• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

And Mitt Picks...

ElasticNinja said:
And these things exist in social democracy likewise, and that system *actually works*, and does so without massive waste of resources like the US lassez-faire system.
Click to expand...

Which social democracy country are you referring to?

As for the US, we haven't followed libertarian principles in ~100 years, so don't confuse the country as it was founded with the one that exists now.
 
ylexot said:
So now that you Twitter, you don't want personal freedom? You shouldn't be responsible for yourself?
Click to expand...

http://androidforums.com/politics-current-affairs/578257-mitt-picks-5.html#post4902450

Depends who is doing the defining. The planter elite at one time did the defining.

Slavery in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Constitution of the United States was drafted in 1787, and included several provisions regarding slavery. Section 9 of Article I allowed the continued "importation" of slaves. By prohibiting changes for two decades to regulation of the slave trade, Article V effectively protected the trade until 1808, giving the States then existing 20 years to resolve this issue. During that time, planters in states of the Lower South imported tens of thousands of slaves, more than during any previous two decades in colonial/US history.[28]

As further protection for slavery, the delegates approved Section 2 of Article IV, which prohibited citizens from providing assistance to escaping slaves and required the return of chattel property to owners.

In a section negotiated by James Madison of Virginia, Section 2 of Article I designated "other persons" (slaves) to be added to the total of the state's free population, at the rate of three-fifths of their total number, to establish the state's official population for the purposes of apportionment of Congressional representation and federal taxation.[29] This increased the power of southern states in Congress for decades, affecting national policies and legislation. They were represented primarily by men of their planter elite, who also dominated the presidency for nearly 50 years.
 
ylexot said:
Which social democracy country are you referring to?

As for the US, we haven't followed libertarian principles in ~100 years, so don't confuse the country as it was founded with the one that exists now.
Click to expand...

Do I have to refer to a country? There's more to life than a nation state.

Also, I'm sure people had a great quality of life 100 years ago and enjoyed the financial crashes thoroughly.
 
ElasticNinja said:
Do I have to refer to a country? There's more to life than a nation state.

Also, I'm sure people had a great quality of life 100 years ago and enjoyed the financial crashes thoroughly.
Click to expand...

Those crashes affected people around the world. Government can't insulate people from that. Look at Greece. They are about to go broke and they have a social welfare system do they not?

jhtalisman said:
The bold and underlined is a complete lie. The tax hit on retirement funds drawn before retirement age is reached is 10%, no more and no less. Your sources are not reliable, just as your apparent choice of government representation is not reliable or competent.
Click to expand...

The penalty for early with drawal is your tax bracket + 10%. In some cases it's up to 25%. In this case, this co-worker and I were in the 35% tax bracket so the penalty is your tax bracket + 10% = 45% in this case.

Edit: Just checked the numbers and it appears I was wrong. 25% tax bracket, not 35%. So 25%+10% total is a 35% hit, not a 45%. My previous point stands though it's a ridiculously foolish move. Also interesting to note that one of Obama's first proposed solutions for the economy was to let people withdraw from their retirement tax free. That's absolutely brilliant. Hand someone a loaded gun and have them put it to their financial head. That's a wonderful solution. Thankfully it got shot down.
 
OutofDate1980 said:
http://androidforums.com/politics-current-affairs/578257-mitt-picks-5.html#post4902450

Depends who is doing the defining. The planter elite at one time did the defining.

Slavery in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Constitution of the United States was drafted in 1787, and included several provisions regarding slavery. Section 9 of Article I allowed the continued "importation" of slaves. By prohibiting changes for two decades to regulation of the slave trade, Article V effectively protected the trade until 1808, giving the States then existing 20 years to resolve this issue. During that time, planters in states of the Lower South imported tens of thousands of slaves, more than during any previous two decades in colonial/US history.[28]

As further protection for slavery, the delegates approved Section 2 of Article IV, which prohibited citizens from providing assistance to escaping slaves and required the return of chattel property to owners.

In a section negotiated by James Madison of Virginia, Section 2 of Article I designated "other persons" (slaves) to be added to the total of the state's free population, at the rate of three-fifths of their total number, to establish the state's official population for the purposes of apportionment of Congressional representation and federal taxation.[29] This increased the power of southern states in Congress for decades, affecting national policies and legislation. They were represented primarily by men of their planter elite, who also dominated the presidency for nearly 50 years.
Click to expand...
The slavery argument...so predictable. I'll let Frederick Douglass (he was a slave...in case you don't know) handle this one. It's a long read, but the overall conclusion is that the Constitution and the founders were against slavery.
The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery? by Frederick Douglass

Now, does the fact that slavery existed back then negate the entire document?
 
