"You didn't build that ... "

IisJustMe · Jul 20, 2012

Thekla said:
I didn't vote for Obama, don't intend to - but clearly, Romney misquoted him
(or distorted what he said).

Romney didn't quote anyone. The media (even the precious liberal-socialist media, aka ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, et al) are the ones who quoted him, and then desperately tried to backtrack by saying, "Oh, he said that only in the context of this." They realized their reporting was going to put Odumba in a serious hole, and it has, and will continue to do so as long as he continues to defend his idiotic remarks instead of just opting for the obvious: He misspoke during an election year and needs to find a gracious way out so he can mend fences with the electorate. I'm beginning to think he's too stupid to realize that, or honestly believes his own ideology and his own B/S so thoroughly that he thinks the American people actually support the advent of socialism. They don't, as he will learn on November 6.

Thekla · Jul 20, 2012

IisJustMe said:
Romney didn't quote anyone. The media (even the precious liberal-socialist media, aka ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, et al) are the ones who quoted him, and then desperately tried to backtrack by saying, "Oh, he said that only in the context of this." They realized their reporting was going to put Odumba in a serious hole, and it has, and will continue to do so as long as he continues to defend his idiotic remarks instead of just opting for the obvious: He misspoke during an election year and needs to find a gracious way out so he can mend fences with the electorate. I'm beginning to think he's too stupid to realize that, or honestly believes his own ideology and his own B/S so thoroughly that he thinks the American people actually support the advent of socialism. They don't, as he will learn on November 6.

I don't think using insulting name-changes supports your argument.

I read the post that gave the statement in context, and it is clearly not what has been presented by numerous posters here.

Per Romney, he's a part of this:

Imo, they're similar - we no longer have a real democracy, and the form of capitalism we have is actually 'corporatism'. Both do and will favor Wall Street and financialization - which is about short term profit, not investment and value creation (which tends to focus on long-term goals).

In this system, the biggest purse wins regardless of value -- and the biggest purse has been created by LIBOR rigging, LBO (not the same as true venture capitalism), Bond-rate rigging (recent lawsuit, won, evidencing widespread collusion and fraud among financial institutions), an unregulated derivates market (estimated to be twice the annual global GDP), rumbles that are gaining in credibility that Lehman's default was actually 'designed/forced' by another major financial institution (strategically withholding return of funds, likely led to profits based on CDSs), outright fraud (MF Global, for example), manipulated (fraudulant) ratings by the Credit Rating agencies, a stock market that is 75% robo-trading (and the bigger the pockets to geographically position trading servers, the higher the win), and a double standard (big crime and fraud walks, little crime lands you in a for-profit prison).

Given his Mass. document-shredding, refusal to release tax returns, failure to actually state what his "plan" is, almost secretive persona, respect for letter but apparently not 'spirit' of the law (a 'wiggly' morality in my view), clear preference for power - circles, dubious Mass. record on employment etc. (see vetting document - consideration for VP in McCain run), Harvard background (Summers, Neoliberal breeding-ground), Hawkish bluster, etc. etc. - nah, no way I'm voting for Romney.

Thekla · Jul 20, 2012

Oh, and they both support the TPP trade agreement (multinationals can demand community payment/tax for "lost profits" due to community standards and regulations).

Corporations will be above the government, meaning corporations will be the government.

No thanks.

Lovely Lane · Jul 20, 2012

IisJustMe said:
Romney didn't quote anyone. The media (even the precious liberal-socialist media, aka ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, et al) are the ones who quoted him, and then desperately tried to backtrack by saying, "Oh, he said that only in the context of this." They realized their reporting was going to put Odumba in a serious hole, and it has, and will continue to do so as long as he continues to defend his idiotic remarks instead of just opting for the obvious: He misspoke during an election year and needs to find a gracious way out so he can mend fences with the electorate. I'm beginning to think he's too stupid to realize that, or honestly believes his own ideology and his own B/S so thoroughly that he thinks the American people actually support the advent of socialism. They don't, as he will learn on November 6.

now it's the ADVENT OF SOCIALISM, all other posts from this one informs us that Socialism is here, on-going. And still this guy won't define it and uses it liberally. I don't believe he knows what it is. Just a word to use to demean the opposition compliments of Fox and Friends no doubt.

ameriswede · Jul 20, 2012

Well said. What we now have, is capitalism run amuck. A very raw form. As for the term socialism, or socialist...like you say, many definitions. What I would like to see more of in USA, is a capitalism that government to capitalizes on, taking the opportunity to spread some of its gains, insuring that all citizens basic needs are met. (I am so liberal that I would fine the right to quality health insurance and higher education, as a basic need. With all the wealth that is produced in USA, there is no excuse not to provide for such a system. Well, that is, if greed does not qualify as an exuse.

ameriswede · Jul 20, 2012

The government went functioning effectively, will facilitate the generation of income. For example, people that are healthy and well educated...are those best equipped to generate income. Thus, a government that capitalizes on the gains of capitalism, will make sure that the people of its land are provided with health care and higher education. A more just distribution of wealth, I would suggest. How can it possibly be good for the American society as a whole, for 1% of the population, to hoad over 37% of its wealth. By the people and for the people...that would include all of them? Or just a select few?

