XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons
XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy
XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns
XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival
From: kcrawford981@gmail.invalid
In article ,
BeamMeUpScotty
wrote:
> On 2/22/2015 1:15 AM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> > In article <2Y4Gw.83017$Oy4.39216@fx17.iad>,
> > BeamMeUpScotty
> > > EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/21/2015 2:12 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> >>> In article ,
> >>> BeamMeUpScotty
> >>> >>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2/20/2015 7:57 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> >>>>> In article ,
> >>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
> >>>>> >>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2/20/2015 2:16 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article ,
> >>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A.
> >>>>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2015 2:10 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article <3xoFw.2191782$1s.1636401@fx05.iad>,
> >>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> CI
> >>>>>>>>> A.
> >>>>>>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2015 6:36 PM, davidp@agent.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Economists are baffled about Obama's recovery
> >>>>>>>>>>> By Robert J. Samuelson - Jan. 19, 2015
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The great wage mystery deepens. In economic recoveries, there
> >>>>>>>>>>> usually
> >>>>>>>>>>> comes a time when strong job gains lead to strong wage gains.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Businesses must pay more to recruit and retain the workers they
> >>>>>>>>>>> need.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Not this time - or at least not yet.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Because there is NO recovery...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> NO "green shoots"
> >>>>>>>>>> No "summer of recovery"
> >>>>>>>>>> No "Jobless recovery"
> >>>>>>>>>> No "stocks led recovery"
> >>>>>>>>>> No "ObamaCare stimulated Recovery"
> >>>>>>>>>> No "Shovel Ready Jobs Recovery"
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Or any of the other half dozen recoveries we were told were
> >>>>>>>>>> happening....
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is NO recovery....
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> there must be a recovery, the 1%er's keep getting richer
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> when did they ever stop getting richer? The rich didn't have a
> >>>>>>>> recession. Just as the government didn't have a recession. The
> >>>>>>>> government just stole money from the rest of us. The poor didn't
> >>>>>>>> suffer
> >>>>>>>> a recession. In fact the Government increased it's deficits and
> >>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>> spending and that proves there was NO recession for the government.
> >>>>>>>> The
> >>>>>>>> rich got richer so there was NO recession for the wealthy.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> so they must have been stealing the money from the gov't, right?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Only if the government was first stealing the money from the middle
> >>>>>> class.
> >>>>>> And that looks like what was happening, *borrowing the printed* money
> >>>>>> was theft and so the entire collapse and TARP and all the bailouts was
> >>>>>> paid for by the middle class which is why they have neither moved
> >>>>>> forward or recovered since the collapse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "the gov't just stole from the rest of us", so you made my point, thank
> >>>>> you
> >>>>>
> >>>> Didn't seem like what you meant but if it was then great...
> >>>>
> >>>> Government stole from the middle class and redistributed it to the poor
> >>>> and the wealthy and the government has nearly crushed the middle class.
> >>>> But that just what Socialism does.
> >>>
> >>> so you don't like the wealthy either, good, that's a start
> >>>
> >>
> >> you jump to conclusions.... and wrong ones at that.
> >>
> >> What I said made it obvious that I don't like Government taking sides
> >> for one group over another because that's NOT treating "persons" equal
> >> under the law.
> >
> > so you are an egalitarian? that sounds like socialism to me
>
> I believe I said equal under the law... that's being a constitutionalist.
> A Socialist or egalitarian seeks to "force" people to become equal
> rather than suggesting we are created as equals with no titles of
> nobility and from that point we make of ourselves what we can and we're
> NOT equal in all areas like political, economic, social, and civil
> rights for all people at all times and places. But that *Government*
> must treat all persons equally everywhere all the time.
>
> That is different from egalitarians and Socialism that try to make
> people all equal in every way all the time and everywhere.
>
> We aren't always equal everywhere and the constitution was written to
> recognize that, and then an attempt was tried to refine that first
> attempt to get rid of titles of nobility and expand it to make
> "GOVERNMENT" treat all people equally.
>
> Unfortunately that has been corrupted by egalitarians and Socialists to
> try to *force* all people to be equal all the time and everywhere and
> that is a total failure and was always going to fail. The original idea
> and the uncorrupted fix had it right. We are all created equal "with no
> titles of nobility" and the government should then treat us equally
> under the law. The problem is egalitarians and Socialists corrupting
> that idea to their own ridiculous idea that all people are equal all the
> time everywhere. Which is NOT what the constitution or Amendment 14
> says.
>
> SO no I'm NOT egalitarian or Socialist, I actually support the
> constitution and NOT the corruption of it.
I believe all people are equal, I don't believe all people are the same
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
