We don't have to compete with it, we just have to own it. The more money we can pump into low-income economies, the better off they'll be. It wasn't so long ago that people worked for pitful wages in this country.
Remember sharecroppers?
Economic growth, even in foreign nations, lifts people out of poverty. As the demand for products increases, so does the demand,and competition, ($$$) for labor. Just look at China, a huge Communist nation bisected by free-market trade zones because of the demand for labor and the fallacy of wages below the market average.
Obviously, we are not going to gut our labor laws to match those of China, and even if we did, industry couldn't sink to that standard because there would be a massive labor shortage. We'd end up with a black-market labor force.
Conversely, we can't hold other nations to our standards because we would incur tremendous labor expenses,(and probably military expenses enforcing such a policy) as well as a black-market labor and product market.
Just leave other nations alone. Their problems are their problems. We can't fix them or mitigate them without pissing off the whole world(and harming our economy), so just let them be.


Thanks. Now I get to pay your entitlement as well as my own, plus your interest. Bear in mind that under my plan, you get to keep whatever benfits you claim over the next twenty years, whereas I have to pay for twenty years and still get nothing.
Quite frankly, it is not your money because your generation didn't take it back. The government spent it as soon as you surrendered it. Now you are saying that if my generation did try to abolish this destructive system you would voluntarily bankrupt the whole country by demanding interest on top of the already unsustainable entitlement budget, which you would get standard benefits from anyways!?
Under my plan, current generations, including my own, would be giving up 20 years' worth of SS taxes to support the entitlements that older generations were promised. And you still want interest?
Are you kidding me!? :-?
Unbelieveable. I thought I actually had a plan that would satisfy the AARP, but I can't even get it past you!


I cede the point because you're sort of right and because an impotent federal government wouldn't garner much party interest, anyway. However, the federal government has no power to prohibit political parties within the states, so have fun banning that inevitable mess.

Ha ha nice but man what a pipe dream none of us will ever get this type of power. And some say no more US bases over seas. But you have to have allies and if you are the most strong military nation you will have to at least provide aid that you pay for to them if you dont guess what?And as to bases in Japan and South Korea what do you think China would do if they knew that we where on the other side of the Pacific? You need tohave some military bases overseas to have some established forces the guy that dosent like you will crush them or they will side with him aginst you in since time of Ancient Egypt even it has been very important to show all comers that you have a military force that will protect its intrests and some things that you nation needs to survive will come from another nation and you have 2 options to have this you either have them as an ally or you control that nation yourself if you dont the guy that doesnt like you will. We thought being isolationest was so great in the 1920s-1941 and look what good that did us we still got into a war. As to SS if people used it the way it was meant to be used there would be no problem it was never supposed to be the only or primary source of money for most retires. To solve this we can do what they do in some asian nations they require by law that every working person put a certain amount of there money into a secure form of savings(it is thier money not the govs so they get all of it) we do not do that here.

Thank you very much. :yep: If we dismantle SS, then I have receipts, I want my contributions back, plus interest, as August said.

What? :o Does that apply to our money invested in banks? It's not our because we haven't withdrawn it?

It's not an entitlement when you are the group funding it.

That's fine with me Lance but while I see your point of helping others it makes no sense to me to do it at the expense of our own people. Besides pollution does not recognize international borders. There is a reason we enacted our environmental laws and I don't see how letting our business leaders bypass them by moving plants overseas helps anyone in the long run.

What? Hey just because I don't exercise a right does not mean I surrender it. What you're advocating is to spend my money but not your own. If the Federal government can crap out trillions of dollars to bail out car companies it can also return my money.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is partly what got us in this mess already.
That money was taken with a promise that it would be paid back, with interest.

I'm joining AARP this year. :DL

Political parties within a state is fine. Out entire political system is based around states so i see them as a natural extension of that.

Didn't mean to.

That's the popular theory but had we not been isolationist how would that have prevented ww2 from occurring? I mean do you seriously think the depression era USA would have been able to project enough military and/or political clout to prevent the nazis from coming to power or Japan and Italy from militarizing?

Oh, this won't be at the expense of our own people. My plan is designed to make the U.S. a major tax haven/investment center, helping to ensure that any business that wants to be competitive is based here.
True, some factories will move to other countries, but only the ones that can profit the most from cheap unskilled labor or lax environmental regulations. We don't want those anyway, and they can help other nations build their economies. Besides, the companies that own those factories will be based here, so most of the profit comes back here for reinvestment or domestic spending.
You have a point with the pollution thing, but I don't think that is the most pressing concern, nor do I have an acceptable solution for it yet. Tariffs certainly aren't the way to go, though. They have a history of poor results as agents of foreign policy.