Thekla · Jul 20, 2012

ameriswede said:
Well said. What we now have, is capitalism run amuck. A very raw form. As for the term socialism, or socialist...like you say, many definitions. What I would like to see more of in USA, is a capitalism that government to capitalizes on, taking the opportunity to spread some of its gains, insuring that all citizens basic needs are met. (I am so liberal that I would fine the right to quality health insurance and higher education, as a basic need. With all the wealth that is produced in USA, there is no excuse not to provide for such a system. Well, that is, if greed does not qualify as an exuse.

"Amuck" is a kind term for it

The US seems to have lost all sense of civic pride, civic duty, and interest in the future of this country and the well-being of its citizens. When I was a kid, businesses were largely run by neighbors - ie people who lived in the same community and were concerned for the well-being of that community, their community. That's been lost ...

Thekla · Jul 20, 2012

ameriswede said:
The government went functioning effectively, will facilitate the generation of income. For example, people that are healthy and well educated...are those best equipped to generate income. Thus, a government that capitalizes on the gains of capitalism, will make sure that the people of its land are provided with health care and higher education. A more just distribution of wealth, I would suggest. How can it possibly be good for the American society as a whole, for 1% of the population, to hoad over 37% of its wealth. By the people and for the people...that would include all of them? Or just a select few?

Years ago, at least in smaller communities, the poor never seemed to be so abjectly poor as they do now - someone would step forward to help. But as the middle class has eroded, the folks who used to help are now in need as well. Food pantries in the states empty quickly, and those who used to donate are now coming for aid.

And there is little sense of 'pride' in having a well-educated, healthy citizenry.

ameriswede · Jul 20, 2012

Thekla said:
"Amuck" is a kind term for it

The US seems to have lost all sense of civic pride, civic duty, and interest in the future of this country and the well-being of its citizens. When I was a kid, businesses were largely run by neighbors - ie people who lived in the same community and were concerned for the well-being of that community, their community. That's been lost ...

Just a side thought, regarding community. In Sweden, the tax system is sort of the opposite of what it is in US. In Sweden, the most of your taxes are payed more locally, and the smaller part goes to a more national "pocket". Makes local politicians more accountable to the people that vote them in office...tax money is more local. Think that is a wiser way of doing things.

Gxg (G²) · Jul 21, 2012

Thekla said:
Corporations will be above the government, meaning corporations will be the government.

Sadly, it seems we're already there.

Thekla · Jul 21, 2012

ameriswede said:
Just a side thought, regarding community. In Sweden, the tax system is sort of the opposite of what it is in US. In Sweden, the most of your taxes are payed more locally, and the smaller part goes to a more national "pocket". Makes local politicians more accountable to the people that vote them in office...tax money is more local. Think that is a wiser way of doing things.

That actually seems quite practical.

Thekla · Jul 21, 2012

Easy G (G²);61025508 said:
Sadly, it seems we're already there.

Hey, Easy G !

Yeah, I think that is the case ...

ameriswede · Jul 21, 2012

To be honest, and this is a very "un-american" thing to say, but at times, I can find American society quite embarrassing. While living in a country where there is a more just and equal "distribution of wealth" (ugly words, I know), and the vast majority of the population has a high quality of life, it is hard to explain the injustices one sees in American society where there are so many that are very poor, while there are some that are rich beyond what can be concieved.

IisJustMe · Jul 21, 2012

Thekla said:
That actually seems quite practical.

It sounds practical when he says it, but you ignored it when I said that we need to keep "real" government and taxes close to home?

And those of you who disparage capitalism as the bane of US society and the economy, don't talk with your mouth full, don't complain unless you have both hands on the wheel of your recently manufactured car, don't gripe as you go to the ATM to withdraw $200 for your shopping spree ... etc., etc., etc.

Thekla · Jul 21, 2012

IisJustMe said:
It sounds practical when he says it, but you ignored it when I said that we need to keep "real" government and taxes close to home?

I do think it's practical, but the success of even this depends on the society in which it is practiced. In the States, we have our state and local legislators being heavily influenced by multinationals and deep-pocketed corporations through ALEC. There is little regard for the future (again, the business ethos of next-quarter profits and bonuses instead of long-term growth and investment), for a shared future and its basis in a well-ordered, healthy present. As the middle class erodes, falling real incomes and lost employment security have the effect of coercion to erode the baseline of what is acceptable. Finally, in the US there are roughly two camps - government as "evil", government as "savior". Imo, both are deeply wrong. We do need a strong government -- as corporate interests become increasingly super-powerful, a strong agile government that is responsive to the people is needed as a counter-balance to inordinately weighty power of corporate power.

