Eddie,
Do you think that the CEO’s rate of pay is what is stopping them from hiring employees? If there is more money just laying around they are just gonna hire someone to give that money to? If there is more work than the workforce can handle they will hire more workers. No one…no business man in his right mind would hire people jsut fopr the sake of having more employees. I understand the golden parachute thing. I do. But are we free or not. Why do we need someone to tell us how much is too much. Once we let government start dictating these things to us, you can kiss it all goodbye.

the key phrase is “reform entitlement spending programs” as THE SOLUTION…..
which is NOT the problem……..so I see no cause for hope……..in fact there is little intelligence involved on either side in Washington…….and whatever the corps have in
mind……there is nothing GOOD to be expected…….except more “time”……..which will if nothing else make “the end is nigher” crowd”……..look increasingly foolish…….as the impending COLLAPSE…..continues NOT TO HAPPEN……

eddie you are a bum

MILLIE: You are a troll for Wall Street excuses. Thanks for the economic collaspe sweetie!

For Gary:

But are we free or not.????

Yes, no, and maybe……..

You are completely free to think or believe anything you like, you are even free
to act on these things if you so choose……actions have consequences……and if
these consequences cause harm, you may be held responsible…….

Why do we need someone to tell us how much is too much. ????

Ask the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrian’s, Persians, Romans, Mayans, the Vikings of Greenland or the inhabitants of Easter Island…….Ask Jimmy Hendrix, Mickey Mantle, Michael Jackson or John Candy? Ask Bernie Madoff, John Corzine, Jack Welch, Jamie
Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein?

Once we let government start dictating these things to us, you can kiss it all goodbye.
Theoretically you do not live in a dictatorship, but a system of government which
claims to be “of,by and for the people.” whose philosophical foundation rests on
the principle that “governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed” and are “instituted among men” to secure their rights to include those of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

This was a radically new idea, being essentially a bottom up, rather than a top down approach to the “legitimacy, authority and purpose of the powers of government” and
in the original construction the mistrust of government reflected this, by requiring
unanimous consent of the previous colonies ( now states ) for any and all federal
action…….keeping potentials enemies closer to home, so as to make any attempt at mischief more difficult to conceal.

Unfortunately, this approach completely castrated the Federal government’s ability to
conduct any foreign policy or to meet the conditions imposed upon this new nation
by the Treaty of Paris……..so desperate measures were required to correct this…in secretin 1787……which produced the document that was an attempt at “a more
perfect union” and which transferred much of what was already contained in the Confederation, to this “new republic”……..with the necessary additions to remedy the problem, as well as other things to alleviate and/or protect parochial concerns and interests.

It was a haphazard, frustrating and messy affair, whose actual events and proceedings
being held in secret are available to the public only in the white washed notes of a single observer and participant, and the end result was to the liking of no one, which required ratification by and all or nothing vote, up or down……..

For better or worse, you now had a central federal authority, and the rest is history…..

If nothing else, what should be clear here is…..like your questions and the idea’s contained in these documents………….words, no matter how noble sounding, are
insufficient to produce the claimed intended results……if they are not understood……..
or reflected in the actions purportedly taken to achieve those results.

Without any agreement of such an understanding, the words become meaningless
rhetoric whose power rests on the self evident illusion that “everyone knows what they
mean” when the fact is that “no one knows what they mean now or meant then.”

This condition is not limited to these words, but many words which are in common
usage………..so much so that……..what was understood to be the only means to
secure those things implied by the words you use in your questions but do not
understand……..is now believed to be both the cause of that loss, and it’s dissolution
the means by which this condition can reach resolution.

“The Master said….If names are not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language is not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success……..Therefor a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately. What the superior man requires, is just that in his words, there may be nothing incorrect.”

Confucious 551 -479 B.C.

How patriotic are you Eddie? What are you willing to give up….maybe your freedom or what extra you have in your pocket book ?

Not really……at least in the sense of the “entitlements” they are considering……
social security, medicare and medicaid……these are easy fixes……

If you are referring to welfare, food stamps or unemployment, these are not really
a problem……and while you might believe this is a cushy life…..I doubt you will find
those actually dependent on them……who would agree with you……

If you have something other than these when you use the word “entitlements”…..
that might prove quite interesting……..do you?

GALT writes:
“GALT says:
“Not really……at least in the sense of the “entitlements” they are considering……
social security, medicare and medicaid……these are easy fixes……”

Since social security is a forced at gunpoint savings plan I do not see why you consider it to be an “entitlement”. I don’t remember how the other 2 fit with that but if we had our hard earned money taken (at government gunpoint) in FICA then they are most certainly not entitlements.

Of course the government could just call them taxes (like ObamaTax) and then future generations would know up front that there is no “security” in social security.

Then again the name warned us from the beginning that they would run out of other peoples money.

Actually they do call them taxes……..just not openly,,,,but if you check the “statute”, it is clearly identified as what it is……a tax on wages……..and there is no legal guarantee of any benefits of any kind…….so they can do what they want…….

Initially, retirement was set slightly beyond life expectancy, so they didn’t expect payouts
to be a problem………

The main purpose or effect of the initiation of the program was to initiate “with holding” at the source……extended to the temporary tax on “income” for the war……..which aligned itself nicely with the shift to admiralty/maritime law in 1938…….which had this not been done would have constituted double taxation on wages, which in common law and equity
would have been clearly unconstitutional but also because the supreme court had already
defined income as “profit or gain” and under this definition wages did not qualify…..the shift negated all previous court decisions in law and equity, thereby allowing the courts to
ignore any citation of them as precedent in motions or appeals because they did not apply
in admiralty/maritime or “statutory” jurisdiction, as it was referred to….and provided sufficient disguise to mask what had taken place…….they then proceeded to lay a further
level of obfuscation by adopting the Uniform Commercial Code both federally and over time in all the states, completing the transition in the late fifties……whereby no further pretense was needed……….and any reliance on what the Constitution might have meant
or intended was purely illusion….discarded completely where conflict could not be avoided….as with reference to “lawful money” and other things……..and altered in more subtle ways to maintain the illusion……where the differences were procedural in the legal arena…….which would escape the notice of the general population as they has limited
exposure to these things on a regular basis…….and limited experience to judge them, even if they were aware………

From a strictly moral perspective, these programs were paid for……so they should not be altered in terms of benefit adjustment except as a last resort……..and by last I mean after every other government expenditure has been considered……..in every other program
or function.

There are administrative reforms directed at fraud and abuse which can be applied,
but the chief area of reform which needs to be addressed regarding cost reductions
must take place in the actual delivery system…….the health care industry……..which does not provide actual health care despite its claims…….and is also extremely inefficient and expensive in what it does deliver……..so it need to be gutted and rebuilt….

But this has been and will be effectively resisted from those profiting from the current structure while victims of it continue to believe that access is the critical component rather than recognizing that effective outcomes through proper treatment and preventative care
are far more important……. than temporary relief of the symptoms of a degenerative condition where the treatment itself may be a contributory factor…….

Which color socks did you wear on your first day in school?