# What Liberals get right



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Nothing... 

No, but seriously, I have to wonder if there isn't some good in the liberal mindset. How can so many people be so freaking stupid?

So I got to laying things side by side and realized something.

They balance us.

Sounds stupid at first, but think about it.

If we TRULY followed the 2A, we would have to give convicted murderers and child molesters guns when they get out. Illegals, traffickers, etc. would all LEGALLY be able to own guns. Some right wingers are ok with that because when they kill someone we can just kill them back. 

There is wisdom in the old adage about an ounce of prevention.

If we all live by the right wing mentality that each person is solely responsible for himself and must pull himself up by his bootstraps, a lot of people in this country would be dead. (I'm not saying that is entirely a bad thing, but it is what it is) 

I'm willing to bet that all of you church goers have been sitting when the plate went around to help someone who is in a tough time. We can all reach out and help our neighbors now and then when needed, and that is a "liberal" thing to do. Liberals, granted, take it past the point of organizing charities to the point of designating new taxes to fund government giveaways, but that is what I am getting at. We can balance each other. 

Those on the right wing want to get rid of all the illegals, liberals want them to stay and take part in the American dream. Who says we can't get rid of the illegals who want to stay by making them legal, and satisfy both sides. The good ones stay and contribute, and the bad ones go bye bye.

The right wing supports business and free enterprise, the left wing supports public assistance. Let them work together. If I want to start a business I go to the welfare office and say gimme 20 guys. You pay their welfare and I'll pay you back plus an overhead totaling what I would pay someone hired off the street. I can train them, and have labor and they can have jobs. If they fail, quit, or get fired, they lose their welfare. If my business goes under they keep getting their welfare. They pay back the system, I pay back the system, and I have a pool of readily available workers who I can then hire on as permanent staff in a year. 

If the right had their way, we would have invaded Iraq after 9/11 and after 6 months of not winning we would just glass the entire middle east. The left restrained that. (yea, they went a little overboard in that, but my point is that we didn't nuke anyone) 

Right wingers come up with stuff like sky cranes, sky scrapers, trains, light bulbs, cars etc. Liberals come up with safety cables, seat belts, "greener" lights and other stuff that is environmentally responsible and saves lives. (OK I'm pretty sure that conservatives actually came up with the majority of these things, but liberals forced the world to start using them.

I guess the Right wing is like a big burly man. Ready for action, a bit of a temper, takes no shit and gets things done. The Left wing is like that woman on his arm who keeps him from killing the guy who was making cat calls at her.


----------



## Pir8fan (Nov 16, 2012)

Actually, the thing liberals excel at is fooling the sheeple. They are master manipulators and they are pros at demonizing and marginalizing any that disagree with them (AKA any one capable of thinking on their own). The moron conservatives never learn this and always try to play nice. It's a losing strategy.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm willing to bet that all of you church goers have been sitting when the plate went around to help someone who is in a tough time. We can all reach out and help our neighbors now and then when needed, and that is a "liberal" thing to do. Liberals, granted, take it past the point of organizing charities to the point of designating new taxes to fund government giveaways, but that is what I am getting at. We can balance each other.


conservatives give more then liberals, liberals want to take from others to give to the needy, they themselves do not want to give... How many liberals do you see running food pantries, free hospitals, soup kitchens, clinics??????????????

Balance.. ha ha ha,,, not hardly



Jakthesoldier said:


> Those on the right wing want to get rid of all the illegals, liberals want them to stay and take part in the American dream. Who says we can't get rid of the illegals who want to stay by making them legal, and satisfy both sides. The good ones stay and contribute, and the bad ones go bye bye.


liberals want them to stay to vote democrat
we have a lot of unemplyeed people and hugh debt.. you want to give 11,000,000 citizenship and healthcare and food stamps and other beenies



Jakthesoldier said:


> The right wing supports business and free enterprise, the left wing supports public assistance. Let them work together. If I want to start a business I go to the welfare office and say gimme 20 guys. You pay their welfare and I'll pay you back plus an overhead totaling what I would pay someone hired off the street. I can train them, and have labor and they can have jobs. If they fail, quit, or get fired, they lose their welfare. If my business goes under they keep getting their welfare. They pay back the system, I pay back the system, and I have a pool of readily available workers who I can then hire on as permanent staff in a year.


have you ever ran a business.. training cost,,ie training replacement people is hugh.. it is better to find good people and pay them well



Jakthesoldier said:


> If the right had their way, we would have invaded Iraq after 9/11 and after 6 months of not winning we would just glass the entire middle east. The left restrained that. (yea, they went a little overboard in that, but my point is that we didn't nuke anyone)


this is just wrong and a fantasy


Jakthesoldier said:


> Right wingers come up with stuff like sky cranes, sky scrapers, trains, light bulbs, cars etc. Liberals come up with safety cables, seat belts, "greener" lights and other stuff that is environmentally responsible and saves lives. (OK I'm pretty sure that conservatives actually came up with the majority of these things, but liberals forced the world to start using them.


ha ha ha ha..wring byt funny 


Jakthesoldier said:


> I guess the Right wing is like a big burly man. Ready for action, a bit of a temper, takes no shit and gets things done. The Left wing is like that woman on his arm who keeps him from killing the guy who was making cat calls at her.


NO! Right wing folks are the workers, liberals are the ex spouse that gets alimoney and is happy getting what THEY ARE OWED


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Nothing...
> 
> No, but seriously, I have to wonder if there isn't some good in the liberal mindset. How can so many people be so freaking stupid?
> 
> ...


The Liberals you speak of are the kind from long ago. Liberals today have morphed into some all consuming monster that only wants to do good if it promotes and hides their real agenda. But then again so have the Conservatives.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

What was once a Liberals, died after Kennedy. They became socialist. They became America hating sour people. Seems they get worst as time goes by. A lot of it has to do with the take over of the education system.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

There are no longer any "real" democrats.... they are all progressive liberals

President Kennedy would not recognize the party


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Nothing...
> 
> No, but seriously, I have to wonder if there isn't some good in the liberal mindset. How can so many people be so freaking stupid?
> 
> ...


That is one of the most dangerous thoughts I have seen. So I will begin with this.
2nd amendment for criminal...only for those who have served their full sentence including parole. If the courts understood that they could then get weapons again...maybe they would actually sentence appropriately for violent crimes. 2nd amendment keeps people from committing crimes where it is practiced and unrestricted.

Liberals vice liberal...you confuse the word with the politics... donations are given in church as are tithing. Don't want to donate?...ok... your still welcome to attend. Liberal point of view...forced donations....or your a piece of crap, white person who should go to jail.

LIBERALS are the least charitable of any political party.

The idea that they are just the yen and yang of a good system is horribly wrong...imho.... its like coming up to a y intersection and hoping both hands apply equal and opposite force on your steering wheel.

One path leads to a socialistic form of government. One leads to a country that is full of people who take responsibility for their own actions...good or bad. Trying to do both leads to the tree in between each road.

Trying to do both is why we are here... think of it as two people pushing a car that needs to move down the road...each pushing in opposite directions....Its only when THE people get out, tell them to stop, and start to push it themselves that we go anywhere...because those assholes are pushing it from the sides of the car.

LEGALIZING ILLEGALS TO MAKE THEM LEGAL....sure that worked out for Reagan didn't it. Millions of new illegals coming here. Amnesty encourages more illegal immigration. And its not just the 'bad' ones that are a problem. Millions of people sucking off of the teat of socialist programs is unsustainable...adding to that by importing the poor and uneducated is not helping us grow but is instead hurting our growth.

Now the goodness in your idea is that as long as we keep them equal they will cancel each other out and government does nothing...but we have moved way to far from center to want that at this point.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

All I'm going to say to the OP is: NOPE!


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

OP, the big thing your missing is this; there are some "liberal" ideas that conservatives agree with, but the key factor is motivation. The government must not force "good" on people, because they then decide WHAT is good. Remember, liberal means MORE government. Cons rv active means less. It has NOTHING TO DO with morals. It has EVERYTHING to do with individual liberty.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Liberalism is a mental disorder. Write it down.


----------



## hag (May 19, 2016)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Nothing...
> 
> No, but seriously, I have to wonder if there isn't some good in the liberal mindset. How can so many people be so freaking stupid?
> 
> ...


Haha haha haha haha! Good one buddy!


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

I'm going to take the time to address just one point here since is was the most touched on.

First, there is a difference between tithing, and a collection for a party in need. 

Second, yes, we GIVE freely in that situation, each in accordance with what he can handle. It is not forced. But when the cause becomes so big that its not handled by a collection plate, people form these things called charities which are a liberal concept and mostly run by liberals, despite receiving most of their money from conservatives, (because Jesus was a libertarian) These are, at their core SOCALIST concepts. When many take care of few it is socialist. That doesn't make it wrong, it is what it is.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm going to take the time to address just one point here since is was the most touched on.
> 
> First, there is a difference between tithing, and a collection for a party in need.
> 
> Second, yes, we GIVE freely in that situation, each in accordance with what he can handle. It is not forced. But when the cause becomes so big that its not handled by a collection plate, people form these things called charities which are a liberal concept and mostly run by liberals, despite receiving most of their money from conservatives, (because Jesus was a libertarian) These are, at their core SOCALIST concepts. When many take care of few it is socialist. That doesn't make it wrong, it is what it is.


When the state takes from people and then redistributes it, it is called a socialist state. Such a state steals responsibility and denigrates society, causing more reliance upon the state and, as a consequence, more control by the state.

Another consequence of the socialist state is the disconnect between members of a community as the members assume the state is responsible for the well being of the other members. People become callous to each others' needs.

It is my opinion that these consequences are not unintended consequences but those that are expected by those who prefer to control the people.


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

If people VOLUNTEER it's not socialist. The difference between charity and socialism is night and day. Socialism is top down control. Charity is a voluntary act. It's not the same. And to say that most charities are run by liberals is PAINFULLY uninformed.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

> If we TRULY followed the 2A, we would have to give convicted murderers and child molesters guns when they get out. Illegals, traffickers, etc. would all LEGALLY be able to own guns. Some right wingers are ok with that because when they kill someone we can just kill them back.


So, once someone pays their debt to society they still owe?

Let's take child molesters off the table. That crime isn't gun related.

Illegals with weapons is called an armed invasion; I don't care what the recent federal court of appeals decided. Let's stick with the citizens of the several states.

Now, for the rest of the crimes; when one has finished out his sentence, shouldn't that person be accepted as a part of society, again, and be expected to not only behave in a manner acceptable within our norms, mores and taboos? Furthermore, shouldn't the also be expected to stand ready to be a part of the overall "militia" that would be needed to take back our government from tyranny or arbitrary rule when society deems that necessary? I think so.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

jim-henscheli said:


> If people VOLUNTEER it's not socialist. The difference between charity and socialism is night and day. Socialism is top down control. Charity is a voluntary act. It's not the same. And to say that most charities are run by liberals is PAINFULLY uninformed.


socialism is the many caring for the few, regardless of why or how.

The problem is not that a program is socialist, but WHAT programs are socialist.

If you take a collection, or start a charity, to help people in need that is an acceptable version of socialism working AS IT WAS INTENDED.

When you try to socialize things like welfare by creating a federal tax and dividing the tax between states and then municipalities, you are forcing people to give (which is unacceptable) and the taxes you pay are not necessarily returning to your community (which also is unacceptable)

Taxes pay for socialist systems like police and other emergency services, as well as a standing military. These are socialist systems. The government takes a little from everyone and distributes it (poorly) to each municipality for use.

Socialist programs are not inherently bad, but the abuses and poor management of those systems are. People scamming welfare, rich neighborhoods getting more funding than poor neighborhoods etc. are examples of this. Another example is the WWP. About 1% of their income pays for actually helping soldiers, and the rest is distributed to pay for "staff" and advertising... and the CEO's paycheck.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> So, once someone pays their debt to society they still owe?
> 
> Let's take child molesters off the table. That crime isn't gun related.
> 
> ...


Child molestation is not necessarily a gun related crime, although it may be. Regardless, do you believe a person who molests a child or murders in cold blood can "repay his debt to society"? I do not, and that is where we may disagree, making this a totally different argument.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> When the state takes from people and then redistributes it, it is called a socialist state. Such a state steals responsibility and denigrates society, causing more reliance upon the state and, as a consequence, more control by the state.
> 
> Another consequence of the socialist state is the disconnect between members of a community as the members assume the state is responsible for the well being of the other members. People become callous to each others' needs.
> 
> It is my opinion that these consequences are not unintended consequences but those that are expected by those who prefer to control the people.


I'm going to refer back to the police and EMS/Fire argument above.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm going to refer back to the police and EMS/Fire argument above.


And, I would argue that is nothing such a stretch that saying this is mixing apples and oranges doesn't cover it.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Child molestation is not necessarily a gun related crime, although it may be. Regardless, do you believe a person who molests a child or murders in cold blood can "repay his debt to society"? I do not, and that is where we may disagree, making this a totally different argument.


Child molestation is not with a gun by itself, but now you are adding qualifiers.

Now, we are talking about "cold blooded" murder and not just murder. By we, I mean you as you are adding more qualifiers.

Not going down that road. I stated what I mean; if someone has done their complete time, they should be handed their weapons back to them.

Now, if you believe child molesters and "cold blooded" murderers should be given a sentence that would not allow them back into society, you and I are on the same sheet of music.


----------



## C.L.Ripley (Jul 6, 2014)

It is inevitable that the left will win, and then not long afterwards the country they win in will fail. America is headed in that direction. The right CAN NOT compete with the free stuff promising leftists politicians who offer the freebies to all the lazy worthless idiots (who are becoming the majority) in exchange for their votes. The best the right can do now is slow down the inevitable.

Republicans use to win statewide elections in California. But no more. And they NEVER will again. There are many parts of California that don't even speak English anymore. Once the left duplicates in the rest of America what they've done in California and a couple other states it's game over. And when I say game over, I don't mean for white people, I mean for America. 

Does anyone really believe the left wants to flood America with Muslin and Hispanics refugees and immigrants because they're such good Samaritans?

The day is coming when the only way a republican will ever win an election anywhere is to be slightly less left than his leftists democrat opponent. Many liberals are saying good to this. They long for the day when whites are a not so tolerated minority. God only knows what the kum bah yah useful idiot's envision it's going to be like, but in the end American will not survive the left being in full control anymore than anyone else in history has. 

Give Me Your Diseased, Your Murderers, Your Terrorists.. long as they vote democrat.


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

Jakthesoldier said:


> socialism is the many caring for the few, regardless of why or how.
> 
> The problem is not that a program is socialist, but WHAT programs are socialist.
> 
> ...


COMMUNISM is the many caring for the few. SOCIALISM I the awkward middle stage of Marxism whereby the state forces ppl into collectivism so they will see how great it is.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

jim-henscheli said:


> COMMUNISM is the many caring for the few. SOCIALISM I the awkward middle stage of Marxism whereby the state forces ppl into collectivism so they will see how great it is.


Communism is the many caring for the many. EVERYONE puts EVERYTHING is in one big pot from which each takes what they need as they need it. That is why Marxist communism cannot exist. Innevitably someone takes more than they need or some get jealous that some get more than they.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> And, I would argue that is nothing such a stretch that saying this is mixing apples and oranges doesn't cover it.


Well call it an apple or an orange, it does not change the fact that every service the government provides for you is socialist in nature. That doesn't make it wrong until it is abused.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> Child molestation is not with a gun by itself, but now you are adding qualifiers.
> 
> Now, we are talking about "cold blooded" murder and not just murder. By we, I mean you as you are adding more qualifiers.
> 
> ...


Edited as I missed your last line. Yes, that is EXACTLY what I mean.

I do not distinguish between cold blooded murder and murder. I don't care if you plotted it out first, if you did it with a gun or a tack hammer, if you killed someone drinking and driving or texting and driving. If you kill someone, and it is not justified, it is murder.

I don't care if you are malicious or just negligent, its murder. Now in defence of self, others, property, or country killing is not murder. To me, it's that simple. But since the liberals say we can't just kill all of the criminals (which is probably a good thing, imagine if we still cut people's hands off for stealing candy) it's probably a good idea to not give killers and child molesters access to firearms.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm going to take the time to address just one point here since is was the most touched on.
> 
> First, there is a difference between tithing, and a collection for a party in need.
> 
> Second, yes, we GIVE freely in that situation, each in accordance with what he can handle. It is not forced. But when the cause becomes so big that its not handled by a collection plate, people form these things called charities which are a liberal concept and mostly run by liberals, despite receiving most of their money from conservatives, (because Jesus was a libertarian) These are, at their core SOCALIST concepts. When many take care of few it is socialist. That doesn't make it wrong, it is what it is.


Again...disagree...first and foremost...to me Jesus is my King, not a libertarian...he was the Christ...to put him in any other category is to also say he was a liar...

Secondly Charity is still donating of ones own accord. Liberals put together most ( I will argue against that) Charities so they can live themselves off of a portion of the proceeds...look at the average percentage of Liberal run Charities...usually less than 50 cents per dollar donated actually goes to the cause. Most are below 25 cents.

As said more adeptly above...the political Term used goes towards how they feel about the role and size of Government... Liberal dose of it...or be Conservative with it.

Tithing is like dues...to be a member...doesn't keep you from attending. Unlike Liberal Unions...which mandate you be a member or your out on your ass.

Your just plain wrong on the issue in my view.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm going to refer back to the police and EMS/Fire argument above.


It is not a socialist idea to hire someone to enforce rules established by a community and to fund that from an agreed up percentage paid to a fund for that purpose.

It is a socialist idea that the money belongs to the elected people and therefore the officer is only accountable to them....BTW conservatism does not mean total absence of Government, city services, etc...it means minimalistic...to the least degree absolutely necessary.

You confuse a lot of things for Socialism....you really should look up the definition.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Well call it an apple or an orange, it does not change the fact that every service the government provides for you is socialist in nature. That doesn't make it wrong until it is abused.


Law enforcement and fire is paid for by the community. It is a service, just like water and sewage. Not the same as socialism. I shouldn't have to explain that difference.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Edited as I missed your last line. Yes, that is EXACTLY what I mean.
> 
> I do not distinguish between cold blooded murder and murder. I don't care if you plotted it out first, if you did it with a gun or a tack hammer, if you killed someone drinking and driving or texting and driving. If you kill someone, and it is not justified, it is murder.
> 
> I don't care if you are malicious or just negligent, its murder. Now in defence of self, others, property, or country killing is not murder. To me, it's that simple. But since the liberals say we can't just kill all of the criminals (which is probably a good thing, imagine if we still cut people's hands off for stealing candy) it's probably a good idea to not give killers and child molesters access to firearms.


First off, you might not distinguish between negligent homicide and murder, but there is a difference. A guy who kills a pedestrian while speeding is not the same Ted Bundy, for example.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> It is not a socialist idea to hire someone to enforce rules established by a community and to fund that from an agreed up percentage paid to a fund for that purpose.
> 
> It is a socialist idea that the money belongs to the elected people and therefore the officer is only accountable to them....BTW conservatism does not mean total absence of Government, city services, etc...it means minimalistic...to the least degree absolutely necessary.
> 
> You confuse a lot of things for Socialism....you really should look up the definition.


Definition of socialism
: a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

Tell me again how police, fire, and EMS are not socialist programs? Go ahead, I'll wait.

I never said conservatism was devoid of government. Never inferred it either. By the way, one thing has nothing to do with the other.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Definition of socialism
> : a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
> Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary
> 
> ...


Law enforcement, fire, ems are services...Not Major industry. Understand? They don't make a product, or make a profit to fund anything else...they provide a common service.

Industry creates products to be SOLD to the population.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> First off, you might not distinguish between negligent homicide and murder, but there is a difference. A guy who kills a pedestrian while speeding is not the same Ted Bundy, for example.


Disagree. Ted Bundy sought out to do his thing believing himself to be right for doing so, and a person who speeds decides that his speeding is more important than the lives he places in danger believing he is right for doing so. While not perfectly identical in nature, they are identical in result.

