# France: the old order changeth



## Tez3 (May 6, 2012)

France has elected her first Socialist President for 25 years. Despite what seems to be commonly thought most European countries have Conservative governments, most notably France. Sarkozy's cosying up to the Far Right hasn't paid off, it turned voters against him. Could this be the first of the Conservative old guard to fall in Europe? Already over here we have had local council elections with the Labour Party doing well and the Conservatives doing badly. I'm glad too to say that the BNP, the Far Right party lost the council seats they had. The Right have made an omnishambles of the recession and the economies, the rich protecting the rich so it's time for change.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17975660


----------



## elder999 (May 6, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> The Right have made an omnishambles of the recession and the economies, the rich protecting the rich so it's time for change



But....but....:lol:....but..._socialism_! :lfao:


----------



## Tez3 (May 6, 2012)

elder999 said:


> But....but....:lol:....but..._socialism_! :lfao:




Yep, Europe will be full of those commies again before you know it!


----------



## Ken Morgan (May 6, 2012)

I seriously doubt they, or anyone else, will be able to do a much to fix what is broken. After 25 years though, it's worth a try.


----------



## Tez3 (May 7, 2012)

Ken Morgan said:


> I seriously doubt they, or anyone else, will be able to do a much to fix what is broken. After 25 years though, it's worth a try.



Worth it just to wipe that smug smile off Sarkozy's face lol. Cameron and his lot here aren't happy here either, Labour did well in the local elections plus Cameron has to testify in the Leveson enquiry in Murdoch and his empire. Great fun.


----------



## Master Dan (May 7, 2012)

The French were protesting last week and thier chant was ( there is plenty of money its in the pockets of the CEO's) I hope our 2012 election will get rid of alot of dilusional right wing republican and GOP people we can only hope.

I'd like to know what you think of what is happening in Germany's elections now with some even Neo Nazi fringe and other ultra conservative groups gaining power? due to financial issues


----------



## Tez3 (May 7, 2012)

Master Dan said:


> The French were protesting last week and thier chant was ( there is plenty of money its in the pockets of the CEO's) I hope our 2012 election will get rid of alot of dilusional right wing republican and GOP people we can only hope.
> 
> I'd like to know what you think of what is happening in Germany's elections now with some even Neo Nazi fringe and other ultra conservative groups gaining power? due to financial issues



The same thing is happening in Greece, the Far Right are making a big push. In Germany and Austria there has always been that undercurrent of pro Nazism, Germany isn't as badly hit by the recession as the rest of the Eurozone but still the worms come out of their holes whenever they sense they can make some gains. Hopefully however the rest of the country is sensible and sane enough to resist letting them have real power.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/topic/national_democratic_party_of_germany/
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,1348896,00.html


----------



## Tez3 (May 7, 2012)




----------



## billc (May 7, 2012)

Viva la taxes, viva la spending, viva la big government programs!!!!  If you thought France was screwed up before, wait till the socialists get a chance to muck things up.  

Increase taxes on the wealthy, increase government spending, wow, it's amazing no one else has tried that before...oh yeah, they have...


----------



## Master Dan (May 7, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> The same thing is happening in Greece, the Far Right are making a big push. In Germany and Austria there has always been that undercurrent of pro Nazism, Germany isn't as badly hit by the recession as the rest of the Eurozone but still the worms come out of their holes whenever they sense they can make some gains. Hopefully however the rest of the country is sensible and sane enough to resist letting them have real power.
> http://www.spiegel.de/international/topic/national_democratic_party_of_germany/
> http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,1348896,00.html


Sad to say middle class people are buying the retoric here from the far right GOP republican party wanting to support extreme moves that with out understanding will hurt them in the end likr animal in pain bites itself. We can only hope that enough sane people are left to throw out Tea Party Far Right Republicans who have no interest in admitting the truth about anything and want to give everything back to the very people who caused this claiming imorral, lazy or illeagle imagrants are the problem make your self feel better by hating someone? thanks for the info


----------



## Master Dan (May 7, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Viva la taxes, viva la spending, viva la big government programs!!!!  If you thought France was screwed up before, wait till the socialists get a chance to muck things up.
> 
> Increase taxes on the wealthy, increase government spending, wow, it's amazing no one else has tried that before...oh yeah, they have...



