your thoughts on the direction government is headed

Discussion in 'The Refreshment Lounge' started by Belcher, Mar 7, 2013.

  1. Belcher

    Belcher Registered User

    27
    0
    1
    what are your thoughts on the way the government is ran and the path that we are going down. With the current economy falling in to a pit and our rights being trampled on, what do you foresee.
    Is the change for the good or bad.
     
  2. jwhoff

    jwhoff Premium Member

    2,591
    142
    83
    We are transforming from the nation state to the corporate state. We've been told this many times over the past eight-to-ten years. Several years ago TIME magazine did a cover and devoted most of an edition to the topic. So it's not freaks talking this one up.

    This has been done before. Fuedalism to nation state. Monarchy to republic.

    No change was ever made without disruption of the civil and economic norms. Our way of doing things now will no longer exist.

    The nation state appears to have run its course. Problematic in that it created issues and trouble for international corporations and became a hinderance to global economics.

    Big money has us fighting among our selves over petty issues. We're fighting racial, generation and immigrantion issues while they see only profits from the mayham! We're tearing ourselves apart daily. Thus, we're losing our power as a people with one voice. All the easier to sweep away the nation state.

    They'll be there to offer simply answers and the corporate way. After all, don't we want less government? Damn the restrictions, let the market bear the costs.

    What a silly concept: "what price freedom."

    I think I'm going to watch Entertainment Tonight! There's somethig worth my time.

    After all, I'm entitled!
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2013
  3. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    There's always "reality" TV!
     
  4. Rick Clifton

    Rick Clifton Registered User

    27
    3
    3
    [h=1]Why Were Corporations Illegal Before 1819?[/h] While many here believe that Corporations are part of a healthy Free Market, it should be noted that our founders fought the British Corporations AS WELL AS the British Government.
    So when you think it's "libertarian" to defend corporations like Monsanto, think again.
    _____________
    When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
    Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.
    The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:
    * Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
    * Corporations were often terminated if they caused public harm.
    * Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
    * Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.

    http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/


    But aren't corporations just part of the free market? Isn't that what capitalism is all about - corporate interests driving the economy?
    Actually, no. Corporate libertarians would have you believe that somehow corporate dominance is entirely consistent with the values and vision of the Founding Fathers, but this is pure myth. The framers believed in limited government and free markets, but corporations were almost non-existent in the early days of the Republic. Unlike today, one could not form a corporation simply by filing a few papers with a government office; instead, permission from the government was needed (usually via an act of the Legislature)

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/why-corporations-are-psychotic
     
  5. RedTemplar

    RedTemplar Johnny Joe Combs Premium Member

    1,072
    36
    68
    Our economy is failing and the stock market is at an all time high. And the Wildcats can't shoot, pass, or dribble. What time does Entertainment Tonight come on?
     
  6. JJones

    JJones Moderator Staff Member

    1,146
    619
    113
    The economy is getting worse? But the mainstream media keeps telling me that it's getting better! :001_cool:

    Remember the golden rule: Whoever has the gold makes the rules. And since cooperations are people (even though they aren't) and filthy rich, they get to make the rules.

    So long as we're somewhat on this subject, here's a neat video for you guys.

    [video=youtube_share;QPKKQnijnsM]http://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM[/video]
     
  7. jwhoff

    jwhoff Premium Member

    2,591
    142
    83
    Now! For the first time we are having a serious discussion.

    So all this badgering about Republicans, Democrats, Populist, Tea, Green and purple parties is of no value. All it does is tear us apart at the lower end (apparently plus-80 percent of the population) of the food chain. We've been losing ground since the late 1970s. Of course, that's when big money decided they should make money financing daily purchases we made off selling us stuff we didn't always need.

    Be honest, how much of evey dollar you make goes to pay off your financed debts?

    We're being sucked in and taught to like it. These guys are pretty smart, don'tyahthink?
     
