This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Problem With Progressives: Everything Is Now A Taxpayer-Funded "Right"
Submitted by Yonathan Amselem via The Mises Institute,
Progressives are often good people with good intentions. However, modern Progressivism has evolved into something so shapeless and amorphous as to amount to little more than a belief in “things that sound nice.” Mainstream Progressives have done an abysmal job of outlining precisely, in their view, the proper role of government and what (if any) limiting principle(s) apply to the state as a whole.
Everything Is Now a Taxpayer-Funded “Right”
Problems with today’s leftism begin with the ideology’s conception of “rights.” In the common laissez-faire view, rights are universal because they do not impose a duty on others to act positively on our behalf. Simply put, the proper view of human rights is that they prohibit us from initiating coercion against others.
Moreover, not only are the rights universal, but they are inherent to being human. To argue that the state confers these rights suggests that the state, through whatever “legitimate” institutions it may possess, can also take them away. This is an unacceptable possibility in a society of free people.
Modern Progressivism, however, has so warped the entire nature of rights as to turn almost any desired good or service into a right.
In this view, private employers refusing to subsidize birth control purchases by employees are violating a woman’s “right” to birth control. Business owners with religious convictions about homosexuality are denying “rights” by refusing to bake cakes for homosexual couples. Offering someone a job that pays wages below some arbitrary federal or state mandated minimum is now an act in violation of a “labor right.”
A service once voluntarily offered to the public is now a duty enforced by the violent arm of the state.
The list of our newfound rights is almost endless, but ten conversations with ten different Progressives will yield ten different sets of absolute rights. Perhaps the only common thread among them all is the demand that the state coerce all members of society into paying for all the goods and services to which we now have a “right.”
A Plea for More Precise Language
Pitching a wish list of other people’s property naturally requires a total deformation of the English language. The left has recently adopted many vague, imprecise, but passionate words into their lexicon.
“Equality,” “social justice,” “appropriation,” “racism,” “climate justice,” “micro-aggressions,” and many other terms referencing broad, nebulous concepts are now battle cries for stuff.
In practice, being “for” something like social justice means to be for just about anything and against just about anything! Do any two people have the same idea about what social justice means?
Groups as diverse as American universities, the Green Party, Italian Fascists, and even the American Nazi party share a commitment to “social justice.” This is not a minor point — expressing a vague set of guiding principles means that almost all government objectives will be legitimate, no matter the destructive means used to achieve those professed ends. Much like Progressive “rights,” terms like “social justice” can be used to justify the overwhelming majority of government action.
The Only Principle Is Faith in the Power of the State
As vague and misty as most modern leftist ideals can be, they do share one solid, bedrock principle: the need for continuous expansion of the government’s role in our lives. The government’s heavy handed regulation of our industries has imposed unbelievable barriers and costs to the supply of goods and services. No matter that this overhead hurts the poorest among us the most, to the Progressive, these costs are necessary in order to ensure we are protected from “greed” or “racism” or sexism” or “wage injustice” or whatever word-clothing that particular government expansion merits. The goal of the policy is vague therefore the government impediment will last indefinitely. The crusade will never end.
Meanwhile, the trillions of dollars spent yearly on welfare programs have done astoundingly little to improve the economic outcomes of the poor since the 1960s. Not even Karl Marx could have imagined a program of wealth extraction and transfer as large (in real terms) as that of the United States government. Yet, poverty rates for African Americans and Native Americans (two groups many of these programs were specifically intended to help) have been stagnant since President Johnson’s War on Poverty began.
The government’s intervention into our financial markets, healthcare system, education establishment and other industries has created structural disorder and price confusion. Bailouts, mandates, licensing laws, arbitrary restrictions, taxes on capital, massive monetary expansions, allotments of unwarranted credit, and other gargantuan government schemes have destroyed the natural channels of capital flows. Costs for even the most basic medical treatments have skyrocketed, another housing and stock bubble is in the horizon, and the federal student loan program has created millions of worthless degrees and a mountain of debt. The Progressive is un-phased by the government’s history of failure because he or she is certain that their vague principals simply require more action by our leaders. If we will only give the state and its army of foot soldiers more tax dollars and more power, the problem will surely go away.