Yes I guess it woudl be an increase to have people who have illegally skipped out paying little or nothing becasue they have money enough for attroney's and CPA that can lie and cheat on thier tax returns. I have personally known far more 7 and 8 figure income people that write off stuff and magically wind up with more assests that drug dealers ever did lie and cheating as everday business and by the way small busines today can be a company that does over $100 million a year but go ahead keep drinking the cool Aid your serving it we cannot put an end to this then the best thing would be to let all the far right take complete control and when 95% of the country is totally screwed no place to live can't eat we will take a lesson out fo the French revolution and bring back the Quezenart conservative food processor or we better learn how to eat Solent Green


----------



## billc (May 7, 2012)

Well, since socialism and the nazis have once again been mentioned, in the wrong context...here is Nobel Prize winning economist Friedrich Hayek on socialism of the German model...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/29736559/FA-Hayek-On-Nazi-Socialism

Can't quite copy from the above so here is another source of the same article...

http://carrefoursagesse.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/friedrich-von-hayek-nazism-is-socialism/



> The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National &#8220;Socialism&#8221; is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the anti-liberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to &#8220;socialism of the chair&#8221; and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form.
> One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners.  But this merely proves that these groups too, as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment, have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement.  But only partly because, and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany, many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience.
> But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt. A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extent directed against their economic policy.



And here he is discussing Nazism and its attitude toward capitalism and individualism...



> But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic-individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, &#8220;international finance and loan capital,&#8221; the system of &#8220;interest slavery&#8221; in general; the abolition of these is described as the &#8220;basis of the programme, around which everything else turns.&#8221;  It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.



Sounds more like OWS than the Republican party doesn't it.  If only more people understood the nature of socialism...and where it leads...

Viva la taxes, viva la spending, viva la big government!!!!


----------



## Tez3 (May 7, 2012)

Do you judge everything by their economic view? If so it's no wonder you have it wrong about the Nazis. We are fighting the Far Right over here, you know the ones who want to dispose of anyone not like them. if you keep telling yourself that it's all about taxes and capitalism I guess you will convince yourself you are right, however those who lived through the last war, those who suffered under the Far Right and those who fight the Far Right know different. Just because someone with the word 'professor' in front of their name says something it doesn't make it true. find someone in person who actually lived through that time in Europe and ask them for the truth.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Well, Hayek wrote the above as the Nazis were coming to power and I believe the other econonmist Von Mises, fled Europe to get away from the nazis.   I think that qualifies for living during that time?


----------



## CanuckMA (May 8, 2012)




----------



## WC_lun (May 8, 2012)

I thought it interesting, though a bit unsettling that Greece elected communist AND neo-nazis to seats.  After the cluster **** made by the Greece government with financial swaps, pretty much bancrupting them through fees and increased interest, I can kinda sorta understand the communist gaining a few seats.  Has it been so long that neo nazis are let to hold power again though?


----------



## Scott T (May 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Viva la taxes, viva la spending, viva la big government programs!!!!  If you thought France was screwed up before, wait till the socialists get a chance to muck things up.
> 
> Increase taxes on the wealthy, increase government spending, wow, it's amazing no one else has tried that before...oh yeah, they have...



So Bill, no comment on France's current state of affairs after a quarter century of conservative 'leadership'? How can the liberals screw it up more?


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Hmmm...did the "conservative" governments reduce government spending?  Did the conservative governments curb big government programs or reduce a large part of the bureacratic state with its huge and unsustainable benefit packages?  Did the conservative governments get control of big government welfare programs?  Did conservative governments reduce barriers to private enterprise in any real meaningful way?  Here is an article that looks at France and its economic state...

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/05/07/french-socialists-victory-is-a-symbol-of-the-eus-decline/



> Soaring taxes, spiraling unemployment, mountains of red tape,  stifling labour regulations, and ruinous levels of public spending  needed to fund vast and unsustainable welfare states and entitlement  programmes have created a perfect storm of economic malaise. And France is a potent symbol of that decline,  with huge levels of public debt, now standing at more than 80 percent  of GDP, government spending at 55 percent of GDP, and a tax burden  equivalent to 42 percent of total domestic income. In addition, Western Europe&#8217;s problems have been exacerbated by the  relentless centralisation of political and economic power in Brussels,  which has added layers of suffocating regulations for businesses operating within the EU, as well as onerous regulations on financial institutions,  while the single currency has made it increasingly difficult for  national leaders to address their own countries&#8217; economic woes.



http://www.heritage.org/index/country/france

And here is an article that talks about the "fake" austerity measures...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journa...sterity-When-Government-Spending-Keeps-Rising

[h=1]t Spending Keeps Rising[/h]               
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







If the conservative governments couldn't rein in the problems made by wasteful  and corrupt big government, as France has, then putting a socialist in charge is going to increase, not decrease, the tax problems, the spending problems, the out of control big government programs and bloated state machine.

