And now…. The REAL Cartoon of the Day!
Obozo’s War on Math
[click image to enlarge]
Have a nice day!
“In the end, more than freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a comfortable life and they lost it all – security, comfort, and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again.” — Edward Gibbon, the great British historian who chronicled the rise and fall of the first great Western civilization, The Greeks in Athens
Are you still around? I thought that the ass-whipping you’ve been receiving convinced you that few on this website agree with your fascist opinions and that you faded into oblivion.
He’s only on the Cartoon of the Day! It’s ALL about PICTURES!
PERIMETER ALERT—PERIMETER ALERT— ZOMBIE INCOMING— ZOMBIE INCOMING!
ObozoMustGo….the real joke of EVERY day.
And the second great fall will be brought about by the Geeks in Washington. The tea-drinking Geeks.
Uhhh… Metro…. how exactly is cutting Federal spending and bringing about fiscal responsibility causing a great fall? Please explain.Thanks.
“But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.” ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
“Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state lives at the expense of everyone.” ― Frédéric Bastiat
I’m sorry, but I have to say that these two quotes do not make the top ten of Bastiat quotes. What does he mean when he says “If the law takes from some persons . . . ” etc. Is he talking about taking his house and giving it to someone it doesn’t belong to? Or is he claiming that because he earned a certain amount of money he should not be required to pay his fair share of that money to help operate his government and the services he receives? How does a blanket statement such as, “Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state,” make any sense at all. Of course not everyone “wants to live at the expense of the state.” As a matter of opinion, I would say that a relatively few people want to live at the expense of the state. I find that to be a pretty cold-hearted and disrespectful statement. How is cutting Federal spending causing a great fall? It won’t if it’s fairly done. But f it’s aimed at only one segment of society, especially the largest segment, it is going to certainly be a contributing factor.
Have a nice day!
Morning Metro! I hope you are well. Send my regards to Mrs. Metro, please.
Re: Bastiat quotes… remember, he lived in the first half of the 19th century, just after the American Revolution and French Revolution. At that time, a great deal of intellectual thought in Europe was dedicated to matters related to the newest ideas of government. That is, freedom, liberty, and self governance in the American fashion, or the early beginnings of totalitarianism and socialist democracy as in the French fashion. Much of his thought involved contrasting those 2 systems. He obviously was much more in support of freedom and liberty than the early stages of socialism. In fact, his quotes are quite prescient because he percieved the injustice of using the law to confiscate from one man to give to the other. It is precisely that first step that is taken by politicians that leads to the mess we now have today. And though it may not quite be true today that everyone want to live at the expense of the state, we only need to look at Greece or France (who just elected a communist last year) to see that the eventual trail of growing government subsidy (stealing from one man to give to another) leads us to increased dependency. Basiat’s quotes are both observations of his current time and warnings to the future based upon a keen understanding of human nature… an understanding of which those of you on the left seem to lack considerably.
Now, you haven’t used the old Marxist mantra of “paying their fair share” lately, Metro. I thought you had learned better than to let your mind wander into such foolish territory. This is a good discussion. Please answer some questions:
1) What is “Fair Share”? I can’t ever get a leftist to answer that.
2) Who really pays the taxes? Do you even know?
3) Would you say that it would be fair if a person earned 1% of the total income in America that that person should pay 1% of the taxes? In other words, every one bears an equal burden for the income taxes according to the income they earn. No earnings, no taxes. That would be fair, wouldn’t it?
I find this answer to my original question puzzling: “It won’t if it’s fairly done. But f it’s aimed at only one segment of society, especially the largest segment, it is going to certainly be a contributing factor.”
Uhhhh… Metro…. if we are going to cut government spending, how is that such cuts do not hit “the largest segment”? Who is the largest segment? Should we just cut government spending that applies to only 10% of people? That would accomplish nothing. 100% of government spending must be cut… and entitlements are the biggest chunk of federal spending making up nearly 2/3 of total spending… and growing. All of it must be cut. There is no other way.
