Why Liberalism is a mental disease

[Shrubwise]

a goo, a goo ga, a goo ga goo abitty bip bip

[Potus]

Originally Posted by Loke [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The founding fathers were anything but socialist. While they may have had some ideas that today could be considered socialist, they in no way envisioned a large central government providing for the needs of the people. They believed in liberty, and the power of the people to govern themselves. I mean, look at the function of the federal government back then. Nothing was centralized and in fact, state governments wielded far more power and responsibility than the federal government.

If you think having a few socialist ideas in a time of radical political evolution makes someone a devout socialist, you're on drugs.

No, they hated people governing themselves, they were scared of popular rule. Hence no direct elections for senators, the senate being an aristocracy, the electoral college.

Also please explain public roads, bridges, canals, dams, ports. Those are all paid for by taxes, all socialist ideas.

GG you can leave now too, you lost.

[Potus]

Originally Posted by wehrmacht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

HAHA @ Potus circular logic

By the way, life expectancy was lower than social security collection age when it was passed in 1935. It was designed to pay out 0 basically. As life expectancy increased, it became a ponzi scheme by default. To accomplish social security's original intent, you would have to raise retirement age to 75+

More complete lies from Wehrmacht, what a surprise he's wrong:

http://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html

[Rifter]

Say "semantics" some more you guys. It makes you sound really smart.

[Hoggen]

Originally Posted by Potus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, they hated people governing themselves, they were scared of popular rule. Hence no direct elections for senators, the senate being an aristocracy, the electoral college.

Also please explain public roads, bridges, canals, dams, ports. Those are all paid for by taxes, all socialist ideas.

GG you can leave now too, you lost.

Are you suggesting roads, bridges, canals, dams, and ports did not exist prior to the formulation of the concept of Socialism? Are you suggesting that any of these require public control of manufacturing to accomplish? Either suggestion is wrong.

The founders hated mobs. They were all for democratic election of representatives, but were against direct votes such as 5 men voting to rape one woman or five hundred thousand voting to enslave two hundred thousand.

[Loke]

You can't talk about taxes and the founding fathers guy. There were *some* taxes prior to the civil war, but they were very limited; primarily certain sales taxes and tariffs on imports. I'm not going to argue that there aren't some socialist ideas present in the ethos of U.S. Government, just like I would never argue that it is a true democracy; it isn't a matter of debate, but absolute fact. However, I would argue your supposed notion that the United States was founded on primarily socialist ideals.

If you sincerely think that the foundation of Americanism closer resembles a Marxist ideology than it draws on influences such as Locke, Hobbes or Smith, you're crazy. I think you're taking the simple idea of social contract and perverting it into this modern notion of an all encompassing centralized social government.

Try walking before you take off sprinting big guy.

[Potus]

Originally Posted by Hoggen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Are you suggesting roads, bridges, canals, dams, and ports did not exist prior to the formulation of the concept of Socialism? Are you suggesting that any of these require public control of manufacturing to accomplish? Either suggestion is wrong.

The founders hated mobs. They were all for democratic election of representatives, but were against direct votes such as 5 men voting to rape one woman or five hundred thousand voting to enslave two hundred thousand.

Whoa whoa someone's actually talking about Socialism and not braindead conservative's ideals of Socialism. They're two different things.

You can't talk about taxes and the founding fathers guy. There were *some* taxes prior to the civil war, but they were very limited; primarily certain sales taxes and tariffs on imports. I'm not going to argue that there aren't some socialist ideas present in the ethos of U.S. Government, just like I would never argue that it is a true democracy; it isn't a matter of debate, but absolute fact. However, I would argue your supposed notion that the United States was founded on primarily socialist ideals.

If you sincerely think that the foundation of Americanism closer resembles a Marxist ideology than it draws on influences such as Locke, Hobbes or Smith, you're crazy. I think you're taking the simple idea of social contract and perverting it into this modern notion of an all encompassing centralized social government.

Try walking before you take off sprinting big guy.

You got trolled, too.

[Loke]

Originally Posted by Potus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're clearly right, so instead of trying to argue my ridiculous point, I'm going to claim I was trolling. Never mind the fact that nothing in this thread was even remotely clever or amusing.

I would rather admit I was wrong than admit that I was "trolling." Seriously, when did posting ignorant statements on the internet to illicit a response become anything other than a horrible waste of time and effort? I'm going to go back to not being retarded now... have fun with the whole trolling thing champ.

[Potus]

Originally Posted by Loke [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would rather admit I was wrong than admit that I was "trolling." Seriously, when did posting ignorant statements on the internet to illicit a response become anything other than a horrible waste of time and effort? I'm going to go back to not being retarded now... have fun with the whole trolling thing champ.

Hah ok it's quite clear you had no idea what you were talking about when you first entered the thread, claiming that modern liberalism and the original liberalism weren't related at all. Since people have already made that argument (poorly) and got beat down by me (Paine: Social Security, Adams: Socialized Medicine), I simply trolled you by calling them socialists.

Have fun not coming back, but like everyone else in this thread got destroyed by me, you'll come back to answer this because you can't handle being wrong.

[wehrmacht]

Originally Posted by Potus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

More complete lies from Wehrmacht, what a surprise he's wrong:

How am I wrong? There's the stats right there. Average lifespan was lower than social security collection age when it was first passed. You listed some govt site that showed some completely different variables instead of just flat out listing the life expectancy.

Life expectancy 1935
------------------
61.7 both sexes
59.9 male
63.9 female