If the conservative governments couldn't change these things in a way to fix the problems, then it didn't matter if they were in charge.  Putting a socialist in charge is only going to speed up the disaster...


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Mark Steyn also points out that once government gets to huge levels, as they are in Europe, then free market supporting conservatives can't make changes, the system is too all encompassing and the people fight the changes because they are used to getting government goodies.  As Charles Krauthammer pointed out, they wanted to change the retirement age in Greece from 60 to 62 and they had people fire bombing buildings.  He said you had young people in the streets rioting over something they wouldn't have to deal with for 40 years.  So Steyn points out, conservatives just become less big, spending stewards of the bloated entitlement state because they can't make real changes that make a difference...

From the article above...



> *Government spending has continued to rise across much of Europe, and  even those countries that have made small cuts have not reduced  government spending to pre-recession levels. Some Keynesians might  believe that these policies are draconian relative to the massive  spending that should have happened during a recession, but that is shifting the austerity goalposts.
> *
> 
> Veronique de Rugy atNational Review Online points  to the graph above, and also points out that "whenever cuts took place,  they were always overwhelmed by large counterproductive tax increases."  Higher taxes on the "rich" have led to uniform misery in Europe--and to  political extremism among disenchanted voters.That is the real failure  of European policy, and the lesson most relevant to Americans as we head  to the polls to choose between an incumbent who wants to raise taxes  and one who wants to reform them.


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2012)

Bili, it's all about the money with you isn't it? the only thing you judge a government on it's whether it makes money, the trouble is you miss out the human tragedies and the human suffering by concentrating solely on the economics. The Far Right in Europe doesn't actually have much of an economic policy, they campaign for votes by blaming everything on immigrants, blacks and Jews. they are on a campaign of terror, they don't care much about economics.


It simply doesn't matter that it's a 'big' government or a 'small' one if you are being denied your freedom, if you are being persecuted, if you cannot work not because there's no jobs but because you are allowed to because of the colour of your skin or your religion. 


Most places in Europe don't have higher taxes on the rich, as I said most governments in Europe are Conservatives, they want the poor to pay for the mistakes of the bankers not them. 

Before quoting all these nonentities 'wise' thoughts, I think it would be better if you stopped looking at the economics and started looking at the human cost of Conservative policies in Europe.


----------



## CanuckMA (May 8, 2012)

Last government to actually balance the books and start repaying the debt in Canada was a liberal government, left of centre.

Outside the US, most elections are not won, they are lost. People don't so much vote a government in as they vote one out. Sarkozy's loss had as much to do with his failed policies as with his trying to win the far right votes from LePen by blaming much of France's ills on immigration. They did not vote for a socialist government, as much as they voted out a conservative one. Sarkizy could not do it, so Hollande is given the chance. if he can't deliver, he'll be replaced next time.


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2012)

The human cost of Conservative policies.

_"His death has spurred massive demonstrations against Greece's Government, which is led by an unelected leader imposed upon the country by Merkel, Sarkozy and the EU." _

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...esponsible-death-pensioner.html#ixzz1uJdjEM5d


Now Greece is facing having the Far Right in power, the last time this happened, there was torture, people disappeared and the country was a hell for many Greeks. 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/11/the_ghost_of_the_colonels.html


----------



## elder999 (May 8, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> The human cost of Conservative policies.
> 
> _"His death has spurred massive demonstrations against Greece's Government, which is led by an unelected leader imposed upon the country by Merkel, Sarkozy and the EU." _
> 
> ...



But, Irene, you forget that fascists are leftists and socialists, and the Colonels obviously are leftist and fascist because they believed in a strong central government with mroe government control-and, of course, they killed and tortured and people disappeared, and only left wingers do that sort of thing..... :lol:


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

No Tez, for me its about the people, always has been always will be.  When the government sucks up all the money through massive taxes, massive spending, massive borrowing to maintain what they're spending, you see what happens to the people.  They get crushed by the massive debt the government builds up buying the votes of the people, and pushing the day of reckoning a little farther down the road.  As they borrow more and more that day of reckoning can't be pushed any farther and you get greece, spain and france.   Dennis Prager has a saying which applies to your pensioner, "The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen."  What is your solution Tez.  More borrowing to fund these massive government programs?  Where does it end, and how does it not create even more human tragedy.

Do you think that taxing millionaires at 75% is going to save france?  Well, this is the thing, we get to see what will happen when you put the mistakes that put greece, spain and france where they are and put the mistakes into overdrive.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Here is R.J. Rummel, Ph.D. in political science on the topic of socialists...

http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/



> What is socialism? It is a politico-economic philosophy that believes government must direct all major economic decisions by command, and thus all the means of production for the greater good, however defined. There are three major divisions of socialism, all antagonistic to each other. One is _democratic socialism_, that places the emphasis on democratic means, but then government is a tool for improving welfare and equality. A second division is _Marxist-Leninism_, which based on a &#8220;scientific theory&#8221; of dialectical materialism, sees the necessity of a dictatorship (&#8220;of the proletariat&#8221 to create a classless society and universal equality. Then, there is the third division, or _state socialism_. This is a non-Marxist or anti-Marxist dictatorship that aims at near absolute economic control for the purpose of economic development and national power, all construed to benefit the people.
> Mussolini&#8217;s _fascism_ was a state socialism that was explicitly anti-Marx and aggressively nationalistic. Hitler&#8217;s _National Socialism_ was state socialism at its worse. It not only shared the socialism of fascism, but was explicitly racist. In this it differs from the state socialism of Burma today, and that of some African and Arab dictatorships.
> Two prevailing historical myths that the left has propagated successfully is that Hitler was a far right wing conservative and was democratically elected in 1933 (a blow at bourgeois democracy and conservatives). Actually, he was defeated twice in the national elections (he became chancellor in a smoke-filled-room appointment by those German politicians who thought they could control him &#8212; see &#8220;What? Hitler Was Not Elected?&#8221;) and as head of the National Socialist German Workers&#8217; Party, he considered himself a socialist, and was one by the evidence of his writings and the his economic policies.
> To be clear, National Socialism differs from Marxism in its nationalism, emphasis on folk history and culture, idolization of the leader, and its racism. But the Nazi and Marxist-Leninists shared a faith in government, an absolute ruler, totalitarian control over all significant economic and social matters for the good of the working man, concentration camps, and genocide/democide as an effective government policy (only in his last years did Stalin plan for his own Holocaust of the Jews).



and this little bit about socialists of the marx persuasion...



> (only in his last years did Stalin plan for his own Holocaust of the Jews).


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

And to help elder with the definition of a "rightist"...

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=22626



> So what are Rightists?
> The prime focus in this paper has been on defining and explaining what Leftism is. It would nonetheless be remiss not to give also at least a skeletal outline of what Rightism is so I will now do that. If Leftism and Rightism are NOT mirror-images, as this paper asserts, some such account does appear necessary in order to complete the picture. I have, however, written one book and many previous papers for those who wish to study conservatism at greater length (See Ray, 1972b, 1973, 1974, 1979 & 1981).
> Military Dictators?
> In the late 20th century, it was a common rhetorical ploy of the more "revolutionary" Left in the "Western" world simply to ignore democracy as an alternative to Communism. Instead they would excuse the brutalities of Communism by pointing to the brutalities of the then numerous military dictatorships of Southern Europe and Latin America and pretend that such regimes were the only alternative to Communism. These regimes were led by generals who might in various ways be seen as conservative (though Peron was clearly Leftist) so do they tell us anything about conservatism?
> ...



He also goes on to describes the American war of independence as a "rightist" war...


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> No Tez, for me its about the people, always has been always will be. When the government sucks up all the money through massive taxes, massive spending, massive borrowing to maintain what they're spending, you see what happens to the people. They get crushed by the massive debt the government builds up buying the votes of the people, and pushing the day of reckoning a little farther down the road. As they borrow more and more that day of reckoning can't be pushed any farther and you get greece, spain and france. Dennis Prager has a saying which applies to your pensioner, "The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." What is your solution Tez. More borrowing to fund these massive government programs? Where does it end, and how does it not create even more human tragedy.
> 
> Do you think that taxing millionaires at 75% is going to save france? Well, this is the thing, we get to see what will happen when you put the mistakes that put greece, spain and france where they are and put the mistakes into overdrive.



No Bili, with you it is all about the money, look at this post, it's money, money, money. I'm not a socialist btw so my answer isn't their way, I'm not a conservative either, I'm a good old fashioned British Liberal (not a Lib Dem either) Not something you know about as your liberals are something else. There's a big difference between European politics and American politics, different people, different needs and aspirations, so stop trying to figure European politics as if they were American. 


You seem to assume all the problems of the recession were caused by socialists, however the majority of governments including Sweden, Spain, Germany and France are conservative. France of course will soon be getting a new government, as Canuck says if the conservative policies were working they wouldn't be voted out.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Well, the pensioner shot himself stating he didn't want to leave his debts to his children.  I think if he had some money and didn't have the debt, he may not have taken his own life.   People need to eat, have clothing and shelter, that seems to take some form of currency since we are, at least for now, not a barter society.  Do you work for free Tez?  Does the market where you shop just give you your items for free?  Do you live in your home for free?  Seems to me it takes money.  