One other point that I’ll make about the Marxist mantra of “paying their fair share”… It absolutely boggles my mind how greedy and corrupt the left is in America. They scream and wail about threats in cuts to entitlements like medicare or restructuring social security all the while you know that we are borrowing 42 cents of every dollar that is spent. You know that you are living on the borrowed money that someone else is going to be on the hook to pay in future years, and you guys on the left absolutely are effing the next generation for your own personal gain. What the in the hell could be more greedy than that? Nothing could, and if you have any moral conscience, Metro, you will admit it.
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any ducation. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
Good afternoon, OMG. I see you haven’t quit using the right wing mantra of anyone who is to the left of Attila the Hun is a selfish, money-grubbing Socialist. The right just loves that definition, don’t they. It just makes things so neat and easy. If someone needs help they need only rely on themselves and the generosity of friends, neighbors and religious community. Right! But then they are lambasted by the right as wastrels, dimwits, brigands and cutpurses because we are not as strong, intelligent or religious as they are. Therefore we do not merit any help. “Effing the next generation for our own personal gain!?” That statement really grates on me like fingernails on a blackboard. Is it such an odious thought to the right that a common, blue-collar wage slave have the audacity to live a few years in retirement in relative comfort. Not elegantly, just comfortable. That is what you call personal gain? However, a person who prospers due to accident of birth, or by a little bit of luck or by being an out and out charlatan, is treated as if they are treated with deference. Yet they seem to jump right in line for their “entitlements” just the same as the rest of us. Now, you ask me my view. Are all wealthy people like that. Of course not! Are all middle class and less fortunate people lazy, greedy and money grubbing Socialists. You imply that is what you think. Either view has a single name, OMG. Stereotyping. And stereotypes are great time-savers. Your friend Bastiat, was born to a financially well-off family, not to a dirt farmer in Iowa nine years after the ’29 depression, so of course our world view might differ. Using the term Socialism as an epithet is getting a bit worn, OMG. I don’t know what kind of economic background you come from, OMG, but I do get the impression that you, like Bastiat, were born into a more comfortable life than I and many others were. So one could reasonably expect that our views are different. But using Socialism as a dirty word does not intimidate me. This country is a Democracy and is also somewhat socialist.
Have a great day, OMG!
BTW, your Bastiat quote sounds like something he came up with on a bad day. He had a nasty hangover, maybe.
Psssst! Metro… you should not use the word “cutpurses”… it gives away your age… just sayin… I’m here to help, my friend… 🙂 Sorry, this is a long one.
I will agree on the stereotyping statement. You are equally guilty and your impressions of what conservatives think are reflective of the leftist propaganda that is perpetuated by an extremely left biased media that is no longer an observer of government, but a participant in it with the DemonRAT party. Nothing could be more incorrect. Never have I ever said that there should not be some form of government assistance as a last resort to those that have come on hard times. But I have said that I recognize human nature, and the perpetual dependency of those who are both able bodied and able minded (and there are millions of those) is a natural result of a system that supports the very concept of giving politicians the power to take from one to give to another. I know this first hand. I have told you in the past that a good friend of mine works in the welfare office in a small city in PA. She swears that fully 2/3 of the people that come into her office are perfectly capable of earning their own living, but instead demand with righteuos indignation that others owe them their cash, food stamps, heat, housing, cell phones, healthcare, etc. It’s the entitlement mentality that is so offensive. I don’t think you disagree with me on this. The real problem is NOT helping someone temporarily that is down. It’s a system that breeds more and more generational dependency that is the problem. Don’t you get it, Metro? Do you have any idea how much money we have spent and how much dependency has grown since the so-called Great Society programs were created to end poverty? Can’t you see what drastic results have happened to poor families, many of them black families, because of increases in generational dependency? Look at the out of wedlock birthrate in the black community. It’s almost 70% today. The Great Society programs have done NOTHING but create more of the problems they were created to solve when first enacted. You cannot deny that, Metro. So you see, we don’t disagree on the existence of a social safety net, we disagree on HOW that social safety net is set up and managed. By the way, I fully believe that the DemonRAT party knows that it benefits from multitudes of dependents that perpetually vote and support them. In essence, the government has enslaved people by making them dependent. It’s the modern equivalent of slavery. No doubt.
