Conservative Response to Liberal Gunman

by **Tralik33** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:57 am

OK, we can agree that the US has been, and to a certain degree, still is run by white men. But, with the first African American President in the White House, a Woman Speaker of the House, and other minorities in all areas of government now, can the argument still be made that the opportunity for success is still not there for these groups? I'm curious to know what barriers you think are still in place that hold back anyone with the drive to succeed? Sure, there are those that are born into wealthy families, poor families, etc... but can the argument be made that these people can't succeed without direct involvement of the Federal Government? I honestly don't believe that to be the case any longer. I think with very very few exceptions,everyone has, in their lifetime, the ability to achieve whatever it is that they desire. Does that mean that everyone succeeds? No, I don't think so. Life throws curves and sometimes things happen that cause us to fail. I think the difference between my world view and that of others is that I don't view the Government as a catch-all safety net whose responsibility is to never allow anyone to fail. Unfortunately many people feel the opposite, feel that the Government is supposed to protect people from all those curves life throws at them. I guess it boils down to the idea, for me at least, that while everyone has the ability to succeed, many take no action to do so, and many others expect someone else to do it for them.

Our current financial mess is a perfect example of Government good intentions biting everyone in the butt. Take the example of housing... At face value, the idea of a "right" to housing sounds great, very philanthropic and benevolent. Everyone should have a house, right? Who wants to say no to an idea like that? But, reality is that the Federal Gvernment intervened into the private sector through mandatory regulations forcing banks to give sub-prime mortgages with little to no down-payment to families that simply could not otherwise have qualified for a home-loan. Now we see that the default rate of these loans was, not surprisingly, extremely high, which created a major financial instability in these institutions. So, not only are the families foreclosed on, but the banks are left holding the bill with properties that they can't resell for what the house is worth because the market is so soft.

Basically that's a round about way of me saying that we have arrived at a point where people aren't allowed to suffer the consequences of poor decisions, lack of planning, or unwillingness to work and it is expected that your neighbor will help shoulder the consequences of those decisions. We have it completely backwards. We reward those that fail to plan and punish those that do well by making them foot the bill. We are in the process of creating a societal "right" to success meaning that regardless of what decisions you make, we are not going to let you fail. What people just don't see is that we only have a "right" to the pursuit of success with no guarantee of equal results to all people.

by **Tralik33** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:17 am

I do want to mention one other thing that I think warrants some contemplation. In the course of American History, there has never been a period where one generation did not make the avenues and paths to success easier to access for the next. Every generation that has come and gone, in its own way, has sacrificed to make the world a better place for their children and their children's children. Afterall, that is the American Dream, right? Hard work, dedication, and the innovative spirit of the American Worker, all combined to provide a better life for each successive generation. Individualism, self-reliance, honesty and integrity are the fundamentals to success in this manner.

My question to those who think Government is the answer to these problems is this: Is the generation who will follow us, our childern and grandchildren, going to be in a better position for success than we were? For the first time in American History, I don't think we can answer that question as "yes". We simply can not saddle them with trillions of dollars of debt, basically selling the very soul of this nation to foreign interests, and think that they will be in a better position than we were. They will pay for our mistakes and may simply never be able to get free of this yoke we will place on them because we do not have the intestinal fortitude to pay for the mistakes ourselves.

by **tigwelder56** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:37 am

" Is the generation who will follow us, our childern and grandchildren, going to be in a better position for success than we were?"

No... I'm at a crossroad in my life where I have to turn onto a different path. We, or they, I prefer they, since it's they that have driven the last nails in our financial coffin. At the speed which this new administration is driving our economy into the ground, I've got no faith left in their ability to bring us out of this mess. As fast as one arbitrary, unilateral piece of crap legislation comes out of Washington, another is being readied for release! The real pisser is that so many of their attempts to introduce this type of garbage is slid in under the cloak of darkness or purely undetectable. There was an agreement that there would be several days given to both sides to review new legislation and that has been the exception instead of the rule. I can only expect some attempt at mitigating my remarks, but that's expected. So the insult I'm supposed to experience, following any reply, should also be considered mitigated from my perspective. Right? That's just the way these games run. Too bad our government has resorted to playing games against the people that pay their excessive salaries. They don't have to worry about their retirement plans though. They get their full pay, with all benefits, medical and dental, forever!! Don't forget that their wives also get the same benefits for life during and after the death of their husbands or wives. What a scam and it's against the American taxpayers. We need to insist that our elected officials all have to retire on the same Social Security plan as the rest of America's citizens. That shouldn't include children born to illegal aliens on American soil and most definitely shouldn't apply to illegal workers, regardless of the time they've worked here.

by **LiberalGunman** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:54 pm

Well I think this will be my last post on this as this thread is starting to unravel and it is taking absurd amounts of time to log on to this site for some reason.

For the record, I am not just blaming conservatives for the problems I outlined earlier. And as for middle class, it is becoming extinct. There are those in poverty and there are the working poor. Increasingly, the working poor have become more and more hateful toward the poor due to the perceived free-ride they are getting. Too bad that anger isn't directed where it belongs: toward the rich that are playing both like puppets. When 90% of this countries wealth is in the hands of 10% of its citizens, its not the fault of illegal aliens, gays, welfare recipients, or Octo-mom.

Keep believing that you can get rich by working hard and being determined alone. Good luck with that.

And for the record, I am NOT in favor of wasting a bunch of money in token hand outs to oppressed groups of people. That solves NOTHING. As I said before, it only acts as a wedge between them and the majority of other groups of citizens struggling in this country. We need to overhaul damn near everything, a revolution if you will, if there is going to be a successful leveling of the playing field.

I appreciate the respectful discussion this thread has provided and I didn't mean to offend you Tig. I hope to continue to converse on both political and Gun topics in the future if they get a new hamster to run on the wheel that is apparently powering this website.

by **tigwelder56** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Hey Lib,

No offense taken, it's the nature of the beast. There will always be differing opinions when talking about the state of the country and how to fix it.

The problem you're having with the website isn't anything new. It has been like this for well over a year, maybe two. The owner/webmaster is well aware of its shortcomings and refuses to do anything to improve it. He must have a reason for keeping it going, but I can't imagine what it is. Maybe he just enjoys aggravating people that have something to contribute. I've found that when you experience the site slowing down, just log out and come back in an hour or two. It doesn't have the bandwidth needed to handle the traffic and I can only guess that the slowdowns and time outs are due to the number of people logged on. Typically, after an hour of people getting irritated by the crappy performance, they log off and then site speed returns to normal. It's not convenient but I've found it easier to handle that way versus the alternative.

I have to wonder why wealthy Americans are being singled out now? There are certainly those rich individuals that have made their fortunes on the back of those people and institutions they control. But why is it government's duty to decide who gets rich, or stays rich? If I worked my life toward the goal of financial wealth, why am I suddenly being stereotyped by the President as some kind of criminal? If I went to school, worked my fingers to the bone and through successful investing etc., made my fortune, why am I being singled out for it? When did individual success become a bad thing to acheive? Why are they going to reduce the limits on taxation for the poor and middle class but raise the tax on those making over $250K to 40%? 40%!! What the hell is with that? Can't you imagine the anger that is developing over that issue? Why as a successful businessman am I being targeted and told that since I worked harder or more successfully than some welfare recipient with 8 children, that I have to now provide more of my income to improve theirs? What's the incentive for people to do well financially? If you can sit on your butt and spit out kids on a regular basis and in turn get more and more money, benefits, housing, you name it, why strive to do anything else? It's no damn wonder people are knocking each other down trying to get across our borders! The discussions going on now about providing Social Security benefits to illegal workers and anyone else that hasn't contributed is an abhorrent idea.

I'm not sure that 90% of the wealth is in the hands of 10% of the people anymore. Now there are certainly people with wealth made illegally, like the Madoff's of the country. But everyone with wealth is being grouped into the same class of people as him and that's not right. I shouldn't have to donate my hard earned income to those who haven't worked a day in their life. Why don't we all just quit work and let the government foot the bill? Why is the government allowed to take money out of my pocket for the sole purpose of giving it to someone who refuses to work? You're right about not being able to use sheer determination and working hard to get rich. If you do, in today's climate, it'll be taken away from you and handed to someone that hasn't earned a dime of it.

I think we're witnessing the beginning of that revolution you mentioned. If something isn't done to curb the current market crash soon, we'll witness the worst depression this country has ever seen. The answer isn't having government take over the country, socialism doesn't breed capitalism. It breeds dependence on the government.

by **LiberalGunman** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 7:54 pm

Hey, I was actually able to log on without pointing my XDM40 at the monitor and threatening it!

Tig, when I mentioned the wealthy in power, I was not referring to those rare few who escaped generational poverty or the working poor to rise to a position of comfort. I speak of the generational wealthy who have had opportunities that the VAST majority of americans will never have.

Also, with all due respect, I think that it is arrogant to assume that you have worked harder in your life than someone on welfare. Its just as easy to label the poor of this country as lazy and unmotivated as it is for me to label the wealthy as greedy and corrupt. I sometimes need reminders myself to be careful about how I stereotype people too.

I worry about the government being the ones to make things right. On the other hand, I really doubt that the hard working poor of this country will ever stop pointing fingers and blaming each other to unite and demand equal opportunities as those born into power and privilege. Therefore, either the government finds a way to do it effectively (without token handouts) or I think the country is in trouble.

I really doubt you are the kind of guy that was born into wealth, or are even wealthy enough to have the power I speak of Tig. If you were, you would not be a Veteran like I seem to remember reading in one of your posts. The generational wealthy do not have to sacrifice their children in foreign wars, by in large.

As always, its great to have these discussions. Thanks

by **tigwelder56** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:53 pm

See, I told you, just wait an hour and the site behaves better most of the time. I'm with you though, I've felt like capping my monitor on more than one ocassion!

It is becoming more and more apparent to me that there is far too many misunderstandings here. I wonder if my views of the different socio-economic classes are different than yours simply because we haven't grouped them into various classes. One thing I want to make perfectly clear is that the welfare recipient I'm referring to aren't the folks that are using the system for its intended purpose. I'm referring to those individuals that as you mentioned, are generational welfare abusers. Their grandparents, parents, sisters and brothers, etc., are utilizing the welfare, Medicaid system as their chosen form of employment. Now that Obama has decided to remove the child limitations will only serve to encourage these people to stay on welfare programs and have more children. It's an invitation for abuse.

You're right as well about my own wealth. It's not what I would consider over the top! As a matter of fact, I'm a disabled Vet, living on very limited income. Every dollar in my pocket counts and as I watch my meager IRA lose money faster than it can be counted, I get angrier and angrier. The obvious waste of taxpayer money being directed to these pork projects, like swine odor research, is so blatantly apparent to people, I have to question the intelligence or lack of in the people requesting it. How can these elected officials continue to request funding for projects that shouldn't make it any farther than a wish list. We have got to let these officials know that we're not going to sit idly by and let these projects go unnoticed. The waste is so widespread in our government and there's no excuse for it. We have to get rid of these chronic abusers in government and that should also include the chronic abusers of government programs, like welfare, Medicaid and Medicare. Eventually I'd like to see a few dozen of our elected officials removed for their abuses as well. I firmly believe that we should entertain the idea of term limits for these same individuals.

by **agonist** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:05 am

It seems that perhaps the differences in opinion here is that Lib thinks the government should be responsibile for figuring out why someone who works hard and is poor and someone else works hard and is rich.

I thinks it's pretty clear that the government is not capable of that judging by the massive growing debt which has been present since the mid to late 1800's.

Our government has continually added social programs and "liberal" policy over time and increasingly so with rapid addition since the 1960s yet by your own admission Lib, the gap between the haves and have nots widens. It's clear that the government can not actively drive the economy or society nor should it. By its very definition that is not its role. Government, the root "govern" means to limit. Government's purpose is to limit the "bad" stuff and let the "good" stuff happen.

Government spending should not even happen. The vast majority of spending should be voted on by referendum. This would do away with ALL special interest spending and limit projects to those that can be afforded and those projects that the majority of taxpayers actually want. No long term commitee chair senator would even try to pass some pork project to buy votes from his constituants. Local populations would be responsible for local standards. This causes people to take an active role in their government and communities instead of the "voter malaise" we have now.

by **LiberalGunman** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:58 am

As unrealistic as it is for the government to be responsibile to fix the unequal distribution of wealth, I tend to hold out hope as I don't see any other way of it happening without revolution.

I also think it is unrealistic to think that the vast majority of government spending should be put to a referendum vote. I think that would be too great an undertaking to manage. I also worry that simply going with the "majority rules" philosophy would have never resulted in the advances this country has made in civil rights legislation and in other areas that were initially not a popular position. They'd still be lynching blacks in a large part of this country if we would have left it up to the locals to decide.

by **LiberalGunman** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:11 pm

Tig-

I am grateful to you for your service and certainly understand you being angry with the bad apples that are abusing the system. They make me angry too. I agree about welfare dependence and how the child limitations being removed could be an invitation for abusing the system. I just think that sometimes we villify the welfare mooches who may be cheating the tax payers out of a few hundred bucks a month, yet we turn a blind eye to white collar criminals who steal billions from americans in shady accounting practices and "creative" tax deductions, or the ones involved in insider trading, or the ones who have politicians in their pocket in order to give them government contracts and tax breaks. I think those criminals do a lot more harm to our country than the octo-mom's of the world.