  8. Rick Clifton

    Rick Clifton Registered User

    27
    3
    3
    [h=1]Why Were Corporations Illegal Before 1819?[/h] While many here believe that Corporations are part of a healthy Free Market, it should be noted that our founders fought the British Corporations AS WELL AS the British Government.
    So when you think it's "libertarian" to defend corporations like Monsanto, think again.
    _____________
    When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
    Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.
    The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:
    * Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
    * Corporations were often terminated if they caused public harm.
    * Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
    * Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.

    http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/


    But aren't corporations just part of the free market? Isn't that what capitalism is all about - corporate interests driving the economy?
    Actually, no. Corporate libertarians would have you believe that somehow corporate dominance is entirely consistent with the values and vision of the Founding Fathers, but this is pure myth. The framers believed in limited government and free markets, but corporations were almost non-existent in the early days of the Republic. Unlike today, one could not form a corporation simply by filing a few papers with a government office; instead, permission from the government was needed (usually via an act of the Legislature)

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/why-corporations-are-psychotic
     
  9. jwhoff

    jwhoff Premium Member

    2,591
    142
    83
    Nope, RedTemplar, the 'Cats can't even pour it in the ocean this year.

    I fear Wild Bill_Lins has a point about reality TV.

    Only wish I had thought about that one last night.

    :38:
     
  10. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    You all are falling in to the trap that has been set by pregresives (Please read you self on this). They make a monarc with socialist leanings sound good like robin hood sounds good untill you see how many truley evel things have to happen to make it work.

    They deminaize so call big busniess. Corperations are made up of people and if any of them violate the law they should be procuted and will be procuted if they violate a law. Corps. are not someting to be taxed they have already payed taxes for everything that you want to be taxed for. and corpate taxes are on profits. where do the profits go to the employees and investment of new products or equpment. The reasion management get big buck is they would go someplace else if they are not pay for ideas and leadership that they provide. Also some have to be paied more because they are called the accountable exective who will be put in jail if any employee of the company does wrong on behalf of the company. This is even if he did not have knolage of the wrong doing.

    Big corporations do a lot they may not make many new jobs but they keep old jobs so somany new ones don't have to be created. If you are non-union in a right to work state you can ether get a newely created job or keep the one you have. When you look at jobs you don't just look at pay (most do) but the totle cost of benifits. A contractor may make $250.00 an hour but he only recive about $25 an hour that he can spend. (all of the thing a big busness pays plus his side of the taxes)


    I can go on and on and on. You see there are two sides to all things and when laws are made to fix a perseption there are unintended consequences and the low information voters only seem to see the perseptions.

    If anyone wants me to go on and on and on just ask.
     
  11. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    The inequlity of anything will always happen when liberty and freedom happens because a person relyes on himself and not others to reconcile the inequlaitys and those who worry more about what others are doing than themself will not have time to reconcile the problems on there own.
     
  12. DJGurkins

    DJGurkins Floresville #515 Premium Member

    325
    20
    38
    Wow you bring up a lot of good points jvarnell. I think I need to look at things maybe from a different vantage point.
     
  13. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    Thank you
     
  14. jwhoff

    jwhoff Premium Member

    2,591
    142
    83
    No one lives in this economy alone. Others MUST participate in one way or another. That participation can be constructive or destructive. The pendulum seldom finds true center is such turbulence. That is the potential problem I see.

    The following is my caution to the extreme viewpoints that are held by unapologetic defenders of capitalism in and of itself. And, carried through logically, to those who oppose it completely.

    I know the alter of PURE CAPITALISM many ascribe to. It's all to alluring to those who want more and, somehow, believe they can achieve their goals no matter the odds or who is harmed in the end.

    The problem is, you can't leave everyone else in the trash heap. Eventually the bill will become due. Unrest will lead to your eventual downfall. Not only do you have to answer for your greed, you will fall victim to the bigger fish in the limited pond.