Socialism IS destructive and has never worked, Metro. It should be heard and taken as a derogatory. It goes against human nature and man’s desire to work for and keep what he/she earns. And the biggest criime of all is committed by politicians who sell you on the lie that if only you give them more of your money, if only you authorize them through the ballot box and law to take from one man so they can give to another, that somehow your life and the lives of all citizens will be better. THAT IS A LIE! It’s not true and you can look around you and see it. You can look at the fact that nearly 50 MILLION Americans are on Food Stamps… and growing. That’s 1 in 6 Americans, Metro, that are living off the backs of other people. That’s nothing to be proud of. It’s a disgusting shame.
Just because someone was a blue collar worker does not entitle them to a comfortable retirement on the backs of other people. The simple fact is that they knew on day one of their first job that they would be retiring at some point in the future. If they worked their whole career and took no measure to provide for their own retirement, that’s their own damned fault, not mine. I’m not saying they should left destitute, Metro. But I am saying that the lie of SS, and an educational system that steadfastly refuses to teach people about personal finance and responsibility, is in large measure to blame. There are many examples of people I know that were plumbers or pipe fitters or carpenters or electricians that saved money, bought a property or 2 or more living on blue collar earnings and are now very comfortable in retirement because of that. That model IS NOT restricted to anyone in America, no matter their birth circumstances or family. There are millions of examples of this that have repeated themselves over and over and over again in America’s history. How many people came here as immigrants with nothing and no welfare and no English and no education, but have made themselves successful and gotten their kids educated who are now successful? Millions of examples. Too many to buy the leftist excuse and lie of classes of people being stuck and disadvantaged. The problem with the left, and your last post leads me to think you believe it also, is that they believe in EQUAL OUTCOMES, not equal opportunity. Now I know you will deny this, but it is true. Your statement about someone being entitled to comfort in their retirment is a statement of desired outcome.
Finally, my father was born in 1934 on a dirt farm in west TX in a shack with dirt floor in the front section. Those floors are his earliest memories as a child. He does remember his father building flooring later on in childhood. He put himself through college and law school while raising a family. I am 1 of 7 and we grew up struggling, but not desparate. I had things to play with, but if I wanted something like a bike or a new baseball glove, I had to work to get it. My first car was $200 and had a 2×6 wood board with cut outs for blinkers as the front bumper. I drove it for 2 years before I upgraded to a $400 car which I drove for 4 years. NO. I did not grow up priviledged, Metro. I was NEVER taught that I was a victim of a system or some social vendetta against my “class” and I was ALWAYS taught that I work for and support myself. Period!!! And now, I have good years and I have bad years. And I am disgusted with how much I pay in total taxes at local, state, and federal level. In fact, if I was not taxed so damned much, I’d be in a much better position to never have to be dependent upon government…. EVER. I am not rich. Not even close. But I am defined as rich by the left. It’s sickening how that definition keeps coming down, all the while the public face put on it by Obozo is “millionaires and billionaires”, but it’s just a distraction away from reality. There isn’t enough of them to cover our government spending for a year, even if every dime of their assets and income were liquidated. The real money is in the middle class, and the reason it’s seemingly shrinking is because of government spending, not because of freedom and capitalism.
Finally, the Bastiat quote is about the methods of argument the left used, even back then, and how they seek to demonize those of us on the right. It’s a perfect quote and observation on the modern day political climate. The Memo proves him right EVERY day!
Have a nice day, my friend!
As William Voegeli put it in Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State, “Liberals don’t want the government to grow indefinitely. They just want it to be bigger than it is right now. The corollary of this stance is liberals’ refusal even to entertain questions on the dimensions of a welfare state that is exactly the right size.”
Good afternoon, OMG.
I usually don’t try to conceal my age, but I just like the word “cutpurses.” I like to preserve some of these old terms. I’m sort of a “preservationist of old words and phrases,” I guess.
There is no disagreement on my part that there are those who take unfair advantage of our generosity (even if it’s sometimes given with great reluctance.) Those people have been and always will be with us. But at the present time there are also a larger number who are in dire straits, not because of their unwillingness to work, but because they can’t find work. I know what you’re going to say, “There’s jobs out there, they just don’t want to do them.” The jobs out there are jobs that barely pay enough for a single person to live on, let alone a family. Even so, there are still people working two or three of those jobs just to make a fraction of their past income. There are people who work 40 or more hours per week and still need assistance. Of course 2/3 of the people your friend sees in the welfare office need help. It is a welfare office. That doesn’t equate to 2/3 of them gaming the system to live a life of ease on welfare. You speak of your father and yourself having to work to put yourself through school and keep up a decent standard of living. You talk of plumbers and electricians and other blue-collar workers who were able to support families and still put away money for retirement. You’re right, they did. 30 years ago. Since then wages have nearly flat-lined. These people are now struggling to put food on the table and a roof over their heads, much less put money aside for retirement. I take your word for it that you aren’t rich, but to a guy who spends 40 hours a week at hard labor to make a third or less money than you, you look pretty rich to them. People of my age were fortunate to earn a decent income for the work we did. We were able to put away some savings, maybe do a little investing and many of us got industrial pensions, profit-sharing, 401ks, IRAs, etc. Now, people doing the same work for the same number of hours, don’t make enough to save or invest for retirement. If they are company-sponsored 401ks or IRAs (which are also going the way of the dinosaur) they can’t afford to put much into them, and company pensions are pretty much history. The decrease in wages pretty much follows the demise of unions, which Republicans love to take credit for. Individually, I never exceeded a five figure income, but I had no complaints. I had five kids, a nice home, two cars in the garage (a new one every 3-5 years) and we managed a nice two-week vacation every summer. I would challenge you to do that today on my 1970s or 1980s salaries. By the 1990s my wife and I both worked and between us, we achieved that six-figure income. Life was good. I have no personal regrets. But, those days are gone. My kids are doing well. My daughters married well, my sons are steadily employed and making adequate money for now, but two of the three don’t make enough money to save for their retirement. The middle son makes that six-figure income and his wife also has a good job. This describes a lot of folks of my generation, but now, after working from 1956 to 2008, pretty much non-stop (I did take a year off between my first retirement and my second retirement) and paying my taxes, my SS, and saving and investing a bit, how do you equate my comfortable retirement with living on your back? How will you feel when your kids accuse you of that? Note, I said comfortable, not luxurious. I have my just-under 1400 sq. ft. home, one car and a golf cart. We take a few cruises (we always search for bargains) and we eat out once or twice per week. Now you want me to feel guilty. It ain’t workin’, OMG. So, in conclusion, I say I made it on my own and now you figure out how to make your own way and your kids will probably think you are a burden too when you’re 74.
“Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I’m 64?” — Paul McCartney
“Nope!” — OMG
Hey, have a great day! My fingers are tired now.
Gibbon’s point is well-taken, but you left out his rmx on Athenian imperialism, besides which, he wrote in medias Mercantilia…every school-boy knows Athens was radically dissimilar to the complex capitalist economies of the modern era, w/their vast interlocking dependencies…look around–how many Northwoodsmen remain [& who makes their tools & weapons]?…Adam Smith said capitalism w/o regulation was an oxymoron [thanx to greed]…’the maket innovates; society regulates’…supply-side & trickle-down have cost millions their jobs, homes & investments
If you are angry, identify & attack your true enemies–ideologists of left & right–of course, w/o resort to the ad hominem billingsgate we’re all tempted by.
Must go in a perfect candidate for crazies of the week.