoy my free healthcare Why should I have to pay for someone's welfare because they lost they're job and home? I know it helps people less fortunate but there isn't an unlimited supply of money in the world. People should be able to keep what they earn and i always give back. And there certainly isn't a surplus of jobs right now. The Federal government is printing money out of thin air, it is basically counterfeit. The dollar is going to crash if this keeps up, or its going to screw over countries like China who are heavily in ivested in the U.S. dollar. Why should you not? Are you that selfish? Don't you care of people, only yourself and maybe your family and friends? Have you ever done any charity or even thought about it? Do you think its they are poor? And how did you expect them to get away from being poor if they aren't given money? And hwere else could government get the money if not from taxes? Also you would be paying your own healthcare, schools, school food(thats also free here :>) And everyone else would too. i mean, one for all, all for one. Except the poor-asses can't really pay much taxes because tehy are fucking poor. ALERT: Godwin's Law [[ In a slightly amusing form ]]: Read what the dude from finald wrote. Yeah for selflessness right? Or at least, we must tame the rabid, individualist ego for the sake of the poor and crippled! Or, as a noble man once said, "It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparions with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole...that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual...This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture...The basic attitude from which such activity arises, we call -- to distinguish it from egoism and selfishness -- idealism. By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men." -Adolf Hitler "Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State." --Benito Mussolini We must let the europeans continue preaching their collectivism. But this time, with an important difference -- this time the United States shouldn't send millions of its own to face death to save a savage continent which, from the looks of things, will never learn. To be completely fair and honest - Hitler managed to bring a near third world nation back to being a super power in a sort time frame - what he did after was his own doing. You could say that it was because of government spending on the military, but that would be reinforcing what the United States has already been doing. The difference between the United States and 1940 Germany is our nationalistic pride rests on the Constitution, not the state.
Railz, note that in your reply you think of things in terms of "bring[ing] a third world nation back to being a super power in a s[h]ort time frame" -- Precisely my point. You don't see individuals -- you see the state. While you presently may shun from the overt use of violence to achieve your concept of noble ends, your answer reveals to me that you are just another thug trying to rule the strongest gang.
|
On April 28 2009 05:14 AdamBanks wrote:Show nested quote +
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government.
The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
Your understanding of history is lacking, and your vauge threat of looming disaster makes me feel like im watching fox. Please elaborate on your post, esp the liberalism part. Just seems that there are some idiotsin thread who believe the poor want to be/choose to be/deserve to be poor. Some of these people honestly belief that the individual is so powerfull it can overcome any obstacle such as illness, low SES or lack of education , which is laughable but typically american.
The term "typically american" is so typically Canadian.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On April 28 2009 05:01 Railz wrote:
To be completely fair and honest - Hitler managed to bring a near third world nation back to being a super power in a sort time frame - what he did after was his own doing. You could say that it was because of government spending on the military, but that would be reinforcing what the United States has already been doing. The difference between the United States and 1940 Germany is our nationalistic pride rests on the Constitution, not the state.
It is what the German government stopped doing that brought Germany's economy back. They stopped printing money, shored up their taxes to cover their all their spending, and got people to work again (instead of subsidizing striking workers.)
I'm not sure that the US nationalistic pride rests on the Constitution instead of the state. There would have to be a lot more federalism if US nationalistic pride were to place in the Constitution instead of the state. The US federal government has already redefined freedom to allow for their abuse of the citizenry.
|
On April 27 2009 20:31 pyrogenetix wrote:
government influencing media happens -everywhere-
i just find it funny when people scream in my face that china controls the media and then think that the news they get is 100% unbiased information.
get real son. spies are everywhere, everyone wants oil and no one wants to shell out money for renewable energy sources. it's that simple.
Its not so hard to look professional and unbiased while being unprofessional and biased, but every news station that I have ever watched seems incapable of doing it.
Its like, their audiences want them to be partisan bastards that spoon feeds crap to them, specially now that anything different would be confirming that they have been mindless bums regarding what info they get all these years and any form of media that is completely honest with you is gonna be labeled into something that scares the stupid people away.
|
On April 28 2009 05:20 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 05:14 AdamBanks wrote:
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government.
The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
Your understanding of history is lacking, and your vauge threat of looming disaster makes me feel like im watching fox. Please elaborate on your post, esp the liberalism part. Just seems that there are some idiotsin thread who believe the poor want to be/choose to be/deserve to be poor. Some of these people honestly belief that the individual is so powerfull it can overcome any obstacle such as illness, low SES or lack of education , which is laughable but typically american. The term "typically american" is so typically Canadian.
I agree, but you have to admit the term typically canadian doesnt seem as offensive....infact that goes for most things containing the term Canadian.
|
On April 28 2009 05:25 AdamBanks wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2009 05:20 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On April 28 2009 05:14 AdamBanks wrote:
The basis for Western Civilization is Liberalism - free speech, free press, free religion, contract law, low taxes. The people studied the democracy of Athens and thought it a horrible system of government.
The development of the 20th century is reverting to social democracy. And just like in Athens, it is heading towards disaster.
Your understanding of history is lacking, and your vauge threat of looming disaster makes me feel like im watching fox. Please elaborate on your post, esp the liberalism part. Just seems that there are some idiotsin thread who believe the poor want to be/choose to be/deserve to be poor. Some of these people honestly belief that the individual is so powerfull it can overcome any obstacle such as illness, low SES or lack of education , which is laughable but typically american. The term "typically american" is so typically Canadian. I agree, but you have to admit the term typically canadian doesnt seem as offensive....infact that goes for most things containing the term Canadian.
True, I don't think offensive. I just think small, weak and angry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
