Who is John Galt

neptunechimney wrote: AV,it is not just a welfare state.


"The US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) says it will seek an order to require Boeing to place the second 787 production line in Washington state, in response to charges filed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) 17 months after Boeing selected North Charleston, South Carolina to host the site."


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... -line.html

I know, I know, we're supposed to believe that unions are the boogeyman, too.

Again, I ask....do you think the personal wealth of the middle class disappeared into the hands of the unions? Or into the bank accounts of the 1/2 of 1% that not only didn't lose ground in the Great Recession, but managed to increase their lead over the rest of us?

It's not the government that's ruined the country, it's the fact that the government is now virtually owned by international corporations.

It's not unions that are destroying our country, it's the fact that so many people have to scramble to get a job, any job. It does no good to envy those who got or held onto a job because of union pressure. And it does no good to believe the propaganda put out by those who have the most to gain from abolishing unions that they are the problem. International corporations cannot force us to compete with Indonesian workers until they have completely destroyed the unions. Yes, I am aware tht unions are not perfect. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater by caving to the demands of the oligarchs that workers can be allowed no representation at all.

This is common sense, people, that famous commons sense most of you put so much stock in. Why is it that common sense seems to elude so many when they get trapped into right/left bickering? Can't you see it plays right into the hands of those on the top of the heap?

Who benefits MOST if unions are destroyed? Hint: It isn't the average working man, and it isn't Joe the Plumber Small Business Owner and it isn't the average middle class person.

SS109 wrote:

Soulshiner wrote: Hard to see her as an icon when she took her Social Security and Medicare under the radar. She took part in the welfare state she so despised in her books instead of using her earned income to take care of herself. Instead, she let the government health care take care of her...

So you believe Social Security and Medicare are welfare? That our senior citizens who payed into the plan for decades are looters?

Why not take back what you have been paying for? My father is a small goverment guy but after paying into Social Security and Medicare for 53 years, he believes he is entitled to the benefits for a couple years.

Yep, of course it is welfare. Most people who collect foodstamps and other forms of welfare have also paid a lot into the system. Very few people spend their whole lives living exclusively on government benefits. The vast majority are taxpayers most of their lives. Some collect more, some less, depending on circumstances. But it's still all welfare. They dressed up SS and Medicare in fancy dress so as not to offend the first recipients who had grown up with a natural dislike for "charity", but welfare, whether it be food stamps or SS, isn't charity. It's a social safety net funded by all taxpayers. Most people probably pay into it more than they'll ever receive, but the same is true for health insurance, auto insurance, and life insurance.

It seems that "certain" kinds of welfare have been more stigmatized than others, but there really isn't much rational difference between Medicare, and Food Stamps other than that one is "needs based" and one isn't. If the Republicans have their way, they'll make them all needs based anyway and then there will be NO difference.

The only way to shrink the size of social entitlements is to ensure there are enough jobs that pay living wages so that anyone who wants one can get one.

Oh my gosh- you almost gave me a heart attack- you nearly sounded like a capitalist.

But you know what - maybe you didn't understand what you were saying.

Don't you and everyone else understand- the elite you talk about only have the influence they have through the taxing and regulating power of government! If we can together tear it down- we will be doing all of us a favor. I truly believe that a welfare state would not be needed at all - if we only get rid of this massive drag on all of us called the government- at all levels.

And my proof- this country did without 95% of that crap for more than 150 years- we became the world's envy in that time, and created better lives and higher standards of living than the world had ever seen. Were there up's and down's - of course- but most of it was up!

This is the power- the elite have no power over us without the government they buy. I'm talking about all the looters- the lazy welfare mom who could be working- and the massive corporation getting special treatment by paying for lobbists. Remove it and we all have more liberty and freedom.

And there would be jobs for all- all who are willing to make the most of their lives. And for those who are too lazy- there would be much less.

AspenValley wrote: It's not the government that's ruined the country, it's the fact that the government is now virtually owned by international corporations.

Otherwise known as Fascism.

BearMtnHIB wrote:

The only way to shrink the size of social entitlements is to ensure there are enough jobs that pay living wages so that anyone who wants one can get one.

Oh my gosh- you almost gave me a heart attack- you nearly sounded like a capitalist.

But you know what - maybe you didn't understand what you were saying.

Don't you and everyone else understand- the elite you talk about only have the influence they have through the taxing and regulating power of government! If we can together tear it down- we will be doing all of us a favor. I truly believe that a welfare state would not be needed at all - if we only get rid of this massive drag on all of us called the government- at all levels.

And my proof- this country did without 95% of that crap for more than 150 years- we became the world's envy in that time, and created better lives and higher standards of living than the world had ever seen. Were there up's and down's - of course- but most of it was up!

This is the power- the elite have no power over us without the government they buy. I'm talking about all the looters- the lazy welfare mom who could be working- and the massive corporation getting special treatment by paying for lobbists. Remove it and we all have more liberty and freedom.

And there would be jobs for all- all who are willing to make the most of their lives. And for those who are too lazy- there would be much less.

I am a capitalist. The delusion that anyone to the left of Ghengis Khan is a communist or socialist is just that, a delusion. But that doesn't mean I don't think there should be limits to the free market. History supplies us with plenty of reasons why.

