A reply to PTCO

11 replies [Last post]
Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
Quote:

PS - The use of "you" and "your" in this post means you (DM), not your race. I know you are sensitive about this so if I refer to your race, I will write "you people" and this you will never see DM, at least not from me, can you say the same? ;-

. Really? Are you comfortable with the phrase 'our people'?

Well, I'll apply your definition to your statements:

Quote:

it's the fact that you believe that government is the solution to equality and social problems

That was not MY belief as I 'sat in' in Nashville, Tennesee; that has never been MY belief as I marched for equal voting rights in this country. It was the people ( our people) who changed a governments incorrect solution of so-called separate but equal implementation of our Constitution. My belief is the government should reflect the people it serves - by representing all people for the good of the country and not for the good of certain corporations, etc. I thought that was also a Libertarian concept. I'm sure you'll clarify that for me.

Quote:

They separate us by use of money and power in return for votes. You have merely fallen for it or thrived upon it. You are either for diversity based on character and ability or you're simply a government stooge with your hand out

The 'government' and private interests have co-opted all segments of the American populace through the use of money and power in return for votes. (Do we agree?). But then you go on by saying that I am either for diversity based on character and ability(which I have stated many times) or I'm a government stooge with my hand out. Are you saying that DM is a government stooge with her hand-out? I disagree. . .since I have been a contributor all my life. . .but you are entitled to your opinion. I worked with state and federal committees to reform the welfare system, but there are some very powerful entities in this country who do not want to see minorities and/or women independent or competitive. . .and they pour a lot of money into Congress to halt meaningful reform. ( Note the difficulty of current legislation Equal Pay for Equal Work being finally passed, and many others)

Quote:

You know this in your heart and deep down it really bothers you because I know you are a Christian DM and you believe that is it wrong to steal people's money by force. Thou shall not steal.

What I believe is that we the people have for generations elected individuals to represent us and some have spent our hard earned money irresponsibly. Thou salt not steal, in my understanding does not refer just to property and/or money - but also to dignity, pride,heritage, spirit. . . . And that stealing has been going on since recorded biblical times. The words of our Constitution implies that the United States respects all mankind. The implementation of that implication is still bring worked on. In the case of our country and the present, there are still millions/billions of dollars unaccounted for in the dealings with the War in Iraq. Yes, I believe in Thou shalt not steal on more levels than you have mentioned - and you're correct, it is bothersome.

Thanks for making clear that your comments have nothing to do with my race, but with my personal beliefs and actions.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
A reply to PTCO

I replied here since we were discussing my personal actions rather than my 'race'

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - What

a great post! It's always best to know intentions, don't you agree?

So, now that you know that my issue with you is your philosophy, perhaps we can have a meaningful debate on this.

First, let me thank you for Nashville and your efforts to bring the true meaning of the Constitution to life.

Secondly, government doesn't exist to "serve the people" waiters do that. Government exists to protect our Rights, that is the reason we had a Constitution and founding documents to show us the way. Government doesn't exist to redistribute. No matter how you look at it DM, the government is power and with it comes the ability to abuse citizens. This is what the government did post Civil War and what it continues to do today. The recent revelations are no surprise to me DM.

The power to force people to pay taxes and to use those taxes to maintain power over the people is exactly what you mentioned in your post. The fact that neo-capitalists learned to use the government to protect themselves from competition is just one example of how government abuses its power. There are many, including the notion that government should play some role in philanthropy, forced philanthropy. We have seen the result of these two abuses through higher prices for everything and institutionalized ghettos.

Let me stop there for now and let you respond.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Thanks for your response. Today is a busy day - but I will get back to my response this evening. There are some points where our worded philosophy appear to differ - and I look forward to the discussion. :-)

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Unfortunately

I am leaving the country again tomorrow and won't be back until next weekend, so you have a lot of time to think about your response. I will not be able to get back to you until then. In the meantime, I will leave you with these questions.

What is the proper role of government in your mind?

If we give up some of our freedom for protection, to what extent should we allow our government to intrude on our freedom?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
Have a great - PTCO

and safe trip!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
Welome Home PTCO

I'll get to the last two questions later. Will be out of town.

Quote:

Secondly, government doesn't exist to "serve the people" waiters do that

My concept of our government in 2013 is representation of the people, by the people, for the people.. . under the guidance of The Constitution. However, with less than 70% of the registered voters voting in our elections – local and national – we have turned our government into a market place with marketeers courting the 40% of citizens who vote. I do not consider a career in public service in our country as the same position as a waiter – but that’s just my opinion.