Without a real sea-change in our country, I don't think even the model of local administration of taxes etc. will have any effect. Pa. is a good example.
Several localities have overturned corporate personhood and/or refused to allow particular corporations to operate within their borders. Corporations responded with deep-pocketed legal action, backed by the state of PA. The Supreme Court's ruling against Montana's (100 year old) campaign finance law is another example.

And those of you who disparage capitalism as the bane of US society and the economy, don't talk with your mouth full, don't complain unless you have both hands on the wheel of your recently manufactured car, don't gripe as you go to the ATM to withdraw $200 for your shopping spree ... etc., etc., etc.

There are many forms of capitalism, but I wouldn't even call what we have in the US capitalism at all (or socialism, as it certainly is not).

SearchingStudent · Jul 23, 2012

To those who swear up and down that "they" built their success solely on their own...you've forgotten one little thing...God. We don't do anything on our own now do we?

Those who are insisting that their success was due to only their own hard work are suffering from the sin of Pride...that is, putting all their faith into their own efforts rather than recognizing who gave them the gifts and ability to succeed...

Dieselman · Jul 23, 2012

Sweden is a beautiful country. However, when Hitler was killing 12 million civilians including the handicapped, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], homosexuals, people with birth defects and Jews, Sweden chose to sit by and do nothing about it. It didn't want to get involved.

During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Sweden allowed the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport (JuneJuly 1941) the German 163rd Infantry Division along with howitzers, tanks and anti-aircraft weapons and associated ammunition, from Norway to Finland. German soldiers traveling on leave between Norway and Germany were allowed passage through Sweden the so-called permittenttrafik. Iron ore was sold to Germany throughout the war.
Source

While the US has spent 4.7% of its GDP to protect nations like Sweden from being overrun by other nations like the former Soviet Union, Sweden contributes only 1.2% of its GDP for its own defense. Like many European nations, they hide behind a curtain of American military power and spend their tax money on social engineering.

In the 20th century, Socialism accounted for the deaths of over 200 million people. It's all about centralized power. It's good if you're the one in the center, but the further you are from the center, the less value you have to the state.

Lovely Lane · Jul 23, 2012

Dieselman said:
Sweden is a beautiful country. However, when Hitler was killing 12 million civilians including the handicapped, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], homosexuals, people with birth defects and Jews, Sweden chose to sit by and do nothing about it. It didn't want to get involved.

During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Sweden allowed the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport (JuneJuly 1941) the German 163rd Infantry Division along with howitzers, tanks and anti-aircraft weapons and associated ammunition, from Norway to Finland. German soldiers traveling on leave between Norway and Germany were allowed passage through Sweden the so-called permittenttrafik. Iron ore was sold to Germany throughout the war.
Source

While the US has spent 4.7% of its GDP to protect nations like Sweden from being overrun by other nations like the former Soviet Union, Sweden contributes only 1.2% of its GDP for its own defense. Like many European nations, they hide behind a curtain of American military power and spend their tax money on social engineering.

In the 20th century, Socialism accounted for the deaths of over 200 million people. It's all about centralized power. It's good if you're the one in the center, but the further you are from the center, the less value you have to the state.

I could have painted Mona Lisa with a 6 inch brush using two broad strokes and it would have been a better rendition than what you portray of Sweden in WWII. You provided a source link and in that there is much information you ignored.

So, how many deaths are attributed to Capitalism? I don't see how you can attribute deaths to a economic system, show me how, thanks.

IisJustMe · Jul 23, 2012

SearchingStudent said:
To those who swear up and down that "they" built their success solely on their own...you've forgotten one little thing...God. We don't do anything on our own now do we?

Show me where Odumba credited got in his little socialist primer lesson?

Almighty's humble servant · Jul 23, 2012

Godcreatedsteve said:
Parasites like Romney build nothing, give nothing, and do nothing but export jobs and cannibalize companies that other people helped to build. This worship of wall street and all the lowlifes who manipulate money is sickening and obscene.

Romney had a business that never produced anything but money (for him) and pink slips (for men better than him). To pretend otherwise is delusional.

Bravo.....another man who thinks on his own. Let those who would have satan pull their strings be.

"You didn't build that ... "

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)

Thekla

Guest

Thekla

Guest

Lovely Lane

Guest

Member

Member

Thekla

Guest

Thekla

Guest

Member

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Thekla

Guest

Thekla

Guest

Member

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)

Thekla

Guest

Senior Member

Dieselman

Guest

Lovely Lane

Guest

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)

Fisher of men

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency