The Prescience Of John Adams

[unregistered]

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

VETTE

We're really speaking of making theft lawful. It was Franklin's great fear. Trouble is, when the LIBs empty out the Super Center and push their loot back to the hood the Super Center stays empty.

 

[koalabear]

Now you know why Sam Adams was into beer.

 

[RobDownSouth]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yep. He saw the future. Of course that's how it SHOULD be.

 

[Squibbs]

Are they trying to take your land, vettepigeon?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Are they trying to take your land, vettepigeon?

IIRC, Vetty lost his "land" in his second heterosexual divorce settlement. He's living with one of his boys.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

...and of course if no new source for theft is found, chaos and anarchy ensues. We're seeing the corrosive effects that liberalism has on liberty today, and make no mistake when they seize our wealth, they are taking our liberty. It's no less an affront to our rights than a street hold-up.

It is theft. Of course if you were smart you would find a way to deal with us on better terms than waiting until we're starving a desperate enough to resort to violence. It would be different if this wasn't about a society where the top twenty percent (Wow, he was WAY OFF on that estimate wasn't he?) own everything and everybody else is destitute. No society can survive that kind of distribution.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

We already have a way to deal with you, you're still around because we haven't got there quite yet.

Oh, I invite you to try. We may as well skip the niceties anyway. We have half the country itching to kill the poor because they dare think they deserve to live and other half that doesn't think that.

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

"Property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty."

Yeah, tell them mankinds all about property and liberty in the year 1787, J.Ad! LOL

This has been another Vetteman Founding Fathers & Framers' Era White Male Privileged Cocksucking Moment®

 

[Sean Renaud]

You mean the thieving lazy.

No. I mean the poor. They aren't lazy. The evidence simply doesn't support that claim. The reason Adams was able to predict this was because it's the inevitable result of capitalism. Besides it had already happened in Europe. He was decended from people who weren't hacking it Europe and fled to a place where the game wasn't over. Fast forward to today and teh game is over in America only this time there is nowhere to flee.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Que]

Points to Sean for frank honesty and the ability to understand the arguent. All too often the other side of this issue simply whines about how life is unfair and uncle sugar needs to make it fair.

To paraphrase Thatcher, the problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of other people's money.

Let's say for the sake of discussion that as of tomorrow we gave every man woman and child in America 40 acres and a mule. We finance is grand experiment by simply taking everything that everyone owns that's worth more than 40 acres and a mule.

It wouldn't even take a generation before things were more or less as they were.

Many would trade the mule for some cigarettes and some lottery tickets and some booze. Maybe we then tax mule droppings to pay for healthcare for emphasema and cirrhosis of the liver.

Generally speaking the playing fields doesn't get leveled by bringing in truck loads of magic free dirt and filling in the festering mosquito breeding swamps. Rather you ger a blade and drag down the high side...there isnt more dirt after you do that.... now the low side has all of the lush topsoil, and the high side is barren rocky ground.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You're full of shit. Learn about America's "poor" here dunce:

Son, I am disappoint.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You're full of shit. Learn about America's "poor" here dunce:

"As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4] In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.

The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.

Poor families certainly struggle to make ends meet, but in most cases, they are struggling to pay for air conditioning and the cable TV bill as well as to put food on the table. Their living standards are far different from the images of dire deprivation promoted by activists and the mainstream media.

Regrettably, annual Census reports not only exaggerate current poverty, but also suggest that the number of poor persons[5] and their living conditions have remained virtually unchanged for four decades or more. In reality, the living conditions of poor Americans have shown significant improvement over time."

Read the whole article here, and STFU:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty

I love that article. The poorest people today live better than the richest did a century ago. By that logic there not only aren't any poor people in America there have never been poor people in the history of the world. Every generation has it better than their grandparents did. That's called technology and more stuff being built period. Half the stuff you listed are necessities anyway. Our poor have it good because they have a fridge. Rediculous.

Poor people have food because they have EBT cards. They aren't starving obviously but still.

Keep thinking that way though. That's why people will eventually get pissed off and resort to violence. You know how to avoid this but you don't want to. So enjoy the violence when the time comes.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I love that article. The poorest people today live better than the richest did a century ago. By that logic there not only aren't any poor people in America there have never been poor people in the history of the world. Every generation has it better than their grandparents did. That's called technology and more stuff being built period. Half the stuff you listed are necessities anyway. Our poor have it good because they have a fridge. Rediculous.

Poor people have food because they have EBT cards. They aren't starving obviously but still.

Keep thinking that way though. That's why people will eventually get pissed off and resort to violence. You know how to avoid this but you don't want to. So enjoy the violence when the time comes.

There was an article here in the Houston paper last winter. Wal-mart noticed that on certain days of the month at their 24 hour locations, people would filter in between 1 and 2 in the morning, often with children, and then mill around the store idly until 2 a.m. ...then everyone headed for the checkout.

They found out that these folks were almost exclusively Texas EBT "Lonestar" customers. They'd exhausted their cards for the previous month, and knew to the hour when it would be recharged.

They might not have been starving...but I suspect they were hungry.

 

[Sean Renaud]

There was an article here in the Houston paper last winter. Wal-mart noticed that on certain days of the month at their 24 hour locations, people would filter in between 1 and 2 in the morning, often with children, and then mill around the store idly until 2 a.m. ...then everyone headed for the checkout.

They found out that these folks were almost exclusively Texas EBT "Lonestar" customers. They'd exhausted their cards for the previous month, and knew to the hour when it would be recharged.

They might not have been starving...but I suspect they were hungry.

I remember hearing similar stories a few years back. However my point was that I'm not clear on how you can consider someone on food stamps as not poor.

 

[doctor_insanus]

You're full of shit. Learn about America's "poor" here dunce:

"As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4] In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.

The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.

Poor families certainly struggle to make ends meet, but in most cases, they are struggling to pay for air conditioning and the cable TV bill as well as to put food on the table. Their living standards are far different from the images of dire deprivation promoted by activists and the mainstream media.

Regrettably, annual Census reports not only exaggerate current poverty, but also suggest that the number of poor persons[5] and their living conditions have remained virtually unchanged for four decades or more. In reality, the living conditions of poor Americans have shown significant improvement over time."

Read the whole article here, and STFU:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty

As if anyone who believes that drivel has the slightest conception of the "typical" poor family. Spoon-fed horse shit to give greedy cunts a reason to hate the less fortunate.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I remember hearing similar stories a few years back. However my point was that I'm not clear on how you can consider someone on food stamps as not poor.

Agreed. I think that Vetty, a man who has received government assistance for over a decade, is lashing out at other who receive assistance.

It's probably his way of coping with self-loathing.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

So which facts in the article are in error, genius?

I'll play, Einstein.

We'll start with this bit of derp:

the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave.

Does having these four items in a home mean you are not poor?

And if not, why bring it up in the first place?

 

[Sean Renaud]

So which facts in the article are in error, genius?

They aren't in error. They're just bullshit. A fridge isn't a luxury item, it's a fucking necessity. So is an oven and a stove. People don't cook over fires anymore. I suppose you can do without a microwave but the other two are requirements.

Okay they have two color tvs. Big fucking whoop. Sure it's still a "luxury" item but they are cheap these days. I'd be impressed if they had flat screens but c'mon everybody I know has tvs to spare. Those just build up over time.

Basically your article is claiming that the poor in America aren't comprable to the poor in Etheopia. Well we aren't in Etheopia so I don't care how they live. I'm an American and I'm entitled to better than that. Hell your original post is about how eventually the rich gather everything up and they have. Most poor people don't own their homes just as he predicted. They own more than the cloths on their backs (and I'm sure he was exaggerating when he said that anyway.) like you said he saw the future. Now you're trying to back track it and claim that since our poor aren't poor by historical standards or international standards that they aren't poor.