And I disagree that the elite would have no power over us without the power of the government. They aren't controlling us with the power to tax, they are controlling us with the power to buy policy that benefits themselves, and themselves only. They are dismantling Ever.Single.Thing our duly elected representatives have built that prevents them from having absolute tyrany over our lives, and with the willing consent of those who are so cowed by them they would rather settle for the crumbs off the rich man's table than stand up to them and call them the tyrants they are.

The government we had in 1850 was just fine. For 1850. This isn't the same world it was then and we can't go back even if we wanted to. The idea that we can somehow restore ourselves to an imaginary golden age is absolute crap. Like it or not, and until and unless the whole modern world crumbles (which it very well may) the world we live in is too different now than it was then to try to force 1850s style governance on us.

I don't believe that government can solve everything, or even most things. But I do believe that a government that is no longer of, for, and by the people is evil and corrupt and must go. I see people like the Tea Partiers waving flags and believing they are going to "win back their country" by punishing people farther down the totem pole than they are. BS. They aren't who took your country, pal. And you aren't going to get your country back by pandering to the people who did, either. Dithering and emoting over your legendary "welfare queen" who "should" get a job is just a big fat smokescreen blown over people so they don't stop to think about who the real villians are.

...they are controlling us with the power to buy policy that benefits themselves, and themselves only

Remove the governmental power to drive policy- they have no power over us at all. We would be free.

And we sure can return to an 1850 government level- about 4% of the national ecomony. That would put 96% of the economy back in our hands.

You have no idea what a booming economy ours would become again.

BearMtnHIB wrote:

...they are controlling us with the power to buy policy that benefits themselves, and themselves only

Remove the governmental power to drive policy- they have no power over us at all. We would be free.

And we sure can return to an 1850 government level- about 4% of the national ecomony. That would put 96% of the economy back in our hands.

You have no idea what a booming economy ours would become again.

I actually agree with you that a smaller government would be a better government. I might disagree on how much smaller, and on what should be smaller.

I'm betting you think most of that 4% should go to the military, am I right? And that's precisely where I'd like to see it shot to sh**, and not because I'm a weenie pacifist, either. It's because that is the primary way that a certain percentage hangs on to power, and it is also the avenue through which much of their ill-gotten wealth flows. If this country goes down, it's going to be because we let these assholes drive us into bankruptcy with foreign wars even as they are lining their silk pockets with the profits.

It's probably too late though. I always knew Bush and Cheney were totally in their pockets but I had some hope they hadn't bought out the Dems completely, too. But if you look at what Obama has done, it's clear they have. There is no political solution to this. It's too late.

AspenValley wrote:

neptunechimney wrote: AV,it is not just a welfare state.


"The US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) says it will seek an order to require Boeing to place the second 787 production line in Washington state, in response to charges filed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) 17 months after Boeing selected North Charleston, South Carolina to host the site."


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... -line.html

I know, I know, we're supposed to believe that unions are the boogeyman, too.

Again, I ask....do you think the personal wealth of the middle class disappeared into the hands of the unions? Or into the bank accounts of the 1/2 of 1% that not only didn't lose ground in the Great Recession, but managed to increase their lead over the rest of us?

It's not the government that's ruined the country, it's the fact that the government is now virtually owned by international corporations.

It's not unions that are destroying our country, it's the fact that so many people have to scramble to get a job, any job. It does no good to envy those who got or held onto a job because of union pressure. And it does no good to believe the propaganda put out by those who have the most to gain from abolishing unions that they are the problem. International corporations cannot force us to compete with Indonesian workers until they have completely destroyed the unions. Yes, I am aware tht unions are not perfect. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater by caving to the demands of the oligarchs that workers can be allowed no representation at all.

This is common sense, people, that famous commons sense most of you put so much stock in. Why is it that common sense seems to elude so many when they get trapped into right/left bickering? Can't you see it plays right into the hands of those on the top of the heap?

Who benefits MOST if unions are destroyed? Hint: It isn't the average working man, and it isn't Joe the Plumber Small Business Owner and it isn't the average middle class person.

Actually goverment has taken over many of the duties of the union, unsafe workplace, call OSHA. Lack of a living wage, the earned income tax credit will make up the difference. And unions can't negotiate for higher earnings when the domestic manufacturers are losing market share to overseas manufacturers.

SS109 wrote: Actually goverment has taken over many of the duties of the union, unsafe workplace, call OSHA. Lack of a living wage, the earned income tax credit will make up the difference. And unions can't negotiate for higher earnings when the domestic manufacturers are losing market share to overseas manufacturers.

I wouldn't say they have "taken over" the functions of unions when it comes to things like safety standards, I'd say rather that things like that have come into being through pressure from the unions. OSHA can be a total PIA sometimes, but if you had any idea of what workplaces might be like without them....well, just read up on what it's like to work in a Chinese or Indonesian factory.

However, I find it totally unacceptable that taxpayers have to pay the burden of subsidizing corporations who won't pay living wages through things like the EIC, foodstamps and other welfare assistance to families who are working full time but still not earning a living wage. Why the heck should I have to pay taxes to subsidize Walmart getting away with paying crappy wages?

The Lefties here who condemm Ms. Rand because they think she would mock the TEA Party forgot to mention that Ayn was also a confirmed athiest. I can imagine more on the Right upset with her for that belief.

Oh btw, going to see it tonight with like minded friends. Couldn't interest my Obama supporting buddies in seeing a different viewpoint, maybe they don't like to have their beliefs tested?