Here is a saying I have coined..."Money doesn't buy happiness....but it sure takes care of the incidentals..."


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

And more on what makes the "Right"...please excuse the length...



> German Origins
> What modern-day Rightists of the English-speaking world are, then, traces right back to the German invaders who overran Britannia around 1500 years ago and made it into England. They brought with them a very decentralized, largely tribal system of government that was very different from the Oriental despotisms that had ruled the civilized world for most of human history up to that time. And they liked their decentralized system very much. So much so that the system just kept on keeping on in England, century after century, despite many vicissitudes. Only the 20th century really shook it.
> Where the English get their traditional dislike of unrestrained central power is not the main point or even an essential point of the present account. Nonetheless, tracing that dislike to the ultimately German descent of most of the English population might seem colossally perverse in view of Germany's recent experience. Was not Hitler a German and was he not almost the ultimate despot and centralizer of power in his own hands? One could quibble here by saying that Hitler was NOT a German (he was an Austrian) and the Israeli historian Unger (1965) has pointed out that Hitler was much less of a despot than Stalin was but neither of those points is really saying much in the present context.
> The important thing here again is to see things with an historian's eye and realize that recent times are atypical. Right up until Bismarck's ascendancy in the late 19th century, Germany was remarkable for its degree of decentralization. What we now know as Germany was once always comprised of hundreds of independent States (kingdoms, principalities, Hanseatic cities etc.) of all shapes and sizes: States that were in fact so much in competition with one another in various ways that they were not infrequently at war with one-another.
> ...


.


----------



## Sukerkin (May 8, 2012)

Still mostly reading your usual suspects then. Bill?  Not expanded your list much?

As a matter of interest, why is it, exactly, that you bother to repeatedly post such misleading things up in any and all threads, whether they are really relevant or not?  I've had you on ignore for months, give you the benefit of the doubt, let you back in and the tune is still the same.

Honestly, without ill-feeling, your sources are not credible; Rummel's qualifications may be real but his perspective is not.  That is largely the end of the story.  Because I strive to remain polite in the main, I won't debate it with you any further because I think you are not interested in learning anything under a light of objective enquiry. It is my belief that you prefer, rather, to cleave to shamelessly partisan pundits because it makes the world a simpler place. It is exactly the same as a British person claiming they have any insight into socio-economic truth when all they read is the Sun (which doesn't have a Page 3 Girl any more, thus removing it's only reason to exist).

But for all other readers who may be new to this topic, I contend that BillC is wrong (possibly wilfully but I hesitate to state that as a fact for I am not him).  There are little grains here and there that are sufficiently true to leaven the whole enough for the unwary but almost everything that Mr. Cihak links to on politics, and most especially economics, does not show more than a passing acquaintance with reality.

:lol:  See what you've done now, Bill?  You forced me to use a Cambridge Comma ... I am ashamed


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Well, the pensioner shot himself stating he didn't want to leave his debts to his children. I think if he had some money and didn't have the debt, he may not have taken his own life. People need to eat, have clothing and shelter, that seems to take some form of currency since we are, at least for now, not a barter society. Do you work for free Tez? Does the market where you shop just give you your items for free? Do you live in your home for free? Seems to me it takes money.
> 
> Here is a saying I have coined..."Money doesn't buy happiness....but it sure takes care of the incidentals..."




That pensioner lived through the Colonel's reign of terror, perhaps too he didn't want to live through another one. The fact Greece doesn't have money is due to the recession, the European Parliament run by the Conservatives placed an _unelected_ government in to cut just about everything they could in Greece. Now tell me again who caused the recession? Not the Socialist governments because there's hardly any in Europe and none in any position to influence economic affairs.
I think you should learn about Eurpoean history and it's politics before making sweeping statements about left and right.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

I see Tez, you are hung up on the physical aspect of money, let me tell you where I come from...

When I was in the national guard, a corporal in my platoon was a chicago police officer.  He said one of the things that really p****d him off was thieves.  He said you have a guy who breaks his back working a 50 hour week, gets home, gets a beer and sits down to watch a show on his television only to find some A**h*** had stolen it. That really set him off thinking about that.  It also helped me understand the nature of money.  

Do you know why "Thou shalt not steal is a ten commandment?"  I'll get to that.


Time in your life passes and never comes back.  Each second is experienced and that is it, it is gone and you never, ever get it back.  In life you have certain choices to make.  Do you labor for one hour or do you do something you would like to do instead.  Once you choose and use that hour it is never coming back.  Let's say you choose to labor for ten hours at 10 dollars an hour to get 100 dollars to buy a toy for your kids.  That choice can't be undone, those hours are gone.  Lets say someone steals that toy.  What have they really done?  They just stole 10 hours of your life you will never get back.  That is why stealing is covered in the ten commandments.  The thief is literally stealing hours of your life.  Money that you earn through work represents seconds, minutes and hours of life.  You spend that life in order to make choices for you and your family.  You use it for food, clothing and shelter but also for toys and vacations.  When a politician takes more money from you than is legitimate or fair, he is taking time of your life, and he is also depriving you of freedom and choice.  Money allows you to make choices, the more you have the more choices you have, the less you have the fewer choices you have.  You pay for those choices with, I guess you could say, parts of your life.  The more money the politician takes from a person, the less choices they are allowed to make for themselves.  That is why allowing people to keep their money, earned through work, which is essentially parts of your life you will never get back, is so important.  Freedom and choices because of money are paid for in "life," the more the government has, the less you have.  Keep in mind, when they waste that money, they are wasting your life, which you will never get back.

Or something like that.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Sooo...the greek government wasn't in debt?  They didn't have a large government that spent too much?  Regardless of who was in charge.  All of a sudden they had no money, just like that?  Their government pensions and benefits had nothing to do with their predicament.  Cook county illinois here in the U.S. has an unfunded penison liability of about 120 billion dollars.  If we have a recession, is it the recession or the out of control government debt and obligations that put us in trouble?


----------



## WC_lun (May 8, 2012)

Billi, the problems in Greece are far more convuluted than you make it seem.  For one thing, many of the bank in the US helped make the debt problem in Greece a lot worse.  That's capitalism though, so no big deal, huh?  Greece was having some problems with debt.  US bank loaned Greece a ton of money then proceeded to sell them credit swaps.  Basically Greece was playing the market, paying a lot of fees to those US banks, in order to keep the books looking as if Greece was doing well and flush.  Of course, when the market went to hell and markers were called in, Greece could not hide thier cooking the books, nor the involvement of US banks in doing so.  In fact, certain bank officials and Greece officials have been charged with wrong doing.  So it is not a question so much of political leanings, but of greed and the desire for power.  Given the right's desire to reduce regulations and stripping the power behind current laws regarding bank behaviour, this will not be a singular incident.


----------



## CanuckMA (May 8, 2012)

Let's see. Big government, tons of regulations, decades of Liberalgovernment left Canada with a surplus and starting to pay down the debt. Our banking regulations were responsible for letting us weather the recession. The subsequent Conservative governemnt has eaten away at all thos fiscal gains.

Bill, you may wish to not speak on that which you know not.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2012)

Hmmm...perhaps this conservative idea helped...I'll let more knowledgable people explain it...

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/canada_slashes_corporate_tax_r.html



> *Canada slashes corporate tax rate to 16.5%*





> But The Canadians have figured out something that eludes American progressives: taxing corporations is a silly way to raise revenue for the state, as it hinders job creation,
> Phred Dvorak writes in the Wall Street Journal:Canada's government says the cuts and other business-attracting measures should bring more investment to the country. Economists say it's tough to figure out what the actual effects of such moves are, though some companies say Canada's relatively low taxes and stable financial​ and regulatory environment swayed their decisions to move operations and capital north.
> 
> ​



http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/12/canada_soars.html



> In reality, Canada has genuinely gone its own way, getting itself out from the shadow of the US economic picture at just the right time. The government of conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has embraced free markets, not just one or two things, but a whole banquet of all the things that make economies grow - smaller government, free [COLOR=#009900 !important]trade[/COLOR], one tax cut after another, and energy development and security. Net result? Same as what Chile got when it tried the same kinds of reforms - a booming economy.
> IBD wonders what the heck the U.S. would look like if it just followed the tax-cutting, government slashing model that has made even the dullest nation turn into the Canadian puma state. What really would it look like?



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/12/canada_soars.html#ixzz1uKuEHWlt

From a link in the above article, the investors business daily...

http://news.investors.com/article/596263/201112291827/tax-cuts-give-canada-economy-a-boost.htm

Hmmmm...



> As 2011 ends, Canada has announced yet another tax cut &#8212; and will soar even more.The Obama administration and its economic czars have flailed about for years, baffled about how to get the U.S. economy growing.In reality, the president need look no further than our neighbor, Canada, whose solid growth is the product of tax cuts, fiscal discipline, free trade, and energy development. That's made Canada a roaring puma nation, while its supposedly more powerful southern neighbor stands on the outside looking in.On Thursday, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that he will slash corporate taxes again on Jan. 1 in the final stage of his Economic Action Plan, dropping the federal business tax burden to just 15%.Along with fresh tax cuts in provinces such as Alberta, total taxes for businesses in Canada will drop to 25%, one of the lowest in the G7, and below the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development average."Creating jobs and growth is our top priority," said Minister Jim Flaherty. "Through our government low-tax plan ... we are continuing to send the message that Canada is open for business and the best place to invest."​





> Harper also has made signing free trade treaties his priority. Canada now has 11 free trade pacts in force, and 14 under active negotiation &#8212; including pacts with the European Union and India, among others.​
> 
> "We believe in free trade in Canada, we're a free-trading nation. That's the source of our strength, our quality of life, our economic strength," Flaherty said last month.Lastly, Canada has pursued its competitive advantage &#8212; oil. And it did so not through top-down "industrial policy," but by getting government out of the way.Harper has enacted market-friendly regulations to accomplish big things like the Keystone Pipeline &#8212; and urged President Obama to move forward on it or else Canada would sell its oil to China.These policies have been well-known since the Reagan era. But in a country that's been institutionally socialist since the 1950s, Harper's moves represent a dramatic affirmation for free market economics.​





> For Canada, they've had big benefits.Canada's incomes are rising, its unemployment is two percentage points below the U.S. rate, its currency is strengthening and it boasts Triple-A or equivalent sovereign ratings across the board from the five top international ratings agencies, lowering its cost of credit.​



You also didn't have Barney Frank and Chris Dodd wrecking your mortgage industry...

You don't have obama trying to destroy your oil, coal, natural gas and other important industries.


----------



## WC_lun (May 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> You also didn't have Barney Frank and Chris Dodd wrecking your mortgage industry...
> 
> You don't have obama trying to destroy your oil, coal, natural gas and other important industries.



...and if this horse manure is the best you can come up with to oppose Obama a second term, you make it easy to vote for him.


----------



## Tez3 (May 9, 2012)

billcihak said:


> I see Tez, you are hung up on the physical aspect of money, let me tell you where I come from...
> 
> The physical aspect of money? what on earth does that means?
> 
> ...



Research, homework, due diligence, words that come to mind when reading your posts on European politics...I include the UK here for ease of understanding. You don't understand Greeces' problems nor do you understand it's history which explains why they vote they way they vote. They went through a horrendous time, where they may have had money to spend  but they lived in fear of the knock on the door by the military police. they feared being tortured because they liked the Beatles or were men with long hair, yes really. They feared being sent to the concentration camp at Oropos as the composer Mikis Theodorakis was ( he wrote the music for Zorba and Serpico among other things).


America thank goodness hasn't known the turbulant history of Europe, it's settlers, I think and their descendants have managed for the large part to learn the lessons from the old countries and steer a reasonably peaceful path, hiccups yes but on the whole America has done far better than it's 'ancestors' in Europe where old wounds lie open still. For you to misunderstand either wilfully or by lack of knowledge what actually goes on here and to keep quoting only those sources that agree with you is a shame in many ways. It stifles any meaningful conversation when you insist you are the only one who is correct especially when you argue about something you clearly don't understand.


----------



## CanuckMA (May 9, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Hmmm...perhaps this conservative idea helped...I'll let more knowledgable people explain it...
> 
> http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/canada_slashes_corporate_tax_r.html
> 
> ...



So you did not read, or simply don't want to comprehend, what I wrote.

Under the Liberal stewardship, we eliminated the deficit, brought in a surplus, started to pay down the debt. The 'big government' regulatins is what stopped our banks from doing the same stupid things the US did. We went through the recession largely unscathed. Then a Conservative government was elected and started their ideas of cutting taxes, and all. We are now running a deficit again. Programs and services are being cut.


----------



## billc (May 13, 2012)

Perhaps the French and the Greeks, and the Spanish and California and my home state of Illinois should watch this video...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...approach-deficit-reduction-historically-fails



> Reason's Nick Gillespie talks Europe and austerity, which can offer valuable lessons for Americans as we engage in the economic debate sure to be had as part of the 2012 election. Significant research demonstrates that so-called austerity measures that worked through the years are ones that focused on government spending cuts, without leaning on tax increases to make up the balance between that and GDP.
> Packages of spending cuts often lead to economic growth, whereas those including significant tax increases do not, which parts of Europe are learning the hard way today. Government spending is also one of the elements that proves less likely to create economic expansion.
> Is Germany doing better than America? It's hard to argue with a 6.2% unemployment rate brought about through serious structural reform, including labor markets. Also, by reducing incentives to stay unemployed and reducing the size of, and compensation for, the government workforce, Germany seems to be faring far better than much of Europe--which responded to economic downturns with higher taxes.


----------



## billc (May 13, 2012)

the hero of France, another limousine lefty...

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...-owns-three-homes-on-the-riviera-7737519.html




> France's new Socialist president owns three holiday homes in the Riviera resort of Cannes, it emerged today.
> Francois Hollande, 57, who &#8220;dislikes the rich&#8221; and wants to revolutionise his country with high taxes and an onslaught against bankers, is in fact hugely wealthy himself.
> His assets were published today in the Official Journal, the gazette which contains verified information about France&#8217;s government.
> To the undoubted embarrassment of the most Left-wing leader in Europe, and a man who styles himself as &#8220;Mr Normal&#8221;, they are valued at almost £1 million.
> ...



Yeah, this guy is going to fix the problems...


----------



## Sukerkin (May 13, 2012)

Honestly. BillC ...

... no, that'll do; I don't need to say any more.


----------



## Tez3 (May 13, 2012)

There is none so blind as those who will not see.


----------



## billc (May 26, 2012)

Some thoughts on the new guy in charge in france...and socialsim...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/socialism_by_any_other_name_is_still_socialism.html



> And the newly elected socialist François Hollande of France offers nothing more -- and nothing less.  He vows to raise taxes on corporations and French citizens that earn more than one million euros annually.  His administration will wage war upon the privately operated "world of finance" by implementing strict government regulation upon banks and insurance companies.  He looks to arbitrarily set the prices of French labor costs without consideration to supply-and-demand realities that naturally dictate those prices.  And he has offered the promise that he will expand the central government's role in education and retirement benefits via public subsidization.
> Now, as an honest and observant critic might point out, not one of those initiatives would conflict with Marx's outline for the deconstruction a capitalist society in preparation for its eventual replacement with a Communist one.  That framework is readily found in the _Communist Manifesto_.  And since Hollande is following formulaic socialist doctrine to propose the same solution to the same problem that every other socialist reformer has offered throughout history, it is safe to say that little separates what he offers from what has been offered by socialists past.





> But despite the Western media's warm reception of this "pragmatic socialism" as something new, the disturbing truth is that socialism has always been always presented this way.  It has always been offered as a pragmatic [COLOR=#009900 !important]solution[/COLOR] to the same exact problem -- the disproportionate distribution of wealth in a capitalist society that is deemed unfair by a political faction that claims to be offering a new, revolutionary path.  And that solution, presented now as it has always been, is for a nation to put its faith in the revolutionary political faction by giving state administrators the mandate to even the score by taking property from those who have too much and redistributing it to those who have too little. The idea is uniformly that the new government will succeed where individuals, left to their own devices in the past, have failed.  This is the very core of socialism in all its forms, and the foundation of all the evils it has wrought.


----------



## Tez3 (May 26, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Some thoughts on the new guy in charge in france...and socialsim...
> 
> http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/socialism_by_any_other_name_is_still_socialism.html




And? He set out his agenda and the French voted for him. If you don't think he's right don't vote for him...oh wait you aren't a French citizen so guess what? your opinion doesn't count lol!


----------



## billc (Jun 8, 2012)

On Greek Nazis...

http://pjmedia.com/blog/underestimating-the-new-nazis-in-greece-the-golden-dawn-party/



> The organization owes its advent in part to a band of new Eckarts, men who use religion to mask their antisemitic ideology and socialist economic theory in Europe and the United States. The organizations growing popularity demonstrates how quickly small numbers and risible doctrines can achieve power given favorable social factors.





> The ENF embraces an economic policy that opposes the effects of Zionism. It advocates distributism, a social philosophy erroneously claiming to be based on that of Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI, who outlined solutions for the ill effects of the Industrial Revolution and the rise of Communism.
> Distributism has much in common with communism, particularly its Utopian promise that the world will be in harmony when human beings share equally the means and fruits of meaningful work. Radical distributists wax eloquent concerning the role of Zionist international banking empires in the present state of Europe, but are shy when asked for details concerning the distribution of presently-held Zionist wealth. The implementation of distributism requires stringent state involvement


.



> Hollands American business partner spread not only the anti-capitalist economic theory espoused by the ENF, but its antisemitism as well. On September 12, 2001, with the nation transfixed in horror at the sight of the Islamic terrorist attacks, Hollands protégé wrote the following for his website The Legion of St. Louis:


Doesn't sound like they support free market capitalism to me...

Why do they sound like they belong to the OWS movement?


----------

