Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages

[Zero Sum 305]

I really must apologize for the animosity.

But I believe you are misrepresenting the 'opposing' poles of Smith phenomenology. Not that black and white.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Wrong. Adam Smith never used the phase, "laissez-faire".

Well damn....he should have brushed up on his French then.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

@ Bill. I imagine that he sat off to the side and in the back corner of his political science class, never once speaking out loud, his outlandish ideas for fear of being laughed out of class.

You don't get out much, do you?

[Zero Sum 305]

Well damn....he should have brushed up on his French then.

It was de Gornay who popularized the term- Laissez faire et laissez passer (let us do and let it happen)

[Wikipedia verified LOL]

And look where a 'strict' interpretation of that term has gotten the US economy. But don't be surprised to have someone blame the unions for that too.

Edited March 11, 2011 by Zero Sum

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I really must apologize for the animosity.

But I believe you are misrepresenting the 'opposing' poles of Smith phenomenology. Not that black and white.

Smith has to be viewed in context, much like Jefferson, who both railed against Hamilton's recklessness in assuming the debts of the colonies, and would later mortgage the US Treasury to help fund Napoleon's war. Things are rarely black and white. History seems to disagree with Jefferson's first notion, yet applaud his foresight for the second.

[Zero Sum 305]

Smith has to be viewed in context, much like Jefferson, who both railed against Hamilton's recklessness in assuming the debts of the colonies, and would later mortgage the US Treasury to help fund Napoleon's war. Things are rarely black and white. History seems to disagree with Jefferson's first notion, yet applaud his foresight for the second.

If we were to bring in a historical context, most of the right's libertarian argument would pretty much invalidate. I think that more 'out there' branch of the right wing needs to be honest that while they may seek a strict Constitutionalist interpretation of the universe, they want to rollback the social and legal fabric of the nation to a prior historical context that does not exist any more, and would be catastrophic in a modern age.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

If we were to bring in a historical context, most of the right's libertarian argument would pretty much invalidate. I think that more 'out there' branch of the right wing needs to be honest that while they may seek a strict Constitutionalist interpretation of the universe, they want to rollback the social and legal fabric of the nation to a prior historical context that does not exist any more, and would be catastrophic in a modern age.

Depends on whether you believe the States, or the Federal government, should be sovereign in mostly local matters. If you believe the first, then you would be an Originalist, as Scalia prefers the term, and require three-fourths of the State Legislatures to approve any new powers given to the Feds. On the other hand, if you believe in the consistent application of rules and regulations across state lines, then the living Constitution becomes an annoying hiderance at best to be manipulated by the courts at will.

[Zero Sum 305]

Depends on whether you believe the States, or the Federal government, should be sovereign in mostly local matters. If you believe the first, then you would be an Originalist, as Scalia prefers the term, and require three-fourths of the State Legislatures to approve any new powers given to the Feds. On the other hand, if you believe in the consistent application of rules and regulations across state lines, then the living Constitution becomes an annoying hiderance at best to be manipulated by the courts at will.

Or manipulated by legislative common sense in a true historical, modern context. The era of the United States has been over a long time. This is the United States.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

For the last few years we have been embracing Keynesian style economics in an attempt to get out this recession. Has it worked? No, it has made things worse, much worse. We now have debt that will destroy this country with very few ways out. We can raise taxes through the roof in an attempt to lower the debt, we can inflate the dollar to get the debt to evaporate away, or we can just ignore it and keep borrowing. All are paths to economic destruction. And at the same time the Dems fight tooth and nail over even slight cutbacks in our budget. And now, getting back to the topic, that we will soon have one half of the country supporting the other half our ability to do anything is quickly slipping away. Stevens utopia dream of a centrally controlled economy has blown up in his face and he will not even admit it. Free markets and unhindered capitalism is the only thing that will save this country. Any other option will only lead us down the same path as Rome.

[mawilson 2,133]

For the last few years we have been embracing Keynesian style economics in an attempt to get out this recession.

Some people think it's Kenyan-style

[mawilson 2,133]

Any other option will only lead us down the same path as Rome.

USSR is a more recent example of a country that had a centrally planned

economy where everything was owned and run by the government.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Some people think it's Kenyan-style

Either way it hasn't worked. Unless of course you like rocketing debt, growing inflation and high unemployment. If you do then it has been a huge success.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Some people think it's Kenyan-style

[Zero Sum 305]

Some people think it's Kenyan-style

Definitely some people. Can we get a qualitative statement as to that group's composition?

[^_^ 5,021]

Definitely some people. Can we get a qualitative statement as to that group's composition?

mawilson is not and never has been a polling firm.