[quote]pittbulll wrote:
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So the posts in which you advocate a minimum wage and other government interference are typos?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United[/quote]
Was money really lost to the upper class?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder is a violation of another’s right ot life. So there would be laws against it.
I actually agree with Pitt’s statement in his last post, although would prefer it was worded differently. Even though it falls well short of redistribution of wealth, it is a good starting point for any worth while government system. [/quote]
I absolutely agree with his last post(assuming I am correctly translating his post to mean that he would prefer the only laws on the books to be violations of the rights of others). His previous posts just had not led me to believe he was in favor of a minarchist state.
Of course, I have a feeling that he believes in a list of rights that looks more like this:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
Than this:
All mankind… being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.
-John Locke
Or this:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom.
I think I see where you all are coming from.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
I took this as, ALL laws on the books (currently) infringe on people rights.
Not, The only laws that SHOULD BE ON THE BOOKS IN MY VERSION OF THE GOVERNMENT are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights.
If the latter is the case, then I misunderstood Pitts position, sorry Pitt.
Edit: I thought he was basically advocating anarchy.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom. [/quote]
One’s freedom ends where another’s begins. That creates maximum freedom. Anything more, one way or the other, is encroachment on another’s freedom, so a law against murder does not infringe on the right/s of anyone. It may infringe on the murderer’s ability, but not his rights or freedom.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
if you kill some one , you have taken away that person’s right to live
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
In response to ‘direct’ force or fraud.
[/quote]
if I understand you , absolutely
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So the posts in which you advocate a minimum wage and other government interference are typos?[/quote]
no
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think I see where you all are coming from.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
I took this as, ALL laws on the books (currently) infringe on people rights.
Not, The only laws that SHOULD BE ON THE BOOKS IN MY VERSION OF THE GOVERNMENT are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights.
If the latter is the case, then I misunderstood Pitts position, sorry Pitt.
Edit: I thought he was basically advocating anarchy. [/quote]
if I understand you , then you understand me 
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom. [/quote]
One’s freedom ends where another’s begins. That creates maximum freedom. Anything more, one way or the other, is encroachment on another’s freedom, so a law against murder does not infringe on the right/s of anyone. It may infringe on the murderer’s ability, but not his rights or freedom.[/quote]
I agree with you, see my post about misunderstanding Pitt’s position.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So the posts in which you advocate a minimum wage and other government interference are typos?[/quote]
no[/quote]
Please elaborate on how you reconcile a minimum wage law with freedom.
I will go ahead and tell you that you can not.
If everyone is free to do as he/she chooses, then an employer is free to hire whoever he/she wants. A job seeker is free to apply for any job he/she wants. An employer(an employer is offering payment in exchange for some task) is free to offer any amount of money he/she wants. A job seeker is free to accept or decline any amount of money he/she wants. If the job seeker wants more money, he/she can ask for it and the employer can either accept or decline that offer(the job seeker is offering a service for pay).
If a pseudo-omnipotent third party steps in and tells the two, “You can not agree to any less than this amount of money,” then there is no longer freedom.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom. [/quote]
One’s freedom ends where another’s begins. That creates maximum freedom. Anything more, one way or the other, is encroachment on another’s freedom, so a law against murder does not infringe on the right/s of anyone. It may infringe on the murderer’s ability, but not his rights or freedom.[/quote]
I agree with you, see my post about misunderstanding Pitt’s position. [/quote]
I totally disagree with his position on murder
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United[/quote]
Was money really lost to the upper class?
[/quote]
It could be more current but I am positive it maintains the same course
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United[/quote]
Was money really lost to the upper class?
[/quote]
It could be more current but I am positive it maintains the same course
[/quote]
What on Earth does that graph have to do with Airtruth’s question?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom. [/quote]
One’s freedom ends where another’s begins. That creates maximum freedom. Anything more, one way or the other, is encroachment on another’s freedom, so a law against murder does not infringe on the right/s of anyone. It may infringe on the murderer’s ability, but not his rights or freedom.[/quote]
I agree with you, see my post about misunderstanding Pitt’s position. [/quote]
I totally disagree with his position on murder
[/quote]
Okay, I said I agree with him not you.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not want to redistribute any one’s wealth , I just want the wealth the middle class lost to the upper class , returned . I call it REREDISTRIBUTION .
I think America needs a liberal dose of progress, Conserving our fiscal assets . (ASK)
Our problem is the way we elect our politicians . The people that contribute to the campaigns expect results for their contribution .
50 American (PEOPLE) donate more than %50 of all Americans .Policy is written to benefit the wealthy . Citizens United is the reason we can not tell Bush from Obama and we would never seen any difference between Obama and Romney besides a white president and maybe minus Obama care
[/quote]
What principles would run your ideal government system?[/quote]
freedom . The only laws on the books are where people or corporations infringed on people’s rights
[/quote]
So laws against say murder aren’t good in your opinion?[/quote]
Murder doesn’t infringe on others rights?[/quote]
Laws against murder infringe on the murders right to freedom. [/quote]
One’s freedom ends where another’s begins. That creates maximum freedom. Anything more, one way or the other, is encroachment on another’s freedom, so a law against murder does not infringe on the right/s of anyone. It may infringe on the murderer’s ability, but not his rights or freedom.[/quote]
I agree with you, see my post about misunderstanding Pitt’s position. [/quote]
I totally disagree with his position on murder
[/quote]
Okay, I said I agree with him not you. [/quote]
you agree that murder does not infringe on the victims right to life ?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Okay, I said I agree with him not you. [/quote]
Will you please join me in asking Pittbulll to give us his opinion on murder laws?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What on Earth does that graph have to do with Airtruth’s question?[/quote]
Also note the graph is garbage. It uses family income and doesn’t openly admit or explain how it adjusts family sizes changing throughout time.
It also, quite predictably, ignores income mobility. As in the same people who make up the upper quintile in 1990 may not be the same people who make up the upper quintile in 2000 or 2010.
I’m sure, though, given the above two weakness, it adjusts for the effect of babyboomer retirement. 
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
you agree that murder does not infringe on the victims right to life ?[/quote]
What?
How did you arrive at this conclusion from what he wrote?