Obama & Biden: Not on the Same Page

[PhoenixCadet]

I'm posting this in the Cadet Forum because I'd like to get Cadets opinions on this, in addition to our adult / military members. What's your take on this?

Obama says, and I quote, "...When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Biden later says, and I quote again, ""He is not spreading the wealth around."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXcImQfubM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoqI5PSRcXM

Aside from the moronic belief that "spreading the wealth" (essentially, socialism) will fix things - does it not bother you that a presidental candidate and his running mate can be this out of touch with each other, yet people still follow them, en masse, like they're the best thing since sliced bread.

What say you?

-PC

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

Wow...

I think Obama and Biden better get on the same page before someone (other than we damned Conservatives) gets ahold of it...

However, in all probability, no one will ever notice it (besides from you and the other members of this forum), and if it is noticed, they'll write it off as a misquote...

[PhoenixCadet]

Wow...
they'll write it off as a misquote...

Did you watch the videos? They can't simply "write it off as a misquote", when you have video footage proving it.

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

I watched the videos.

But, I know for a fact that someone is going to find some way to argue it out that Biden was tripping up, or something like that.

[TruBlu]

Its just another mess up that won't get much attention because at this point, the relationships between the presidential candidates and their VP picks haven't been exactly the smoothest road for either party. I'm not saying that this isn't ridiculous, it is and it should be presented as a broken front for their campaign. But in the end, it will just end in another speech saying "Oh I was confused and recede my prior statement to replace it with this one, 'Obama is right.'"

And this is just something to chew on as a neutral thought: Whats so wrong about socialism besides the fact that it won't work in this country because of our capitalist foundation?

[PhoenixCadet]

And this is just something to chew on as a neutral thought: Whats so wrong about socialism besides the fact that it won't work in this country because of our capitalist foundation?

I firmly believe that you should work for your wealth, not have the government hand it to you. I also believe that your wealth is yours, not other people's. If you want to donate to charity to help out - good on you, but it's in no way right for the government to step in and not just tell you to, but to actually take it from you.

It won't work in our country, but that won't stop politicans from trying to make it work.

(FYI - My family falls well below Obama's $250k mark, by about 150k.)

-PC

[TruBlu]

I firmly believe that you should work for your wealth, not have the government hand it to you. I also believe that your wealth is yours, not other people's. If you want to donate to charity to help out - good on you, but it's in no way right for the government to step in and not just tell you to, but to actually take it from you.

It won't work in our country, but that won't stop politicans from trying to make it work.

(FYI - My family falls well below Obama's $250k mark, by about 150k.)

-PC

Socialism does not take wealth away from anyone because under true socialism, there is no such thing as wealth. Moving to socialism would take away wealth thought.

Here's my view on socialism and the world: it would work, if every single country were to take part in it, otherwise the country practicing it will suffer massive economic failure on the global playing field. With a crap economy, your country runs itself right into the ground and boom, no more country.

My view on socialism was not formulated from this article here: http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html, but is an interesting read. I especially think this part really supports what I'm saying As a purely economic system, socialism is a lousy way to run a large scale economy. Socialism is not a political system, it's a way of distributing goods and services. At their ideal implementation, socialism and laissez faire capitalism will be identical as everyone will produce exactly what's needed for exactly who needs it. In practice, both work sometimes in microeconomic conditions but fail miserably when applied to national and international economies. And they fail for the same reason: Human pervserity. Too many people don't like to play fair, and both systems only work when everyone follow the same rules. So basically, socialism would be viable, but EVERYONE would need to practice it, the idea of a "socialist America" is just political jive for this election and all of Obama's "socialist ideals."

[PhoenixCadet]

...true socialism, there is no such thing as wealth.

And that's where my problem lies. If there is no "wealth", and everyone's the same, it's essentially taking away your economic individuality. I don't know about you, but I'm happy where I'm at in life now, and moving to socialism wold essentially have everyone living in the dumps.

A government who can provide for everyone, can just as easily take everything away, as well. I also firmly believe that socialism is the next step towards communism. While you can't bring communism right away, you can slowly do so through socialism. Much like the frog in a pot of water analogy. If you throw a frog in a boiling hot pot of water, it will jump right out. If you put a frog in a pot of luke-warm water, and slowly increase the temperature untill it's boiling - the frog will stay in until it boils to death.

YMMV, though - this is just my opinion. I'm a firm believer in capitalism and economic freedom / individuality. The whole idea of being the same as everyone else bothers me on many levels.

[TruBlu]

And that's where my problem lies. If there is no "wealth", and everyone's the same, it's essentially taking away your economic individuality. I don't know about you, but I'm happy where I'm at in life now, and moving to socialism wold essentially have everyone living in the dumps.

A government who can provide for everyone, can just as easily take everything away, as well. I also firmly believe that socialism is the next step towards communism. While you can't bring communism right away, you can slowly do so through socialism. Much like the frog in a pot of water analogy. If you throw a frog in a boiling hot pot of water, it will jump right out. If you put a frog in a pot of luke-warm water, and slowly increase the temperature untill it's boiling - the frog will stay in until it boils to death.

YMMV, though - this is just my opinion. I'm a firm believer in capitalism and economic freedom / individuality. The whole idea of being the same as everyone else bothers me on many levels.

When you say communism, you mean what communism is now, not what it was initially formulated to be. Communism, in its purest and most true form, is the Utopian Society that you see me referring to ever so often. Communism in today's since is simply dictatorship with socialist qualities.

[PhoenixCadet]

When you say communism, you mean what communism is now, not what it was initially formulated to be. Communism, in its purest and most true form, is the Utopian Society that you see me referring to ever so often. Communism in today's since is simply dictatorship with socialist qualities.

A utpoian society is defined most commonly as "A place in which social, legal, and political justice and perfect harmony exist." I'm a realist. This is earth. As long as there's more than two people on it, you will never have perfect harmony in anything. There will always be at least the smallest level of disagreement.

That form of communism has proven not to work, and I go by based off of what it is today.

[TruBlu]

A utpoian society is defined most commonly as "A place in which social, legal, and political justice and perfect harmony exist." I'm a realist. This is earth. As long as there's more than two people on it, you will never have perfect harmony in anything. There will always be at least the smallest level of disagreement.

That form of communism has proven not to work, and I go by based off of what it is today.

Ah, exactly. Human nature dictates that conflict will always arise, so communism, in it's purist form will never exist, and neither would socialism. So basically, all this talk about socialist ideas and our candidates needs to stop, because it won't happen. Our country is quite large, approximately 300 million people. Creating nation wide programs for health care coverage, at this point in time and anytime after wards, will prove to be very problematic and more expensive with such a large population.

I do not believe that capitalism is our only way really, but neither is socialism (notice I said that it was a neutral statement earlier). Some socialist elements already exist in our nation, and that's fine. Most aspects of our economy are capitalist though. I think its all about finding a proper balance between the two.

[PhoenixCadet]

So basically, all this talk about socialist ideas and our candidates needs to stop, because it won't happen. Our country is quite large, approximately 300 million people. Creating nation wide programs for health care coverage, at this point in time and anytime after wards, will prove to be very problematic and more expensive with such a large population.

See, this is also where my problem lies. (And you're not the only person I've talked to with that attitude.) You say it won't happen. Are you referring to the socialism / communism in the "pure form", or the dictator-type form? If the former, I agree with you. It ain't ever happenin'. If the latter (dictator-type), this is where I see the problem.

People have the attitude "oh, this is America, it could never happen to us", but it really can. It can happen anywhere, to any people, in any country. It's that type of attitude, "nothing will ever happen to us", that lets it happen in the first place.

I recall a quote (can't place it exactly), but it's something to this effect: "All it takes for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing."

[TruBlu]

See, this is also where my problem lies. (And you're not the only person I've talked to with that attitude.) You say it won't happen. Are you referring to the socialism / communism in the "pure form", or the dictator-type form? If the former, I agree with you. It ain't ever happenin'. If the latter (dictator-type), this is where I see the problem.

People have the attitude "oh, this is America, it could never happen to us", but it really can. It can happen anywhere, to any people, in any country. It's that type of attitude, "nothing will ever happen to us", that lets it happen in the first place.

I recall a quote (can't place it exactly), but it's something to this effect: "All it takes for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing."

NO NO NO, I refer to the former of the two (maybe I should have worded my former statement better). I do not believe that America is immune to anything. I take a look at great countries, powerful countries, that fell to dictatorships (Russia, Germany, Italy, etc.) because of economic turmoil and radical leaders that promised reform. Especially in times like these were the country is said to be on the brink of major depression and currently in repression, I do not believe that America is immune to anything.

"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke. I know exactly what you are saying.

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

However, Democracy can't last forever...

Democracy is probably the weakest form of Government...

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'

'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'


'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'

'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage'

[TruBlu]

However, Democracy can't last forever...

Democracy is probably the weakest form of Government...

Is it that democracy is the weakest form of government, or that the people's words are the stronger than the idea of democracy itself? Think about it. If people overthrow a democracy and replace it with another form of government, isn't it still a democracy, after all the people willed it? Democracy isn't weak, in fact its very strong because it isn't really a government at all, in America, we are a democratic republic. Democracy is an idea not a government.

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

It is an idea.

I think you didn't catch my edit though...

Anyway:

Democracy can only exist as long as voters allow it to exist. As soon as they realize that they can "vote themselves into wealth", that'll happen, then the state becomes socialist. From there, the voters grow dependent, and from that, Communism grows. During that, people realize that they want more than they get, and so, they revolt. From that, democracy arises, so on, and so forth.

As a side note: Let's get back to Obama and Biden before the mods come and shut this place down. ;)

[TruBlu]

It is an idea.

I think you didn't catch my edit though...

Anyway:

Democracy can only exist as long as voters allow it to exist. As soon as they realize that they can "vote themselves into wealth", that'll happen, then the state becomes socialist. From there, the voters grow dependent, and from that, Communism grows. During that, people realize that they want more than they get, and so, they revolt. From that, democracy arises, so on, and so forth.

I just read your edit, and that is very interesting indeed. Where did you pull that from?

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

Another forum I'm at, and they got it from an e-mail.

Everything there I've heard before (books, television programs, internet sources, etc.).

P.S.: I think we're somewhere between numbers 6 and 7...