OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

WHY do liberal folks never get it? Why do a million successive failures not clue them in that their ideas are failure incarnate? These geniuses refuse to amalgamate the raw data laying all around to inexorably force the conclusion that the premises of liberalism are false. Because, much like how poison works—by mimicking the good things our bodies need, but delivering death instead of life—liberalism is a faux religion, a f**e ethics. Liberalism causes death.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/62228?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=92dddb877f-Call_to_Champions&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-92dddb877f-297697313

petertimber

Liberalism is a mental disorder. Humans are BORN with inherent Freedoms which are affirmed in the Constitution of the USA. Liberals have to IMPOSE their will with Laws, regulation, rules, policies and procedures upon society.

Liberalism is a philosophy of failure. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

MarvinSussman

The conservative belief that liberals want wealth e******y is a self-induced hallucination. Liberals want a true e******y of opportunity.

The conservative philosophy of government was best stated by President Coolidge: “The chief business of the American people is business.” He was wrong. The business of our nation is exactly and only that found in the preamble to our Constitution: “to... promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

Times change but the Founding Liberals can’t change with them. They wrote what they wrote, and the most important word in the preamble to the Constitution is “Posterity”. The Founding Liberals understood why we are here on Earth: survival of the species is the motivating force of life.

A nation without a thriving young generation faces its doom. Care of the young is the highest priority of all the creatures on earth - except Conservatives. Care of our young must not end at birth. Post-natal care must also be the highest priority of federal, state, and local government.

Government must provide children with health care, education, and homes in a secure neighborhood. Children, from conception through university, must get all the health care, food, shelter, and play they need and as much education as they can absorb. Care of the young is a civilization’s wisest investment.

A thriving young generation must include all children regardless of the wealth or poverty of their homes. Providing excellent care only for children of the rich will not produce enough brilliant leaders in technology, industry, and government. If you want all the cream, you have to milk all the cows. (Ninety-nine percent of all discoveries are found by one percent of all scientists.) A level playing field and equal opportunity from the moment of conception are the liberal’s core beliefs.

Support for children by local taxes inevitably results in deprived areas, from Watts to Mississippi. To be equitably distributed, care of the young must be financed by the federal government. Commensurate with their means, all Americans, together as one, must share the load. Fairness and cooperation are the liberal’s core beliefs.

Conservatives hold the opposite view. They believe children should be rewarded or punished depending on how well or how poorly they choose their parents. They want the care of the young to be financed by local taxes so that school quality varies with class and so that science education is stunted by fundamentalist school boards. Is it a wonder that, according to the National Academy of Sciences report, while half of GDP growth depends on technology, the US is rated 48th in science and math education?

Instead of taxing wealthy estates, consisting mostly of untaxed capital gains and municipal bond interest, conservatives would endow the least productive segment of society: children of the rich. Since Congress can be bought, wealth is power and inherited wealth is the inherited power to increase and endow wealth, aristocracy, the exact opposite of democracy, the exact opposite of meritocracy. This is dishonesty and corruption. Conservatism is a crime against Nature.

The health, education, and shelter of the young are more important than the leisure activity of the rich. Nobody deserves to inherit enough money to bribe Congress for wealth-growing advantages. Ban the tax havens! Eliminate tax-free municipal bonds and special deals for hedge-fund managers and their money-changing brethren in the temple!

The human race succeeded only because evolution gave it enough intelligence to understand the value of community: the solidarity of the clan, the tribe, and larger groups that does not exist among other primates. We succeeded only because we took care of each other through fire and flood.

Conservatives want to destroy that social solidarity. While the economic burden of disease far exceeds that of weather, does it make sense that we help communities struck by a tornado but not individuals struck by cancer? Now, Conservatives want to defund FEMA! Come hell or high water, you're on your own! Conservatism is a crime against Nature.

Conservatives believe the tax burden should be shifted from the rich to the middle class, from capital to labor. They would create a polarized generation: a small aristocracy and a large underclass — a lost generation. Conservatism is a complete betrayal of Posterity and the Founding Liberals.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
…© 2014 Marvin Sussman All Rights Reserved. Permission granted only to copy entirely.

OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

And, the failed Keynesian idol spews his propaganda once again...blah...blah...blah...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Retired669

Great post again Marvin but these baggers still have no clue to what you are trying to tell them. If it doesn't come from faux it isn't true. That's just how closed minded and stupid this bunch is. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

On one level your idea of equal opportunity sounds great. How do you propose to give young children from broken, uneducated homes equal opportunity with children from intact homes, one mother, one father, well enough off to care for their children? Do you propose that all children be removed from their families, and raised by the government in massive dorms? Would you prefer that the children of poor people be removed at birth and given to intact families with well educated adults to raise? Or do you propose that money be handed to the poor so that they can properly raise their offspring, even though the families still would not be one mother and one father, the educational level would not go up any, and the behavior and lack of socialization would remain the same? Guess what , we are doing that right now and you should be able to see how well that is NOT working. Are there any other plans you would suggest that would solve the problem in the REAL World not just in your Utopian imagination?

MarvinSussman

I propose that education, healthcare, and infrastructure be funded the same way we fund an army during a war: do wh**ever it takes because it is a war to stay on top of the world. The problem is never the budget; it's the availability of physical (including human) resources and time.

The spending required by the above, like the spending on World War II, will bring prosperity that will answer all your questions as it answered those of the Great Depression.

Ask grandma how good it was.

OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

Why am I not surprised an ignorant socialist like yourself would support failed Keynesian economics. You display your colossal ignorance more and more in your brain-dead juvenile postings. No wonder you're retired, they most likely forced you to retire before you jeopardized some one's safety, or the company.

OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

More failed Keynesian economic bulls**t. My mother lived through the depression, so I am well aware of the hardship they went through. You neglect to state that the depression should only have lasted about 3-4 years at the most. FDR raised taxes on just about everything which helped to d**g the depression out to 16 years, and it took a world war to get us out of the depression. If you want to know about the 40s, watch this short video.

http://objflicks.com/decadeofthe1940s.html

MarvinSussman

There have been two major economic experiments proving that sufficient deficit spending to increase consumer demand will restore prosperity.

In January 1933, Hitler took power during a terrible depression and restored prosperity in one year by spending heavily on the autobahn, the Volkswagen, TV, gliders, zeppelins, concentration camps, munitions, etc. That made him popular and enabled him to rebuild the German Army.

In March 1933, FDR took power during a terrible depression and managed to reduce the unemployment rate from 25% to 12% by 1936 by spending as much as Republicans would let him spend on WPA, PWA, CCC, TVA, and more. He built the Hoover Dam, planted two billion trees, and built thousands of federal buildings still in service. Just when he wanted to start on the Interstate Highway System, the Republicans made him balance the budget and the unemployment rate went back up to 18% by 1939.

Then World War II brought fantastic, utterly wasteful spending without limit. Did it bring more depression? No! Prosperity was restored within one year. Eighty million war workers had money in the bank and in war bonds, enough to live decently during the war and to buy cars and homes after the war.

When I came home from Europe in 1935, my uncle told me that my grandchildren would be paying off the debt. He was so wrong. The war debt was never paid off. It still exists as a blip on the current debt, overwhelmed by the tremendous spending on veterans homes and education, the Marshall Plan, Cold
War rearmament, the Korean War, nuclear energy, the Interstate Highway System, NASA, the Vietnam war, and a dozen proxy wars. The result was that the wartime debt/GDP ratio declined from 120% to 30% during 35 years of prosperity due to growth of the denominator, GDP.

Ask grandma how good it was.

Deficit spending has always brought recovery from recessions and depressions every time the spending was large enough.

Obama’s stimulus was a great success and would have brought full recovery if it were three or four times larger to fully close the output gap. http://www.pitbulleconomics.com/stimulus.pdf

Recessions are caused by lack of consumer demand. Prosperity depends upon major purchases (homes, cars, etc.), which require bank loans based upon savings. So, recovery from a recession requires savings, which the working population uses to reduce debt. Therefore, recovery needs new savings from new hiring generated by investment in new products. So, recovery waits for investors who wait for recovery, which explains the slow recovery.

To hasten recovery, there must be another source of savings. With a trade deficit, that source must be deficit spending on infrastructure by the federal government. Without such deficit spending, there can be no early savings, lending, major purchases, and quick recovery.

If FDR spent in 1933 as much as he spent in 1943, would not the depression have ended in 1934 as it ended in 1944 due to the same amount of spending? It worked for Hitler. Why would it not work for FDR?

OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

And, by his spending policies, and high taxes, he took a depression that should have only lasted 3 to 4 years at the most, and drug it out for 16 miserable years! Wake up! Keynesian economics didn't work then, and they sure as hell won't work now. Obozo has already spent more than all presidents up to Bush have spent, and what has it brought us??!!

OldSchool Loc: Moving to the Red State of Utah soon!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Now, I really know you're completely full of crap!

petertimber

Buy it New
Use it Out
Make it Do
Do Without

Spend less than you make and you have the philosophers stone

Any excess monies spent are politicians buying v**es, assisting Lobbyists who assist politicians both publicly and privately and all manner of corruption. When was the last time any criminal Congressman (they never get convicted) was brought to trial and I am talking about the Menendez and Rangels who live in the Halls of Congress with their other brothers in lining their pockets.

J Anthony Loc: Connecticut

How is your mind so closed?. You don't have to agree with everything, but how is it that you can't even acknowledge a few simple t***hs that effect all of us who aren't born into wealth and privilege? You would rather we tear ourselves apart then try and form a left/right coalition, wouldn't you?

Btfkr Loc: just outside the Mile High City

A lovely pseudo intellectual poison article. Thanks for sharing.