You and Neal are killing me:O:
You'd still get the same social security that everyone else has gotten, whereas I'd be getting nothing, because I won't qualify for retirement benefits within 20 years.
The vast majority of working Americans never get back what they put into social security, and now that I want to get rid of it, you suddenly feel like you should get back everything you put into it, plus interest?
That's not fair, and it certainly isn't feasible. SS spending is like a quarter of the national budget all by itself. If we were to pay back all SS contributions to persons eligible within twenty years, plus the accumulated interest, it would destroy the country. We'd have to borrow or print about.... my god I don't even know.... a very conservative estimate (42,000(avgincome)x.25(FICA)x.15(SS)x30(years worked)x100,000,000(people eligible within 20 years) works out to about 5 trillion without interest! At even 3% interest it comes out to a further 4.5 trillion for a total of 9.5 trillion!
There you go. You almost managed to double the national debt, and that has interest, too. How are we gonna pay that off?:dead:

Can't you just take the same benefits everyone else got and be happy?:DL
Please?:D

Politics is the art of compromise. Never start negotiating from the place you want to end up at... ;)

BTW in trade for my agreement on dissolving Social Security all congressional health care benefits must expire when they leave office and they get no pensions either. I'd prefer they also be tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail but i'm willing to compromise on the rail part... :D

We were not really isolationists, Roosevelts agressive foreighn policy almost guaranteed our involvment in foreighn wars. Violating neutrality acts byarming combatanys and escourting. Lets also not forgett that we claimed 1/2 of the Atlantic ocean as soverghn U.S. territory and fired on German subs without legal merit...hardly isolationists. Roosevelt almost lost his political career and there were strong bodies in government that opposed him.

Good point, but all that occurred after the nazis got into power and at that point war was pretty much inevitable.

Couldn't we just nationalize China? :hmmm:

When I become Prime Minister with a huge majority and popular support
I will disband the democratic process to ensure I could keep power indefinitely.

Home Affairs
Any sign of discontent or opposition would be dealt with swift execution or
torture. I would stir hatred against any slightly unpopular minority group
and then persecute them whilst appearing to my supporters to be saving
the country from said minority group.

Culture
All media, including TV, the internet and books would be banned unless it
was either made by people answerable to me or has been checked by
them.

Foreign Relations
I would keep most foreign relations hostile to keep the people united in
their support for me as protector of the country. If possible I would
enter a low risk, but protracted war, preferably against the minority group
mentioned above.

Economic Matters
All unions would be banned. Most business rules would be abolished,
especially monopoly rules. Service industry will be discouraged. Social
spending will be abolished with the exception of pensions and
education (Education falling under the same rules as media anyway).
Military spending will be increased many times over.
All national debts will be declared void.
20% of GDP per year will go towards my vast mausoleum which will
replace the city of Coventry.

@ August I sort put that into words wrong. I know that WWII was goona go down anyway. what i am saying is that we due to a public that largely supported not getting involved was a bad thing. If wed have said we in this too when England and France declared war in 1939 it could very possiably shortened the war by years. I mean the military knew for many years that some day we would fight Japan in the Pacific. And they also knew that sooner or later wed would have to fight Germany as well. So what i really should have said is that the general publics desire to "stay out of it" hurt rather than helped us.Bottom line to me is like it or not we are the world power right now and to have said power you have got to be in places. And I no dumb dumb either I was in the Air Force and the Army and have been overseas including Iraq. In fact Id say that being in the military over the years is what helped me to understand how the world works some say love everyone or just saty in your nation it just dosent work that way. the only way to insure that you are safe is to have your power on display where it needs to be.And we dont always get it right we dont always pick the right place the right time but you cant always be right. That is what got us WWII they let Hitler do things way back in the 30s they could have said hey buddy you better chill out but they did not. All things that happen in the world have an effect on the rest of it.

By the way your pic there you have the old kit when was that late 60s 70s early 80s? Hard to tell by the small pic. Looks alot like Grenada got a buddy that was an Airborne Ranger he was in that back in 83.

That was taken in '82 at Hanscom AFB in Massachusetts. I was stationed at Ft. Devens with the 10th SFG.

From the high chancellor : "England Prevails!"

"Remember, Remember the fifth of november, the treason and gunpowder plot. I see no reason the fifth of november ever should be forgott"

Consider your self on The List.

V: Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villian by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.

The only verdict is vengence; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.

Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.

Evey: Are you like a crazy person?

V: I'm quite sure they will say so.:arrgh!: