Why don't you offer the actual words Ron Johnson used to accuse Sen. McConnell instead of putting your own words in his place then lambasting the senior member of the senate?

Paid now though. They just had to wait an extra couple of weeks. In all honesty, knowing the kind of money these government workers pull in, if they can't go for a couple of weeks without a paycheck then they have problems a lot bigger than anything I can fathom.

Name one.

Ha! No kidding. Just imagine if that money had been funneled into the southern border security system. Only another $17B to go. But no, they'd prefer to throw it away than secure the border. How self-effacing is that?

Why are you trying to insult me? Are you attempting to start some pathetic name-calling competition with me? I can do that but you might not like the outcome, it ain't pretty.

Name one.

She wants him to do well in spite of the 'resistance'. She predicted his election way back in 2016 to howling laughter on live TV. Didn't phase her one bit. What a woman!

Read the US Constitution, Article 2 Section 6, then understand how lame that statement is.

What $40B?

Serious question: The Federal government was partially shut down for more than a month; did anything change in your life as a result? Was there something that government does that you missed or just couldn't live without? Did you breathe a long sigh of relief when the government finally opened its doors again and welcomed you back into its loving arms?

I personally didn't miss a thing. My life carried on as always just like the government was still there, thousands of miles away, doing whatever it is that government does to make my life so much better than... Hmm. I don't know what, because my life doesn't seem to miss them when they're gone. Maybe they just weren't gone long enough. Maybe we should run a little experiment where government shuts down until we feel their absence and ask them back again.

How long do you suppose that might take?

As an aside, a quarter of the government's workforce (800,000 people) was either required to work unpaid or furloughed (PC speak for laid off). Can you imagine a private employer requiring employees to work without knowing when or if a paycheck was in the future? I'm sure there must be a word for that...

Also, did you know that the US Federal government is the largest single employer in the world? 3.2 million employees, and that does not include the military.

Here's a 'radical' idea. Add up all government expenses for the year and divide that by the number of taxpayers and that's the individual bill for each payer. Simple, quick and efficient. You don't get asked your tax bracket when you buy groceries, why should there be different levels of payment for the same government expense?

That would lean pretty heavily on the right to bear arms. A defenseless people is an easy target for an aspiring dictator. Again, just ask any Venezuelan. Back in 2012, Hugo Chavez's government said that the ultimate aim was to disarm all civilians. They're regretting their decision to play along with that little socialist ruse now.

I was educated in many places from a young age. We moved every two years and my education was a patchwork of different schools and approaches to education. Where were you educated?

As for the attribution of American wealth, I disagree entirely. No doubt there are many advantages to being blessed with natural resources and enjoying geographical convenience; without a free market those boons would be meaningless, just ask any starving Venezuelan what he thinks about all the oil wealth his government squandered while trying to impose its socialist utopia on the citizenry.


Do I? I don't recall mentioning any of those names lately but maybe my memory is finally giving up the ghost. Would you mind pointing put to me where I wrote even one of those names in the moderately recent past? I'll wait.


Again, the word 'leftist' is not in my lexicon. I simply don't view political positions from that 'left/right' paradigm. Here's a quick primer on a far more sensible viewpoint:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGL8CiUtXF0


I see. You think that the British form of 'democratic socialism' (an inherent oxymoron, by the way) is 'intelligent'. Have you heard of the British 'National Health Service'? It was hailed as the definitive answer to socialized medicine when the British Parliament passed the 'National Health Service Act 1946'. Well, it's 'changed' a little since then:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2318493/posts


I am not exactly an expert in things of an academic nature when referring to economics, but I can honestly make no sense of that.



Henry Ford understood something fundamental about free market economies; that the division of labor has benefits far beyond the production line. As Ludwig Von Mises famously said: "We owe the origin and development of human society and, consequently, of culture and civilization, to the fact that work performed under the division of labor is more productive than when performed in isolation." He took that to the next level.

That the buyer must be able to afford the product is a given in any transaction, not just in buying one of Henry Ford's 'Model T's. That Ford was able to design his assembly line in such a way as to multiply productivity when compared to his competitors allowed him to not only make his cars affordable but to pay his workers better than any of his contemporaries. He 'cornered the market', forcing his competitors to play catch-up, and making an absolute king's ransom in the meantime.

"You can have your car in any color you want, as long as it's black". Henry Ford.

As socialist ideas enjoy somewhat of a resurgence among young Democratic lawmakers and their liberal base in the U.S., a short recap of some of the 'successes' enjoyed by socialist policies in countries around the world:

The average Venezuelan has lost 24 pounds due to food shortages. More than 2 million people have fled the country, which was once the wealthiest in South America.

In 1929, Lenin’s successor Joseph Stalin led the total collectivization of farms – making them all government property. That sparked an all-out famine, during which millions starved to death.

Freedom House’s ranking of press freedoms states that “Cuba has the most repressive media environment in the Americas. ... The Cuban news media are owned and controlled by the state and the independent press is considered illegal.”

In the 1950s India followed the socialist creed and the state seized control of steel, mining, machine tools, water, telecommunications, insurance, and electrical plants. In the 1970s, India went further and added socialism to the country’s constitution, however, poverty remains rampant in India, where the average income per person is around $2,000 per year.

In socialist China in 1956, Chairman Mao Zedong announced a new policy of encouraging dissent and debate. As he put it: "The policy of letting a hundred flowers bloom, and a hundred schools of thought contend.” Anyone who spoke up publicly was punished and often sent to deadly forced labor camps. Mao later publicly boasted that he had “enticed the snakes out of their caves”.

Economist Bryan Caplan said many such leaders only pretend to care about reducing poverty.

“Revolutionary socialists have been far more interested in crushing their favorite scapegoats - businesspeople and the rich - than in alleviating poverty,”

Indeed they can!