New number ... 7.5 % !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that's a fallacy. Obama would've won this election, regardless. Even if all of the votes were for Romney and not Johnson, he still would've lost.

 

Yep, it was and is democrats turn at the trough. Once it is established that Obama was a dismal failure, republicans will be the rich/elites darling again. As long as they can keep the peons arguing over mindless issues, the two party scam will continue to prevail, and nothing will change on the teeter totter of American politics.

 

I believe we should stop playing shell games with Statism and actually solve simple poverty in our republic.

 

The Green or Libertarian. I agree with some positions of both, the overall position of neither.

- - - Updated - - -

Could be, this time.

 

It's all about maintaining civil order, coupled with the seduction of the socialist Welfare State: DEPENDENCY -- it's the very life's blood of Socialism, Iriemon. Romney had a fighting chance until some lousy creep Libocrat sycophant leaked out a TRUE statement that Romney made about so many people in this country being on Uncle Sam's sugar-teat. Ooooh! Now what do you suppose that inspired in those who suck on the sugar-teat, or think they might be sucking on said sugar-teat sometime in the near future...? Of COURSE Obama won... how could he have lost...?

We both know how unfair Bernanke's manipulation of the economy is -- "rescuing" the criminal bastards who were deemed "too big to fail", and this fraud-"recovery" the Fed has propped up and nourished is not for the benefit of people who suck on the sugar-teat. The Dow rides above 15,000 right now for one reason, and one reason only -- BEN SHALOM BERNANKE, and his reckless, irresponsible method of pulling trillions of worthless dollars out of thin air -- and -- thrusting us into levels of debt that we can never get out of except by declaring default and staging a currency reissue.

You're a saver, too? The best deal I could get on a 12-month CD after last November's disastrous election was from Security Service Federal Credit Union, at 1.15%. Surely even you would agree that no matter how the government and the Fed. cook the books our real rate of inflation has been much higher than that. I'm losing money on money I save -- if you're not, please tell me which savings institution I should open an account with! Sure, my investments are doing better than that -- hell, nearly anything else would be better than 1.15%. But, like most people, I'm not too anxious to put a lot of money into a fraud-balloon stock market that the "insiders" may just decide to blow up tomorrow. Who knows what the hell those people are actually thinking?

 

I would quibble that it is not a welfare-state dependency, but a warfare-state dependency and that form of entitlement. haven't you wondered why we can't even get rid of a useless drug war that can never work through forms of Prohibition?

 

Any viable suggestions as to how to accomplish this feat?

 

Very easily and simply and with existing legal and physical infrastructure.

 

I agree with you, I think. Here in Colorado, we voted to legalize the recreational use (and taxation) of marijuana, and I voted for this, even though I'm an arch-Conservative (on economic issues).

There's EARNED entitlements, like Social Security, and there's UNEARNED handout-welfare. We need to leave the EARNED entitlements alone and cut the UNEARNED welfare crap to the bone for all who are capable of working.

 

I would agree with you, if and only if, you also solve for a natural rate of unemployment engendered by capitalism.

 

Can you be more vague?

- - - Updated - - -

Unless jobs are created, you better be prepared to open lots more prisons.

 

There is nothing vague about existing legal and physical infrastructure.

 

OK what laws are in place to keep poverty at bay? If anything they sustain the situation.

 

A federal doctrine regarding employment at will and State at-will employment laws already exist. There is no basis to deny and disparage the privileges and immunities of the least wealthy regarding recourse to a social safety net when corporate welfare and that form of "social" safety net has even paid multimillion dollar bonuses to the wealthiest in our republic.

 

At will laws just mean that the employee can quit for any reason or no reason at all, and the employer can fire them for any reason or no reason at all, AKA right to work states. How does that eliminate poverty? If anything it assures that having seniority means nothing, and an employer can keep you on until you ask for a raise, then they can fire you and hire somebody else.

 

You are right, merely the rule of men may never solve poverty; however, our Founding Fathers assured us that the rule law can secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

It is in regard to unemployment compensation on that same at-will basis, but without that extra-legal, denial and disparagement of the privileges and immunities of the least wealthy in our republic.

 

Where have you been? The Great Recession ended (officially) by mid-2009. Today, the unemployment rate is down, the number of people employed increases. Now we need to cut all the stupendous amounts of welfare crap, put unemployment benefits back to about 26-weeks, and get on with life! I mean -- did President Wonderful accomplish all this, or didn't he? If "Obamanomics" is such a stunning success, then why is half the population still living off welfare handouts? It can only be because they've been sitting on their fat, lazy asses for so long that they don't know how to do anything anymore, except making sure to always vote for socialist Democrats. If so, that's their problem, not that of the United States or its taxpayers....

 

I would agree with you but for an inefficient, natural rate of unemployment engendered by capitalism.

 

OK, I get the passive-aggressive evasion "tactic". In the spirit of dialectic revelation, if nothing else, at least tell us all what this "natural rate of unemployment engendered by capitalism" IS. If there were no capitalism, there would be no industry, commerce, manufacturing, or wealth-building beyond the level of primative agrarian "stone-age" tribal confederations. There would be no jobs... or do you really not get that? Do you want to return to the grinding poverty and injustice of the Feudal Era?

But, please, go ahead and tell us what political/economic idea you are dancing around, with specifics, and facts, please. If yours is nothing but another socialist fairyland reverie in which half the population sucks a parasite's living off the labor and effort of the other half, be honest enough to tell us that, too....

 

Wow, dude. Have you taken a psychology course, lately? Did you miss the progression from third world to first world in your history studies?

 

Yeah... I doubted you'd have anything to say with any substance to it, and I wasn't disappointed. Fine. Let's just agree that marijuana should be legalized and taxed, order a pizza, roll a joint, and have a nice day.

Comrade Obama is making sure that your side is provided with all the welfare and government support "services" it wants, and, that my side is going to have to pay for all of it -- forever and ever. In your mind, that is a much more fair thing than "capitalism", and since you won't even discuss the specifics of your viewpoint, you win the day, courtesy of our socialist regime. More than anything, you'd better hope that this government gravy-train lasts all your lifetime or you will starve, and that would be especially cruel after you've gotten the marihoochie "munchies"....

 

My comments are more relevant than yours. Third world AnCaps, second world command economies, and first world mixed economies is the point I am getting at.

 

Hmmm... maybe if I smoke a little bit more of this stuff and get totally couch-locked, some of what you're advocating as a replacement for mere "capitalism" will start to make sense....

 

Don't quit on me now, Iriemon! I'm serious as I can be... if you know of a place where I can deposit guaranteed savings in any American institution for one year and bet better than a 1.15% return on my money, I really do want to know! I'm not talking about these fly-by-night "holding companies" -- I mean savings institutions that are guaranteed by the Federal Government. There isn't one is there...? And that's exactly what Bernanke's plan is -- to flush all the money out of safe havens and into the gamblers' ultimate casino -- the stock market! But I don't really care about Chairman Ben anymore. Surely, by now we ALL know what he's up to. I just want to know where you would get a CD right now.

 

It is my anti-hypocrisy medication and it works quite well as far as I am concerned since it also helps me resort to the fewest fallacies.

In any Case, capitalism has already been "replaced" by socialism and mixed market economies.