But, I'm one of those guys who thinks a bull rider wearing a vest and a helmet is a pussy. You knew what the risk of getting on that bull was, and you accepted it. That is the appeal of the sport. So take that for what it is.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Some services have been agreed to be for the common good ...fire, postal, police...some are paid for by taxes and some by an added fee for service...stamps...charge for service (ambulance)... Not owned by the Government...owned by the people...


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Disagree. Ted Bundy sought out to do his thing believing himself to be right for doing so, and a person who speeds decides that his speeding is more important than the lives he places in danger believing he is right for doing so. While not perfectly identical in nature, they are identical in result.
> 
> But, I'm one of those guys who thinks a bull rider wearing a vest and a helmet is a pussy. You knew what the risk of getting on that bull was, and you accepted it. That is the appeal of the sport. So take that for what it is.


Irrespective of the intention or not...should they both be treated the same? 
You should pay the full price of the crime...but once you do...your free again...otherwise why ever let them out? If courts had to accept that, the sentences would be more in line with the crimes.

So do you also think Hockey players who wear helmets and masks now are pussies too? Instead of just being smart? 
What does the vest or helmet have to do with his ability to ride the bull? Nothing...which is what he's scored on...you get no extra credit for getting your head stomped.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Law enforcement, fire, ems are services...Not Major industry. Understand? They don't make a product, or make a profit to fund anything else...they provide a common service.
> 
> Industry creates products to be SOLD to the population.


 Definition of industry
: the process of making products by using machinery and factories
: a group of businesses that provide a particular product or *service* <--- Edited made this bold in case you would have missed it
: the habit of working hard and steadily
Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

The words "sold" and "profit" are not found in this definition
Wanna try again?


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Definition of industry
> : the process of making products by using machinery and factories
> : a group of businesses that provide a particular product or service
> : the habit of working hard and steadily
> ...


Again you miss the key word...Business...that provide service...so go look up...business


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Some services have been agreed to be for the common good ...fire, postal, police...some are paid for by taxes and some by an added fee for service...stamps...charge for service (ambulance)... Not owned by the Government...owned by the people...


...really, Ever ask a cop who pays his salary? bet he says city hall, and not "you"

incidentally, since you were so kind as to mention "paid for by taxes", who do you pay taxes to? "The People"? I'm guessing you make out that check to the IRS. (They are the government in case you are confused)


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> ...really, Ever ask a cop who pays his salary? bet he says city hall, and not "you"


Don't give a rats ass what a cops says or thinks pays his salary. Doesn't make him right.

Oh and Business....
*the activity of making, buying, or selling goods or providing services in exchange for money 
Merrion-Webster


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Again you miss the key word...Business...that provide service...so go look up...business


Definition of business
: the activity of making, buying, or selling goods or providing services in exchange for money
: work that is part of a job
: the amount of activity that is done by a store, company, factory, etc.

police provide "policing" the government pays them "For us" with money that we "pay" (those are called taxes)


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Cops don't provide a service in exhange for money they do a job and draw a salary...not sale their services to the public.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Definition of business
> : the activity of making, buying, or selling goods or providing services in exchange for money
> : work that is part of a job
> : the amount of activity that is done by a store, company, factory, etc.
> ...


Wow...I like you Jake...your tenacious lil feller...I give you credit... your almost there...a few more years of twisting words and meanings...bait and switching....you will make a decent Democrat candidate...you running for office?

Honest question..assume by the moniker that you served...thanks for your service and what branch?


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Don't give a rats ass what a cops says or thinks pays his salary. Doesn't make him right.
> 
> Oh and Business....
> *the activity of making, buying, or selling goods or providing services in exchange for money
> Merrion-Webster


He would be right. Do you write the paychecks for the cops? Does the money come from your pocket? Do you designate on your taxes that this part is for the police and this part isn't?

No. You don't.

What happens is this:

The government decides that they need X% of your income and purchases in order to fund what services they decide we need. (while our government is supposed to be representative, they do whatever the hell they want)

You pay said X% to the government.

The government pools all that money into one giant fund.

The government designates partitions of that fund to its sub sections. These are things like DOD, Education, Civil services, etc., and most importantly, their own paychecks.

These subsections of the government then divide this funding to lower municipalities where appropriate. ie. DOD down to Army, Navy, Airforce, Marines, Coast Guard, Homeland Security, CIA etc. and DOE to each state who divides up into smaller areas, like counties (after taking their own cut), who divide it further into school districts (again, a cut is taken) who take their cut and pass it to individual schools.

So while in a perfect world, you would be correct, in the real world you are seen as niave, believing that "the People" have anything to do with the government.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> He would be right. Do you write the paychecks for the cops? Does the money come from your pocket? Do you designate on your taxes that this part is for the police and this part isn't?
> 
> No. You don't.
> 
> ...


Oh....I thought we were talking about the Government that our Constitution says we were supposed to have....

Your right.... we are now more socialist.... 
Now since we are both talking about the same government...let me ask you...aside from Police, fire, emt and the like...what other aspect of socialism do you think we would benefit from?


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

I can't believe y'all are arguing with an idiot :vs_laugh:


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Wow...I like you Jake...your tenacious lil feller...I give you credit... your almost there...a few more years of twisting words and meanings...bait and switching....you will make a decent Democrat candidate...you running for office?
> 
> Honest question..assume by the moniker that you served...thanks for your service and what branch?


