Reactionaries claim that the purpose of the American Constitution is to restrict the power of the U.S. government. If they were not so ignorant of American history they would know that the Constitutional Convention was called to strengthen the U.S. government. The Articles of Confederation had been proven to be inadequate.

The following link is to a fairly short chart comparing the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution.

http://home.earthlink.net/~gfeldmeth/chart.art.html

 

Libertarianism/classical liberalism is about power to the individual, not corporations.

Interesting choice of signature. Did you know that The Right Honourable Bill Gladstone was a classical liberal that believed in free markets, civil liberties and was against government spending? In fact, it would be quite difficult to find someone more libertarian from that period in UK history.

 

+1

Local is what matters.

The national presidential election is inconsequential to the future of the country. Too much is in play, and not even George Washington himself could undo it at this point.

I am just thankful that Romney did not inherit the fiscal cliff, the next Arab Spring, Netanyahu's looming war with Iran, a rising China, and a socialized healthcare system that Reid would not have allowed him to repeal.

Nationally, what's done is done.


Given the direction of this thread, I guess we know who Obama will blame for the next four years: uncooperative Republicans.

 

This is just about as ridiculous as anything I have seen you post in three years.

Congratulations, by the way. I know you were rooting for the guy who won. So was I, but no doubt for reasons that you will frown upon.

 

That was meant as a reply to your free markets portion of your post. Also I'd like to mention that the American revolution was as much about
throwing off the yoke of the English crown as it was throwing off the corporate yoke of the crown supported English trading companies.

No I did not. At the time I was looking more for a short quote on a descriptive difference between a liberal and a conservative. His short quote fit what I was looking for. I didn't take the time for a complete history lesson on the man maybe I should have.

 

You should keep the quote. It is a good one.

 

A weak government strengthens the corporations by default. The natural tendency is for an industry to begin with many small companies. As time goes on the more successful companies drive the less successful companies out of business. The more successful companies become corporations.

The only alternative to big business is big government controlled by regular, contested elections.

 

Wow, what a statement!!!

How is big government an alternative to big business?? Here, I thought that the only alternative to big business was more small businesses, apparently I was wrong on that.

We both live in a country with the conveniences that the majority of the world only dreams of. Our people are (relatively) well fed, our obesity rate is sinful; well clothed; healthy (relative again considering our wanton obesity) and extremely mobile. Most of this prosperity came from our capitalism and the growth of our industries and businesses.

If we are experiencing downturns in the economy, is it because of big business or big government? This question will be answered in completely opposite ways by the two of us. You are unwilling to do as I do, I recognize that the blame is shared by both.

However, to eliminate capitalism from our society would most certainly (IMHO) bring the end to our prosperity

 

Oh man tenguy this is the best laugh I've had all day.

We are most certainly experiencing an economic down turn because of the greed and corruption of 'big business" which caused a global economic collapse and the Great Recession in the US. Businesses that were too big to fail and had to be bailed out by the taxpayers.

 

You need not qualify that sentiment with "IMHO." Capitalism has given this country a level of prosperity that has benefited everyone. The poorest people in America are richer than most of the people in the world. Capitalism has lifted the fortunes of the rest of the world as well, to greater or lesser extents more or less proportionate to the levels of liberty in those locales.

It is beginning to unravel, now. I suspect the devolution will accelerate in coming years. Just as you and DL would ascribe entirely different remedies to our economic travails, I am certain that he and I would ascribe different causes to the devolution of our stature in the world. Perhaps he would even see it as a good thing; a leveling of the playing field, or some such notion.

All I would say in response would be that history is littered with failed civilizations; that greatness is a fleeting state; and that we tinker with that state, however well intentioned, at our peril.

We are tinkering in such a way now, this moment, and we have just voted for four more years of it.

Good.

Should be an intriguing experiment.

My fortress is prepared. What about yours?

 

Well, you are back to normal. Keep laughing. Beats the alternative.

 

Thank you for your prompt reply DL. Oops, sorry Stumbler, didn't know it was you.

However, since you did bother to reply, I guess we'll just have to make the observation that you too can not see the economic problems as being the fault of big government, oh well so be it. With your proven lack of understanding of things economic, we'll just have to suffer the ignorance a while longer.

 

Thanks for that supportive response. My answer to DL was more to humor him, than to educate him, that is beyond the scope of my extraordinary talents.

Amen to the intriguing experiment, I am totally convinced that the "progressives" have no idea as to the fragility of the whole house of cards.

My fortress is secure, as secure as it can be that is. My one conciliation is that if and when the wheels come off the track, everyone will be equally screwed. My advantage is that my age, I won't have to worry about putting it back on track. My sincere condolences go to those who will bear the brunt of the debacle.

Beware that what you wish for, for it just might come to pass.

 

To keep businesses small we need a government with the power to keep companies from becoming too large.

 

Ever here of true free market competition? It's something that big government abhors.

 

The standard of living of countries with Social Democratic economies compares favorably with that of the United States. In those countries there is less poverty, less crime, and better health.

 

Good for them, now go take their oil, make them support their treaties (ie:NATO) equally with the other members and then tell me how great they are. BTW, why are they not growing?

 

I am willing to acknowledge that the government shares responsibility by making it easier for people to buy houses they could not afford. I also think deregulation played a part, along with the fact that President Bush cut taxes while starting two expensive wars he could not win.

 

I am unaware of anyone with national name recognition who advocates that we "eliminate capitalism from our society." Nevertheless, the Scandinavian countries, Canada, Australia, and Germany have been less effected by the Great Recession than the United States. In each of these countries the government plays a greater role in the economy than the U.S. government does in our economy.

 

Nobody gives a shit, DL.

If you love Big Government and want it to run your life...MOVE.

Many of us would rather Government not be our Nanny and rule over us from the womb to the tomb.