Quote:

No matter how you look at it DM, the government is power and with it comes the ability to abuse citizens. This is what the government did post Civil War and what it continues to do today

We the citizens, IMHO, have given up our power to corporations and wealthy individuals who ‘buy’ our representatives.

Quote:

The power to force people to pay taxes and to use those taxes to maintain power over the people is exactly what you mentioned in your post

This power came about by an unreadable tax code that is impossible for the average taxpayer to comprehend and legally adhere to. Yet because the citizens in the United States have elected to stay at home on election days, we have given our power away!!! We should have had ‘reform’ regarding taxes in this country long, long ago.

Quote:

The recent revelations are no surprise to me DM.

Daily, the recent revelations are being ‘changed’ or receiving even more confusing explanations. Even teenagers are asking why certain politicians are so surprised when much of what is being discussed as ‘revelations’ has been incorporated into movie plots; TV shows; and best selling novels. It is difficult to distinguish between reality and fiction today. . . .but if the technology is there for corporations to discern our likes and dislikes – and use this knowledge for marketing purposes – it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out how to use this technology in the ‘spy’ world. In 2013, we should be looking at the reality of our world situation – and the status of our security.

I think the sincere concern about our 'freedom' is being used by politicians to smear the current administration for incorporating the policies that were established by the former administration - and demanding a transparency that could harm our security today. 9/11 happened under another administration - and security measures were implemented to protect American citizens. A Congress (bi-partisan) appears to be split on this issue of 'revelation'. What do you think?
.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
Two questions - answered. PTCO
Quote:

What is the proper role of government in your mind?

I have no problem with the proper role of government as stated in the Constitution. The purpose of this document is stated quite succinctly:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I have no problem with the structure of our government, i.e. the three branches.

It took some time for the ‘we the people’ part of the Constitution to apply to all citizens of our country – almost 200 years. However, by ‘sticking’ to the words of the Constitution, women, the poor, and minorities can now enjoy legally all aspects of the words of our Constitution.

Quote:

If we give up some of our freedom for protection, to what extent should we allow our government to intrude on our freedom?

Before I respond to this – please tell me how you feel ‘government’ has intruded on your freedom. I lived in Los Angeles during WWII. Much of our ‘freedom’ was taken for our ‘protection’. I was too young to note – but I don’t remember any protests at this loss of ‘freedom’. (of course there is the exception of the internment of Japanese Americans) There were roads that were opened only after the war was over. There were restrictions on the use of beaches, etc. I think I can share my opinion better if I understand what you mean about ‘government’ and intrusion on individual freedoms. Today, in 2013, we have freely given up much of our ‘privacy’ by voluntarily participating in social networks, etc. I’m sure you know that corporations have been using the information that we place on/in any technology for marketing purposes. Thanks.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Vision vs. Reality

There seems to be a common thread in these answers, that is if we had greater participation in voting that the outcome would be better. You see I hold a different view, I believe no matter how many people you have voting the outcome would be exactly the same. Greater participation doesn't necessarily indicate "wisdom" or even representation. The problem with democracy, especially when you have a government with powers to redistribute money, is that overtime you will have more people voting to transfer more money to themselves.

Just look at outcomes DM, you mentioned it yourself. Corporations that can't compete use the government to vote for laws, tax, tariffs, etc. that give them "protection" from more effective competitors. So, who pays for this protection? We do. We pay because the competitor that can produce product at a lower cost and provide it to the consumer at a lower price can be blocked from doing so. These neo-capitalists come up with a variety of justifications to support this position, including "unfair" competition, monopoly practices, etc. In the end though these positions are self-serving at our expense. They transfer money from us to themselves and back to politicians that thrive on the "contributions" to campaigns. We aren't talking about small chump change here DM, we're talking trillions of dollars.

So, you can extend this philosophy to large labor unions, minority groups, and all sorts of "special interests" under the banner of "protection", "equality", "fairness", "justice". In the end however, there is no way the government can guarantee financial equality. As a wise man once said the moment we are all equal is the moment we are unequal. He meant "financially", not equal rights.

That's the main point DM, we must separate money from the equal opportunity to succeed or fail. Giving someone a financial advantage, through force of law, leads to someone else not having the same advantage. It breeds friction, hatred, envy, and all sorts of sins. Government's role is simply to protect our Rights as a free people, allowing us to exchange our labor and the fruits of our labor anyway we want, without infringing the Rights of others.

Your vision is the vision of most people of good intentions but using the government to fulfill that vision is what we actually have, inequality and injustice. That's the reality.

So, if you want a better world with greater opportunity for all people, get the government out of our lives.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO
Quote:

There seems to be a common thread in these answers, that is if we had greater participation in voting that the outcome would be better. You see I hold a different view, I believe no matter how many people you have voting the outcome would be exactly the same. Greater participation doesn't necessarily indicate "wisdom" or even representation. The problem with democracy, especially when you have a government with powers to redistribute money, is that overtime you will have more people voting to transfer more money to themselves.

It seems like both political parties have a different view/or take different actions than you feel important in regards to ‘participation’ in the voting in our country. The Democrats are accused of having a full-fledged program to register more voters; the Republicans are accused of trying to oppress certain segments in the electorate. We know that ads were targeted to the 40% of the electorate who are seen as regular voters. I think that the review of actual voters in the country shows that the amount of voters among women, youth, and minorities had an important impact on the outcome of the 2013 presidential election.

Quote:

. Corporations that can't compete use the government to vote for laws, tax, tariffs, etc. that give them "protection" from more effective competitors.

Yours is one way to describe the action of some lobbyists for certain corporations in this country – and it has been, at times, effective IMO. Surveys indicated that the American public, regardless of ideology, favored gun registration. Our leaders, who represent the American public, voted this down. Why? IMO, it was due to the financial support from the NRA, the gun industry lobbyists, etc., etc., etc. I do not see the competition that you are referring to – but only the desire to keep their products unregulated and to exert their power over the will of the people through using the leverage of financial support to our representatives in Congress.

Quote:

So, who pays for this protection? We do. We pay because the competitor that can produce product at a lower cost and provide it to the consumer at a lower price can be blocked from doing so. These neo-capitalists come up with a variety of justifications to support this position, including "unfair" competition, monopoly practices, etc. In the end though these positions are self-serving at our expense. They transfer money from us to themselves and back to politicians that thrive on the "contributions" to campaigns. We aren't talking about small chump change here DM, we're talking trillions of dollars.

Very interesting. Please give me some examples of the above action. Thanks.

Regarding ‘financial equality’. This sounds more like an attempt at implementing a Communist doctrine/ideology rather than the reality of Civil Rights requests in these United States. In my experience, equality meant having an equal opportunity in this country – not at all tied to ‘financial equality’.

Quote:

Giving someone a financial advantage, through force of law, leads to someone else not having the same advantage. It breeds friction, hatred, envy, and all sorts of sins

Before I comment further regarding ‘financial equality’, please elaborate what you mean by the above quote – with some examples. Thanks.

Quote:

Government's role is simply to protect our Rights as a free people, allowing us to exchange our labor and the fruits of our labor anyway we want, without infringing the Rights of others

Our government, under the guidance of our Constitution has tried to adhere to your quote above – but did not approach to achieve that until after the Civil Rights movement. Would you agree?

Quote:

So, if you want a better world with greater opportunity for all people, get the government out of our lives

Sort of like removing the stoplights from busy intersections. What a mess that would be!
I look forward to your response. As long we have such a different view of ‘government’ it may be hard to come to any agreement, but at least we will have a better understanding of our different viewpoints.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Yes, DM

Yes, DM it is true that we have vastly different views, my attempt is not to convince you but to let others read about different ideas. Your ideas and my ideas and come to some understanding based on reason rather than emotion, on outcomes and not visions.

Your world is driven by a vision of the perfect world and emotion, which in some circumstances is not a bad thing, but in governance it is wrong and the attempt to use it has failed miserably.

Civil Rights and the civil rights movement happen to be a fulfillment of the ideas expressed in the Constitution, that all men are created equal and under the law of the land all men should be treated the same. It is the outcome of this movement that is in question. As a movement however we can take great pride as a nation in the defeat of government enforced segregation.

Equal treatment is not the outcome of the Civil Rights Movement. The outcome is the use of government and its power to favor one group of people over another in an attempt to right past wrongs. The freedom unleashed by the Civil Rights Movement has been usurped by unbridled greed and corruption. This is not unusual really, it is the normal outcome of social and blood wars. Though I am certain you have a different view, you should consider the forced allocation of taxpayer money for college admissions, business loans, home loans, hiring, etc. These programs are not necessarily based on abilities, skills or even financial need, they are based on color. It's the ultimate insult to a race of people that built vast sophisticated cultures throughout Africa. Cultures that most in this country are unaware or care to learn about.