»
- 104 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Fuck Progressives.
Humm.... Good thinking. They do have a lot of cute girls.
Like this TIME magazine article about the North Pole melting away at 50+ degrees
http://patterico.com/files/2015/12/North-Pole-Unfrozen-as-Temperature-So...
EXCEPT They Got The Wrong North Pole. North Pole AK
http://patterico.com/2015/12/30/time-magazine-screws-the-pooch-on-north-...
If there is a God, please do something about this ... I know we're all supposed to be "God's creatures" but this is stretching it a bit.
Jews created progressivism in order for the society to self-destruct itself, making it even easier for the Jews to take total control.
Wackoism.
" Dats Rayciss! ... I demand moar Safe Space! "
"progressives are often good people with good intentions"
Sorry, you lost me there. No one who wants to lock me in a cage for saying things they don't like is "good people". Nor is anyone who wants to take an ever increasing amount of my money to fund things I find deplorable. If I don't pony up the money or do as Im told, the progressives will have me arrested, and steal my stuff to get "the money I owe the government", which, according to the progressive, the government owns everything I earn, and are generous to allow me to keep a small amount of it. And if I resist the person coming to take my money/stuff, I will be killed. So, no, progressives are not "good people"
Come to think of it, most of those same things apply to republicans too, so fuck them as well.
An optimal balance between progressives' good intentions and libertarians' good intentions is hard. Consider two easy illustrative examples:
Extreme progressives suck just as much as extreme libertarians, but let's not write off the moderates in the two camps. The melding of their views is probably the closest to an ideal form of government humans can hope to attain.
Nice ad hominem attack, yovatti.
The only other worthless, ad hominem attack you could have used would have been to reply: "Anti-Semite."
Why don't you prove otherwise rather than attacking?
Personally, I do agree there is an absurd amount of anti-Semitic "it's the joooos" accusations on a lot of these independent forums.
However, I think it is the natural reaction after half a century of no one being able to discuss honestly and openly without fear of being branded an anti-Semite and thereby tossed aside the history of the Jews in the 20th century. This especially when we consider their role in many communist/socialist/statist and atheistic-humanist movements that were responsible for over a hundred million deaths.
I'm thinking of Kevin MacDonald's excellent analysis in Culture of Critique and several other works.
Essentially, we are free to point to the leftist JINO mafia and say, "There and there and there...that's where those mother fuckers stabbed people in the back for their own good. That's where they betrayed. That's where they murdered. That's where they parasited on others to climb to power so that they could subvert and overthrow. And most of the Jews roaming America and Europe today are not descended from any of the 12 tribes but are the descendants of those who converted and are no more special in God's eye and have no more right as The Chosen to do whatever they please with God on their side than Sammy Davis, Jr."
Not all Jews, mind you, but many of those in positions of power and wealth and whose primary goal was the promotion of Jewish interests.
And we can make these statements openly and honestly and if any of those JINO mafia assholes try to drop the ad hominem A bomb on us, we can proudly say, "Fuck off, asshole. This is true history and we won't shut it up because we have been brainwashed into thinking everything associated with all Jews is wonderful and for the good of humanity."
Nancy Pelosi is Catholic. Harry Reid is a Mormon. Obama is...apparently a fucking transgendered-muslim-black nationalist unitarian-atheist-progressive.
Not a jooo in the bunch who signed off on it.
The "jury" is still out John Roberts tho ;-)
nmewn
Funny, to see a comment like that on the site that is almost entirely focused on the "powers behind the curtain" and claims that all the political faces are nothing more than puppets with a hnad up their ass moving their lips.
And the owners of all the mediaSpin outfits that promote their idiot ideas? jooz, khazars, pick a name
How about the Fed, from start to now? Huh?
What an absurd notion. We do not need more precise language from progressives on the statist notions they call 'rights', and we would not get it anyway, since progressives have learned not to be specific about anything, or risk the annihilation of their arguments by the application of simple logic.
What we need is to start pouring chlorine into the gene pool by the metric buttload.
Time's edited the article to remove the link to North Pole, Alaska.
Golly Gosh and Gee Willickers!!!!!
Fucking water carriers for the sitting administration
REDACTED HISTORY!!!!!
Progressives and conservatives in the US works for the same boss. Just in opposite direction on the circle.
Not sure what you mean by "conservative." Perhaps you mean "cuckservative?"
I consider today's conservative to be the direct descendants of Jeffersonian policy (thus my nom de poste).
We want small government, minimal taxation, maximum individual liberty constrained voluntarily by the individual so as not to impact others, and defense of our country and culture.
As such, progressives (a generic term for fascists, communists, national socialists, etc.) are my enemy.
We work for opposing goals and I have no qualms about meeting those tyrannical bastards on the battlefield some day, because, you know, their Alinsky tactics are to shut up and humiliate everyone that disagrees with them and, you know, when dialog breaks down, violence breaks out.
And here I just want to be a me not a we.
I would not call Jefferson a conservative in today’s America. Jefferson was an intellectual. Reflective. Critical thinker and compartmentalized academic writer. Here’s an excerpt:
"Men are naturally divided into two parties: Call them, therefore, Liberals and Serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, Whigs and Tories, Republicans and Federalists, Aristocrats and Democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still and pursue the same object. The last one of Aristocrats and Democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all." --Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee, 1824. ME 16:73
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/thomasjefferson/jeff0800.htm
Second: Fascists and Communists are not the same. Fascism comes from the right when capitalism fails. Communism comes from the left. Anyway, all three will fail.
Third: The word progressive is meaningless. Just add more confusion. But consider this:
Jefferson's distinction between aristocrats and democrats was developed about a half a century later by Bakunin, the anarchist thinker and activist. It was actually one of the few predictions of the social sciences ever to have come true. It ought to have a place of honor in any serious academic curriculum in the social sciences and the humanities for this reason alone. Back in the nineteenth century, Bakunin predicted that the rising intelligentsia of the nineteenth century would follow one of two parallel paths. One path would be to exploit popular struggles to take state power, becoming what he called a "red bureaucracy" (Russia) that will impose the most cruel and vicious regime in history. That's one strain. The other strain, he said, will be those who discover that real power lies elsewhere, and they will become its "bought priesthood," in the words of the labor press, serving the real masters in the “state-supported” (USA) private system of power, either as managers or apologists "who beat the people with the people's stick," as he put it, in the state capitalist democracies. The similarities are pretty striking, and they run right up to the present. Chomsky on Mis-Education. Page 44.
http://www.amazon.com/Chomsky-Mis-Education-Critical-Perspectives-Series/dp/0742529789
Hey Jeffersonian Liberal
Please note that while Escrava Isaura appears to be arguing the definition of words that in his quote from Jefferson I am sure "Liberals and Serviles" that it is classic liberalism he is referring and had it's original true meaning as you know.
So
Third: The word progressive is meaningless. Just add more confusion.
Is bullshit as those of us who use know. As they usually twist shit the "progressives" took "liberal" to abscond the bad reputation progressives had pre 20th century.
More twisting of words bullshit.
Talk straight people, it is that simple.
The auto rate is affordable.
Just got that - + 100
Haha ha ha ! ! ! ! !
It's pretty simple - human rights include life, liberty and property acquired through voluntary transactions. If someones civil rights usurp any of those human rights they are null and void. Human rights trump civil rights. Period. Of course that means most of the so called civil rights on the books today including voting because voting is always about someone taking from another for their benefit or appointing someone to be legal guardian over others against their will.
Fuck Progressives.
In the ass with a broken bottle.
"Progressives are often good people with good intentions."
lol...yeah.
Rejoice! Rejoice! We hit 80,206 pages of regulations this year! A new record!
"Progressives are often good people with good intentions."
Isn't there a saying about what the road to hell is paved with?
Dead Progressives?
More like the victims of Progressivism.
Yeah.
But after a while the evidence really starts piling up like "Forcing the young and healthy to buy health insurance (from a corporation) to subsidize the old & sick." or pay a tax/fine/penalty to the state, hell, they even promoted it that way.
I mean...holy shit! Really?! Thats "prow-gwessive"?
And they advocated for it...lol...clearly we're not dealing with people playing with a full deck.
/////////
A couple progs say no?
Well, show yourselves as the lying sacks of shit you are.
I pay roughly the same for health insurance now as it was when it was just regular catastrophic insurance for the same coverage.
I haven't seen a doctor since I was hit by a car.
Well I know mine went from something resembling "health insurance" to something resembling catastrophic.
So you know what I did?
I went back to eating whateverthefuck I want, smoking whateverthefuck I want and drinking whateverthefuck I want. My intent of course is to actually get to the point I have to USE IT and get some benefit from paying for it.
And the driver hit you with his car, car's don't randomly pick people out to run over.
Hope you're OK - but if you're still driving - do you have a sticker so we can ID you?
I was walking.
Sorry - that was for nmewn - high viz jacket then?
Your "progressive" government hasn't mandated ALL pedestrians where them.
Yet ;-)
High visable jacket for you too Newman, if you are smoking whatever you want, drinking whatever you want and going for a walk.
"
Well I know mine went from something resembling "health insurance" to something resembling catastrophic.
So you know what I did?
I went back to eating whateverthefuck I want, smoking whateverthefuck I want and drinking whateverthefuck I want. My intent of course is to actually get to the point I have to USE IT and get some benefit from paying for it.
And the driver hit you with his car, car's don't randomly pick people out to run over."
I was hit by a car. The driver thought speeding is okay since he lived in another state.
The local sheriff deputy dipshit didn't do his job (go figure).
However, I sued everyone and am all healed up. I thought they were going to have to amputate my leg.
Being a believer in eastern medicine, I healed myself.
Also, as a vegan I don't get sick. I don't do drugs or smoke tobacco or eat dead cooked shit.
I will survive and thrive in the age of aquarius. And I will lecture flesh eating zombies till I die.
Vegan reality rape!
Progressive Minds 101...
"I was hit by a car."
Yet...you were cognitive enough after talking to Shem Shiesham to...
"However, I sued everyone and am all healed up."
Everyone except "the car" that hit you, apparently.
This is why "progressives" and everyone else live on different planes consciousness, the gun does not go off by itself, the car does not drive itself, litter does not walk to the edge of the road.
But in your world, if inanimate objects are banned they will simply cease to be, somehow.
Grass eater ;-)
How's the leg? You can always get a job at Ihop.
They didn't used to anyway (before Google)
Sorry to hear that. Was there head trauma?
Good luck finding a doc who accepts your Obamacare insurance. Many people are paying for "insurance" but have zero coverage at thier hospital or doc of choice.
"
Good luck finding a doc who accepts your Obamacare insurance. Many people are paying for "insurance" but have zero coverage at thier hospital or doc of choice."
I had a choice of four doctors. Hospitals here have to help you if you pay or not.
Sorry. But you sound like you are full of shit.
Ha!
Fuck you too.
lol
So you were on welfare before Obamacare - paying zero
And you are still on welfare paying zero
B-b-but we had to pass the bill to see what's in it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU
Too bad none seem to deal with big corporations that pollute the planet.
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-we-cant-stop-the-enormous-methane-l...
Corporations deal because governments deal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism#Fascist_corporatism
Which is to say that if you believe in governments — and those who actually control them* — you deserve what you get.
* http://www.franz-oppenheimer.de/state1.htm
Except the right to bear arms.
The real welfare goes to the billionaire class.
yes. like offering land belonging to one people as a gift to another.....thats progressive
"The real welfare goes to the billionaire class."
What about those who work for government?
I hear people continuously retire getting 100% of benefits plus pay.
How is that possible?
How can you get paid after retirement?
The REAL Free Shit Army are public sector unions.
Lots of them on zerohedge. Heck one dipshit bragged about being a .fedgov traitor for 20 odd years.
http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-trouble-with-publ...
Don't most vegans work for the government or in higher ed?
These fuckers trample our real Rights (with a capital R) on their way to the feed trough. Fuck them and their bankrupt (literally) Ideology.......
An article from the MISES INSTITUTE. Are you fuking taking the piss? I just looked up who Mises is and his background.
Pssssst. Keep quite. All working for the same boss.
So this is not approved speech in your opinion?
It's not about "approved" but when I get a guy paid by Budweiser telling me that his beer is best - I get somewhat suspicious.