ElasticNinja said:
Do I have to refer to a country? There's more to life than a nation state.

Also, I'm sure people had a great quality of life 100 years ago and enjoyed the financial crashes thoroughly.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should have asked for an example instead of assuming that you were referring to a specific country. Since we can't agree on what right and left are, trying to figure out what you mean by a social democracy seems futile.
 
ylexot said:
The slavery argument...so predictable. I'll let Frederick Douglass (he was a slave...in case you don't know) handle this one. It's a long read, but the overall conclusion is that the Constitution and the founders were against slavery.
The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery? by Frederick Douglass

Now, does the fact that slavery existed back then negate the entire document?
Click to expand...

Yeah, right. That's why it took a civil war to end de jure, but not de facto slavery.
 
Ylexot, social democracy is fairly common in Europe to varying degrees, outside of 7 or 8 post communist ones (Poland, Lithuania, Romania... you get the picture).
Ireland is a social democracy (lite, perhaps, but still), as is Belgium, Finland, Portugal.

A.Nonymous said:
Those crashes affected people around the world. Government can't insulate people from that. Look at Greece. They are about to go broke and they have a social welfare system do they not?
Click to expand...

They are indeed broke, and we aren't helping. Lots of problems with that country.
It was a social democracy to a large extent. Problem was they had far too many public employees who weren't needed and the upper middle class didn't pay tax.
Pretty sure it had a better healthcare system than the States though.
 
ylexot said:
So you're saying you know more about slavery and the Constitution than Frederick Douglass? That takes some pretty big balls.
Click to expand...

You need not fantasize what I say, I write it out for you.

Actual history: There was chattel slavery in the US and it was legal under the original Constitution, which was later amended to outlaw same.

Actual history: Many of the founders owned slaves.

Alternate history: "Constitution and the founders were against slavery."

Can you tell the difference ?
 
A.Nonymous said:
That they still can't afford.
Click to expand...

What exactly is your point? They dont have enough tax revenues, and have too much spending. Doesnt negate my point. The most corrupt, bloated and inefficient country in Europe had a healthcare system more efficient than yours.
 
ElasticNinja said:
What exactly is your point? They dont have enough tax revenues, and have too much spending. Doesnt negate my point. The most corrupt, bloated and inefficient country in Europe had a healthcare system more efficient than yours.
Click to expand...

Many don't understand micro/macro economics.

Close your eyes and pretend one is a CEO of an international corporation with wholly owned subsidiaries.

You have subsidiaries that can produce services at 1/3 of the cost of another subsidiary, can you implement this cost saving globally ?
 
OutofDate1980 said:
You need not fantasize what I say, I write it out for you.

Actual history: There was chattel slavery in the US and it was legal under the original Constitution, which was later amended to outlaw same.

Actual history: Many of the founders owned slaves.

Alternate history: "Constitution and the founders were against slavery."

Can you tell the difference ?
Click to expand...
Yes, we all know slavery existed and many of the founders had slaves. That does not mean that the founders wanted to keep it.

"All good men wish the entire abolition of slavery, as soon as it can take place with safety to the public, and for the lasting good of the present wretched race of slaves. The only possible step that could be taken towards it by the convention was to fix a period after which they should not be imported."
Oliver Ellsworth, December 10, 1787

"I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be offered to abolish this lamentable evil. Everything we do is to improve it, if it happens in our day; if not, let us transmit to our descendants, together with our slaves, a pity for their unhappy lot and an abhorrence of slavery."
Patrick Henry, letter to Robert Pleasants, January 18, 1773

"It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused."
John Jay, letter to R. Lushington, March 15, 1786

"Slavery naturally tends to destroy all sense of justice and equity. It puffs up the mind with pride: teaches youth a habit of looking down upon their fellow creatures with contempt, esteeming them as dogs or devils, and imagining themselves beings of superior dignity and importance, to whom all are indebted. This banishes the idea, and unqualifies the mind for the practice of common justice."
David Rice, speech to the constitutional convention of Kentucky, 1792

"Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over the life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law.... The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all."
James Wilson, The Natural Rights of Individuals, 1804

​
 
National Debt hits $16 trillion. Every taxpayer now owes $140k. Let's pause and thank both parties for their contributions and admire how both candidates have plans that will increase the debt.
 
ylexot said:
Yes, we all know slavery existed and many of the founders had slaves. That does not mean that the founders wanted to keep it. ...
Click to expand...

Fact is the constitution permitted slavery and many white rich dudes made money off slavery, so therefore slavery was kept. Always follow the money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom