The absurdity of bailouts and our welfare program

reply to post by neo96

That ain't billionaires fault that is Washington's fault creation the problems that offer no solution.

Actually your wrong here. The billionaires started hoarding their wealth along with shipping jobs overseas greatly affects the economy and creates the problems where people need assistance to survive.

How much wealth have they hoarded compared to how much wealth they've created?

reply to post by buster2010


Saving is the only rational move to make in current conditions. The same goes for moving jobs over seas. Our government has made it too costly and too much of a liability for people to keep businesses here.

Originally posted by crankySamurai
reply to post by Americanist
Only the american government can initiate force against its own citizens.

That's a given.


It is also why many early patriots were against the US keeping a 'standing army.'

The other concern about that was that a standing army could possibly bankrupt the nation.
They were wise men.

reply to post by queenannie38


Totally agree.

Originally posted by crankySamurai
reply to post by buster2010

 

Saving is the only rational move to make in current conditions. The same goes for moving jobs over seas. Our government has made it too costly and too much of a liability for people to keep businesses here.

edit on 4-9-2012 by crankySamurai because: (no reason given)

It's quite simple actually. Government overspending ruins the value of our currency, makes everything more expensive, and increases tax liabilities. This stunts economic growth and over the long term destroys the middle class through lack of job opportunity and excessive welfare. Once you've reached the excessive welfare and lack of jobs the snowball effect takes place essentially resulting in a new dictatorship. It's happened dozens of times throughout history to the greatest and most powerful of nations.

reply to post by libertytoall


But what happened to the Roman empire is rather unique...yet shares much in common with the US, right now.

The Scourge of Militarism

Notice...this was written in 2003.

Excerpt:

The collapse of the Roman republic in 27 BC has significance today for the United States, which took many of its key political principles from its ancient predecessor. Separation of powers, checks and balances, government in accordance with constitutional law, a toleration of slavery, fixed terms in office, all these ideas were influenced by Roman precedents. John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams often read the great Roman political philosopher Cicero and spoke of him as an inspiration to them. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, authors of the Federalist Papers, writing in favor of ratification of the Constitution signed their articles with the name Publius Valerius Publicola, the first consul of the Roman republic.

The Roman republic, however, failed to adjust to the unintended consequences of its imperialism, leading to a drastic alteration in its form of government. The militarism that inescapably accompanied Rome's imperial projects slowly undermined its constitution as well as the very considerable political and human rights its citizens enjoyed. The American republic, of course, has not yet collapsed; it is just under considerable strain as the imperial presidency -- and its supporting military legions -- undermine Congress and the courts. However, the Roman outcome -- turning over power to an autocracy backed by military force and welcomed by ordinary citizens because it seemed to bring stability -- suggests what might happen in the years after Bush and his neoconservatives are thrown out of office.

Obviously, there is nothing deterministic about this progression, and many prominent Romans, notably Brutus and Cicero, paid with their lives trying to head it off. But there is something utterly logical about it. Republican checks and balances are simply incompatible with the maintenance of a large empire and a huge standing army. Democratic nations sometimes acquire empires, which they are reluctant to give up because they are a source of wealth and national pride, but as a result their domestic liberties are thereby put at risk.

These not-particularly-original comparisons are inspired by the current situation of the United States, with its empire of well over 725 military bases located in other people's countries; its huge and expensive military establishment demanding ever more pay and ever larger appropriations from a supine and manipulated legislature; unsolved anthrax attacks on senators and newsmen (much like Rome's perennial assassinations); Congress's gutting of the Bill of Rights through the panicky passage of the Patriot Act -- by votes of 76-1 in the Senate and 337 to 79 in the House; and numerous signs that the public is indifferent to what it is about to lose. Many current aspects of our American government suggest a Roman-like fatigue with republican proprieties. After Congress voted in October 2002 to give the president unrestricted power to use any means, including military force and nuclear weapons, in a preventive strike against Iraq whenever he -- and he alone -- deemed it "appropriate," it would be hard to argue that the constitution of 1787 was still the supreme law of the land.