See, what we really need is ObamaWeiser, to FORCE YOU to buy Budweiser beer, then all your suspicions can be confirmed ;-)
It's not about "approved" but when I get a guy paid by Budweiser telling me that his beer is best - I get somewhat suspicious.
But not suspicious enough to actually read Mises. Your loss. Another unwitting victim of high time preference.
Gimme a break, until a few years ago after I stumbled over a path of Mike Ruppert to Wm Cooper then Dr Moncreith (?) etc etc I didn't even know who I was.
S'alright.
Oy vey Mises was part of the ko$er nostra.
This article is an attack on neo liberalism by neocons.
The goyim think the chosenittes are talking about them.
Are you sure that's a Soros approved comment?
Sounds a bit sketchy to me.
I'd like to thank my down votes and and encourage more. As we close out 2015, which is close to my 1 year as a member, I fear my down votes will categorise me as a fukin no opinion shithead that adds no contrary thought and is therefore useless (I thought I had this handled and then...well...Dutchboy2015 RIP). So please, make a pledge, our goal this year is a negative 55 for today. As they say in Chicago "vote early, vote often and don't let death be a show stopper"
All votes disappear when the forums are archived at the end of each month so you can stop worrying about it and focus on the topic at hand.
Hey, I like your stuff. I miss Dutch as he was a prolific writer, good entertainment especially with the double and triple posts.
You know who Smedley Butler is / was and you just found out who Ludwig von Mises is?
That is interesting. Just sayin'.
Valid point
Be careful. If you misgender and mistakenly direct a transvestite to the wrong public restroom in New York City it could cost you a $250,000 fine. It’s called “discrimination on the basis of gender identity.”
New York City will fine up to $250,000 for willful, malicious misuse of gender pronouns
LGBTQ Nation
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
The New York City Commission On Human Rights has officially banned willful misuse of gender pronouns as part of a new update to the city’s 1945 Human Rights Law.
The new guidance, released on December 21, will fine employers, landlords and service providers up to $250,000 for deliberately addressing individuals by the wrong name or gender pronouns.
New York City defines “gender” as one’s “actual or perceived sex and shall also include a person’s gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior or expression, whether or not that gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the legal sex assigned to that person at birth.”
The new guidance can impose a civil penalty fine “up to $125,000 for violations, and up to $250,000 for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct.”
The penalty amount will be determined based on the severity of the violation, a history of previous violations, knowledge of the NYC Human Rights Law and the violating company’s size.
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/12/new-york-city-will-fine-up-to-250000-for-willful-malicious-misuse-of-gender-pronouns/
It pays to have no money these days.
Remember the good old days when nouns had gender and it wasn't subject to a crackpot and a bureaucrat's interpretation?
Sorry, I agree with the birth control thing. If you are going to set up a system in which employers are the main conduit to health care, you can't have them also impose their own morality on how one uses it. But health care is tough because it's already so fucked up in the way it's structured. The solution is to break the employer path to it.
the right to levy taxation is a privilege, not a right.
no-one has the right to deprive anyone of money and anyone who thinks this is true is corrupt.
so that this principle is re-established, democracy needs to move to "no representation, without taxation".
simply put, if you pay no taxes, or are employed by the state(federal, state or city), you don't get a vote.
let's see how many people stop fucking around and start figuring how, where, when and whytheir "real" dollars should be spent and what on.
trouble is, the corruption of the federal, state and city etc finances has been so endemic for so nlong, the first thing that needs to happen is that half of all tax dollars should go to eradicating federal, state and city etc DEBT.
i doubt any body will ever act in the long term interests of even self-preservation by getting rid of that monkey.
This is the only country I have lived in in the civilized world where the citizens fear their revenue agency..."~@MarkSteynOnline on #Rush
Finally... Progressives are communists.
Yep, they change the name every twenty years, or after every failed state, whichever comes first.
Someone needs to start a "stay the fuck out of my wallet" party to compete with the Republicrats.
Yeah fuck the people. We need to free up some cash for the rich! The rich are hurting. Please give generously.
Progressives = Grifters; theft masked as an agenda.
www.traderzoo.mobi
Parasites gonna parasite.
It's partly our fault for not exterminating them.
