So, employment in the private sector doesn't have any positive effects?
Do you believe in the free market, or do you feel that ALL employment should be government based, such as 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need'?
Republicans: I WARNED YOU.
- Thread starter Protectionist
- Start date
-
- Tags
- republicans warned
So, employment in the private sector doesn't have any positive effects?
Do you believe in the free market, or do you feel that ALL employment should be government based, such as 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need'?
The Marxist quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" has nothing to do with govt or private employment. It has only to do with distribution of wealth.
Sure employment in the private sector can have plenty of positive effects. Why do you ask ?
I believe in a limited free market. No market should be 100% unrestrained, as many tragic examples can attest (thalidomide, Vioxx, Ford Pinto, Chevy Corvair, etc)
Somewhere, someone in the GOP made the statement that deficits don't matter. Maybe Cheney? That is partially true, the economy and jobs should be a piority. Once the jobs are moving up, more taxes will be paid which will help lower the deficit. The deficit has been cut by one-trillion dollars by this administration. Obama turned the job market around from losing 750,000 jobs a month to gaining positive jobs numbers for some 32 months. We still need more. If the two jobs bills would be put on the floor by Boehner, we could have more. This man has done an amazing job in spite of the hateful GOP and their full intentions to bring the man down, regardless of the damage to the country. My thought, be freaking careful of the ditch you dig for your enemy, lest you fall in it. As for this muslim brotherhood crapola, he had four years to do whatever you think he was going to do, instead he was working hard to save the auto industry, keep the banks solvent and helping to establish health care. Now he wants to increase jobs, cut the deficit, and work on an immigration policy, also gun control. This bogey man shat is so old. Cheers.
Last edited:
I know what the saying means.
The reference was the government providing all the employment, and deciding what people should make, not as the 'private' market provides.
Republicans kept the House and there is no other economic system other then trickle down in free societies.
Frankly, Americans have been sold a raise taxes on the rich when more informed constituents know this isn't solving anything. Entitlements must be addressed and then a coherent and reasonable energy and economic policy need to be implemented. Yours is a political thread start with a motive behind it, when you're ready to discuss the issues, let us know.
Quit putting people to sleep with your talking points, thanks.
Even in a free country there are rules and laws, as well as those means used to enforce them. As you have decided to enter THIS country...you might wish to try to fit in.
Yet...seeming to be an unpleasant aspect of the flock, biting the shepherd, and pissing on the other sheep will certainly end poorly for the creature.
Everything you said to me, I say it right back to you (talking points, motive, agenda).
I stand behind the OP 100%, and really it can't be denied. The American people have long discarded the false notion of trickle down economics, and have come to embrace (so the polls say) >> Percolate Up economics generated by higher taxes on the rich, and govt jobs created (FOR AMERICANS, not foreigners), especially to fight illegal immigration, and thereby prevent massive welfare $$$ loss and massive remittances$$ loss.
Those ARE the issues (partially), and I'm discussing them right now.
Last edited:
Not at all. Just because he called for economic equality, that would make him an anarchist ? LOL. Sounds like you might define the overwhelming majority of Americans as "anarchists". Like Marx, they believe in equality AND attaining it through the income tax system, starting with tax raises on the rich, that's all.
http://www.capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/2292/americans-support-higher-taxes-really
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...t-americans-support-raising-taxes-on-wealthy/
He called for the dissolution of the state, so ya he was an anarchist. He wasn't an idiot about it (like the black hoody types you see in the news), he took a more libertarian stance calling for gov't to be shrunken to the point of obsolescence rather then eliminated out right but an anarchist he was. I wish Dirk was around, he (while not a Marxist) shares Marx's view on gov't and could explain it better then I can. I'm sure he'll reply to this post in about 6 months or so. :giggle:
I don't need Dirk (whoever he is) to explain it. I know as much about Marx and his policies I'll ever need to know. And wasn't it just the CAPITALIST state that he was calling for dissoution of ? (not necessarily a "state" per se).
In fact, by Marx's advice of having the income tax system redistribute wealth, and keep it equalized, it might appear Marx was OK with a state, as long as it was doing what he preferred. You can't have an income tax without a state.
Similar threads
