tommy71 on December 29, 2012 at 1:56 PM

The USA as a constitutional republic is dead.

We’re well past the tipping point, too many have become moochers and looters, and we’ll never have a government that has any semblance to fiscal sanity, because 51% of voters don’t want to hear anything but what the government is going to give them.

Need proof? Look at California, look at Greece. That’s our future.

@Rebar Sure, go ahead. Lose the House too. And keep whining ‘let it burn’. Lol

tommy71 on December 29, 2012 at 1:30 PM

So what?

We’ve already lost the country, in all but name we’re a fascist dictatorship.

The only hope for freedom is for the red states to break off and form a new nation, the sooner that happens the better.

Yeah, just brilliant. Then, the GOP will truly become the party of the ‘rich’. The MSM will keep pounding on it, and the general electorate will believe it. Actions speak louder than words. And when the GOP loses the House to in ’14, and have zero leverage, you can still whine and console each other with ‘Let it burn’. Adolescent behaviour.

tommy71 on December 29, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Funny. Democrats voted against the Bush tax cuts and were for defence cuts.

So, I guess that y’all were lying all that time about the “Bush tax cuts for the rich” and “cutting defence pork wouldn’t be catastrophic.”

True colours.

The only way this will change, is when we simply run out of money.

Rebar on December 29, 2012 at 1:00 PM

And people.

Baroness Thatcher was only partially correct. She overlooked a couple of things about socialism.

The first: Homogeneous societies are more apt to share with one another than heterogeneous ones. Marx and Engels wrote about this. I think it probably explains why Scandinavian-style welfare states have succeeded so far while the Soviet Union failed. (There are, of course, other issues, too. The Scandinavian countries have small populations and are wealthy due to natural resources that they have wisely exploited. On the other hand, they are now beginning to face problems because of decades of lax immigration that has allowed alien cultures and religions to make demands on them that are taxing the society and the welfare state).

As European countries became more “multi-kulti,” the native populations became more conservative, in the European sense, and less socialist. In other words, they supported denationalisation, freer markets, less government regulation, etc, because they realised that more socialism meant they would have to share with people with whom they had little in common. Call it bigotry, racism, xenophobia or whatever. Go to China, either Korea, Japan, Cuba or kindergarten and you will likely see the same phenomenon.

For this reason, I doubt that a European-style socialist state would last for very long in the US. It would have to be more totalitarian and even that failed in the USSR because math and economics do not bend to the diktats of dicKtators or politburos. The Chinese Communist Party has been smart enough to realise this. Unfortunately, it hasn’t been wise enough to understand that people will not settle for economic freedom.

Second, and this is a biggie: Socialism doesn’t just require other people’s money. It requires OTHER PEOPLE. The welfare hammock in Europe became so luxurious that people stopped having children. There isn’t a country in the 27 members of the EU that has a fertility rate of 2.2, which is considered the replacement rate or the number of children per woman necessary to keep the population steady. NOT ONE. In Spain and Greece, the FR is so low that each successive generation will halve the population. Croatia is down to 1.1 and the Slavian countries are nearly as bad.

So, what do you do when you can’t be bothered to give birth to the children to pay the taxes to keep you in the style to which you’ve grown accustomed? Why, you import your children, silly! Of course, you are SOOL when your “children” arrive and find out that they actually don’t feel like working to pay the exorbitant taxes to keep old, white people in the styles to which they think they are accustomed. Besides, that luxury, welfare hammock looks pretty good. Let the rich eat the bill!

In the US, not only has our FR fallen below the replacement rate for the first time in modern history, we don’t have enough people pulling the cart. Look at the worker:recipient ratio for Social Security:

Fact: There were 159.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1940.

Fact: There were 16.5 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1950.

Fact: There were 5.1 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1960.

Fact: There were 3.7 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1970.

Fact: There were 3.2 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1980.

Fact: There were 3.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1990.

Fact: There were 3.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 2000.

Fact: There were 3.3 workers for each Social Security recipient in 2005.

Fact: There were only 1.75 workers for each Social Security recipient in 2010.

tommy71 on December 29, 2012 at 1:13 PM

And the alternative is to “compromise” ie become the democrat-lite party? And when we go bankrupt the GOP will still be blamed for it?

Let it burn then.

so our choices are tax and spend or borrow and spend. those are the only two choices? We are so screwed.

unseen on December 29, 2012 at 12:47 PM

You forgot PRINTING, PRINTING, PRINTING!

Weimar, here we come!