The we know whats best crowd never seems to be able to explain jack. Ask um a few questions and rip them to shreads.
They pretty much cant defend most of their hairbrained shit. They will look at you like ya shot their dog.
Progressive should mean progressively getting a little better with time... We have progressives that enjoy progressing in the direction of deterioration? How could anyone call our leaders "progressive" when the plane is in a nose dive? With "true" progressives things would progressively be getting better? Ask yourself that question the next time a politician tells you they are "progressive". I call our politicians progressive in the direction of filling ones own pockets? Self promoting progression is not progress for the people progressing. There is a big difference in the types of progression.
Progression for the "good" of the people should be what we are "Progressing" towards... But nooo.. we progress towards a zero sum, the problem is who is choosing the direction of "our" progression, certainly not the people or the majority.
Maybe as a result we create "microprogressions"
I seen what you done did there Boy! Left Right, Left Right, Left Right, Left Right . . . . . . . I beans following that paradigm foreva and it's now old hat. The 5% JPM EBT rips of the Social Outcasts as they search for a can opener for that tin of GMO corn served up by that other big welfare recipient Agent of .Gov aka Walmart. So, FUCK YOU Yonathan Assalamualaikum Mises! Let's add the GE / MIC Private Welfare Checks to those of the Great Unwashed and the CHARITY CASE YOU RODE IN ON.
From a legal standpoint, there is NO such thing as a "taxpayer funded right". Any benefit to an individual paid for with money from the public treasury is a Legislatively created PRIVILEGE. Within that understanding you can draw the distinction between CIVIL LIBERTIES (inailenable rights) and so called CIVIL RIGHTS wich are merely political/econoimic grants (privilege) that can be modified or taken away at the will of the legislative body that created them. Once you make VOLUNTARY application (Social Security ACT) for public money, you are, as a matter of law, taking advantages under a statute and therefore place yourself in a position in which you will NOT be heard before a court complaining of constitutional violations associated with said privilege. SEE Am JUR "WAIVER AND ESTOPPEL OF RIGHT TO RAISE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS).
Oh and by the way, the legislative branch can TAX (excise) the privileges it creates. Look at the Federal/ State witholding from your paycheck. Those are PRIVILEGE/EXCISE taxes under the Social Security Act. And as the power to TAX is a purely legislative function, the amount of the tax cannot be limited by the courts under the doctrine of separation of powers.
So look at your gross pay and then understand that YOU, by your application into the PRIVILEGE, just handed the legislative branch the power to tax your wage at 100 percent. Your STANDING to argue that this violates constitutional guaruntees of PROPERTY and CONTRACT have been WAIVED by YOU through your VOLUNTARY SIGNATURE. Or more likely your parents applied for the number so they can get the tax deductions.
I have 2 children, 14 and 17. Neither have the SS #. We cannot claim them as dependents. There exist ADMINISTRATIVE EXCEPTIONS for drivers and hunting licenses. They could never collect SS, medicare medicade, food stamps , ect. THIS has been confirmed in existing case law. What they earn they keep 100% tax free. FACT. NO person can get into tax court without a TAX ID number. SS# is the only number available to US citizens period.
The citizens have been duped. Most of you can thank your parents. The absolutely coesive nature of a voluntary system is plain on its face and is the biggest fraud in the history of mankind
New Years Resolution - realise that the premise of a post starting with "from a legal standpoint" is equivalent to "tits on a bull"
The entire system of government in the eyes of the constitution and thus the judiciary is viewed and enforced from "a legal standpoint". Presenting facts as the result of research for the sake of trying to educate people of the truth from a proper perspective is worthless you say? Perhaps. But what then is the alternative? Give up? Violent redress? Bitch, moan and complain using off point arguments? .gov has made an art out of chewing people up and spitting them out that aproach a legal issue from the wrong premise. Ignorance is bliss. If you wish to be among the willfully blind, be my guest.
My point is that I don't believe there is any longer 'law' by the common understanding. When the 'law' is applied unequally, it is no longer law but a means of control by a ruling class over the others. I think that is where we are now and not just in the US. I would suggest that if you think we still have a nation or world with a rule of law - it's you who need an eye check up. That being said, while I applaud your goal, I just don't see it happening short of a collapse of the present system in one fashion or another.
"I think that is where we are now and not just in the US. I would suggest that if you think we still have a nation or world with a rule of law - it's you who need an eye check up"
a recurring thought I often encounter on ZH. it is not so here... ergo it can't be elsewhere. very patriotic, I guess. it's exceptionalist, too, isn't it?
Not patriotism at all, I've been to other places, I saw no better. Probably it's so somewhere, but not that I've found. If you know where that is - please enlighten me
Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were "progressives". Tell me you are a progressive and you will have a very bad day.
The label "progressives" really means nothing. Look it depends on what you are progressing towards "progressive" can mean anything? Im not disagreeing they were all bad people, just with the label, they were NAZIs not progressives? but the idea we cant "progress" is dangerous, it means we are stuck? PROGRESS!!! is good, when people are good, we just have bad people driving the bus so the progression is bad. The problem is not "progression" its progressing in the wrong fucking direction, a fucking evil direction at that. I agree with you that what progression means right now is NOT GOOD! But its more about the people than that label. The people you are referring to I believe to be on the Evil side of things, very similar I think to some we have in now.
We are never always right so we have to seek knowledge and progress. If we didnt we wouldnt have anything? Progression is a part of life the direction we choose to go in is where we are fucking up. We are letting greed decide the direction of our progression. Most of us disagree with that direction? So this type of progression sucks!
Say instead of progressing in the direction of bailing banks out, we let them fail and let people stay in their homes, would that have been a better progression? My thought is we would NOT be here.
"Our" "Progression" has gone in the opposite direction (Evil) ever since money entered politics. Long, long ago.
"Progressives" = Cultural Marxists.
Great information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M
You see the label and not the word. Do you think we should not progress? Its a dangerous word to alienate is my point, it means the exact opposite of what it is when evil speaks it. I dont consider myself a "progressive" but I do tend to progress in the way I feel is good, especially if I think there is something wrong. Now I have progressed from liking Bill Clinton years ago, to really not being able to stand him and Hillary, I would never vote for them ever, now that I have progressed I can see them for who they are? Now imagine no progression?
Not to progress is socialist in my opinion, someone else decides everything for you and you cease to grow. Not progressive, no progression. They like people to think they are opposite of what they are.
In reality they are not progressive because the exact opposite of progression happens, regression and dont be fooled that is their plan.
Zero Sum = Regressive not Progressive.
Check this out:
re·gres·sive r???resiv/ adjective adjective: regressive-
1.
becoming less advanced; returning to a former or less developed state.
-
of, relating to, or marked by psychological regression.
-
2.
(of a tax) taking a proportionally greater amount from those on lower incomes.
-
3.
Philosophy
proceeding from effect to cause or from particular to universal.
Translate regressive to"the regressive, infantile wish for the perfect parent of early childhood"
The USE over TIME Graph didnt show up, but its interesting.. USE of the word spikes over the last 50/60 years.
Use over time for: regressive
Whenever I hear something that sounds like its means the exact opposite of what someone is saying, or it doesnt add up. I know its this "Group" that is in control at the moment...
People deceive us when they are able to Label themselves w/ no one to question the Label. Bad guys dont walk up to you and say they are bad guys, they say they are "progressives" when they are really "regressives"
Think about this Gold is a relic? Exact opposite? I believe so. Think of all the titles this governent puts out, "Free" trade cost us a fortune. Patriot act which took all our freedom of privacy away? http://people.howstuffworks.com/patriot-act2.htm
the list is unreal, someone should just study the title of all the Bills they could see what an absolute sham our gov is. The titles to me are an indication of them "knowing" what they are doing and are meant to belittle the people who dont see them for what they are. Obama is just plain dangerous with his "agenda's" its crazy.
The word Progressive as a political ideology has nothing to do with the word progress. It was coined by their marketing wing during the industrial revolution, After stealing and destroying the word Liberal from Libertarians.
That being said, I don't think we need a lot of "progress" in our legal system. Take the internet as an example, no change needed to the 1st amendment. Gay marriage is another example, the court, not the legislation changed.
Drug laws are a good example of where we need to "regress". If our drug laws regressed to the 1920s, our prisons would be half empty.
I totally agree, I like to keep it simple too and laws are what is conquering us and I hate law especially what these dickheads craft out of greed. I do think we need to constantly look to become better, we have over time and would should try to continue on a "good" path. Deceitful progression is driving the bus. I admit there really isnt lots to add to the constitution at all except getting rid of some of the more recent changes. More or less I think of it like Plato's Five Regimes, we are progressing just in a naturally destructive way. I like balance and we are way out of balance. We used to make good progress now we make no progress or backwards progress.
I can live with progressives. What worries me are the evangelicals and the fascist NSA supporters who want to destroy the fourth and fifth and sixth amendments.
I can't live with either: they're both progressives. Both promote their view of better(progressive) living while forcing it down our throats through state action. Fux 'em all.
They're not Progressives, they're Regressives. If you don't believe me take a look at an aerial view of Detroit today after decades of Progressive policies and compare it to a pic 20 yrs ago.
They are properly called control freaks or simpler yet collectivists.
You know what I hate even more than "progressives" - writers who label massive groups of completely different people with completely different value and belief systems under one label - in this case 'progressives'.
I consider myself a progressive, but there is only one politician anywhere in th world I agree with on virtually everything - Ron Paul.
Try to put a silly, neat little label on that!
"Yet, poverty rates for African Americans and Native Americans (two groups many of these programs were specifically intended to help) have been stagnant since President Johnson’s War on Poverty began.
WRONG. According to Pew Research:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/11/27/native-americans-left-beh...
And many native Americans, who make up a relatively small part of our population, live on reservations where jobs are not available.
Also, citizens in the rest of the developed world, who enjoy universal health care, are happy to see their tax dollars being applied to something they use. They don't have to pay huge insurance premiums, make decisions to forgo health care to save money and risk bankruptcy if they can't pay private health care bills.
Most people don't have a problem with higher taxes being paid by wealthy Americans to create a social safety net, or would be happy to be paying less overall, in terms of health care dollars (since any tax increase would be offset by a much larger decrease in health insurance, deductibles, copays, etc), to fund Medicare for All. The Mises misers are a MINORITY.
let me introduce to the other apple phone
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
i think you will find there is a correlation to those escaping poverty and those entering it - provided of course you are honest and don't just look at one side of the balance sheet
It seems there is no real concern abouit debt when it comes to spending trillions on military and national security fighting the bogus "War on Terror". Its only when it is used to provide social programs to taxpayers that the debt Nazis get worked up.
"The Mises misers are a MINORITY."...so you hate minorities?
I could barely keep reading past Pew. They are extremely political, please don't quote a study if you haven't read their methodology.
"Most people don't have a problem with higher taxes being paid by wealthy Americans"...translated, most people want shit thehey didn't pay for. When the highest tax bracket was 90%, the effective rate was 17%. We're not falling for the tax the rich line anymore. 80% of billionaires are Democrats...we have figured out that game.
And you can keep Medicare, no thanks.
Please explain what is inaccurate about the Pew survey, and provide any DATA you can give me that prove this articles mistatements about African Americans and poverty since LBJ. Just saying that I don't "understand" the "methodology" doesn't qualify as an argument.
And I wonder how many senior citizens would be willing to give up their Medicare? None that I know of. So, yeah, I think people WOULD keep their Medicare if they had a choice of getting it.
Debt is the real concern. The system is already ruined, there is no saving it, quit spending or not. To have faith some 'elected' government in the near future is going to 'turn it around' is stupidity. Protect yourself, your children and your families. History has begun repeating itself.
Mises institute doesn't have a problem with progressives but with dumb people pushing dumb articles every day. Almost every sentance in this article is garbage.
And first of all "The left has recently adopted many vague, imprecise, but passionate words into their lexicon. “Equality,...”
Liberté, égalité, fraternitéis a product of french revolution, a time in history when few had everything and many had nothing but their lives. Apparantly lives so good that they were better given for this idea than living. Mises would be discusted at what is written in his name. These ideals are a part of a perfect society we need to strive forward, not away from.
These are utopian ideas, but the fact that we cannot achieve the utopia does not mean we stop looking for it and kill our brothers, our equals for our part of "liberty".