I am libertarian at best. But I also see that the reason the People in this coutry can't get shit done is that we are too busy with stupid freaking labels. If someone is a Democrat they are automatically opposed to anything a Republican says. White people are scared to speak for fear of being called racist. Black people are labeled lazy, disruptive, criminals. Anyone who looks Mexican is an assumed illegal, and everyone who looks Muslim is an assumed Terrorist. All jews hate muslims and all muslims hate everyone not muslim.
We are so busy disagreeing that we will never get shit done in this country.

A bunch of crybaby bitches every one of us.

You don't want murderers to ever get out of jail. You want the 2A to remain unstained. You aren't gonna get the first one,("you" being "You all" for the record, this is not at any individual, it's at every individual) murderers will be set free. Period. Do you want them to be entitled to have guns (or any weapon really) when they get out?

The reality is NO ONE can agree on this so it will never get solved because we cannot get along long enough to pull out collective heads out of our collective asses and make some change that will make real difference in the world.

I fully understand why toothpicks come with instructions.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Cops don't provide a service in exhange for money they do a job and draw a salary...not sale their services to the public.


again, THE GOVERNMENT is paying for the service with taxes ie. BUYING the service


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> He would be right. Do you write the paychecks for the cops? Does the money come from your pocket? Do you designate on your taxes that this part is for the police and this part isn't?
> 
> No. You don't.
> 
> ...


Damn...so your saying we just get there from here? Might as well call it a night then.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> He would be right. Do you write the paychecks for the cops? Does the money come from your pocket? Do you designate on your taxes that this part is for the police and this part isn't?
> 
> No. You don't.
> 
> ...


So you admit that in a perfect world I'd be right....so why are you supporting the things that are making this an imperfect world?


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

inceptor said:


> I can't believe y'all are arguing with an idiot :vs_laugh:


We can't believe how incredibly intelligent and productive your response was. Thank you so much for contributing, you wonderful and valued member of this community, whos input has advanced this discussion by leagues.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Damn...so your saying we just get there from here? Might as well call it a night then.


Let me stop at this point.

This is what is. Period. Sorry but this is what we have to work with. It sucks, its wrong, its broken, but it is.

Until we fix the problem of letting the government rip us apart nothing will ever be fixed. Thats just the long and short of it.

Right now this is a nation that is divided so many different ways. If the government said they were going to give away free cool aid if we just said what we wanted it would never happen. There would be a separate campaign for every flavor, an organization for the abuse of whatever the hell coolaid is made out of, a religious rights group demanding that they get a tax break on the coolaid, a group who is pissed off that the coolaid isnt gatorade, 6 committees to govern each other in the decision making, funding, and distribution of the coolaid, a vegan protest group, an anti gluten group, and a group who somehow manages to compare coolaid to hitler.

The government isnt the problem, the government is taking advantage of the problem.

The People are the problem.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I'm beginning to understand what this is about. That being the case, I think I'll shake the hook out of my mouth and move along.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> So you admit that in a perfect world I'd be right....so why are you supporting the things that are making this an imperfect world?


even in a perfect world where the People control the government, taxes would still be collected, and police would still be paid with said taxes, which would still be a socialist concept.

The funny thing is that you aren't denying any fact except the name. This establishes exactly the point I have been making. Its not the "socialism" that we are fighting, its the label "socialist"

Yes, as a government and in general socialism doesn't work. Our education system is an example of failing socialism. Many things should not be "socialized" by the government. (welfare)

But when we CHOOSE to take a collection for a neighbor, while that is socialist, it is socialism actually working. It does work, on small scales like that.

I know, you will say that isnt government. Government is the body which governs in accordance to a predefined regulation. The pastor (governer) takes a collection (creates a tax [voluntary]) under the pretense that he will deliver it to the designated recipient (predefined regulation) and then drops off a check at the family's home (socialism worked in this case)


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Denton said:


> I'm beginning to understand what this is about. That being the case, I think I'll shake the hook out of my mouth and move along.


If you mean an attempt to get people to open their eyes to the fact that the government is creating as many divisive groups in our population as possible in order to prevent us from ever reaching a majority large enough to force the government to govern as the people see fit, and then join as many people together in one unified cause of simply starting our government over, however that might look, and rebuilding it the way the Constitution says it should be, then you are correct.


----------



## hag (May 19, 2016)

You say bull riders that wear helmets are pussies? I bet you have never set your ass down on the back of a bull so therefore your opinion on the matter ain't worth a steaming pile of shit to me. You're view of socialism and the government in general reek with the stench of a person who has never physically accomplished anything so they decided to string some bullshit sentences together and try their best to make a compelling argument that will sound intelligent and bring them a feeling of superiority. Sorry but you're bullshit theory of government has not fooled anyone. The feeling of intelligent superiority will have to wait for another day or another forum. In the realm of politics, you sir are a mental midget. I'm afraid you have brought a spork to a gun fight


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Jakthesoldier said:


> If you mean an attempt to get people to open their eyes to the fact that the government is creating as many divisive groups in our population as possible in order to prevent us from ever reaching a majority large enough to force the government to govern as the people see fit, and then join as many people together in one unified cause of simply starting our government over, however that might look, and rebuilding it the way the Constitution says it should be, then you are correct.


Sorry, brother, but I didn't get that point anywhere.

If that is what you are wanting to say, then with that I agree.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Oh....I thought we were talking about the Government that our Constitution says we were supposed to have....
> 
> Your right.... we are now more socialist....
> Now since we are both talking about the same government...let me ask you...aside from Police, fire, emt and the like...what other aspect of socialism do you think we would benefit from?


I think we have already gone overboard. The reality is that we have created a government that is so big and our population is so huge, that we are stuck in some situations.

How else can we fund education? Private schools? Viable, but what about poor communities? Can they afford to hire good teachers?

Who paves the roads?

Who drives the busses?

Who helps the old man who has no family in the state?

Close knit communities have community watch, and similar programs. VFW, Shriners, Rotary, Lions, all collect money from communities and use that money to make minor improvements in the community.

To answer this and another question you asked with way more information than you asked for:

Hi, I am Jak (Jack, not Jake) I served 9 years 8 months in the Army as a mortarman (11C), medical laboratory technician(68K), and surgical research technician (68KP9) I deployed once to Iraq as an 11C. I was medically retired last year with a 90% disability rating.

Personally I support small communities and small business, or, when big business is necessary, big businesses that keep as much of the local profit local as possible. Walmart no, HEB yes. I abhor big government, mandatory pay in programs that I may or may not ever use, full time politicians, laws for the sake of laws, laws for the sake of coorporations, and career politicians.

I don't care what religion you are, or what your sexual preference is as it has no effect on me whatsoever. If you have a penis you are a man, If you have a vagina you are a woman. I am pro gun, believe if you are stupid enough to enter my home uninvited, you accept the fact that I will shoot you. I believe that despite being against abortion, no man has a say as to what a woman does with her body. I believe that seperation of church and state works both ways in that you can not use religion as a basis for creating a law just as equally as no law can govern a religion (that does not mean a religious establishment cannot be taxed) I think gays should be allowed to join in CIVIL union (not marriage, but legally the same) and marijuana should be legal and taxed. I believe in personal responsibility and understanding that no one is to blame for you being stupid and cleaning up your own mess. Fair refers to the start not the finish. Our military should be the primary concern of the federal government followed immediately by education. All government contracts need to be reexamined and people who pay $17 million to "test" pistols need to be fired. Leaks need to be stopped, borders need to be closed, citizenship needs to be less expensive to obtain, but background checks (imigration not guns) need to be more stringent. Insurance should be optional, but if you destroy someone else's property you are still liable for the damages, pay up now. Retroactive insurance? Like a loan you go to prison for not paying? IDK. If you work you get paid, if you don't you don't. If you are on welfare and you decide to have more children, you don't get more money. Limit welfare to a lifetime maximum of one year.

Get the Idea? I am not too far off from most of you, although I know we all disagree on some things.

We aren't debating how the system works, we are debating how is should work, and what to call it. Kind of weird.

I'm sorry guys I'm a little more testy than usual. Yesterday I was served with child support papers for two children that aren't mine by a woman who has been scamming the welfare system since 2005.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

hag said:


> You say bull riders that wear helmets are pussies? I bet you have never set your ass down on the back of a bull so therefore your opinion on the matter ain't worth a steaming pile of shit to me. You're view of socialism and the government in general reek with the stench of a person who has never physically accomplished anything so they decided to string some bullshit sentences together and try their best to make a compelling argument that will sound intelligent and bring them a feeling of superiority. Sorry but you're bullshit theory of government has not fooled anyone. The feeling of intelligent superiority will have to wait for another day or another forum. In the realm of politics, you sir are a mental midget. I'm afraid you have brought a spork to a gun fight


Rondo O'Connor taught me to teamrope and bull ride. When you figure out who he is, you will understand why I don't give two fiddley foxtrots what the hell you think about my opinion. And while you just missed the mark in your attempt at being eloquent in telling me off, you failed to actually provide any actual argument at all. In fact, your entire post was EXACTLY what could be expected from a Bernie Sanders supporting gender studies major.


----------



## hag (May 19, 2016)

I know who rondo O'Connor is. He almost died years ago from a head to head collision with a bull. At least he wasn't being a pussy and wearing a helmet though right? Or maybe he was being a pussy by staying in his coma so long. You've got a funny way of honoring your mentors.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I would like to add that Jak is my friend and someone who I respect. We all have different ways of looking at things. Regardless of the different ways of seeing things, I stand with Jak.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

hag said:


> I know who rondo O'Connor is. He almost died years ago from a head to head collision with a bull. At least he wasn't being a pussy and wearing a helmet though right? Or maybe he was being a pussy by staying in his coma so long. You've got a funny way of honoring your mentors.


Funny thing about Rondo... he broke his neck in 3 places getting thrown from a horse. Healed up and whupped Tuff up and down until the coma you are referring to. But do you know what happened next? He healed up and got right back on the bull and started mopping the floor with people again until it happened again. Rondo survivded a broken neck and 2 comas, and the ONLY reason that he didn't get back on the bull again, is that he was BANNED from bull riding and told if he ever got on a bull again he would be stripped of every recorded win he ever won. (That part stayed pretty quiet)

Want to know why? Because he loved it. He knew better than all of us EXACTLY what could happen. He still got on the bull. He loved the danger, the rush, and the challenge. It was SUPPOSED to be dangerous. That is what made it manly and exciting. You were a man cheating death. "pads" just water it down. Its less dangerous, less manly. Like playing Russian Roulette with blanks, what's the point.


----------



## hag (May 19, 2016)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Funny thing about Rondo... he broke his neck in 3 places getting thrown from a horse. Healed up and whupped Tuff up and down until the coma you are referring to. But do you know what happened next? He healed up and got right back on the bull and started mopping the floor with people again until it happened again. Rondo survivded a broken neck and 2 comas, and the ONLY reason that he didn't get back on the bull again, is that he was BANNED from bull riding and told if he ever got on a bull again he would be stripped of every recorded win he ever won. (That part stayed pretty quiet)
> 
> Want to know why? Because he loved it. He knew better than all of us EXACTLY what could happen. He still got on the bull. He loved the danger, the rush, and the challenge. It was SUPPOSED to be dangerous. That is what made it manly and exciting. You were a man cheating death. "pads" just water it down. Its less dangerous, less manly. Like playing Russian Roulette with blanks, what's the point.


I agree with you on this. I totally disagreed with some of your posts and I guess I got a little defensive. I am sure we probably have more in common than we have that we would disagree with. You say that the police is a form of socialism and your reasoning is that we as a populace pay taxes and the government then takes that money and pay a portion of it to police officers for services rendered. I compare that to any other business. If we as a populace buy Ford vehicles and the company pays a portion of that income to its workforce for services rendered then it is free market capitalism at its best. I also disagree that tithing or donations to charities are socialist acts and will refer to some of the replies above by Denton and others. If you can rope a calf and you've rode bulls then I can't dislike you. I just disagree with you


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

hag said:


> I agree with you on this. I totally disagreed with some of your posts and I guess I got a little defensive. I am sure we probably have more in common than we have that we would disagree with. You say that the police is a form of socialism and your reasoning is that we as a populace pay taxes and the government then takes that money and pay a portion of it to police officers for services rendered. I compare that to any other business. If we as a populace buy Ford vehicles and the company pays a portion of that income to its workforce for services rendered then it is free market capitalism at its best. I also disagree that tithing or donations to charities are socialist acts and will refer to some of the replies above by Denton and others. If you can rope a calf and you've rode bulls then I can't dislike you. I just disagree with you


I see what you are getting at, but we choose what vehicle to buy, if we buy one at all, no consequences. We are forced to pay for police, even if we never use them. Back home we had 3 cops. One police, one sheriff, one highway patrol. My only experience with them growing up was a speeding ticket my dad didn't get. But we sure paid taxes.

Because the government designates the budget of the police, and not the people, the program falls under a "socialist" designation. My point is that not everything that is socialist, or liberal, is bad. But what if restaurants were socialized? That wouldn't work out so great. So we keep the liberals in check, and they keep us in check. We need an opposing view to remind us when we go too far, but going to blows over it is what rips us appart. Grouping everything together that is part of a group and calling it good or bad is stupid. Each issue should be examined, debated, and decided upon.

Not every kill a cop makes is a good one, or a bad one. Each one is one or the other, and that needs to be determined on a case by case basis.


----------



## New guy 101 (Dec 17, 2014)

Like I said Jak, your tenacious....I like that about you....gotta disagree on a lot of things...like education being a federal Government responsibilityAnd the definition of certain services being a socialist idea. 
But you were getting hit from 5 different directions and you didn't start crying...


----------



## Operator6 (Oct 29, 2015)

New guy 101 said:


> Some services have been agreed to be for the common good ...fire, postal, police...some are paid for by taxes and some by an added fee for service...stamps...charge for service (ambulance)... Not owned by the Government...owned by the people...


You've never heard of a fire department sending a bill to put out a house fire, etc ?

Some departments do exactly that.

Sorry, that's the reality of it.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

At one time liberals where called progressives and for a while they did do a lot of good in this country in reforming labor laws and made a lot of good changes for the working man. Like everything though it got corrupted and lost its way and now you have to pick between somebody who represents people that want to work you ragged and pay you peanuts or somebody who wants you to give all your earnings to somebody who doesn't work. I consider the Republicans the lesser of the two evils but make no mistake, there are few people in Washington or in state governments that care about the working class.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Operator6 said:


> You've never heard of a fire department sending a bill to put out a house fire, etc ?
> 
> Some departments do exactly that.
> 
> Sorry, that's the reality of it.


In our county the Ambulance service is contracted through a private company so you do get a hefty bill if you get transported to the hospital.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I think we have already gone overboard. The reality is that we have created a government that is so big and our population is so huge, that we are stuck in some situations.
> 
> How else can we fund education? Private schools? Viable, but what about poor communities? Can they afford to hire good teachers?
> 
> ...


Wish I could double like this post. You hit the nail right on the head. I hope that child support situation works out for you.


----------

