Glaucon

We are not obligated to help our neighbors in need, it is ok to let those suckers starve, be homeless and sick and we ill still be right ...and I don't mean just extreme right wing.

Glaucon

Sharia law????? How did you end up laying that on me? I don't even know what sharia law is. Do you get a lot of things like that confused? I am not into "pretty boys" and Allah is probably not all that great. Don't make thing up, it makes you sound foolish.

Blacksheep

Oh, that one got your panties in a bunch, huh? I kinda knew it would. You don't know what Sharia Law is? Really? Are you really that uneducated? Never mind. I believe you, I see the stuff you say.

But back to that young male goat, you really should have taken better care of it. Don't ever ask me for another one.

Winter Solstice Loc: Salt Lake City

This Country was founded when we adopted the Constitution of the United States. Not when Immigrants first started coming here. The Pilgrims may have tried community farming, so what? That has absolutely nothing to do with sharing the wealth.
There is not a single place in the Constitution where we are directed either to "share our wealth" or "give to the poor".
We do have a "moral" obligation to see that the hungry are fed and the naked are clothed. But the Government should Never Force Us to "Share Our Wealth". That is a personal obligation and not a National one.

Flyinhoss Loc: Texas

The government is charged with the responsibility to maintain a standing military to protect it's citizens from foreign invasion and a judiciary to resolve disputes among ourselves. Charity is the responsibility of local communities, churches, synagogues and mosques. Our Forefathers sought to limit the over-reach of government, via The Constitution, but career politicians, big business lobbies with special interest and Socialists have subverted and perverted the intent of that founding document.

WHAT WE OWE OUR NEIGHBORS & COUNTRYMEN IS CIVILITY and nothing more. Everything beyond civility, should be freely given, not taken by force of "BIG GOV".

Patty

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

It is not about giving or taking any thing. It is just about seeing every one has a fair chance to seek what others have.

Failing to see that is what is destroying the quality of life for most.

When to many are left with depending on your Civility, Civility fails.

Have you not notice the unrest taking place more & more every day.

Just as you have the right to self determination so have others. You do not like theirs & they do not like yours.

If common sense is lost all is lost.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beautifully said! You are absolutely correct. These are such simple concepts that reflect true freedom - but the political left refuses to grasp it because they WANT collectivism, but don't like the connotation that it is in fact STEALING.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Kenneth Biggs Loc: Nashville,Tennessee

FLOYD, I ,must agree with you!, the first words, are,''FREEDOM TO, AND, OR, RIGHT TO,LIVE!, KENNY1948.

JimMe

My Concern is:

That Our Fed Gov INCREASES OUR FED DEBT BY HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS EACH YEAR in Order to be Benevolent to the Poorer Citizens Without Decreasing Their Numbers At All... That The Fed Gov Doesn't EVER Look to TRULY "PAY-AS-THEY-GO"... That USA Citizens & USA Companies are Judiciously Ordered to "Pay-As-We-Go" & the Courts Have Attached Leans on Paychecks & Revenues to Pay Down Our Debts... That The Fed Gov NEVER HAS BEEN JUDGED THIS WAY...

This is My Concern...

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

An excellent point, Jim. It sorta negates the validity of government's actions toward its citizens, doesn't it. What I see it as is the one finger salute to honest citizens.

Blacksheep

Over $16 Trillion of our national debt is owed to us. The American public. Our government does a bond issue to raise money and we buy those bonds. I looked this up because I was wondering what would happen if we nationalized our debt the way banana republics have done in the past, and it would be the wealthy among us who would take the biggest hit.

However, that hit would be limited to the twice-yearly interest paid out to the bond holders and the face value of the bonds at maturity. The bonds are $1000 face value each and are sold at auction to the highest bidder, and have various maturities, at 2, 3, 5 or 10 years, or more.

This is money loaned by us to the Treasury and not money in circulation among us. It is instead used to finance the government, which puts some of it back into circulation and the rest goes for military or "other". So if this debt were nationalized, the Treasury would still have the money and the bonds would become worthless. That would put a lot of interest collectors out of business and would be a huge step toward "redistributing the wealth", which is exactly why I thought of the possibility.

Comment Loc: California

I will never admit to my reading just to torture you. :lol: :lol:

Comment Loc: California

Hehe! I am getin to ya. :lol: :lol:

CDM Loc: Florida

You keep repeating 'it's about seeing everyone has a fair chance to seek what others have'...But you refuse to define how that outrageously subjective concept is defined.

I asked you about this and you didn't answer.

Let me ask it another way...when, exactly and under what circumstance is an American robbed of the opportunity to fairly "seek what others have?" I really, really want to understand this from your perspective.

If you cannot articulate a definition and direct answer, your entire argument is fallacious at best and purposefully disingenuous at worst.

Without defining clearly how the alleged injustice occurs you are simply parroting an ancient and bovine liberal argument supporting massive taxation in a communistic welfare state.