    Look at the teachings of masonry closer. Somewhere you will find the moral of fair play. Pay the man what he deserves, don't shortchange him from his fair portion. Your reward will be peace and harmony if not a sense of fair play. Look further to the holy scriptures of world religions and find that the sense of sharing and lending a helping hand abound. Did not the Hebrews leave a tenth if the fields for the poor to reap? (Find it when studying Boaz). What say ye is practiced during the season of Ramadan? We all know of the Golden Rule.

    Now I know, the first defense one feels compelled to throw against such a question is: Why should those who are lazy (worthless) reap the rewards of those who work. But just think further about this defense. Really, can anyone say that one percent of the population is carrying the other ninty-nine percent of lazy, shiftless, no ambition population in this country?

    Even the most ardent defender of the gods of Pure Capitalism will have a hard time with that question. One would logically presume.

    Capitalism is not the issue. The issue is that there are those who are abusing it! They do not want economic principles to work. They continually search for ways to perverse and redefine them. Greed, my dear friend, is a terrible vice to waste.

    Now I know this post will not set well on the alter before the gods of Pure Capitalism, but here is a look at an opposing view. A more tempered view of things. Though I fully expect to be painted into the corner of socialist, if not Karl Marx himself, for daring to oppose Pure Capitalism.

    No one economic system is perfect. No one economic system is pure evil in and of itself. Rather the abuses thereof can destroy the primary concept. Look not to the evils of particular economic systems. Rather look to the abuses of each.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2013
  15. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    Bro. jwhoff Pure Capitalism dosen't preclude someone from being genrous and giving. To go along with the words Geed we should also look at the word envy and who decides what is fair. (I deaming them worthey) Not some burocrat deming them worthy of someone else's hard work. Abuses happen when someone makes a rule/law to fix a simptom like fairness of outcome. We as Masons and all religens are called to help the poor (and that is in our harts). When the government makes a rule/law that makes me do something they are telling me how they want the poor helped which may not be how they need to be helped.

    economic principles do not equel equlity of outcome it is a ballance. If you look at the economic bell curve you will notic that econimic rules made by government don't take money form the right hand side of the curve and give to the left side it flattens the curve. The curve is population on the Y and Income is X.

    Socialism really is a government making econmic rules to cause an outcome by fource and the indivual has no free will to decide who is worthy. Who better than you can be genrous to others with your money.

    A quick note look up what percentage of income ploititions gave to charities in 2010 (I think that 2011 and 2012 are not published)

    I had no problem with your post an am trying to work with you to show you that words like greed, fairness and income equlity happen to brake down personal genorisity.
     
  16. RedTemplar

    RedTemplar Johnny Joe Combs Premium Member

    1,072
    36
    68
    When we have pure socialism or pure fascism we will live under tyranny. In all things, moderation. Let us not pervert the purpose of refreshment into intemperance or excess.
     
  17. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    Yes but Captilisam fixes both of those.
     
  18. RedTemplar

    RedTemplar Johnny Joe Combs Premium Member

    1,072
    36
    68

    True, but it concerns you a great deal more if you are on the side that needs
    to be fixed.
     
  19. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    Yep that is why captlisam is the way in my view because it is a person making his own decision at what price to sell a product. Food and water alone execpeted as a need that needs to be watched for gouging. This also makes freemasonery a necessity for society because this is the guiding principals in stead of laws that regulate actions. Every time you put a law in to regulate actions it takes away from tenniants of masonary.

    What I have said above is how I really feel and I am having a hard time understanding how a mason can have socilist tendencies because they are forced by laws and not by freedom ofwill to help others.
     
  20. Belcher

    Belcher Registered User

    27
    0
    1
    Well said my brother. The foundation of this great country is based on our many freedoms. If we continue to allow the government the
    Take them we will all be puppets on strings. Why is it that with the economy and the stock market at an all time high. We as a country can not come out of this economic slump. I for one can not make since of how someone will give up there rights.

    I will not stand hoodwinked in front of a wall......
     

Share My Freemasonry