However, it is not just the interest groups surrounding the Civil Rights movement that are the only problem in unequal treatment. The fact that corporations can have laws passed to protect and create markets; the fact that public unions can organize; the fact that every possible special interest group can simply squall about unequal treatment and they will get nearly unlimited taxpayer funds. These are the real problems of the modern social democratic philosophy. A movement that will inevitably end in financial and cultural ruin.

So, I'll stop here and let you respond.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Online
Joined: 10/30/2005
REPLY TO PTCO

Before I continue, I do not feel you answered a question that I posed – and it is important for me to understand what you mean by ‘financial equality’ Thanks.

Your Quote:
Giving someone a financial advantage, through force of law, leads to someone else not having the same advantage. It breeds friction, hatred, envy, and all sorts of sins

Before I comment further regarding ‘financial equality’, please elaborate what you mean by the above quote – with some examples. Thanks.

Quote:

Equal treatment is not the outcome of the Civil Rights Movement. The outcome is the use of government and its power to favor one group of people over another in an attempt to right past wrongs.

In my opinion and experience, the outcome of the Civil Rights Movement was the equal opportunity afforded to all, opportunity that segregation prevented. One of the perceived outcomes was the feeling that the opportunities enjoyed by some Americans to be separate and favored by segregation was taken away by the Civil Rights Movement – hence the creation of ‘Christian Schools’ in the south, ‘private clubs’ in the North, etc., etc., etc. This was the outcome of ‘getting around’ the privileges enjoyed under Jim Crow.

Quote:

The freedom unleashed by the Civil Rights Movement has been usurped by unbridled greed and corruption

Freedom ‘unleashed’? An interesting concept. Should freedom have remained ‘bridled’? Unbridled greed and corruption was here during Biblical times – and hasn’t ceased much today, in my opinion. Could you give me some examples of this ‘unleashed’ freedom that you find so distasteful?

Quote:

, you should consider the forced allocation of taxpayer money for college admissions, business loans, home loans, hiring, etc. These programs are not necessarily based on abilities, skills or even financial need, they are based on color.

These programs are based on need and for years – past discrimination. When the legislators tried to get Asian Americans as a group banned from SBA loans,– because of the assumption made that Asian Americans had no one who met the qualifications and need; they were foiled by the actions nationwide of Asian American organizations. The reality, IMO, is that ‘some’ Americans did not like the competition that the Asian Americans were presenting in the business world because of their work ethic and business standards. Check here to see how ‘race’ plays a role in SBA loans. http://www.sba.gov/loanprograms

Some Americans didn’t want the competition. Today, there are many European-Americans who qualify for and receive SBA loans. The college admissions issue is being debated in the courts now. The parents and administrators of many of the leading American colleges and universities have sought diversity on campus for years (even before the Civil Rights Movement) because in America and in the world, educated individuals are going to have to know how to deal with people of all colors and ideologies. (religions, etc.) I remember there was a time in the ‘70’s when leading companies were wary of hiring a person (black or white) who had a ‘segregated’ education – and questioned their ability to deal fairly with clients; business partners, etc. from diverse backgrounds. Today, there are very few 500 companies who do not have a diverse representation of Americans in their administrative divisions.

Quote:

It's the ultimate insult to a race of people that built vast sophisticated cultures throughout Africa. Cultures that most in this country are unaware or care to learn about

In the late fifties and early sixties, most elementary students were exposed to a comparative study of four cultures. The culture of Japan; the culture of Mexico; and at least one culture found in Africa with the cultures found in these United States. In many states, this occurred in the fifth and sixth grades. Most students in one segment of our country did not have this opportunity. This is an insult to the thousands of African-American families who call the ‘south’ their home.

Quote:

The fact that corporations can have laws passed to protect and create markets; the fact that public unions can organize; the fact that every possible special interest group can simply squall about unequal treatment and they will get nearly unlimited taxpayer funds.

Squalling provides unlimited taxpayer funds? Please give an example. Thanks. The above quote was/is quite familiar from those who still feel the ‘squeeze’ of all Americans, minorities, women, different ideologies, etc. having equal OPPORTUNITY at the American dream.

I have lived through over 70 years of American history. No one has to tell me that the ‘dream’ has not been realized - but being a minority/woman in this country is no longer the ‘nightmare’ that existed in certain localities in our wonderful country. I’ve had the opportunity to travel throughout the world, and with all of our problems – this is still ‘home’ to me – and I continue to celebrate the progress that has been made since the Civil Rights Movement.

I am still hazy on your concept of government. I don't disagree with what I think is your concept on how it is being implemented today - but I still believe the OUR government as guided by the Constitution is valid for a free people of diverse backgrounds.